Are the Ramseys involved or not?

[UKGuy]

.

I think it would have been easier to prove sexual abuse and who did it(would have probably lead also to the murder motive) than who killed her ,why and how or who covered it up.

madeleine,
How can you prove who assaulted JonBenet, there are three suspects?


The Coroner cited asphyxiation as one cause of death, and we have Patsy's fibers on the alleged asphyxiation device.

John Ramsey's fibers may or may not be linked to a sexual assault. They be residual evidence from a cleanup?



.
.

 

[madeleine]

madeleine,
How can you prove who assaulted JonBenet, there are three suspects?

well,prima facie tells me and maybe it would also tell a cop that it was the adult man in the house,so start PUSHING him or his wife,throw the reports on the table in their faces and one of them will crack!IMO

The Coroner cited asphyxiation as one cause of death, and we have Patsy's fibers on the alleged asphyxiation device.

very true but imagine how easy their lawyer would blame this on fiber TRANSFER

John Ramsey's fibers may or may not be linked to a sexual assault. They be residual evidence from a cleanup?



.
.

yep,that's what I said days ago too...

 

[madeleine]

also,PR fibers in the garrote proves she was part of the cover-up,not necessarily in the killing?

 

[madeleine]

that was always the problem and I think the cops had this problem as well,you just can't prove which one did what

 

[madeleine]

:banghead::furious:

MY GOD,
I am so SURE that one of the 3 would have cracked in the beginning!!!when everything was fresh,no time to make up stories and excuses,no Lin Wood,and so many other details like this....

But NO,it had to happen in Boulder where cops and DA's were a bunch of morons and cowards!:furious::banghead:

this case wasn't impossible to solve,not at all......it was solvable!not only this but it could have been solved so EASY!all you needed was a secure crime scene and competent cops and ....right timing,remember how freaking SCARED the R's were at FIRST?they got arrogant ,calm and confident way later!

 

[UKGuy]

:banghead::furious:

MY GOD,
I am so SURE that one of the 3 would have cracked in the beginning!!!when everything was fresh,no time to make up stories and excuses,no Lin Wood,and so many other details like this....

But NO,it had to happen in Boulder where cops and DA's were a bunch of morons and cowards!:furious::banghead:

this case wasn't impossible to solve,not at all......it was solvable!not only this but it could have been solved so EASY!all you needed was a secure crime scene and competent cops and ....right timing,remember how freaking SCARED the R's were at FIRST?they got arrogant ,calm and confident way later!

madeleine,

I am so SURE that one of the 3 would have cracked in the beginning!!!when everything was fresh,no time to make up stories and excuses,no Lin Wood,and so many other details like this....

This why I advocate that Patsy should have been charged with 1st degree homicide and John as an accessory or accomplice, this would have weeded out the culprit. At least the evidence would have been aired so allowing a jury to decide?


I reckon there was conspiracy to fix the outcome. The continuing silence should tell you something about this notion, when compared with other notorious cases.


.
.

 

[Roy23]

madeleine,

This why I advocate that Patsy should have been charged with 1st degree homicide and John as an accessory or accomplice, this would have weeded out the culprit. At least the evidence would have been aired so allowing a jury to decide?


I reckon there was conspiracy to fix the outcome. The continuing silence should tell you something about this notion, when compared with other notorious cases.


.
.

You charge Patsy Ramsey with first degree murder with the evidence they got and She would have owned that town. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[UKGuy]

You charge Patsy Ramsey with first degree murder with the evidence they got and She would have owned that town. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Roy23,
From my perspective, she owned the town already, without being charged.

That was the problem behind the scenes the R's weilded influence. When did you last hear off a Private Investigator leaving a homicide case with boxes of forensic evidence. Who allowed that and why?


Patsy's fibers were embedded into the garrote that was placed around JonBenet's neck. Now that does not prove it was her that killed JonBenet. But it is enough evidence to charge her with homicide 1st degree, and let the jury decide.

That course was not taken, why? I would suggest because of Team Ramsey influence!



.

 

[Roy23]

Roy23,
From my perspective, she owned the town already, without being charged.

That was the problem behind the scenes the R's weilded influence. When did you last hear off a Private Investigator leaving a homicide case with boxes of forensic evidence. Who allowed that and why?


Patsy's fibers were embedded into the garrote that was placed around JonBenet's neck. Now that does not prove it was her that killed JonBenet. But it is enough evidence to charge her with homicide 1st degree, and let the jury decide.

That course was not taken, why? I would suggest because of Team Ramsey influence!



.

Some of you guys need to get off these boards for a while. This whole Ramsey's owned the town and had all this power stuff is so far from the truth. They really couldn't charge the Ramsey's with what they had. I hate that this board specifically has to resort to fairy tales and conspiricy theories to explain why things went so wrong.

All you gotta do really is look at the police. If they contain the crimescene, we probably are not even talking about this today.

 

[BBB167893]

that was always the problem and I think the cops had this problem as well,you just can't prove which one did what

That's the problem precisely, madeleine. In LE circles, it's called the cross-fingerpointing defense. How do you prove who did the actual killing, and which one just helped cover it up?

Well, in a way, you provided the answer:

MY GOD,
I am so SURE that one of the 3 would have cracked in the beginning!!!when everything was fresh,no time to make up stories and excuses,no Lin Wood,and so many other details like this....

But NO,it had to happen in Boulder where cops and DA's were a bunch of morons and cowards!

this case wasn't impossible to solve,not at all......it was solvable!not only this but it could have been solved so EASY!all you needed was a secure crime scene and competent cops and ....right timing,remember how freaking SCARED the R's were at FIRST?they got arrogant ,calm and confident way later!

That's precisely the point, maddy: cases like this are not solved on forensics. They're solved by getting one party to turn on the other. And how do you do that? You arrest each one and put them in a holding cell with some really SCARY people!

And don't ANYBODY tell me it doesn't work (if you're reading this, you know who you are!). It DOES work, which is WHY it's a standard tactic of police forces across the country.

 

[BBB167893]

You charge Patsy Ramsey with first degree murder with the evidence they got and She would have owned that town. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pilgrim, as sorely tempted as I am to start breathing fire, I haven't lost my temper yet this week. So, I'm going to try to keep that streak going.

First of all, no matter how badly the police may have wanted it, I don't think there was much chance of Alex Hunter charging Patsy with first degree murder. He just wasn't that kind of prosecutor.

WHICH, leads in to the next point. As I told maddy, and God knows how often I've told you, the way you solve a case like this is by getting a confession. Alex Hunter himself shot that idea down specifically because it offended his sensibilities.

As for Patsy owning the town, in some ways, that was a bit of the problem. Not her, so much as her husband's money and the Haddon Law Firm, which has its talons in just about everything.

 

[BBB167893]

That was the problem behind the scenes the R's weilded influence. When did you last hear off a Private Investigator leaving a homicide case with boxes of forensic evidence. Who allowed that and why?

Damn fine question, UKGuy.

Anyone with eyes can see that something stank in this case. I don't know why in the hell Roy23 can't.

Actually, I take that back. I used to be an IDI, so I DO know. But, I'm trying to be a gentleman about these things, so I'll leave it at that.

 

[BBB167893]

Some of you guys need to get off these boards for a while.

Maybe we'll come over to YOURS for a while! Have a big party!:great:

This whole Ramsey's owned the town and had all this power stuff is so far from the truth.

So says John Ramsey. Everyone else, though...

Pilgrim, anyone who knows anything about this case knows just how powerful the Hal Haddon law firm was and still is, with connections right up to and including the Clinton White House. They DID have the power, much more than a two-bit flunky like Alex Hunter could ever hope to match.

Look, I've probably forgotten more about this case than most people will ever learn. So when someone says something like you just did, I'm tempted to, metaphorically speaking, slap 'em across the face and say, "what is wrong with you? Why can't you see what's right in front of ya?!"

BUT, I don't forget my friends, Roy. I remember how you tried to help me out with advice when I announced I'd found a publisher. You did for me, so I'm going to do for you. If ever you feel like asking something that you'd like to know, don't hestitate to come to me. And if you ever feel that you're being treated unfairly, just let me know.

They really couldn't charge the Ramsey's with what they had.

ALEX HUNTER certainly couldn't! That's the whole point, pilgrim. Just WHAT is so damn hard to understand about that? I'll tell you what: you show me ONE case--just ONE--where Alex Hunter prosecuted a death penalty case, win or lose.

Surely by now, you've read what others have had to say about him. It's not just this case! Alex Hunter was a menace, a stain on the profession.

You told me once that you understood my point about Alex Hunter being a weak prosecutor. Well, DO YA or DON'T YA??

I hate that this board specifically has to resort to fairy tales and conspiracy theories to explain why things went so wrong.

I think I speak for the majority, Roy, when I say that the idea of an IDI accusing OTHER people of resorting to fairy tales and conspiracy theories is LAUGHABLE, and that's giving the vest BEST of it.

I'd need to write a SECOND book JUST to cover all the nonsense, fairy tales and conspiracy theories the Ramseys and their amen choir have laid on us to explain away the evidence against them. And frankly, I don't have the patience to write another book about this case.

All you gotta do really is look at the police. If they contain the crimescene, we probably are not even talking about this today.

No one here is trying to let the police off the hook, Roy. But don't bother trying to lay it all on them. When the police failed to contain the crime scene, they hurt the case. When the DA became more interested in playing politics and making deals, they lost it completely. That's not just my opinion, either. No less an authority on the case than Michael Kane has said that once the police recovered from the early botch-ups, they did a phenomenal job of investigating. He also said much of what I'm saying about the DA's office. So don't blame me or anyone else here.

 

[UKGuy]

Damn fine question, UKGuy.

Anyone with eyes can see that something stank in this case. I don't know why in the hell Roy23 can't.

Actually, I take that back. I used to be an IDI, so I DO know. But, I'm trying to be a gentleman about these things, so I'll leave it at that.

SuperDave,
The removal of this case evidence by Lou Smit and its eventual release into the wild, suggests it was premeditated with his pedophile intruder in mind?

Its as if those involved were gorging on the Ramsay case file evidence, always thinking ahead to see where the $$ signs were rolling.



.

 

[Alix]

The episode "Baby, It's You" is one of probably more episodes very loosely based on JBR, even down to the egg-sucking lawyer and the bought-and-paid-for John Douglas profiler drip. I love L&O.:rocker:

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Yeah, there's been a few crime shows that have done episodes based on this case:

NYPD Blue: Lost Israel
Law & Order: Ghosts
CSI: Las Vegas: Gentle, Gentle
Law & Order: Baby, It's You
Law & Order: Criminal Intent: Masquerade
Bones: The Girl with the Curl

 

[Alix]

Yeah, there's been a few crime shows that have done episodes based on this case:

NYPD Blue: Lost Israel
Law & Order: Ghosts
CSI: Las Vegas: Gentle, Gentle
Law & Order: Baby, It's You
Law & Order: Criminal Intent: Masquerade
Bones: The Girl with the Curl

Hey, thanks!!

 

[BBB167893]

SuperDave,
The removal of this case evidence by Lou Smit and its eventual release into the wild, suggests it was premeditated with his pedophile intruder in mind?

Its as if those involved were gorging on the Ramsay case file evidence, always thinking ahead to see where the $$ signs were rolling.



.

I don't know about that, UKGuy. But Lou Smit's blackmailing the DA into keeping that stolen evidence definitely suggests something along the lines of what I was talking about earlier: he had some kind of leverage on the DA, something that Alex Hunter didn't want to come out.

 

[BBB167893]

The episode "Baby, It's You" is one of probably more episodes very loosely based on JBR, even down to the egg-sucking lawyer and the bought-and-paid-for John Douglas profiler drip. I love L&O.:rocker:

I remember that one, Alix. But I also remember a follow-up L&O episode, which made me NOT love L&O anymore.

I don't remember the title of it, but it first aired in December of 2005, when the detectives were played by Dennis Farina and Jesse Martin. In this episode, the John Ramsey character was now widowed (in real life, Patsy was still alive--life imitating art, and all that). Well, in the episode, the real killer is eventually found. Now, here's where I got REALLY mad! Throw-the-remote-control-at-the-TV-screen-and-yell mad!

The writers of the episode had the real killer be obviously based on David Westerfield, the killer of Danielle Van Dam, and I mean right down to how Westerfield's lawyer tried to plea-bargain in exchange for Danielle's body right before the body was found.

Well, as Squishified and mtwentz and I were talking about a few weeks ago, that doesn't work. Specifically, and the writers ought to have known this, the two cases are as different as night and day. They're practically from different planets, as Nancy Grace and Marc Klaas pointed out to Lin Wood when he tried to co-opt the Van Dam case for his own purposes.

No, David Westerfield and the Van Dam case showed how a REAL pedophile intruder-killer operates, and it does not even REMOTELY resemble the camping-out, note-writing, combination ransom/pedophile kidnapper bogeyman that that senile old busybody Lou Smit (check THAT acronym!), that egomaniacal fool John Douglas and the rest of Team Ramsey's cronies would have us believe did this! If regular folks like us can see that, I damn well don't see why these writers can't!

SEE??!! I haven't been here one hour and I've already lost my temper!

 

[UKGuy]

I don't know about that, UKGuy. But Lou Smit's blackmailing the DA into keeping that stolen evidence definitely suggests something along the lines of what I was talking about earlier: he had some kind of leverage on the DA, something that Alex Hunter didn't want to come out.

SuperDave,
I agree. Lou Smit was a seasoned investigator. I'll bet he soon worked out who the prime suspect was.

I'll bet that leverage amounted to evidence that has been redacted, and which Lou Smit was not allowed to take away?


.