JonBenet case attention

[cherrymeg]

We would hope so, but what could motivate them to NOT get help? That is what we must ask ourselves, Cherry! Take a gander at the Grand jury true bills..maybe they can shed some light for you...

I thought maybe they released something new. I understood it to mean that the parents were responsible. There was abuse occurring in that home. Was it happening to both children?

 

[NanaNZA]

Cherry, we can only speculate. but they were trying to keep something(s) secret. We don't know what evidence/information has been withheld that may be contained in medical records, and one can only guess what those poor children were going through in that house... Their mother was very ill for a long time, and their father had a pretty demanding career I expect...
The grand jury felt that the parents were responsible, yes, you are correct.. but what exactly were they responsible for? Well, obviously felony child abuse of JBR:
PR and JR "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."
And this:
PR and JR "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." Who were they rendering assistance to, Cherry? Someone else or each other?

 

[UKGuy]

Yes! and how PR doesn't recognize her own dishes!
UKGuy opines that that the sexual assault happened before the blow to the head. I must think about this..

NanaNZA,

the sexual assault happened before the blow to the head

Sure that's the default assumption, but it might be wrong, e.g. JonBenet might have been assaulted as she lay dying, i.e. after the blow to the head.

In other words the physical assault might come before the sexual assault?

.

 

[UKGuy]

Cherry, we can only speculate. but they were trying to keep something(s) secret. We don't know what evidence/information has been withheld that may be contained in medical records, and one can only guess what those poor children were going through in that house... Their mother was very ill for a long time, and their father had a pretty demanding career I expect...
The grand jury felt that the parents were responsible, yes, you are correct.. but what exactly were they responsible for? Well, obviously felony child abuse of JBR:
PR and JR "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."
And this:
PR and JR "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." Who were they rendering assistance to, Cherry? Someone else or each other?

NanaNZA,
An alternative perspective to all the legalese and lawyer mumjo jumbo is to consider what if JonBenet was already known to the authorities as a prior victim of a sexual assault?

i.e. The parents knew the risks and did nothing, so they get charged, rather than being direct suspects they become passive enablers?

We know JonBenet was in therapy because Patsy said so in one of her interviews, so why does a 6-year old pageant star need therapy and why have you heard no more about this from BPD?

.

 

[NanaNZA]

UKGuy, are you saying what I think you are saying? That a sexual assault on JBR had been reported at some time prior to this crime? Or did i misunderstand you?

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy, are you saying what I think you are saying? That a sexual assault on JBR had been reported at some time prior to this crime? Or did i misunderstand you?

That a sexual assault on JBR had been reported at some time prior to this crime?

Yes that's what I'm saying, although its not stated as fact anywhere, its the best explanation for what we know, i.e. how did the Grand Jury know if the parents had neglected JonBenet in the past?

JonBenet's and Burke's medical records have been sealed, quite possibly destroyed or lost by now?

Everyone who knows the case is aware of stuff going on in the period leading upto JonBenet's death. Nobody in Boulder wants to talk about it, particularly the families linked to the Ramsey's, e.g. Stines.

.

 

[NanaNZA]

That makes a lot of sense, UKGuy. I never thought of it like that. Why is Boulder so protective of this family? I am astonished that nobody has leaked grand jury secrets. Of course I know they are legally bound to secrecy, but the fact that nobody has gone rogue.... Are they afraid of legal consequences? financial consequences (getting sued by JR)? or afraid they may compromise a trial (that will likely never happen)?

 

[UKGuy]

That makes a lot of sense, UKGuy. I never thought of it like that. Why is Boulder so protective of this family? I am astonished that nobody has leaked grand jury secrets. Of course I know they are legally bound to secrecy, but the fact that nobody has gone rogue.... Are they afraid of legal consequences? financial consequences (getting sued by JR)? or afraid they may compromise a trial (that will likely never happen)?

NanaNZA,

Are they afraid of legal consequences?

You bet.

financial consequences (getting sued by JR)?

Yes.

afraid they may compromise a trial (that will likely never happen)?

I doubt that, more they are concerned about the publicity, e.g. it will not look good, so they keep their mouths shut.

I think its in the CBS Documentary where the Invetigators are on camera going from door to door in Boulder to ask about the JonBenet case, nobody wanted to speak !

.

 

[NanaNZA]

But is someone really wanted to leak something on the sly, anonymously, seems like they could find a way... This is hypothetical of course - but many people have leaked information in the past.....

 

[UKGuy]

But is someone really wanted to leak something on the sly, anonymously, seems like they could find a way... This is hypothetical of course - but many people have leaked information in the past.....

NanaNZA,
Well so far none of the Grand Jury members have revealed much, Kolar has hinted at stuff in his book, and Steve Thomas lost his house for making claims about the Ramseys, also anyone leaking has to back it all up, that needs documentation or a third party, which are difficult to find due to the legal situation.

No News Paper or TV Studio is going to broadcast hearsay rumors when JR would just sue them on the spot !

Once JR has left us, I reckon people will come forward since you cannot defame the dead, then it will be which one to believe?

.

 

[cherrymeg]

Cherry, we can only speculate. but they were trying to keep something(s) secret. We don't know what evidence/information has been withheld that may be contained in medical records, and one can only guess what those poor children were going through in that house... Their mother was very ill for a long time, and their father had a pretty demanding career I expect...
The grand jury felt that the parents were responsible, yes, you are correct.. but what exactly were they responsible for? Well, obviously felony child abuse of JBR:
PR and JR "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."
And this:
PR and JR "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." Who were they rendering assistance to, Cherry? Someone else or each other?

If you are suggesting the dad was too busy molest or harm JBR, that's not enough to make him innocent. If he was at work at the time of her death that would be different. He wasn't. I think they were looking at the parents and couldn't prove who actually murdered her but they felt it was at least one of them.

 

[fcavanaugh]

Cherry, we can only speculate. but they were trying to keep something(s) secret. We don't know what evidence/information has been withheld that may be contained in medical records, and one can only guess what those poor children were going through in that house... Their mother was very ill for a long time, and their father had a pretty demanding career I expect...
The grand jury felt that the parents were responsible, yes, you are correct.. but what exactly were they responsible for? Well, obviously felony child abuse of JBR:
PR and JR "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."
And this:
PR and JR "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." Who were they rendering assistance to, Cherry? Someone else or each other?

With regard to the portion of the indictment where it states "PR & JR rendered 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", sounds like the GJ didn't think BR was responsible, as I understand it, according to CO law, a child under the age of 10 years can't be arrested, charged, or prosecuted for the crime of Murder. Is that not correct, or am I missing something?

 

[Waterdog]

To me it sounds as if they felt he WAS responsible.

Pr & JR rendered assistance to a person (BR) with the intent to prevent their (BR's) arrest or persecution knowing they (BR) had committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the 1st degree.

I think this explains in a nutshell why this case was never tried in a court of law, a child under 10 cannot be prosecuted for murder anyway. Their money made the rest (the parents' cover up) go away.

 

[Swirlz]

The first degree murder mentioned eliminates Burke.

He could not have been charged with murder.

So the Grand Jury believed that either John or Patsy committed the murder and the other one helped cover it up.

We know both parents were charged with the same thing. We know one of the jurors himself even admitted he didn't know which particular person committed the murder. We know the only fiber evidence found on JBR was from the two parents.

 

[NanaNZA]

If you are suggesting the dad was too busy molest or harm JBR, that's not enough to make him innocent. If he was at work at the time of her death that would be different. He wasn't. I think they were looking at the parents and couldn't prove who actually murdered her but they felt it was at least one of them.

Good morning Cherrymeg, no I was suggesting that perhaps there was abuse and neglect. But to be clear, I don't believe JR was molesting JBR, no. And as to the last part of your post, that is definitely one interpretation of the grand jury's findings, though not the one that I subscribe to personally.-IMO

 

[Waterdog]

The first degree murder mentioned eliminates Burke.

He could not have been charged with murder.

So the Grand Jury believed that either John or Patsy committed the murder and the other one helped cover it up.

We know both parents were charged with the same thing. We know one of the jurors himself even admitted he didn't know which particular person committed the murder. We know the only fiber evidence found on JBR was from the two parents.

Thanks, Swirlz, this makes sense. If this is the case, I believe it was JR - todays gut instinct. I've gone back and forth between the 3 so many times, and it gets confusing (by design, right?)

 

[NanaNZA]

Thanks, Swirlz, this makes sense. If this is the case, I believe it was JR - todays gut instinct. I've gone back and forth between the 3 so many times, and it gets confusing (by design, right?)

Not so fast Waterdog!
Lets look at this:
COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime)
On or about December 25, and December 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colorado, John Bennett Ramsey (or alternately, Patricia Paugh Ramsey) did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.
I think you have to conclude why PR and JR were each only named as ‘Accessories.’

For those who claim that JR and PR were each named as accessories to each other, where are the signed true bills naming them each as the possible corresponding Principals of First Degree Murder?

Hypothetically, the DA files all (6) indictments (3 for each) and lets the jury decide who did what.

Perhaps the only logical explanation is that they rendered assistance to a third party. Why would that third party not be named? Colorado statue at that time held that persons under the age of 10 could not be held responsible for a criminal act…

--My opinion only.

 

[UKGuy]

The first degree murder mentioned eliminates Burke.

He could not have been charged with murder.

So the Grand Jury believed that either John or Patsy committed the murder and the other one helped cover it up.

We know both parents were charged with the same thing. We know one of the jurors himself even admitted he didn't know which particular person committed the murder. We know the only fiber evidence found on JBR was from the two parents.

Swirlz,
Burke can be charged with Murder in the First degree, but not prosecuted for it, as he was underage, etc.

Both parents have been charged with assisting a third party, so they cannot both be that third party, if either was then Murder in the First Degree would be levelled at whomever they thought it was.

Just as each parent was charged with assisting a killer, they could both have been charged with Murder in the First Degree, and Hunter could have taken that to court.

Hunter tweaked the outcome so it was neutral, i.e. he was anonymizing the killer.

JonBenet's killer in the True Bills is simply referred to as the Person.

.

 

[NanaNZA]

Thank you UKGuy, you explained it better than me

 

[dancinunderthemoon]

Exactly. There seems to be quite a bit of misinformation in this thread.

SERIOUSLY!??! I have not followed this as close as you have apparently, I know all the tv and documentaries said she was, that the killer used patsy's paintbrush ?? What is the truth of this? Thanks