Found Deceased NY - Jennifer Ramsaran, 36, Chenango County, 11 Dec 2012 - #12

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Status
Not open for further replies.
Seems to me, some are desperate enough to lie for the alleged guilty to protect their own family - we might just get to watch this unfold rather publicly - If this were my family I'd LU, if not for my defence, for my PR. No one can be naive enough to think they are going to skim by without an attorney. I wonder if GR is sharing his attorneys? They seemed to know others named publicly in this case rather well - I hope everyone is keeping an eye on the scorned because this is only going to get worse and there are already too many victims
 
Well, shame on the adults who dragged them into this.

They can be okay though. All they need is love, stability, honesty and just enough cash to get by. I am certain three children have exactly that now. And I am desperately hoping the other two will have it soon.

Although I have to say, if an account were to be set up for Jennifer's children, I'd be really tempted to donate. I know we aren't allowed to do that kind of thing here, but I would really like to see it somewhere 'out there'. You never know. Upstate might update us - he/she is all official now!

PS: I still think you're wild upstate, even with the stamp of authority!



I would imagine something along the lines of this will happen and it is in very capable, loving hands. People have jumped at the opportunity to help Jen's kids and I would imagine those loving and capable hands are there for the long haul - Big hearted people rock!
 
I would imagine something along the lines of this will happen and it is in very capable, loving hands. People have jumped at the opportunity to help Jen's kids and I would imagine those loving and capable hands are there for the long haul - Big hearted people rock!

You got it with the big hearted people upstate!! We have seen many, and I have met some awesome people out there!!!!!!!! You rock upstate! Z you are the best!! We have a great family here on WS to don't want to leave anyone out!! :rockon:
 
Thinking of Jennifer but mainly the justice that we have all prayed for.
 
O/T but Abigail mentioned a missing young man in Kentucky upthread. It's just been confirmed he is alive.

When someone is missing I try not to think about justice too much. I just cannot bear the idea of someone being lost 'out there' somewhere and just try to think about how they can be brought home.

Jennifer was very different for me though. I felt there were injustices too outrageous to be ignored while she was missing and afterwards. And now I desperately want justice for Jennifer's loved ones as much as for Jennifer.

I think they will get it.
 
O/T but Abigail mentioned a missing young man in Kentucky upthread. It's just been confirmed he is alive.

When someone is missing I try not to think about justice too much. I just cannot bear the idea of someone being lost 'out there' somewhere and just try to think about how they can be brought home.

Jennifer was very different for me though. I felt there were injustices too outrageous to be ignored while she was missing and afterwards. And now I desperately want justice for Jennifer's loved ones as much as for Jennifer.

I think they will get it.



Good to know and happy to hear this
 
Thanks! And thanks to everyone who went over there to help out. A very mysterious case...heart rending in many ways...still a lot of unanswered questions
picture.php


but I don't need the answers...I have the one answer I need: he's alive.:dance:

Now...back to our Jennifer! And :justice:
 
It is very poignant because I can't help wishing there had been a chance for Jennifer to be found alive too. I think it was clear to almost everyone from early on that it wasn't to be though.

It reminds me of GR's statement about the 'what ifs'. Though I think his what ifs are probably very different from the ones I think of.
 
That's interesting. I had to look up material witness. I realised that, despite being very familiar with the term through news reports, I didn't really know what it means. It says at this link it is someone with information that could significantly affect the outcome of a trial!.

Whatever information ES has sounds as though it must be pretty crucial to me.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/material+witness
 
I have another legal question. I just can't stop worrying and the trial is ages away. I'm getting on my own nerves now.

If someone pleads not guilty, do they have to answer questions in court by the prosecutor? Or can they stay silent? I am sure I remember cases in England where a murder suspect stayed silent because his/her lawyer thought they would give the jury a poor impression.
 
I have another legal question. I just can't stop worrying and the trial is ages away. I'm getting on my own nerves now.

If someone pleads not guilty, do they have to answer questions in court by the prosecutor? Or can they stay silent? I am sure I remember cases in England where a murder suspect stayed silent because his/her lawyer thought they would give the jury a poor impression.

No, the accused can choose not to testify in court. If he does testify in his own defense, he is subject to cross-examination by the D.A.

However, whether or not he testifies, any words he has spoken prior to the trial -- whether to other individuals (including ES), or in televised interviews (including the parts that got cut before airing), or in police interrogations -- all can be entered into testimony. This is where material witnesses come in. They give testimony as to what they heard, what they saw on the day of the murder, and in the days before and after.

Obviously, GR and his attorney will hope that ES forgets a lot of details. They might try to encourage her to that end...through swarmy accolades in an interview...or professions of undying love.
 
Well, that makes me wonder if there will be anymore material witnesses. I suppose the staff at the Y and the sheriff's deputy might be called by the defence, but from what's been said I don't know if that would help GR very much - I think it was stated the Y staff themselves tipped off LE that GR had visited outside of his usual time, and made a big fuss about Jennifer going shopping?

I wonder what impression the deputy got? I don't recall any information or quotes about that exchange. I'm thinking if GR was trying to make people pay attention to his presence, and being over-friendly, it may have made the deputy a little uneasy and what was said would have stuck in his mind.
 
Well, that makes me wonder if there will be anymore material witnesses. I suppose the staff at the Y and the sheriff's deputy might be called by the defence, but from what's been said I don't know if that would help GR very much - I think it was stated the Y staff themselves tipped off LE that GR had visited outside of his usual time, and made a big fuss about Jennifer going shopping?

I wonder what impression the deputy got? I don't recall any information or quotes about that exchange. I'm thinking if GR was trying to make people pay attention to his presence, and being over-friendly, it may have made the deputy a little uneasy and what was said would have stuck in his mind.

It's my understanding that the material witnesses are called by the State; therefore, any testimony would be more likely to support the murder indictment. Material witnesses could include anyone he spoke to or who saw him on the day of Jennifer's murder -- school personnel or other parents (when dropping off kids), YMCA staff and anyone else who spoke to him at the Y or observed his demeanor, ES, of course, as she gave him a ride home that day, Jennifer's parents (he called them that evening), and the officer who took the missing person report. Maybe the children? (not sure about the law on that). Maybe any colleagues from IBM with whom he would have communicated that day (although I doubt he had time for much conferencing). Also, anyone who had pertinent conversations with GR in the weeks preceeding and months after her murder (i.e. saying he wanted to spend the rest of his life with ES).

If I understand correctly, material witnesses could be called to verify his whereabouts on the day of the murder, whether his alibi holds any water, any converations that might be significant, his appearance and demeanor on the day of Jen's murder, etc. If children are permitted to testify, they can attest to whether or not they saw their mother alive that morning, whether she was up and dressed or still in bed, whether she was alert or seemed unusually...sleepy/disoriented. Material witnesses may also be called to report if something were missing that GR could have access to -- such as a bottle of benzodiazepine.

Material witnesses could also be called to give testimony of any knowlege they might have as to whether Jennifer was physically abused in the months/years leading up to her murder. If, say, friends, employer, relatives saw marks on her arms, or if they observed her being treated roughly, or if she confided in someone to that effect. Also, since she'd made an appointment with a divorce attorney -- anyone she may have confided in regarding that and her reasons for seeking divorce.
 
Thank you Abigail! Do you happen to also know if Jennifer's divorce lawyer will be able to give evidence? I remember in the Drew Peterson trial there was a really big fuss about whether second wife Stacey's lawyer could testify. Defence said it was all hearsay and his testimony was actually not allowed. Then, in a stunningly reckless move that left some (all?) of us ecstatic, defence called him themselves.

Whereupon he dutifully stated that Stacey had told him that Drew had confided....he killed his first wife Kathleen! I think at that stage the other defence lawyer began shouting across to examining defence, to try and make him shut up! Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone.

If Jennifer in her initial phone call had told her lawyer GR was betraying her, abusing her or threatening her, I wonder if that would be classed as hearsay too?

I just read in the Allison Baden-Clay thread that her insurance company put a hold on any payout as soon as her husband was charged. I hope the same has happened in this case. People seem a little worried there that if he is found innocent, husband will take all the money and leave his children (in maternal parent's care) penniless. If he doesn't regain custody, I would have thought a father in that situation would be forced to share any payout - maybe in the form of child support to the grandparents?
 
Thank you Abigail! Do you happen to also know if Jennifer's divorce lawyer will be able to give evidence? I remember in the Drew Peterson trial there was a really big fuss about whether second wife Stacey's lawyer could testify. Defence said it was all hearsay and his testimony was actually not allowed. Then, in a stunningly reckless move that left some (all?) of us ecstatic, defence called him themselves.

Whereupon he dutifully stated that Stacey had told him that Drew had confided....he killed his first wife Kathleen! I think at that stage the other defence lawyer began shouting across to examining defence, to try and make him shut up! Correct me if I'm wrong, anyone.

If Jennifer in her initial phone call had told her lawyer GR was betraying her, abusing her or threatening her, I wonder if that would be classed as hearsay too?

I just read in the Allison Baden-Clay thread that her insurance company put a hold on any payout as soon as her husband was charged. I hope the same has happened in this case. People seem a little worried there that if he is found innocent, husband will take all the money and leave his children (in maternal parent's care) penniless. If he doesn't regain custody, I would have thought a father in that situation would be forced to share any payout - maybe in the form of child support to the grandparents?

I didn't follow the Drew Peterson case closely - I do remember there was some objection (from defense) about Stacie's pastor testifying, because she had shared with him that he had killed his 3rd wife Kathleen (Stacie was #4), but I wasn't aware of the lawyer's testimony. I think usually the issue with a lawyer testifying is not that it is hearsay so much as the issue of attorney-client privilege. But, it sounds like Jennifer only made the appointment, and died before she kept it. So...interesting if she said anything to the lawyer or his/her secretary when making the appointment -- if she hadn't signed any papers to hire the attorney, he or she would be free to testify as to anything she said.

I'm pretty sure the insurance money is safe. Even if he is acquitted in a criminal trial, if the insurance company feels the evidence is compelling, they can refuse to pay out -- to GR at least. They can also try him in a civil trial, which is far harder to win.
 
Well, that makes me wonder if there will be anymore material witnesses. I suppose the staff at the Y and the sheriff's deputy might be called by the defence, but from what's been said I don't know if that would help GR very much - I think it was stated the Y staff themselves tipped off LE that GR had visited outside of his usual time, and made a big fuss about Jennifer going shopping?

I wonder what impression the deputy got? I don't recall any information or quotes about that exchange. I'm thinking if GR was trying to make people pay attention to his presence, and being over-friendly, it may have made the deputy a little uneasy and what was said would have stuck in his mind.



I would think the material witness could be called to testify about times and talks that fall outside of that particular time frame given in another post - I see where it later adds "Or months to years leading up to Jen's murder" I would personally believe the months leading up to his arrest as well, right?

If we have this material witness idea down, yes the prosecution has a very good material witness - This witness whether material or hostile - LOL - Will be for the prosecution's side

ES and her husband were at the school together and actually intermingled with other parents - This sighting would leave me to believe someone is going under the bus -- imo, of course
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
94
Guests online
271
Total visitors
365

Forum statistics

Threads
609,686
Messages
18,256,743
Members
234,723
Latest member
Pamadeus
Back
Top