The Ramseys are no longer “cleared” according to Stan Garnett

[cynic]

Bump, (for Sophie)

 

[BOESP]

Dr. Wecht's statement is similar to the conclusion Steve Thomas came to in his book.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Dr. Wecht's statement is similar to the conclusion Steve Thomas came to in his book.

I don't think they have the same suspect in mind.

 

[BOESP]

I don't think they have the same suspect in mind.

Did Wecht name anyone?

 

[twinkiesmom]

Did Wecht name anyone?

I haven't read these books in many years, but ST and Schiller's books focus on Patsy/bedwetting, whereas Wecht's theory suggests this was an accidental death secondary to sexual abuse.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/forensics/cyril_wecht/6.html

 

[BOESP]

I haven't read these books in many years, but ST and Schiller's books focus on Patsy/bedwetting, whereas Wecht's theory suggests this was an accidental death secondary to sexual abuse.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/forensics/cyril_wecht/6.html

I interpreted both Thomas's and Wecht's theories to be similar in thought but stated differently. I didn't recall if Wecht named a suspect but Thomas is quite open that he believed Patsy did it.

 

[WANM]

I think that whether the Boulder police are "suspicious" of the Ramseys or not, they NEED to consider other possibilities. Is it THAT hard for people to think that someone other than the Ramseys could have done it? What if you are wrong? What if they didn't do it, and a killer is free? I'm not saying anyone has to like the Ramseys or anything they do, but just because you don't like them doesn't mean they did it. And yes, I'm talking to you Boulder police. How many years has it been? If there was any evidence that the Ramseys did it, they would already be in jail. The Boulder police wanted to convict them so bad, but in the end- they couldn't come up with any evidence substantial enough to convict them.

 

[DeeDee249]

I think that whether the Boulder police are "suspicious" of the Ramseys or not, they NEED to consider other possibilities. Is it THAT hard for people to think that someone other than the Ramseys could have done it? What if you are wrong? What if they didn't do it, and a killer is free? I'm not saying anyone has to like the Ramseys or anything they do, but just because you don't like them doesn't mean they did it. And yes, I'm talking to you Boulder police. How many years has it been? If there was any evidence that the Ramseys did it, they would already be in jail. The Boulder police wanted to convict them so bad, but in the end- they couldn't come up with any evidence substantial enough to convict them.

There was enough evidence. It was the DA (friend of the R's defense team) who refused to allow the BPD to arrest them. The DA also refused to provide the warrants needed by the BPD to obtain even more evidence.

 

[twinkiesmom]

I interpreted both Thomas's and Wecht's theories to be similar in thought but stated differently. I didn't recall if Wecht named a suspect but Thomas is quite open that he believed Patsy did it.

No, to Wecht the crime was sexually motivated although the death may have been unintentional. Steve Thomas appeared to be on the same wavelength as Schiller.

 

[MurriFlower]

I think that whether the Boulder police are "suspicious" of the Ramseys or not, they NEED to consider other possibilities. Is it THAT hard for people to think that someone other than the Ramseys could have done it? What if you are wrong? What if they didn't do it, and a killer is free? I'm not saying anyone has to like the Ramseys or anything they do, but just because you don't like them doesn't mean they did it. And yes, I'm talking to you Boulder police. How many years has it been? If there was any evidence that the Ramseys did it, they would already be in jail. The Boulder police wanted to convict them so bad, but in the end- they couldn't come up with any evidence substantial enough to convict them.

Absolutely correct wanm. There was not enough evidence, that is why the DA wouldn't charge them. He was not corrupt (as RDI believes), he in fact removed one assistant DA because he was on the R's side.

If the Boulder Police have the same mindset as the RDI on this forum, that explains why this crime hasn't been solved. There is a total inability to even consider that they might be wrong, for example they are still adding to what they call the 'totallity of evidence' (which is in fact a collection of anecdotes) that only they believe is incriminating beyond reasonable doubt.

You are wasting your time trying to tell them that anyone other than the R's might have been guilty. You will find them trying to 'convert' you to RDI and if that doesn't work they will harrass you till you quit.

 

[DeeDee249]

You are wasting your time trying to tell them that anyone other than the R's might have been guilty. You will find them trying to 'convert' you to RDI and if that doesn't work they will harrass you till you quit.

Nobody harasses anyone here that I can see. No one has quit either, as far as I know, with the exception of one poor RDI who was harassed in PERSON by rabid IDIs and left for their own safety. This happened a few years ago.

 

[Peepers]

Absolutely correct wanm. There was not enough evidence, that is why the DA wouldn't charge them. He was not corrupt (as RDI believes), he in fact removed one assistant DA because he was on the R's side.

If the Boulder Police have the same mindset as the RDI on this forum, that explains why this crime hasn't been solved. There is a total inability to even consider that they might be wrong, for example they are still adding to what they call the 'totallity of evidence' (which is in fact a collection of anecdotes) that only they believe is incriminating beyond reasonable doubt.

You are wasting your time trying to tell them that anyone other than the R's might have been guilty. You will find them trying to 'convert' you to RDI and if that doesn't work they will harrass you till you quit.

I do believe there wasn't enough evidence in the sense of the grand jury. I personally dont think the GJ was corrupt; they just couldnt find enough evidence. The way things "looK" and "they way they acted" is not evidence in the legal sense. There are so many unanswered questions. If it comes out there was an intruder and its proven and someone is convicted; I dont know if I would be surprised or not. Personally, I think there is no logical explanation for the intruder because of the RN. If there was no RN, I think it would look less incriminating, but the RN is soooooo strange it trumps the intruder. I dont think JR was molesting JB, I dont think Patsy killed her in a rage, I think something happened in that house with BR and JB and PR and JR felt they had no choice but to cover it up. I feel sad for them really.

 

[Peepers]

I should add about the RN....its not that Im convinced of its weirdness because the writing supposedly matches PR..Its the content .I can get past the similarities in the writing. I cant get past the content.

 

[MurriFlower]

I should add about the RN....its not that Im convinced of its weirdness because the writing supposedly matches PR..Its the content .I can get past the similarities in the writing. I cant get past the content.

Well, I can't see there is any more reason to think one of the R's wrote it than there is to think someone else wrote it. All it requires is some knowledge of the family to know what work he did, that he moved from Atlanta, and his name.

The 'ransom' of $118,000 might point to someone who had prior access to the house (and saw/knew of the bonus payslip); it might equally have been seen while in the house on that day; it might be symbolic (a debt or amount owing); or it might just be a random amount that we see as a coincidence in hindsight.

Heck, all the so called 'inside' information that the RN contains could have been obtained from a lost wallet.

The fact that we can't explain the meaning of the RN does not make it more likely that she was murdered by her family than by an outsider.

 

[Peepers]

Well, I can't see there is any more reason to think one of the R's wrote it than there is to think someone else wrote it. All it requires is some knowledge of the family to know what work he did, that he moved from Atlanta, and his name.

The 'ransom' of $118,000 might point to someone who had prior access to the house (and saw/knew of the bonus payslip); it might equally have been seen while in the house on that day; it might be symbolic (a debt or amount owing); or it might just be a random amount that we see as a coincidence in hindsight.

Heck, all the so called 'inside' information that the RN contains could have been obtained from a lost wallet.

The fact that we can't explain the meaning of the RN does not make it more likely that she was murdered by her family than by an outsider.

I agree with you Murri..it could have been someone that knew the family and wanted the R's to look guilty. That is possible. For the big picture...to me..there isnt enough evidence IDI or RDI..both theories have their downfalls, Im just stating what I personally believe.

 

[MurriFlower]

I agree with you Murri..it could have been someone that knew the family and wanted the R's to look guilty. That is possible. For the big picture...to me..there isnt enough evidence IDI or RDI..both theories have their downfalls, Im just stating what I personally believe.

I'm not sure it was intended to make the R's look guilty. I think the BPD was the reason for this. I guess an IDI would have found this very fortunate and if this person had an opportunity to do so, I'm pretty sure they would have encouraged the notion.

You are right, the whole murder scenario was weird, but what went on after was even stranger.

 

[BBB167893]

I think that whether the Boulder police are "suspicious" of the Ramseys or not, they NEED to consider other possibilities.

They DID.

Is it THAT hard for people to think that someone other than the Ramseys could have done it?

That's a question that has to be answered on an individual basis.

I'm not saying anyone has to like the Ramseys or anything they do, but just because you don't like them doesn't mean they did it.

Never claimed it did.

And yes, I'm talking to you Boulder police. How many years has it been? If there was any evidence that the Ramseys did it, they would already be in jail. The Boulder police wanted to convict them so bad, but in the end- they couldn't come up with any evidence substantial enough to convict them.

That is a very popular IDI claim, but not supported by any facts. DD is absolutely right.

People have gone to prison, even death row, on MUCH less. What kept the Ramseys out of prison was the combination of money's corrupting influence, a weak DA lacking experience and more dedicated to a social agenda, and the cross-fingerpointing problem.

Like Joe Friday said, just the facts, WANM.

 

[BBB167893]

Absolutely correct wanm. There was not enough evidence, that is why the DA wouldn't charge them.

Not enough evidence according to WHOM? Even if that's true, that's one of the major points I've been trying to make: what would be enough evidence for ANYONE ELSE was not enough for Alex Hunter. Hunter was notorious for interpreting the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" FAR beyond its intention. And you don't have to take my word for that. There are any NUMBER of sources that agree with me.

He was not corrupt (as RDI believes),

Corrupt, maybe. Stupid and weak, DEFINITELY. I'm not the only one who thinks so. The FBI, the Georgia cops, the Dream Team lawyers.

he in fact removed one assistant DA because he was on the R's side.

That's nonsense (and I'm being generous here).

If the Boulder Police have the same mindset as the RDI on this forum, that explains why this crime hasn't been solved.

I'll be glad to TELL you why it hasn't been solved!

 

[BBB167893]

Nobody harasses anyone here that I can see.

You have to understand, DD, that to IDI, reasoned argument backed by research IS harrassment! And I know that only too well.

I am so SICK of this IDI "poor me" BS.

No one has quit either, as far as I know,

Like my old dad used to say, DD: if you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen, but don't blame the cook.

with the exception of one poor RDI who was harassed in PERSON by rabid IDIs and left for their own safety. This happened a few years ago.

Yeah, I remember.

 

[BBB167893]

I do believe there wasn't enough evidence in the sense of the grand jury. I personally dont think the GJ was corrupt; they just couldnt find enough evidence.

Depends on how you look at it, Peepers. I have it on good authority from several sources on BOTH sides of the argument that the GJ would have indicted, but Alex Hunter dismissed them before the deadline. These include Dan Caplis, Bryan Morgan, and Henry Lee.

Add to that another important and very likely possibility: that the GJ was never MEANT to indict anyone and was only used as a dog-and-pony show for the media and the voters in the wake of Steve Thomas's resignation and public blasting of the DA's office. ST pretty much says so in his book.