Explaining the indictments.

Gunther Toody

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2013
Messages
427
Reaction score
271
I had a brief discussion with my son who has spent 20 years in law enforcement about what exactly the indictments mean. I am sure most know the implications but for those who are wondering...

An indictment is an official charging document allowing prosecutors to proceed with criminal charges against the accused person.

By indicting JR on charges of child endangerment resulting in JBR's death, the grand jury found probable cause that he recklessly or negligently allowed circumstances that led to her tragic death in December 1996.

While it does not directly charge JR with murdering JB, a charge of criminal endangerment resulting in death is extremely serious, indicating alleged conduct that enabled or failed to prevent the child's killing.

PR was also indicted for the same alleged crimes. Consequently, the grand jury found probable cause that not just JR, but also PR's actions or negligence unreasonably endangered JB in a manner that led to her death.

It casts even more doubt on an intruder theory, by alleging both members of the family engaged in conduct that imperiled JB's wellbeing and led to her tragic death.

So in summary, by indicting both parents on endangerment charges, it concentrates suspicion fully within the family home. It implies the grand jury believed J and P jointly created an endangering environment through their actions or failures to act that was the direct catalyst for JB's death, rather than any outside intruder.
 
I had a brief discussion with my son who has spent 20 years in law enforcement about what exactly the indictments mean. I am sure most know the implications but for those who are wondering...

An indictment is an official charging document allowing prosecutors to proceed with criminal charges against the accused person.

By indicting JR on charges of child endangerment resulting in JBR's death, the grand jury found probable cause that he recklessly or negligently allowed circumstances that led to her tragic death in December 1996.

While it does not directly charge JR with murdering JB, a charge of criminal endangerment resulting in death is extremely serious, indicating alleged conduct that enabled or failed to prevent the child's killing.

PR was also indicted for the same alleged crimes. Consequently, the grand jury found probable cause that not just JR, but also PR's actions or negligence unreasonably endangered JB in a manner that led to her death.

It casts even more doubt on an intruder theory, by alleging both members of the family engaged in conduct that imperiled JB's wellbeing and led to her tragic death.

So in summary, by indicting both parents on endangerment charges, it concentrates suspicion fully within the family home. It implies the grand jury believed J and P jointly created an endangering environment through their actions or failures to act that was the direct catalyst for JB's death, rather than any outside intruder.
We mustn’t forget about the aiding and abetting indictment either. And they walked …
 
We mustn’t forget about the aiding and abetting indictment either. And they walked …
And more troubling is the fact that they turned on their friends, claiming that they might be guilty, instead of playing dumb and just going along with the intruder theory.
 
And more troubling is the fact that they turned on their friends, claiming that they might be guilty, instead of playing dumb and just going along with the intruder theory.
Not sure that they turned their backs on some of their friends is more troubling then the Aid and Abet charges brought against both JR and PR. We must remember that BR was less than a month away from being charged. It plays into what occurred.

But your point is good. IMO, they turned their backs on their friends that no longer served them and their purpose. Rightly, there was a lot of hurt and angered feelings left amongst those cast aside.
 
As a charge of murder against the parents could not be proved, there'd be no point in bringing it. However, the chronic SA could be proved. The DA decided not to pursue it.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
299
Guests online
1,122
Total visitors
1,421

Forum statistics

Threads
597,570
Messages
18,066,635
Members
230,392
Latest member
@ttentive
Back
Top