Problems with the DA

DeeDee249 said:

Couldn't open it, but I assume it refers to to the present DA. I don't know whether the Rs case is a chargeable case. Of the three possible perps, one os dead and one is forever beyond prosecution. But Hope Springs Eternal.

Click to expand...

Heyya DeeDee,

Stan Garnett talks about cold cases in Boulder County
Published on Nov 9, 2012 by TheDailyCamera

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Z95-twQaYc&feature=g-all-u"]DA Stan Garnett and Cold Cases - YouTube[/ame]
(3:10)

Stan Garnett: Uhm, we, you know, our primary limitations
in terms of how much work we put into a case,
are tied to our ethical standards of making certain
that we have enough evidence.

Uhm, we, we will never file a case unless
the evidence is sufficient to meet our ethical standard,
that we have a reasonable likelihood of conviction
unanimously by a jury of twelve.

So, if we don't have that, you know,
an example is the Ramsey case.
Ramsey case, the state of the evidence, at this point
is such that, uhm, there`s not a lot of work going on,
on that case.

Uhm, if evidence developed, that led us to think
we might be able to file a case,
we'd make it a top priority.

But if you don't have the evidence
or if the evidence is equivocal, and it can`t,
it`s not leading anywhere,
we're not going to put the resources in it.
If we do have evidence, and we think we can develop it,
we'll put a lot of resources into it."

That word equivocal means cross-finger-pointing defense.

BOESP said:

That word equivocal means cross-finger-pointing defense.

Click to expand...

That one statement ASSURES me that the Rs are known by LE to be involved. That says it all. If it was an UNKNOWN perp and the DA had NO thought that the parents were guilty, he would have never made that comment. There can't be cross finger-pointing unless you KNOW whose fingers would be pointing. Sound like he KNOWS.

DeeDee249 said:

That one statement ASSURES me that the Rs are known by LE to be involved. That says it all. If it was an UNKNOWN perp and the DA had NO thought that the parents were guilty, he would have never made that comment. There can't be cross finger-pointing unless you KNOW whose fingers would be pointing. Sound like he KNOWS.

Click to expand...

That was my take too DeeDee. He pretty much said the case was dead in the water.

BOESP said:

That was my take too DeeDee. He pretty much said the case was dead in the water.

Click to expand...

And of course, at least one set of those fingers is dead as well. This leaves him no way to actually prove who did what. JR could say anything he wants and there is no way to corroborate it. When it comes right down to it, JR really doesn't need to worry. He knows the case will never be prosecuted. I just wish he'd keep out of the public eye. Stop writing his insipid books, it's nauseating. Just crawl back into the swamp and stay there with his new "JB wanna-be" wife.

BOESP said:

That word equivocal means cross-finger-pointing defense.

Click to expand...

Hmmm...yes, you can interpreted this way...however, the true definition of equivocal is:

1.Open to more than one interpretation; ambiguous.
2.Uncertain or questionable in nature.
3.Subject to two or more interpretations and usually used to mislead or confuse

Click to expand...

....I still hope that one day Colorado government will impose the sanction to Boulder DA office for violating the law of juristiction by exposing the corruption activities during JBR murder investigation. This case has many political strings which MUST be expose and cut off as the cancer. And like I said many times before, maybe we, as the taxpayers, should demand the investigation and (hence) the punishment for such an unlawfull DA activities.

John Ramsey is getting older. His 'connections' are getting weaker. Hopefully, with his new young wife, $$$ fortune disappeares...Why DA affraid to look at this case from the different perspective? Let's assemble new GJ; put all evidences on GJ table and ask only one question: does INTRUDER killed JBR?

And if answer is 'NO' then JR must be presecuted for kidnapping, period. Regardless, who did what, regardless of 'finger pointing' defense.

Otherwise, our grand-grand-children will believe in IDI due to the fact that JB parents were never persecuted and died peacefuly on 'other side of suffering'.

jmo with anger and frustration!

OpenMind4U said:

Hmmm...yes, you can interpreted this way...however, the true definition of equivocal is:


....I still hope that one day Colorado government will impose the sanction to Boulder DA office for violating the law of juristiction by exposing the corruption activities during JBR murder investigation. This case has many political strings which MUST be expose and cut off as the cancer. And like I said many times before, maybe we, as the taxpayers, should demand the investigation and (hence) the punishment for such an unlawfull DA activities.

John Ramsey is getting older. His 'connections' are getting weaker. Hopefully, with his new young wife, $$$ fortune disappeares...Why DA affraid to look at this case from the different perspective? Let's assemble new GJ; put all evidences on GJ table and ask only one question: does INTRUDER killed JBR?

And if answer is 'NO' then JR must be presecuted for kidnapping, period. Regardless, who did what, regardless of 'finger pointing' defense.

Otherwise, our grand-grand-children will believe in IDI due to the fact that JB parents were never persecuted and died peacefuly on 'other side of suffering'.

jmo with anger and frustration!

Click to expand...

Why would his new wife cause his money to disappear? As long as John is alive, he'll have his connections. I'm not sure if you can say they are getting weaker. They don't have to be as "active" now because the case isn't "hot".

OpenMind4U said:

Hmmm...yes, you can interpreted this way...however, the true definition of equivocal is:


....

Click to expand...

The "true definition" you gave describes the theory behind cross-finger-pointing.

BOESP said:

The "true definition" you gave describes the theory behind cross-finger-pointing.

Click to expand...

BOESP, I'm not arguing about that at all....And I believe that 'cross-finger-pointing' defense would be irrelevant if DA would approach the 'kidnapping' charges as cynic was stated in another thread. Regardless, the current DA COULD and SHOULD take the proper steps toward JBR case resolution if they have the 'balls'. It only takes: publicly acknowledge the absence of the INTRUDER evidences!!! And it can be done by calling new GJ.

eileenhawkeye said:

Why would his new wife cause his money to disappear? As long as John is alive, he'll have his connections. I'm not sure if you can say they are getting weaker. They don't have to be as "active" now because the case isn't "hot".

Click to expand...

JBR case is and ALWAYS will be 'hot' until it's resolution. 'Hot' to the point that DA officials affraid to touch it, even today! Why? IMO, NOT because the lock of sufficient evidences and their erroneouse interpretation...but because the politics which ties Boulder DA to Ramsey name. If the same case would happens in ordinarly family - it'll be resolved in 1997.

In regards of JR's new wife and $$$ disappearance. You can answer this question yourself by following the marriage history and divorce settlements of his new wife. I'll not go there...But I have no doubts that JR's new marriage is based on his money. And it will last until he dies or his money is gone, whatever comes first...

In regards of JR's connections. Politics and money are two pipes which feed from each other. Let's follow Ramsey's money a little bit...

- The ties with LM is weackened because LM has no interest in Ramsey anymore. Plus, LM has their own problem with government right now. So I doubt LM will play 'Pamsey' card as they did in 1996-1998;
- Elected officials in Colorado to whom Ramsey substentially $$$ contributed in 1996 and further are almost gone and/or out of political power. In addition, the ties between these officials and Boulder DA are almost gone as well. The legacy of prior DA corruption is hanging as the sharp sword above the current DA neck. Today, I doubt that DA will kiss Ramsey's behind as they did years ago. But I doubt they'll do anything either...the chance of corruption exposure is too high...They rather 'do nothing' and keep this case on the shelf, until JR is death. Such a shame!!!!

To solve this case - follow the money!

Therefore, I strongly believe that only way to shake-up the current DA is to 'clean-up the house':
- expose DA's ties to Ramsey's money = expose DA corruption;
- call new GJ under current 'clean' DA;
- resolve the case.

jmo

Ya’ know... I don’t know if anyone else noticed this past September that a 55-year-old cold case that was prosecuted resulted in a guilty verdict in the case of seven-year-old murder victim Maria Ridulph. The murderer (Jack McCullough/John Tessier) was one of over a hundred suspects who had been looked at and released when the murder occurred. Afterwards, he joined the military, changed his name, moved to another state, and started a new life as a policeman and then a security guard in a nursing home.

The evidence he was convicted on consisted of an unused train ticket, the 55-year-old memory of a friend of the little girl, and a professionally conducted interview. One other thing that helped was that it was prosecuted by a district attorney with a pair of more than just Christmas balls.

The whole case is fascinating (includes his rape of a sister and the 2005 disappearance of his daughter), but what I find especially relevant to JonBenet’s death is the story behind the interview that was set up by the investigators. They knew they would only have one shot at getting him in an interview, so they called in a professional interviewer -- a Certified Forensic Interviewer (CFI). The story behind what went into the preparation for, and the planning behind, the interview is the current “Featured Article” on IAI’s website linked here. I don’t know how long it will be featured here, so it may disappear at some time the future.

If only Boulder had some of these guys working for them. We might not be here now if they did.

Also, for anyone who finds it interesting, here is a link to a blogtalkradio interview with the guy who conducted the interview with McCullogh/Tessier about interrogation techniques:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/behind...ns-methods-discussion-pt1-wicklander-zulawski

Other links:

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012/09/14/ex-cop-convicted-in-1957-murder-of-ill-girl-7/57782408/1

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/15/former-cop-convicted-1957-murder/

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/oldest-prosecution-of-a-cold-case-in-us-resolved-with-wicklander-zulawski-and-the-international-association-of-interviewers-assistance-179291621.html
.

DeeDee249 said:

LOL at Keith Richards. He can't be killed through conventional means.
Looks like he's been dead for years anyway. I knew him in NYC when I was 14- he was 19. Crazy then, crazy now. They all were.

Click to expand...

OMG, DD! You were a RS groupie? :rocker: LMAO. (So funny -- your observations about KR.):floorlaugh:

BTW, DD, I haven't told you, but I'm glad you made it through Sandie okay. Hope the dogs were all okay too. Like you said somewhere I read, family (including pets) is what's important -- other stuff is just gravy. Well... maybe you didn't say it quite the same way, but I think that's what you meant.
.

otg said:

OMG, DD! You were a RS groupie? :rocker: LMAO. (So funny -- your observations about KR.):floorlaugh:

BTW, DD, I haven't told you, but I'm glad you made it through Sandie okay. Hope the dogs were all okay too. Like you said somewhere I read, family (including pets) is what's important -- other stuff is just gravy. Well... maybe you didn't say it quite the same way, but I think that's what you meant.
.

Click to expand...

LOL! I was NOT a Groupie. That involved sex. Believe me, they were skeevy then, too. I'd still be on penicillin.
But if you saw the movie "Almost Famous", you'll know what a "Band-Aid" was. That was ME. We just hung out in the same places, and they weren't quite as famous yet.
And thanks for your good thoughts. I am still not able to live in my house, but hope to be by Christmas. Lost my whole ground floor. And I am allergic to mold.

DeeDee we need to know more about The Stones and you!!

anne11 said:

DeeDee we need to know more about The Stones and you!!

Click to expand...

Anyone who wants to know more feel free to PM me. Remember, I was 13-14 years old then! 1963. A lifetime ago. Freshman year in High School.

My sincere apologies, DD. I didn't realize the distinction in being called a "groupie", and I certainly didn't mean to insinuate any such thing. I simply thought of a groupie as being someone who was extraordinarily devoted to the members of one group. I knew girls when I was younger (much younger actually) who called themselves groupies, but who had never even so much as left their own hometown to even see a concert.

Anyway, I know you didn't mean to start me up on such a personal rant -- I just wanted to make sure you knew I didn't mean anything else by what I said.

Rock on!
otg
.

otg said:

My sincere apologies, DD. I didn't realize the distinction in being called a "groupie", and I certainly didn't mean to insinuate any such thing. I simply thought of a groupie as being someone who was extraordinarily devoted to the members of one group. I knew girls when I was younger (much younger actually) who called themselves groupies, but who had never even so much as left their own hometown to even see a concert.

Anyway, I know you didn't mean to start me up on such a personal rant -- I just wanted to make sure you knew I didn't mean anything else by what I said.

Rock on!
otg
.

Click to expand...

Please- NO OFFENSE taken. Most people don't know the difference. The term does not have the same meaning now as it did then. It is pretty innocuous. Please don't give it a second thought. I thought it was funny.

Peepers said:

All of the blame can go on forever...there was a grand jury and they did not indict the R's. Blame them.

Click to expand...

isnt it funny that after all that time we find out the GJ did in fact indict the Ramseys.

How many DAs have been in office since Jon Benet's murder happened?

Have any of them said they plan to charge one of the Ramseys with her murder? Or have evidence showing they were involved?

I know some think ML was biased but she hasn't been the only DA over this case, has she?

elannia said:

isnt it funny that after all that time we find out the GJ did in fact indict the Ramseys.

Click to expand...

It wasn't on murder charges though, was it?