Members' Theories

[DeeDee249]

The BPD wanted to interview the Rs separately- that is the proper procedure. This is why it was a sticking point. When there are two suspects and even if they are NOT suspects, it is important that they not be questioned together. They aren't supposed to be able to "get their stories straight". This is the reason for the delay. The Rs lawyers wouldn't allow them to be interviewed alone. That is one of the things that makes me suspicious. If they both were telling the truth, what would it matter if the were questioned separately? The truth is the truth whether one person tells or two.
As for being questioned by the DA's office- I discount much of that interview. For one, the DA had too many ties to the defense attorneys and their firm- Hunter should have recused himself as soon as the Rs hired that firm. Then, too, there was such an adversarial relationship between the DA's office and the BPD that I can't imagine the BPD getting much truthful information from them.
The testimony of people who were not there that night, such as Melinda, really doesn't add much to the Grand Jury as far as I am concerned. She may have given testimony about her relationship with JR his family, and about what she was told that day, but as someone not in the house when the crime was committed, I don't see what she could bring to the investigation. Ditto her then-fiance. Of course, JAR is still considered by many to have actually been in the house that night, but without knowing what he was asked, he may have been of little value as well. Ditto BR, who interestingly, had parents who didn't want him questioned right after- when he could have possibly seen or heard evidence of an intruder. Unless he was being questioned as a participant in the events of that night, his testimony was also of little value since he was "supposed" to be asleep during it all.
I have no idea why Patsy and JR were not called before the GJ. But I'd really like to know.

 

[WHITEFANG]

DeeDee249;5314700]The BPD wanted to interview the Rs separately- that is the proper procedure. This is why it was a sticking point. When there are two suspects and even if they are NOT suspects, it is important that they not be questioned together. They aren't supposed to be able to "get their stories straight". This is the reason for the delay. The Rs lawyers wouldn't allow them to be interviewed alone. That is one of the things that makes me suspicious. If they both were telling the truth, what would it matter if the were questioned separately? The truth is the truth whether one person tells or two.

We know better than that. They wanted to trip them up, and it is all too easy to do so. I am not saying they shouldn't have been interviewed separately. I am saying they may have had good reasons to do what they did.


It is important to recognize several things. One, they did cooperate. They, "John and Patsy Ramsey offered to testify before the grand jury, but were never subpoenaed. The Ramseys asked to meet with the governor and his advisory council. The request went unanswered." They didn't like the cops. In fact, they despised them, it seems. They didn't trust them, for good reasons, too, IMO. The cops had demonstrated they were idiots from the start, by not searching and finding Joni immediately. The Coroner was an idiot, too, for not taking her temperature immediately. What a complete, total jerk and incompetent nit-wit. Do you know how much they were paying that idiot? These errors alone were catastrophic for a successful investigation. The R's were smart people and they had smart lawyers, and they very well may have kept innocent people out of prison.

Have you been around incompetence/incompetents like they displayed, like them, with your lives on the line?

How do innocent people get convicted of murder? How often do innocent people get convicted of all kinds of crimes? Did they have competent counsel? Did the cops investigate? Did DA's turn a blind eye to credible evidence on each occasion? Who knows? What is known is that innocent people go to prison and are even put to death.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Prosecutors last year allegedly tried to stop detective Lou Smit from sharing with a grand jury his theory that an intruder killed JonBenet Ramsey.

March 16, 2000: Gov. Bill Owens isn't buying John and Patsy Ramsey's book or their claim of innocence.

"This book is obviously part of an orchestrated 'the Ramseys are innocent' campaign," Owens said Wednesday. "It's clear, I believe, what they are trying to do -- it's to remove the focus on them as suspects. I don't think it will work."

Innocent until proven guilty.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Rapp, 39, and his wife, Regana L. Rapp, were indicted by a Jefferson County grand jury on... The indictment of the Rapps spelled out how they obtained some information about the Ramseys. Within days of the child's death on Dec. 26, 1996, callers from Touch Tone used pretexts to obtain American Express credit card records for her parents, John and Patricia Ramsey, according to the charges. Those records showed that purchases were made at a Boulder hardware store several days before the child's death.

Should everyone be the target of the kinds of tactics used here to get information?

"It is difficult to put a monetary value on privacy, but it was clear that the Rapps violated the law in the way they obtained information," Hall said. "What's against the law is how they got the information."

Would you like it if someone was using those methods to get info on you and your loved ones at this very moment? Anyone here cherish their privacy? Want your phone, medical records and personal notes splashed across the world's stage?

 

[WHITEFANG]

Related bribery and extortion charges against Craig Lewis, news editor for the Globe, were dropped after the paper agreed to make a $100,000 donation to the UC school of journalism.

This, despite the fact that the R's were "filthy *advertiser censored*?"

 

[WHITEFANG]

Steve Thomas's settlement deal with the Ramseys

Oh, he settled did he?

Wood said the settlement with Thomas "totally vindicates" the Ramseys. However, he noted that Thomas "doesn't have a whole lot of money."
He added, "The dollar amount is irrelevant to the Ramseys. They sued this case as a matter of principle." Like most settlements, the defendants made no admissions. But, Wood insisted, "The result speaks for itself. How many people settle a libel case?"

This will be twisted every which way but loose. But, Thomas didn't have to write this "book."

 

[WHITEFANG]

Mrs. Ramsey was quoted as saying, 'There is a killer on the loose, I don't know who it is, I don't know if it's a he or a she - but if I were a resident of Boulder I would tell my friends to keep their babies close to you'. The very next day, the Mayor Of Boulder was quoted as saying, 'People in Boulder have no need to fear that there is someone wandering the streets of Boulder, as has been portrayed by some people, looking for young children to attack. Boulder is safe, it's always been a safe community and it continues to be a safe community'.

Except for JonBenet.

 

[WHITEFANG]

The Star reported that Burke had killed his sister​

Fine outfit. Wish they were on your doorstep seeking the truth?

 

[WHITEFANG]

May 2, 2000: A candidate for Boulder District Attorney said Tuesday that he knows who killed JonBenet Ramsey, and he will seek an arrest in January if he's elected.

Attorney Ben Thompson, who is challenging prosecutors Trip DeMuth and Mary Keenan for the Democratic nomination for district attorney, said he knows evidence in the case and has a team of people — including former Boulder detective Steve Thomas who wrote a book about the Ramsey case — who would help him take a case to court next year.

The Ramsey's never had a chance.

 

[MurriFlower]

The Ramsey's never had a chance.

And he didn't win, but did he then reveal his evidence against the person(s) he believed did it? Or was it just a bit of a carrot to dangle under the voters noses?

 

[WHITEFANG]

And he didn't win, but did he then reveal his evidence against the person(s) he believed did it? Or was it just a bit of a carrot to dangle under the voters noses?

MurriFlower, can I ask you a personal question? Are you from another planet? Is it possible you are really SuperWoman in disguise?

Can we rename you "SW!!!" for short?

You are on target. Seriously, you are seeing everything like an athlete in her "zone."

Don't know but am gonna look.

 

[BBB167893]

That is scary!

You're telling me!

 

[BBB167893]

You mean like the Ramsey's? Like this?

•Handwriting samples were given by John (December 26, 28, January 5, 1997); Patsy (December 28, January 4, 1997, February 28, April 12, May 20), and Burke (December 28).
* Police questioned them both on December 27 and John again on December 28. Officers were with the Ramseys 24 hours a day from 6 a.m. December 26, the day JonBenet's body was found, through 2 p.m. December 29, when the Ramseys left for the funeral in Atlanta.
* Police questioned Burke Ramsey on December 26. The conversation was tape-recorded without either parent present and without parental consent. A police psychologist interviewed Burke on January 6. Burke was interviewed again, over three days, in May 1998.
* After the Ramseys returned from JonBenet's funeral in Atlanta, their attorneys offered to make them available for a joint interview January 18, 1997. The police declined this offer and stated in writing that such an interview would not "be helpful" because "the time for interviewing John and Patsy as witnesses who could provide critical information that would be helpful in the initial stages of our investigation has passed."
* The police countered with an offer that the Ramseys come to the police station at 6 p.m. on a Friday night and subject themselves to an open-ended interrogation. That suggestion was rejected, in part because of the written statement above.
* Patsy and John gave hair and blood samples, as well as fingerprints, immediately when the police requested them; so did all other members of the family. In February 1997, both Patsy and John voluntarily gave pubic hair samples.
* Early in the investigation, the Ramseys offered to let the police search both of their houses, John's office, their cars and his airplane hangar, without a search warrant.
* On April 11, 1997, John and Patsy Ramsey, with their attorneys, met with Peter Hofstrom of the DA's office and Tom Wickman of the Boulder Police Department. This meeting was held at Mr. Hofstrom's and Detective Wickman's request. An apology was given for the way the family had been treated. The Ramseys were asked to give additional interviews and continue their previous cooperation. John accepted their apology and agreed to move forward. No conditions were placed on the manner in which the interviews would be conducted.
* On April 12, 1997, the Ramseys agreed to let authorities search their house again without a warrant; agreed to destructive testing of walls located at their home; agreed to identify Patsy Ramsey's prior writings; and agreed to make themselves available for separate interviews on April 23. The Ramseys also agreed to answer any questions put to them. On April 22, the Boulder police canceled the interviews.
* The Ramseys agreed to be interrogated by the Boulder police and district attorney's office on April 30, 1997. These interviews lasted two hours (John) and six hours (Patsy).
* They were interrogated by the district attorney's office for three full days each in June 1998. No additional interviews were requested.
* They signed more than 100 releases for information requested by the police, ranging from medical records to credit card records and even videotape rental records. The Ramseys provided all evidence and information requested by the police.
* Burke Ramsey, John Andrew Ramsey and Melinda Ramsey Long all were subpoenaed and testified before the grand jury.
* John and Patsy Ramsey offered to testify before the grand jury, but were never subpoenaed. The Ramseys asked to meet with the governor and his advisory council. The request went unanswered.


The preceding are examples of their lack of cooperation and unwillingness to talk to them?

Yeah, actually. I'd be glad to explain why, too.

 

[BBB167893]

Should everyone be the target of the kinds of tactics used here to get information?

"It is difficult to put a monetary value on privacy, but it was clear that the Rapps violated the law in the way they obtained information," Hall said. "What's against the law is how they got the information."

Would you like it if someone was using those methods to get info on you and your loved ones at this very moment? Anyone here cherish their privacy? Want your phone, medical records and personal notes splashed across the world's stage?

This I agree with 100%. These were a couple of sleazebags who took it upon themselves to pry into the case and got caught.

Related bribery and extortion charges against Craig Lewis, news editor for the Globe, were dropped after the paper agreed to make a $100,000 donation to the UC school of journalism.

Fang, if you knew the story behind that, you'd freak.

This, despite the fact that the R's were "filthy *advertiser censored*?"

Excuse me? Who said that?

 

[MurriFlower]

Fang, if you knew the story behind that, you'd freak.

Go ahead - freak us.

 

[BBB167893]

Oh, he settled did he?

I honestly don't know. To hear Mark Fuhrman, who knows ST well, tell it, the publishing company settled and basically pulled the rug out from under him.

This will be twisted every which way but loose.

It already HAS, mostly by Wood and his online lapdogs.

The Ramsey's never had a chance.

JONBENET never had a chance, you mean.

May 2, 2000: A candidate for Boulder District Attorney said Tuesday that he knows who killed JonBenet Ramsey, and he will seek an arrest in January if he's elected.

Attorney Ben Thompson, who is challenging prosecutors Trip DeMuth and Mary Keenan for the Democratic nomination for district attorney, said he knows evidence in the case and has a team of people — including former Boulder detective Steve Thomas who wrote a book about the Ramsey case — who would help him take a case to court next year.

Damn shame he didn't win.

 

[WHITEFANG]

You're telling me!

Think of the pain. My god man! How can you bear it?

 

[MurriFlower]

Damn shame he didn't win.

What would we be doing now with all our spare time then?

 

[WHITEFANG]

I honestly don't know. To hear Mark Fuhrman, who knows ST well, tell it, the publishing company settled and basically pulled the rug out from under him.



It already HAS, mostly by Wood and his online lapdogs.



JONBENET never had a chance, you mean.

May 2, 2000: A candidate for Boulder District Attorney said Tuesday that he knows who killed JonBenet Ramsey, and he will seek an arrest in January if he's elected.

Attorney Ben Thompson, who is challenging prosecutors Trip DeMuth and Mary Keenan for the Democratic nomination for district attorney, said he knows evidence in the case and has a team of people — including former Boulder detective Steve Thomas who wrote a book about the Ramsey case — who would help him take a case to court next year.

Damn shame he didn't win.

Was that agonizing? To make that crass statement? Pretty rough on you? Horrible, huh? Oh the pain!

You're a rabbit on the run.

 

[BBB167893]

And he didn't win, but did he then reveal his evidence against the person(s) he believed did it? Or was it just a bit of a carrot to dangle under the voters noses?

I don't know. I know that he appeared on Larry King alongside ST that year. This is what he said:

"It's political, the reason that it hasn't been prosecuted. And we have a district attorney's office that is more political than it is a prosecutor's office. I'm sitting here listening to those two talk, or those three talk, and it's strange to me that Alex sounds more like a defense attorney than a prosecutor, and that's part of the problem. Let me say there is a cancer in our DA's office, and whenever anybody points it out, what happens is they attack whoever points it out instead of addressing the issue and trying to solve the problem."

I don't know Ben Thompson personally, but he sounds like my kind of man; a MAN'S MAN. Which means he's all wrong for a place like Boulder.

For the record, ST and Thompson were opposed on the show by Alan Dershowitz, who refered to Alex Hunter as a "constitutional hero" and said that promises like Thompson's are how "things are done in Iran, not America." I'm sure that some of you would agree. But, you might wish to consider the source. Just to give you a little perspective on this, Alan Dershowitz has become infamous within the last ten years for going on TV and in newspapers and books laying out his legal argument for why the US government has the right to torture people who are declared enemy combatants.

Go ahead - freak us.

Gladly. Though, I must warn you: you might find it a little difficult to defend the Rs and especially their lawyers afterwards.

Here goes: in mid-1997, Craig Lewis, the GLOBE news editor--if you could call him that--hatched a scheme to buy a copy of the ransom note. The plan was to offer Don Vacca, a Ramsey-hired handwriting expert, a sum of money in exchange for a copy. He hired a local attorney named Thomas Miller (hereafter known as Tom Miller) under false pretenses and put his plan into action. The meeting went down, Lewis made his offer, and Vacca rejected it. Vacca went to the authorities and demanded action, but the Jefferson County DA blew it off. I'm not really sure why; maybe they figured it wasn't worth pursuing.

Well, by the end of that year, Miller, who was also a handwriting expert well-respected in the Colorado court system, got the materials legit and made his conclusion as to who wrote it: Patsy Ramsey.

Here's where it gets interesting. Eventually, word leaked up to Hal Haddon, the senior partner in Haddon, Forman and Morgan, the Ramseys' lawyers. Haddon was friends with Dave Thomas, the Jefferson County DA, and apparently called in a favor. The favor was that, after two full years of the JC DA saying that it wasn't worth pursuing, Lewis and Miller were arrested and charged with commercial bribery, with Lewis getting slapped with extortion to boot.

Miller was puzzled as to why he got hauled in on this beef. It soon became apparent that HE was the real target all along, not Lewis. He saw the handwriting on the wall when he saw how different the plea deals that they were offered were. Lewis got the offer that Fang posted: if the GLOBE agreed to make a donation of $100,000 to the University of Colorado, Boulder journalism school, he'd be free and clear. The donation was made, and Craig Lewis walked free that very day.

Miller's offer was substantially different. No self-respecting man could accept the terms of the deal he was offered. The deal was that Miller would go free IF he voluntarily gave up his law license and personally repudiated his own handwriting credentials. He told them to stuff their deal.

So, he went to trial. During the trial, his lawyer called to the witness stand a man named David Williams. David Williams was a private investigator employed by Hal Haddon's law firm. Williams admitted on the witness stand that he and several other private investigators had been ordered by Hal Haddon himself to find "dirt" on Miller, something that would bring his credibility as a handwriting expert into question.

Why did they do this? Well, according to Williams, Haddon was afraid that Miller might be called to testify against Patsy Ramsey if the Rs were ever brought to trial. So, Williams and the others were dispatched to pry into his private and professional life, searching for any kind of professional breach of ethics or illegal act, anything that could be used to give a jury reason not to believe him. When they couldn't find one, they decided to MAKE one. Thus, the request to Dave Thomas to bring charges against him. It was a despicable instance of the political cronyism that ruined this case.

When it was all said and done, it took the jury less than one hour of deliberations to set Miller free. SOME justice prevailed, I guess.