I apologize, I'm really not trying to be snarky.
Nobody's hurt.
My point just is this ... if the Ramsey's are stone cold guilty like some think, there should have been rock hard evidence to put them away.
Yeah, that's what they said about OJ Simpson, too. The fact is, weasel, there's
plenty of evidence against them, it's just the no one in the DA's office had enough experience with circumstantial cases to put it all together piece by piece, which is what you have to do in these cases, because 9 times out of ten, there just flat-out is NOT going to be the "smoking gun."
You also don't take into account how the DA's office denied search warrents, collaborated with defense attorneys, UNDERCUT their own WITNESSES and other assorted screw-ups that damaged this case so terribly.
Surely a GJ would have indicted if that had been the case.
Henry Lee thinks they DID, and Alex Hunter shot it down. He'd done exactly that before.
Weasel, I honestly don't mean to sound condescending, but it might help to know just what went on with this GJ. Actually, what DIDN'T go on with it might be more accurate. I actually talk about the GJ at length in the book:
In 1998, the District Attorney called a Grand Jury to look into the case. Grand Juries are investigative bodies who can issue indictments against suspects if sufficient probable cause exists. Since the standard is so low, it has become common knowledge that a good prosecutor can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich. As Det. Thomas remarks in his book, it was clear the sandwich was in no danger.
<<snip>>
Considering that no one in the DA's office wanted to convene a Grand Jury in the first place and felt forced to do so in the wake of Steve Thomas's resignation, lest the Governor step in, is it any wonder it went nowhere?
<<snip>>
What's more, none of the actual detectives who worked the case were called to testify. Why do it at all? Burke Ramsey was called, but not John and not Patsy. They were never grilled by the prosecutors and shown to the Grand Jury for what they were. What the h*** were these people doing?
<<snip>>
Also, it didn't help that the Grand Jury would only meet for a few days every month or so. How were they supposed to retain anything?
<<snip>>
In 2006, a grand Juror went public, offering more insight into the workings of the Grand Jury. This juror, who shall remain nameless since she is not a public figure, said that when the coroner made his presentation and the autopsy photos were viewed, none of the Grand Jurors could believe that a mother could do that to her child. She seemed to suggest that as a mother herself, she went into the proceedings feeling that way.
As always, I'm struck by how naive people can be. I guess they didn't talk to Ron Walker, the FBI man on the scene that morning. He was interviewed by the cable channel "A&E." Here's what he had to say.
"Well, as much as it pains me to say it, yes, I've seen parents who have decapitated their children, I've seen cases where parents have drowned their children in bathtubs, I've seen cases where parents have strangled their children, have placed them in paper bags and smothered them, have strapped them in car seats and driven them into a body of water, any way that you can think of that a person can kill another person, almost all those ways are also ways that parents can kill their children."
Weasel, have you ever heard the old joke about not wanting to leave justice up to people who coulnd't get out of jury duty? That about sums it up. The GJ was first and foremost a political dog-and-pony show, and the doberman never arrived.
