Grand Jury True Bills John & Patsy Discussion thread

[Chelly]

Jeffrey Tobin, CNN, believes the R's not involved.

 

[Amster]

Oh lord Gerardo is saying, "the indictment proves there was a third person, and the unidentified DNA proves there was some sort of intruder"

I'm paraphrasing but :banghead::banghead::banghead:

It's really sad the misinformation that is created when the media's primary concern is reducing everything to sensational sound bites.

:banghead::banghead::banghead:

BFF of Jose Baez....of course he is the cheerleader of child killers!

 

[eileenhawkeye]

So do you guys think we will hear from John Ramsey? Not just a statement, but an actual TV interview? And do you think it will happen very soon (sometime next week) or could you see in in two months or so, near the anniversary, perhaps, oh here's John Ramsey to talk about how a crazy, misinformed GJ almost sent him and his innocent wife to jail?

 

[shefner]

Listen folks....for those saying they can understand the Ramsey's staging this crime to protect BR, are you for real? One of your children kills another of your children and you don't freak out and immediately call 911?!
That is absolutely-freaking crazy! I will never understand something like that. I have 4 children and if one murdered another, I would be the first in line to say, "Sorry, son, but we have to get you some help by calling the police and reporting this. You will be punished for this....but we will try to support you to get the medical and psychological help you need."
To think the parents would write ransom notes (chapters) and tie a garrote around their little girl's neck just to protect their son? No way. If they did something like that, they are insane. Maybe that's the problem.

 

[Rougelatete]

Just curious what scenarios people feel are most likely, given that the language "first degree murder" was wrapped up in the "child abuse leading to death" indictments:

A) JR and PR knew that BR was using strangulation devices in his sexual molestation of his sister and did nothing to stop it or get him treatment, knowing that this sexual asphyxiation could one day lead to her death.

B) PR knew that JR was doing the above and did nothing to stop it (or vice versa).

C) The garrote and attempts at asphyxiation were part of the cover-up, not an aspect of the sexual molestation.

 

[tezi]

Jeffrey Tobin, CNN, believes the R's not involved.

Toobin, the great helper of OJ Simpson's defense...

Yeah, I believe him...NOT! :floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

 

[tezi]

Just curious what scenarios people feel are most likely, given that the language "first degree murder" was wrapped up in the "child abuse leading to death" indictments:

A) JR and PR knew that BR was using strangulation devices in his sexual molestation of his sister and did nothing to stop it or get him treatment, knowing that this sexual asphyxiation could one day lead to her death.

B) PR knew that JR was doing the above and did nothing to stop it (or vice versa).

C) The garrote and attempts at asphyxiation were part of the cover-up, not an aspect of the sexual molestation.

C--but I can't explain right now...I need to go get my granddaughter settled for the night.

 

[chlban]

bettybaby00;9928168]

Oh lord Gerardo is saying, "the indictment proves there was a third person, and the unidentified DNA proves there was some sort of intruder"

I'm paraphrasing but :banghead::banghead::banghead:

It's really sad the misinformation that is created when the media's primary concern is reducing everything to sensational sound bites.

Jeffrey Toobin on Anderson 360 spouting the same party line. The GJ did not have the DNA evidence that cleared the family.

Did I miss something? I thought that over the last few years touch DNA had been essentially discredited as any type of real evidence, and yet every single network seems to be pointing to DNA as the proof the Ramsey's are innocent.

I'm starting to wonder.

 

[SunVenus]

So do you guys think we will hear from John Ramsey? Not just a statement, but an actual TV interview? And do you think it will happen very soon (sometime next week) or could you see in in two months or so, near the anniversary, perhaps, oh here's John Ramsey to talk about how a crazy, misinformed GJ almost sent him and his innocent wife to jail?

Oh yes, I feel sure JR won't be able to keep quiet. He likes attention, he loves playing the victim, and he will probably write yet another book proclaiming his innocence. (A case of he "dost protest too much, methinks", IMO). I'll betcha he'll be making the rounds on the 700 Club & shows of that ilk, and anyone/anything else who can stomach having him on & are stupid enough to buy into his perpetual BS.

 

[IHAVENOCLUE]

You bring up a great point but who's to say that the parents did warn him about talking about what happened, even a child that age can grasp that talking about something could get them in big trouble and I have no problem believing that he would have kept quiet, he has all of these years.

Do we even know for certain that BR wasn't sexually abused, as well?

maybe the threat of this kept him quiet for so long?

:dunno:

 

[InstantProof]

Listen folks....for those saying they can understand the Ramsey's staging this crime to protect BR, are you for real? One of your children kills another of your children and you don't freak out and immediately call 911?!
That is absolutely-freaking crazy! I will never understand something like that. I have 4 children and if one murdered another, I would be the first in line to say, "Sorry, son, but we have to get you some help by calling the police and reporting this. You will be punished for this....but we will try to support you to get the medical and psychological help you need."
To think the parents would write ransom notes (chapters) and tie a garrote around their little girl's neck just to protect their son? No way. If they did something like that, they are insane. Maybe that's the problem.

I think a dictionary was said to be opened to the page with the word 'incest' in the home, which says to me someone in the home was ashamed of the stigma, and probably unaware until that incident.

 

[bettybaby00]

Hmmmm, does anyone watch " the Kelly file,"

Seems as if her next segment will have mark furman and the lead in suggests he agrees with the indictment?

 

[bettybaby00]

Wow....she asked why parents would cover it up.

He said, "there were 4 people in the house that night, mom, dad, jonbebet and her 9 year old brother."
When asked , "but DNA cleared everyone," he replies....

"DNA needs supportive evidence."

Pretty much says it's not necessarily indicative of the killer, "b/c DNA can last thousands of years." He doesn't use the term touch DNA, but it's what he means IMO

I know most people don't like him, but thus far he's the only one tonight "going off script."

 

[Tril]

Listen folks....for those saying they can understand the Ramsey's staging this crime to protect BR, are you for real? One of your children kills another of your children and you don't freak out and immediately call 911?!
That is absolutely-freaking crazy! I will never understand something like that. I have 4 children and if one murdered another, I would be the first in line to say, "Sorry, son, but we have to get you some help by calling the police and reporting this. You will be punished for this....but we will try to support you to get the medical and psychological help you need."
To think the parents would write ransom notes (chapters) and tie a garrote around their little girl's neck just to protect their son? No way. If they did something like that, they are insane. Maybe that's the problem.

I'm a BDIer and have been from the very beginning. I do not believe that either John or Patsy inflicted any of the injuries that were found on JonBenet's body. Patsy penned the ransom note, and John may have helped decide what it should say. They wiped down batteries and probably tried to stage the scene in other ways too, but I don't believe they inflicted any damage to the body.

I don't think Burke participated in the cover-up. His non-involvement in the cover-up could explain the youthful-sounding voice, which was probably his, saying, "Well, what did you find?" when Patsy was on the phone telling the 911 operator about a ransom note. The youthful-sounding voice must have been Burke's, since he and his parents were supposedly the only living people in the house at the time. This may have been the second time Burke had asked the same thing, which would explain his phrasing of the question. John was heard replying in an angry tone, "We're not talking to you." What an odd response, unless Burke did it.

Cyril Wecht was quoted as saying there was nothing that was done to JonBenet that Burke could not have done.

 

[lawstudent]

The thing is, if it was indeed Burke, how did law enforcement decide it was "first degree murder"? I mean, maybe they were just covering their bases, but it seems like even if they suspected he did it, it would be hard to say it was premeditated. If they had evidence of a long term plan from somebody, it seems like that would have come out at this point, and charges would have been pursued. Even if there were a few minutes or hours of premeditation, with a young child, I'd think it would be considered second degree - a kid losing control. That would make it a lot easier to get a conviction, given the circumstances.

Prosecutors decline to press charges that are presented to them by cops or even grand juries regularly - I know there were questionable actions by law enforcement in this case, but it's not an outrage that charges weren't brought after an indictment. There can be enough evidence to charge but not enough to convict. That's why there is discretion. It's entirely possible they just couldn't figure out who did what. This whole thing is so weird - so we know for sure the grand jury had a lot of info we don't have? It seems like it somehow would have come out by now. This case is so weird.

ETA: I know a lot of people think the Ramseys would turn on each other if it wasn't Burke they were trying to protect, but that's just not necessarily true. There are plenty of cases of people covering for someone who was not a child - fear of being alone, or of what will happen, or of the press, or losing financial support, or just being under the spell of the parent/spouse/whoever. Most people wouldn't stick with a spouse who did that, but plenty of women stay with predatory men, and plenty of men can't stand up to crazy women. It's not shocking to me. There would have to be a lot of complicated dynamics leading up to it, obviously.

 

[cattlekate]

We just got the True Bills - and no reasoning behind them! Ack. So frustrating! Patsy Ramsey, the Perfectionist Narcissist, who took Ativan and Klonipin to handle her anxiety about not being perfect, who put xmas trees on every floor and got tailored matching clothing for every xmas photo because everything had to be perfect, who left a trail of fibers the Pink Panther could clue out, who placed her child in the xmas "gift" crawl space room which held xmas presents 24 hours prior, - murdered her child - either out of perfectionist rage or pre-planned delusional psychosis of wanting her beloved doppleganger child in heaven to await her impending death. When you have Stage 4 cancer, it doesn't matter how many "clear" tests you get. Every abdominal twinge makes you think it is back and you are going to Jesus. Look at that Dec 25, 1996 photo of Patsy clutching the arm of Jon Benet - she knew her child was not here for long. I don't get why we accept Andrea Yates' psychotic delusion of an altruistic heavenly journey for her babies and not Patsy's. JMHO, but that ransom note, written by disassociating delusional Patsy, was written before she fed her child pineapple and did the deed before the clocked ticked to Dec 26. There was no prior sexual abuse - bed-wetting and feces on the wall by a toilet or in the bed was just Jon Benet picking at herself to help defecate because she was anxiety ridden and was bed-wetting because her filled-up colon was pressing against her bladder. That's it. And yet the politics of Planet Boulder, a multi-billion-dollar business on Pearl Street, a powerful Denver law firm, and a frightened, unschooled DA made the case stall. What a sad travesty. JMHO of course.

 

[Tril]

lawstudent, I don’t recall that anyone in LE considered Burke a likely suspect. Also, in Colorado children under the age of ten cannot be (at least they couldn't be at the time) charged with crimes, and Burke was two weeks shy of his tenth birthday when JonBenet died.

 

[lawstudent]

lawstudent, I don’t recall that anyone in LE considered Burke a likely suspect. Also, in Colorado children under the age of ten cannot be (at least they couldn't be at the time) charged with crimes, and Burke was two weeks shy of his tenth birthday when JonBenet died.

Right - I'm saying a lot of people here seem to think this confirms that Burke did it - but what evidence would make the jury think it was likely that Burke was responsible for a first degree murder? The Ramseys were not charged with murder though, right? That's what the NYT says - some people were saying it could be the missing charges, but the NYT says they were never brought. So presumably neither of the parents was thought to be the murderer - who would they be an accessory to? Or did the jury find there was only enough evidence for an accessory charge, but not a murder charge, because they couldn't figure out who the murderer was? That would explain why the DA didn't proceed.

 

[vlpate]

Do we even know for certain that BR wasn't sexually abused, as well?

maybe the threat of this kept him quiet for so long?

:dunno:

Maybe he thought they thought an intruder did it and they thought he thought they thought this too. YKWIM? In other words - Burke, being nine, thought he had his parents fooled, by no design of his own, and he went with it by not outting himself or talking about it, ever. They needed to make him think they believed an intruder did it and not him...but they knew he did it, and deep down he knew they knew.

Sort of unspoken, sick, complicity. Like a woman who knows her husband/boyfriend is molesting her son or daughter, and the molester knows she knows, but nothing is ever said by anyone, including the kids. A learned behaviour.

 

[vlpate]

Right - I'm saying a lot of people here seem to think this confirms that Burke did it - but what evidence would make the jury think it was likely that Burke was responsible for a first degree murder? The Ramseys were not charged with murder though, right? That's what the NYT says - some people were saying it could be the missing charges, but the NYT says they were never brought. So presumably neither of the parents was thought to be the murderer - who would they be an accessory to? Or did the jury find there was only enough evidence for an accessory charge, but not a murder charge, because they couldn't figure out who the murderer was? That would explain why the DA didn't proceed.

There's a myriad of reasons why the DA didn't proceed, one being he rarely proceeded. Investigators were always frustrated by this. Factor in the strange bedfellows at the time and the "why" is not so out of reach.