Incompetence or something else?

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by madeleine, Dec 19, 2010.

?

Why wasn't this case solved?

  1. Incompetence

    13 vote(s)
    22.0%
  2. Money&connections

    6 vote(s)
    10.2%
  3. incompetence,money&connections

    40 vote(s)
    67.8%
  1. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am not sure anymore that this case wasn't solved due to incompetence.

    If you know that you can't handle such a case,why refuse the FBI's help.

    Why were the first officers at the scene instructed to treat the parents as victims.

    From ST's book:


    "Although putting Trujillo on evidence would remove him from fieldwork,he seemed to have a problem with priorities,and I was concerned that his slowness in accomplishing tasks might hinder the testing of evidence.For instance,a full year passed before he completed his report on the initial Atlanta trip."


    "The first officer was having difficulty in recollecting certain events."



    Let's not forget Arndt's strange behaviour,now she's getting flowers from suspects,then she's going on TV claiming JR did it.

    Everything the DA office did

    ML,no need to comment.


    At first I thought this case was screwed up because everybody in Boulder is incompetent.
    Maybe I was wrong .

    Maybe those who say it was about the money are right.Not sayin' the entire BPD knows,it's enough for their bosses to know,who then instruct their officers to follow leads that are going nowhere.

    So why wasn't this case solved?
    Incompetence?
    Money&connections?
    or
    All of the above?

    I just can't believe how unlucky JB was..........
     
  2. Loading...


  3. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Still trying to understand what ML did and why she did it.Cause a competent,smart DA would know better.

    Was it incompetence,ego or was it about something else?
     
  4. slug

    slug New Member

    Messages:
    187
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    From an outsider's point of veiw there definatly seems to have been a high level of incompetence.
    Starting from the first report of a kinapping and onwards.
    IMO the police should have done a search of the house when they first got there, while other officers should have been getting as much info from the parents.
    was money or connections a factor? I dunno if they didn't play any part then theres a lot of incompetance around, maybe the Ramsey's were considered a wealthy family so some people didn't look at the initial kidnap in the same way they would have for most people.
     
  5. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    This makes no sense, as DNA was discovered at the crime scene that has the property of being mutually corroborative. ML then simply made a rational deduction based on this event. Your post seems to proceed on the assumption that there was no DNA event.

    Understanding what ML did only requires that you understand the DNA events and its significance, and its evident that you dont fully understand them or the driving force behind the DA's actions. This seems true because the DNA events are a glaring omission from your post.

    Had the BPD arrested JR or PR early on, and never ever found this DNA, then incompetence would be a factor. Had the BPD not used the term 'umbrella of suspicion' and not required PR to give full right and left hand exemplars word for word of the ransom note, then connections and money could be a factor.

    I cant vote on your poll because of glaring omissions of other possibilities. Only three choices are provided when obviously none of the three are applicable.
     
  6. Peepers

    Peepers Member

    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Incompetence and alot of stubborn people...all the way around.
     
  7. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Can you go to court with her findings?NO (lol,imagine F.Lee Bailey/the alledged intruder's defence lawyer, playing with these DNA findings,better,throwing it out of court in one second)
    Then,IMO,it's not enough to clear someone either and a competent unbiased DA would know it.
     
  8. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Until it's a match,this DNA is nothing.It's only stuff ML put in an exoneration letter,it proves nothing,it tells us nothing about who killed JB,how and why.So what are we talking about here.You can't even call it evidence since you can't go to court with it,it's corroborated with nothing else.
     
  9. passionflower

    passionflower Just 1 tip to find a killer

    Messages:
    27,333
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I voted incompetance AND money and influence.
    Boulder LE was not experienced in murder, let alone a child murder.
    Nor in high profile kidnapping..........
    The house (crime scene) was never controlled.
    The Ramseys were powerful people in the community.
    Money talks...............
    exactly like in the OJ case........people were in ahhhh, of the wealthy couple and treated with kid gloves!
     
  10. Holdontoyourhat

    Holdontoyourhat Former Member

    Messages:
    5,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yes I can and I'm not alone. CNN, Fox, CBS, NYTimes, and more all call it evidence. This means you're wrong.

    Evidence is anything that tends to prove or disprove something. It seems you want this to be called evidence if and only if it proves a specific person did it . This is flat wrong. The evidence can also be used to prove a third party was there that night who was not a family member.

    For credibility sake, please go ahead and call it evidence because it is.
     
  11. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0


    CNN and fox can call it whatever they want,they don't have to go to court with it .
     
  12. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Huh?
    Doesn't apply to me,I am not one of those who have only ONE suspect in mind.
     
  13. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    DNA alone is nothing (in this case) and ML probably knows it too,she used it to exonerate someone which is totally different than trying to charge someone.
    Why did she do it just before she left,hm?So she doesn't have to explain herself.Why didn't she test the rest of the evidence?No,she only tested what was needed in order to clear them.Why didn't she test stuff that could tell us more about the intruder?Or help get him?Cause this wasn't her mission,the intruder,her mission was the Ramsey's.HUGE difference.
     
  14. Peepers

    Peepers Member

    Messages:
    563
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    And lets not forget arrogance in the way ST thought it was such an obvious case that he refused to look at anything else with any serious objective eyes and the arrogance of the whole department thinking they had it in the box, thus not keeping good notes or records and letting the investigation be subjective instead of objective.
     
  15. SunnieRN

    SunnieRN Active Member

    Messages:
    3,577
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I believe the whole case actually started on December 23rd, with the 911 phone call that night. Solve that mystery and the BPD as well as the DA's office will be much closer to solving the December 25th/26th mystery.

    Was the BPD expert at child murder? Of course not, but were their investigative powers staunched by the DA's office and the R's lawyers, most certainly. Which of course speaks more to the mentality of the DA's office in Boulder, rather than the R's lawyers. They were being paid handsomely to do exactly what they have done.

    Add in poor crime scene management, detectives that were in over their heads before they even started, the results are exactly how they appear today.

    There is one piece of evidence that can not be explained away, no matter what else ever happens in this case. Why did the Ramseys choose to put December 25th on JonBenets headstone?

    So my vote, police mistakes, DA influence and good lawyers, made this case what it is today.
     
  16. claudicici

    claudicici Active Member

    Messages:
    2,921
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Why did the Ramseys choose to put December 25th on JonBenets headstone?

    That one's easy to answer IMO.Because it sounds more dramatic and significant then December 24th.
     
  17. my_tee_mouse

    my_tee_mouse Done. Put a Fork in Me.

    Messages:
    3,581
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Their choices were: December 25, which would mean she died before midnight; or December 26, which would mean she died after midnight, correct?
     
  18. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    :clap: :clap: :clap: Damn good points, maddy.
     
  19. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    That would be a first! I'm not joking, either. ML never made a rational deduction in any of the other cases she handled. Seems awfully weird to start now!

    SOMEBODY doesn't understand the driving force behind the DA's actions, all right! Some of us, OTOH, understand them only too well! Or maybe you're counting on us not knowing about all the s**t she did for the Rs BEFORE this "DNA event" occurred? Is that it?

    Give me a BREAK, HOTYH. If anything, money and connections are the ONLY thing that saved them at that point!
     
  20. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    The magic words.
     
  21. eileenhawkeye

    eileenhawkeye Active Member

    Messages:
    8,769
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    36
    JonBenet's murder was the only murder in Boulder in 1996. LE was used to dealing with drunk college students not child murders. Then, you have the national media wanting to know every detail and demanding that the police hurry up and solve the case which puts a lot of pressure and scrutiny on LE. You also have the Ramseys who have money, lawyers, and connections to further intimidate the cops. I think it was just too much for LE to handle and they probably should have called for outside help as soon as they saw how much media this was getting and how the parents were using their wealth to their advantage. I believe that if this happened in Denver (where the police have more experience with murders) and/or if the media hadn't picked it up (less pressure on LE) and/or if the Ramseys were middle class or working class, it would have been solved by now. But then again, there are plenty of unsolved crimes that received no media coverage, where the persons of interests were not wealthy, and LE was used to dealing with murder.
     

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