midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
Because he focuses on Burke throughout the last section of his book. Because he states very clearly that he does not feel either Patsy or John capable of killing their own child, as they come across to him as a good Christian family. In this he is, very strangely, in complete agreement with Lou Smit, whose evaluation of the Ramseys he refers to in the same passage.
Finally, he makes it very clear that his take on this crime could not lead to a conviction because Burke was too young and the statute of limitations on accessory after the fact has passed.
By pressing for a re-examination of the case in the light of Kolar's theory, you are in effect arguing that the case be dropped.
Help me Jesus!
Doc - Evidently you and I are not interpreting Kolar's writing the same way.
While I agree with you that he has clearly indicated Burke has involvement in the death of JB, I am led to believe he also feels there is substantiating evidence that this crime included the other members in the household, each of them in varying degrees.
Kolar writes a section starting on page 401 of his book, titled Critical Analysis of John Ramsey's Statements, through to pg 404, and another section titled Closing Observations with regard to John not bringing up info after 1998 in his further interviews about a key element that would support the intruder theory, makes this statement:
"As a criminal investigator, I have to consider the question: Was this an oversight on John Ramsey's part, or does the intentional absence of this key element reveal consciousness of guilt?"
Because of what Kolar writes with regard to Patsy, I agree he does not feel her level of involvement contributed to JB's death.
When Kolar wrote to Gov. Owens in 2007, he stated, "I am convinced there are grounds for taking another look at the possibility of family involvement in the death of JonBenet and would request that the special prosecutors who were most familiar with the details of the first grand jury inquiry be asked to review the evidence......". Gov. Owens did contact the DA's office, and Kolar learned that only Bennet, Lacy and members of her command staff would look at his material - NO outside prosecutors, BPD reps or members of the BAU from the FBI. Kolar knew it was pointless, since Lacy was supporting the intruder theory and the DNA reports, and was unwilling to seek the assistance of outside experts. Gov Owens wanted Kolar to go public with his new theory, but he stated, "I thought about it for a few weeks and scrubbed the idea. I didn't particularly care for wearing a bulls-eye on my back and decided to wait for a change in regime in Boulder."
So, Kolar did wait, and then presented his document in 2011 to BPD and Stan Garnett and in his letter to Garnett wrote: "...I continue to argue that there is a course of action available to you that will ultimately clear this homicide...........In closing, I have to state that I have always held to the belief that the criminal justice system would be able to bring this case to a successful resolution." And this is how I interpret his comments: In other words, I can show you how to indict John Ramsey, since he is the only remaining prosecutable family member.
I believe Kolar holds John ultimately responsible for the final strangulation of JB. You are working very hard on 'probable cause' to indict JR, and I think Kolar's theory MUST point out there is probable cause to indict JR. He spends too much of his book pointing out the flaws of John's involvement.:moo:
My speculation that Kolar wants to see JR answer up in no way is an argument that I want to see this case get dropped, so I cannot agree with your sentiment, but I do not hold it against you for having it or expressing it. I know how seriously devoted you have become to also wanting to see JR be indicted, and I support your efforts totally. I can see no one else tightening that ligature except John Ramsey, given all the clues of the case to date. If he ever goes to trial, the bottom line will be to prove he was the killer, and I agree with your belief that a good prosecutor should be able to do just that.
JMO - and as other bylines say: THIS TIME WE GET IT RIGHT
p.s. As far as Jesus helping, I'm sure He will, if it's really His will.