Ramseys Indicted by the Grand Jury in 1999

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Tricia, May 10, 2015.

  1. Tricia

    Tricia Owner Websleuths.com Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    25,949
    Likes Received:
    19,180
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Still to come...
     
  2. otg

    otg Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,396
    Likes Received:
    94
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Okay, Tricia. You've got my attention (and my curiosity piqued). When will we know more?
     
  3. observation

    observation Active Member

    Messages:
    1,388
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
  4. Justice4JB

    Justice4JB New Member

    Messages:
    25
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The whole DA should be embarrassed and ashamed about the way they handled this case from Alex Hunter to Mary Lacy..
    They had the Ramseys back in a pathetic way that troubled the way of justice..
     
  5. BOESP

    BOESP Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,750
    Likes Received:
    52
    Trophy Points:
    48
  6. Jolamom

    Jolamom Member

    Messages:
    63
    Likes Received:
    27
    Trophy Points:
    18
    I was just wondering, if the Grand Jury decided each of the Ramseys were individually responsible for "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.." Why was Burke allowed to remain in the household?
     
    MaryNo likes this.
  7. observation

    observation Active Member

    Messages:
    1,388
    Likes Received:
    17
    Trophy Points:
    38
    I am just speculating... I often wonder if the Ramsey's dropped BR and JBR off at home, got them settled, told them to have a snack and get their PJ's on while PR and JR dropped the gifts off to their friends. Perhaps the GJ testimony revealed this info. Could easily explain the true bill.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
     
  8. Foreign Faction

    Foreign Faction New Member

    Messages:
    78
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Interesting theory, but very doubtful that a) the Ramsey's would ever leave BR alone in the house with JBR (see my other posts), b) that wouldn't be enough for the indictment, and c) would be impossible to prove outside of an R admission.
     
  9. kanzz

    kanzz kanzz=kansas

    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I find the indictment very interesting and am surprised it isn't getting much more discussion here.
    To me, it seems apparent that the GJ believed that a 3rd person (BR) committed the murder.
    The only documents I have found are for Count IV(a) and Count VII. Two charges that have been mentioned repeatedly.
    http://www.cnn.com/interactive/2013/10/us/jonbenet-ramsey-documents/?hpt=hp_t1
     
  10. FinallyRegistered

    FinallyRegistered Active Member

    Messages:
    1,980
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    38
  11. zencompass

    zencompass Hope springs eternal

    Messages:
    4,196
    Likes Received:
    17,738
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Hi Kanzz,

    I agree. To me, the Grand Jury findings were always the key to solving this case.
     
  12. Mandala

    Mandala Member

    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Is it true that Hunter cannot legally discuss anything that took place in the grand jury? Is this because the evidence contains information regarding Burke who was a minor at the time?
     
  13. SuperDave

    SuperDave Former Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I don't know if that's the reason, Mandala. I think he just doesn't want any secrets to get out.
     
  14. Mandala

    Mandala Member

    Messages:
    64
    Likes Received:
    26
    Trophy Points:
    18
    If that's the case then he has a lot to answer for.
     
  15. rashomon

    rashomon Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,688
    Likes Received:
    106
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Quote from Count VII:
    Does this mean the GJ believed that nine year-old BR committed a First Degree Murder? That what happened was even more than a fierce sibling fight that escalated to the point where BR might have struck JB's head in a rage with an object?

    Also, the term child abuse makes me think more of a parent's actions than those of a sibling. (?)
     
    MaryNo likes this.
  16. kanzz

    kanzz kanzz=kansas

    Messages:
    1,273
    Likes Received:
    28
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I think the GJ was just labeling the crimes that were committed against JB - "Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death". BR was only 9 at the time and couldn't be charged with the crime of murder. Even though we now know that the head blow would have eventually resulted in her demise, it was the strangulation that ultimately caused her death.
     
  17. SuperDave

    SuperDave Former Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    84
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Welcome back! I was getting worried.

    As to your questions, I agree the wording about child abuse suggests an adult much more than a fellow child. Problem is, the definitions of these terms can be a bit elastic. As to the first, it might still be considered First Degree murder under the Felony Murder rule: that is, someone gets killed in the course of another crime.

    It would help if the Grand Jury would tell us these things!
     
  18. RL2

    RL2 Active Member

    Messages:
    127
    Likes Received:
    112
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Right. Whoever tied that noose around her neck did so intentionally, thus whoever he/she is, he/she is guilty of 1st degree murder. Forget accident plus staging at that time... it is now murder.
     
    Leimsieder likes this.
  19. Frigga

    Frigga New Member

    Messages:
    5,229
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    ^^^ That is why LLW and JR NEED the narrative to be the opposite.
     
  20. FairM1

    FairM1 Active Member

    Messages:
    95
    Likes Received:
    184
    Trophy Points:
    33
    From what I have read it is extremely common for grand juries to return indictments the test of finding probable cause is a low one. Presumably the indictment was drafted by Hunter and put to the jury as being one that he wanted them to consider? ie was there enough evidence to bring that indictment to trial
     

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