Has the case fizzled a bit?

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,
Conspiracy to commit homicide in the nth degree might do?

The R's can be charged and brought to court. A conviction is another matter.

A court case is the last the R's want, a public airing of their laundry in public would not look pretty!


.

You are forgetting one of the most important problems in the case from day 1. That is a DA too afraid/incompetent/corrupt to bring charges unless he can be ASSURED a conviction. AH had NEVER prosecuted a case successfully. His one attempt did not result in a conviction, and a mortified AH decided to never attempt to try a case again. Instead, he plea-bargained and was quite well-know for it.
2. EVERY subsequent DA has come under the thumb of corruption and are afraid to challenge the powerful defense team. These DAs won't file charges unless they are guaranteed a conviction, and juries don't guarantee anything. Especially juries that can be tampered with by the defense team and threat of litigation/retaliation.

 

[OpenMind4U]

You are forgetting one of the most important problems in the case from day 1. That is a DA too afraid/incompetent/corrupt to bring charges unless he can be ASSURED a conviction. AH had NEVER prosecuted a case successfully. His one attempt did not result in a conviction, and a mortified AH decided to never attempt to try a case again. Instead, he plea-bargained and was quite well-know for it.
2. EVERY subsequent DA has come under the thumb of corruption and are afraid to challenge the powerful defense team. These DAs won't file charges unless they are guaranteed a conviction, and juries don't guarantee anything. Especially juries that can be tampered with by the defense team and threat of litigation/retaliation.

DD, OK, agree with you on this one as well...however, AH time is off, he's long gone...what holds the current DA to proceed?! Every DA likes to win, nobody wants to be a looser. But if DA's goal is to take the 'winning' cases only then something is really wrong with our jurisdiction system! Even the most likely 'winning' cases can be lost (hate to mention OJ and Anthony cases)....According to cynic post, the LAW has provition to CHARGE Ramsey TODAY, no time limitation!...And let's jury decide!...cannot understand why 'corruption' world of AH and ML should be a permanent legacy for the current Boulder's DA???!!!!

 

[Bonnette]

But if DA's goal is to take the 'winning' cases only then something is really wrong with our jurisdiction system!

Right, there is.

Even the most likely 'winning' cases can be lost (hate to mention OJ and Anthony cases)...

This is precisely why DAs prefer to try cases that are freighted with hard evidence - they want to avoid embarrassment, and they do not wish to lose elected office by "wasting" taxpayers' money on grand juries and cases that carry a high risk of acquittal.

...cannot understand why 'corruption' world of AH and ML should be a permanent legacy for the current Boulder's DA???!!!!

The culture of Boulder has not changed since Thomas wrote his book, which remains one of the most accurate (if understandably vitriolic) assessments of a politically correct environment ever written.

 

[DeeDee249]

THAT particular DA (AH) would only take cases he was sure to win. It is not indicative of all DA's, though there is plenty of corruption in many of them. As for the successive BOULDER DAs well...let's just say they all caved to pressure from "outside sources".

 

[midwest mama]

cynic,

Do you think Kolar knows about possibility of charging JR with 'kidnapping felony'?? Now, I understand why he used word 'kidnapping' and emphasized it's meaning during his interview with Boyler!!!!

WOW!!!!!!! Thank you again!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!....very-very much!

Also, he did title his book, Foreign Faction, Who Really KIDNAPPED JonBenet.

Right title, clear presentation of known evidence, disclosure of behavioral aspects, and re-enforcement of a believed Theory of Prosecution.

I'd say he knew what he was doing.

And no desire to stir the pot by with a reply from the RST.

 

[cynic]

cynic,
If I interpret that correctly then all the R's, except BR could have been charged with Felony Murder with the sexual assault and kidnapping as the felony crimes?

Yes. PR and JR could have been charged with felony murder with the underlying felony of kidnapping.
The underlying felony of sexual assault on a child would only work if the abuser was NOT Burke because the age span between Burke and JonBenet is less than 4 years:
Sexual assault on a child. 18-3-405.
(1) Any actor who knowingly subjects another not his or her spouse to any sexual contact commits sexual assault on a child if the victim is less than fifteen years of age and the actor is at least four years older than the victim.

Which must mean JR could still be charged?

Yes, the door is open but no Boulder DA is going to walk through it.

Colorado (Col. Rev. Stat. Sec. 18-3-102)
It is first degree murder for someone, acting alone or with others to (1) commit or attempt to commit arson, robbery, burglary, kidnapping, sexual assault, class 3 felony sexual assault on a child, or escape and (2) in the course of or in furtherance of the crime or in immediate flight from it, anyone causes the death of a person other than one of the participants. The crime is subject to the death penalty or life in prison.

Here is how John fits in:

It is first degree murder for John Ramsey, acting alone or with Patsy Ramsey and/or Burke Ramsey in furtherance of the crime of felony kidnapping to cause the death of JonBenet Ramsey. The crime is subject to the death penalty or life in prison.

In order to make this a “fileable” case, however, you would have to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that John was involved in the furtherance of the crime.
Involvement in staging would be an example.

 

[cynic]

So, at the minimum, we could HOPE for JR: second degree kidnapping (class 2 felony)....I'll take it!!!.....

Do you think Kolar knows about possibility of charging JR with 'kidnapping felony'?? Now, I understand why he used word 'kidnapping' and emphasized it's meaning during his interview with Boyles!!!!

I would think that Kolar is quite aware that that is the only currently available path.
The path is felony murder, however, not a specific charge such as kidnapping.
Felony murder is a special provision that allows for a great degree of latitude in prosecuting an individual.
As a prosecutor you only have to prove involvement in such a way that the crime was furthered.
Kidnapping as an underlying felonious crime would still have to be proven, but it would not be necessary to show who specifically did the kidnapping.
In this case you would have to prove that someone knowingly, forcibly or otherwise seized and carried JonBenet without her consent, and without lawful justification into the wine cellar and that John was in some way involved in the furtherance or “success” of the crime.

 

[cynic]

I forgot to include this in my earlier post, but better late than never.
This is from the late Darnay Hoffman:

Myth #4: Identifying the ransom note writer still doesn't mean the district attorney can get a murder conviction.

This is not only wrong, it is the closest thing to a "Big Lie" being perpetrated by the district attorney's office. This "Whopper" goes something like this: Even if we know the ransom note writer, how can a jury convict them of a murder without more evidence of their physically participating in the actual killing of JonBenét? Simple. Colorado's felony murder statute makes anyone participating in such dangerous crimes as kidnapping equally responsible for any murder resulting from such activity. Much like the get-away-driver to a bank robbery where a guard is killed (who is later found guilty of murder despite not even being in the bank during the robbery and murder) the JonBenét ransom note writer can be charged with first-degree murder even if the police can't prove the writer actually killed JonBenét. Yet Alex Hunter persists in naively stating that even if the ransom note writer were identified and arrested and jailed, they would be immediately eligible for bail. This is also not true because felony murder is not a bailable offense in Colorado. The ransom note writer would have to sit in jail until they went to trial or made a deal to reveal JonBenét's murderer to the district attorney.
http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1998/04/11-ed.html

 

[Chrishope]

I would think that Kolar is quite aware that that is the only currently available path.
The path is felony murder, however, not a specific charge such as kidnapping.
Felony murder is a special provision that allows for a great degree of latitude in prosecuting an individual.
As a prosecutor you only have to prove involvement in such a way that the crime was furthered.
Kidnapping as an underlying felonious crime would still have to be proven, but it would not be necessary to show who specifically did the kidnapping.
In this case you would have to prove that someone knowingly, forcibly or otherwise seized and carried JonBenet without her consent, and without lawful justification into the wine cellar and that John was in some way involved in the furtherance or “success” of the crime.

So, just about no chance at all of a conviction on felony murder then.

 

[BOESP]

So, just about no chance at all of a conviction on felony murder then.

IMO, if JonBenet did not walk to the basement on her own, and she was killed in any part of the house not in the basement, John is the most likely person to have carried her to the basement, particularly if she was injured while in her bedroom. John Andrew Ramsey would have been able to carry her as would any other male over a certain age or with physical capability.

A 45 pound child (if iirc) is not easy for a woman to carry, let alone down stairwells. Ditto for a male child 9-10 years old. I've seen no reports of any dragging marks on JonBenet's person so I infer she either walked or was carried.

So, imo, it might be provable John participated if it hasn't already been proven.

 

[OpenMind4U]

IMO, if JonBenet did not walk to the basement on her own, and she was killed in any part of the house not in the basement, John is the most likely person to have carried her to the basement, particularly if she was injured while in her bedroom. John Andrew Ramsey would have been able to carry her as would any other male over a certain age or with physical capability.

A 45 pound child (if iirc) is not easy for a woman to carry, let alone down stairwells. Ditto for a male child 9-10 years old. I've seen no reports of any dragging marks on JonBenet's person so I infer she either walked or was carried.

So, imo, it might be provable John participated if it hasn't already been proven.

Agree, but IMO the problem will be to proof WHERE (in which room besides the basement!) the head blow has accured. Based on cynic post, I see no problem to charge with 'kidnapping' even if head blow/strangulation were happened in the basement, NEXT to WC...not in WC itself. So, by placing JBR inside the WC, close and latch the door behind - is part of the 'kidnapping' definition, isn't? And it should NOT be matter WHO particularly placed her there, in WC (PR, or BR, or JR) - everyone could be charged with 'kidnapping' felony as participants, regardless who ACTUALY turned the door latch down (probably, except BR due to his age at that time).

Am I wrong with the law interpretation?

 

[BOESP]

Agree, but IMO the problem will be to proof WHERE (in which room besides the basement!) the head blow has accured. Based on cynic post, I see no problem to charge with 'kidnapping' even if head blow/strangulation were happened in the basement, NEXT to WC...not in WC itself. So, by placing JBR inside the WC, close and latch the door behind - is part of the 'kidnapping' definition, isn't? And it should NOT be matter WHO particularly placed her there, in WC (PR, or BR, or JR) - everyone could be charged with 'kidnapping' felony as participants, regardless who ACTUALY turned the door latch down (probably, except BR due to his age at that time).

Am I wrong with the law interpretation?

I know very little about Colorado law OM4U. Wish I did know more.

As far as turning the door latch down, I don't think Burke could have reached it unless he stood on something.

If I understood Cynic's post correctly, what he/she was saying is the criteria for age(s) for sexual abuse was met in this case as was the moving of JonBenet into the wine cellar, whether forcibly or by just telling her to walk in there on her own, meets the criterion for kidnapping. In other words, kidnapping seems to be a chargeable offense in this case based on my understanding not of Colorado law but on what Cynic posted.

My thinking from Kolar's book is, perhaps, he is laying groundwork for possible kidnapping charges. Again, I'm just guessing.

There are some truly convoluted theories being proposed here on Websleuths.

Perhaps, the BDI theory best explains Arndt's comment of believing Patsy did not kill JonBenet and that Patsy was imprisoned by secrets. Arndt was a trained sexual abuse investigator. She also stated that she believed John Ramsey killed JonBenet (or words to that effect).

I'm not sure but what the chronic sexual assault was a separate issue from JonBenet receiving the head injury. The ligature strangulation, in my view, was part of the staging or else what might be termed a mercy killing. I also think Patsy could have lied to Arndt, leading Arndt down the path Patsy wanted her to go.

If Patsy and John wanted to downplay any part Burke might have played why in blue blazes did they seek so much publicity. Actually, why did they seek so much publicity regardless of what happened. I saw next to nothing of their mugs on television that seemed to be pushing for resolution in their daughter's death.

 

[OpenMind4U]

:woohoo:

I know very little about Colorado law OM4U. Wish I did know more.

As far as turning the door latch down, I don't think Burke could have reached it unless he stood on something.

If I understood Cynic's post correctly, what he/she was saying is the criteria for age(s) for sexual abuse was met in this case as was the moving of JonBenet into the wine cellar, whether forcibly or by just telling her to walk in there on her own, meets the criterion for kidnapping. In other words, kidnapping seems to be a chargeable offense in this case based on my understanding not of Colorado law but on what Cynic posted.

My thinking from Kolar's book is, perhaps, he is laying groundwork for possible kidnapping charges. Again, I'm just guessing.

There are some truly convoluted theories being proposed here on Websleuths.

Perhaps, the BDI theory best explains Arndt's comment of believing Patsy did not kill JonBenet and that Patsy was imprisoned by secrets. Arndt was a trained sexual abuse investigator. She also stated that she believed John Ramsey killed JonBenet (or words to that effect).

I'm not sure but what the chronic sexual assault was a separate issue from JonBenet receiving the head injury. The ligature strangulation, in my view, was part of the staging or else what might be termed a mercy killing. I also think Patsy could have lied to Arndt, leading Arndt down the path Patsy wanted her to go.

If Patsy and John wanted to downplay any part Burke might have played why in blue blazes did they seek so much publicity. Actually, why did they seek so much publicity regardless of what happened. I saw next to nothing of their mugs on television that seemed to be pushing for resolution in their daughter's death.

BOESP, Thank you for respond. I'm glad that you agree in 'kidnapping seems to be a chargeable offense in this case'. At the minimum, we can HOPE for possible charges.

In regards of strangulation, IMO (today!), I cannot see it done for the 'mercy' purpose. Such a violent act cannot justify any mercy notion....IMO, if it was done as the 'staging' then it was done to COVER some damage(s) which was done before. Kind of re-direct from the actual injury. For example:

- if parents found JB in some kind of partial hanging position with some marks on her neck already then I can see why they need to 'cover' this with the same or another type of legature; and/or...
- if parents found JB in camatose condition without the knowledge of the ACTUAL damage done to her sculp (because it wasn't visiable!) and were assuming that her neck was broken then again, I can understand the need to use strangulation as the 'staging'.

The only above two scenarios could be justifiable for me to accept the strangulation as the 'staging'....otherwise, the strangulation was an act of the sick mind!

Unfortunately, the more I learned about JB and Burke's up-bringing condition (patological/psyhological problems, dysfunctions, encopresis) the more I'm willing to accept that JBR murder (and all elements of it from RN to acute injury!) was performed by one really disturbed, sick mind.

jmo

P.S. maybe this will refresh our memory?...[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlxJRb5T_XM"]Patsy Ramsey Interrogation with Tom Haney and Trip DeMuth - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Chrishope]

IMO, if JonBenet did not walk to the basement on her own, ...

Which we don't know, and can't prove.

... and she was killed in any part of the house not in the basement, ...

Which seems unlikely, given the evidence of the urine stain outside the WC.

... John is the most likely person to have carried her to the basement, particularly if she was injured while in her bedroom.

Agreed. Most likely, but certainly not the only one capable.

John Andrew Ramsey would have been able to carry her as would any other male over a certain age or with physical capability.

A 45 pound child (if iirc) is not easy for a woman to carry,
let alone down stairwells. ...

Disagree. Mothers carry 45 pound children all the time. Also bags of groceries, dogs that need to go the vet, etc. etc. etc.

... Ditto for a male child 9-10 years old.

Agreed.

I've seen no reports of any dragging marks on JonBenet's person so I infer she either walked or was carried.

One or the other, and it might make all the difference which one.

So, imo, it might be provable John participated if it hasn't already been proven.

I don't see where the proof is coming from.

 

[BOESP]

Chrishope, where I live most 45 pound children walk on their own and I don't recall seeing many being carried period, particularly down stairs by women. I haven't seen many of them carry 45 pound bags of groceries either. For that matter, I've never seen a women carry a 45 pound dog down steps let alone easily. I am sure there are exceptions but I don't think Patsy Ramsey was that exception.

 

[Chrishope]

OK, you don't believe PR can carry 45 pounds. I don't think she's that weak. More to the point though, neither of us prove anyone carried her.

 

[BOESP]

OK, you don't believe PR can carry 45 pounds. I don't think she's that weak. More to the point though, neither of us prove anyone carried her.

So she walked into the wine cellar alive. Is that what you are saying?

 

[Flatlander]

I would think that Kolar is quite aware that that is the only currently available path.
The path is felony murder, however, not a specific charge such as kidnapping.
Felony murder is a special provision that allows for a great degree of latitude in prosecuting an individual.
As a prosecutor you only have to prove involvement in such a way that the crime was furthered.
Kidnapping as an underlying felonious crime would still have to be proven, but it would not be necessary to show who specifically did the kidnapping.
In this case you would have to prove that someone knowingly, forcibly or otherwise seized and carried JonBenet without her consent, and without lawful justification into the wine cellar and that John was in some way involved in the furtherance or “success” of the crime.

Evidence:
Other than the forensics (fiber evidence) that was left on JB and at the crime scene; I wonder what Fleet White could say about this since he was the only known person to look in the wine cellar earlier that morning?

Also how do we explain how JB blanket ended up underneath her body which had been taken from the dryer and JB tucked in like a baby? The fibers on the duct tape even. I feel there is strong evidence but nobody that is in a position of POWER will take a stand against JR.

Cynic, thank you for the legal aspects of this case. Just makes me wonder how the R's got through all the loop holes.

 

[Chrishope]

So she walked into the wine cellar alive. Is that what you are saying?

I think it's most likely JR put her in the WC. But I can't prove it.

But she's probably dead when that happens, so we aren't dealing with kidnapping. We're dealing with moving a corpse.

 

[OpenMind4U]

Yes. Carrying your own child from one part of your house to another is NOT kidnapping. No where on earth is it kidnapping. Murdering your child, or anyone else for that matter, is homicide. If the Ramseys had ever been charged, the charge would be homicide. Not kidnapping, that's absurd.

DocG, you are WRONG!!! 'Carrying your own child from one part of your house to another' without child's consent is part of kidnapping definition! This quote from cynic post. It fits perfectly, regardless from which room to which room the child was seizing and carring! Especially, when child was found abandon in the room BEHIND the LATCHED DOOR!:

The seizing and carrying of a person from one place to another is the basic asportation element of kidnapping. The elements of Kidnapping in the Second Degree are :
■Knowingly
■Forcibly or otherwise
■Seizing and carrying any person from one place to another
■Without her consent, and
■Without lawful justification.