Blunt Force Trauma

[K777angel]

That's odd? I've seen no 'antics'. He seems calm, quiet, professional and polite. Even his insistence on appearing before the grand jury was handled as quietly as possible when he had to get a court order. No 'antics' at all. He still has the reputation of a top evidence oriented investigator and prior to joining DA-Keenan in her quest for the truth, he was working three days a week for El Paso County as a homicide investigator, so I don't think they considered him a "laughing stock". Do you think DA-Keenan wanted to hire a "laughing stock"?

Lou Smit "professional"?? He can't even speak proper English! "I seen it."
"I done it." AGGHHH!
You say no antics? You've got to be kidding! Trolling his lame theory from network to network pretending that he has been objective in his assessing the evidence in this crime when he in fact very conveniently LEAVES OUT all those facts that do not "fit" his intruder theory is about as big an antic as I can imagine. Where is his admittance that this child was: *placed on a blanket instead of the cold dirt floor? *Wrapped up in a blanket and not tossed like a discarded rag doll? *Wiped down and her panties and pants pulled back up (and then wrapped up in a blankie) --- ALL actions he KNOWS does not at all indicate that an intruder did it.
And where has he pointed out that Patsy Ramseys jacket fibers were found intertwined in the cord around JonBenet's neck?
And where does he bring up the very troubling aspect of the pineapple in her system?
And where does he objectively point out the familiar phrases of Patsy Ramsey in the ransom note?
And when does he explain just WHEN the perp supposedly placed that note on the spiral staircase?? This MUST be considered in this crime. It makes NO sense either placing it before he supposedly went up the stairs to get JonBenet as the pages would be lying there in his way on the way down them.
And it makes NO sense that he had them down in the basement with him and then ran back upstairs after he killed her to place the pages there - GREATLY increasing his chances of being caught - and then what? Runs back down to the basement and out the little window? Oh! With the baseball bat mind you.
No, he doesn't go out a door on the main level where he is after placing that note on the stairs (the quickest exit opportunity). He must have gone back down the stairs to the basement again because that is what Lou Smit said he thinks happened.
So - when did he place that note LOU? Remember - it was in top condition.
No wrinkles. No creases. No fingerprints even.
Nobody could step over them on those huge winding stair steps. So he would have had to step ON them coming down carrying JonBenet.
And no one did.
And it is ludicrous to believe he took the time after killing her to come BACK upstairs to the main part of the house! Especially when he knew there was no kidnapping for ransom now.

Lou Smit is a fool. And proves it every time he opens his mouth.

 

[Toth]

I know of no 'familiar phrases' in the note; I know of quite a few 'unfamiliar phrases' in the note.
I see no problem in the placement of the note.
I see no reason why Lou Smit's early educational environment should play a role in this investigation. A 'dese,dem and dose' guy can still be honest and perceptive.

 

[Barbara]

"A 'dese,dem and dose' guy can still be honest and perceptive."

I agree. But Lou has missed the mark on the honest and perceptive part, even if he spoke the King's English

 

[Jayelles]

Yes, I'm sure her body and particularly the clothing retained fiber evidence despite the very dry Santa Ana winds. Is there a correlation between a partially clothed body retaining fiber evidence in dry conditions and a naked baseball bat retaining fibers in wet conditions? Perhaps there is a high correlation. Perhaps not. I frankly do not know.

Danielle was naked. They never found her clothes.

 

[K777angel]

I know of no 'familiar phrases' in the note; I know of quite a few 'unfamiliar phrases' in the note.
I see no problem in the placement of the note.
I see no reason why Lou Smit's early educational environment should play a role in this investigation. A 'dese,dem and dose' guy can still be honest and perceptive.

There most certainly ARE familiar phrases to the Ramseys in that note/letter.
Perhaps if you "know of none" as you say - you might read up a little on it.

The placement of the note is a big problem. You tell me just WHEN the "intruder" would have been able to put those 3 pages on the steps Toth.
When? When do YOU think he did it?

I did not question in my post Lou Smit's "perceptiveness" or "honesty" - but I sure will here. He seems to have neither anymore. I was questioning what you called his "profressionalism." I pointed out that he does NOT sound professional. He sounds like a backwoods hick. He sounds uneducated.

He might be a kind man. He might be a gentle and soft spoken man. But he is not ethical nor professional in handling the Ramsey case. His own peers will tell you that.

 

[why_nutt]

There most certainly ARE familiar phrases to the Ramseys in that note/letter.
Perhaps if you "know of none" as you say - you might read up a little on it.

Note: It's up to you now John!
Patsy (in Colorado Woman Magazine, December 1994): It isn't up to them if you have the sonogram, it's up to you!

Note: if you want her to see 1997
Patsy (in 1996 Christmas letter): I'm sure we'll be seeing the orthodontist in 1997
Patsy (same 1996 Christmas letter): We are all enjoying continued good health and look forward to seeing you in 1997
Patsy (in 1995 Christmas letter): Please come see us in 1996!

Note: We respect your bussines, but not the country that it serves.
Patsy (in 1995 Christmas letter): Europe has been successfully conquered with offices in every country except Norway!

Note: Victory!
Patsy (in 1995 Christmas letter): John, John Andrew, and Melinda took the crew of the Miss America (our sailing sloop) to victories in the NOOD Races

 

[Maxi]

ST expressed respect for Lou Smit, and I don't think he'd have done that just to look good. IMO, Smit is another of the many people who is blinded by the Ramsey charisma. You'd think a tough old cop would know better, but I've seen seasoned newsmen (who may be the most cynical people in the world) get caught up in the Kennedy magic.

That kind of charisma is a mixed blessing. Assuming no Ramsey is guilty, I think it may have been a factor in JBR's death.

 

[TLynn]

John also stated they wanted a "proper burial" for JonBenet.

Smit touted around a photo of the basement window wide open - he claimed it was a crime scene photo and that was his indication it was an intruder. He knew that wasn't an accurate crime scene photo - the window was NEVER open like that.

He's been dishonest about this case. He continued his charade of dishonesty when he did his little dance climbing through the basement window.

He based his theory on a lie and refused to incorporate the true facts of the case (including the pineapple).

 

[Toth]

>John also stated they wanted a "proper burial" for JonBenet.
I wish some threads on this forum would get a proper burial. Oops, perhaps you think my use of the phrase 'proper burial' is somehow indicative of guilt?

>Smit touted around a photo of the basement window wide open
> - he claimed it was a crime scene photo and that was his indication it
>was an intruder. He knew that wasn't an accurate crime
>scene photo - the window was NEVER open like that.
The window would have been open like that if anyone passed through it. I do not know if it was open when the police photographer took his photographs, though I believe it was. I believe there is testimony that the window was originally found open and was closed prior to the discovery of the corpse.

>He continued his charade of dishonesty when he did his little dance
>climbing through the basement window.
Dishonesty? He demonstrated that a large man could get through the window with ease. Nothing dishonest about that.

 

[Ivy]

Well, Toth, Smit sure didn't demonstrate that someone could climb in through the window without scooting his butt over the sill and disturbing the dust...now, did he? If an Intruder entered or exited via the window, he must have flown or floated through it.

 

[K777angel]

What was patently dishonest is how Lou Smit made a fool of himself when he tried to tie that suitcase in with some intruder needing it to get up and out that window. Did you SEE how low to the ground the window was? LOL!
I guess the "intruder" was a midget. Oh - and remember, Smit also wants us to believe this intruder also carried a baseball bat out the window with him so he could "lay" it gently on the small concrete ledge outside of the house.

And THIS is the guy we are supposed to admire as some great detective.
Ha! Not any more.

 

[Islander]

The window would have been open like that if anyone passed through it. I do not know if it was open when the police photographer took his photographs, though I believe it was. I believe there is testimony that the window was originally found open and was closed prior to the discovery of the corpse.

Toth: You are wrong about the testimony and TLynn is 100 percent correct. Lou Smit, in an attempt to sell his intruder theory to the public, used the picture of the wide-open basement window when he knew the picture was inaccurate. He knew this because John Ramsey told him so during John’s interview on June 23, 1998. It was Smit who asked John if he ever went down to the basement. John replied that he had early on the morning of December 26, saw the window open about an inch or so, and latched it. He told Smit that he didn’t remember if he told anyone that he found the window open. He also explained that he had used that window to enter the house before, and that they sometimes left the window open a bit to cold down the basement. John had previously told Steve Thomas the same thing when interviewed in April of 1997. Perhaps we can cut Smit some slack for not knowing about the Thomas interview, but certainly he should have remembered what he heard directly from John Ramsey. Yet he continued to include that wide-open window picture in his infamous Power Point presentation.

 

[Toth]

What was patently dishonest is how Lou Smit made a fool of himself when he tried to tie that suitcase in with some intruder needing it to get up and out that window.

How do you account for the shard of glass being on top of the suitcase when the suitcase would normally have been located nowhere near the window but over next to the stairs?

 

[popcorn]

Since when is there a reliable source for where the suitcase normally was placed, and for obvious reasons prime suspects can't be included. This was a basement playroom for children and the family had a history of being slobs. By admission this was not the family's favored type of luggage. If the suitcase had been donated to charity the month before John Ramsey would never have even missed it.