Tunnel vision, why was "Amy" overlooked?
- Thread starter Junebug99
- Start date
tezi
Proud member of WS since 2000.
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2003
- Messages
- 5,615
- Reaction score
- 1,964
Wait, wait...Who are you to tell anyone who to quote? Most of us have been here a lot longer than you have, and we know what is an acceptable source and what isn't. So, maybe we should try this again.
And the source for the feces would be James Kolar's book. No, I don't have time to look up the pages right now. But, it's in there.
JMO
Mama2JML
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,233
- Reaction score
- 7
An excerpt from 08.01.2000 article by Charlie Brennan:
"Police chief doubts same person killed Ramsey, attacked teen girl
...
Mr. Ramsey confirmed Monday that JonBenet took lessons at Dance West, a studio where the second victim had performed. The studio owner, Lee Klinger, said he has never been contacted by police investigating either case.
Both girls performed at public functions in Boulder not long before being victimized: The 14-year-old girl danced in several public performances in the year before her assault. JonBenet, the reigning Little Miss Christmas, was featured in a holiday parade shortly before she was killed.
...
Investigators who worked on the Ramsey case for Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter said they were surprised last week to learn about the second attack.
'I'm shocked,' said Steve Ainsworth, a Boulder County sheriff's detective who spent a year as a consultant on the case to Mr. Hunter. 'I think this is something that definitely should have been brought up. I was pretty amazed at the similarities.'"
"Police chief doubts same person killed Ramsey, attacked teen girl
...
Mr. Ramsey confirmed Monday that JonBenet took lessons at Dance West, a studio where the second victim had performed. The studio owner, Lee Klinger, said he has never been contacted by police investigating either case.
Both girls performed at public functions in Boulder not long before being victimized: The 14-year-old girl danced in several public performances in the year before her assault. JonBenet, the reigning Little Miss Christmas, was featured in a holiday parade shortly before she was killed.
...
Investigators who worked on the Ramsey case for Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter said they were surprised last week to learn about the second attack.
'I'm shocked,' said Steve Ainsworth, a Boulder County sheriff's detective who spent a year as a consultant on the case to Mr. Hunter. 'I think this is something that definitely should have been brought up. I was pretty amazed at the similarities.'"
I stand corrected, Amy's parents insisted they take finger prints. Wouldn't that be standard practice for a break in, sexual assault? Did they not learn anything after botching the JBR investigation? Especially a second assault two miles from the first assault. Police work at it's finest.
Venom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 1,386
- Reaction score
- 349
:sigh:
From one of the links in this thread:
"The family was dissatisfied with the quality of police work. The family had to request that the police fingerprint the house more thoroughly. Linda Arndt was in charge. Tom Wickman, Tom Trujillo and other detectives also worked on the case."
There it is that it WAS fingerprinted but the family wanted more fingerprinting.
Or should I believe the "fact" being said here that the BPD never fingerprinted the house?
From one of the links in this thread:
"The family was dissatisfied with the quality of police work. The family had to request that the police fingerprint the house more thoroughly. Linda Arndt was in charge. Tom Wickman, Tom Trujillo and other detectives also worked on the case."
There it is that it WAS fingerprinted but the family wanted more fingerprinting.
Or should I believe the "fact" being said here that the BPD never fingerprinted the house?
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
Your entire premise that the other child attacked in her bed wasn't actively investigated by the BPD and that it's possibly related to the JB murder is based on unfounded gossip and Team Ramsey sources with an agenda that has nothing to do with evidence in either case.
Because of the Ramsey case, this one got lots of attention. Team Ramsey even dragged it out in a Tracey crocumentary, complete with ninjas dressed in black--one of the more ridiculous shows he put together.
Team Ramsey detectives and advocates are hardly unbiased sources. They perpetuated this connection and I've never seen any legitimate source provide one iota of evidence the two cases were connected.
As for the "unfounded" sources you seem to be implying RDI use, since I have yet to see one police report or press conference held by the BPD on the case proving anything, gossip is what remains, and most of it coming from Team Ramsey.
It was the girl's father who said at one point he shut down the investigation because he didn't like that the BPD were questioning his daughter's schoolmates. Like the Ramseys, he seemed to believe a police investigation into a crime must involve psychic readings and pinky-swearing: nothing too uncomfortable, just arrest SOMEBODY they don't know and move along, please.
This is a very old case and the news reports on it weren't that many back when it happened, so good luck with finding something that is going to satisfy your desire to connect the 2 and blame the BPD for not doing the same.
And now that you've accused RDI of "dragging another families [sic] name through the mud", I believe that qualifies as a personal attack. Perhaps you would like to rephrase?
Just my opinion, of course.
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
Why would contract consultants working for the DA need to know about a case the BPD was investigating that was never connected to the Ramsey case?
Or have you not heard that Team Ramsey's early days working for Hunter were a huge part of the problem between the BPD and the DA's Office, setting back the investigation by the actual BPD detectives whose job it was to conduct it by interfering on behalf of the Ramseys? Hunter, Smit, Haines, Ollie, and San Agustin ruined this investigation behind the scenes from Day One, following through with their disinformation and nonsensical public relations sweeps on behalf of the Ramseys everytime someone pointed a camera at them. Maybe someone should ask Haines does he routinely obtain standard search warrants for critical evidence in child murders or does he prefer palm reading and crystal ball gazing to catch criminals?
Standard protocol in LE is that the police department investigates a case and then turns it over to the DA to prosecute if and when there is enough evidence to do so. I understand that Hunter and Lacy turned that upside down while advocating for the prime suspects, rather than doing their actual job, but that didn't change the fact that the BPD had no reason or cause to tell the Hunter's "consultants" anything about this case or any other case. Especially since the D.A. promptly turned it all over to the lawyers of the prime suspects in the child murder case.
These two cases were not related by any evidence. Period. It might make interesting theory to sell to intruder theorists, but other than Team Ramsey digging up one more red herring, it's baloney. Like the rantings of yet another obscure media hound who broke into a house to steal materials to fabricate evidence, created fictional ninjas to libel a dead man who couldn't defend himself, and like Karr easily got himself featured in yet another money-making venture to obscure the truth of the case against the Ramseys, there's nothing there. It's pure fiction.
Patsy wrote the ransom note; not one piece of evidence at the crime scene was traced anywhere other than back to the home and the family; the 3 people in the home all had means and opportunity, and motive is certainly arguable. They obstructed the investigation, lied repeatedly and voluminously to LE and the public, and but for their money and connections they'd have been in and out of prison by now.
The end.
Mama2JML
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,233
- Reaction score
- 7
Good morning, KK...
At the time of the article's printing, it had been 3 years since the second attack & Boulder-area LE entities were unaware. Seems irresponsible & negligent to me.
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
Perhaps you can define "Boulder-area LE entities"?
As I pointed out, that seems to be mostly, if not solely, Team Ramsey's spin.
If there was no evidence found by the BPD connecting the two events, and if the parents in fact put a stop to the BPD investigation by eliminating their access to witnesses, like the victim and the mother in the home at the time, for instance (gosh, why does this sound familiar?), what should the BPD have done? Put out an all points bulletin that somewhere, some alleged pedophile might be escaping justice?
This is what I find absurd about all of this: if you have seen more than Team Ramsey-inspired hysteria generated for yet another fantasy intruder suspect, please share it with us.
Because I have never seen that. Ever.
Truer words were never spoken.
Isn't this just an opinion though?
Venom
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2013
- Messages
- 1,386
- Reaction score
- 349
Some of it may be opinion, some is the truth.
If you read through the R's interviews you can see they told a few lies. One right off the top of my head, they claimed that JB was asleep and carried to her bed, BR testifired that she was awake and walked up to bed.
If you read through the R's interviews you can see they told a few lies. One right off the top of my head, they claimed that JB was asleep and carried to her bed, BR testifired that she was awake and walked up to bed.
KoldKase
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2008
- Messages
- 996
- Reaction score
- 26
It appears to me, after refreshing my memory with the link at ACandyRose.com on the sources we have seen, which include gossip, speculation, and summaries from an alleged actual police report on the investigation of this case posted by an anonymous person, but no actual police report: LE never found any link between these cases. They did investigate and collect crime scene evidence; they re-investigated that possible link when Team Ramsey shoved it down their throats 3 years later.
The 14 yr old's attack came 9 months after the Ramsey murder. If there was some involvement of the mother or daughter which resulted in a need to cover something up, we don't know. Neither do all the investigators who only provide speculation, as well.
The same situation is clearly present with the Ramseys and their Team trying to use this case as proof of their own innocence: look, another intruder!
Unfortunately children are sexually assaulted in this world on a routine basis, and statistically most often it's by someone they know, not an intruder. So two in the same town, at their homes, in the same year is more common than unusual.
Other elements are listed as similarities, but in fact without some kind of corroborative evidence, these could be nothing but fabrications to cover up what actually happened. Or perhaps the similarities are that they have similar elements of a cover up, for all we know.
Both cases involved an alleged "intruder" spending hours in the home after gaining no-forced entry, hours concealed from multiple active family members in the home before the attack on the child--according to the parents' stories.
Look closer: the older child's mother was home during the attack on her, but not the father. There could be reasons either the mother or child may have lied about what truly was happening and who was involved: perhaps the teen's boyfriend sneaked into the house to be with her and they got caught, he ran, and the girl told the "intruder" lie to keep from being punished; also what if the mother secreted a boyfriend in that night and when she fell asleep he went for the girl, got caught, and fled?
In each SPECULATIVE scenario, either one of those present would have had a motivation to cover up the true nature of what was going on. Since the Ramsey case was on everyone's mind, a ready-made intruder was handy. "Hours hiding" explains how he knew to run through the master bedroom to escape through exit doors there--not everyone has those, not even the Ramseys. So voila: the "intruder" who hid in the house had time to wander around for hours...just as was publicly speculated on by Team Ramsey to explain how their intruder managed his familiarity with the home, writing pads & pens, cellar room, etc.
Also both cases had an alarm system which didn't get tripped upon an intruder's entry, so how did he get in without signs of force? Easy: neither was activated for various reasons, in the latter case until bedtime at 11. That alarm is tripped, though, by the mother and daughter running out of the house--odd, isn't it, when the intruder had just escaped through the bedroom and was outside, as well? My instinct would be to lock doors and stay inside while calling 911. But that alarm did go off, so why? Maybe mom was chasing the intruder or boyfriend outside, not running outside in fear? Or maybe the daughter was running after her boyfriend? If either of those were true, tripping the alarm brought LE, so now the cat is out of the bag and stuff has to be covered up?
Or maybe what they said happened, happened. How do we know what is true and what is not? Yes, some elements are similar to the Ramsey intruder story--which has also produced no evidence to prove an intruder was ever there.
FACT: We know JonBenet was attacked because she was murdered, had an autopsy which proved she was brutally sexually assaulted, bludgeoned, and strangled. But there is no proof that there was an intruder in the home, much less one who spent hours there, concealed, before the attack. We only have the prime suspects to tell us that's the truth.
Is this an "intruder's" M.O. or are they random events, separate from each other but sucked into the Ramsey vortex?
Only those involved will ever know--and they're not telling.
The 14 yr old's attack came 9 months after the Ramsey murder. If there was some involvement of the mother or daughter which resulted in a need to cover something up, we don't know. Neither do all the investigators who only provide speculation, as well.
The same situation is clearly present with the Ramseys and their Team trying to use this case as proof of their own innocence: look, another intruder!
Unfortunately children are sexually assaulted in this world on a routine basis, and statistically most often it's by someone they know, not an intruder. So two in the same town, at their homes, in the same year is more common than unusual.
Other elements are listed as similarities, but in fact without some kind of corroborative evidence, these could be nothing but fabrications to cover up what actually happened. Or perhaps the similarities are that they have similar elements of a cover up, for all we know.
Both cases involved an alleged "intruder" spending hours in the home after gaining no-forced entry, hours concealed from multiple active family members in the home before the attack on the child--according to the parents' stories.
Look closer: the older child's mother was home during the attack on her, but not the father. There could be reasons either the mother or child may have lied about what truly was happening and who was involved: perhaps the teen's boyfriend sneaked into the house to be with her and they got caught, he ran, and the girl told the "intruder" lie to keep from being punished; also what if the mother secreted a boyfriend in that night and when she fell asleep he went for the girl, got caught, and fled?
In each SPECULATIVE scenario, either one of those present would have had a motivation to cover up the true nature of what was going on. Since the Ramsey case was on everyone's mind, a ready-made intruder was handy. "Hours hiding" explains how he knew to run through the master bedroom to escape through exit doors there--not everyone has those, not even the Ramseys. So voila: the "intruder" who hid in the house had time to wander around for hours...just as was publicly speculated on by Team Ramsey to explain how their intruder managed his familiarity with the home, writing pads & pens, cellar room, etc.
Also both cases had an alarm system which didn't get tripped upon an intruder's entry, so how did he get in without signs of force? Easy: neither was activated for various reasons, in the latter case until bedtime at 11. That alarm is tripped, though, by the mother and daughter running out of the house--odd, isn't it, when the intruder had just escaped through the bedroom and was outside, as well? My instinct would be to lock doors and stay inside while calling 911. But that alarm did go off, so why? Maybe mom was chasing the intruder or boyfriend outside, not running outside in fear? Or maybe the daughter was running after her boyfriend? If either of those were true, tripping the alarm brought LE, so now the cat is out of the bag and stuff has to be covered up?
Or maybe what they said happened, happened. How do we know what is true and what is not? Yes, some elements are similar to the Ramsey intruder story--which has also produced no evidence to prove an intruder was ever there.
FACT: We know JonBenet was attacked because she was murdered, had an autopsy which proved she was brutally sexually assaulted, bludgeoned, and strangled. But there is no proof that there was an intruder in the home, much less one who spent hours there, concealed, before the attack. We only have the prime suspects to tell us that's the truth.
Is this an "intruder's" M.O. or are they random events, separate from each other but sucked into the Ramsey vortex?
Only those involved will ever know--and they're not telling.
Mama2JML
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,233
- Reaction score
- 7
How do we know Burke wasn't mistaken? OR, how do we even know if this story (re: Burke's testimony) is true/accurate? Kolar seems to believe JonBenet was asleep when the Rs arrived at home.
Hexe
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 1,403
- Reaction score
- 6,597
Mistaken? How? It's hard to mistake a girl deeply asleep, carried by the parents with a fully awake girl, walking and talking.
Pineapple eaten by JonBenet shortly before her death. Pineapple in the bowl, on the table in the breakfast room. Only the figerprints of Patsy and Burke were found on it, so it seems someone served it to JonBenet, and certainly not when she was asleep.
It is rather hard to imagine an intruder, who just broke into Ramsey's house, feeling so comfortable in there, that he brought his victim to the kitchen, found the pineapple in the fridge, served it to JonBenet and sat there calmly, watching her. Ergo, the person who served the pineapple must be one of the family members. So it corroborates Burke's statement about JonBenet being awake, when they came home.
Mama2JML
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,233
- Reaction score
- 7
The pineapple may have been eaten ~6 hours before death, and I am not confident that Burke's recollection was...
A) accurate.
-OR-
B) portrayed accurately.
Hexe
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 11, 2011
- Messages
- 1,403
- Reaction score
- 6,597
Not true. It was written here many, many times, that the pineapple goes through the digestive tract much faster than that.
Why?