Jayelles
New Member
Copying this from FFJ:-
Candy posted this at CS. She has requested that it isn't copied elsewhere but although it would appear we have Candy to thank for its release into the public domain, I'm not sure she can claim copyright. Nevertheless, I won't copy it out of respect for her request:-
http://www.cybersleuths.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004839;p=2
I've largely had little opinion about Fleet White. He's kept quiet about the Ramsey murder and therefore anything I might think/say would be largely speculation. I certainly don't think he's involved in JonBenet's murder in any way.
Now, like another poster, I think this letter is pertinent because it gives us a greater insight than ever before into his frame of mind.
Candy's comment about the letter is:-
I'll address this first.
The purpose of the letter does not appear to to complain about the Ramseys but rather to stress how the Whites were affected by the media handling of the case.
Fleet White is critical of false press coverage which were hurtful and harmful to his family. Steve Thomas blew the whistle on infighting inside the investigation which was harming the investigtion. That was NOT the purpose or focus of the letter so why should Fleet White mention it?
Although Fleet White does not use the letter to say lots of negative things about the ramseys, he does refer to the fact that the Whites have been critical of the ramseys - when he says:-
and when he says:-
Fleet White stressed in this letter that he is a material witness and does not speak about the case publicly. The letter informs us that he is critical of them but that he only repeats these criticisms in the correct forums. IMO, there is nothing significant in the fact that he does not say many negative things about the ramseys in the letter.
Fleet use the letter to apologise for his failure to show at the Miller trial hearings (choosing to go to prison instead). He explained that he felt his summons as a witness was suspicious as he had little to contribute on the matter. He also explained that he felt a conversation initiated by another prior to his being summoned as a witness was no coincidence and that it had been contrived to involve him so that he could be placed in the witness box and questioned about matters which he felt should be reserved for a murder trial. He suspected that there had been an attempt to damage his credibility as a witness.
He expressed the opinion that:-
We know that he subsequently did comply with future summons as per the Wolf depositions. On this occasion, he appeared and stated that he 'could not recall' certain details of the events surrounding JonBenet's murder. Candy has expressed contempt for Fleet White's refusal to discuss his valuable witness observations about the events of Dec 26, 1996. IMO, this more than validates my opinion about his "amnesia" in the Wolf deposition.
The letter Candy has produced give us a valuable insight into Fleet White's considered opinions. He clearly states that there are things which he knows and has never spoken of:-
IMO, this letter more than demonstrates that Fleet White has behaved with honour and sincerity throughout the fiasco.
Candy posted this at CS. She has requested that it isn't copied elsewhere but although it would appear we have Candy to thank for its release into the public domain, I'm not sure she can claim copyright. Nevertheless, I won't copy it out of respect for her request:-
http://www.cybersleuths.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004839;p=2
I've largely had little opinion about Fleet White. He's kept quiet about the Ramsey murder and therefore anything I might think/say would be largely speculation. I certainly don't think he's involved in JonBenet's murder in any way.
Now, like another poster, I think this letter is pertinent because it gives us a greater insight than ever before into his frame of mind.
Candy's comment about the letter is:-
:
....Notice once again how little Fleet says negative about the Ramseys. To him, the real villian is leaks and the press. Funny, he never mentions ST with regard to leaks.
I'll address this first.
The purpose of the letter does not appear to to complain about the Ramseys but rather to stress how the Whites were affected by the media handling of the case.
Fleet White is critical of false press coverage which were hurtful and harmful to his family. Steve Thomas blew the whistle on infighting inside the investigation which was harming the investigtion. That was NOT the purpose or focus of the letter so why should Fleet White mention it?
Although Fleet White does not use the letter to say lots of negative things about the ramseys, he does refer to the fact that the Whites have been critical of the ramseys - when he says:-
JonBenets father, John, had been the chief executive of a successful subsidiary of Lockheed Martin. He and his wife had retained prominent lawyers and were not cooperating with the police.
and when he says:-
Priscilla heard a portion of her secret grand jury testimony discussed on television and radio talk program - testimony that had been highly derogatory of one of JonBenet's parents.
Fleet White stressed in this letter that he is a material witness and does not speak about the case publicly. The letter informs us that he is critical of them but that he only repeats these criticisms in the correct forums. IMO, there is nothing significant in the fact that he does not say many negative things about the ramseys in the letter.
Fleet use the letter to apologise for his failure to show at the Miller trial hearings (choosing to go to prison instead). He explained that he felt his summons as a witness was suspicious as he had little to contribute on the matter. He also explained that he felt a conversation initiated by another prior to his being summoned as a witness was no coincidence and that it had been contrived to involve him so that he could be placed in the witness box and questioned about matters which he felt should be reserved for a murder trial. He suspected that there had been an attempt to damage his credibility as a witness.
He expressed the opinion that:-
In the future if I should receive a lawfully served subpoena I will either contest the subpoena in accordance with the courts procedure or simply comply with the courts order and appear.
We know that he subsequently did comply with future summons as per the Wolf depositions. On this occasion, he appeared and stated that he 'could not recall' certain details of the events surrounding JonBenet's murder. Candy has expressed contempt for Fleet White's refusal to discuss his valuable witness observations about the events of Dec 26, 1996. IMO, this more than validates my opinion about his "amnesia" in the Wolf deposition.
The letter Candy has produced give us a valuable insight into Fleet White's considered opinions. He clearly states that there are things which he knows and has never spoken of:-
I suspected that I would be asked about the events of December 26, 1996 that I had not publicly disclosed for over four years as a witness in the Ramsey investigation.
IMO, this letter more than demonstrates that Fleet White has behaved with honour and sincerity throughout the fiasco.