Grand Jury True Bills John & Patsy Discussion thread

[TreeClimbingGirl]

So they knew that she might die but left her in the situation and then covered it up.What could that mean.

I'm not as familiar with the case as many here are, but one possible interpretation could be that the older brother did it and the parents covered it up. Although you would expect to see some kind of obstruction of justice charges were that the case, that may not have been among the charges they were allowed to choose from.

 

[Rougelatete]

Child abuse resulting in death and accessory to murder...what was it JR said in his book again? :floorlaugh:

That said, I wonder about the first charge. Were they doing it based on the broken window they knew about but didn't fix - which would allow an intruder to get into the house - the pageants for sexualising her or something else? I'm very curious on this.

Also, these are counts 4 and 7. Where's the rest?!

I think it's something more along the lines of they knew they had a psychiatrically troubled (male) child in the house and did not seek appropriate help for him to stop his behaviors. They knew he was abusing his sister and it's possible they knew about other abuse going on in the household on the part of JR and/or PR. I get the sense that the Grand Jury believed JR and/or PR witnessed their son abusing JBR that night and did nothing to stop it and it resulted in her death -- how else can we reconcile the first degree murder notation? JMO.

 

[Darlene733510]

These pages that were released tell me that the R's knew JBR was being sexually molested, and they ignored it, and refused to put a stop to it.
4 people were in the house - one is dead, and 2 refused to protect her from her molester.
Who does that leave??? I don't think we need a "rocket scientist" to figure out what was going on.
I bet the tabloids will have some interesting articles on the release of this information.

 

[tezi]

Child abuse resulting in death and accessory to murder...what was it JR said in his book again? :floorlaugh:

That said, I wonder about the first charge. Were they doing it based on the broken window they knew about but didn't fix - which would allow an intruder to get into the house - the pageants for sexualising her or something else? I'm very curious on this.

Also, these are counts 4 and 7. Where's the rest?!

IMO, the first charge is for not calling 9-11 when JBR was discovered injured. I could be wrong.

We aren't getting anything else. Only the documents with the foreman's signature.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/local-news/jonbenet-ramsey-murder-grand-jury-indictment-charges-john-patsy-ramsey-with-child-abuse

 

[SyraKelly]

Oh-I really want to know what you all think of this
Can't wait to read all your posts

you all have been here since the beginning!!

 

[Nom de plume]

Ppfffttt.....

What a joke; a bad joke. What was the point? Why even bother? It was public knowledge over 10 months ago what the charges were.

Figures. :banghead:

 

[JC84]

I am NO expert here but let me get this straight...

The grand jury wanted to charge PR and JR with the same two charges each. Allowing the crime to happen and covering it up, in simple terms.

This raises two points:

1. There's only one way both could reasonably be charged on these two counts, surely. And that's Burke did it. They allowed it. They covered it up.

2. If the Grand Jury didn't think that was the case, I can start to see Hunter's issue with indicting them - how was he supposed to win that case?

This IS disappointing, but as Chelly says, should we be reading between the lines here?

"We didn't know who did what," one juror told the Camera, "but we felt the adults in the house may have done something that they certainly could have prevented, or they could have helped her, and they didn't."

In light of this quote...maybe I lean towards number 2.

But I still think number 1 is a possibility.

 

[tezi]

I think it's something more along the lines of they knew they had a psychiatrically troubled (male) child in the house and did not seek appropriate help for him to stop his behaviors. They knew he was abusing his sister and it's possible they knew about other abuse going on in the household on the part of JR and/or PR. I get the sense that the Grand Jury believed JR and/or PR witnessed their son abusing JBR that night and did nothing to stop it and it resulted in her death -- how else can we reconcile the first degree murder notation? JMO.

^^^^

This along with not calling 9-11when she was first discovered, long before the "ransom book" was allegedly discovered on the stairs.

 

[madeleine]

^^^^

This along with not calling 9-11when she was first discovered, long before the "ransom book" was allegedly discovered on the stairs.

ransom book :floorlaugh:

ty for the laugh,needed it after such a disappointment

 

[otg]

Coming up on Fox News: said they would be having a legal panel "breaking down what this indictment means."

 

[SyraKelly]

ransom book :floorlaugh:

ty for the laugh,needed it after such a disappointment

hmm-Why are you disappointed Madeleine?

 

[tezi]

What a bittersweet day. JonBenet had a chance at justice in the legal system, but because of Alex Hunter and his desire not to move forward, it was lost.

Count VII really tells me everything I need to know. While the John and Patsy may not have killed JonBenet, they covered it all up. Gee, John, we now see you for WHO you really are. Nevermind the touch DNA, it doesn't even come into play here. YOU and YOUR WIFE helped whoever killed your daughter get away with it. Gee, aren't you so proud of yourself? Now, the world knows...Instead of "manning up," you threw countless people under the bus, even though you knew the truth. And if it was Burke who did this, you failed him also.

John, we know...We know the truth now...Why don't you try writing a book about THAT?

You, along with your wife, ruined an honorable man's career. Yes, I am speaking of Steve Thomas. Yeah, you had help, Alex Hunter and his minions helped, but in the end, you and Patsy bear responsibility.

The only thing anyone can do is pray for you. Because apparently (even for all my short-comings, I have never covered up a murder), you need prayers worse than I ever could.

JMO

 

[gsquared]

It's been a loooooong time since I've here...any old timers around who remember me from 1996-2000 era? Kidlet is all grown up and in college now. My thoughts on today's news:

The indictment is pretty clear - it accuses BOTH parents of covering up for someone else. It says: "...each parent "did render assistance to a person" with the intent to prevent their arrest or prosecution, knowing they had "committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death...". So, either they covered up for each other, or they covered up for their son, who was the only other person in the house.


It also says that each parent "did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health, which resulted in the death of JonBenet Ramsey." So again, either they each placed her in danger of the other parent, or the "danger" was their son, because he was the only other one in the house.


Not all of the report was released. The judge held something back. I have a good guess as to what that was about.

 

[chlban]

etamine;9926201]

Child abuse resulting in death and accessory to murder...what was it JR said in his book again? :floorlaugh:

That said, I wonder about the first charge. Were they doing it based on the broken window they knew about but didn't fix - which would allow an intruder to get into the house - the pageants for sexualising her or something else? I'm very curious on this.

Felony child abuse and accessory to murder for not getting a window fixed?
Or entereing your daughter in perfectly legal (although totally creepy) beauty pageants?

I don't think so. I have always leaned to PDI, but reading this I can reach only one conclusion, which had been my very first theory way back when. BDI and his parents covered it.

It says they covered up 1st degree murder committed by a third party.

The shocker in this to me, really, is that they apparently believed the death was not a result of an accident. It was premeditated murder committed by a 9year old child. Yes, of couse I know Burke wasn't named, by law he couldn't be, but who else would both parents cover for?

Creepy. Really, really creepy.

 

[BetteDavisEyes]

Much ado about nothing.

I can't speak for everyone who followed this case, but I always thought that John and Patsy covered for one another, and both parents covered for Burke. :moo:

 

[rachael123]

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, the Grand Jury believed BR (or whoever was the initial perpetrator) committed FIRST DEGREE murder -- that this was not an accident, this was planned, intentional, premeditated. That is a whopper to digest. And, then they believe that John and Patsy intentionally -- and with knowledge of the crime committed -- covered up a first degree murder of their daughter together. This is truly mind-blowing. What would lead them to believe it was premeditated?!

That's my question and the news is barely covering this.

 

[madeleine]

hmm-Why are you disappointed Madeleine?

greedy me wanted all 18 pages

 

[madeleine]

So, if I'm understanding this correctly, the Grand Jury believed BR (or whoever was the initial perpetrator) committed FIRST DEGREE murder -- that this was not an accident, this was planned, intentional, premeditated. That is a whopper to digest. And, then they believe that John and Patsy intentionally -- and with knowledge of the crime committed -- covered up a first degree murder of their daughter together. This is truly mind-blowing. What would lead them to believe it was premeditated?!

GOOD question!

 

[Linda7NJ]

Marking...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[AnaTeresa]

Very curious how BR is feeling today.