Grand Jury True Bills John & Patsy Discussion thread

[lawstudent]

Can someone explain why this is so illuminating? The grand jury's versions of events are not necessarily the true ones - it's fairly easy to get indicted. Not saying that I don't believe the Ramseys are involved, but the jury's opinion of how it happened doesn't seem particularly dispositive to me.

And as for putting her in the zone of danger, that would definitely not be an abusive older brother, broken window, or pageants. That means that either John/Patsy either did something that had a great risk of injury or knew she was injured and didn't seek medical help. It has to be a very direct relationship between their actions and the harm - not just failing to make good parenting decisions, which would be more neglect. The first degree murder thing is interesting.

 

[tezi]

I sense some people's disappointment and I am confused..
Finally after 17 yrs,we have a very important group of people saying that they believe
someone in that house killed her and covered it up.
We have waited 17 yrs for someone to publicly tell us something and here it is..
Am I missing something??:dunno:

Apparently, my friend, we both are. This is a huge step in righting some wrongs. JonBenet may never receive justice.

We knew about the felony child abuse resulting in death. We did NOT know about the Accessory charge. To me, that is huge.

 

[SeaEclipse]

Curiously, the charges in each parent's unsigned indictment are listed as Count IV(a) and Count VII. Recht said that shows the district attorney presented multiple possible charges to the grand jury — likely including murder — and that these two were the only ones the grand jury could agree upon. And that, Recht said, shows why Hunter was reluctant to go forward with any of the charges.

"In part, this vindicates Alex Hunter," Recht said. "He probably saw this as a classic compromise, and he believed, if he couldn't prove murder, he couldn't prove either of these beyond a reasonable doubt."

Read more: JonBenét Ramsey grand jury indictment accused parents of child abuse resulting in death - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/breakingn...-grand-jury-indictment-unsealed#ixzz2ikjgxmZx
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
Follow us: @Denverpost on Twitter | Denverpost on Facebook

What on earth? Couldn't prove murder?

So did JBR try to commit suicide by garroting herself and hit her head or die of natural causes?

This is essentially what I was coming here to say (what the article said). If you look at the indictment, the two charges (4(a) and 7) are numbered such that they (1) clearly weren't the only charges presented and (2) almost certainly weren't part of a cohesive theory. What they demonstrate is far more likely to be a compromise on the part of the GJ than a coherent theory that BR did it and they covered it up. In fact, I think it's more likely that the GJ thought one parent did it and both covered it up, and they just didn't have probable cause that either parent did it. This is why Hunter declined to prosecute -- the GJ didn't endorse any of the theories that prosecutors had.

I also think people are forgetting that the DNA evidence didn't match BR, so the theory most people are presenting here doesn't fly.

 

[AliVada]

This has been a long time coming, but many of us have long suspected that the murderer was in fact a Ramsey. Anyone have a link to the enhanced 911 where Burke is heard in background asking "what did you find" ... if he was killer, what was that question about? The staging and the ransom note? What is he were the killer would he have been unaware of at the point of that call to 911?

My gut has always been Jon was abusing her, Patsy flipped and the rest is history.

I surely wish Burke would speak and speak truth... I wonder if that day will ever come?

It took 22 years to figure out who baby "Hope" was .... maybe time will bring the whole truth to light in this case as well.

Kathy

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, the Grand Jury believed BR (or whoever was the initial perpetrator) committed FIRST DEGREE murder -- that this was not an accident, this was planned, intentional, premeditated. That is a whopper to digest. And, then they believe that John and Patsy intentionally -- and with knowledge of the crime committed -- covered up a first degree murder of their daughter together. This is truly mind-blowing. What would lead them to believe it was premeditated?!

I'm blown away too. I've always thought if BDI, it was an accident. This is huge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[eileenhawkeye]

That's my question and the news is barely covering this.

Really? I feel like it's getting a lot of coverage. We can't expect wall-to-wall coverage. According to this website interceder.net, it's been picked up by 698 media outlets so far. From what I've seen, no matter what media outlet you get your news from (well national ones), you will probably hear about this.

Look at this way...If a child went missing today, and his/her disappearance was getting the same amount of coverage this news was getting, we would all be ecstatic.

 

[Puzzler]

I still like my theory. I think PR caused the chronic damage to JB's body with corporel cleaning (which imo is sexual abuse). I think PR accidently killed her that night, probably due to rage over bed wetting. And I think she convinced JR that BR did it while molesting his sister, enlisting his help to cover the crime by staging within staging (She staged first before JR was aware of JB's death, then he helped her stage, believing he was covering for his son). I think JR at some point figured out he isn't sure which of his loved ones killed his daughter, but was now complicit and had to hold firm to the story.

Thanks for this post. Your theory makes the most sense to me so far on a human-behavior level.

I'm curious, do you have an idea on how exactly the head injury was inflicted?

 

[ShadyLady]

But didn't the R go sailing all the time
B could have learned to tie knots like that even if he was only 9-Remember John was in the Navy I believe-I can see father teaching son knot tying and flying planes!!

JMO

Obviously, it is all speculation at this point. But, I am looking at the evidence, and coming to the conclusion that it was only one person that sexualized JBR, and that was Patsy. I just don't think it was BR playing doctor. Too much history of Patsy's focus and actions with JBR. And the housekeeper's opinion.

IF it were BR, when the parents found the body....I think they would have immediately taken off the garrote....with no conscious thought. I think PR wrote note to explain missing child and give her time to dispose of body. Did John figure it out and support her in the end....maybe.

 

[Geneva]

From Burke Ramsey's FB page.

Wonder who is smiling today.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

From Burke Ramsey's FB page.

Wonder who is smiling today.

Yeah, we actually have some debate over whether or not that is really Burke's FB. There is another one, that was confirmed to be him. The picture you just posted is from December 2006, and is available to the public. So Burke #2 made his profile picture one from '06? It's odd.

But...OMG...what if that Burke Ramsey is fake, and media outlets contact him on FB asking for a statement, and he gives one?!

 

[shefner]

I think the housekeeper sealed the deal for me. I don't think a nine year old is sophisticated enough to know anything about a garrote. From wiki: "Experts noted that the construction of the garrote required a special knowledge of knots. ".....and maybe PR knew about garrotes from her own sexual games with JR. Her paint brush, her note, her history of bathroom punishment.

And how convenient to be able to indirectly blame BR.

Something is really wrong with BR though. He is....messed up in some way. I think his mom worshipped his sister. His dad was distant. BR probably had internal anger issues about this but subverted it.
OK....I'm done pretending to be a child psychologist now.

 

[Toltec]

Heavens, it's been a long while and did not expect anything new to come up. I just wanted to say that being first degree murder charges filed would mean that the child died, the parents knew who did it and when they did not report it to authorities, it became first degree murder.

 

[Dragonlady]

This is essentially what I was coming here to say (what the article said). If you look at the indictment, the two charges (4(a) and 7) are numbered such that they (1) clearly weren't the only charges presented and (2) almost certainly weren't part of a cohesive theory. What they demonstrate is far more likely to be a compromise on the part of the GJ than a coherent theory that BR did it and they covered it up. In fact, I think it's more likely that the GJ thought one parent did it and both covered it up, and they just didn't have probable cause that either parent did it. This is why Hunter declined to prosecute -- the GJ didn't endorse any of the theories that prosecutors had.

I also think people are forgetting that the DNA evidence didn't match BR, so the theory most people are presenting here doesn't fly.

If I recall correctly the underwear was new and unwashed and the dna could have been touch dna from packaging and handling.
So I don't think that rules out BR alltogether.
His parents made sure that she was redressed and cleaned.

 

[shefner]

Thanks for this post. Your theory makes the most sense to me so far on a human-behavior level.

I'm curious, do you have an idea on how exactly the head injury was inflicted?

I know this question wasn't addressed to me....but how about slamming a child into the bathtub so that she damaged her head.
Maybe PR was angry....flung JBR into the tub and started scrubbing....then realized what had really happened, that JBR was injured.
I am totally mixed up about who did this but it was either PR or BR. And JR is just as guilty, imo.

 

[Geneva]

Something is really wrong with BR though. He is....messed up in some way. I think his mom worshipped his sister. His dad was distant. BR probably had internal anger issues about this but subverted it.
OK....I'm done pretending to be a child psychologist now.

ITA I have always thought that the poor children were seriously messed up in the head from Patsy.

 

[Magdalyn]

It's my understanding that in many states, you can charge with 1st degree murder if another felony is being perpetrated at the time of death. IMO, the GJ was going for 1st degree because evidence shows she was freshly abused (sexually and physically) at time of death.

http://www.lawinfoboulder.com/colorado_statutes/murder_first_degree.html

1.A person commits the crime of murder in the first degree if:
(a) After deliberation and with the intent to cause the death of a person other than himself, he causes the death of that person or of another person; or
(b) Acting either alone or with one or more persons, he or she commits or attempts to commit arson, robbery, burglary, kidnapping, sexual assault as prohibited by section 18-3-402, sexual assault in the first or second degree as prohibited by section 18-3-402 or 18-3-403 as those sections existed prior to July 1, 2000, or a class 3 felony for sexual assault on a child as provided in section 18-3-405 (2), or the crime of escape as provided in section 18-8-208, and, in the course of or in furtherance of the crime that he or she is committing or attempting to commit, or of immediate flight therefrom, the death of a person, other than one of the participants, is caused by anyone; or

ETA: Case in point: Local to me, we had three idiots carjack a fourth person recently. While busy pistol whipping the victim in the backseat, said pistol discharged, accidentally killing the driving carjacker. The two other carjacker idiots are in being charged with 1st degree felony murder of their 'friend'. They didn't intend or premeditate HIS death, it was accidental. But his death happened while they were committing a kidnapping and a carjacking and assault, so.... 1st degree for you! Thankfully, the victim of the carjacking survived.

 

[Chris_Texas]

With all respect, in my opinion it is premature at this point to CONCLUDE that Burke did anything. One might have some questions, or wonder, but that's all that is reasonable at this point.

The facts are these: There is NO physical evidence tying Burke to any crime at all. This cannot be said for mom and dad. Further, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that Burke did not do it -- specifically, the parents sending him out of the house, and out of there control, that morning. Unless they were convinced that Burke was anb emotionless monster and psychopath, they would never confidently unleash a nine-year-old and trust that he wouldn't confess and bury them all. No parent would easily believe that about their own son, and if they DID believe that they couldn't trust him not to blurt the truth (or some malicious fiction) just to watch the world burn.

And that, my friends, is the glaring chasm in the BDI theory.

When they turned him loose that morning, they did so knowing that he had no actual facts to disclose. More, they likely expected to be arrested, and they wanted him out of the home when that happened.

This release tells us nothing, other than that the Grand Jury did not have a clear picture of which one of the two parents actually murdered the girl.

IN MY OPINION.

 

[chlban]

TroyinTX;9926559
I

wonder why BR has not ever talked about the case publicly since he has been an adult? You'd think at some point he'd want to talk about and how he wants the killer of his sister to be caught. Heck, I couldn't even tell you what BR looks like

.

Really? It seems pretty obvious to me. He did it. Why would he want to talk about it?

Seems like he moved on pretty easily considering he was front and center for one of the most notorious murders in American history

I certainly agree. Because of his age at the tme he can never legally be held responsible. However, it seems similar to OJ getting away with murder. He may not have been in jail for the murders but he certainly paid a price. I think it's very likely that Burke will as well now that this information has come out

That is, of course, assuming the news media stops spinning that crap about the DNA exonerating all the Ramsey's. One stupid woman decided that the DNA exonerated them. There are hundreds of far smarter people than she, that write that stupid touch DNA as exaclty what it is. Nothing.

Sadly it seems that so far we are only hearing from the Lemmings.

 

[shefner]

With all respect, in my opinion it is premature at this point to CONCLUDE that Burke did anything. One might have some questions, or wonder, but that's all that is reasonable at this point.

The facts are these: There is NO physical evidence tying Burke to any crime at all. This cannot be said for mom and dad. Further, there is circumstantial evidence to suggest that Burke did not do it -- specifically, the parents sending him out of the house, and out of there control, that morning. Unless they were convinced that Burke was anb emotionless monster and psychopath, they would never confidently unleash a nine-year-old and trust that he wouldn't confess and bury them all. No parent would easily believe that about their own son, and if they DID believe that they couldn't trust him not to blurt the truth (or some malicious fiction) just to watch the world burn.

And that, my friends, is the glaring chasm in the BDI theory.

When they turned him loose that morning, they did so knowing that he had no actual facts to disclose. More, they likely expected to be arrested, and they wanted him out of the home when that happened.

This release tells us nothing, other than that the Grand Jury did not have a clear picture of which one of the two parents actually murdered the girl.

IN MY OPINION.

There is no way that BR didn't know what happened to JBR. He knew and I think everything had been severely rehearsed. The fact he kept the secret so well makes me think he may have indeed committed this murder....because his secrecy was truly self-serving.

 

[BD1]

Thanks for this post. Your theory makes the most sense to me so far on a human-behavior level.

I'm curious, do you have an idea on how exactly the head injury was inflicted?

Not very specifically- I do not remember the autopsy report as clearly as some here do, but in re reading that could probably narrow it down to what type of blow causes the fracture she had. As I recall, it was considered more likely to be an actual direct strike to the head with an object as opposed to say, a fall into a wall, floor or something else. I do believe the head injury happened before the 'strangulation'. I believe the head injury occurenceand her appearing dead or close to death started the whole ball rolling.