Has the case fizzled a bit?

[Linda7NJ]

I have to disagree, strongly. There's been high-profile cases involving missing/murdered children that have happened at all different times of the year. In this case, we have a "child beauty queen" from a wealthy family; of course it would still be a huge story if she was killed on December 26 or January 26. Also, in PMPT, a CNN reporter said when all they knew about the case was that a child was killed on Christmas, the story didn't have a "national feel" to it until they found out about the pageants. Lastly, didn't it take months before JBR got a headstone?

Doesn't it usually take a long time to complete a headstone? I know my grandmothers took months too, but was ordered at the same time as funeral planning.

I think the day had less to do with it than the fact a pretty little white child, a beauty queen, of privileged parents was found murdered in her own home and the three page note is what grabbed the medusa attention. The bonus was pageant video and photos they could loop nonstop.

 

[BBB167893]

Amazing post, and THANK YOU!!!!!:rockon:

I'm just getting warmed up!

 

[BBB167893]

I think he took it to GJ under pressure.

Finally, we agree on something! Scarlett, I don't know if you saw it, but this is what I wrote on the subject:

I've often compared the DA's office in this case to the administration of Richard Nixon, specifically to Nixon's conduct vis-a-vis the Watergate scandal. There are people, such as my brother, who believe that Nixon's choice to resign rather than be put through an investigation and impeachment, were not out of respect for the office of president, but out of fear (possibly justified) that an investigation would uncover something MUCH worse.

Well, that's the tack that I've begun to take regarding the DA's office. I admit, it's a theory only. I couldn't even hazard a guess as to what Hunter and company might wish to keep hidden. But I can't ignore the pattern that I've noticed. That being: Hunter and his successors have fought very strongly to make sure that no one from the outside can examine the case files or work the case.

Exhibit A: The Grand Jury itself. Hunter was very clear that he did not want one and stated to the police and his assistants after the June 1998 interviews that one would not be called. He DID call one later that year, of course, but only AFTER ST's resignation letter made the rounds in the media and the governor of CO started feeling the heat. Hunter called the Grand Jury as a dog-and-pony show to present the image that he was doing something with the case so that the governor's office would not take the case from him and appoint a special prosecutor, which he was threatening to do.

You have to wonder WHY Hunter was so intent that the governor's office not take the case.

 

[BBB167893]

He also could have been corrupt, scared or ignorant.

Or any combination thereof.

 

[BBB167893]

The fact that the R's had money has nothing to do with this case.

DAMN! It's a good thing I wasn't drinking anything when I read that, or I'd have spit it all over the monitor! Good God Almighty.

People get prosecuted whether they have money or not. Usually the money comes into play when they go to court and have high priced lawyers and lots of help to fight for them.

HELLO!!!!

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Doesn't it usually take a long time to complete a headstone? I know my grandmothers took months too, but was ordered at the same time as funeral planning.

I think the day had less to do with it than the fact a pretty little white child, a beauty queen, of privileged parents was found murdered in her own home and the three page note is what grabbed the medusa attention. The bonus was pageant video and photos they could loop nonstop.

I think the date was somewhat important for the initial exposure of the case. Since it was a slow news week, there weren't other stories competing for the attention of Americans. CNN gave John and Patsy 30 minutes of airtime on January 1st, and I'm not sure if they would've gotten that much time on another day of the year. On that day, everyone is at home and a lot of people probably flip through the channels, and they came across the two of them on CNN. So I feel like the date allowed the initial coverage to stand out, and not be overshadowed by other news stories.

 

[BBB167893]

Apparently, you are not well acquainted with Alex Hunter. Yes, he knew something was wrong. All his backdoor dealings with Team Ramsey would have come to light in the courtroom. I know you have faith that AH and Company did the right thing, but in this case and many others, it's just not true.

JMO

Don't worry, Tezi. I'm just the man to educate them! And I'm on the job!

Alex Hunter was elected DA in 1972 and was never voted out until his retirement in 2000. This case was his downfall because he was not able to do what he had done in the past: sweep his failings under the rug. He was a product of the 60s, that terrible and terribly romanticized era when cops were "pigs," drugs were "in," and big government was the solution to every problem. He was a defense lawyer who felt that winning wasn't everything when it came to trying criminals. And he certainly practiced what he preached. By Christmas of 1996, Alex Hunter had not taken a single case to trial in almost a decade. To say he was not an aggressive prosecutor is like saying water is wet. He spent most of his time offering plea bargains. With such a dismal record, his thirty year tenure is hard to explain to anyone who doesn't understand the Boulder political climate, but simple once you do. And that long tenure led to inertia and complaceny. To those who claim that since he was never voted out, he couldn't have been that bad, I say this: there's an old saying in American politics that says "you get the government you deserve." Boulder deserved Alex Hunter. JonBenet certainly did not.

But these are all generalizations. Let's look at some hard specifics. Many sources have spoken of Hunter's lousy record, so let's have a look:

--1981: In a highly publicized case, Hunter charged Christopher Courtney with second-degree murder after Courtney shot two people dead at the Longmont Civic Center. When the first trial ended in a mistrial, Hunter reduced the charge to criminally negligent homicide and Courtney walked away with a two-year sentence in the county jail. That generated cries of dismay from the mayor and city council.

--1982: Kirk Long resigned as undersheriff. Long penned a letter at that time that sounds strikingly reminiscent of that written in 1998 by Steve Thomas. The letter said, in part: "We in America have a legal system that is designed to be adversarial. It is apparent to me that the only adversary relationships within the legal system of the 20th Judicial District are the relationships between law enforcement agencies and the office of the District Attorney. The ignoring of compelling physical evidence, the artificial bolstering of conviction statistics through plea bargaining, deferred prosecutions, and deferred sentences speaks loudly of incompetence and political maneuvering. The essence of my belief is that the citizens of Boulder County do not have an advocate in the judicial system."

--1985: In a case of foot-dragging, it took Hunter more than two years to charge Mike Grainger with a crime, even though Grainger's obese wife was found laying in bed with a massive head wound, and there was no evidence of an intruder. Grainger got three years.

--1986: In his last major case, Hunter was named special prosecutor in neighboring Adams County to try the sheriff there, Bert Johnson. The sheriff was charged with extortion, embezzlement and sexual misconduct. Hunter offered to dismiss all charges if Johnson would resign from office, but the judge rejected the deal. Hunter lost the case at trial. He decided never to try another case.

And it should come as no surprise that the Grand Jury empaneled to investigate the JB case went nowhere, because none of the DAs, including Hunter himself, had any real experience with handling them. He and his staff didn't WANT a GJ in the first place, and only did so because Gov. Romer was feeling the heat from ST's resignation letter and wanted to cover his own butt. Once he was bricked into that corner, at least he had the sense to call in outside help. Specifically, he brought on Michael Kane, Bruce Levin and Mitch Morrisey, experienced prosecutors with winning records who knew how to handle Grand Juries. But, as with the GJ itself--which I have aptly described as a dog and pony show, which the doberman no-showed--the three specialists were essentially window-dressing, which they themselves have said. To paraphrase Henry Lee, the egg was already scrambled. I should point out that there is only one instance where a Grand Jury was used by Hunter, and it was a debacle just like this case. I'll let ST tell it:

I received a copy of a letter containing information on the cold case of one Thayne Smika, who had been arrested in 1983 for the shotgun slaying of Sid Wells. The accused murderer is today, in cop talk, in the wind, becasue Alex Hunter secretly promised the defense attorney that the GJ hearing the case would not indict Smika. The victim's family, the investigating cops, and the grand jurors were not told of this deal.

With this in mind, the various sources--both RDI and IDI--who claimed that Hunter dismissed the Ramsey GJ before they could vote become even more credible.

Then there's Hunter's mindset, which I have often talked about. It's been said that Hunter had a definition of reasonable doubt that no one could meet, and that he'd require a videotape of the crime, a signed confession and a DNA match just to issue an arrest warrant. He would often defend this inflexibility by saying that he wanted to get all of his ducks in order. During the A&E documentary "Anatomy of a Murder," Hunter said, incredibly, that Johnnie Cocharan rushed the LA DA into prosecuting OJ Simpson before they were ready, even though they had a mountain of evidence against him. ARE YOU KIDDING ME??? I have no doubt that the Simpson case scared the brown stuff out of Hunter. It's implication was clear: if a powerful, aggressive team of prosecutors with a mountain of evidence couldn't convict OJ--even though the only thing they were missing was the proverbial busload of nuns--what chance did Hunter have against lawyers from one of the most powerful law firms in the country?

He claimed that the police didn't have enough evidence to bring charges, but he himself could have done the required things to GET evidence. He did none of them. Hrefused to grant search warrants. He refused to countenance the idea of throwing the Rs into separate holding cells until one confessed, even though it worked like a charm in the Lisa Steinberg case. He gave away tons of evidence to the defense.

That's not to say that he doesn't have his fans. Problem is, they're all far-left, "cops-are-pigs" defense attorneys. One is Alan Dershowitz, who defended OJ. Here's an exchange between him and ST:

DERSHOWITZ: I think that Alex Hunter is, although he's become criticized, I think he's a constitutional hero. He's a man who has made a decision to take the barbs and the slings, and there are going to be many, because it's much easier to bring the case. It would take no courage to bring the prosecution, and then if the jury acquitted, blame it on the jury. But it takes a lot of courage for a district attorney to bite the bullet and take the hard decision, and say there was a murder, maybe it's even likely certain people did it, but likely isn't enough.

THOMAS: Well, let me make one comment. Mr. Dershowitz is with all due respect, a notorious criminal defense attorney. Where is a Vincent Bugliosi or a Rudy Giuliani sitting next to Mr. Hunter, these guys, who I consider hero prosecutors making that argument.

REAL prosecutors have no trouble calling it like it is. Here's an excerpt from an interview with Vincent Bugliosi:

VINCENT BUGLIOSI I'm sure he's an honorable person and he's interested in seeking justice in this case. But he's certainly not the stereotypical DA who's tough and hard—nosed. And you need an aggressive DA in a situation like this. And he apparently is not that type of person.

ELIZABETH VARGAS (VO) Which, perhaps, is why his critics say it took public protest to get the Ramsey case to a grand jury after nearly two years. Remember, a grand jury can compel reluctant witnesses to testify. (interviewing) How unusual is it to wait that long to impanel a grand jury to investigate that?

VINCENT BUGLIOSI It's highly unusual, particularly when you have two suspects and they're not cooperating with you I mean, it's DA 101 that when you have two suspects, you do everything possible immediately to separate those two and not give them time for their stories to harden and to reconcile with each other. It's being done now, a year and a half later. But it's a little late in the day. Incompetence.

And that's not even the worst of it. When he left, Mary Lacy took over, and she was even worse. At least--according to Henry Lee and ST--Hunter would hear all sides. Lacy was like Paul Simon's Boxer: hears what she wants to hear and disregards the rest. She refused to even SPEAK to the investigators who worked on the case during Hunter's tenure. She made up her mind from Day One that since the Rs didn't fit the standard profile, they couldn't have done this. She let her feminist beliefs cloud her judgment. She pegged Bill McReynolds as the killer and would not let go until his 2002 death of heart failure. She actually chastised Tom Haney for being too tough on Patsy during the '98 interviews. WHAT?! Tom Haney is one of the finest homicide detectives in the entire Rocky Mountain area, if not the country. His record speaks for itself. And here's this assistant DA, who at that time I don't think had ever tried a murder case in her entire career, and to my knowledge still hasn't, telling him he was too tough for using absolutely STANDARD interrogation techniques that the greenest rookie on the beat would know! Haney's general feeling was, "who the hell does she think SHE is?"

Another incident came in 2006 when a ten-month-old boy named Jason Midyette was beaten to death and she wouldn't take any action because the grandfather owns half of Boulder's Pearl Street Mall. Lacy only filed charges after Bill O'Reilly's people hounded her in her own driveway for weeks.

There are many reasons why Patsy Ramsey was never prosecuted for murder. The DA's office is one of the big ones. When ST talks about the people in this case who will have to beg their way into heaven, you KNOW who he's talking about.

I've laid down the challenge. Defend them if you can!

 

[BBB167893]

There are many of you that say that JBR was murdered by her father and/or parents, but can you explain away the presence of a foreign DNA that was found on her body?

Um, yes, I believe I can. First and foremost, you have to remember that the DNA (found on her CLOTHING, not her BODY) was old, degraded DNA, possibly weeks old.

But, possibly even MORE important that THAT, is how sensitive the technology for testing DNA has become. Back in 2006, cable host Bill O'Reilly interviewed a criminologist for the FBI on this very case. She said that as the DNA technology improves, there are going to be more and more cases where DNA is found that is not relevant.

That ties in neatly with something that Henry Lee said earlier. He said that in HALF (read that again! HALF) of all cases where DNA is discovered, the DNA is irrelevant to the crime. Now, that was back in the halcyon days when you actually needed a SIZEABLE sample of DNA in order to do an analysis in the first place. (And to be frank, when you need to augment the DNA through replication just to get an incomplete sample, that's NOT a good sample, by my reckoning.)

Now triangulate that with this simple fact: human DNA is EVERYWHERE. The world is bristling with it. Each one of us is very likely COVERED with DNA which is not our own. Touch DNA does not require a sizeable sample, but as little as two or three skin cells, which could come from anywhere.

To me that seems like pretty hard evidence.

That's the problem, Alyssa. To people who don't know much about it, all DNA seems like hard evidence. I'll be brutally honest with you: if the DNA in question was something unmistakable, like blood or semen, I never would have my awakening, as such. But the idea of a test that can pick up DNA from a single skin cell scares the living CRAP outta me, for a number of reasons.

Not only that, the sex offenders in the neighborhood were cleared, JBR's parents were cleared, and I'm pretty sure most acquaintances of JBR were cleared as well. I know that this isn't conclusive, but don't you all think you're being a little biased and rushing to judgment here?

"Rushing to judgment?" Alyssa, I was a hope-to-die IDI up until 2001.

Not only that, but the facts just don't add up in this case.

Be specific, Alyssa.

 

[BBB167893]

Welcome.
Have you had the time to look at all the evidence? It's not one thing that is the smoking gun in this case, but it's the totality of all the evidence.

And here I was, thinking that no one listened!

 

[BBB167893]

Na.. If you are corrupt you want to go with the flow and hide it.. Not stand up against the powers that be and make a ruffle.

Except he DIDN'T stand up to the powers that be, Scarlett. The powers that be in this case were the Ramsey lawyers: powerful muckety-mucks within the Democratic Party in Colorado (which was Hunter's party) and personal friends and colleagues of then-President Clinton. They owned or partially owned half the damn state.

 

[BBB167893]

OH, Lacy is much scarier. I've met the woman in person. EVIL comes to mind...

JMO

She'll get hers. They always do.

 

[tezi]

Whew, SuperDave...

And you know about the Michael Manning case also, right? Alex Hunter at his finest...LOL:floorlaugh:

JMO

 

[BBB167893]

Yes, There are alot of fibers that do not belong to any of the R's there. way more than the few that have been sourced to the people that live in that house. That is more evidence to put on the unknown Perp column.

Even if that's true, you forget one BIG thing: none of those fibers can be TIMED. That is, no one knows how long they were there. But we KNOW that the family fibers were from that night AND in places they say they never touched.

See, that's the mistake IDI always makes. Sure, each single piece of evidence can be argued, but not when you put it all together into the big picture.

 

[madeleine]

Even if that's true, you forget one BIG thing: none of those fibers can be TIMED. That is, no one knows how long they were there. But we KNOW that the family fibers were from that night AND in places they say they never touched.

See, that's the mistake IDI always makes. Sure, each single piece of evidence can be argued, but not when you put it all together into the big picture.

the Ramseys claimed the roll of tape belonged to the intruder yet there were PR fibers found on the piece covering JB's mouth
the Ramseys claimed the rope was brought by the intruder yet PR fibers were found between the rope and JB's neck
JB was found wearing a NEW pair of panties yet JR fibers were found in it

not only that but (interesting, no?) fibers from clothes they wore THAT night
what a coincidence,huh?

but no,some try to convince us that 1+1=3

 

[tezi]

Even if that's true, you forget one BIG thing: none of those fibers can be TIMED. That is, no one knows how long they were there. But we KNOW that the family fibers were from that night AND in places they say they never touched.

See, that's the mistake IDI always makes. Sure, each single piece of evidence can be argued, but not when you put it all together into the big picture.

That is exactly what all of us RDI people have been saying. You have to put it all together into the big picture.

Thanks SuperDave!

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm seriously crushing on Super Dave again...ssshhhh ... No one tell my husband

 

[BBB167893]

http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/jonbenet_ramsey/jonbenet_ramsey_autopsy.pdf

this is her autopsy and it says nothing of anything that would be chronic abuse.. Just the injury from that night...

We've all read the autopsy report, Scarlett. That doesn't change anything. The coroner isn't going to say what he thinks CAUSED the injury until he's called to court.

 

[madeleine]

The fiber evidence tells me it all happened pretty soon after they arrived home...also interesting that JB was found in the same shirt she wore the night before....PR was wearing the same clothes as well....wonder why JR needed a shower before calling the cops,hmmm....


what I also wonder is....how much did JB bleed?it was enough for someone to panic and wipe her off...but there was no blood on the LJ's....which makes me wonder...did she ever wear them like they said when she was put to bed ?or where they put on only after "it" happened?

 

[madeleine]

it makes me :banghead::banghead::banghead:
if they used the search dogs they might have found that bloody cloth she was wiped off with :banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[tezi]

I'm seriously crushing on Super Dave again...ssshhhh ... No one tell my husband

I have been crushing on SuperDave for years, but don't tell anyone! :floorlaugh::floorlaugh: Especially SuperDave....:blushing::blushing: