breach of promise

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Tadpole12, Oct 8, 2013.

  1. Tadpole12

    Tadpole12 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,479
    Likes Received:
    176
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Re, previous thread: Boulder Da sued for release of indictment
    [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9867208#post9867208"]Boulder DA sued for release of indictment - Page 12 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]

    *********************************************************

    http://www.dailycamera.com/news/bou...release-indictment-jonbenet-ramsey-john-patsy

    Boulder DA: Release of Ramsey documents would be "breach of promise" to grand jury

    10/08/2013 11:31:53 AM MDT

    "The Boulder District Attorney's Office filed a response today to a lawsuit filed by a Daily Camera reporter and a press advocacy group, saying the release of the indictment secretly voted on by the JonBenet Ramsey grand jury in 1999 would be a "breach of promise" to the jurors."
     
  2. Loading...


  3. ATasteOfHoney

    ATasteOfHoney Active Member

    Messages:
    5,883
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    36
    :banghead:


    Wow......just wow!
     
  4. eileenhawkeye

    eileenhawkeye Active Member

    Messages:
    8,769
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Just because they reply that way doesn't mean it's true, and doesn't mean the judge is going to agree with them. They don't want to release the indictment, and they need a reason. Both sides have issues their "argument" and the judge will make a decision, or ask for more information and set another date on October 11th.
     
  5. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Boulder DA: Release of Ramsey documents would be "breach of promise" to grand jury

    promises,promises ,blah blah blah :nevermind:

    it's more like excuses,excuses in this case..
     
  6. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    it's even a bit ironic...cause the jurors themselves broke the silence re the indictment in the first place...so I guess this means they want the truth to be known,no?
     
  7. Little Jedi

    Little Jedi "I am free of all prejudices. I hate everyone equa

    Messages:
    984
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ^^^^This^^^^
     
  8. tezi

    tezi Member of Websleuths since 2000.

    Messages:
    5,359
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I think so. They are tired of the cover-up that has been going on since December 26, 1996. I know I am.

    This release of the news of the indictment is like a slap in the face to those of us who believe without a doubt that the Ramseys are responsible at the very least for the cover-up of the murder of their daughter.

    I say release the indictment and let the chips fall where they may. And let the guilty parties that have been part of this cover-up for years run and hide.

    JMO
     
  9. dodie20

    dodie20 New Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't think the breach of contract argument is going to fly since the gj Did vote to indict. It not being signed off is where the breach of promise comes into play, imo, because for years, the gj refusing to indict has been the foundation for a lot of 'the Rs have been persecuted' speak. If after their vote, authorities admitted the gj voted to indict, but they themselves decided against it for whatever reason, then this breach argument might make sense, but as it stands, it looks like the gj was manipulated and misrepresented. One thing I'd like to see happen, is for every person in authority who said or wrote that the gj voted not to indict, be held accountable for those words. IMO, the gj members have been wronged and it looks like they are still being used and manipulated. Moo based on the reports so far.
     
  10. eileenhawkeye

    eileenhawkeye Active Member

    Messages:
    8,769
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    36
    The hearing was today. Craig Silverman was there, and here are his tweets:

    #JonBenet fascinating hrg just ended. Press arguing Boulder DA wrong then and now to keep indictment secret. Fleet White here watching too.

    Per Tom Kelly -- press lawyer -- Alex Hunter had no right to keep privete grand jury's true bill agst John and Patsy Ramsey.

    #JonBenet Judge has matter under advisement and said he will rule next week. John Ramsey is alive but statute of limitations on F2 is over.

    #JonBenet Boulder Dep DA Finn argued grand jurors expect secrecy. Press atty Wesson responded this GJ expected it would be far from secret.

    From Boulder Daily Camera tweets:

    RT @SarahKuta: Judge held a closed door meeting with attorneys to discuss the existence of an indictment at all.

    RT @SarahKuta: Because the hearing proceeded, we were led to believe they decided that an indictment does in fact exist in Ramsey case.

    From Daily Camera reporter:

    Sarah Kuta ‏@SarahKuta 30m
    Judge can decide grand jury secrecy is absolute or issue show cause order, which means defendant will need to prove why should remain secret
     
  11. eileenhawkeye

    eileenhawkeye Active Member

    Messages:
    8,769
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    36
    http://www.dailycamera.com/news/bou...indictment-lawsuit-court-arguments?source=rss

    So the indictment does exist.
     
  12. gramcracker

    gramcracker Indentured Cat Servant

    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    36
    what is F2? TIA (I'm sure I'll be like "duh" when I find out, but I gotta ask, LOL)
     
  13. otg

    otg Reports of my death are greatly exagerated... but

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
  14. otg

    otg Reports of my death are greatly exagerated... but

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Oh, my! FW was there. Looks like he's still interested in seeing justice. I hope his presence in the courtroom is a constant reminder to everyone involved in this that he won't let it die.

    TY, eileenhawkeye, for the updates. I found the twitter accounts if anyone else wants to follow:

    https://twitter.com/craigscolorado

    https://twitter.com/SarahKuta
     
  15. redheadedgal

    redheadedgal Active Member

    Messages:
    4,633
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    it was awesome to read FW was there !!

    thanks for the report, eileenhawkeye.

    #justiceforjonbenet
     
  16. Venom

    Venom New Member

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm glad that FW showed up, he must still care enough for justice for little JB. I'd love for him to talk one day. Hopefully next week when the ruling comes it will be in the favor of releasing the indictment. :please:
     
  17. eileenhawkeye

    eileenhawkeye Active Member

    Messages:
    8,769
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    36
    It doesn't look like the judge is going to make a ruling next week. Instead, he will decide whether Garnett needs to testify on why the GJ indictment should stay private.

    We got through the first hearing without the judge throwing out the case...so a positive so far...
     
  18. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    [​IMG]

    FW in court
     
  19. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have some questions for those of you who know this stuff better:

    -who knew about the indictment besides the jurors and Hunter?I am interested whether the R's attorney's knew about the result
    -if CB wins what exactly will be made public?what exactly will be released? (what kind of information)

    TIA:seeya:
     
  20. eileenhawkeye

    eileenhawkeye Active Member

    Messages:
    8,769
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Well, I found a Grand Jury indictment from the Gosnell case in Philadelphia, and there are almost 100 pages about the corruption in the case. There's a section called "How did this go on for so long?" with multiple, major entities getting an entire chapter. It's extremely detailed with a lot of the testimony that was said during the GJ:

    http://www.phila.gov/districtattorney/pdfs/grandjurywomensmedical.pdf
    (Warning: Some graphic photos)

    So I don't know if the Ramsey GJ will be similar...but the fact that the Boulder DA really doesn't want it released...makes me think there's more to it than simply a list of charges.
     
  21. dodie20

    dodie20 New Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I also want to know who all knew about the indictments. When I think of how many times someone smugly used the GJ voting Not to indict as proof of innocence, I want to know who all deliberately lied. mo
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice