Websleuths
Go Back   Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community > Featured Case Discussion > JonBenet Ramsey

Notices

JonBenet Ramsey What really happened to 6 year old JonBenet? Someone is getting away with murder. All information posted on this site is gained through published documentation on this case. It is strictly opinion only.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #76  
Old 02-05-2012, 12:13 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye View Post
If this case hadn't been picked up by the media, do you think Lockheed Martin would've cared if the case was solved or not?
I think it was simply a given that the case would be picked up by the media. To what extent, I don't believe anyone was able to predict on that night/day. I also don't believe they had any idea how much notoriety this murder would get from the Internet; it wasn't yet a system of communication for the general public, as common now as television. Who could have imagined Websleuths and FFJ, now more than a decade old, much less MILLIONS OF THEM?

You can do the research yourself, though, don't take my word for it: any large company is loathe to have an executive involved in some huge public scandal--and it doesn't get any messier than a molested, murdered six year old in your basement. Even John Ramsey found his "billion dollar company" sold (to G.E., I think) and himself ousted within the year; no doubt with the standard "golden parachute"--meaning millions in cash and stock--landing in some Cayman Island bank account. Remember John and Patsy took a little "vacation" to the Bahamas within the year after the murder. I remember the tabloid photo of Patsy in the pool because it seemed odd that instead of helping LE find her child's killer, she was avoiding them like the Red Death and chilling at a resort.

There was a news article, way back, maybe in the first year after the murder, that reported that John Ramsey had refused to take a polygraph which had been requested by Lockheed Martin. Odd, isn't it, that LM would ask, or that this would be reported? Maybe it was some kind of stipulation G.E. demanded before the sale? It appeared to be "a reason" offered as to why John was ousted, but changing administration is not uncommon when companies are sold, though we beer can collectors are rather out of the loop on these kinds of deals, and even moreso in 1996. It seems like it would have been big news, but it died as quickly as that one report.

We now have good evidence that the Ramseys did take a polygraph for their lawyers early on, not the one they "went public" with under Lin Wood's spin machine, but when their lawyers were with Haddon's firm. They were asked about taking a polygraph in a media interview and were very dodgy about it, both Patsy and John, saying that is "privileged" between them and their lawyers. HAHA! Um, I might be simple but I wasn't born yesterday: it's YOUR privilege to give, and WE KNOW THAT, BEOTCHES. (Ooops. Was that not respectful, Tricia? )

It's my belief that Lockheed Martin helped bury this case, with all their power and influence, because they'd do that for any scandal involving one of their own. I can't prove it, but Alex Hunter's actions, the "blank" phone record--that was no accident, and anyone who thinks it's just some coincidence and means nothing in a child murder case like this is as naive as I once was.
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.

Last edited by KoldKase; 02-05-2012 at 12:36 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #77  
Old 02-05-2012, 01:52 PM
FairM FairM is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 158
I have this book on order , looking forward to reading it.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to FairM For This Useful Post:
  #78  
Old 02-05-2012, 05:15 PM
DeeDee249 DeeDee249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In the Federal Witness Protection Program
Posts: 7,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderllama View Post
DeeDee, I know you're able to cope with the opposite side of the fence with regards to your faith. That alone makes you a rare case and my hat goes off to you.

If would probably be remiss of me to ask if you have ever spoken to anyone in the Ramsey family from the other side?

You know that my beliefs will automatically make me suspect you will answer with "that's not how it works" or "they're not ready", but for the benefit of everyone else, I'm genuinely interested in the answer.


PM me here. We can discuss it better off the forum.
__________________
THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:
  #79  
Old 02-05-2012, 05:31 PM
DeeDee249 DeeDee249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In the Federal Witness Protection Program
Posts: 7,448
I think Lockheed would have buried the case even if it had not had the national media attention it got. A scandal is a scandal. It wasn't just Lockheed. The defense attorneys and their firm were very politically powerful as well.

Just this past weekend I watched the DVD of Schiller's "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town" again, but with the Director's Commentary turned ON. I'd seen this movie several times, because I own a copy, but hadn't listened to the comments from Schiller in a while. It was very enlightening. In the very beginning he mentions that right at the outset, a main roadblock to justice in the case was the unique situation in Boulder LE of having a very liberal ex-hippie as a DA and a very conservative police department. Right off the bat their approaches to crime and criminals in particular came from opposite ideologies. Schiller's book and movie are fairly neutral, but he plainly feels the famlies' actions were not the actions of innocent people. He also comments that right from the start, the R's defense team defended them as guilty clients, not as innocent people being framed. I agree. All I have to do is read the interviews with the Rs, especially Patsy. I can tell more from what LW does NOT allow Patsy to answer than from what she says. In many cases he does not even allow certain questions to be asked. Or he jumps right in with diversionary comments. LE, in sometimes perplexing laxity and sloppiness, allows themselves to be distracted and led off topic. Then, when the interview resumes, they fail to go back to that topic so that it is addressed properly. LE dropped so many balls.
__________________
THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:
  #80  
Old 02-06-2012, 11:59 AM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
I think Lockheed would have buried the case even if it had not had the national media attention it got. A scandal is a scandal. It wasn't just Lockheed. The defense attorneys and their firm were very politically powerful as well.

Just this past weekend I watched the DVD of Schiller's "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town" again, but with the Director's Commentary turned ON. I'd seen this movie several times, because I own a copy, but hadn't listened to the comments from Schiller in a while. It was very enlightening. In the very beginning he mentions that right at the outset, a main roadblock to justice in the case was the unique situation in Boulder LE of having a very liberal ex-hippie as a DA and a very conservative police department. Right off the bat their approaches to crime and criminals in particular came from opposite ideologies. Schiller's book and movie are fairly neutral, but he plainly feels the famlies' actions were not the actions of innocent people. He also comments that right from the start, the R's defense team defended them as guilty clients, not as innocent people being framed. I agree. All I have to do is read the interviews with the Rs, especially Patsy. I can tell more from what LW does NOT allow Patsy to answer than from what she says. In many cases he does not even allow certain questions to be asked. Or he jumps right in with diversionary comments. LE, in sometimes perplexing laxity and sloppiness, allows themselves to be distracted and led off topic. Then, when the interview resumes, they fail to go back to that topic so that it is addressed properly. LE dropped so many balls.
So true, DeeDee. There were so many obvious questions, including follow-up questions, that never got asked or never were answered when the Ramseys were interviewed. Of course, the Ramseys never would have answered truthfully anyway, but simply asking and having that on record would have been important.

Hunter and Lacy were the biggest obstacles to solving this case, IMO. I think both of them were guilty of dereliction of duty, of obstruction of the investigation, and without question of destroying the case completely for all time.

Lin Wood was always "cuing" John and Patsy when the questions were damaging to them or when their answers were clearly incriminating. Wood earned his money from the Ramseys, I'll give him that.
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #81  
Old 02-06-2012, 03:45 PM
UKGuy UKGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoldKase View Post
That's the thing: it's so obvious; it was so obvious that something horribly wrong was going on with the investigation. D.A. Hunter, UP FRONT, was handing THE EVIDENCE REPORTS to the Ramsey lawyers, including a copy of the ransom note given to them in JANUARY, within a month of the murder. It wasn't until Hunter finally killed the grand jury investigation that Thomas was unleashed and his book appeared in book stores, telling the public exactly what went wrong with this case.

Oh, how Hunter and the Ramseys hated Thomas. He actually threw open the door on their little conspiracy. He didn't have all the pieces, or if he did, no doubt his publisher wouldn't include the most damaging stuff. To this day, saying his name is like throwing water on the Wicked Witch of Oz. (I love that about him.)

What you say about our politicians is spot on; they're all in it for the money they can make after they finish voting on laws and policies to benefit their financial backers and themselves, which is a done deal once they're elected. Anyone who wants to know how our economy got so wrecked only needs to look at the wholesale deregulation of the banking industry at the beginning of this century: let the greedy "regulate" themselves, because we know they'll do a good job, right? lol And if they don't, we'll just write out blank checks for them, call it a bail out, and let the taxpayers pick up the bill--DOUBLE DIPPING! Corruption in this country, much like in the Ramsey case, is an open secret.

But I digress. To the point, you're right about the only chance of the truth coming out being someone who has that evidence finally stepping forward to show us. Those phone records may still be in the evidence room, in fact; because they were allegedly collected illegally by a PI--ha, just like you said--who was going to sell them to a tabloid. Alas, that's one case the BPD solved faster than you can say Gotcha! The "evidence" was collected--the phone bills--and walked past Thomas, who wrote about it in his book; he was told flat out he'd never see them. What more did he need to know about his attempt to actually investigate this case to conclude the BPD was a beard for the Ramsey's true lawyer, Alex Hunter?

Yes, "Crazy Aunt Pam," as Peter Boyles calls her, certainly had carte blanche evidence collecting, didn't she? Wearing a police jacket, complete with a complimentary Happy Meal--it's like a Coen Brothers film isn't it?
KoldKase,
Quote:
Oh, how Hunter and the Ramseys hated Thomas. He actually threw open the door on their little conspiracy. He didn't have all the pieces, or if he did, no doubt his publisher wouldn't include the most damaging stuff. To this day, saying his name is like throwing water on the Wicked Witch of Oz. (I love that about him.)
They sure did. And they litigated and shut him up. I've not heard anything from him. Maybe he became tired and moved on, but he knows stuff that we only speculate about e.g. splinter/paintbrush handle, prior abuse, size-6 Wednesday pair, Christmas wrapper for the size-12's etc etc. I hope one day he pops up on a forum such as this, or does a radio interview, and completes the parts of his book that were redacted?


Quote:
And if they don't, we'll just write out blank checks for them, call it a bail out, and let the taxpayers pick up the bill--DOUBLE DIPPING! Corruption in this country, much like in the Ramsey case, is an open secret.
Sure, the Federal Reserve prints dollars like there is no tomorrow, and Joe Public picks up the bill for what is euphemistically termed Capitalization, usually of the banks. The end result will be that the dollar will lose the confidence of other countries e.g. China , Russia who will refuse to accept dollar payments, and at some distant point the dollar will cease to be a reserve currency. At this point the US economy will collapse. Bear in mind Russia is an oil and gas exporter and China is now the worlds prime manufacturer.

Quote:
it's like a Coen Brothers film isn't it?
It sure is. It would also make a very good Columbo script. I envisage the opening scene with the Ramsey's staging the wine-cellar, you get to see Patsy dramatically dialling 911, and the initial lea response. Then later in the day, grumpy and annoyed at being called out on his vacation, Columbo turns up in his oldsmobile, takes out his notebook and starts his usual round of apparently inane questions.

Excuse me Maam, could I ask one more question? Yous see I'm confused about the underwear JonBenet was wearing when she was found. Now Maam, did you say they were a Christmas gift, was that for JonBenet? Oh I see, for your niece, but you decided to give them to JonBenet, you placed them in her underwear drawer? OK, well I have a problem with that Maam, Steve Thomas says they found no size-12 underwear in JonBenet's underwear drawer, yet they turned up in a packing crate at your house in Michigan, how could that happen Maam?



Quote:
Yes, "Crazy Aunt Pam," as Peter Boyles calls her, certainly had carte blanche evidence collecting, didn't she? Wearing a police jacket, complete with a complimentary Happy Meal--it's like a Coen Brothers film isn't it?
Totally pre-arranged, premeditated, planned. The Happy Meal would look oh so incriminating in a Columbo style movie script. Then there is the doll order , Columbo would have a field day with that. Or Columbo this is Lou Smit the legendary detective, have you two met before, LOL.




.
Reply With Quote
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:
  #82  
Old 02-06-2012, 08:04 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Here's something potentially interesting. I mean, it made my heart beat fast and has me wondering if I'm imagining things...that kind of interesting.

Cynic posted a link to Peter Boyles's 15 years later, anniversary radio show on the case. For those who don't know. Boyles has been talking about this case on a Colorado talk radio show since the beginning, and he clearly believes the Ramseys were involved. He's had many insiders as guests through the years, and his show was the one which had current Boulder DA Stan Garnett on when Garnett said nobody's cleared in this case.

So cynic posted this series of links here on another thread, as well; but I was watching them the last two days and commenting at FFJ where he has a thread devoted to the show. There are guests who have good insight into the case, as well as Boyles' own thoughts about it--all very interesting stuff, complimented by the satirical songs this group put together from time to time about case absurdities.

Then I came across #6 in the series and a caller who dropped what I consider to be...mind-blowing, if it's true. Did I say mind-blowing? I mean a break in the case that would call for the U.S. Attorney General to step in and start an investigation, if it's true at all.

But it's Boulder, so apparently no one has even noticed it...it even flew right over Boyles's head.

Well, see what you think. If there's anything to it, I owe Lockheed Martin an apology. At the very least, their hit squad can stand down.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...t=10067&page=2
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #83  
Old 02-06-2012, 09:08 PM
DeeDee249 DeeDee249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In the Federal Witness Protection Program
Posts: 7,448
Like so many of us have felt all along....family member causes death of JB, not meaning to kill her, and the death is staged to look like a kidnapping/murder.

Like we said....

Didn't I read where someone was heard to say to JR "It was an accident, John" and words to that effect, intimating that they knew what happened. Not that JR didn't know, but just a comment that could have meant that since it was an accident, just come clean with everyone OR since it was an accident, no one will ever know the truth and it will remain an unsolved crime. Not sure which.
I don't remember if it was AH who said that or the Rs Pastor. Anyone else recall that comment?
__________________
THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:
  #84  
Old 02-07-2012, 11:10 AM
deca deca is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 2,098
Just FYI, I have known a few people to work at LM and they have all had to take lie detectors. Same with some other companies out there that deal with homeland security, very top secret weaponry, etc. They take/give them periodically to make sure they aren't selling secrets.
Reply With Quote
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to deca For This Useful Post:
  #85  
Old 02-07-2012, 03:20 PM
UKGuy UKGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoldKase View Post
Here's something potentially interesting. I mean, it made my heart beat fast and has me wondering if I'm imagining things...that kind of interesting.

Cynic posted a link to Peter Boyles's 15 years later, anniversary radio show on the case. For those who don't know. Boyles has been talking about this case on a Colorado talk radio show since the beginning, and he clearly believes the Ramseys were involved. He's had many insiders as guests through the years, and his show was the one which had current Boulder DA Stan Garnett on when Garnett said nobody's cleared in this case.

So cynic posted this series of links here on another thread, as well; but I was watching them the last two days and commenting at FFJ where he has a thread devoted to the show. There are guests who have good insight into the case, as well as Boyles' own thoughts about it--all very interesting stuff, complimented by the satirical songs this group put together from time to time about case absurdities.

Then I came across #6 in the series and a caller who dropped what I consider to be...mind-blowing, if it's true. Did I say mind-blowing? I mean a break in the case that would call for the U.S. Attorney General to step in and start an investigation, if it's true at all.

But it's Boulder, so apparently no one has even noticed it...it even flew right over Boyles's head.

Well, see what you think. If there's anything to it, I owe Lockheed Martin an apology. At the very least, their hit squad can stand down.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...t=10067&page=2

KoldKase,
That Patsy called Mayor Leslie Durgin and asked a favor of her buddy, is par for the Ramsey course. An initial interpretation is that Mayor Leslie Durgin was, like many others, simply used to promote the Ramsey's agenda?

Now if this is true, it does mean phone calls were made that morning, probably prior to the 911 call? Mayor Leslie Durgin must have thought this communication was going to become public knowledge at some point, so offered the I did not want to know defence e.g. ignorance. Despite all those involved in the coverup becoming aware that JonBenet had been abused chronically, they remained silent.

This is interesting
Quote:
Durgin recalled recently how that she'd always wanted to work for a tabloid, just to see what it was like "to get paid to make up stories." Now, after nearly a year of answering questions from the tabloid press about the Ramsey murder case, her curiosity has been more than satisfied about how it's done, she said.
Is that an indirect admission that make up stories were fabricated to match the Ramsey agenda?

There is currently a cold-case review of JonBenet's homicide being undertaken. I reckon there should be a mass emailing campaign to highlight what this witness claims and ask for the recovered phone records to be made available.




.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:
  #86  
Old 02-07-2012, 03:44 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
KoldKase,
That Patsy called Mayor Leslie Durgin and asked a favor of her buddy, is par for the Ramsey course. An initial interpretation is that Mayor Leslie Durgin was, like many others, simply used to promote the Ramsey's agenda?

Now if this is true, it does mean phone calls were made that morning, probably prior to the 911 call? Mayor Leslie Durgin must have thought this communication was going to become public knowledge at some point, so offered the I did not want to know defence e.g. ignorance. Despite all those involved in the coverup becoming aware that JonBenet had been abused chronically, they remained silent.

This is interesting

Is that an indirect admission that make up stories were fabricated to match the Ramsey agenda?


.
I've been pondering, of course. I doubt Patsy called the mayor up and said, "Hey, we just bludgeoned, garroted, and sexually assaulted our child and we're calling it a kidnapping attempt. You in?"

I imagine it would have been more like, "We've had a terrible accident and [insert pitiful story here]. We want to grieve in private, and I just don't think I can take another tragedy now if the police go hard on us--can you help?"

If this call happened before 911 was called, that might have brought a sleepy Leslie Durgin's sympathy into play and she made the call, never imaging what had actually happened to JonBenet. Once the BPD was pulled into what later clearly because the cover-up of a vicious abuse and murder, what're the mayor and Koby going to do? Admit they helped obstruct an investigation because the Ramseys were rich, affluent friends of the mayor? I don't think so. This would explain the "I don't want to know" comment: realizing she'd been played, and well, by a child killer might have been a bitter moment for Durgin.

Of course, this is all speculation.

Quote:
There is currently a cold-case review of JonBenet's homicide being undertaken. I reckon there should be a mass emailing campaign to highlight what this witness claims and ask for the recovered phone records to be made available.
Yes, it would be amazing if this could be investigated by someone who actually gave a chit about the injustice, corruption, and cover up that went on in Boulder...but I won't hold my breath. Those phone records were collected within a year of the murder to prosecute the PI who illegally obtained them, and they've never been "used" for anything other than that, at least, as far as we know. They're no secret, let me say; Thomas wrote about this in his book in 2000.

Personally, if someone actually did try to go after all those who corrupted this case, I'd expect a real bloodbath in Boulder. The list is, after all, long and distinguished.
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #87  
Old 02-07-2012, 03:47 PM
SuperDave's Avatar
SuperDave SuperDave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ceti Alpha V
Posts: 11,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by FairM View Post
I have this book on order, looking forward to reading it.
Hey, FairM! LTNS.

I'm glad you're here. You can be witness as I induct KoldKase into the Order of the Dragon. She's got a lot to say. People should listen to it.

In all seriousness, I hope it's a good read.
__________________
All posts made by me are MY exclusive property, and are NOT to be used or reproduced without my permission. DAVE SMASH THIEVES!
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SuperDave For This Useful Post:
  #88  
Old 02-07-2012, 03:50 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by deca View Post
Just FYI, I have known a few people to work at LM and they have all had to take lie detectors. Same with some other companies out there that deal with homeland security, very top secret weaponry, etc. They take/give them periodically to make sure they aren't selling secrets.
Thanks for the info, deca.

Maybe that's why JR was asked to take the polygraph by LM. Why he refused to take it if it's SOP is another question, I guess. Maybe he was afraid someone would slip some questions in he didn't want to answer? Or maybe the article was inaccurate--that's happened. No way to know at this point, I guess.
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #89  
Old 02-07-2012, 03:52 PM
SuperDave's Avatar
SuperDave SuperDave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ceti Alpha V
Posts: 11,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
Just this past weekend I watched the DVD of Schiller's "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town" again, but with the Director's Commentary turned ON. I'd seen this movie several times, because I own a copy, but hadn't listened to the comments from Schiller in a while. It was very enlightening. In the very beginning he mentions that right at the outset, a main roadblock to justice in the case was the unique situation in Boulder LE of having a very liberal ex-hippie as a DA and a very conservative police department. Right off the bat their approaches to crime and criminals in particular came from opposite ideologies.
That would be it, all right. As I said, even if he DID believe PR to be guilty, he probably saw the right-wing police force as a greater threat to society than the crooks.

Quote:
Schiller's book and movie are fairly neutral, but he plainly feels the famlies' actions were not the actions of innocent people. He also comments that right from the start, the R's defense team defended them as guilty clients, not as innocent people being framed. I agree.
And SD makes three.

Quote:
All I have to do is read the interviews with the Rs, especially Patsy. I can tell more from what LW does NOT allow Patsy to answer than from what she says. In many cases he does not even allow certain questions to be asked. Or he jumps right in with diversionary comments. LE, in sometimes perplexing laxity and sloppiness, allows themselves to be distracted and led off topic. Then, when the interview resumes, they fail to go back to that topic so that it is addressed properly.
That's always bothered me. They treated them with kid gloves. Whatever happened to the Third Degree?
__________________
All posts made by me are MY exclusive property, and are NOT to be used or reproduced without my permission. DAVE SMASH THIEVES!

Last edited by Tricia; 02-09-2012 at 08:31 PM. Reason: Edited out cruel comment
Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to SuperDave For This Useful Post:
  #90  
Old 02-07-2012, 03:55 PM
SuperDave's Avatar
SuperDave SuperDave is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ceti Alpha V
Posts: 11,158
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoldKase View Post
Hunter and Lacy were the biggest obstacles to solving this case, IMO. I think both of them were guilty of dereliction of duty, of obstruction of the investigation, and without question of destroying the case completely for all time.
Cyril Wecht once described this case as "the perfect storm." I disagree. It was a normal storm; Hunter and Lacy were just really sh***y captains.

Quote:
Lin Wood was always "cuing" John and Patsy when the questions were damaging to them or when their answers were clearly incriminating. Wood earned his money from the Ramseys, I'll give him that.
Yeah, but that money won't help him when he's standing tall before the Man Upstairs. I'd go further than that, but it got erased last time, so I'll mind my p's and q's.
__________________
All posts made by me are MY exclusive property, and are NOT to be used or reproduced without my permission. DAVE SMASH THIEVES!
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SuperDave For This Useful Post:
  #91  
Old 02-07-2012, 04:00 PM
UKGuy UKGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
Like so many of us have felt all along....family member causes death of JB, not meaning to kill her, and the death is staged to look like a kidnapping/murder.

Like we said....

Didn't I read where someone was heard to say to JR "It was an accident, John" and words to that effect, intimating that they knew what happened. Not that JR didn't know, but just a comment that could have meant that since it was an accident, just come clean with everyone OR since it was an accident, no one will ever know the truth and it will remain an unsolved crime. Not sure which.
I don't remember if it was AH who said that or the Rs Pastor. Anyone else recall that comment?
DeeDee249,
Quote:
family member causes death of JB, not meaning to kill her,
RDI, absolutely.

Quote:
and the death is staged to look like a kidnapping/murder.
I wonder what was intended here. Since the kidnapping and murder do not require a garrote. Was this a last minute addition?

Also in ITRMI, chapter:A Gathering Storm Steve Thomas recounts that Coroner Meyer told him that JonBenet had both a chronic and an acute vaginal injury, that the latter had occurred about the time of death.

I just wonder if this was a staged injury inflicted by the use of the paintbrush?


Was it Lou Smit who referred to the accident?


.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:
  #92  
Old 02-07-2012, 04:25 PM
DeeDee249 DeeDee249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In the Federal Witness Protection Program
Posts: 7,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
DeeDee249,

RDI, absolutely.


I wonder what was intended here. Since the kidnapping and murder do not require a garrote. Was this a last minute addition?

Also in ITRMI, chapter:A Gathering Storm Steve Thomas recounts that Coroner Meyer told him that JonBenet had both a chronic and an acute vaginal injury, that the latter had occurred about the time of death.

I just wonder if this was a staged injury inflicted by the use of the paintbrush?


Was it Lou Smit who referred to the accident?


.
When a "kidnapping" victim is going to remain in the house, and is dead, there has to be SOMETHING visual to explain the death. Something killed her- yet the head bash (which I believe came first and was not intended to kill her) left NO visible trace. No blood, no scalp laceration. It was only revealed at the autopsy and, according to Det. Arndt- who was there- those present at the autopsy were stunned to discover it. So how to explain the dead body? So...while the garrote specifically may not have been needed-something visible WAS needed. The cord and "handle" were handy right there in the basement- JR was familiar with garrotes knots. It isn't a huge leap to see how it was decided to stage a ligature strangulation.
And there is always the possibility that the garrote was used as a sexual device, but I have a hard time accepting that they'd have left the garrote in place if that was the case. However, if the original was something soft, like a scarf (JR put one in her coffin, and a scarf was found in an odd place in the basement- I believe on the washer/dryer just outside the wineceller) then the pressure on the vagus nerve could have stopped her heart as well. The replacement ligature was the cord.
__________________
THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:
  #93  
Old 02-07-2012, 04:30 PM
DeeDee249 DeeDee249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In the Federal Witness Protection Program
Posts: 7,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
KoldKase,
That Patsy called Mayor Leslie Durgin and asked a favor of her buddy, is par for the Ramsey course. An initial interpretation is that Mayor Leslie Durgin was, like many others, simply used to promote the Ramsey's agenda?

Now if this is true, it does mean phone calls were made that morning, probably prior to the 911 call? Mayor Leslie Durgin must have thought this communication was going to become public knowledge at some point, so offered the I did not want to know defence e.g. ignorance. Despite all those involved in the coverup becoming aware that JonBenet had been abused chronically, they remained silent.

This is interesting

Is that an indirect admission that make up stories were fabricated to match the Ramsey agenda?

There is currently a cold-case review of JonBenet's homicide being undertaken. I reckon there should be a mass emailing campaign to highlight what this witness claims and ask for the recovered phone records to be made available.




.

That is why those phone and cell phone records are so important. And the judge who ordered them sealed had to know that. Just one more thing to make you say "Hmmmm".

Wondering if Patsy asked the mayor to "fix it" made me recall that Patsy actually DID ask someone to fix it. I am not sure who, but Patsy asked someone "Couldn't you please fix this for me?" not long after the murder. Anyone remember who it was or the circumstances?
__________________
THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:
  #94  
Old 02-07-2012, 05:15 PM
UKGuy UKGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by KoldKase View Post
I've been pondering, of course. I doubt Patsy called the mayor up and said, "Hey, we just bludgeoned, garroted, and sexually assaulted our child and we're calling it a kidnapping attempt. You in?"

I imagine it would have been more like, "We've had a terrible accident and [insert pitiful story here]. We want to grieve in private, and I just don't think I can take another tragedy now if the police go hard on us--can you help?"

If this call happened before 911 was called, that might have brought a sleepy Leslie Durgin's sympathy into play and she made the call, never imaging what had actually happened to JonBenet. Once the BPD was pulled into what later clearly because the cover-up of a vicious abuse and murder, what're the mayor and Koby going to do? Admit they helped obstruct an investigation because the Ramseys were rich, affluent friends of the mayor? I don't think so. This would explain the "I don't want to know" comment: realizing she'd been played, and well, by a child killer might have been a bitter moment for Durgin.

Of course, this is all speculation.



Yes, it would be amazing if this could be investigated by someone who actually gave a chit about the injustice, corruption, and cover up that went on in Boulder...but I won't hold my breath. Those phone records were collected within a year of the murder to prosecute the PI who illegally obtained them, and they've never been "used" for anything other than that, at least, as far as we know. They're no secret, let me say; Thomas wrote about this in his book in 2000.

Personally, if someone actually did try to go after all those who corrupted this case, I'd expect a real bloodbath in Boulder. The list is, after all, long and distinguished.
KoldKase,
Quote:
Personally, if someone actually did try to go after all those who corrupted this case, I'd expect a real bloodbath in Boulder. The list is, after all, long and distinguished.
You bet! Its alleged that Mayor Leslie Durgin was phoned, the Governor was phoned, the Lawyers were phoned and told to get interviewing. So its one big conspiracy.

I reckon one day the truth will be made public, but long after John Ramsey is dead. Its too good a media story to be missed. Someone will gather the facts, do the interviews, play those phone tapes to the public, and ask the conspiracy question?

Just adding this here for convenience:
Quote:
Yes, "Crazy Aunt Pam," as Peter Boyles calls her, certainly had carte blanche evidence collecting, didn't she? Wearing a police jacket, complete with a complimentary Happy Meal--it's like a Coen Brothers film isn't it?
I went back and read the paragraph ITRMI chapter: Little Miss Christmas where the clearance takes place, and Detective Mike Everett supervised the process, which took more than one trip over three to four hours. Now two items of interest that were removed, which were not required, since replacements were easily available, these were Patsy's Nordstrom's credit card, and a cell phone!

Could the latter have been used to phone Mayor Leslie Durgin?



.

Last edited by UKGuy; 02-07-2012 at 05:45 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:
  #95  
Old 02-07-2012, 05:31 PM
UKGuy UKGuy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
When a "kidnapping" victim is going to remain in the house, and is dead, there has to be SOMETHING visual to explain the death. Something killed her- yet the head bash (which I believe came first and was not intended to kill her) left NO visible trace. No blood, no scalp laceration. It was only revealed at the autopsy and, according to Det. Arndt- who was there- those present at the autopsy were stunned to discover it. So how to explain the dead body? So...while the garrote specifically may not have been needed-something visible WAS needed. The cord and "handle" were handy right there in the basement- JR was familiar with garrotes knots. It isn't a huge leap to see how it was decided to stage a ligature strangulation.
And there is always the possibility that the garrote was used as a sexual device, but I have a hard time accepting that they'd have left the garrote in place if that was the case. However, if the original was something soft, like a scarf (JR put one in her coffin, and a scarf was found in an odd place in the basement- I believe on the washer/dryer just outside the wineceller) then the pressure on the vagus nerve could have stopped her heart as well. The replacement ligature was the cord.
DeeDee249,
Yes any of the above. I'm just not convinced, as yet, by any particular theory for the addition of the garrote.

It was not required. The stager did not need to offer a visible cause of death, since the stager e.g. RDI, was fabricating a bedtime abduction, the visible cause of death is redundant because JonBenet is hidden away in the wine-cellar or initially from an investigation perspective she is gone , and has been kidnapped.

So offering a visible cause of death only comes into play if JonBenet is discovered, by then, theoretically its too late?

The forensic evidence, fibers etc, suggest it was Patsy who added the garrote. I speculate that it was also Patsy who inflicted the acute internal injury, and changed her into those size-12's.

This would mean Patsy really contributed the most to the staging, particularly when you take into account her writing the ransom note?


Yet it was John who showered and cleaned up etc, while Patsy retained her clothes from the evening before. Very bizarre.



.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:
  #96  
Old 02-08-2012, 01:43 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Oh, lord. Before I become a Dragon Lady and such, let me translate my previous, cryptic post into English for you. (I'm so easily distracted when it comes to proof reading. sigh)

Quote:
If this call happened before 911 was called, that might have brought a sleepy Leslie Durgin's sympathy into play and she made the call, never imagining what had actually happened to JonBenet. Once the BPD was pulled into what later clearly became the cover-up of a vicious abuse and murder, what are the mayor and Koby going to do? Admit they helped obstruct an investigation because the Ramseys were rich, affluent friends of the mayor? I don't think so. This would explain the "I don't want to know" comment: realizing she'd been played, and well, by a child killer might have been a bitter moment for Durgin.
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.

Last edited by KoldKase; 02-08-2012 at 02:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #97  
Old 02-08-2012, 02:01 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
Hey, FairM! LTNS.

I'm glad you're here. You can be witness as I induct KoldKase into the Order of the Dragon. She's got a lot to say. People should listen to it.
I've always wanted to be officially declared a Dragon Lady, cause I've certainly earned it.

[IMG][/IMG]
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #98  
Old 02-08-2012, 02:44 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
When a "kidnapping" victim is going to remain in the house, and is dead, there has to be SOMETHING visual to explain the death. Something killed her- yet the head bash (which I believe came first and was not intended to kill her) left NO visible trace. No blood, no scalp laceration. It was only revealed at the autopsy and, according to Det. Arndt- who was there- those present at the autopsy were stunned to discover it. So how to explain the dead body? So...while the garrote specifically may not have been needed-something visible WAS needed. The cord and "handle" were handy right there in the basement- JR was familiar with garrotes knots. It isn't a huge leap to see how it was decided to stage a ligature strangulation.
I have often wondered about this: I know people argue Patsy was fully capable of making this instrument of death, and that's true, but it always has "felt" like a man's work to me.

With that in mind...

Quote:
And there is always the possibility that the garrote was used as a sexual device, but I have a hard time accepting that they'd have left the garrote in place if that was the case. However, if the original was something soft, like a scarf (JR put one in her coffin, and a scarf was found in an odd place in the basement- I believe on the washer/dryer just outside the wineceller) then the pressure on the vagus nerve could have stopped her heart as well. The replacement ligature was the cord.
As I've said many times, Dr. Wecht can blow me out of the water with his expertise and experience, so the "suppressed vagus nerve" on its face is not a theory I reject.

What I do reject, however, is the complete lack of an explanation as to why there is no bruising indicating repeated strangulation, as would have occurred if there were some erotic strangulation "game" going on, as Wecht theorizes.

All the bruising on the neck is, to me, unquestionably caused by the one and only ligature found still tied onto the child. The lines are consistent with pulling it tighter up the neck. The petchiae under the skin are consistent with this, as well. The dark, triangle-shaped bruise on the left anterior neck is consistent with the same ligature being pulled and dragging up the neck.

The deep bruising under the ligature's final resting place is proof positive to me that this is the cord that cut off blood and oxygen to/from her brain and killed her. If she were already dead, that bruising would be very different, would it not?

If there were a different series of bruises from another cord or scarf used on her, I don't see them. Since the bruises on the neck are associated with the actual cord found on the neck, how can she have died from a previous strangulation BEFORE THAT CORD WAS APPLIED with such deadly consequences?

The evidence is this: the color of the bruising on the neck is consistent with it having happened perimortem. Postmortem bruising has a different color.

Dr. Meyer might not have been the best in the world, but he certainly knew that difference, as well as he brought in a pediatric specialist the next day to confirm his autopsy findings, and he decided strangulation was the cause of death.

So how can the child die from strangulation twice? The weakness of Dr. Wecht's theory is simply that there is no evidence on the body to support her being strangled two separate times, not even a strangle and release, then repeat, as per erotic strangulation.

You are much better at these medical technicalities than I, DeeDee, so I make this argument with respect. I simply have never seen anyone explain this in a way for it to make sense to me--which may just be my own failings, I admit.

Trying to get to the bottom of this for myself, I've posted many photos, some of which I've marked to illustrate my problems with the "vagus nerve" theory, which I posted at FFJ, as I'm sure you know. On page one are autopsy photos, and then on page two I drew lines along the bruising to illustrate the path of the cord. WARNING!! GRAPHIC AUTOPSY PHOTOS! If you don't have a strong stomach, don't click!

Autopsy photos: CAUTION GRAPHIC - Forums For Justice


I know we've had this discussion before, DeeDee. But like so many in this case, it goes on. Also, I forget a lot now, it's been so long, so I always appreciate your insights.
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.

Last edited by KoldKase; 02-08-2012 at 02:56 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #99  
Old 02-08-2012, 04:22 PM
KoldKase's Avatar
KoldKase KoldKase is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 985
Quote:
Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
DeeDee249,
Yes any of the above. I'm just not convinced, as yet, by any particular theory for the addition of the garrote.

It was not required. The stager did not need to offer a visible cause of death, since the stager e.g. RDI, was fabricating a bedtime abduction, the visible cause of death is redundant because JonBenet is hidden away in the wine-cellar or initially from an investigation perspective she is gone , and has been kidnapped.

So offering a visible cause of death only comes into play if JonBenet is discovered, by then, theoretically its too late?

The forensic evidence, fibers etc, suggest it was Patsy who added the garrote. I speculate that it was also Patsy who inflicted the acute internal injury, and changed her into those size-12's.

This would mean Patsy really contributed the most to the staging, particularly when you take into account her writing the ransom note?


Yet it was John who showered and cleaned up etc, while Patsy retained her clothes from the evening before. Very bizarre.



.
It's just too hard for us who are within some range of "normal" when it comes to parenting, isn't it?

So I return to the evidence, like most people here:

Blood from JB's nose was found on the pillowcase on her bed by LE: see the 1998 LE interview with Patsy.

Because of this, I am fairly sure this means her head was bludgeoned in or near her room, or at least on the 2nd floor.

The garrote cord was tied onto the child's neck, but I have not seen any unquestionable source with evidence proving exactly where that was done. Since it was tied in the back of the neck, and since she was laid on her stomach by the paint tray (carpet fiber from the basement and a paint chip matched to paint from the paint tray were found on her chin at autopsy), it's possible the cord was tied onto her neck by the paint tray in the basement, as well.

The paintbrush was inserted into her vagina, as the birefringent material found indicates. That paintbrush was broken beside the paint tray, as slivers of it were found on the carpet there. So one can argue she was brought downstairs unconscious from the head blow, laid on her back, undressed, paintbrush from paint tray inserted, then she was wiped down, redressed, and turned over, a cord tied on her neck at this time, the paintbrush broken and tied onto the cord, both as she was lying on her stomach. Then the "handle" was pulled from behind/over her. I'm assuming, of course, that she was wiped down and redressed before she was turned over because her bladder released onto the front of her long johns and onto the basement carpet by the cellar door when she expired, or that's what Lou Smit said.

Then her body was moved into the cellar room, laid on a blanket which was wrapped around her "papoose style"--you can see a similar picture of just such a wrapping around her while she was a baby in John's arms in one of the books on this case--maybe the Ramsey's?

At some point during this staging, the cord was tied to her wrists, and the duct tape was put on her mouth.

This is the best I've been able to piece this murder together from the evidence I've read about or seen on TV programs, etc., and this is always second-hand/third-or-more-hand, many times repeated, so I could be wrong about much of this, I must say.

One thing I do believe: if JonBenet's blood from her nose found on the pillowcase is truly a fact in evidence and came from drainage from the head blow, then not-quite-10 year old Burke was probably not capable of carrying his sister's limp 45 lbs. to the basement by himself. I think this is reasonable speculation because during the 1998 LE interview with her, Patsy and Haney determined a timeline of a few days before the murder since JB's sheets had been changed; so it's likely that nosebleed happened in that time period, when Patsy herself said she had no knowledge of JB having a nosebleed (though Patsy tried to equivocate the blood drops by saying JB picked her nose).

I believe a lot of terrible things about Patsy and John, but I don't believe they'd have carried their dying child to the basement and had Burke accompany them to participate or watch her being garroted. So if JB was bludgeoned on the 2nd floor, Burke was not involved in the remainder of the crimes at least, IMO.

Who struck the head blow? That's the main question, for me, because I think that was the reaction to whatever action set this whole thing off that night.

I believe Patsy knew JB had been molested by someone in their inner circle--or even Patsy herself, as theories of that are also possible. Because of the autopsy results, because of JB's age and lifestyle, because of the physical evidence of the fibers and ransom note, and because of so much more, I believe Patsy was involved in this murder at least after the head blow.

Personally, I think it's entirely possible that John and Patsy took the child to the basement together. They both have fibers found on the body, with Patsy's found tied into the murder weapon.

Of course, John's shirt fibers on the genitals don't prove he was even there for the strangulation, so I'm only speculating he was there based on what I've said before: the garrote looks to me like something a man would think of, not a woman. Also, I believe John lied to LE many times, as well, but of course, he could have been covering up for someone else in his family.

Why use the garrote if she was dying from the head blow? I think DeeDee may be right, but maybe it's more complicated than that. If neither Patsy nor John were present when the head blow happened--meaning Burke bludgeoned his sister in a sibling fight--they might not have known how completely her skull was damaged. Perhaps the ones who needed the visual image of death were in fact her parents.

Maybe they thought she was dead already. I've seen so many good sources say that head injuries are totally unpredictable. Maybe JonBenet was on her bed, perhaps some convulsing happened, but maybe one or both of the parents found her and felt no detectable pulse, not by them, at any rate. So perhaps they took her downstairs to stage the death, thinking this would look convincing to LE if kidnappers were involved. Otherwise, why leave the child? If she were only unconscious, why not take her, even better she wouldn't scream or fight?

This is hard to imagine, because it's all so unimaginable. So I find it difficult to be clear on this speculation. But it has occurred to me that the Ramseys, one or more, were improvising at the climax of a crisis that had begun some time before, when they found out JonBenet was being molested.

So was the strangulation truly "an accident" if any of this were truly what happened? That would be a point of law I'm not adequate to argue: "intent" would be the issue on which it would hang, but I've seen some compelling argument, with case law cited, that not calling for help, even if there was no intent to kill, would put this case into serious felony murder charges.

Well, these are my best guesses. That's all they'll ever be, and I've never seen anyone agree on much of anything about this case, so I don't expect anyone to do so now.

But getting those phone records to track the Ramsey calls that morning would go a long way towards finally putting any "intruder" nonsense to rest, IMO.

And it's also my opinion that finding out who was molesting JB BEFORE that night would break the case wide open, as far as knowing who did what to JonBenet Ramsey on Dec. 25/26, 1996.
__________________
Bloomies underwear model:
Bloomies model


My opinions, nothing more.

Last edited by KoldKase; 02-08-2012 at 05:02 PM.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to KoldKase For This Useful Post:
  #100  
Old 02-08-2012, 09:26 PM
DeeDee249 DeeDee249 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: In the Federal Witness Protection Program
Posts: 7,448
It is unfortunate that the house was released by LE as soon as it was. There was much evidence to be found. Maybe we'd know where she was first attacked. I feel she died in the basement, because I agree that is where the garrote was made and placed on her.
About the fibers, though...JR's dark wool shirt fibers were found in the crotch of her panties, but I wasn't aware they had been stated to be found on her genitals. I realize that would make sense. I also know that "dark fibers" were found on her thighs and pubic area (the vulva/genitals) but I thought that was identified as dark cotton fibers, not the wool fibers of the shirt. JR owned a dark blue terrycloth bathrobe, which was found in the den. (an odd place for a bathrobe). I never saw where the dark cotton fibers from were ever tested against that terry robe or against any towels in the home or against the black comforter found stuffed into the suitcase. So much was left untested.
__________________
THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.
Reply With Quote
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Great Book by Peggy Lakin About JonBenet Ramsey Tricia JonBenet Ramsey 16 08-28-2012 07:45 PM
John Ramsey's Track Record for Voters (DOI-John's own words) Show Me JonBenet Ramsey 7 05-23-2004 10:12 AM
Whatever Is John Ramsey Thinking? Barbara JonBenet Ramsey 20 04-21-2004 03:04 AM
Ramsey housekeeper cannot publish book blueclouds JonBenet Ramsey 1 01-12-2004 09:04 PM


© Copyright Websleuths 1999-2012 New To Site? Need Help?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:11 AM.

Advertisements

Pre-Order Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony today!