DA's objectivity

[BBB167893]

But I also think I need to see the cards that Dave is holding because it seems that he has dissected this case like none of us have.

Not sure how to take that.

I see arrogance in both of their posts. That may offend them both but i have respect for them.

Not offended, merely puzzled. Arrogance?

 

[Tadpole12]

I certainly appreciate the endorsement. It really doesn't matter to me either way.

Hi Roy23.

No prob. I just thought, from your postings ( concise and no nonsense ), that you would be able to be impartial and authoritarian.

I think it is important to Dave and Holdon to be right. I still think they care about justice but I think losing is something both would resent. But I respect them both in totally different ways. I think Holdon, being IDI, will eventually be proven right. But I also think I need to see the cards that Dave is holding because it seems that he has dissected this case like none of us have. I see arrogance in both of their posts. That may offend them both but i have respect for them.

I know SD has commented that he would gladly be wrong, if a CODIS hit would identify the IDI dna. Sure there's that satisfaction in being right, and SD and Hotyh have that commeradery and competetive thang goin' on, but I do beleive that both would enjoy and appreciate the 'exercise in Justice' that a mock trial, even with the limitations and conditions, would provide them.
I'm not sure if either would hold resentment?

There's always the mock appeal? to follow.

If the Ramsey's are innocent, it kills me to think of what the media and even this board has done to them. It would be sickening from some of the posts made here. Our justice system and the media has major problems and will never be perfect, but it is the best. I wish, like in China, we could eliminate serial offenders and not give them the rights that others offord. But I also wish that people with money, like the Ramsey's, pay the ultimate price like we would have to if they are in fact guilty.

Ya, well JR truly resents the cybersleuths. They were a powerful and unimaginable force.
"but it is the best" - That is undeniable even with all of it's problems.
If the Ramsey's are innocent, then no apologies would suffice.

And Tadpole, I will not take this job on my own. There has to be as minimum as three people that evaluate this evidence. And you are going to be one of them, if I take the job. They are not interviewing me, they have to choose me because in the end nobody wins or loses. And I don't want the burden on my own. When the case is solved, that will be the ultimate day when winners and losers can gloat or whatever.

And I don't want the burden on my own.-Roy23
Ya, I understand that, but many would be willing to assist and advise you.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Maybe a judge pool of 3 or 5 judges, and majority using the 'thanks' button indicates approval of a motion or sustaining an objection. What about that idea?

I think 'any two' approval would work also. That is, not everybody in the pool is going to be around all the time, so all you'd need is for a second to the motion.

 

[Roy23]

Not sure how to take that.



Not offended, merely puzzled. Arrogance?

You should take it all respectfully. On arrogance, just don't be offended. I am arrogant as well. You have studied more than anyone and make it known, you are a hero or totally wrong. We will see, I hope and i believe you do too.

 

[BBB167893]

I know SD has commented that he would gladly be wrong, if a CODIS hit would identify the IDI dna.

You said it.

Sure there's that satisfaction in being right,

Not for me, there isn't. No satisfaction at all.

I'm not sure if either would hold resentment?

I couldn't say.

 

[BBB167893]

Maybe a judge pool of 3 or 5 judges, and majority using the 'thanks' button indicates approval of a motion or sustaining an objection. What about that idea?

I think 'any two' approval would work also. That is, not everybody in the pool is going to be around all the time, so all you'd need is for a second to the motion.

I think it's a fine idea.

 

[BBB167893]

You should take it all respectfully. On arrogance, just don't be offended. I am arrogant as well. You have studied more than anyone and make it known, you are a hero or totally wrong. We will see, I hope and i believe you do too.

A hero or a heel. Either way, I've done my darndest.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I think it's a fine idea.

Alrighty then who whats to be in the judge pool on a mock trial of a pseudonym defendant named _______? No promises, no real names, not responsible for anything, and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental, and all that...

I think if there's a mix of RDI and IDI it won't matter. Indicate with the 'thanks' button.

 

[BBB167893]

Alrighty then who whats to be in the judge pool on a mock trial of a pseudonym defendant named _______? No promises, no real names, not responsible for anything, and any similarity to any person living or dead is coincidental, and all that...

I think if there's a mix of RDI and IDI it won't matter. Indicate with the 'thanks' button.

Any volunteers are asked to step forward.

Meanwhile, I'll go search for a few fence-sitters.

 

[BBB167893]

I say we move this conversation to a new thread.

I've got something that goes much closer to the subject of this one. Folks, this will knock your eyeballs out!

John San Augustin and Ollie Gray are private investigators working on behalf of the Rs. Westwood did an investigation revealing some of their less than savory practices in this case as relates to their self-promoting and relationship to Lou Smit. But that PALES in comparison to this!

Last year, San Augustin made a shocking admission to Nancy Grace. Take a look:

GRACE: And when did you enter the case?

SAN AGUSTIN: We were brought in to initially look at this case. And then after that, shortly we were brought on by Alex Hunter`s staff to assist Lou Smit in the intruder theory.

WHOA!!!

I seem to recall someone implying I was a conspiracy theorist. I would have waited an eternity for this opportunity.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I say we move this conversation to a new thread.

I've got something that goes much closer to the subject of this one. Folks, this will knock your eyeballs out!

John San Augustin and Ollie Gray are private investigators working on behalf of the Rs. Westwood did an investigation revealing some of their less than savory practices in this case as relates to their self-promoting and relationship to Lou Smit. But that PALES in comparison to this!

Last year, San Augustin made a shocking admission to Nancy Grace. Take a look:

GRACE: And when did you enter the case?

SAN AGUSTIN: We were brought in to initially look at this case. And then after that, shortly we were brought on by Alex Hunter`s staff to assist Lou Smit in the intruder theory.

WHOA!!!

I seem to recall someone implying I was a conspiracy theorist. I would have waited an eternity for this opportunity.

I think if you walked up to Augustin and asked about a 'shocking admission to Nancy Grace' he wouldn't know what you were talking about.

What are you talking about anyway? Wasn't Lou Smit assigned to the case, and doesn't Alex Hunter get to hire PI's if he wants?

 

[BBB167893]

I think if you walked up to Augustin and asked about a 'shocking admission to Nancy Grace' he wouldn't know what you were talking about.

From what I know of him, HOTYH, you're absolutely right! He's just not that insightful. Moreover, I've always been surprised at how candid some people will be when they think they've got the upper hand.

What are you talking about anyway? Wasn't Lou Smit assigned to the case, and doesn't Alex Hunter get to hire PI's if he wants?

What do you THINK I'm talking about? I'm talking about how the DA hired members of the Rs' DEFENSE TEAM whose job was, as JR himself admits, NOT to do any investigation, but to build a defense to keep JR and PR out of prison.

And that doesn't bother you?

ANYONE could see the problems inherent to all of that. The sheer ETHICAL considerations alone are deeply troubling.

HOTYH, I expected MUCH better from you.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

What do you THINK I'm talking about? I'm talking about how the DA hired members of the Rs' DEFENSE TEAM whose job was, as JR himself admits, NOT to do any investigation, but to build a defense to keep JR and PR out of prison.

Lets say your claim is true. On what do you base it? Can you show by any means that Augustin had already been paid by the R's when the DA then hired him? Can you show that JR instructed anybody to 'not do any investigation, keep JR and PR out of prison? Why is it suspicious for an innocent to be motivated to stay out of prison by whatever legal means? If the DA wants to hire JR's people, that flatters JR, adds to an image of innocence. How does someone wanting to stay out of prison, who has been put 'under an umbrella' indicate culpability anyway. If it doesn't add to culpability, why is it relevant?

Or is this all an illusion?

This is like a practice for upcoming mock trial, if you're still willing. If not I totally understand.

 

[BBB167893]

Lets say your claim is true.

Even you would have to admit the implications are pretty bad, aren't they?

On what do you base it?

Other than their own admissions?

Can you show by any means that Augustin had already been paid by the R's when the DA then hired him?

Yes and no, HOTYH. For one thing, they were never paid. They've worked pro bono all these years.

But in that interview, one MIGHT get the impression that he hadn't yet. So, Grace asks him flat-out:

GRACE: So at no time were you employed by the Ramseys?

To which he responds:

SAN AGUSTIN: No, we were working pro bono on behalf of the Ramsey family, you know?

Can you show that JR instructed anybody to 'not do any investigation, keep JR and PR out of prison?

I don't know whether JR explicitly instructed them to do so or not, but I know that was what they were hired to do. I can show that much. JR admits it in his 2001 deposition AND one of the other PIs, David L. Williams, was forced to admit that in open court in a different case.

Is that good enough for you?

Why is it suspicious for an innocent to be motivated to stay out of prison by whatever legal means?

It isn't. That's NOT what we're talking about here. We're talking about a concerted effort to hinder a police investigation.

If the DA wants to hire JR's people, that flatters JR, adds to an image of innocence.

That's kind of my point, HOTYH: a DA cannot afford even the APPEARANCE of impropriety. And this, combined with the first post on this thread, is designed to show that it was more than just an appearance.

Maybe you've forgotten, but several members of the FBI felt that the DA's office was operating on their own agenda and that they should have been investigated for it.

How does someone wanting to stay out of prison, who has been put 'under an umbrella' indicate culpability anyway.

HOTYH, be reasonable, okay? WHY would a truly innocent person NEED to have a private goon squad trying to dig up dirt on potential witnesses, and in at least one case, calling in political favors to dirty them up when they COULDN'T find any?

THAT is the question you should ask.

If it doesn't add to culpability, why is it relevant?

If it DIDN'T add to culpability, HOTYH, it WOULDN'T be relevant. Ergo, I wouldn't have brought it up in the first place! I should think you'd know me well enough by now to know that.

Or is this all an illusion?

You'll probably just take it as such anyway.

This is like a practice for upcoming mock trial, if you're still willing. If not I totally understand.

Just what do you understand?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

JR admits it in his 2001 deposition AND one of the other PIs, David L. Williams, was forced to admit that in open court in a different case.

Is that good enough for you?

I don't know. Lets see it.

 

[Roy23]

Dave,

I am going to hold off before I say anything monumental here. I look forward to hearing more about your knowlege of the case. But JR did not need to do all that to stay out of jail.

 

[BBB167893]

I don't know. Lets see it.

HOTYH, I thought you'd NEVER ask! Your wish is my command!

First, here's JR's depo statements:

A. Well, there was a group called Ellis Armistead & Associates. David Williams. John --and I can't think of his last name.

And:

A. The investigators were retained by our attorneys, and they stated to me that the principal purpose of those investigators was to prepare a defense in the case that the police might bring a charge against me. I hoped that they would also follow up on leads that came to us, but I was frequently reminded by our attorneys that their principal role was to prepare a defense should that be necessary.

Now the other one. This is an in-court statement from the afore-mentioned David L. Williams about the dirty tricks I made mention of:

Q: Do you have a recollection of Mr. Haddon saying, who is the guy, Tom Miller, go check him out?

A: It's more a recollection of we need to develop impeachment information.

Q: So you were looking to develop impeachment information against Mr. Miller?

A: Yes.

There you are!

 

[BBB167893]

Dave,

I am going to hold off before I say anything monumental here.

Great, now I'm in suspense.

I look forward to hearing more about your knowlege of the case.

Agree with me or not, Roy, I will do my best not to disappoint.

But JR did not need to do all that to stay out of jail.

I realize you believe that, Roy. But you must understand that a statement like that immediately begs the question: if he didn't need to do all that, WHY did he do it in the first place?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

HOTYH, be reasonable, okay? WHY would a truly innocent person NEED to have a private goon squad trying to dig up dirt on potential witnesses, and in at least one case, calling in political favors to dirty them up when they COULDN'T find any?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a 'goon squad' slang for hired thugs that use violence on people? If there's no violence, its not really a 'goon squad' is it? Why do you need to characterize private investigators hired by the prosecuting office as goons? Does that help your argument?

I realize you believe that, Roy. But you must understand that a statement like that immediately begs the question: if he didn't need to do all that, WHY did he do it in the first place?

The many things you mention, people you quote, refer to things done by the DA's office and JR's lawyers. Somehow, you're able to collect them all into JR's personal actions or directives and I don't see that has having happened.

I suppose to satisfy RDI, one who has been placed 'under an umbrella' on a capital child murder is supposed to do nothing but stand under it? Lest they be perceived as more culpable. The more they fight or prepare to fight, the more culpable they are??

There's really no relationship between culpability and desire to defend oneself, by legal means. Goon squads are a fabrication.

 

[BBB167893]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a 'goon squad' slang for hired thugs that use violence on people? If there's no violence, its not really a 'goon squad' is it?

HOTYH, I suppose you're right. My language was a bit strong.

But that doesn't really change anything, does it? They may not have used physical violence (although, since almost none of the witnesses they spoke to have come forward, I don't know for certain that they didn't), but can you honestly say that that the way they tried to game the system is any better?

Yes, I was at fault. "Goon squad" was over the top, and I retract it. I'll try to do better.
But DON'T try to change the subject.

Why do you need to characterize private investigators hired by the prosecuting office as goons?

I don't NEED to, HOTYH. I admit that. I just get so damn upset at this whole thing. It just bothers me, okay?

Does that help your argument?

I imagine there are people who would look at these shenanigans and use that terminology.

The many things you mention, people you quote, refer to things done by the DA's office and JR's lawyers.

Yeah, and I expect you to acknowledge them.

Somehow, you're able to collect them all into JR's personal actions or directives and I don't see that has having happened.

Um, HOTYH, I don't believe I said explicitly that they WERE his personal actions or directives.
What I AM saying is that a reasonable person COULD make the inference that he had something to do with it. Let me explain. According to his deposition, he knew they were doing that from the word "go." No argument there, right? If I were in his position, and I were TRULY INNOCENT, I would at least ask them WHY they felt it was necessary to do all of this, KNOWING that it would reflect very badly on me if it ever came out.

I suppose to satisfy RDI, one who has been placed 'under an umbrella' on a capital child murder is supposed to do nothing but stand under it? Lest they be perceived as more culpable. The more they fight or prepare to fight, the more culpable they are??

HOTYH, do not mischaracterize my position, okay? At least have enough respect for me not to do that.

You probably wouldn't like my answer to that, anyway.

There's really no relationship between culpability and desire to defend oneself, by legal means.

Leaving aside whether there is or not for a moment, you're not honestly trying to compare defending oneself with what happened HERE, are you? There's a difference between defending yourself and trying to ruin and railroad someone because they could testify against you. Try focusing on that.

Goon squads are a fabrication.

Don't change the subject.