Steve Thomas Update 2009

[ziggy]

Lou Smit when asked about his religious beliefs when it came to the Ramseys said he's put Christians in jail. What Lou Smit did, and what is his forte, is organizing case files, and review the evidence. He went into the case believing the parents did it. Steve Thomas belittled Lou Smit, when it became obvious Lou wouldn't be part of the Ramseys did it gang. Gee, a cop with no homicide experience compared to Lou Smit's reputation of solving cold cases. Lou very methodically looked at the evidence and put together a plausible case for an intruder. Lou Smt said based on his experience most crimes are what they appear to be, and I believe that is the case in the murder of JonBenet. If it's ever solved, it won't be that sensational---a kidnapping gone bad by amateurs.

Hello Maikai - long time no see. We are going to be in the minority here and because of the way the minority is sometimes treated, I haven't been to this forum in years - even though it was the reason I came to WS years ago.

Lou Smit's ability to work cold cases speaks for itself whether he was a Christian, prayed etc. or not. ST may have been an GREAT cop in narcotics stings etc. but the way you go about that type of investigation is just different and that is why the best homicide cops aren't usually the ones brought in from other areas or whatever and thrown into the most complicted case in the history of the town (and perhaps the world).

Lou and Steve are both just human. They both may bring interesting evidence and theory to the case. I would not WORHIP either one, but the worshiping of ST is something I can't stomach. What if he's wrong? Nobody on this forum really knows for sure. I am 100% sure ST believes what he says, but reality for some is not really the truth because of the particular glasses they wear.

I hope we will one day know the truth. If the case is being investigated again, that's probably good because now that the intruder theory has more legs in the public eye, it might bring us back to level ground to begin again.

There will not be enough evidence imo to pin this on either parent or sibling. Since poor JonBenet, there have been other intruders kidnapping children, killing them. At the time, nobody thought that was possible.

Just like Madeleine's parents, I'm just not ready to persecute them based on what we know thus far because if they are innocent, it would pave my path straight to hell!

I just want the truth and ST is not the light of the world and he's not the answer.

PS I don't spell check and I'm sloppy, not stoopid

 

[BBB167893]

Lou Smit's ability to work cold cases speaks for itself whether he was a Christian, prayed etc. or not. ST may have been an GREAT cop in narcotics stings etc. but the way you go about that type of investigation is just different and that is why the best homicide cops aren't usually the ones brought in from other areas or whatever and thrown into the most complicted case in the history of the town (and perhaps the world).

Well, if you ask my opinion, ziggy, it's not a complicated case.

There will not be enough evidence imo to pin this on either parent or sibling.

Unfortunately, even if there were, it wouldn't do any good now.

Since poor JonBenet, there have been other intruders kidnapping children, killing them. At the time, nobody thought that was possible.

Whoa, ziggy. That's one of the points I go to lengths in the book to make: that those crimes do not even REMOTELY resemble this one. Here, let me post a snippet:

in 2002, the dents became large holes. That year, American television screens were full of the faces of kidnapping victims, whose names we still remember to this day: Danielle Van Dam, Samantha Runnion, and Elizabeth Smart (who was returned safely, thank the gods). And of all of those little girls who were murdered, not one of them even remotely resembled what happened to JonBenet. For years, Team Ramsey told us that JonBenet was killed by some pedophile killer, and now we were forced to see what real pedophile killers do: they don't kill their victims inside the home, they don't redress their victims, and they dump their victims after killing them. Lin Wood, the Ramsey lawyer, had the unmitigated gall to co-opt the pain these families were in to push his clients' wild claim. Well, he didn't get away with it. Nancy Grace, the tough-as-nails Southern hellcat prosecutor was on that Larry King show that night, as was Marc Klaas, who has been a tireless advocate for laws to protect children from predators ever since his daughter Polly was kidnapped from her bedroom and murdered by a career criminal who had just gotten paroled for the umpteenth time in 1993. And they didn't go for it. Nancy pointed out how different JonBenet's killing was from those other cases, and Klaas, who is in a unique position to understand just what an insult Wood was committing to the memories of the victims' families, really went to town

 

[BBB167893]

I think I'll dig out his book, and the Vanity Fair article, and start a thread on his great work on the case.

That's something we all could enjoy.

 

[Ravyn]

I want to know who put ST on the case.And why? You know Lou Smit stated that he couldn't remove PR for being the RN author. But why do you think someome put ST on this investigation with no homcide experience cause this would and could help the DA justify his actions by saying well ST doesn't have the right experience for this kind of case there was alot a fall guys in this case as I see it and remember ST didn't believe the parents done it at first but then aagin the parents never done nothing to prove they didn't but alot of this is my opionions on this case.

 

[Ravyn]

And SD, what all happen to Marc Klaas when the LE thought he was the one that hurt his daughter and if I remember correctly he talked to the LE without lawyers.. So it always pay to have money when a child gets murder cause in my opinion that what helped the R's. In my opinion if a child found in their own basement then why not look at the parents or a family memeber. And why try to hind all evidence of an intruder as a parent I wouldn't want the same thing that happen to JonBenet to happen to someone's child, and thank heavens we have someone like Marc klaas and John Walsh that have stood up to protect the children... But like I said this is my opinion...

 

[GingBreade]

And SD, what all happen to Marc Klaas when the LE thought he was the one that hurt his daughter and if I remember correctly he talked to the LE without lawyers.. So it always pay to have money when a child gets murder cause in my opinion that what helped the R's. In my opinion if a child found in their own basement then why not look at the parents or a family memeber. And why try to hind all evidence of an intruder as a parent I wouldn't want the same thing that happen to JonBenet to happen to someone's child, and thank heavens we have someone like Marc klaas and John Walsh that have stood up to protect the children... But like I said this is my opinion...

Exactly! Marc Klaas didn't lawyer up IMMEDIATELY (if at all?) and he talked and talked to the cops and whoever wanted to talk to him. That's because he was innocent..

 

[Ames]

Exactly! Marc Klaas didn't lawyer up IMMEDIATELY (if at all?) and he talked and talked to the cops and whoever wanted to talk to him. That's because he was innocent..

Right! Mark Klaas on NG (Nancy Grace) said that innocent parents do not lawyer up, and refuse lie detector tests. He said that innocent parents will do whatever it takes to cooperate so that they can be ruled out quickly as suspects...and LE can move on and concentrate on finding the REAL killer. I have chatted with Mark before...I asked him specifically if he believed there was an intruder, in the Ramsey case. And he said.."No intruder, it was someone that lived inside the home".

 

[ziggy]

There will always be the ability to find distinguishable characterisitcs of each case to make your points. Afterall, that's what defense attorneys do. Each case in it's own right is also unique.

People with the business associates and lives they led such as the R's are different from say, Samantha Runion's mom, and yes, even Mark Klaas (another guy I respect but don't worship or agree with everything he says) so depending on the situation, lawyering up may be more common for them because of the distinguishable characteristics of this case, their professional relationships, and perhaps advice from others. Clearly they could feel the heat. They did what you are supposed to do if you feel threatened by the police and there are many cases where the cops WERE WRONG in their initial investigation and assumptions and innocent people have been railroaded.

That happens too you know. Witch hunts a plenty have put innocent people behind bars for years. I've seen the entire judicial system of a town be corrupted by one prosecutor with a creepy mind.

I just won't be a witch hunter. I see evidence on both sides. I can see some damning evidence and some exculpatory.

There is no way to say for sure by anyone except the killer.

Reasonable minds can disagree. I just can't stomach some of the vengence people want when they could very well be wrong.

 

[Ames]

There will always be the ability to find distinguishable characterisitcs of each case to make your points. Afterall, that's what defense attorneys do. Each case in it's own right is also unique.

People with the business associates and lives they led such as the R's are different from say, Samantha Runion's mom, and yes, even Mark Klaas (another guy I respect but don't worship or agree with everything he says) so depending on the situation, lawyering up may be more common for them because of the distinguishable characteristics of this case, their professional relationships, and perhaps advice from others. Clearly they could feel the heat. They did what you are supposed to do if you feel threatened by the police and there are many cases where the cops WERE WRONG in their initial investigation and assumptions and innocent people have been railroaded.

That happens too you know. Witch hunts a plenty have put innocent people behind bars for years. I've seen the entire judicial system of a town be corrupted by one prosecutor with a creepy mind.

I just won't be a witch hunter. I see evidence on both sides. I can see some damning evidence and some exculpatory.

There is no way to say for sure by anyone except the killer.

Reasonable minds can disagree. I just can't stomach some of the vengence people want when they could very well be wrong.

You would think that the Rams would have wanted to get themselves cleared..so that the BPD could get busy trying to find the "intruder", instead they lawyered up and stonewalled. And didn't want to give polygraphs...why not? What do they have to hide? Personally I would be saying..."YES...hook me up to a polygraph RIGHT NOW! I want to clear myself so that you will quit wasting precious time with me". "I will do what you need me to do, even if it is coming down to the police station for an interview when I believe that I need MORE TIME to collect myself...just as the Ramsey's did. They should have made a bee line, right to the police department, and gave them the interviews that the police wanted...instead, they wanted to do it on THEIR terms.

 

[Sophie]

I'm not sure that anyone is really after vengeance, are they? After all, one suspect is beyond human justice and any other perp has already taken twelve-odd years off his/her sentence. It's just wanting to know what happened to a child who might have been the new Mother Theresa or who might have turned into a total brat (that's the whole point of being six - you might turn into just about anything). It's exactly the same with Madeleine - punishing someone won't really make much difference now but knowing what happened to her is something we all want.

While I can see why you would raise the vengeance point in the context of ST not recanting his orginal thesis, the Patsy theory was actually a relatively small (although admittedly sparkly) part of ST's book. The main thrust was someone pointing out malfeasance in the public domain when doing so could actually do him some harm. This was what was so extraordinary.

 

[Sophie]

I want to know who put ST on the case.And why? You know Lou Smit stated that he couldn't remove PR for being the RN author. But why do you think someome put ST on this investigation with no homcide experience cause this would and could help the DA justify his actions by saying well ST doesn't have the right experience for this kind of case there was alot a fall guys in this case as I see it and remember ST didn't believe the parents done it at first but then aagin the parents never done nothing to prove they didn't but alot of this is my opionions on this case.

Actually, Ravyn, I hadn't thought about this but you are right - ST's (and everyone else's) lack of experience was an utter Godsend to anyone outside the BPD who wanted something to deflect attention from their own shortcomings. In fact (and again, there's a chance I'm imagining this*) but didn't Hunter try to suggest that ST had some sort of mental illness?

*Re-reading all the JBR stuff is looking like my summer literature project

 

[DeeDee249]

ST was put on the case because he was a good detective and the Boulder police was a small force. Denver called the Boulder chief of police with an offer to help (as they were a larger, more urban-type city and they had homicide experience). The Boulder chief refused all offers of help, even from the FBI, who were there at the house early that day. They were also sent home. When the crime turned out to be a murder instead of a kidnapping, the FBI were told their services would not be needed. It was an ego thing, really, with not wanting to make the Boulder police seem like they couldn't handle the case. (which obviously they couldn't).
Let's be frank- it wasn't ST's lack of homicide experience that hurt this case. It was the DA's refusal to support the police and grant the needed warrants. It was Hunter's fear of the R defense team. It was the missteps of the 2 officers first on the scene. It was not securing the crime scene immediately, allowing it to be irrevocably compromised. It was allowing so much time to elapse before talking to the parents, and not doing it separately.
THOSE things hurt this case, not ST's lack of homicide experience. A good detective follows evidence. Period.

 

[Ravyn]

I'm just wondering wasn't there someone higher that could had went over the DA head, and if so why didn't they.Cause I always thought the F.B.I. could go over the D.A

 

[Maikai]

Are you attempting to rewrite history or just play semantic games?

http://www.forstevethomas.com/stevehistory.htm

"After two officer-involved shootings, Thomas also instructed on surviving critical incidents. Prior to the Ramsey case, Thomas worked on a multi-state task force investigating racketeering and organized crime that resulted in numerous grand jury indictments."

He may have done a decent job as a narc and the organized crime task force, but in most cases they targeted the suspect and then set out to find evidence to convict them. His previous experience may have contributed to his short comings in the Ramsey case.

 

[DeeDee249]

He may have done a decent job as a narc and the organized crime task force, but in most cases they targeted the suspect and then set out to find evidence to convict them. His previous experience may have contributed to his short comings in the Ramsey case.

Let's face it- in EVERY crime police may have a suspect in mind and then try to piece the evidence. When a child is found murdered in their own home and that child's body is found by a parent in a well-hidden area- the first suspects that come to mind would be the parents. There is a long list of shortcomings in this case, not all of them attributable to ST or the Boulder police.
Detective Arndt was a rape victim specialist. That did not serve her well when investigating THIS case because she immediately viewed Patsy as the victim. The VICTIM was JonBenet. And that should have taken priority. It shouldn't have been "this poor mother whose daughter was murdered" but rather "this poor child was murdered- let's do all we can to find out who did it". Justice should be blind. In this case it wasn't.

 

[madeleine]

Exactly! Marc Klaas didn't lawyer up IMMEDIATELY (if at all?) and he talked and talked to the cops and whoever wanted to talk to him. That's because he was innocent..

YUP.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kuu_IfYOX7U"]YouTube - Marc Klaas - Its Our Duty[/ame]

:blowkiss: for both of them,Marc&ST :blowkiss:

 

[BBB167893]

I want to know who put ST on the case.And why? You know Lou Smit stated that he couldn't remove PR for being the RN author. But why do you think someome put ST on this investigation with no homcide experience cause this would and could help the DA justify his actions by saying well ST doesn't have the right experience for this kind of case there was alot a fall guys in this case as I see it and remember ST didn't believe the parents done it at first but then aagin the parents never done nothing to prove they didn't but alot of this is my opionions on this case.

Sure. That way, if it works out, the DA takes all the credit. If it doesn't, he takes no blame.

 

[JMO8778]

WOOHOO!!!! YAY!! <<applause>> Go Steve Thomas!!!

 

[Maikai]

Maikai, I am rushing around a bit but I think this is the interview I meant (just Googled it and identified it from the mists of time so I'm not 100%certain it's the right one: I'll check later. Nonetheless, it's pretty hard to see anything here that is redolent of dodgy policing.....).

http://www.westword.com/2000-10-19/news/justice-boulder-style/1



(PS. Happy Weekend BTW )

Thanks Sophie....that was a good article, and it outlines the two shooting incidences. Both could be justified, but they also could have been ended by other methods. Also, interesting discussion on ST's history in law enforcement. He worked the Hill area for 3 years---he should have known how it was changing for the worse, with the Ramsey home right in the middle of it. Not too far away was a hangout for transcients...and not the peace-loving hippies of the past. There were fights everyday...drug activity....violent assaults.

 

[Maikai]

Let's face it- in EVERY crime police may have a suspect in mind and then try to piece the evidence. When a child is found murdered in their own home and that child's body is found by a parent in a well-hidden area- the first suspects that come to mind would be the parents. There is a long list of shortcomings in this case, not all of them attributable to ST or the Boulder police.
Detective Arndt was a rape victim specialist. That did not serve her well when investigating THIS case because she immediately viewed Patsy as the victim. The VICTIM was JonBenet. And that should have taken priority. It shouldn't have been "this poor mother whose daughter was murdered" but rather "this poor child was murdered- let's do all we can to find out who did it". Justice should be blind. In this case it wasn't.

I agree. Arndt should not have been left alone in the house to begin with. While she was at the house the BPD was trying to find a handbook on kidnappings from a seminar. French should have looked into the cellar room. I know Linda Arndt thought the house had been searched thoroughly--she was told that. ST is just one cog in the wheel.

I was with my dad in Denver when the crime occurred--he is a retired cop. The first thing he said when the newscast came on was the parents did it--that's what they are taught. Perhaps they need to change the training manual. The Dowaliby murder was one of the first publicized cases where it was not the parents, but the father was indicted--mostly due to politics. Daly Jr. was running for mayor, and he wanted credit for solving the case---so his cronies were more then happy to oblige him and the Grand Jury indicted the father---and it was later learned, they were lied to as far as evidence. Fortunately he was eventually released from prison, with a brother-in-law (paranoid schizophrenic) the most likely suspect. To this day the case is unsolved. There's been other stranger intruder cases since. Usually there's some kind of history that comes out when a parent is involved.