Colorado Statutes relating to JonBenet Ramsey’s death

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by otg, Apr 7, 2014.

  1. otg

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

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Because of several recent discussions, I looked into some of the statutes that dealt with the True Bills that had been returned by the Ramsey Grand Jury. I really thought I had found something that would make both of the charges not subject to the Statute of Limitations as has been widely reported in the press. This relates to a discussion on another thread where we talked about complicity. So I decided to ask a friend of mine who is an attorney. Here is what I wrote as I interpreted what I had found on Count VII [I’ll address the other True Bill (Count IV), and other issues in later posts.]:
    The answer I got tells me that I was confusing the two distinctly different concepts of the word Accomplice as opposed to Accessory. Here is the explanation I received:

    I’ll address the other True Bill (Count IV) in another post when I get a more detailed explanation. But there is one more piece of information I did get that was in response to this question of mine:

     
  2. Loading...


  3. bettybaby00

    bettybaby00 New Member

    Messages:
    3,981
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    OMG!!!

    Gets comfy on couch, and gets down to some serious reading!


    Thank you for all you do <3
     
  4. bettybaby00

    bettybaby00 New Member

    Messages:
    3,981
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    As clearly written as you've put it here, it's a lot to absorb, and I will have to read this several more times.......yet I can't help but conclude:

    So it's apparently all about how the DA(s) has no balls?

    :banghead: :banghead::banghead:
     
  5. questfortrue

    questfortrue Member

    Messages:
    966
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    18
    This is a huge discovery.

    For some time I’d thought the statute of limitations had run out. (I thought it was 3 years from the time of the homicide.) So, I was confused after I read the True Bill how that worked: murder in the first verbiage and no action on the part of DA AH? But then I carefully re-read Garnett’s statement in the Daily Camera, and the words “conclusive evidence” jumped out at me.

    Garnett in the Daily Camera (BBM): “Which brings me to the "true bills" from the Ramsey grand jury. I became aware of the existence of these documents when I took office in 2009. I asked my appellate department to review them and was told that they related to charges for which the statute of limitations had run years ago. My staff evaluated the Ramsey case to determine if there was any charge for which the statute of limitations had not run and for which there was conclusive evidence. Because there was none, we focused on other matters (including four murders we tried in 2009, two of which were cold cases). .”

    Later I listened to Silverman on Boyle’s radio show. Silverman (attorney in Denver) made the statement that he believed JR had to be “sweating” this pronouncement. To me, Silverman also found this GJ revelation pretty big stuff.

    Gonna have to take some time to go over OTG post. But initial reactions – ITA with BB: Where’s the cojones!

    :worms:
     
  6. Venom

    Venom New Member

    Messages:
    1,304
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Wow! Great post and info otg. I think it pretty much finalizes my theory.
     
  7. otg

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

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I should point out (just to be clear) that my friend has no access to the proceedings of the RGJ, and therefore is not saying he knows what they concluded (or how), or for that matter, what actually occurred. All this attorney is telling me is how the laws apply, and what it appears to be that the majority of the GJ agreed to.
     
  8. otg

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

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I don't know if I'd be quite as quick to say that about the current DA, betty. It seems he's taken a realistic view on what it is that he inherited from his predecessors. Lacy's "pronouncement of exoneration" didn't help the situation. The problem (IMO) was that charges should have been filed when the GJ returned the true bills on the charges which had not yet run out of time on. (Maybe Hunter is the one whose anatomical deficiencies you were referring to?)
     
  9. Linda7NJ

    Linda7NJ New Member

    Messages:
    30,906
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thank you otg!


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  10. DeeDee249

    DeeDee249 New Member

    Messages:
    8,022
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I think "Ball-less in Boulder" sounds like a GREAT name for a new TV show, doesn't it? It could star all of our "favorites- AH and his "crew", and even some that are ball-less because of gender (ML).
    :floorlaugh:
     
  11. bettybaby00

    bettybaby00 New Member

    Messages:
    3,981
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    O. M. G.

    Loves it :floorlaugh:
     
  12. SapphireSteel

    SapphireSteel New Member

    Messages:
    6,786
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks for going to all that trouble.

    Jonbenet's case is truly staggering in so many ways, not least because of the political shenanigans that went on.

    The only solution is for the good people of Colorado/America to persist in asking for an official and unbiased inquiry into the entire mess.

    Jonbenet has been let down by everyone, at every level.

    eta: I sometimes think WS is the only place that still cares.
     
  13. bettybaby00

    bettybaby00 New Member

    Messages:
    3,981
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :lol: IA, SG hasn't necessarily been as "as guilty" as his predecessors, but that's for another time.

    What struck me when reading your excellent post is this:

    There has been much ink regarding AHs inability to prosecute this case, in part, b/c of the formidable opponents he faced. IMO, behind the scenes this has been held up as an excuse, while publicly the public was told "the case lacks enough credible evidence." yet we see day in and day out cases prosecuted across the country with far less "evidence." So I have to ask, if there was so much hesistancy on AHs part b/c of his less than impressive prosecutorial experience, why were the pleas for a special prosecutor so steadfastly ignored?

    We were reminded of S. Thomas' plea the other night (LindaNJ ?), but reading your post here made me want to dig out the Whites letter to the citizens of Boulder dated, August of 1998.

    I won't post the whole thing as it s rather lengthly. The following is still long, so I apologize in advance :)

    several passages and concepts definitely stick out, and the overall tone has stayed with me. I definitely recommend to those who haven't to read it in its entirety.

    http://extras.denverpost.com/news/whiteltr.htm





    All of that work, and the GJ just didn't cooperate now did they?

    Lord it would be great to get their opinion of the GJ True-bills. No doubt they would be further disheartened to see how AH duped the public for so long.
     
  14. midwest mama

    midwest mama Active Member

    Messages:
    1,289
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    :cheer:

    Ciss Boom Bah!! Way to go otg!

    IMO, this just supports my conviction that JR has been smearing his "innocence" in the face of society for far too long. And doing it all while continuing to further his good Christian character, and making a statement to the release of the GJ information as being "just more drama". Simply sickening. :burn:

    Would your lawyer pal have any info about any ways for normal citizens to shake things up? Civil suit, some kind of petition to the DA, standing on our heads on the state capital steps? Anything? Something!!! :banghead:
     
  15. gramcracker

    gramcracker Indentured Cat Servant

    Messages:
    1,690
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    36
    thank you for posting that, Betty

    I swear, the Whites' letter and Steve Thomas' letter ... how can that much logic and information go ... nowhere?

    Welcome to Boulder! Dirty Deeds, Done Dirt Cheap!
     
  16. Linda7NJ

    Linda7NJ New Member

    Messages:
    30,906
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Makes ya wonder how they sleep at night.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  17. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    BBM

    There's a guy around here who's been saying that for the better part of 20 years! Who was that, again?
     
  18. otg

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

    Messages:
    2,389
    Likes Received:
    18
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Does anyone else enjoy reading good courtroom drama books, or enjoy watching a great movie about some court case -- either real or fictional? Seems like the better ones always have some moment toward the end where, after you’ve come to identify with the main character, it all looks hopeless for him (or her). Then someone discovers some obscure “loophole” in the law, or they realize that everyone has overlooked some small detail that was right there under their proverbial noses all along and ends up saving the case. Somehow that’s what I thought I had found when I asked my lawyer friend about the two True Bills that were made public. In my legal ignorance, because of what I read in the Colorado Revised Statutes (CRS), it appeared to me that while the press had reported that the statutes of limitations had run out on each of the two charges, they still boiled down to Felony Murder (having been committed during the commission of another felony).

    This is why I asked my “legal advisor” about the possibility. The first answer I got was about Count VII (Accessory to Crime). Essentially, the answer is that as an accessory (as opposed to an accomplice), it doesn’t raise the charge to the status of M-1 (if I understand the answer correctly). But what it does tell us is what the RGJ seemed to been thinking about what happened based on the information there were able to get, which of course we do not know. [To better understand the concept of an "accessory", think about how the word is used in describing something in your car or your house. An accessory is something not essential to its function, but something that simply makes it better or more effective.]

    I haven’t yet gotten a detailed explanation about my question on Count IV (a) (Child Abuse Resulting in Death) (my friend is only doing this in his spare time, and still works full time -- for people who pay him), but I will pass along what he is able to tell me when he finds the time. In the meantime, I’m going to post what was presented to him so we can discuss it here. Maybe someone will see something I’m missing, or might be able to give us more information about it. Here is what I wrote:

    I’ll add now that while writing this, I notice a glaring difference in the TB and the statutes I quoted. I’ll look into it myself when I can get to it, but meanwhile I’ll leave it at that and see if anyone else notices it, or can find out if it matters. (It's not the fact that the Denver Post calculated the 3-years from the wrong starting point.)
     
  19. Linda7NJ

    Linda7NJ New Member

    Messages:
    30,906
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Basically, IMO it says it's still murder in the first degree, even if the person committing is under the age limit.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  20. Linda7NJ

    Linda7NJ New Member

    Messages:
    30,906
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Basically, IMO it says it's still murder in the first degree, even if the person committing is under the age limit.

    All so confusing...the sexual assault is a felony & would make murder first degree. It couldn't be accidental if the head bash was part if the sexual assault.

    The Ramsey's ...TB seems to be deliberately lacking some verbiage.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/quote]





    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  21. THE BUNK

    THE BUNK New Member

    Messages:
    456
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not up to snuff on my law...but would this mean that back in 1996, Burke Ramsey could have been charged with Murder One?
     

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