Yes, that is the interview I remember. I thought there might have been a cigar box, I remembered the comment about them being stored in there because it was a cool, dark place. So it seems from JR's interview that it was NOT under her head, but on top of a paint can.
Has the case fizzled a bit?
- Thread starter wonderllama
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Yes, that is the interview I remember. I thought there might have been a cigar box, I remembered the comment about them being stored in there because it was a cool, dark place. So it seems from JR's interview that it was NOT under her head, but on top of a paint can.
questfortrue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2013
- Messages
- 1,005
- Reaction score
- 135
As a new member, Ive been continually astounded by the knowledge of this case by longtime writers, not to mention posters high standards of honesty and civility.
One of the recent questions I had pertained to Colorados felony murder law, and Cynic provided a great analysis of the components of the law and ramifications. (Post #36 in the Has the Case fizzled a bit? thread)
_________
Back in the early 2000s, a man by the name of Scott Peterson was convicted of homicide of his wife Laci Peterson. This was a totally circumstantial case. No witnesses. They found one hair of Lacis on a pair of pliers in his newly purchased boat. They discovered he went fishing not real far from where her decapitated body washed up. The prosecutors showed Peterson as a liar. Also, the prosecutors had two very powerful witnesses regarding his character and his lies Amber Frey, Scott Petersons former mistress and of course Lacis mother, Sharon Rojas. Sharon Rojas was relentless in pursuing justice for her daughter and her daughters unborn son. Scott Peterson received the death penalty on circumstantial evidence.
It wouldnt take a genius to locate the inconsistencies in JRs statements in interviews and what he said to the police. Some of these statements would negate him placing blame on other family members. E.g., how can you place blame on your spouse when you said to the police that you needed to cover JBs body, since you didnt want PR to see her body like that. Or how can you place blame on a son, when you said you put him to bed and neither you nor PR ever later spoke to him about JB. (Playing amateur legal analyst here.)
Laci Peterson had her mother powerfully speaking for her. Poor JB only has WS and FFJ and those who write books speaking for her. I know that letters to public officials dont usually work, But enough negative publicity regarding case malfeasance do. Publicly elected officials hate negative publicity!
Nonetheless, I hear Cynics description of the problems with a prosecution, and so perhaps it will never happen. But who here wouldnt want to see a prosecutor make the attempt. This case is a forever stain on Boulder. All stated, moo.
One of the recent questions I had pertained to Colorados felony murder law, and Cynic provided a great analysis of the components of the law and ramifications. (Post #36 in the Has the Case fizzled a bit? thread)
_________
Back in the early 2000s, a man by the name of Scott Peterson was convicted of homicide of his wife Laci Peterson. This was a totally circumstantial case. No witnesses. They found one hair of Lacis on a pair of pliers in his newly purchased boat. They discovered he went fishing not real far from where her decapitated body washed up. The prosecutors showed Peterson as a liar. Also, the prosecutors had two very powerful witnesses regarding his character and his lies Amber Frey, Scott Petersons former mistress and of course Lacis mother, Sharon Rojas. Sharon Rojas was relentless in pursuing justice for her daughter and her daughters unborn son. Scott Peterson received the death penalty on circumstantial evidence.
It wouldnt take a genius to locate the inconsistencies in JRs statements in interviews and what he said to the police. Some of these statements would negate him placing blame on other family members. E.g., how can you place blame on your spouse when you said to the police that you needed to cover JBs body, since you didnt want PR to see her body like that. Or how can you place blame on a son, when you said you put him to bed and neither you nor PR ever later spoke to him about JB. (Playing amateur legal analyst here.)
Laci Peterson had her mother powerfully speaking for her. Poor JB only has WS and FFJ and those who write books speaking for her. I know that letters to public officials dont usually work, But enough negative publicity regarding case malfeasance do. Publicly elected officials hate negative publicity!
Nonetheless, I hear Cynics description of the problems with a prosecution, and so perhaps it will never happen. But who here wouldnt want to see a prosecutor make the attempt. This case is a forever stain on Boulder. All stated, moo.
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
Right on the money, questfortrue! Speaking of which, after all the dollars that Boulder spent on investigating and summoning a grand jury, which did vote to indict, you would think that going the extra distance and spending what it would take to wrap up with a trial would at least put some finality to the whole travesty.
Otherwise it seems like a lot of money wasted for nothing, that at the very least would end up being money spent for something: An attempt to bring justice to the horrendous death of a beautiful young child, as well as Boulder showing that it has the desire and capability of pursuing such a challenging case. The experience that the prosecution would gain would be immeasurable also, not to speak of the respect that they would gain from the public.
Trying this case, though they could lose in gaining a conviction, would bring nothing but a win in public esteem.
eileenhawkeye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 8,755
- Reaction score
- 132
They've already spent over $2 million on this case, though. I'm not saying there should be some price on justice, but I don't agree with the idea that they should start spending another few million on a trial, and it doesn't matter whether they win or lose.
I also don't think them bringing the case to trial, and losing, is going to help their reputation. I guess it depends, though. In the Anthony trial, most agree that the prosecution did a good job but the jurors were just idiots. If John did go on trial, and I'm sure he would have a better lawyer than Jose Baez, and if the prosecution is unprepared etc; I could see it looking very bad for them. This case ending in a trial 20 years later where John is acquitted...I don't think that would look good at all.
I've seen really good lawyers lose cases. If the client is guilty and the prosecution presents a convincing case, there's not much any lawyer can do. IMO, once the Rs discrepancies, outright lies, and changed stories are exposed, JR will be in a world of hurt. Show their interviews and read excerpts from their books, and then compare them to their statements to police. And then compare all of that to the evidence. IMO, a good lawyer would keep the case out of court and convince JR to plead guilty to a lesser charge? Being publicly exposed for his role, and with all of the details, isn't something that JR would look forward to. He has spent the last 16 years playing the victim. No way would he want to explain, in front of reporters, how he broke that window, and then crawled through in his underwear. Or how he slept through a scream that managed to wake up a neighbor. Or how he can't remember crucial details of JB's life, but he can remember both PR and himself, dabbing their chins, before he proposed. One good thing about the amount of time that has passed, is that the Rs have given LE a lot of extra ammunition to work with.
I think that there are too many skeletons in the Boulder LE closet- incompetence, corruption, etc. Along with that, we have the death of one of the suspects and the immunity of another (because of age at the time) and you have the possibility of a trial that will never come to anything. It is a dead-end trial. The charges that could be brought against JR DO have limitation statues. I so not think they could charge him with murder at this point, or even manslaughter because it would be impossible to prove he acted alone. Without being able to show exactly WHAT he did, and with not being able to mention what BR may have done, this would be futile. And I think these reasons are why nothing has or will be done.
We know what happened- but not exactly. I think THEY know what happened-but not exactly. And it can't be known exactly now.
We know what happened- but not exactly. I think THEY know what happened-but not exactly. And it can't be known exactly now.
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
Lots of credible comments in the last few posts. Money, time, reputations, questions, questions and more questions have all contributed to this crime being left an open cold case.
Bottom line, for me, is charge JR with Felony Murder. It doesn't matter then who did what - just that he was there, aware, and did nothing to seek an interruption in her death makes him a party of Felony Murder. IMHO, circumstantial evidence, combined with forensic evidence, is strong enough to convince a group of 12 jury members with half a brain and a complete soul that JR bears responsibility in JB's death.
He can't prove he WASN'T the one who killed her, can he? Those shirt fibers in her underwear are more than very incriminating, IMO. Absence of any other fingerprints on suspected weapons makes him just as likely to have used them as anyone else. And, before police told them they would have to leave the house, he called to arrange for a flight out of state.
Good thing I wouldn't have to be on that jury.
Bottom line, for me, is charge JR with Felony Murder. It doesn't matter then who did what - just that he was there, aware, and did nothing to seek an interruption in her death makes him a party of Felony Murder. IMHO, circumstantial evidence, combined with forensic evidence, is strong enough to convince a group of 12 jury members with half a brain and a complete soul that JR bears responsibility in JB's death.
He can't prove he WASN'T the one who killed her, can he? Those shirt fibers in her underwear are more than very incriminating, IMO. Absence of any other fingerprints on suspected weapons makes him just as likely to have used them as anyone else. And, before police told them they would have to leave the house, he called to arrange for a flight out of state.
Good thing I wouldn't have to be on that jury.
Nom de plume
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 24
The real trick would be finding 12 people with half a brain and a complete soul! If you could find 12 like that, the defense would object to them and have them dismissed. Last thing they'd want is anyone with any common sense, much less a conscience.
Bad thing I wouldn't GET to be on that jury.
Nom de plume,
Everyone knows what happened that fateful night. So lets have a trial regardless of its composition.
Just put all the evidence on the table and roll the cameras for everyone to see hear what happened that night.
.
eileenhawkeye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 8,755
- Reaction score
- 132
Doesn't the defendant get to choose whether he was a trial by jury or judge? IF John were ever be indicted, I wonder what he would choose?
Nom de plume
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 24
I have no doubt that JR is narcissistic enough to think he could BS 12 jurors into believing anything he has to say. Now his attorneys on the other hand might advise him to select a judge instead. Especially if that judge was in his pocket like the former DAs were. :moo:
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
:goodpost: I AM WITH YOU ON THIS ONE!!!:blowkiss:
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
:noooo:Is that true?? Could JR elect to stand directly before a judge without a jury trial? I swear if this case would come to that, I think I'd have to paint myself RED, and run down the main street of Boulder shouting "Satan's nickname is Lin Wood!!":cursing::cursing::cursing:
:moo::furious::moo:
CanManEh
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2008
- Messages
- 1,827
- Reaction score
- 69
With JR being such a stand up guy N all Im surprised that within the week after PR passed that JR hasn't come out with a book blaming PR for JBR death It's not like she could do or say anything about what he would be saying and by doing so he could collect millions on the book deal maybe a movie deal while were at it also lifting the heat off of his back and BR back of either for ever having to pay for the murder...Then again maybe that is plan B to be saved for a rainy day down the road just in case sometime in the future he is ever brought up on charges of the killing of JBR ...
Darlene733510
Active Member
Since PR is dead, I think that if JR was ever prosecuted he would say she did it all, and he only carried JB's body upstairs. Then we have BR, and if he is the culprit, who would never be charged because of his age when it happened. We know the fibers from JR's shirt were on the area where they should never be. My only hope is that other evidence is still in storage, and could be sent to the lab. I also would like to know what the secretary at access graphics heard when she intercepted phone calls, but she was not allowed to testify to the GJ. The Whites, and the Stines certainly know more, but they probably have sealed their lips for eternity. It's probably a good thing that I don't live in Boulder, because I would be sitting on the DA's doorstep every day. He'd probably put me in jail, but I'd call the Daily Camera first - that would be my one call. Maybe this case would get some attention. Can't you just see the headlines, Granny Goes To Jail For Justice for JBR!!!
eileenhawkeye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 8,755
- Reaction score
- 132
IDK He seems pretty satisfied with just talking to the media every time there is a development in the case, or to promote his book. But I noticed that if a development happens and it is more RDI, he is quiet. He did not do any interviews after it came out that Boulder PD wanted to re-interview Burke but he was refusing, nor did he talk about the news about the GJ indicting the R's.
CanManEh,
Nope can never happen. Simply because it was not PDI. The rest of his family would baulk at exploitation on this scale. BR would likely go on the media and tell the truth!
.
The cross-fingerpointing defense needs to be kept alive. If JR claimed PR did it he's admitting complicity in a cover up. The SOL has run on obstruction of justice charges, but he doesn't need the negative publicity. People might start to point out the reasons it's unlikely PR was the murderer. Since BDI is silly in the extreme that leaves only one culprit. Better to leave multiple "possibilities".
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
Snipped
I am ssoooo with you on this, Darlene - I would be another Granny sitting beside you - maybe even holding a sign!
I am ssoooo with you on this, Darlene - I would be another Granny sitting beside you - maybe even holding a sign!
Smelly Squirrel
(Taylor's Version)
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2011
- Messages
- 4,139
- Reaction score
- 19,570
The case is unsettled for me at at least until I can see more evidence, as perhaps may happen if the grand jury testimony is released.
Has anyone read the Wendy Murphy book or knows if there's anything new there?
Has anyone read the Wendy Murphy book or knows if there's anything new there?