I can't find a hole in this theory...

[Bonnette]

I reckon a more clever option might be to advertise WS bigtime, or write a book, outlining who might have done it and why, e.g. SuperDave.

Yes!!

Promote this all over the internet, e.g. get the truth out, in a legal format of course, then the press and media will take notice. Since the print and offline media tend to follow the internet these days!

Excellent idea.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm out. *i* couldn't find John guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.....and in all honesty, I would still be unable to in a civil case where the burden is far less.

Personally, I am impatiently awaiting Dave's book



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OpenMind4U]

Hold on! Hold on everyone! Please read my original post #653. I NEVER suggest to prosecute JR!!!! I suggest to write petition to expose DA corruption to nullify 'clearing' Ramsey and to unlock 'island of privacy' medical records. This shoul be the first step. The main goal should be to gather new GJ....and whatever new GJ will decide - let it be!!! I think somehow the following posts after #653 went to the wrong direction. We have ABSOLUTELY no rights to ask for specific Ramsey prosecution!!!. JMO.... .

 

[Bonnette]

Hold on! Hold on everyone! Please read my original post #653. I NEVER suggest to prosecute JR!!!! I suggest to write petition to expose DA corruption to nullify 'clearing' Ramsey and to unlock 'island of privacy' medical records. This shoul be the first step. The main goal should be to gather new GJ....and whatever new GJ will decide - let it be!!! I think somehow the following posts after #653 went to the wrong direction. We have ABSOLUTELY no rights to ask for specific Ramsey prosecution!!!. JMO.... .

Yes, things did spin a bit out of control following on your original post! I'm a lot to blame for that, methinks. Mea culpa and apologies! And thanks for setting things aright.

 

[Bonnette]

I'm out. *i* couldn't find John guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.....and in all honesty, I would still be unable to in a civil case where the burden is far less.

Personally, I am impatiently awaiting Dave's book

I couldn't either, Linda. My gut says he is one of the culprits, but that ain't jurisprudence. So yeah...I eagerly await Dave's book, too!

(Edited to add: What I would love is for a trial to expose evidence we haven't seen, which would make JR's role clearer. docg believes there's enough evidence to convict, and maybe there is...there might be much more information that could be developed than we've heard about, and Kolar said as much; but the DA is off in an ivory tower and can't be bothered.)

 

[BOESP]

snip...

I like the idea of a Grand Jury. Hunter was wrongly criticized imo for his handling of the last GJ, because at that time Patsy was in the line of fire and there never was a case to be made against her -- meanwhile John was ruled out, and the intruder theory was still alive and well thanks to Lou Smit, so what would be the point of indicting anyone at that time? I think Hunter did the right thing to call it off.

This time would be different, because now instead of Lou Smit we would have James Kolar, and Kolar could easily destroy Smit's wacky theories AND the DNA evidence also.

So. END of intruder theory. Patsy is no longer with us, so we don't have to worry anymore about whether to indict Patsy or John, or whether it's possible to build a case against Patsy. ... snip

I think you will find several people who disagree with your above statements in bold.

 

[DeeDee249]

You need to read my blog, especially this post. Here's the key paragraph:

Patsy Ramsey is no longer with us. Burke Ramsey was too young to be prosecuted. But this doesn't matter, because the only inhabitant of that house on that night likely to have sexually molested the victim was the only adult male in the house: John Ramsey. And yes, she was sexually molested, on the night of the crime, if not on earlier occasions as well. And hence: (hint hint) John Ramsey is, and always has been, the one you want to prosecute.​

If nothing else, he could be accused of molestation, since there was no intruder and the only mature male in the house is by far the most likely to have sexually assaulted the victim. And the molester is the most likely to have committed the murder, so he could be accused of that as well. He would then be forced to take refuge in the lame intruder theory, or claim he was only covering for Patsy or Burke. Since he's spent the last 16 years vociferously denying any involvement by anyone in his family, I really doubt he'd have the guts to do that. But if he felt he had no choice, and Patsy or Burke are in fact the ones who did it, then the truth would finally come out.

This is the ONLY way to go I'm afraid. There's no way to put him on trial as an accessory. And in my book there's no question he both molested and killed his daughter. If he wants to deny that then let him make his case to a jury.

The problem is that too many following the case have pet theories that they simply refuse to let go of, and there is no way Patsy did it or Burke did it will ever lead to any sort of indictment, much less a conviction. There are very good reasons, however, to indict and try John Ramsey.

I think it would be very hard to prove that it was JR who molested JB. Even pre-adolescents like BR are capable of sexual contact. There was no semen found- other than that of JAR on the comforter in the suitcase. Boys of that age (just under 10) can and do have sexual feelings and are capable of sexual experimentation. It need not have been a sexually mature male. Some boys that age may even ejaculate and have sperm present and boys far younger can have erections. I think JR cannot be ruled out but I also consider JAR and BR as possible molesters.
If JR was not the killer/molester, he could at least be prosecuted for obstruction of justice, tampering with evidence, and tampering with a body.

 

[Chrishope]

Well, I wish you all the best of luck with the petitions, and the publicity.

This won't be a popular post, but what the heck.

The defense doesn't have to prove anything. All they need to do is sow the seeds of doubt. Legally it must be "reasonable" doubt, but no one with doubts believes their doubts are unreasonable, so really all they need is doubt.

We who are RDI tend to underestimate the power of the IDI scenario. How many IDIs come to this site and believe IDI because they can't imagine the parents doing such things? As if lack of imagination constitutes some type of evidence. Expect at least half the jurors to have a similar lack of imagination.

The artifact dna doesn't make the intruder less likely in the minds of jurors. It multiplies the possibility of an intruder. You can bet the defense will have an expert say that the touch dna COULD be from the killer -any one of the 5 or 6 artifact dna samples.

I almost agree that it would be possible to prove JR lied about the window, except he's going to be a lot more convincing testifying in court. All the hemming and hawing and "not sure" and "don't remember" will be gone. The biggest problem with the window is getting the jury to understand what's counter-intuitive - the window was "unstaged". It will be difficult to get some of the jury to believe someone unstaged their own staging. It's possible to cast doubt on JR's story, but he can always claim he was just saying it to cover for PR.

The fiber evidence will easily be destroyed (I know none of you agree and think the fiber evidence actually means something) and the defense will have an expert who will say it could be secondary transfer - which is in fact true (that is to say, it could be secondary)

The cross finger pointing defense is alive and well, and in fact stronger w/o PR in the picture. There is no way to put her on the stand and get some contradictory statement out of her. No chance of an emotional outburst. JR won't have to accuse PR, the lawyers will imply that it was PR, and the implication will be plenty clear. If the jury can't decide between JR and PR, they'll acquit (as they should).

JR doesn't have to worry in the slightest whether his defense sits well with the judge or not. It simply doesn't matter. I suspect the jury will be sympathetic to him trying to cover to shield PR.

Of course, talking about the trial is getting ahead of ourselves. There has to be an indictment first. There was no indictment all those years ago with relatively fresh evidence. If there isn't much new to bring before the GJ, I don't see why there should be an indictment now.

Don't get me wrong, I think Doc has definitely solved this crime. His theory is, IMO, by far the most plausible. But I disagree that the case has good prospects for prosecution. Still, if someone can convince the Boulder DA to move on this it would be great. Even if JR is acquitted the cause of justice would be no worse off than it is today.

 

[Bonnette]

...I disagree that the case has good prospects for prosecution. Still, if someone can convince the Boulder DA to move on this it would be great. Even if JR is acquitted the cause of justice would be no worse off than it is today.

That's the bottom line, I think.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Hold on! Hold on everyone! Please read my original post #653. I NEVER suggest to prosecute JR!!!! I suggest to write petition to expose DA corruption to nullify 'clearing' Ramsey and to unlock 'island of privacy' medical records. This shoul be the first step. The main goal should be to gather new GJ....and whatever new GJ will decide - let it be!!! I think somehow the following posts after #653 went to the wrong direction. We have ABSOLUTELY no rights to ask for specific Ramsey prosecution!!!. JMO.... .

Back in either 2009 or 2010, Stan Garnett was on a local radio show where he said the R's weren't cleared anymore. Now, he could have given a press conference or sent out a statement to the mass media. He could have gone on different TV shows to talk about this. But for whatever reason, he did not. So I think that if the DA ever decided to start a new Grand Jury for this case, we would not hear anything about it until the day it began. I don't think Boulder LE/DA will actively seek out publicity for the case, until it's unavoidable such as a new Grand Jury, an arrest, etc.

 

[midwest mama]

eace:Chrishope - Actually, your last post was awesome. Great devil's advocate truths. But you know you'd love to see this case prosecuted just as Doc proposes as much as some of the others of us, and to this I say:
:toastred:

NOTHING VENTURED, NOTHING GAINED

 

[Linda7NJ]

Hold on! Hold on everyone! Please read my original post #653. I NEVER suggest to prosecute JR!!!! I suggest to write petition to expose DA corruption to nullify 'clearing' Ramsey and to unlock 'island of privacy' medical records. This shoul be the first step. The main goal should be to gather new GJ....and whatever new GJ will decide - let it be!!! I think somehow the following posts after #653 went to the wrong direction. We have ABSOLUTELY no rights to ask for specific Ramsey prosecution!!!. JMO.... .

Why do all of that when there is zero chance of a prosecution?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[midwest mama]

Hold on! Hold on everyone! Please read my original post #653. I NEVER suggest to prosecute JR!!!! I suggest to write petition to expose DA corruption to nullify 'clearing' Ramsey and to unlock 'island of privacy' medical records. This shoul be the first step. The main goal should be to gather new GJ....and whatever new GJ will decide - let it be!!! I think somehow the following posts after #653 went to the wrong direction. We have ABSOLUTELY no rights to ask for specific Ramsey prosecution!!!. JMO.... .

Whoa OpenMind - The only way a new GJ will be called is if the DA feels there is evidence that will cause him to consider looking for 'probable cause' for an indictment in the case. There is only one possible way to call for an indictment as a result of BPD reviewing and asking the DA to consider the evidence, and that is to look at John Ramsey as the chargeable suspect in this open murder case.

Kolar's Theory of Prosecution must be based on clear evidence, possibly circumstantial more than direct, but nevertheless, still reason to consider an indictment. No DA will spend another taxpayer dollar going down the avenues you suggest without FIRST feeling there might be reason to do so based on his conviction the case can be prosecuted.

So, we must :fencefall: and determine the DA must consider charging John Ramsey, even if a trial wouldn't end up with a conviction. It's the only way to move this case toward closure.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Whoa OpenMind - The only way a new GJ will be called is if the DA feels there is evidence that will cause him to consider looking for 'probable cause' for an indictment in the case. There is only one possible way to call for an indictment as a result of BPD reviewing and asking the DA to consider the evidence, and that is to look at John Ramsey as the chargeable suspect in this open murder case.

Kolar's Theory of Prosecution must be based on clear evidence, possibly circumstantial more than direct, but nevertheless, still reason to consider an indictment. No DA will spend another taxpayer dollar going down the avenues you suggest without FIRST feeling there might be reason to do so based on his conviction the case can be prosecuted.

So, we must :fencefall: and determine the DA must consider charging John Ramsey, even if a trial wouldn't end up with a conviction. It's the only way to move this case toward closure.

Agree.
Trying to prosecute John Ramsey at this point would be a huge mistake. He would never be convicted and double jeopardy would attach. Left alone we can still hope Burke or john will come forward someday and tell what he knows or confess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[midwest mama]

Sorry, mama, but 2 writers is NOT the way to go. To you this might sound like a compromise but to me all it will do is create more confusion and in this case confusion = John continuing to get away with murder. What's important to understand is that it is not necessary to prove John wrote the note. All that's necessary in a Grand Jury proceeding is to show probable cause that John sexually assaulted and murdered his daughter.

Once the prosecution squashes the intruder theory, then this has to be an inside job. And once we have an inside job, then the most likely person to have sexually assaulted the victim is the only mature male in the home. Reasonable doubt is not a factor for a Grand Jury, only probable cause. Once probable cause is established, then he's put on trial, which is all any of us can hope for at this point.

So, if a case would go to trial, I think that note would be all over the courtroom. The proceedings by the defense could include establishing any shred of credibility to the fact that someone other than JR was involved in the actual murder of the child, whether or not he sexually assaulted her at any earlier time, or even that evening. If there would be enough consideration given to just Patsy writing the note, which there clearly is, then I think jurors would have a hard time dismissing her culpability, thereby causing too much 'reasonable doubt' that JR might have killed JB.

If Patsy writing the note in collusion with JR could be shown to be a great possibility, then we might have jurors looking hard at JR as a manipulative, dominant figure which would give him a greater chance of being seen by jurors as capable of committing an act of molestation, MAYBE even murder against his own daughter if he felt his freedom might be threatened. So, I think that the more that note gets jumbled up enough in jurors mind as to it being possible there were 2 authors, IF they have any empathy for Patsy in their minds, they would see JR in the light of being controlling, domineering, and downright heinous enough, since he was able to drag Patsy into his scheme. :moo:

 

[DeeDee249]

Agree.
Trying to prosecute John Ramsey at this point would be a huge mistake. He would never be convicted and double jeopardy would attach. Left alone we can still hope Burke or john will come forward someday and tell what he knows or confess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think Double Jeopardy comes into play here. That is only in cases where someone has already been tried once already. JR has never been tried in this crime.

 

[midwest mama]

Agree.
Trying to prosecute John Ramsey at this point would be a huge mistake. He would never be convicted and double jeopardy would attach. Left alone we can still hope Burke or john will come forward someday and tell what he knows or confess.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You make a solid point. Hard to argue. But I, for one, would hope if the case would ever get tried, a confession would come flowing out of one of their mouths right in the courtroom. If the case would make it into a courtroom, against the odds that continue to plague JB's justice, then maybe we should think that a confession under duress from a prosecutor also has a slim, grant you VERY slim, chance of happening.

Enough is enough already! :maddening:

 

[OpenMind4U]

Whoa OpenMind - The only way a new GJ will be called is if the DA feels there is evidence that will cause him to consider looking for 'probable cause' for an indictment in the case. There is only one possible way to call for an indictment as a result of BPD reviewing and asking the DA to consider the evidence, and that is to look at John Ramsey as the chargeable suspect in this open murder case.

Kolar's Theory of Prosecution must be based on clear evidence, possibly circumstantial more than direct, but nevertheless, still reason to consider an indictment. No DA will spend another taxpayer dollar going down the avenues you suggest without FIRST feeling there might be reason to do so based on his conviction the case can be prosecuted.

So, we must :fencefall: and determine the DA must consider charging John Ramsey, even if a trial wouldn't end up with a conviction. It's the only way to move this case toward closure.

MM, I probably didn't make myself clear. I'll try again. You see, I'm very competative domino player. Not just simple domino game, but the team against the team game.To win this game, you must count the remaining combinations and make your next move so your partner recognized your strategy and plays accordingly. Now, does domino game has anything in common with JBR case?

Step 1. Undue the damages!

What damages?
- BPD made non-reversable mistakes at the beginning;
- DA actions, especially by A.Hunter and M.Lucy, have protected Ramsey's more than Ramsey's protected themselves. Ramsey could hire thousand PR and shark-lawyers - but without DA support, they would be convicted long time ago!...DA becomes Ramsey's main partner! DA has damaged this case many times more than BPD did. DA 'clear' Ramseys (all of them!) and DA sealed Ramseys medical records (all of them)! . These two things MUST BE UNDUE!!!!. And the only way to 'undue' this - is to expose DA corruption. Write the 'letter', petitions, talk to media...it's not about Ramsey yet! It's about Bolder's DA unlawfull criminal activities!

Step 2. Re-evaluate the strategy!
- unsealed medical records will provide an additional evidences, pointing to whatever direction it may lead;
- 'unclear' Ramsey action will put preasure on JR, BR and Ramsey Team, it's much different game than was before. The message will be clear: no intruder! Media will be all over, like never before...
- get new experts, re-evaluate all evidences;
- re-evaluate the strategy!

Step 3. Win the Game!

Get new GJ based on new evidences and new strategy. And let GJ decide. Today, I have no idea who will be indicted. But I'm very much sure that indiction will be made.

JMO

 

[txsvicki]

Does kolar give any hints at all that he believes someone was or had been molestng burke? Every behavior sign mentioned points to it, imo. The doctor noticed signs and nothing was followed up. Jonbenet was the worst injustice, but ignoring the plight of a surviving child was another one, even if he did inflict the head bash. Imo, Kolar exposes this as well as the murder going unpunished.

 

[Chrishope]

What you say makes sense, but in this case I'm convinced the note would not have to be an issue -- unless the prosecution wanted to make it an issue, which imo would be a mistake. The last thing the defense would do would be to accuse Patsy of writing that note -- or to even suggest she might have. That would be tantamount to a confession from John that he'd been lying through his teeth for 16 years. The prosecution could simply argue that we have no way of knowing who wrote the note. And the defense would argue it was written by an intruder. End of story.

I'm at a loss to see why you think it's a problem for JR to admit he's been lying for 16 years? The SOL has run on the obstruction of justice charge. His choice, if it came to it, would be admit he lied to keep his wife out of prison, or go to prison himself.