What would you have done differently?

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by christine2448, Aug 22, 2006.

  1. christine2448

    christine2448 Retired WS Staff

    Messages:
    10,385
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If you had been in charge of this investigation, what would you have done differently?

    Please remember, I am on the fence, leaning toward intruder(s) (but not Karr)


    1. Not have allowed JR to search the house.

    2. Not have allowed ANYONE come in the house but LE/forensics until the investigation was completed.

    3. Would have had PR , JR, and BR transported directly to the police station for questioning, any evidence collection that could possibly be done on their persons.

    4. Would have collected everyone's clothing right there, before they were allowed to leave house.

    5. Investigated the 38 + (from what I have heard) sex offenders in the area.

    6. Investigated the burglaries going on in the area.

    I can't think of anything else, these are the first things that come to mind.

    I don't know who did this, but, LE sure did mess this up from the get go, IMO.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. tumble

    tumble New Member

    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Many good points Christine.

    3. Would have had PR , JR, and BR transported directly to the police station for questioning, any evidence collection that could possibly be done.

    Initially it was a kidnapping. The R's had to be there waiting for a call.
    But I would definitely put them in one room and forbid them to move around the house.
     
  4. christine2448

    christine2448 Retired WS Staff

    Messages:
    10,385
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Oh yea, your right. Well, may I change my statement to start off " As soon as JonBenets body was discovered, I would have had PR, JR, and BR transported.......

    Thanks Tumble.
     
  5. rashomon

    rashomon New Member

    Messages:
    1,670
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That was the biggest (and really unforgivable) mistake the Boulder Police made: as soon as JB's dead body had been discovered in the parents' own home, the scene had changed abruptly from kidnapping to murder (at least it looked like murder from the staged scene), the parents should have been arrested (a murdered child in the parents' your own home is probable cause for an arrest!), questioned separately, and the parents then could have been locked into the contradictions of their own statements.
    Steve Thomas and virtually all unbiased LE experts ever asked about that issue unanimously agreed on that.
     
  6. SuperDave

    SuperDave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    What would I have done?

    How much time you got, christine?
     
  7. aspidistra

    aspidistra New Member

    Messages:
    214
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The problem is that everyone believed it was a kidnapping, so the body was not found for 7 or 8 hours...by that time it had rigor mortis and livor mortis...It is easy for us to second guess what should have been done, yet if we put ourselves in their shoes I think we would have thought it was a kidnapping too.

    Having said that, even after the body was found, mistakes were made. It has been said the police were not used to murders and crime scenes and bungled it. From what I've read, it showed incompetence to leave the body in the living room for hours. Since it was already moved by the father it should have been taken to the morgue immediately.

    No neighbours should have been allowed in. The entire house was a crime scene and should have been immediately sealed off and protected.

    Boxes and bags of evidence were taken out willy nilly by family, friends and police. Nothing should have been touched except by police and everything marked and identified. There were crime scene photos of every room apparently, but should have been more.

    The house was allowed to be stripped too soon, from what I recall. For example, we now have a third party giving an account of Karr "hiding under the bed in the guest room." There is no way to check for his hairs or fibres now in that location. But if there is a hair and fibre analysis for that location and every location in the house, it can be checked now. Was that done? If not, it should have been done, with samples of carpet and other materials kept.

    I think the bungling in retrospect was due to everyone having their own agenda and fighting the common good which was to preserve evidence. It did not help the case at all for Arndt to say she knew Ramsey did it because of the cold look in his eyes. Things like that have nothing to do with detective work. They are not crime evidence.

    You are right about investigating the sex offenders in the area. I have heard that it wasn't done and find it hard to believe. I thought a house to house search and investigation was done on all neighbours, as well as an investigation of all people who had been in the house, from a list the Ramseys gave police.

    I understand how an intruder could fall through the cracks of the investigation, especially if he fled Boulder immediately and was never a resident there and used care in covering his tracks. But the investigations had to be done to rule out neighbours and friends. How thorough were they? If Karr's brother ever worked for the Ramseys in house renovation, which seems likely given that Karr's father was in the construction business and taught his sons from birth (based on current news accounts), his name should have come up. If an investigation of Karr had taken place even as a part time handyman, though, would they have gone as far as investigating his brother? Where would they stop with their questioning? This is the potential problem if the killer was related to or knew someone who was a very minor player in the Ramsey's world. In hindsight the connection seems solid, but to investigators and the Ramseys it might not even be noticed. Therefore the only thing that could reasonably be expected is not to destroy the crime scene, collect all evidence and preserve it. Hopefully they have enough that can determine whether Karr was or was not in that house.
     
  8. Hyatt

    Hyatt New Member

    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think that Linda Arndt (?) was unjustifiably crucified for the first few hours of this case, although, after reading her deposition in her case against Boulder, I don't come to the same conclusions that she did.

    I get tired of this old defense strategy of "contamination" of the crime scene and the expectation of the "pristine" in this area, which is totally unrealistic. If Lin Wood (and John Ramsey) are running around shooting their mouths off about this being a DNA case - you can bet that the opposite is true. This, by the way has always been proven to be a good rule of thumb - whatever that team says IS, I have found in the past to be precisely what it IS NOT. They call it a DNA case because they know that one would expect their own DNA to be all over that house and thereofore it would be hard to convict THEM on DNA.

    When Arndt and others showed up at that house, it was on the basis of the belief that the Ramseys were victims of a kidnapping, so it would not have entered most people's minds, I think, to immediately treat them as suspects. (AFTER the Ramsey case, given their precedent, cops probably would immediately conceive of that possibility.) I do think that all friends and victims' advocates (who called these victim advocate people in anyway?) ought to have been sent home promptly. Comfort should have waited at least until the presumed kidnapper's call. I also think that in such a case it is normal to request that the parents search the house because only they can alert the police to changes in the environment - objects taken or moved etc. In retrospect one wonders why Patsy didn't get off the couch and drama and ALSO go searching for clues, changes, missing clothing etc.

    So now, JR comes up the stairs with the body. At THAT point everything changes BUT he has already moved the body so damaged the crime scene, so it matters little that Arndt places the body somewhere because what is she supposed to do? Tell him to freeze on the spot indefinitely? I mean, while it has been said that the first officers may have already entertained suspicions about the family because of the weird ransom note, the weirdness of that note only became totally obvious when the body was found in the house. So, I think that the police team was criticized unjustly up to that point.

    I believe that social prejudice probably played a role here. The Ramsey's obvious wealth could well have intimidated the LE people into not demanding certain things like the departure of all non-family members, but those of you who have heard the Ramseys speak must admit that they are not exactly push-overs for complying to authorities, let alone mere requests. And let's not forget that friends almost as quickly began suggesting legal representation, which JR was no doubt only to eager to quickly get since the last thing he would have wanted would have been for ANY family member to bring down the scandal which subsequently ruined his then-successful career.

    Subsequent to that, several LE people have complained about the cozy relationship the higher-ups established with the Ramseys and their expensive and no doubt locally-influential legal team, giving them information, making concessions, making few or no reasonable requests. Let's face it - the higher-ups of this case were scared to death of the Ramseys and their attorneys long arms and THAT was what compromised this investigation.

    You know what is a total laugh? They had SO many reasons to arrest the Ramseys at the time and yet did not for fear of not having enough of a case. And NOW, when they have virtually NOTHING on this Karr guy, an arrest is made. What can I say? Money matters and IMO it hasn't ceased mattering in this case. So who "fumbled" this case? Not the lower investigative branches but the higher-ups with connections with the influential R lawyers and/fear of Ramsey & their lawyers' wrath.

    The "investigative bungling" did not happen THEN. It is happening NOW.

    JMO
     
  9. christine2448

    christine2448 Retired WS Staff

    Messages:
    10,385
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks Hyatt, excellent post. Very, very interesting points, IMO



    ...teeter/totter, teeter/totter.
     
  10. SuperDave

    SuperDave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    The police need probable cause to arrest. Everyone agrees they had that. The DA messed it up.
     
  11. tumble

    tumble New Member

    Messages:
    579
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    7. I would have examined the outside of the house and documenting the state of the ground looking for footprints in the snow first thing at the kidnap scene.

    Hindsight is a great tool.
     
  12. Bev

    Bev New Member

    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    mistakes, but there is no such thing as a perfect investigation. Everyone involved made mistakes. The FBI could have claimed jurisdiction and taken over the case from the minute they hit the door. The cops could have followed procedures by the book, and still not have resolved this case. The crux of the matter is that those law enforcement officials involved thought they were dealing with a wealthy, connected family (which they were) and did what most LEOs do in that situation - walk on eggs. Another fact to consider is that initially they thought their suspect was the housekeeper/husband. They were on that family within hours. Handwriting samples, surveillance, taking statements from them, checking their alibis. This nonsense that the cops zeroed in on the Ramseys that morning and never let go is baloney. It wasn't until a few days later, when the Ramseys had refused to talk to the police that the "worm really turned" to coin a phrase. That's when it really turned sour.
     
  13. dottierainbow

    dottierainbow Former Member

    Messages:
    1,408
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would not leak information.
    Amy
     
  14. JDB

    JDB Tybee you will never be forgotten

    Messages:
    10,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I being the JR would have never carried JBR upstairs. I would have just told the police I know where she is.
     
  15. bulletgirl2002

    bulletgirl2002 New Member

    Messages:
    471
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hindsight is certainly 20/20 isn't it!!!

    I am certain that the police and everyone concerned would have done many things differently if they had known what they know today.
     
  16. Texana

    Texana Overreaching

    Messages:
    6,293
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sealed off the house as a crime scene. A kidnapping (at the very least) had occurred--seemingly--so the house should have been sealed off and the family moved out.

    Nobody else in the house but crime technicians and detectives.

    That would have eliminated all the cross-contamination arguments.

    Each member of the family should have been questioned separately.

    If you take your child to the emergency room in Colorado with any kind of odd injury, you will be separated from your spouse and questioned (happened to friends of mine.) Same for Texas--at least for me--not even an odd injury, just a fall from a treehouse fort. We were separated and questioned. Even the child was questioned, in each case.

    Those are my two big "hindsight's twenty-twenty" thoughts.
     
  17. Hyatt

    Hyatt New Member

    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I can't believe this!: Anderson Cooper just had Trip DeMuth (sp?) on. Remember him from the Steve Thomas book? So, though this guy doesn't appear to buy that Karr is guilty, he goes on and on about "back then the DA's office (he was chief prosecutor) was prohibited from following other leads beyond the Ramseys with their own detectives like .... Lou Smit." If memory serves, Trip was one of the major figures cozying up to the Ramseys at the time and transmitting police investigation information to the Ramsey team. Can someone confirm whether I have that right?

    Goes on about police mistakes vs the DA's office. It was the DA's office that killed this case back then with the help of folk like ... Lou Smit and Trip . It bugs me that CNN chooses THIS guy to comment on the case. The media always gets its information from the wrong sources.

    JMO
     
  18. Hyatt

    Hyatt New Member

    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Texana, when the parents are suspects, cross-contamination, DNA etc, can never become important. The Ramseys soon became adamant that they NOT be questioned separately. But I DO think that all the friends and victim's advocates should have been sent home. The friends had been invited over by the Ramseys, though. I asked before who called over the victim's advocate people. Does anyone know?

    CNN just said that it was JR who asked PR to call the police that morning. So HE was the one who chose to disregard ransom note instructions.

    JMO
     
  19. curiositycat

    curiositycat The one thing that doesn't abide by majority rule

    Messages:
    4,948
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Linda Arndt, the detective to first arrive at the scene, told JR and Fleet White to look everywhere for JBR. In her deposition her excuse for this was that it was the holidays and they were understaffed. I can understand that, but it was totally unprofessional. That was the first mistake.

    I would not of let anyone else in that house. The parents should of been taken downtown immediately for questioning; separately. Crime scene sealed off.

    This case was botched then and it's being botched now IMHO.

    I feel like a little rat on a wheel going round and round in this case and never getting anywhere.

    Everyone has there favorite theory as to what really happened, including me, and when I read them there is some "sense" in all of them.

    Great Thread thanks for starting it.
     
  20. Texana

    Texana Overreaching

    Messages:
    6,293
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hyatt,
    I know what you mean, but if Patsy Ramsey hadn't been there when JonBenet's body was brought up, the whole issue of the fibers in the garrotte would be much more clear. Ditto for the fibers from JR.

    The Ramseys could have refused to answer questions separately, but they could have been separated at least--at the beginning.

    Not securing the crime scene IMO means that the Ramseys could never be really convicted--or exonerated.
     
  21. Hyatt

    Hyatt New Member

    Messages:
    170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Since this is a hypothetical question involving hindsight, I am wondering at what point a Ramsey arrest would have been plausible.
     

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