SnippedBM
Nom,
Further, like it or not, EVEN A MURDERER has the right to be defended - this IS the way our legal system is set up and this is how it works. But having said that, what in the world makes you feel from my posts (if you'd read them thoroughly) that I have no respect for the hard work of the police department and the detectives working on this case? That's an entirely unfair assumption and just is not true.
Look, Nom - you cannot have a free and democratic society UNLESS ALL who participate in that society have the same rights as everyone else. And like it or not, this means those that are PRESUMED innocent until proven guilty.
My feeling comes from your own words Bam:
I would have asked that they refrain from focusing too much as to how the Ramsey attorneys were behaving with their clients and FOCUS on the bigger picture - that lovely little girl.
JMO, but to me that implies that you think BPD was more worried about the RST than they were gathering evidence and finding the killer of JB. And I'm well aware of how our legal system works, thank you. I suppose it all comes down to one thing. Whose rights are more important? Legally, I suppose JB has no more rights since she's dead, but the suspects in her death certainly have all the rights the wonderful "justice" system we have affords them. IMO, our legal system has become twisted to the point that criminals have far more rights than victims, and there is no justice in that.
Nom,
It was up to the Ramsey Team attorneys to do their jobs; it was up to the police department personnel, i.e., the various police officers, detectives and those working in the DA's office and all the other peripheral folks involved in this case...
...to either bring this case to fruition and to trial, or keep it going until they felt they had enough evidence to charge someone. This was the police department's job to do so; unfortunately, it didn't happen. Hunter did not feel he had enough to take this case to trial. Frankly, even given my issues with the politics played by the DA's office, I think that was the correct decision. One thing I don't think any of us would have liked to have witnessed, was to have had this case go to trial and see a hung jury.
BBM Well I guess that's a matter of opinion. According to ST & JK there was plenty of evidence to charge them. It's on AH's head that no charges were filed, not BPD. They were blocked at every turn from getting additional evidence, and still they felt there was enough.
Additionally, Burke's behavior with that psychiatrist that interviewed him (when he covered up his face with the game board when asked about improper touching)...
...could have been because HE had been improperly handled/touched by Patsy as well. This could also have been the very reason that Patsy was so nervous when Burke was being interviewed by the psychiatrist.
I've read up a lot on this case and I do not recall seeing any factual documentation or statement which indicated that Burke did not suffer, at times, at the hands of his Mother re: behavioral issues. Has anyone else?
So again, we are perhaps basing opinions on the assumption that Burke was never improperly touched by Patsy. I would say the chances are that if JonBenet had been punished unduly at her Mother's hands, then so was Burke.
And like it or not, ALL of us have our own colored glasses on when it comes to life and how we view things. That's not necessarily a bad thing, Nom. I'll wager you have your own perspective on this case due to various issues in your own life as well.
Intuition kicks in at some point for me, too, as to various issues in this case. I've learned throughout my years. to TRUST that, as hard as that may be at times.
Of course it's possible PR was touching BR inappropriately. Does that mean it happened? No, it doesn't. I have no doubt that someone had abused him though.
Yes, we all have our own colored glasses on regarding life. It appears that yours are colored to protect the accused. Mine are colored to protect to victim. I guess that comes from years of seeing justice denied to innocent victims due to the sleezy, underhanded tactics of some attorneys. And no, I don't hate all defense attorneys. I have two very close friends that are attys. One in fact is a very well known defense atty, but he has morals and ethics. I've seen him refuse to represent people that were obviously guilty. One case in particular comes to mind about the murder of a teenage girl. He knew the was guilty, and that if he tried he could get him off, but refused to take the case because he wanted to see justice done. He couldn't live with knowing he was putting a cold blooded murderer back out on the street to do it again, and for that I have the highest respect for him.
I've learned to trust my intuition as well, and mine tells me that while I believe PR was a shallow, sick, twisted woman that paraded her daughter around like a little Lolita, she didn't kill her. It also tells me that JR is not the poor, grieving, harrassed, innocent father you perceive him to be.
Believe it or not, at one point early on in the case, I thought PR was the guilty party as well. More evidence was made public, and I studied all of the evidence extensively, and the more informed I became, the less likely it seemed. The most obvious answer is not always the correct one.
Just :moo:
