Boulder Grand Jury Voted To Indict-Boulder Dailey Camera

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Didn't I read on here that there was green garland found in JonBenets hair when brought up from the wc by her father. This tells me that since there was green garland also on the stairs to her bedroom that she was carried down the stairs from her room to be able to get the garland in her hair. So she did not walk up onto some burglars, she was already possibly unconscious or sleeping when carried from her room. JMO.
 
Do any of you tweet? When I'm not on WS, my day job is a PR person. Most journalists and public officials these days communicate with the public via Twitter. When you tweet them, and include a hashtag (#Justice4JonBenet), it creates a Twitter "feed" -- so that anyone who goes back and searches for #Justice4JonBenet can easily see every tweet ever sent by anyone who used that hashtag.

Twitter is by far the easiest, fastest, and most effective way to publicly put pressure on the current DA and the press. I just sent this, to nobody in particular:

It is time for John Ramsey's arrest! #Justice4JonBenet! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...arents-beauty-queens-murder-13-years-ago.html

Once I have time to find twitter handles of the players involved, then I will tweet them directly. I encourage you all to do the same!
 
Actually, it fits the evidence better than any theory out there.



I agree, but only so long as we remain open to any possible angle and do not make the mistake of devoting ourselves to a particular conclusion about this case as if it were our religion, which it is not. It is an unsolved murder.



Clearly, child murder trumps child molestation in the hierarchy of evil human behavior. If the male burglar is depraved enough to brutally murder a six year old girl, he is certainly depraved enough to sexually assault her. Thus, it would not be at all unlikely for our male burglar, turned child murderer, to let all his demons out on this occasion. After all, he cannot possibly behave any worse after crushing a little girl's skull with a tire iron. (No, JBR was not hit over the head with a flashlight.)



For the sake of argument, let us assume that there is no controversy over the issue of whether or not there is definite evidence of prior sexual abuse. The fact of the matter is that JBR had an older brother. It is not terribly unusual for young children, even siblings, to play doctor. What is more, the evidence for prior sexual abuse is debatable. In other words, it is so scant that the evidence, at best, suggests little more than children playing doctor and does NOT suggest chronic, aggressive, sexual abuse at the hands of an adult. The Ramseys have been accused of "hiding something" since Day One of the investigation. If they were indeed hiding something it is most likely sexual play between Burke and JBR, and their motive for keeping it a family secret should be obvious and understandable, considering the relentless witch hunt to which the family was being subjected.



I have seen no substantial evidence to suggest that the Ramseys were "umm, well, not the norm" whatever that means. I doubt they were the perfect family; but then again, no such family exists. They certainly were not radically dysfunctional and it is wrong for you to suggest that they were.



There would have been no reason for the burglars to murder JBR unless she could identify one of them by name. If JBR was so well acquainted with one of the burglars, it is entirely plausible that this person could have gotten her hands on a key to the Ramsey residence. Thus, there would have been no sign of forced entry.

What is more, the Ramseys were not very fastidious with their home security. Indeed, they did not even bother to set the alarm most of the time. Therefore, it is entirely possible that a door had actually been left unlocked, despite all assurances to the contrary by all concerned parties.




The usual stuff: jewelry, guns, collectibles, cash, anything that can be easily thrown into a shoulder bag and hocked at the local pawn shop.



There is no reason to suspect that these were experienced, professional burglars who relied on swag as their primary source of income. In fact, it is at least as likely that these were thrill burglars out for kicks and a little dope money.



That the burglars could have screwed up so badly by getting wrong the date of the Ramseys departure to Michigan is telling of what sort of burglars we are dealing with, and perhaps ultimately, their identities.



Good question. Why not just grab JBR and leave? Why hang around?

The answer: They had no where to take her. Indeed, they might not even have had a car with which to smuggle JBR away. Now what sort of burglars are these? My guess is that they are young adults. They either live with their parents in the surrounding neighborhood or they live in a dorm or frat house at UC, which is just around the corner from the Ramsey residence.



The female burglar did this because she knew and liked JBR. It was she who wrote the ransom note. It was she who tried to persuade her depraved boyfriend not to kill JBR. It was she who felt genuine remorse for the murder.



I think there is a very high degree of probability that our female burglar is dead, having been murdered by her male accomplice not long after the murder of JBR. Has he walked the straight and narrow since then? I doubt it. But if he moved away to Europe or Israel or Australia, he could have easily eluded the radar of American law enforcement.



Clearly, one of the burglars was possessed by an actual human soul and felt some degree of remorse while the other one was a sadistic, cold-hearted, psychopath.



The most glaring piece of evidence is the ransom note which was not likely written by Patsy, or John, or Burke. Obviously, somebody wrote the note and it was not a member of the Ramsey family.

Hi Ed, thank you for responding. I do want to continue this conversation, but I have a birthday party tonight I am baking & cleaning & prepping for, so I can't give this the attention it deserves at the moment. Once things chill a bit here at my house, I'll be back. Just didn't want you to think I was ignoring you. Catch ya later! :)
 
I think it’s simple as to why they left her hidden (key word) in the basement. I think they never thought anyone would treat this as anything other than a kidnapping. And who would search the house for a kidnapped child?

In other words, you believe the Ramseys to be complete and utter morons who might not have surmised that someone--perhaps even the police--would eventually search the house as a matter of common sense, if not SOP.

I can understand the motivation for your line of reasoning. After all, Detective Aren't and the rest of the Keystone Kops did not do such a bang up job with this most basic step in the investigation. However, you really should not assume that everyone in the world, including the Ramseys, are bungling dolts.

The fact of the matter is that anyone with more than two brain cells in their head would have figured that if they are going to stage a kidnapping, then they better get the body out of the house, pronto.
 
That is patently false. You do not know what you are talking about.

Have you LOOKED at the comparisons and exemplars of Patsy and the note? There is NO doubt that she wrote it, And to state the experts have not determined the same thing is simply not true. She was the ONLY one who could not be ruled out as the author.
 
Is it possible that this "leak" of a former indictment happened just to provide the opportunity a DA or Chief of Police can use to call for a new investigation, because at this point, though there is no NEW information -- there is NEW insight into information that was previously not regarded? :woot:

Pray that the powers that be are gearing up to use their power. :please:
 
Do any of you tweet? When I'm not on WS, my day job is a PR person. Most journalists and public officials these days communicate with the public via Twitter. When you tweet them, and include a hashtag (#Justice4JonBenet), it creates a Twitter "feed" -- so that anyone who goes back and searches for #Justice4JonBenet can easily see every tweet ever sent by anyone who used that hashtag.

Twitter is by far the easiest, fastest, and most effective way to publicly put pressure on the current DA and the press. I just sent this, to nobody in particular:

It is time for John Ramsey's arrest! #Justice4JonBenet! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...arents-beauty-queens-murder-13-years-ago.html

Once I have time to find twitter handles of the players involved, then I will tweet them directly. I encourage you all to do the same!

Awesome. :woohoo:
 
Is it possible that this "leak" of a former indictment happened just to provide the opportunity a DA or Chief of Police can use to call for a new investigation, because at this point, though there is no NEW information -- there is NEW insight into information that was previously not regarded? :woot:

Pray that the powers that be are gearing up to use their power. :please:
I've been thinking about this and unless we're told, there's no way to know. Somebody might have gotten sick of JR playing the victim. Or, now that BR is old enough to come clean about any involvement, (but hasn't), somebody is trying to pressure him. Or, maybe all of the new focus being put on BR, seems unfair to someone who knows he was also a victim of his parents. After Kolar's book came out, I expected JR to jump to his son's defense, but he didn't. And what's mind blowing, is he didn't defend his son even though IMO, he very well knew that a grand jury had voted to indict himself and PR. IMO, if BR isn't responsible, JR owes it to him to tell the truth. What kind of parent would let his son get blamed for killing his sister? Oh, never mind, that was a dumb question. The answer is a man who a grand jury voted to indict for that murder. And it goes round and round. moo
 
Is it possible that this "leak" of a former indictment happened just to provide the opportunity a DA or Chief of Police can use to call for a new investigation, because at this point, though there is no NEW information -- there is NEW insight into information that was previously not regarded? :woot:

Pray that the powers that be are gearing up to use their power. :please:

MM, this is exectly my thoughts (see post #245)!!! And you're absolutely correct: new GJ would have apportunity to gather new information, like the following:

- calling Burke to testify without invoking the 5th amendment (since he's currently refused to cooperate with BPD and possibly will do the same in court);
- obtaining new evidence by reviewing documents which have been sealed in 1998. Because prior to call new GJ, DA must issue request to unseal all of the 'island of privacy' documents;
- the most crutial pieces of evidence could be obtained by interviewing ex-BPD and ex-DA officers like ST and Kolar.

According to Kolar, assembling of new GJ is very important step for further prosecutable process.

Personnaly, I would very much support and promote any actions toward new GJ.

jmo
 
I am just making observations, and not much more.

It seems that some here believe that since the GJ voted to indict, that that automatically means the Rs were "guilty" of child abuse/murder, et al, and would have been found "guilty" in a court of law.

OTOH...

It seems that some believe that the injustice in this new information was that the GJ voted to indict and Hunter refused to sign on the dotted line so that a trial could ensue. Maybe the Rs would have been found guilty, or maybe they would have been found not guilty.

Am I missing something?
 
I am just making observations, and not much more.

It seems that some here believe that since the GJ voted to indict, that that automatically means the Rs were "guilty" of child abuse/murder, et al, and would have been found "guilty" in a court of law.

OTOH...

It seems that some believe that the injustice in this new information was that the GJ voted to indict and Hunter refused to sign on the dotted line so that a trial could ensue. Maybe the Rs would have been found guilty, or maybe they would have been found not guilty.

Am I missing something?

I've picked up on the anti-Ramsey bias here that you seem to be eluding to. I just want to state that the GJ voting to indict means nothing in and of itself. The motivation for that indictment could have been frustration or trying to use it improperly to try to wring more information out of the Ramseys. The bottom line is that the AG made the call not to indict and I believe he had a good reason for it. After examining all of the evidence, i believe he believed there was insufficient grounds for a conviction.
 
In other words, you believe the Ramseys to be complete and utter morons who might not have surmised that someone--perhaps even the police--would eventually search the house as a matter of common sense, if not SOP.

I can understand the motivation for your line of reasoning. After all, Detective Aren't and the rest of the Keystone Kops did not do such a bang up job with this most basic step in the investigation. However, you really should not assume that everyone in the world, including the Ramseys, are bungling dolts.

The fact of the matter is that anyone with more than two brain cells in their head would have figured that if they are going to stage a kidnapping, then they better get the body out of the house, pronto.

If the count of your brain cells are higher than two and your knowledge of this case is an average (at the minimum!) then you should know:

- they don't have TIME to get rid of the body. The pilot was waiting to fly them out of city; oldest children were waiting to join them on vacation; friends have knowledge of their plans and any delays would raised suspicions.

- they would never let the body to rot. The 'proper burial' was very important to Patsy (read ransom note!);

- Ramsey were not the first and not the last people who used 'kidnapping' misdirection in homicide cases. See Smith case, see Anthony case, see S.Peterson case....dozens of them around the world...Last month, husband of famous Russian journalist had claimed that she was kidnapped for political reasons. Week later, LE found her dead mutilated body in the trunk of the car. Eventually, husband admitted that he killed her for personal reasons.

So, please stop 'pushing' your hidden agenda or GO AWAY!!!!!
 
However, you really should not assume that everyone in the world, including the Ramseys, are bungling dolts.

*However, you really should not assume (or imply in your “other words”) that I assume anything that I haven’t said. My post seems to have angered you.

I, unlike you, tried to answer your question in a nice and respectable manner. It just happened to not be what you wanted to hear. So,

you rudely comeback with insinuations and assumptions that try to make my reply appear as it can’t be taken seriously? Spare your typing fingers; any further effort put into such an ingrate is a waste of my time. If you read my posts you will see I don’t readily argue with the obtuse.
Carry on.

(Sorry guys, up until I met this selfish poster I was a nice person. It’s just not safe or easy being somewhere in between an RDI and IDI.)

What makes other people think it's ok to tell you what you were 'really' saying? Oh, to be so pompous.

In other words, you believe the Ramseys to be complete and utter morons who might not have surmised that someone--perhaps even the police--would eventually search the house as a matter of common sense, if not SOP.

I can understand the motivation for your line of reasoning. After all, Detective Aren't and the rest of the Keystone Kops did not do such a bang up job with this most basic step in the investigation. However, you really should not assume that everyone in the world, including the Ramseys, are bungling dolts.

The fact of the matter is that anyone with more than two brain cells in their head would have figured that if they are going to stage a kidnapping, then they better get the body out of the house, pronto.
 
I've been thinking about this and unless we're told, there's no way to know. Somebody might have gotten sick of JR playing the victim. Or, now that BR is old enough to come clean about any involvement, (but hasn't), somebody is trying to pressure him. Or, maybe all of the new focus being put on BR, seems unfair to someone who knows he was also a victim of his parents. After Kolar's book came out, I expected JR to jump to his son's defense, but he didn't. And what's mind blowing, is he didn't defend his son even though IMO, he very well knew that a grand jury had voted to indict himself and PR. IMO, if BR isn't responsible, JR owes it to him to tell the truth. What kind of parent would let his son get blamed for killing his sister? Oh, never mind, that was a dumb question. The answer is a man who a grand jury voted to indict for that murder. And it goes round and round. moo

O/T but David Westerfield was ready and willing to let his son get blamed for the child *advertiser censored* found on his computer. After all this time that still makes me :furious:
 
I am just making observations, and not much more.

It seems that some here believe that since the GJ voted to indict, that that automatically means the Rs were "guilty" of child abuse/murder, et al, and would have been found "guilty" in a court of law.

OTOH...

It seems that some believe that the injustice in this new information was that the GJ voted to indict and Hunter refused to sign on the dotted line so that a trial could ensue. Maybe the Rs would have been found guilty, or maybe they would have been found not guilty.

Am I missing something?

Agree on second. In addition, Hunter LIED to the public, to the taxayers, to people who elected him and paid his salary. Hunter claimed that GJ did NOT reach indictment. And with this statement, Ramsey got the 'free' ticket to promote their innocents for years and years...until another a##hole elected official did worse than Hunter: ML exonerates Ramsey based on non-identified multi-source touch-DNA....
 
In other words, you believe the Ramseys to be complete and utter morons who might not have surmised that someone--perhaps even the police--would eventually search the house as a matter of common sense, if not SOP.

I can understand the motivation for your line of reasoning. After all, Detective Aren't and the rest of the Keystone Kops did not do such a bang up job with this most basic step in the investigation. However, you really should not assume that everyone in the world, including the Ramseys, are bungling dolts.

The fact of the matter is that anyone with more than two brain cells in their head would have figured that if they are going to stage a kidnapping, then they better get the body out of the house, pronto.
I don't think so at all. Actually, the only person who would be genuinely concerned with taking a body away, would be a real kidnapper...so as to have something to bargain with. If the kidnapper doesn't take the hostage, how will he get his money? IMO, PR wrote that note to give the allusion that JB was out of the house, so cops would NOT look in the basement. She couldn't have that, now could she? Actually, the note did its job and things went along smoothly, except for a couple of glitches. #1, a cop stayed at the house, and #2, JR 'found' JB and brought her up. IMO, he knew she was down there and decided for whatever reason, to put an end to the charade. moo
 
John Ramsey on news of grand jury's vote to indict: 'Just more drama'

JonBenet's father tells People magazine parents were prepared to be arrested

In his first public remarks since the Daily Camera reported that a grand jury voted in 1999 to indict him and his wife for child abuse resulting in the death of his daughter JonBenet, John Ramsey was dismissive of the news in an interview with People magazine.

"It's just more drama," said Ramsey, 69, in the Feb. 11 edition, which appears on newsstands Friday.


The article is continued here.
 
John Ramsey on news of grand jury's vote to indict: 'Just more drama'

JonBenet's father tells People magazine parents were prepared to be arrested

In his first public remarks since the Daily Camera reported that a grand jury voted in 1999 to indict him and his wife for child abuse resulting in the death of his daughter JonBenet, John Ramsey was dismissive of the news in an interview with People magazine.

"It's just more drama," said Ramsey, 69, in the Feb. 11 edition, which appears on newsstands Friday.


The article is continued here.
well, of course it's just more drama. This is all about John Ramsey and how he has been persecuted. Oh, when will the drama ever end? Never mind that his daughter was viciously beaten, raped, and murdered, this is just drama. oh, my my my. I never cease to be shocked by Jon Ramsey's bloody arrogance and elite holier than thou, you can't touch this veneer. moo
 
John Ramsey on news of grand jury's vote to indict: 'Just more drama'

JonBenet's father tells People magazine parents were prepared to be arrested

In his first public remarks since the Daily Camera reported that a grand jury voted in 1999 to indict him and his wife for child abuse resulting in the death of his daughter JonBenet, John Ramsey was dismissive of the news in an interview with People magazine.

"It's just more drama," said Ramsey, 69, in the Feb. 11 edition, which appears on newsstands Friday.


The article is continued here.

From the horse mouth...who would know better about DRAMA than Ramsey themself??:great:
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
116
Guests online
210
Total visitors
326

Forum statistics

Threads
608,994
Messages
18,248,274
Members
234,522
Latest member
dolljess
Back
Top