Why did the Grand Jury not indict the Ramseys?

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Roy23, Aug 21, 2009.

  1. Tobiano8th

    Tobiano8th Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    795
    Trophy Points:
    93
    seems like some of the comments here are suggesting you can get a conviction from disproving a negative.

    if you had absolute evidence that no one outside of the J/P/BR was in their house for the 24 hours prior to JBR's death, you have not come remotely close to a conviction for murder........ all you've achieved is IMO pretty clear evidence that the R's know what happened to JBR. unless laws regarding children's deaths are very severe, you won't convict them of much from that knowledge..
     


  2. proust20

    proust20 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    210
    Likes Received:
    379
    Trophy Points:
    63
    The staging and the various contradictory statements by the Rs were effective in muddying the waters to such a degree that AH, who was not Gung Ho about pursuing this case from the outset, rightly assumed that he could not prove the Rs guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. This view seems correct given the high- powered team of lawyers and consultants working for the Rs. Later on, ML showed herself to be totally lax.
     
    SkyBoomer, dgfred and Venom like this.
  3. Blanche

    Blanche Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    924
    Trophy Points:
    93
    The Ramseys are smart, they got away with it .
     
  4. Waller

    Waller Active Member

    Messages:
    65
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    33
    Last year a psycho was arrested for a double murder committed in 1969.
    If they're guilty maybe they would be arrested in the future.
     
  5. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    2,917
    Trophy Points:
    113
    proust20,
    It might be the GJ was the chosen vehicle to funnel the case in a particular direction, particularly when Alex Hunter by prosecutor fiat decided not to even file the case, never mind to decline any further legal steps.

    AH and the R's hoped this would bury the case?

    .
     
  6. Venom

    Venom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,346
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I also think having money for good lawyers and influence helped.
     
    MsJosie likes this.
  7. Nerissa

    Nerissa Working on a case.....of scotch

    Messages:
    665
    Likes Received:
    6,946
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Inbetween Kolar's book & the GJ statement: it's obvious, IMO, that: BDI

    The R.'s continued to make $$ off the salacious death of their daughter & so did/has the media...

    If the GJ was more common knowledge (& Kolar's opinion, who knew ALL of the case) it wouldn't be a 'thing' - it would be 'solved' in most people's minds....

    But no $$ in laying to rest the life & memory of JBR.....& of course, disgusting Ramseys using her - knowing full well the truth - to fatten their pockets. Truly sickening

    JMO
     
    SkyBoomer and tezi like this.
  8. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    2,917
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Nerissa,
    Yes, John Ramsey is a JonBenet media consultant these days, he pops up on documentaries offering his opinion on the latest twist and current theory.

    .
     
    SkyBoomer and tezi like this.
  9. dcountmontecristo

    dcountmontecristo Free Thinker

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    43

    Attached Files:

    tezi and dgfred like this.
  10. dcountmontecristo

    dcountmontecristo Free Thinker

    Messages:
    103
    Likes Received:
    147
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Colorado Rules of Criminal Procedure

    Indictment and Information (§§ 6 — 9)

    Rule 7 states:
     

    Attached Files:

  11. Tobiano8th

    Tobiano8th Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    795
    Trophy Points:
    93
    how common is it for the DA not to go forward when the GJ has voted to indict?...... serious question. i have no idea.

    i think the police "know" RDI................ but i do not think they know what precipitated JBR getting hit the head so hard.......

    can you reasonably get a conviction based on that uncertainty?...... i understand there are lots of convictions purely or mostly on circustantial evidence. but that is a pretty big "circumstance"

    i do think the BPD and B DA screwed this up completely..... and i consider the lawyering up immediately while under zero pressure from the police pretty bad. i can see some lawyer as PR spokesperson, but they went way way beyond that.
     
    dgfred and Venom like this.
  12. GoBuckeyes

    GoBuckeyes Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,937
    Likes Received:
    9,398
    Trophy Points:
    113
    It's unfortunate that just the act of exercising the right to have an attorney present or to represent the individual will cause many people to view someone as guilty. I mean that for cases across the board, not this one only. I support police officer. However, make no mistake, when a crime has been committed they are not your friend. They can and frequently do lie and use a variety of means to try to trip people up. I can't blame anyone who lawyers up, and I think it's naive not to. AMOO

    The Rs did what people of means do. Are they innocent or guilty? Beats me, but they look no more or less guilty to me simply because they lawyered up.

    Again, MOO
     
  13. Forumetiolo

    Forumetiolo Active Member

    Messages:
    109
    Likes Received:
    118
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I could only imagine what these parents went through. Had their daughter dead and their son being a suspect. Heartbreaking!
     
  14. FruityBooger

    FruityBooger New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    3
    SO, my question is in the wording regarding the indictment. I'm completely paraphrasing here, but both JR and PR are charged with the same crimes. They also find that hey help a "person" cover up said crimes and put JB in a position for child abuse to occur.

    My question is, is the reason they were both charged because the GJ couldn't determine which of the two (hence the term "person") actually committed the crimes, or because neither of them were at fault for the actual murder, just the cover up and staging (meaning BDI)? BUt if the latter is the case, could the GJ technically say they put her in a position for child abuse to take place if it's being committed by another child? For more clarity, if Burke was abusing JB, would they have called that child abuse or would it be termed something different like assault/rape/etc?

    I can see an adult abusing a child is legally termed child abuse, but if it's another kid doing the harm, is it still called the same thing?

    I'm asking this because if BDI, and they don't call assault by a child to another child abuse, then an adult had to have inflicted the the injuries and committed the murder, especially if PR an JR were only part of the cover up.

    The other questions I have, not GJ related, are:

    1- is it realistic to think the R's would have sent DS home (if he was there spending that night w/ Burke) alone, in the dark, on a bike at 9 years old? I don't care if it was just a few blocks, no way in hell would I send a kid home in the middle of the night on a bike at 9 years old! That didn't make sense to me.

    2- Hearing BR on the 911 tape. If that's really him on the 911 call when PR thought she hung up, they pulled off a miraculous staging in a whopping 5 or 10 minutes because, unless the call was staged too, it sounds as if they just found out what was going on or that BR did something. It just doesn't leave enough time for the staging that took place. Can anyone shed any light on how they could have pulled this off in such little time?
     
    dgfred likes this.
  15. David Rogers

    David Rogers Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    262
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Who is to say they sent him home on his bike. The Steins could have come and got him.
     
    Beltonian likes this.
  16. FruityBooger

    FruityBooger New Member

    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    3
    I read in another thread some people speculating they sent him home on BR's bike after he and BR did something to JB which is why the R's and Stines have stayed so close (the cover up), plus explaining why nobody seems to know what happened to the bike BR got for Christmas that year.
     
  17. Venom

    Venom Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,346
    Likes Received:
    103
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Who has a sleepover on Christmas? Let alone a family who were planning on getting up early and flying on a trip?
    I guess it's possible. But I wouldn't think of having a kids sleepover on Christmas.
     
    dgfred likes this.
  18. David Rogers

    David Rogers Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    262
    Likes Received:
    461
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Unless Doug was going on the trip with them. Why doesn’t anyone talk to the kids now?
     
  19. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    2,917
    Trophy Points:
    113

    David Rogers,

    Oh, why not?

    Could be the children are under an injunction not to talk to the media?

    Still Susan Stine stated that she heard Burke and Douglas Stine talking over the details surrounding JonBenet's death.

    Minimally the thing about Burke talking to DS is that wrt Burke's version of events, as per his parents, he knew details about JonBenet's death that apparently were not available to him.

    Remember the parents said we did not talk to Burke about JonBenet's death, etc.

    Do I believe this, not really.

    .
     
  20. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,576
    Likes Received:
    2,917
    Trophy Points:
    113
    FruityBooger,
    Theoretically Burke would be charged with child abuse, e.g. Sexual Assault, but due to his age no prosecution would follow along with no publicity as per Colorado State Statute on children involved in crimes, which Hunter ensured by not filing the True Bills as required.

    The Grand Jury estimated that both parents played a similar role in JonBenet's homicide, e.g. in plain language they covered up by staging a crime-scene, and allowed JonBenet to be placed in danger.

    If the Grand Jury were undecided as to who indict for First Degree Murder counts then there is nothing to prevent them charging both parents with First Degree Murder?

    With only three suspects on the table reference to a third party, i.e person is superfluous, e.g. it's either the parents or Burke Ramsey?

    The judge likely refused to release other True Counts and these remain sealed, probably due to Colorado State Statute on children involved in crimes, as these name Burke Ramsey as the person?

    Some suggest one of the sealed counts might name a parent as JonBenet's killer, possibly so why not add it to the unsealed counts which also name the parents as co-conspirators?

    i.e. Naming the parents in specific counts but not in others is legally inconsistent, and patently would serve no purpose.

    Yes, it's all possible to do in a small time frame as JonBenet was likely moved from upstairs to down to the basement along with a suitcase of forensic evidence which was then left there, the rest is authoring the ransom note.

    Remember the parents forgot all about JonBenet and Burke's pineapple snack, the Breakfast Bar was left in place, totally contradicting the parents claims they put JonBenet straight to bed.

    Although the staging time frame would extend beyond 5 or 10 minutes.
    .
     
    SkyBoomer and dgfred like this.

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