Lockheed, the FBI, and terrorism in Boulder

In 1999, Dr. Bob McFarland interviews Donald Freed, a professor, author, screenwriter, etc...


Donald Freed "...I must tell you finally that Norm Early who had been the district attorney of Denver and was the vice-president of Lockheed Martin Security at the time of the murder of Jon Benet. I interviewed him at the time. He's a fascinating man---- extremely intelligent. And he said to me finally, "You know I had a six year-old son and we have a security protocol and that letter threatened other executives. Where was the security? Where were the bodyguards? Where was the protocol? Where was the alert; the drill; the routine; the regimen that we so carefully shared and worked on at Lockheed Martin? Not a word. Not a sound. Not a telephone call."

So, he began to call executives and lawyers and others and said, "Why wasn't my family alerted? What happened?" And they said to him, "Well, there was no threat" And he said, "How do you know that?" They said, "Well, I don't know. We just knew". And he said, "Well, think about it and I want an answer!" The next day he talked to some of these people and reported to me that they said, "You know we stayed awake all night wrestling with the question----agonizing with it. And you know you're right. How did we know that the (ransom note) was a hoax immediately? We might have known it in a day or two, or a week or two. But how do we know until this day?

To this day there has been no arrest. To this day we know that there was a murder and that there was a note left stating that foreign agents were involved."

http://www.vote.org/ramsey/freed.htm

Anyone involved in reading and researching JonBenet's death, that does not read this link, should just not bother coming in here anymore.

Nehemiah's link http://www.vote.org/ramsey/freed.htm

I am again reminded of the Oklahoma City Bombing of the Murrah Building April 19, 1995, just the year BEFORE JonBenet was murdered.

Another thought comes to mind, in summer of 1996, the year JonBenet was murdered we have the Boat Man incident, where in Waterford Michigan, someone representing himself as John Andrew Ramsey Jr. offered $10,000.00 to 'the police informant Boat Man' to create a deadly accident with JAR and JonBenet in the same boat, while the presumed JAR jumped to safety before a boat would hit them.

The 'Boat Man' was as far as WE know only talked about on a phone call from BPD, with the Waterford PD. BPD was told the Boat Man was not reliable, yet was indeed used by Waterford PD as a police informant for them.

Just why would the investigation end there, well for starters the family Ramsey attorneys advised that JAR was NOT in Waterford during the time frame that Boat Man alleged.

Suggested reading about Murrah Building bombing, book, "The Third Terrorist", by Jayna Davis. The FBI smothered that involvement up about Iraq involvement. Jayna rounded up all manner of 'eye witnesses' and motel records where the people involved stayed for quite some time, and where the Ryder Truck with oil barrels in the back of it and leaking gasoline was parked on the morning of the bombing. The truck and a small parade of cars holding the 'group' of motel residents headed out toward Okla City the morning of the bombing. A book well worth the read.

Perhaps at this juncture of our lives in America, LE is a little more careful, or I would hope so about checking out things that do not seem likely. Too bad Charlie Chan type folks are in such scarce abundance.

Great find Nehemiah.




.

I'd like to read that book about Okla City bombing, Camper. I had never heard of it until now.

Where did we get the info about Boat Man? I remember us posting about this a few years ago, but I didn't save any of the information.

Another excerpt from the article:
http://www.vote.org/ramsey/freed.htm

"...IN THE CASE WHERE THERE IS A RANSOM NOTE---THAT TRIGGERS THE FBI's JURISDICTION. And this is a well-oiled machine of many decades standing. When it goes into action the local police are pushed into the periphery.

When its a wealthy corporate executive; and when the note in fact announces that these are foreign terrorists---now every bell in the "national security system" begins to ring---then the interfacing with the CIA, the NSA, the Pentagon; all this unfolds within a matter of minutes. The Attorney General stands by; the President is awakened ready to go on television; because it is a written and unwritten law that "foreign terrorists" on the soil of the United States should they dare commit a crime; should they dare to contemplate a kidnapping or the murder of an innocent child or American citizen or any visitor to the United States; that unleashes the full might and power of the United States of America, no matter what it takes or how long it takes.

With this huge multi-million dollar security apparatus that exists for that day that any member of a family of a corporate executive; any member, wife, child of corporate executive's family should be kidnapped; they go into overdrive. That's when they earn their money and it’s when they face the CEO's in Denver, and that's where they say "here's where Lockheed Martin stands: your children can or cannot go to school; your wives can or cannot go to the market". An entire protocol unfolds. The interface between the head of Lockheed Martin Security and the FBI is elaborate and its interlocking and its complete.

So the two units, in the Boulder Area, are trained to react to an act of terrorism, like kidnapping, are Lockheed Martin Security on one hand and the FBI on the other. Now, NOBODY FROM EITHER TWO OF THESE UNITS CAME NEAR THAT CRIME SCENE and the question is as in the case of Sherlock Holme's dog that didn't bark. What you're looking at here is SOMETHING THAT IS SO IRREGULAR; SO IMPOSSIBLE, because remember, the SOG, the seat of government operates in this regard..."

So, what happened here in the Ramsey case?

Nehemiah, 'The Third Terrorist' by Jayna Davis, is well worth reading by all of America.

Boat Man came forward in February of 1997.

Keep in mind millions upon millions of people have a pet tabloid paper, Enquirer, Globe etc. I read people right here on line that say, oohhhh I never buy that type of paper. Well millions upon millions of people are and do each and every week, go figure. Perhaps Boat Man was a fan of the Globe, that was the contact he made. Perhaps he read of JonBenet in there, perhaps in a Michigan newspaper, we donut know.

The fact of the matter was that he found out about JonBenets murder, where did he find out??? The news of it took him quickly to the Globe. The fact is that he was an informant for the Waterford MI police department. They used his information informing on drug dealers etc, so why all of a sudden was he not a reliable person in telling his story to the Globe?

IF he did not take up the $10,000.00 offer to be involved in a boating accident that would injure or maim JonBenet, why was he then not a reliable person? WHY was he not shown a picture of John Andrew Ramsey, along with 6 or so other nut suspects, to see IF he could pick out JAR from a group of strange suspect type people, JUST TO see if HE could select JAR from the assortment?

Wellllllllll, the Ramseys and or their attorneys, SAID, JAR was NOT in Michigan at the time the offer was extended to DO the boat accident.

Welllllllll then when everyone suspects the BPD of fouling up the case by poor police work especially at the Ramsey home the morning of 12/26/96, why would not a thinking person suspect that the alibis are a bit too good as well.

The murder of an innocent little girl, does not seem to hold as much interest for a lot of folks on actually finding the person who did IT.

Another thought IF Boat Man hung out in unseemly drug and drinking groups of people, to catch drug dealers, what might that say about the person who offered the $10,000.00 to do the 'accident'. I don't remember if the article stated the precise location where the offer was made, or why Boat Man was there at the time either.

Boat Man had nothing to gain with his story, his name was never mentioned, nor his picture either. I also doubt that he was paid by the Globe, unless and until LE tied the loose ends together, but that never happened. I would guess Ramsey attorney intervention. Wouldn't the Ramsey and their attorney have been doing everything in their power to find out who was 'impersonating' their son, particularly when the offer was made the summer of 1996, the same year JonBenet was murdered. This could have been their biggest CLUE in finding the person who murdered their baby. They never publicly stated so, just super quiet from their corner, could not hear a pin drop, no newspaper followup. Boat Man was a nut case, somehow I don't think he was. Wonder IF someone paid him to shuddup, hmmm.



.

Camper said:

Another thought comes to mind, in summer of 1996, the year JonBenet was murdered we have the Boat Man incident, where in Waterford Michigan, someone representing himself as John Andrew Ramsey Jr. offered $10,000.00 to 'the police informant Boat Man' to create a deadly accident with JAR and JonBenet in the same boat, while the presumed JAR jumped to safety before a boat would hit them.

The 'Boat Man' was as far as WE know only talked about on a phone call from BPD, with the Waterford PD. BPD was told the Boat Man was not reliable, yet was indeed used by Waterford PD as a police informant for them.

Just why would the investigation end there, well for starters the family Ramsey attorneys advised that JAR was NOT in Waterford during the time frame that Boat Man alleged.

Click to expand...

Boat Man? I don't know this story but I wouldn't put much trust in a claim by "Boat Man" for attention that comes after 1996.

Getting back to the thread, I have read elsewhere that maybe the RN's repetition of "early, early, early" was some kind of code to alert someone above Norm Early of a stand down order, either from a perp or coverup. Or maybe it was another clever twist to indicate knowledge of Norm Early. If it was an intruder, that intruder was very clever. If it was just a coverup, then there must have been some counselling (over the phone?) on how to write an RN with so many movie references.

I have not seen any good suspects as an intruder. It would take an intruder (or intruder's partner) with this kind of knowledge to write the RN.

Rupert said:

Boat Man? I don't know this story but I wouldn't put much trust in a claim by "Boat Man" for attention that comes after 1996.

Click to expand...

Maybe you wouldn't or maybe I wouldn't (but I do) and the BPD didn't seem to care much either, but surely the Ramseys should have. Boat Man came forward the first part of Feb, soon after Christmas on my calendar, and the murder.


A royal messup by all of 'The Authorities', imop, as far as the topic thread is concerned.



.

"The inability of the FBI to explain to former Denver DA and Lockheed-Martin executive Norm Early why they never took charge of the Ramsey case -an apparent kidnapping of a top Defense contractor executive's daughter by foreign terrorists- is suspicious and an apparent violation of the "Lindbergh Law." Det. Linda Arndt stated on TV last week that she specifically asked for FBI assistance and did not receive it. She received no backup of any kind, having been told everyone was in a meeting -for hours starting about 7:30 AM the day after Christmas. Were they in a meeting with or about the FBI? Mr. McFarland has a contact with information that Lockheed-Martin security were in the Ramsey house before the BPD. We have available a video of Mr. Early discussing the issue on a recent TV show."

http://www.vote.org/ramsey/kane2.htm

Has anyone ever heard this...that the Lockheed Martin security was possibly at the Ramsey home before the BPD ever arrived? This guy is saying that Dr. McFarland has a contact stating this, and that they have a video of Mr. Early discussing this, also. Anyone seen this?

Nehemiah said:

"The inability of the FBI to explain to former Denver DA and Lockheed-Martin executive Norm Early why they never took charge of the Ramsey case -an apparent kidnapping of a top Defense contractor executive's daughter by foreign terrorists- is suspicious and an apparent violation of the "Lindbergh Law." Det. Linda Arndt stated on TV last week that she specifically asked for FBI assistance and did not receive it. She received no backup of any kind, having been told everyone was in a meeting -for hours starting about 7:30 AM the day after Christmas. Were they in a meeting with or about the FBI? Mr. McFarland has a contact with information that Lockheed-Martin security were in the Ramsey house before the BPD. We have available a video of Mr. Early discussing the issue on a recent TV show."

http://www.vote.org/ramsey/kane2.htm

Has anyone ever heard this...that the Lockheed Martin security was possibly at the Ramsey home before the BPD ever arrived? This guy is saying that Dr. McFarland has a contact stating this, and that they have a video of Mr. Early discussing this, also. Anyone seen this?

Click to expand...

No but how many daughters of top defense contractors have been kidnapped by foreign terrorists?
On the day after Christmas?
Maybe like on 911 nobody really knew what to do.

Did you read the posted article? "security" "protocol" "routine" "carefully shared and worked on regimen" "alert"

Again, we are talking about Lockheed Martin, not some mom and pop business. We are talking "foreign faction", terrorists, if you will.


In 1999, Dr. Bob McFarland interviews Donald Freed, a professor, author, screenwriter, etc...


['Donald Freed "...I must tell you finally that Norm Early who had been the district attorney of Denver and was the vice-president of Lockheed Martin Security at the time of the murder of Jon Benet. I interviewed him at the time. He's a fascinating man---- extremely intelligent. And he said to me finally, "You know I had a six year-old son and we have a security protocol and that letter threatened other executives. Where was the security? Where were the bodyguards? Where was the protocol? Where was the alert; the drill; the routine; the regimen that we so carefully shared and worked on at Lockheed Martin? Not a word. Not a sound. Not a telephone call."

So, he began to call executives and lawyers and others and said, "Why wasn't my family alerted? What happened?" And they said to him, "Well, there was no threat" And he said, "How do you know that?" They said, "Well, I don't know. We just knew". And he said, "Well, think about it and I want an answer!" The next day he talked to some of these people and reported to me that they said, "You know we stayed awake all night wrestling with the question----agonizing with it. And you know you're right. How did we know that the (ransom note) was a hoax immediately? We might have known it in a day or two, or a week or two. But how do we know until this day?

To this day there has been no arrest. To this day we know that there was a murder and that there was a note left stating that foreign agents were involved." ]

Nehemiah,

Interesting isn't it!

For that matter John Ramsey was CEO of the company, and it was HIS daughter that was ?kidnapped? by Foreign Terrorists. He should have by all that sounds right, have been on the telephone to the Security Department of his company ASAP. Wellllllll, perhaps he was, since the telephone records that Steve Thomas wanted were withheld, what exactly does that little ceremony mean?



.

As we all know, Lockheed Martin receives (received in 1996) millions of dollars in training contracts. Possible that the perp was someone from another country, who was angry with John over being awarded (hence, beating the perp out of) one of these contracts?

When I read the ransom note, I believe it to be someone of this nature, or at least someone trying to swing the reader to that viewpoint. Plus, the SBTC could represent some type of "Training Contract".

Nehemiah said:

Did you read the posted article? "security" "protocol" "routine" "carefully shared and worked on regimen" "alert"

Again, we are talking about Lockheed Martin, not some mom and pop business. We are talking "foreign faction", terrorists, if you will.


In 1999, Dr. Bob McFarland interviews Donald Freed, a professor, author, screenwriter, etc...


['Donald Freed "...I must tell you finally that Norm Early who had been the district attorney of Denver and was the vice-president of Lockheed Martin Security at the time of the murder of Jon Benet. I interviewed him at the time. He's a fascinating man---- extremely intelligent. And he said to me finally, "You know I had a six year-old son and we have a security protocol and that letter threatened other executives. Where was the security? Where were the bodyguards? Where was the protocol? Where was the alert; the drill; the routine; the regimen that we so carefully shared and worked on at Lockheed Martin? Not a word. Not a sound. Not a telephone call."

So, he began to call executives and lawyers and others and said, "Why wasn't my family alerted? What happened?" And they said to him, "Well, there was no threat" And he said, "How do you know that?" They said, "Well, I don't know. We just knew". And he said, "Well, think about it and I want an answer!" The next day he talked to some of these people and reported to me that they said, "You know we stayed awake all night wrestling with the question----agonizing with it. And you know you're right. How did we know that the (ransom note) was a hoax immediately? We might have known it in a day or two, or a week or two. But how do we know until this day?

To this day there has been no arrest. To this day we know that there was a murder and that there was a note left stating that foreign agents were involved." ]

Click to expand...

Well maybe I'm a bit naive about such security matters however it just seems like the timing of the crime may of caught many people asleep. Christmas night into the next morning. I mean a lot of people just have thier gard down and are maybe slower to respond. Was part of the plan?

Bumping this back to the front page because elements of this case from so many widespread locations, and the planning for Christmas night when so many people would be relaxing and off-guard so obviously figures. Might there be some sort of organized crime bunch around Waterford, Mich, near Bloomfield where Union Leader Jimmy Hoffa disappeared? J Ramsey wouldn't have been involved in that Union, but former college classmates?

In the JonBenet Ramsey case we have internationals, (airline industry people, which would probably originate the foreign faction idea) and a Waterford, Michigan appearance of a possible John Andrew Ramsey LOOKALIKE, possibly the same one seen by Barnhill in Boulder, also possibly the loiterer hate- propagandist against the Ramseys at the Charlevoix, Michigan gas station, (a JAR lookalike in long coat?) California Kali group members, McSanta also in some kind of cult beliefs.

A change in JonBenet since a visit to Texas was mentioned only by Judith Phillips. that we know of, and in this thread a reference to the Oklahoma City case. Maybe even a vague reminder of the Michigan Jimmy Hoffa case, or am I getting carried away, and the Chandra Levy case because she was investigating Oklahoma City and involved with Congressmen?

That's three possible Michigan connections. maybe four or more, if you include the Hoffa matter, besides the fact the John Ramsey went to college in Michigan.

His first wife wouldn't have had any such animosity toward JonBenet, but has she ever been asked to think about possible Michigan-Texas people they've known? She might be able to come up with something if she thought long and hard, or might be afraid to say so if she did think of something. She just wants to get on with her own life, is married again?

If there's a JAR LOOKALIKE, he must be related to someone living at Waterford, Michigan, else why would anything happen in such an obscure suburb place, who knew John in college days or somehow, who also was familiar with Charlevoix (?) and Boulder. Maybe now in Texas.

What about all this, Camper? I like your posts about this boat man. Also all you other guys' posts. The Texas possible connection could also be someone from Michigan who knows all these other connections, or possible connections.

The mastermind of this case could be someone who hates both Christmas and BEAUTY QUEENS, amateur profiling as I remember I've said before. Danielle Van Dam was possibly also going to be one. Her mother had her taking piano lessons, like JonBenet, and language lessons, etc. I just may have once personally have known someone sabotaging a few Mich. piano jobs a LIE that I'd been a beauty queen and so had a "big head", where I'm getting this amateur profiling hunch, a sociopath petty-jealousy motive, and notice I only said "may have known" someone like that. Sociopaths are able to lead others astray, according to web searches.

Re Helgoth and James Selby, seemingly a deluded loser, both may have been suicided to make them look guilty, Selby even mind-controlled (hypnotized?) to confess. He seemingly elected not to stay around to enjoy any "attention", if he wasn't suicided, so that may not have been his confession motive after all. Ancient Judas was a classic psych specimen, said something before killing himself because he couldn't stand it. Did the Ramseys hear of Selby's alleged confession? If they'd ever met him, they would have commented and it would have been reported, right?

There had been gossip at the University in Boulder about the local little beauty queen, and some artist had ridiculed her in a painting, which he was made to remove from wherever at the college he was showing it. And paintings of women in coffins at the Denver Airport underground gallery. Before civilization, virgins and other humans were sacrificed for the profit of whatever community. (Did victims ever HAUNT, their dreams? They probably felt no guilt.)

In view of so many WIDESPREAD connections, (majority of them Michigan ones rather than foreign or Boulder? ) how could anyone think even for a minute that the case could be just an immediate-family matter? I haven't kept up with the boatman aspect and all details through the years, but it all seems big, really big, and linked to some kind of weird uncivilized beliefs maybe being revived due to a sociopath psych disorder.

According to web searches, apparently the test of whether a perp is really a sociopath, and Scott Peterson didn't completely qualify, is ability to fool most of the people most of the time, lias with a feeling of failure in life, and ability to lead people astray. (Then sometimes betray-punish them or SUBSTITUTE VICTIMS, like Helgoth and maybe Selby? Just a guess for whatever it's worth.)

First of all WE have someone coming forward in FEB 1997, two months AFTER the murder. For zman to 'think' regarding his post which I quote here:

Originally Posted by Rupert
Boat Man? I don't know this story but I wouldn't put much trust in a claim by "Boat Man" for attention that comes after 1996.




This was and IS the biggest clue that ever emerged in the Ramsey case, and the reason I think this is:

1. IF true, when would he have come through with the info? As a police informant he would be MIXING with druggies, drinkers, and low lifes on a frequent basis.
When someone would approach him with an offer of $10,000 to create a deadly boat accident, most likely in my opinion he would have told the guy to get lost, and
chalked it up to another day in Margarita Ville.

2. The $10,000 dollar offer came in the SUMMER OF 1996.

3. The murder happened just a few months later!! Shortly after BOATMAN thought about the proposed accident. I THINK HE WAS being a good citizen, hey
I like to believe in people's honesty. Sometimes I get smacked in the face for that, but. Boatman was doing HONEST work tracking down drug pushers etc.

4. Lawyering up seemed to make the older son, bullet proof, no filmed interviews WITH his picture. Heck we have a hard time even finding a picture of the older
son.

5. WE don't know IF boat man was ever shown pictures of potential people who would have offered the money to have a deadly accident. DO YOU really think
that the Ramsey attorneys would have allowed a PICTURE OF the older son to have been 'viewed' by BOATMAN?

a. NOPE, just told everyone that older son was not in Michigan at the time the 'proposal' was made. I DON'T remember 'where the older son was, anyone
recall why he was NOT in Michigan at 'THAT' time?

b. To further speculate about the Charlevoix person and the cowboy boots etc. I can see a family member who comes and goes to have a key to the house in
Charlevoix, and 'lettin' a frend' hang out er something like that. Heck the folks were in Colorado. I have three sons who used to be in their twenties.

6. ANYONE who would have offered $10,000 to have an accident like the ASKER PERSON wanted, HAD TO HAVE BEEN EITHER ON DRUGS AND
OUT OF HIS LOCAL MIND, OR UNDER HEAVY INFLUENCE OF ALCOHOL, imop. BECAUSE as the story went the ASKER PERSON described
HOW he wanted the accident to happen, "I will be in the boat with JonBenet, you are to come head on toward our little boat, and I will jump to safety just before
you hit us."

First of all we don't know the size of the boat the ASKER person would be in, and we don't know the size of the boat BOATMAN would be hitting it with. I
would assume it would have to be more powerful than the ASKER persons boat. IF this would be the case, HOW would it be possible for the ASKER person to
ESCAPE injury IF the end result was to be JonBenets death? To think that HE could escape injury in a deadly accident, means to me that he had to be drunk or
on drugs.

Boat man was quickly shoveled under the rug never to be seen or heard from again. The older son has had his own rug makers, all is quiet on the eastern front, no
pictures, no progress reports. A boring ball game, no runs, no hits and no perceivable errors.

BUT for all of the SECURITY issues of Access Graphics, WHY does the ransom note have many of PR's handwriting issues in it? WE do have battling experts on
the WHO that wrote the note.

IF it were not for THAT note, I might be led into the mysterious world of 'The Foreign Faction'.

Excuse any typos, I have not proof read this post.

No grandbaby yet.



.

Click to expand...

Good morning, Camper. You'd only want to close up some gaps in your paragraphs if you proofread, no typo's that I noted.

I don't think you read my post yet that is right above yours. I really wanted your opinions. What a coincidence that we must have been writing at the same time. Timewise I beat you by a hair, even with a lot of editing to include more and more. Hope you haven't gone too far away yet. I don't get email notices of replies right now, maybe after DST ends the last of October. Will try to remember to check back, though.

Hi Camper

I have only ever heard about this boatman story on this forum and dont really know the specifics of it, could you possibly fill me in a little on it.
Thanks, also congratulations on nearly being a grandmum... I hope all goes well.

Friday Night,

Maybe it's happened, Camper is a gramma again (?)

I'm with you, Narlacat, wanting a bit more about the boatman thing. While we're waiting, I'll just share that I had my second laser eye surgery this morning. All went well both times. Still have a long way to go. Glad I didn't miss my answer here.

Congrats to Camper.

narlacat said:

Hi Camper

I have only ever heard about this boatman story on this forum and dont really know the specifics of it, could you possibly fill me in a little on it.
Thanks, also congratulations on nearly being a grandmum... I hope all goes well.

Click to expand...

Welllllll, if you have not been here from December 27, 1996, then you would have missed the story. WS had so many crashes and lost archives, it was in there.

The whole of the story was that it appeared in the Globe in February of 1997, which would have been prepped for the printing IN JANUARY the very month AFTER the murder. NO DELAY in boatman contacting them, when his lightbulb went on. Very simply stated.

=============================

Eagle, NO BABY yet!!!!!!!! Was due yesterday. I can make my own announcement and will WHEN there is one to make, thanks.


.

BOATMAN

The boatman story is on page 199 of PMPT pb:

"When the Star received a tip on February 5 that John Andrew Ramsey had tried to arrange the death of his half-sister, JonBenet, they passed the information to the Boulder police.

"A sometime police informant had told the tabloid that on the weekend of either Memorial Day or July Fourth, 1996, while the Ramsey family was vacationing in Michigan, John Andrew had offered him $10,000 to ram a power boat into a smaller boat that would be carrying him and JonBenet. Supposedly, John Andrew would jump overboard to safety just before impact and JonBenet, he hoped, would be killed. The informant told the Star that he had rejected the offer.

"Detective Jane Harmer was assigned to follow up on the tip. The informant was interviewed by police in Waterford, Michigan, where he repeated the story he'd told the tabloid. Two weeks later the Boulder police discovered that the informant had a dubious history. A check of Michigan police agencies revealed that he had come under suspicion -- first for possibly planting drugs in an alleged dope house and second for refusing to take a polygraph test to confirm information he had provided in a cocaine investigation. By the end of February, Boulder police had dscided that the informant's accusations were unfounded, and yet another lead in the Ramsey case would go nowhere."

And on page 302:

"Morgan also wrote that John Andrew hadn't been in Charlevoix, Michigan on either the Memorial Day or the July Fourth 1996 weekend. The accusation of a onetime police informant that John Andrew had tried to stage an "accidental death" in order to kill JonBenet was clearly preposterous. Morgan again requested an official announcement that John Andrew was no longer a possible suspect." (Brian Morgan was the Ramseys' attorney.)

BlueCrab

BlueCrab said:

BOATMAN

The boatman story is on page 199 of PMPT pb:

"When the Star received a tip on February 5 that John Andrew Ramsey had tried to arrange the death of his half-sister, JonBenet, they passed the information to the Boulder police.

"A sometime police informant had told the tabloid that on the weekend of either Memorial Day or July Fourth, 1996, while the Ramsey family was vacationing in Michigan, John Andrew had offered him $10,000 to ram a power boat into a smaller boat that would be carrying him and JonBenet. Supposedly, John Andrew would jump overboard to safety just before impact and JonBenet, he hoped, would be killed. The informant told the Star that he had rejected the offer.

"Detective Jane Harmer was assigned to follow up on the tip. The informant was interviewed by police in Waterford, Michigan, where he repeated the story he'd told the tabloid. Two weeks later the Boulder police discovered that the informant had a dubious history. A check of Michigan police agencies revealed that he had come under suspicion -- first for possibly planting drugs in an alleged dope house and second for refusing to take a polygraph test to confirm information he had provided in a cocaine investigation. By the end of February, Boulder police had dscided that the informant's accusations were unfounded, and yet another lead in the Ramsey case would go nowhere."

And on page 302:

"Morgan also wrote that John Andrew hadn't been in Charlevoix, Michigan on either the Memorial Day or the July Fourth 1996 weekend. The accusation of a onetime police informant that John Andrew had tried to stage an "accidental death" in order to kill JonBenet was clearly preposterous. Morgan again requested an official announcement that John Andrew was no longer a possible suspect." (Brian Morgan was the Ramseys' attorney.)

BlueCrab

Click to expand...

Interesting that it would appear from the account you have given us here BlueCrab that the WPD nor the BPD requested a lie detector test, for the $10,000 proposal. Wonder why or IF my assumption is correct.

I am purely guessing that WPD and BPD under the circumstances of WPD telling of their story on the drug plant, that WPD and BPD did not want to combat the Ramsey attorneys. Anyone think I might be right?

IF I had been in charge of the investigation, I would have ensured that the 'informant' got to see a line up of potential 'suspects'. Here is a case for Jeanne Boylan!


.