Hi, all. A few months ago, the subject of ML came up. Our friend DeeDee summed it up rather brilliantly: To which I added: As usual, whenever one of us hits too close to home for IDI, they divert and obfuscate, even if they have to attack to do it. I was called a chauvinist dinosaur for my trouble, which really irked me, because I didn't say anything that hadn't already been said by people who knew her. So let's take it up a notch and get into specifics here. My book contains a quote from a candidate who ran against her in the 2000 election, Ben Thompson. Also a Democrat, but he seems to have his head on straight: "It's political, the reason that it hasn't been prosecuted. And we have a district attorney's office that is more political than it is a prosecutor's office. I'm sitting here listening to those two talk, or those three talk, and it's strange to me that Alex sounds more like a defense attorney than a prosecutor, and that's part of the problem. Let me say there is a cancer in our DA's office, and whenever anybody points it out, what happens is they attack whoever points it out instead of addressing the issue and trying to solve the problem." I think it's helpful to remember that Mary Lacy had her mind MADE UP on day one, not because of evidence, just because the Rs didn't "seem" like the "type" of people to do this. Don't take my word for it! Frank Coffman is a Boulder-based columnist. He actually worked on Lacy's election campaign until he found out what a dog-lunch she is. He had this to say: "Her basis for believing the Ramseys are innocent, as she explained it to me, is that the Ramseys don't have a history of being abusive parents that would be apt to kill their child," said Frank Coffman, who knew Keenan from volunteering on her 2000 campaign for district attorney. Coffman said, "At least from what she told me about it, she was basing her opinion on the Ramseys' innocence on the fact that they don't fit the profile of murdering parents." Here's the kicker: Because the Ramseys distrusted Boulder police - who they believed were fixated on them as suspects - John Ramsey was interrogated by veteran El Paso County homicide investigator Lou Smit and grand jury specialist Michael Kane, while Patsy was grilled by Denver district attorney's investigator Tom Haney and Boulder prosecutor Trip DeMuth. All interviews were videotaped and every few hours, completed tapes were transported from the Broomfield Police Department - where the interviews were conducted to avoid media attention - to Boulder, where they were studied by Boulder detectives and prosecutors, including then-Deputy District Attorney Keenan. One source involved in those sessions recalls being told by colleagues that Keenan chided Haney for being too tough on Patsy Ramsey: "Mary really had her nose in it, and thought that the Ramseys were being really pushed around," said another key law enforcement source. Now let's all think about that one REAL HARD! I devote significant space to ML in my book. This is a passage that describes my feelings when I found out what I just posted (Some of the more extreme profanity has been sanitized): Tom Haney is one of the finest homicide detectives in the entire Rocky Mountain area, if not the country. His record speaks for itself. And here's this assistant DA, who at that time I don't think had ever tried a murder case in her entire career, and to my knowledge still hasn't, telling him he was too tough for using absolutely STANDARD interrogation techniques that the greenest rookie on the beat would know! Haney's general feeling was, "who the hell does she think SHE is?" The finishing touch: One of the Ramsey-case veterans who spoke about Keenan only on the condition of anonymity said that her background appeared to affect her attitudes toward the Ramsey case. "Right after the (June 1998) interviews, she went in and sat down and spent two hours talking to the Ramseys about their suspicions about Santa Claus," the source said. "It was clear she thought this woman (Patsy Ramsey) was a victim. She is a very pro-woman prosecutor. Her whole life revolves around believing what women say. I think she is so empathetic she couldn't stand to watch someone, in her mind, being victimized." The bold is mine. Mary Lacy has allowed her radical feminist beliefs to cloud her judgment, what there is of it. Don't take my word for that. In Thomas's book, he writes, "Deputy DA Mary Keenan said the body language of John and Patsy wasn't suggestive of deception, and that men were not in a position to judge Patsy Ramsey's demeanor." WTF???!!! These are just snippets. Go here for a more comprehensive picture: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5392260&postcount=64"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Jane Valez Mitchell & other Media People Who Know Only Ramsey Spin Let's Educate Them[/ame] Here's a longer section of the manuscript: She was biased in the favor of the Ramseys because of their status. She has so much as said so. Lacy is known as a radical feminist who lets her belief in women's innocence cloud her reason. She demonstrated that in the University of Colorado case, where, back in 2001, a group of football players were accused of rape. Lacy was gung-ho to prosecute, even though it was clear that there was no case. It was Duke before Duke, where the three lacrosse players were hung out to dry by an overzealous, politically motivated prosecutor. Another incident came in 2006 when a ten-month-old boy named Jason Midyette was beaten to death and she wouldn't take any action because the grandfather owns half of Boulder's Pearl Street Mall. Journalist Frank Coffman describes Lacy as a feminist who is very pro-woman, to the point where it clouds her judgment, as I just showed you. She's also a mother and a career woman. Nothing wrong with that. I'm not one of these "a woman's place is in the home" type guys. I'm secure enough in my manhood to say that if a woman wants it all, she can have it. I just hope she can handle it and she doesn't lose perspective. Since Mrs. Lacy can't keep her own son out of trouble (he was busted for DUI), I'd say she has. I think that Mary Lacy saw Patsy, a wealthy, successful mother and identified with her. She saw this successful, lovely lady being grilled by a bunch of macho male cops and that was it. Jeff Shapiro seems to agree with me: Journalist Jeff Shapiro writes, "It's no secret that in 1997, when Lacy was a sex-assault prosecutor under then-DA Alex Hunter, she was furious when he did not appoint her to work on the case. Because Hunter and the police shied away from the intruder theory, many law enforcement officials often wonder if Lacy's attempts to prove them wrong are driven more by her personal feelings than by the actual pursuit of justice." And that's not even TOUCHING on any of the many OTHER problems. Believe me, the main point of this thread is enough to keep us busy for quite a while! So to any IDIs who have read this far, this is your chance. No more diversions. No more strawman arguments. No more projection. No more cracks about RDI monomania. In other words, no BS. Just a straight-forward, no-nonsense decision: Defend ML if you can. Or admit that you've backed a losing horse. It's completely your choice.