RIP Common Sense

[cynic]

...the cold case of Heather Dawn Church. Technically, Smit did not solve this case at all, Tom Carney, a crime laboratory technician who worked for Colorado Springs figured the best evidence they had were fingerprints, so he took photos of the fingerprints and sent them to about 100 agencies to enter into their fingerprint databases. Voila, they got a hit in Louisiana. Case solved. By a crime lab technician, not, technically, Lou Smit.

That's absolutely true.

El Paso County got a new sheriff, John Anderson, a former Colorado Springs police sergeant. Anderson soon hired an old partner, Lou Smit, as head of investigations. Smit, who has a knack for solving old homicide cases, made Heather a top priority again.
Shortly after starting work last January, Smit reviewed Heather's file, a process he calls "messing with a case." He asked his investigators to come up with something new, something that hadn't been tried.
Tom Carney, a crime laboratory technician, immediately thought of the prints. "We knew those fingerprints had to be from the suspect," he said.
A better approach, he figured, would be an exhaustive mailing of quality photos of the prints to every police agency with an Automated Fingerprint Identification System. Like the FBI's system, AFIS compares fingerprint images electronically. AFIS computers aren't interconnected, but each one may contain prints that aren't in the hands of the FBI.
So Carney made 100 sets of photos of the three fingerprints and began sending them to 92 agencies with AFIS. Carney remembered thinking, "If this doesn't work, that's it.
On March 24, someone from the Louisiana prison system called to report a match between the prints from the Church home and prints in its data base. The prints belonged to Robert Charles Browne. He had spent time in Louisiana prisons for various crimes, including auto theft, in the early and mid-1980s. He moved to Colorado in 1987 and, after living at several addresses, settled into a home just down the road from the Church residence.
August 6, 1995: Colorado Springs Gazette

Compare with:

Smit first displayed talent for getting to the bottom of cold cases in the 1980s with Colorado Springs police, then later with the El Paso County Sheriff's Office. In 1991, four years after the murder of 13-year-old Heather Dawn Church, Smit dredged up old fingerprint evidence from a windowpane at the Church home, sending it to dozens of agencies in hopes of finding a match. The effort paid off. The print belonged to a man who lived about a quarter-mile from the girl. The man was subsequently arrested and convicted.
http://www.csindy.com/colorado/getting-away-with-murder/Content?oid=1127733

 

[vlpate]

This has pretty much explained Lou Smit IMO.

Detective Smit joined the Colorado Springs Police Department in 1966. At the time, he fell a half-inch short of meeting the 5-foot-9 height requirement. He persuaded his cousin, who was on the force, to hammer him on the head with his nightstick, The New York Times Magazine reported in 2007. The resulting welt allowed him to meet the requirement when he was re-measured.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/us/14smit.html

Shut the eff up LOL I've never seen this. Too funny. All this time and I had no idea he had intimate knowledge of "head trauma"..:slap:

 

[KoldKase]

Shut the eff up LOL I've never seen this. Too funny. All this time and I had no idea he had intimate knowledge of "head trauma"..:slap:

I don't want to sound like a smartazz here, but how'd you manage to miss that? :silly:

 

[cynic]

I don't want to sound like a smartazz here, but how'd you manage to miss that? :silly:

This has caused me to wonder if there is a minimum height requirement at the Boulder DA’s office and how many inches below the mark Lacy:crazy: might have been??? :bigstick:

 

[KoldKase]

Cooperating with Authorities running to the media, making book deals, and threatening them because they and they only had egg on their face.

You only have part of your story right anyhow. But yeah on the part you do that is exactly what I am saying happened. The Ramsey's are victims and RDI's like most of you are now part of the lynch mob.

So if you can't win on the evidence, you start with the name-calling.

This particular epithet was first used in this case by none other than Team Ramsey, headed by Haddon himself: lynch mob. It didn't even work for him because it's the universal sign of a weak argument.

Are you familiar with Ramsey Super-Shill jameson, who ran a forum for years in which she did some very nasty things on their behalf. She loved to post actual photos of real lynchings. Lovely friends the Ramseys kept.

Once their main supply of online support and a legendary spreader of disinformation for the Ramseys, she actually turned their former maid's husband in for child *advertiser censored* after posting some photos she claimed to have found online.

Of course the husband of the maid was not the man in the photo, nor was the child their daughter, but the family had to be investigated once the finger was ponted. That family suffered for simply working for the Ramseys. They were poor and they had no one to protect THEM: no powerful team of lawyers lining up to keep THEM from being LYNCHED by the Ramseys. The Ramseys used those poor people and never looked back ONCE, couldn't have cared less how much the maid's family or anyone else was hurt as the Ramsey's good little shills went about pointing their cameras, pens, and lawyers at anyone and everyone who served Team Ramsey in obstructing the investigation into the murder of their own little girl.

Dozens of innocent people were hurt by the unapologetic onslaught of libel and slander used against the vulnerable by Team Ramsey. There's your lynch mob. The Ramseys have never so much as set foot inside of the BPD to ask if they could help, though they've done their best to get others arrested.

So when you try to cast such an aspersion on us who have never done anything but sought the truth when the Ramseys themselves have gone to Hell and bargained with the Devil himself to keep it buried, you may be fooling yourself, but that's all.

 

[KoldKase]

This has caused me to wonder if there is a minimum height requirement at the Boulder DA’s office and how many inches below the mark Lacy:crazy: might have been??? :bigstick:

:lol:

I think there were other, more important requirements in Boulder in those days.
Hunter was the D.A. who brought her on, after all. :ufo:

 

[cynic]

:lol:

I think there were other, more important requirements in Boulder in those days.
Hunter was the D.A. who brought her on, after all. :ufo:

I can’t argue with that, LOL.

 

[cynic]

So if you can't win on the evidence, you start with the name-calling.

This particular epithet was first used in this case by none other than Team Ramsey, headed by Haddon himself: lynch mob. It didn't even work for him because it's the universal sign of a weak argument.

Are you familiar with Ramsey Super-Shill jameson, who ran a forum for years in which she did some very nasty things on their behalf. She loved to post actual photos of real lynchings. Lovely friends the Ramseys kept.

Once their main supply of online support and a legendary spreader of disinformation for the Ramseys, she actually turned their former maid's husband in for child *advertiser censored* after posting some photos she claimed to have found online.

Of course the husband of the maid was not the man in the photo, nor was the child their daughter, but the family had to be investigated once the finger was ponted. That family suffered for simply working for the Ramseys. They were poor and they had no one to protect THEM: no powerful team of lawyers lining up to keep THEM from being LYNCHED by the Ramseys. The Ramseys used those poor people and never looked back ONCE, couldn't have cared less how much the maid's family or anyone else was hurt as the Ramsey's good little shills went about pointing their cameras, pens, and lawyers at anyone and everyone who served Team Ramsey in obstructing the investigation into the murder of their own little girl.

Dozens of innocent people were hurt by the unapologetic onslaught of libel and slander used against the vulnerable by Team Ramsey. There's your lynch mob. The Ramseys have never so much as set foot inside of the BPD to ask if they could help, though they've done their best to get others arrested.

So when you try to cast such an aspersion on us who have never done anything but sought the truth when the Ramseys themselves have gone to Hell and bargained with the Devil himself to keep it buried, you may be fooling yourself, but that's all.

BBM
ITA, couple that with Lin Wood threatening litigation upon anything that might bring justice for JonBenet and you have a clear picture of who the lynch mob is.
Look at how quickly Lin was out when the BPD recently approached Burke.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Speaking of lacking common sense...

While reading comments about the Caylee Anthony case on other forums, I read a post by one idiot claiming that JonBenet's case was SOLVED in 2011 but the press won't report it because they didn't like that an intruder had killed her. Apparently, there was a trial and everything. This hasn't been reported by any press, or mentioned on any LE/municipal websites, yet somehow this person knows it was solved.

Another idiotic comment I read was that JonBenet's parents are actively searching for the killer, but the press won't give them any attention. First of all, Patsy is dead, and John is definitely not looking for the killer. Playing a role in a Aphrodite Jones TV Special that gives out false information is not looking for the killer.

UGH.

 

[DeeDee249]

Speaking of lacking common sense...

While reading comments about the Caylee Anthony case on other forums, I read a post by one idiot claiming that JonBenet's case was SOLVED in 2011 but the press won't report it because they didn't like that an intruder had killed her. Apparently, there was a trial and everything. This hasn't been reported by any press, or mentioned on any LE/municipal websites, yet somehow this person knows it was solved.

Another idiotic comment I read was that JonBenet's parents are actively searching for the killer, but the press won't give them any attention. First of all, Patsy is dead, and John is definitely not looking for the killer. Playing a role in a Aphrodite Jones TV Special that gives out false information is not looking for the killer.

UGH.

Maybe these people had someone hit them on the head with a hammer, too.

 

[SunnieRN]

The two of you amuse, amaze and astound me!!!:clap::yourock::great: Add in Super Dave and DeeDee and you could not only prove this case, but prosecute it too!! Thanks for all the great education!!

As you can see in the preface to my post, I presented Klaas by way of giving an alternative viewpoint to the “get all the lawyers you can afford” situation that we saw in the Ramsey case.
It is a fact that many people have sat down with police and agreed to be interviewed without an attorney present and I acknowledge that, while there is an element of risk in doing so, it unquestionably at least gives the appearance that they have nothing to hide.
I will admit that I have enormous respect for Marc Klaas and his work.
While he consulted an attorney, he did not hire one, nor did he use a lawyer, a public relations consultant or a spokesperson to hide behind as the Ramseys did with respect to their dealings with the police.
Klaas, in numerous appearances and interviews over the years, has also repeatedly underscored the need to cooperate quickly and fully with police.
Once again, the mind boggling and unprecedented action of stalling police for 4 months stands in stark contrast to not only the advice of Marc Klaas, but what would be the normal behavior of any parent interested in aiding in an investigation, (with the exception of Casey Anthony and the Ramseys.)

While there are considerable differences between the disappearance of Polly Klaas and the death of JonBenet, it is still a fact that as a parent Klaas could have been involved.

ERNIE ALLEN, PRES., NATIONAL CTR FOR MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN: It is surprising. And certainly, in this country, one of the first things that law enforcement would do is question the parents, question those who are around the children.
SNOW: Take the case of Polly Klaas, who was abducted from her home in 1993 and was found dead months later. Her father, Marc, says he and other family members were questioned by police and cleared within a week of Polly`s disappearance.
MARC KLAAS, KLAAS KIDS FOUNDATION: We took polygraph exams, we answered all their questions until they were satisfied that we had nothing to do with it, and then they moved on.
http://truthofthelie.com/2007/10/mystery-of-madeleine-mccann-disappearance-still-unsolved/

Pat Brown: One of the things, I think Marc Klaas says it all of the time on Nancy Grace when he’s on there. He says, a parent, and he should know because he was a suspect right up front with his missing daughter, Polly, He says you do everything you can to get the focus off of you to clear your name so they can go look for the person because the family is always looked at first because we all know that that’s most likely the people that do in their children and have the proximity to them. So you want to make sure you clear yourself in every way possible so the police go okay it’s definitely nothing to do with you. You’re showing no signs of trying to obstruct the investigation, you’re showing no signs of defense initiatives, showing no signs that you’re not telling the truth. So, you know, we, we’re comfortable with you.
http://regretsandramblings.com/2011/08/04/pat-brown-on-websleuths-radio-transcript/

With approximately 77 abductions by family members for every kidnapping by a non-family member law enforcement will inevitably follow the statistics and concentrate on the child’s known universe. They will launch parallel investigations with a focus on the family and move outward. Like concentric ripples in a pond, they will look at family, friends and acquaintances, peripheral contacts, sex offenders registered in the community and finally the most frightening and daunting scenario of all: strangers.
As intrusive as it may become and as irrelevant as it may seem, fully cooperate with law enforcement and eliminate yourself as a suspect. They will ask questions that seem irrelevant and may even ask you to take a polygraph examination. It is not fair, but it is necessary. Remember, like you, law enforcement doesn’t know where your child is and the sooner they are able to gather and assimilate information and evidence, the sooner they are going to be able to direct their investigation toward the solution.
http://www.klaaskids.org/pg-mc-lawenforcement.htm

Although the following deals with a general missing child scenario, I thought it was relevant:
To give your child the best chance of being found, you and law enforcement must treat one another as partners. —Don Ryce
Few parents have had experience working with law enforcement agencies. Perhaps you have had contact previously with law enforcement as a result of a traffic ticket or an accident. If so, you probably saw law enforcement as the enforcer of rules that had been broken—not as a lifeline.
But when your child is missing, you and law enforcement become partners pursuing a common goal—finding your lost or abducted child. As partners, you need to establish a relationship that is based on mutual respect, trust, and honesty. As partners, however, you do not have to agree on every detail. This chapter provides insight into the relationship you are entering into with law enforcement—what you can expect from the investigation, what types of questions you are likely to be asked, and what situations you and your family are likely to encounter in the process.

Your Partnership With Law Enforcement
When asked if it bothered me to take a lie detector test, I told the reporter, “They can electrocute me if it will bring my son back.”
—Claudine Ryce

Most people do not believe that they will be victims of crime—or that their children will be victimized. But if a young member of your family becomes a victim, you will likely wonder what law enforcement expects of you and what you can expect of law enforcement. Understanding these expectations will deepen your knowledge of law enforcement’s role, establish a sound basis for your relationship with the agencies and organizations that are there to help, and assist you in handling this all-too-sudden change in circumstances.
Make sure law enforcement understands that your child is in danger and that his or her absence is likely to be involuntary. If your child is 10 years old or younger, it will not be hard to show that your child is in danger. However, if your child is older than 10, it is important to let law enforcement know that your child’s absence is not normal behavior and that you would be surprised if your child had disappeared voluntarily.
...
Be prepared for hard, repetitious questions from investigators. As difficult as it may be, try not to respond in a hostile manner to questions that seem personal or offensive. The fact is that investigators must ask difficult and sensitive questions if they are to do their jobs effectively.
...
Do everything possible to get you and your family removed from the suspect list. As painful as it may be, accept the fact that a large number of children are harmed by members of their own families, and therefore you and your family will be considered suspects until you are cleared. To help law enforcement move on to other suspects, volunteer early to take a polygraph test. Insist that both parents be tested at the same time by different interviewers, or one after another. This will help to deflect media speculation that one of you was involved in the disappearance.
Insist that everyone close to your child be interviewed. Encourage everyone—including family members, friends, neighbors, teachers, and coaches—to cooperate in the investigatory process. Although polygraph testing is voluntary, refusal to take a polygraph can cause law enforcement to spend time trying to eliminate an individual from the suspect list through other means and, as a result, take valuable time away from finding the real suspect.
...
Talk regularly with your primary law enforcement contact.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/html/ojjdp/204958/ch2.html

Let’s look at how the Ramseys used their resources:

On the night of December 27, the day after the debacle on Fifteenth Street, Detective Arndt and Sergeant Larry Mason arrived at Tin Cup Circle at 9:30 P.M. to schedule the formal interviews. But instead of stepping forward to cooperate, the Ramseys seemed to be fast fading from view.
John Ramsey was there but would not talk to them alone. Also present were his brother, Jeff Ramsey; Dr. Beuf, the pediatrician; Rod Westmoreland, Ramsey’s financial adviser from Atlanta, who introduced himself as an attorney; and the influential local lawyer Mike Bynum, who had once worked in the DA’s office. Bynum made his role official when he said he would be providing John Ramsey with legal advice.
It was the first time police had had a chance to speak with Ramsey since he had left his house the previous afternoon, yet he sat there with two lawyers.
The session lasted only forty minutes, during which time the detectives learned little. Ramsey asked no questions about the murder, the autopsy, or how JonBenét was killed. I later considered this very peculiar behavior. Parents usually want to provide information as soon as possible to help police find who harmed their child before the trail goes cold.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 53

As the second full day of the investigation came to a close, the parents still would not give interviews to police and had hired lawyers and private investigators who were tying down the testimony of witnesses before police got to them.
“Why won’t they help us?” I wondered. “What are they afraid of?”
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 65

Detective Arndt made one final try at persuading the lawyers to grant interviews but was told that the family would be out of state for an unknown time. She responded that she had a single page of questions the police would like to have answered, and the attorney said, “Fax them.”
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 67

Certainly everyone has the right to hire a lawyer and the right to remain silent, and I could not blame someone with a lot of money for hiring an attorney with impeccable credentials. But Ramsey had gone far beyond protecting his interests. What he had done would be unheard of in most big cities, even in the largest police investigations, and he simply overwhelmed a little town like Boulder.
Starting only a few hours after he found the body of his daughter, he retreated into a legal stronghold that could not be cracked. At least, not by us.
Hal Haddon of Denver had been the chief trial deputy in the state public defender’s office before going into partnership with two other attorneys, Bryan Morgan (the friend and occasional breakfast partner of Pete Hofstrom in the DA’s office) and Lee Foreman, in 1976. Eight years later, when Colorado Senator Gary Hart failed spectacularly in his presidential bid, Haddon was his campaign manager. His candidate crashed, but Haddon was left plugged into the Democratic Party political network, particularly in Colorado. In the nineties, as the attorney for Rockwell International, he engineered a plea bargain as a grand jury investigated the company for alleged environmental crimes at the Rocky Flats nuclear weapons plant just outside Boulder. The deal so enraged the grand jurors that they leaked their secret report to the press. Ramsey hired Haddon.
Bryan Morgan of Boulder was no stranger to law enforcement, partially from his representation of a woman named Lee Lindsley in a case several years before. Police responding to her early morning 911 call had found the snow around the house undisturbed and her physician husband shot to death. She was charged with murder, but Morgan successfully argued that two intruders did it, and Lindsley was acquitted. She moved to Atlanta and taught at the elementary school attended by the older children of John Ramsey. The Lindsley and Ramsey cases had a lot of similarities, including a claim of an intruder and the same defense attorney, but Deputy DA Trip DeMuth, in an extraordinary decision, forbade my pursuing that line. “The case is sealed,” he said. We had never intended to razor-blade open the file but thought to interview some of the major participants. “Don’t go near it.” Ramsey hired Morgan.
John Ramsey hired Patrick Burke of Denver to represent Patsy. Burke had once worked with Pat Furman, a professor of law at the University of Colorado, to gain acquittal for a man allegedly involved in the white supremacist slaying of Denver talk-show host Alan Berg. Ramsey hired Furman, too. The police found it particularly interesting that John and Patsy would be represented by separate attorneys, a move that can indicate a possible conflict of interest between the parties.
A lawyer was needed in Atlanta for the family members back there, and someone suggested Jim Jenkins, one of the top lawyers in Georgia. Ramsey hired Jenkins.
The private investigative firm of Ellis Armistead in Denver was brought aboard. Pat Korten, a public relations specialist in Washington, D.C., was hired to deal with the press. Handwriting experts were hired. And John Douglas, a former FBI profiler who had spent a career getting into the minds of killers, was hired.
We referred to the whole pack as Team Ramsey, and although the attorneys resented being called “defense lawyers,” that’s precisely what they were, as one would later openly declare.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, pages 110 - 111

Although still too distraught to meet with us, John and Patsy Ramsey spoke for several hours with their newest trophy hire, John Douglas, formerly with the FBI’s behavioral sciences unit.
John Ramsey’s lawyer Bryan Morgan was at the profiler’s side and permitted no direct questions about the Ramseys during a long interview.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 136

Two months would pass before we finally got to interview Lucinda Ramsey Johnson. In the meantime, we learned that John Ramsey was paying both for his first wife’s lawyer and for the mortgage on her house. There was no doubt about her loyalty.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 150

Fleet told us that Ramsey lawyer Mike Bynum had called them shortly after the body was discovered. Surely he was talking about December 27, the night John Ramsey talked with Bynum at the Fernie house. White found his notes and said, “No, it was the day before, on the afternoon of December 26.” You sure of that date? I asked. White checked his notes again. Yes.
The minds of two detectives went into overdrive. The body of JonBenét was found at 1:05 P.M., and John and Patsy left the house at about 2:30 P.M. NOW White was saying that an attorney was already in play, calling witnesses, only a few hours later. WOW!
Fleet added that he was also interviewed by three people associated with Team Ramsey the following day, December 27, when he didn’t know any better than to speak with them. The private investigators weren’t out canvassing the neighborhood for an intruder but were pinpointing the Ramseys’ best friends while the police were being stalled.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, pages 287 - 288


“Team Ramsey:”

John Ramsey’s lawyers:
Lee Foreman (criminal defense attorney)
Hal Haddon (criminal defense attorney)
Bryan Morgan (criminal defense attorney)

Mike Bynum (civil defense attorney)
William Gray (civil defense attorney)
Lin Wood (civil defense attorney)

Patsy Ramsey’s lawyers:
Patrick Furman
Patrick Burke

Lawyer for Lucinda Johnson, Melinda, John Andrew, and Burke Ramsey:
James Jenkins

Private Investigators:
Ellis Armistead
Jon Foster
David Williams
Ollie Gray
John San Agustin
What were these investigators doing?
Q. Then what was, basically, your association with the private investigation of the potential suspects in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. The investigators were retained by our attorneys, and they stated to me that the principal purpose of those investigators was to prepare a defense in the case that the police might bring a charge against me. I hoped that they would also follow up on leads that came to us, but I was frequently reminded by our attorneys that their principal role was to prepare a defense should that be necessary.
Deposition of John Ramsey, December 12, 2001

Handwriting analysts:
Lloyd Cunningham
Howard C. Rile, Jr.

Other:
Patrick Korten - Media consultant
Charlie Russell – Public relations consultant

Rachelle Zimmer - Spokeswoman for the Ramsey family

John Douglas - Criminal profiler (consultant)

Ed Gelb - Polygrapher

Lou Smit – Friend

Mary Lacy - Friend

Thank you for this and the work that went into it! I researched Lou Smit many years ago because I just couldn't figure out how a man with his crazy ideas was so revered in some law enforcement circles. I think the straw that broke the camel's back was when he and ....was it Doberson? ... stun gunned a pig. We kept hearing how he had solved a famous cold case that had been given up on years earlier. How did he solve the case? I'm not saying he didn't solve cold cases, because he did (no one is sure which ones), but, the one he touted, the one certain swamp dwellers crammed down our throats anytime his intruder theory was questioned, was the cold case of Heather Dawn Church. Technically, Smit did not solve this case at all, Tom Carney, a crime laboratory technician who worked for Colorado Springs figured the best evidence they had were fingerprints, so he took photos of the fingerprints and sent them to about 100 agencies to enter into their fingerprint databases. Voila, they got a hit in Louisiana. Case solved. By a crime lab technician, not, technically, Lou Smit.

Well, and then there's this:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:AG7ZSEBNdVwJ:www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php%3Ft%3D9703+lou+smit+was+a+fraud&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us
By Whynut:

So, the one and only detective the Ramsey's hired to find the ever illusive intruder was the late, great, Lou Smit. Unless you count his sidekicks whose names escape me - something like Laurel and Hardy....

"...when they get a match...."

Tell me, please, exactly where you think they're going to make that match?

Do you actually believe that this perp did not know the Ramseys? You think the ransom note writer was able to hang out in the house for hours, abuse and murder a child while the parents slept, have a seat and write A PRACTICE RANSOM NOTE OR TWO OR THREE on Patsy's pad with her pen, in her handwriting, using the same LINGUISTICS and inside personal and professional references someone would have to be familiar with to fool every handwriting analyst who ever examined the note?

OH, AND THE CHILD ATE PINEAPPLE WITH HIM BEFORE HE MURDERED HER! Yeah, he had her eating at the table with him, then back to her room they went, never mind her family sleeping nearby, no worries. After all, someone was already sexually abusing her, so they wouldn't mind anyway, would they?

And for 15 years, the parents of the murdered child spent a fortune to cover up for this stranger, all while making themselves appear as guilty as sin by avoiding and lying to LE ad nauseam when they did give them interviews four months after the murder?

Did I mention the Ramseys knowingly withheld critical evidence from LE for five years--the "alleged" package of Bloomies?

Did I mention three YEARS after the murder Patsy couldn't pass a lie detector test until the fourth or fifth try, with HER OWN SELF-SPONSORED POLYGRAPHERS? And they'd already taken who knows how many for her lawyers before that, one can deduce from their refusal to answer that question in an interview, citing "privilege." Ha! THEIR privilege to waive, but la de dah.

Yeah, there's some child molester running around garroting children who did it so badly he completely screwed up and murdered JonBenet, after he changed his mind that he didn't really want to kidnap her after all...so many victims, so much time to hang out, you know...and decided to take her to the basement and finish her off after he'd bludgeoned her in her bedroom, but hey, why not leave the ransom note he so thoughtfully and diligently wrote in draft after draft, to get it just right, doncha' know?

And you, Roy, think that some day, some match to that DNA is going to hit and LE is going to be breaking their necks to take credit for...discovering some stranger's DNA doesn't tell them anything more than the clothing got contaminated at some point?

JonBenet's parents could have stopped ALL of this by simply going to the BPD and cooperating FROM DAY ONE.

And why wouldn't they? Excuses, excuses. Actions are key; and their action was to try to get out of town as fast as they could, keep their lawyers between them and LE, and obstruct the investigation.

You do know LE uses the Ramsey 911 call to train how to detect lies, right, Roy?

 

[JBean]

Please don't discuss members here on the forum. I am removing posts about the status of a posters membership. Please don't contact a moderator about this topic as it is not information that is shared. Thanks

 

[wonderllama]

I think I just got told off by someone else's mother

 

[BBB167893]

This has pretty much explained Lou Smit IMO.

Detective Smit joined the Colorado Springs Police Department in 1966. At the time, he fell a half-inch short of meeting the 5-foot-9 height requirement. He persuaded his cousin, who was on the force, to hammer him on the head with his nightstick, The New York Times Magazine reported in 2007. The resulting welt allowed him to meet the requirement when he was re-measured.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/14/us/14smit.html

And THIS is the guy IDI pinned its hopes on! God save us all...

 

[BBB167893]

The two of you amuse, amaze and astound me!!!:clap::yourock::great: Add in Super Dave and DeeDee and you could not only prove this case, but prosecute it too!! Thanks for all the great education!!

Someone call my name? Heeeeee's BACK!

Not that I disagree with your assessment, SunnieRN, but as far as I'm concerned, justice (some of it) has already been done. God passed his sentence on Patsy Ramsey: she died a horrible, lingering, terrifying, painful death. And I can only imagine what happened to her soul afterwards.

I'm not in this just to get justice for JonBenet. I'm out to prevent it from happening AGAIN. And sadly, now it HAS, with Caylee Anthony. And I honestly believe that the Ramseys and their acolytes bear some of the blame for that. As ye sow, so shall ye reap.

But since you brought up what it would take to prosecute this case, I can't help but compare this to OJ Simpson. When asked how OJ managed to beat the rap, anyone with a SHRED of intellectual honesty will tell you that it came down to demographics. The defense team made sure that the jury was made up of people who were most likely to believe their story about "the pigs." Well, in this case, the middleman was cut out entirely. They didn't NEED a jury to believe that because they already had a DA who believed it!

Don't take my word for it, either. Alex Hunter was a product of the Great Society and very much stuck in that era, an era when cops became seen as "pigs," brutal fascists who acted as eyes, ears and fists for "the Man." Alex Hunter believed that. As he saw it, the police were a greater danger to society than all the criminals put together. So it's at the point where, if someone asks me why this case was so badly botched: that's the answer I give 'em: a far-left politician more interested in reforming the law to suit his own politically correct agenda than in justice.

And it's not just ME who has said that. And not just ST either. It's a LONG list.

 

[wonderllama]

I think Dave's got it in one.
No justice will come from this case other than the fact that PR suffered at the end the way she did.

And one can only hope that for the 10 years she lived after JBR's death, PR was frightened of being caught every day. That there is your justice.

 

[BBB167893]

I think Dave's got it in one.
No justice will come from this case other than the fact that PR suffered at the end the way she did.

I realize that may have seemed cruel, especially so, given my own unique personal history. But the sympathy I once felt is eroding FAST.

And one can only hope that for the 10 years she lived after JBR's death, PR was frightened of being caught every day. That there is your justice.

You wouldn't know it from her public actions. She seemed to think it was all a big game. Darnay Hoffman and Dr. Steven Pitt both said that this was a woman who honestly believed she was too smart for a bunch of small-town hick cops to ever nail.

 

[runsdeep]

gotta get on my soap box now. my thoughts have always been that any parent who knows about mistreatment and doesnt stop it, is just as guilty as the one doing the actual behavior.