Grand Jury True Bills John & Patsy Discussion thread

[txsvicki]

I thought Burke hit her once with a club and reported to the doctor as accidental, but never heard of the other incident. There are several falls reported. I thought it was a little odd that they happened after pageantry started. If B was violent, then why not before..... Maybe nannies watched them closely before, but accidents reported after pageants began keeps me wondering about Patsy. JonBenet arguing over dresses and crying during the dressy xmas party also makes me wonder because friends thought Patsy obsessed with that type of thing and Linda Pugh seemed to think her nuts. Maybe the panties are even somehow connected.

 

[DeeDee249]

I thought Burke hit her once with a club and reported to the doctor as accidental, but never heard of the other incident. There are several falls reported. I thought it was a little odd that they happened after pageantry started. If B was violent, then why not before..... Maybe nannies watched them closely before, but accidents reported after pageants began keeps me wondering about Patsy. JonBenet arguing over dresses and crying during the dressy xmas party also makes me wonder because friends thought Patsy obsessed with that type of thing and Linda Pugh seemed to think her nuts. Maybe the panties are even somehow connected.

I don't think they had nannies. Patsy had housekeepers, and they may have watched the kids from time to time. And of course, they probably used babysitters, like most couples with small kids.
A pretty good reason why BR dod not seem to exhibit these tendencies towards his sister before the pageants is that the pageants themselves may have triggered his jealousy. JB seemed to get heavily involved in the pageants after they moved to Boulder. BR was too young before that to really understand the impact the pageants would have on his family and the attention his sister would receive.

 

[otg]

Just to clarify (if possible) the nanny/babysitter/housekeeper confusion... I guess it depends on how we would define the word nanny. There were two women who had worked in the past for the Ramseys (Shirley Brady and Susanne Savage) who both called themselves nannies. I think their duties included some housekeeping chores, and Brady was called in on occasions when they needed a temporary babysitter after she was no longer employed if they had something to do and wanted someone to watch the kids. According to Brady, “I was the housekeeper and nanny to their little son who was born while I was there (Atlanta).” According to the Denver Post, Oct. 15, 1999:

Brady came to work for JonBenet's parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, when they were living in Atlanta in the late 1980s, before they moved to Boulder in 1991. She initially was hired when the couple's son, Burke, was born, and then she helped raise JonBenet until she was 6 months old.
​

The Daily Camera identified her as “Shirley Brady, the Ramsey's nanny in Georgia from 1986 to 1989.” (http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/01/24-3.html)


Savage (according to ACR) was at first called in as a babysitter through a company named “Take a Break”, and then later the Ramseys hired her as a nanny/housekeeper. In Patsy’s April 30, 1997 interview, she said (in reference to concerns about JonBenet’s doctor visits): “No, before was when I was having chemotherapy. I don’t remember. Susanne took them to the doctor a lot then. My housekeeper, a nanny sort of. I don’t remember. I mean if…”

In a letter written by Savage (according to PMPT), she says the following:

I first met the Ramseys in 1991, when Take a Break, a professional sitting service, called me. JonBenet was seven months old.

Two years later, in 1993, Patsy was diagnosed with ovarian cancer and I went to work full-time for the Ramseys. It was a really hard time for Patsy. Nedra came to help, because Patsy had to be isolated from the family. She couldn't risk catching a cold or flu while she was in treatment.

I traveled with the family to Atlanta to take care of JonBenet and Burke.
​

(Incidentally, it was Savage who reported the incident with BR and a neighbor boy exposing themselves in the yard somewhere.)

 

[Hexe]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe BR had showed aggression toward JBR before she died. Didn't he hit her over the head with a gulf club on two different occasions and the injuries were severe enough for her to be sent to the ER? I don't think it is a coincidence that she was similarly struck over the head the night she died.

As far as I know it's what Ramseys stated. There were no eyewitnesses from outside of the family, right? I'd take everything they said with a grain of salt. No, make it a truck, full of salt.

 

[Tadpole12]

http://insidethunderdome.com/2014/03/27/charlie-brennan-wins-investigativeenterprise-dfmie/

Charlie Brennan wins Investigative/Enterprise DFMie
2014/02/27

"Charlie Brennan of the Daily Camera in Boulder, Colo., won the Investigative/Enterprise DFMie for small newsrooms for breaking a story that had stayed a secret for more than decade.
On Jan. 27, 2013, Brennan reported that the grand jury investigating the death of JonBenet Ramsey had voted to indict her parents in 1999, but the district attorney refused to prosecute."

...

"Judges’ comments:

Charlie Brennan’s investigation into the JonBenet Ramsey case is an incredible example of the power of ‘staying on a story.’ By developing his sources and fighting to publicly release legal documents, Brennan did an exceptional job of keeping our legal system transparent and accountable."
​

 

[bettybaby00]

Question for those who have a better memory than me :blushing:

I'm not sure whether or not this was brought up during any of Kolar's interviews with Tricia after the public release of the GJs documents; did he learn of the existence of the GJ's findings as part of his investigation? Or did he find out along with the rest of us?

TIA

 

[Linda7NJ]

Question for those who have a better memory than me :blushing:



I'm not sure whether or not this was brought up during any of Kolar's interviews with Tricia after the public release of the GJs documents; did he learn of the existence of the GJ's findings as part of his investigation? Or did he find out along with the rest of us?



TIA

He knew. He mentions specifically he isn't sharing what was learned by the GJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bettybaby00]

He knew. He mentions specifically he isn't sharing what was learned by the GJ


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes I know he can't reveal evidence, testimony from the GJ, but I would think, especially after the fact, he could state specifically that while he was investigating the case that he was aware of the existence of the true bills.

Just have some thoughts percolating, and I realized I don't know the answer to this, or if it's possible to know?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Yes I know he can't reveal evidence, testimony from the GJ, but I would think, especially after the fact, he could state specifically that while he was investigating the case that he was aware of the existence of the true bills.



Just have some thoughts percolating, and I realized I don't know the answer to this, or if it's possible to know?

Ooooh!

Hmmm excellent question! I don't believe he did know! Not 100% positive though. I know Steve was floored when he found out like everyone else.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bettybaby00]

Ooooh!

Hmmm excellent question! I don't believe he did know! Not 100% positive though. I know Steve was floored when he found out like everyone else.
.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

His reaction is completely understandable, as is the fact he was unaware of their existence.

Now Kolar....did he know?

Will BBL with regard to what I'm thinking

not that it's any big revelation of evidence or anything :lol:

 

[otg]

Ooooh!

Hmmm excellent question! I don't believe he did know! Not 100% positive though. I know Steve was floored when he found out like everyone else.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Steve Thomas resigned before the RGJ was impaneled. As a private citizen, he would have no more access to GJ information than any of us.

Kolar, OTOH, was brought in well after the dismissal of the RGJ by Lacy when she had wrested control of the investigation from BPD. He was specifically hired to look at what evidence existed, and to do any needed additional investigation. What I do not know is whether or not he actually had access to the GJ proceedings. But I certainly would think that he had access to any evidence that developed as a result of the GJ investigation (as well as all of the considered TBs -- even the ones not approved). The GJ is an investigative body created to establish probable cause. In fact, they have more power than the BPD in getting access to some types of evidence.

Below the RGJ jurors' names on the following link is a primer on the GJ rules and process. So far as I know, everything stated there is correct based on the CRS. Begins at "[FONT=Times New Roman,Times][SIZE=+0]Basic Facts about the Grand Jury and How it Works[/SIZE][/FONT]":

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer7_ham.html

 

[UKGuy]

Steve Thomas resigned before the RGJ was impaneled. As a private citizen, he would have no more access to GJ information than any of us.

Kolar, OTOH, was brought in well after the dismissal of the RGJ by Lacy when she had wrested control of the investigation from BPD. He was specifically hired to look at what evidence existed, and to do any needed additional investigation. What I do not know is whether or not he actually had access to the GJ proceedings. But I certainly would think that he had access to any evidence that developed as a result of the GJ investigation (as well as all of the considered TBs -- even the ones not approved). The GJ is an investigative body created to establish probable cause. In fact, they have more power than the BPD in getting access to some types of evidence.

Below the RGJ jurors' names on the following link is a primer on the GJ rules and process. So far as I know, everything stated there is correct based on the CRS. Begins at "[FONT=Times New Roman,Times][SIZE=+0]Basic Facts about the Grand Jury and How it Works[/SIZE][/FONT]":

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer7_ham.html

otg,
Kolar would have access to the complete BPD evidence cage that is currently stored somewhere in Colorado state.

Whether that would include any GJ productions is a moot point. They might be stored at a separate storage facility due to compliance with prevailing legal statutes?

That said, Kolar would have had access to both the GJ and BPD documented evidence repository, consisting of physical documents, search warrants etc, and PDF copies of GJ results.

The Cold Case review team will most likely have everything stored as one large electronic repository.

All that said, when asked to review anything, how does the reviewer know she has everything available on the table?

.

 

[Linda7NJ]

otg,

Kolar would have access to the complete BPD evidence cage that is currently stored somewhere in Colorado state.



Whether that would include any GJ productions is a moot point. They might be stored at a separate storage facility due to compliance with prevailing legal statutes?



That said, Kolar would have had access to both the GJ and BPD documented evidence repository, consisting of physical documents, search warrants etc, and PDF copies of GJ results.



The Cold Case review team will most likely have everything stored as one large electronic repository.



All that said, when asked to review anything, how does the reviewer know she has everything available on the table?



.

1of 60,000, 2 of 60,000, 3 of 60,000!


Giggle


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bettybaby00]

Steve Thomas resigned before the RGJ was impaneled. As a private citizen, he would have no more access to GJ information than any of us.

Kolar, OTOH, was brought in well after the dismissal of the RGJ by Lacy when she had wrested control of the investigation from BPD. He was specifically hired to look at what evidence existed, and to do any needed additional investigation. What I do not know is whether or not he actually had access to the GJ proceedings. But I certainly would think that he had access to any evidence that developed as a result of the GJ investigation (as well as all of the considered TBs -- even the ones not approved). The GJ is an investigative body created to establish probable cause. In fact, they have more power than the BPD in getting access to some types of evidence.

Below the RGJ jurors' names on the following link is a primer on the GJ rules and process. So far as I know, everything stated there is correct based on the CRS. Begins at "[FONT=Times New Roman,Times][SIZE=+0]Basic Facts about the Grand Jury and How it Works[/SIZE][/FONT]":

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer7_ham.html

In going back, and reading some of his interviews, it seems evident that Kolar was aware of the TBs. In his book, he recounts several written communications with various people that accompanied his case theory. He always indicates that the versions we are reading are redacted, and it's only now dawning on me that part of the redacted language likely contained references to the TBs against the Rs.

When I brought this up earlier, I had done so b/c I read a comment somewhere that for some reason made me question Kolar's knowledge of the TBs. Idk why, but I had another aha moment. AHs actions surrounding the TBs was kept so well under wraps, and were so misleading I never considered who else was aware of them, outside of the actual GJ members of course. This promted me to look back at the exchange with ML after kolar had sent her an updated version of his theory which included the information regarding the train tracks...in part he wrote

Therefore, after much reflection and having enduring many sleepless nights, I am requesting that I be permitted the opportunity to present my case theory to Mitch Morrissey and Michael Kane, the special prosecutors who were most familiar with the investigation when the case was presented to the grand jury in 1998. I believe there are specific records and testimony that were not sought during the first inquiry that are key to solving this case and these are things that could be obtained through the investigative powers of the grand jury.

In closing, I have to indicate that I find myself in a very uncomfortable position for I have a great deal of respect for your office and the people employed there. I was once the chief investigator for that office and had the opportunity to serve as the lead investigator in one of the most bizarre murder investigations this country has ever witnessed. What I discovered during my review of this case leads me to believe that it is solvable. With that said, I fully realize that my theory is in direct contradiction to your stated belief that the Ramseys were not involved in the death of their daughter…yet I am resolved to move forward and seek resolution to a matter that has endured nearly a decade of speculation and frustration. As a criminal investigator, I believe it is our duty to pursue all viable leads developed during the course of a homicide inquiry. Furthermore, I hold to the belief that investigators and prosecutors are obligated to seek the truth, regardless the difficulty of the task and no matter where the course may lead. I would propose that there are sufficient grounds to revisit the possibility of family involvement and would like to think that this theory and these leads warrant the same degree of attention, effort and resources that were recently expended in the pursuit of John Mark Karr.

It seems clear that there was evidence that he knows the GJ didn't see. For sure, BRs records, as well as the train track info. Despite not having this perspective, the GJ concluded the Rs were involved, and he knows Lacy KNOWS this as well.

After first ignoring this communication, and then after she is forced to acknowledge it, she reveals her true colors. To me she is all but affirming that she never intended to further the investigation.

He summarizes her reply...

I received a letter from Lacy that more or less accused me of overstepping my authority, and being too willing to pursue leads that she did not think likely to be productive. It had been her intention to scale back the investigation when I took over the case for her office and instead, I had pumped new blood into it by discounting the point of entry, eliminating the use of a stun gun, and discovering viable leads to pursue.

When she finally responds, it seems evident the only way she saw this getting solved was through a confession, or by the tDNA miraculously being matched.

I hired you as my Chief Investigator in July 2005. At that time, we discussed your role regarding the Ramsey case. I was clear in my direction to you that we would follow-up leads from law enforcement and other credible sources that had indicia of reliability. That decision was based upon recent history that involved Chief Investigator Bennett having to spend an inordinate amount of time responding to leads that were marginal at best. We made a deliberate decision to put our investigatory priorities on recent cases. You obviously disregarded my direction. You proceeded without my approval and without consulting with me. You were clearly acting outside of your defined role.

You requested in your communication of January 5th that your presentation be shared with certain entities in Law Enforcement. It will not be shared with them. We will not be part of this mockery you are trying to market. We take our jobs and our role with regard to this case seriously. When and if we have a serious suspect based upon substantial evidence, we will work closely with all appropriate agencies. This is not that time.

Finally, I need to remind you that as of the date of your resignation from the Boulder District Attorney’s Office, you are no longer protected by any immunity from civil litigation based on your conduct as an investigator.

Ugggghhhh...despite KNOWING of the existence of the TBs ML had no desire to move the investigation forward unless it was a crazed intruder. Was there a special Ramsey kool-aid? And to top it off, she reminds him of his vulnerability regarding civil action!!! From who? Wood!????:banghead:

Hunter's refusal to sign the TBs is excused b/c he claimed he wouldn't have been able to win in court with the evidence they had. So why then would a new prosecutor be so unwilling to obtain that evidence in order to turn it into a winnable case? When given new avenues to pursue that supported the GJ's findings, why would she reject viable leads this way??

It makes me so angry. :tantrum:

Someone else commented what possibly could come out once JR is no longer around, I fear we may have to wait out more than just him. I'm not sure whose behavior is worse, AH or ML?????

:tantrum:

 

[DeDee]

The GJ completed their thirteen month assignment in Oct. 1999.

"We didn't know who did what," a juror told the Daily Camera on the condition of anonymity. "But we feel the adults in the house may have done something that they certainly could have prevented, or they could have helped her, and they didn't."

Jurors confirming the vote to the Camera -- who agreed to talk only on the condition of anonymity -- <snip>.

"It's still unresolved," one juror said. "Somebody did something pretty horrible that wasn't punished.

"I'm not saying that I am at peace. But I had sympathy with his (Hunter's) decision. I could see the problem that he was in. I could understand what he was doing."

Still, one juror who spoke with the Camera expressed a feeling of still not being completely reconciled with Hunter's decision. <snip>

And, the juror said, "I think I did believe that they would get more evidence and figure out who did it."

Another grand juror who confirmed the vote said, "I think I have conquered the feeling of any acute frustration."

"This is what we thought, and that's what you (the prosecutors) asked us for, and that's what we gave you, our opinion," the juror added. "That was our job, and the rest of the legal procedure, they just do with it what has to be done."

Several grand jurors declined to comment on their vote. One, in doing so, said, "Our job was to try to come up with, to help solve, this crime."


And the DAs Office:

Bill Wise said that those advising Hunter were not all of one mind when the decision was made.

"I would say there was not unanimity, or a unanimous decision, by anyone," Wise said. "I know of at least one, and possibly two (prosecutors), who felt it should have been filed, period, end of discussion. And I know of at least two, if not more than two, probably four, that thought there was not enough evidence to file."

Who were the four DAs who agreed [with Hunter] not to sign the TB?

Alex Hunter
Mary Keenan Lacy
Bill Wise
Bruce Levin
Michael Kane
Mitch Morrissey
Bob Grant


http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_22446410/boulder-grand-jury-voted-indict-ramseys

 

[Tawny]

I wonder if the GJ believes or believed that the parents knew she was still alive before the strangulation...

 

[DeDee]

Jurors even in routine cases are typically cautioned to avoid media coverage, and the juror said that was the case for the Ramsey grand jury -- but only at first.

"At the beginning, they said, 'Don't look at the media.' But this was a year-and-a-half we were doing this, so some time not long after the beginning, they said, 'We really can't ask you not to look at the media. There is too much stuff going on.'"

And so, the juror said, "The instructions sort of changed to, 'What you need to pay attention to is what's said in this room. You've already seen how much out there is not true. Pay attention to what is said inside this room because this is evidence we can back up. And things that are said outside aren't that way.' They expected us to be grownups about it, if you will."

While speculation was rampant outside the Boulder County Justice Center about what might be going on in the grand jury room, for the eight women and four men deciding the case, the work was both sobering and draining.

"It was pretty traumatic," a juror said. "It was a horrible event, and to really have to delve into all of the evidence and know what happened and get details was difficult.

"The reality is it was a horrible thing, and I didn't have the luxury of picking and choosing what I would pay attention to. I needed to know what happened in every detail, so it was difficult. So many people had been traumatized by this, and hurt, and scared."

I needed to know what happened in every detail, so it was difficult. So many people had been traumatized by this, and hurt, and scared.

 

[bettybaby00]

I wonder if the GJ believes or believed that the parents knew she was still alive before the strangulation...

The TB is ambiguous enough that it's unclear.

Yet I wonder. The ME testified right? His opinion was the head bash first. What was his determination regarding the time between the head bash & strangulation? I can't recall his opinion. But if he stated that the lapse was up to 90 minutes, then yes I think it's reasonable to think they might have believed the parents were aware.

Perhaps this is another aspect to the "child abuse" language of the TB?

Eta:

As recounted by Kolar:

Dr. Meyer told the investigators that it would have taken some time for the brain swelling to develop, and there likely had been a period of JonBenét&#8217;s survival from the time she received the blow to her head and when she was eventually strangled. He reported that this would have been a lethal blow, and that he did not think it likely that she regained consciousness.

I would think he was pressed to give some sort of time frame during his testimony. I would think failure to call 911 constitutes child abuse.

 

[Alchemist]

I Read that a judge released the grand jury results of the ramseys. The jury found them guilty but not of the murder, but knowing who did and covering up. BR?

 

[2 percent]

I'm afraid I don't see this quite as cut and dried as everyone else here.
They were indicted on the fourth count, to me that means the evidence doesn't point to any one person but can point to several. Which means the staging and clean up of the crime scene did its job and confused the case.

I think the GJ did a good job and indicted on the part they knew they could. A child died at home and she had signs of both prior and recent sexual assault. It was apparent to the GJ that the Ramseys had inserted themselves in the case. The reason doesn't have to be Burke, it could be to cover for one or both of their complicity. It could also mean they covered for an intruder (although that is very unlikely).

I think the DA decided not to indict because it would be a disaster and he was scared of that. While the Ramseys may be convicted, it would probably still leave the murderer unrevealed. I think he had no confidence in the cops and no confidence in the GJ's interpretation of the evidence. My only question on this part is if the Ramseys knew they were indicted but weren't going to trial. It would be interesting to find that out.

I don't think this automatically means it was Burke. If that was revealed in the transcripts it would have leaked out by now. Having an answer for such a high profile crime like this wouldn't have stayed secret. I know there would be consequences for revealing deliberations and testimony in a GJ but I bet many of the media would more than happy to compensate anyone for their contempt charges.