Boulder Grand Jury Voted To Indict-Boulder Dailey Camera

[Edmond.DantesIII]

I don't think so. AH was not and is not an expert on the JonBenet Ramsey case. The grand jurors, on the other hand, spent over a year of their lives poring through the evidence, (and not even all of it), so it's safe to say, they were knowledgeable on the subject of JonBenet's murder. To say the weight of the evidence leans toward the Rs being not guilty, is a misinformed statement. The grand jury sure didn't think so. That's why they voted to indict both of the Rs for child abuse resulting in death. This isn't gossip, this isn't speculation, and regardless of what JR says, this isn't 'just drama'. This is fact. No amount of wild theories, spin, or anger will change it. Accepting this news may be hard for some, but it is what it is. A GRAND JURY, (one of the most serious and awe inspiring duties in the US), voted to indict the Rs.

You seem to be confused as to what an indictment actually means. An indictment simply means that there is enough evidence to take the case to trial. It is not a judgment of conviction. However, the weight of the evidence, in my opinion, and surely in the opinion of the Ramsey defense team, would almost certainly have resulted in a verdict of Not Guilty. This is exactly why AH did not take the case to trial. He would have lost, and lost badly.

 

[wengr]

Actually, I am using the term "tire iron" as a general reference to any solid metal prying device such as a tire iron or crowbar with an elbow. Judging by the autopsy photo of the skull and the rectangular displacement in the posterior parietal area, she was most likely struck with the elbow of something like this:

Thanks for the response. The problem here is that the skull damage is not a rectangle at all. It is in my opinion an elipse. The item shown here, while I know it's just a non specific example, could not imo produce such a wound. And more to the point, why would burglers carry such an item with them during a burglary? There were no fresh pry marks. It was not used for entry. As a weapon? Unlikely, as according to your theory, the burglars were there BECAUSE they thought the house was unoccupied and the R's were in another state. What is the reason?

 

[wengr]

You seem to be confused as to what an indictment actually means. An indictment simply means that there is enough evidence to take the case to trial. It is not a judgment of conviction. However, the weight of the evidence, in my opinion, and surely in the opinion of the Ramsey defense team, would almost certainly have resulted in a verdict of Not Guilty. This is exactly why AH did not take the case to trial. He would have lost, and lost badly.

Agreed. And I would add that AH did not ignore the GJ simply because he would likely have lost. He ignored the GJ imo because he would likely have lost AND his offices' obstruction of the investigation would be exposed as the principal reason why he lost.

 

[OpenMind4U]

Agreed. And I would add that AH did not ignore the GJ simply because he would likely have lost. He ignored the GJ imo because he would likely have lost AND his offices' obstruction of the investigation would be exposed as the principal reason why he lost.

Agree. In addition, regardless if AH WOULD or WOULD'T have lost this case, as the rule of tumb, prosecutor's role is to follow the main principals of the juristiction procedures. It's VERY uncommon when GJ indicts and prosecution refused to prosecute (go to trial). Does anyone know any other cases when DA behaves like this??? Because I don't.

So, if anyone (agan, regardless of IDI or RDI!!!) wants to know the HONEST answer to the question 'why AH ignored GJ decision?' then you should ask yourself the following questions:

- does AH had any personal ties/interests/investments in connection to Ramsey? I'm talking financial corruption here;
- does AH had any political constrains which prohibit him to prosecute Ramsey? I'm talking political corruption here.

And if you don't know the answers to above questions then investigate yourself!!! It's damn easy. Look who works in Ramsey's team. Looks who USED to work at DA office. Look who made contributions to selected government officials at that time....And if people in Ramsey 'camp' has any connections to DA office then you have your answer.

JBR case was not complicated case. The only complication was the name Ramsey.

jmo

 

[BOESP]

You seem to be confused as to what an indictment actually means. An indictment simply means that there is enough evidence to take the case to trial. It is not a judgment of conviction. However, the weight of the evidence, in my opinion, and surely in the opinion of the Ramsey defense team, would almost certainly have resulted in a verdict of Not Guilty. This is exactly why AH did not take the case to trial. He would have lost, and lost badly.

BBM. Unless you are Alex Hunter and psychic as well, any prudent person would take what you said with a large dose of salts.

 

[gramcracker]

anyone see LW w/ Vinnie on IS this morning? looking forward to transcript/video link from those who perform that kind of magic here. TIA

 

[OpenMind4U]

Openmind-I have been doing just this since this news hit-I am blown away by how DEEP this case went..just WOW!!My heart aches for all the people who the R's ran over-esp The Whites-What they did to them-just unforgivable!!!

It's pretty sickenning, isn't?!:banghead:...My first 'education' lesson starts with two letters: FW letter to government and ST resignation letter. And after, I saw how some media plays role in this corruption as well.

This case is the proof of how 'money talks, ******** walks'...and Alex Hunter was not the only one who sold his soul to the devil (meanning, kissed Ramsey's behind for personal gain). ML was much-much worst!!!! She made more harms to this case than AH did.

O, well! Just hoping that Garnett is smart enough to avoid being on 'Ramseys associate' list.

 

[SyraKelly]

It's pretty sickenning, isn't?!:banghead:...My first 'education' lesson starts with two letters: FW letter to government and ST resignation letter. And after, I saw how some media plays role in this corruption as well.

This case is the proof of how 'money talks, ******** walks'...and Alex Hunter was not the only one who sold his soul to the devil (meanning, kissed Ramsey's behind for personal gain). ML was much-much worst!!!! She made more harms to this case than AH did.

O, well! Just hoping that Garnett is smart enough to avoid being on 'Ramseys associate' list.

It is sickening-I just read those 2 letters F& P wrote on FFJ-:banghead:It is mind-blowing stuff what happened!!!
I hope Garnett has the courage to to get the truth out there,but after reading all that-I am not holding my breath...its just to deep!!!I am sad for JB!!

 

[dodie20]

You seem to be confused as to what an indictment actually means. An indictment simply means that there is enough evidence to take the case to trial. It is not a judgment of conviction. However, the weight of the evidence, in my opinion, and surely in the opinion of the Ramsey defense team, would almost certainly have resulted in a verdict of Not Guilty. This is exactly why AH did not take the case to trial. He would have lost, and lost badly.

No, I'm not confused, but You seem to be minimizing the job of the grand jury, and dismissing their vote. But of course, the Ramsey defense team would have thought they would have gotten a not guilty verdict...or so they say. AH was no psychic and he had no way of knowing what would have happened, but obviously, he wasn't willing to take the chance of getting a guilty verdict. Him thumbing his nose at the the jury's vote, is pretty arrogant, IMO. and as far as I'm concerned, there's no excuse for it.

 

[Tadpole12]

Heyya dodie20,

I don't understand why AH would not complete the 'process' of justice by signing. How could the three year iirc statute of limitation be effected if the true bill was not signed.

However, one expert told the paper that in her opinion proper legal procedure would have been to sign the document and file it with the court before going to open court to dismiss the charges.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...queens-murder-13-years-ago.html#ixzz2Jg0yzkGm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

[Tadpole12]

also ...

I had the opportunity to read the People article this morning:
full page article, photos occupied most of page, very little text.

Kolar was quoted within, to the effect that no one will ever be charged in the JBR case.

 

[Tadpole12]

Digg it.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/01/3...to-indict-is-just-more-drama/?test=latestnews

"A grand jury true bill vote for murder charges isn't drama," Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, a journalist who has investigated the Ramsey murder for 16-years, told FoxNews.com. "It's the gold standard for prosecution in the criminal justice process. I’ve always respected John Ramsey, but he is starting to sound like someone who is completely disconnected from reality.”

 

[Tadpole12]

cynic posted a link to the Peter Boyles show of Jan 29, 30, over at FFJ.
ty cynic.

[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10212"]Peter Boyles talks about the recent Grand Jury revelation! (January 28 & 29, 2013) - Forums For Justice[/ame]


Guess I'll try and have a listen this aft'
and check out local opinion.

 

[dodie20]

Heyya dodie20,

I don't understand why AH would not complete the 'process' of justice by signing. How could the three year iirc statute of limitation be effected if the true bill was not signed.

However, one expert told the paper that in her opinion proper legal procedure would have been to sign the document and file it with the court before going to open court to dismiss the charges.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...queens-murder-13-years-ago.html#ixzz2Jg0yzkGm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Shouldn't he have signed the document and Then refused to go forward? I would just think his signature would have been required, if for nothing else, to show that he was aware of and had read the document. omg, I don't understand what kind of statement AH was trying to make...that the idea of indicting the Rs was so preposterous, that he wouldn't dignify the paper with his signature? You Do make a good point though. IMO, him not signing it, should nullify the statute of limitations. Also IMO, it should be signed now, by whoever is in office, if for no other reason than as a formality. I can't stand the way JonBenet has been dismissed over and over. She deserves to have the jury's vote acknowledged and validated. moo

 

[UKGuy]

Shouldn't he have signed the document and Then refused to go forward? I would just think his signature would have been required, if for nothing else, to show that he was aware of and had read the document. omg, I don't understand what kind of statement AH was trying to make...that the idea of indicting the Rs was so preposterous, that he wouldn't dignify the paper with his signature? You Do make a good point though. IMO, him not signing it, should nullify the statute of limitations. Also IMO, it should be signed now, by whoever is in office, if for no other reason than as a formality. I can't stand the way JonBenet has been dismissed over and over. She deserves to have the jury's vote to be acknowledged and validated. moo

dodie20,
Presumably AH was attempting to legally neutralize the GJ process, by not validating the process with his signature, never mind filing with any Court.

No statute of limitations would be very bad news for the Ramseys, all of them including Pamela Paugh.

I'll bet all the Ramsey phonelines are red hot, buzzing on a daily basis, as they report the latest media speculation.

JR and BR will have taken legal advice on what to say, to whom etc. I wonder just what JR's new wife thinks of all this, married to someone who should have been indicted on the charge of killing his own daughter?

The tabloids are going to have a field day with all of this once someone else inside the investigation opens up.



.

 

[BOESP]

also ...

I had the opportunity to read the People article this morning:
full page article, photos occupied most of page, very little text.

Kolar was quoted within, to the effect that no one will ever be charged in the JBR case.

Hopefully that was a reporter's error ... hopefully. If true, then Kolar must believe it was Burke (based on my interpretation of Kolar's book) or he must think it was Patsy (who is dead and can't be charged).

But Steve Thomas did say a chance arrow might hit a deserving target. I'm going to look on the positive side and believe this.

 

[Nom de plume]

Agree. In addition, regardless if AH WOULD or WOULD'T have lost this case, as the rule of tumb, prosecutor's role is to follow the main principals of the juristiction procedures. It's VERY uncommon when GJ indicts and prosecution refused to prosecute (go to trial). Does anyone know any other cases when DA behaves like this??? Because I don't.

So, if anyone (agan, regardless of IDI or RDI!!!) wants to know the HONEST answer to the question 'why AH ignored GJ decision?' then you should ask yourself the following questions:

- does AH had any personal ties/interests/investments in connection to Ramsey? I'm talking financial corruption here;
- does AH had any political constrains which prohibit him to prosecute Ramsey? I'm talking political corruption here.

And if you don't know the answers to above questions then investigate yourself!!! It's damn easy. Look who works in Ramsey's team. Looks who USED to work at DA office. Look who made contributions to selected government officials at that time....And if people in Ramsey 'camp' has any connections to DA office then you have your answer.

JBR case was not complicated case. The only complication was the name Ramsey.

jmo

:goodpost: :applause: You nailed it OM4U!!

 

[Nom de plume]

No, I'm not confused, but You seem to be minimizing the job of the grand jury, and dismissing their vote. But of course, the Ramsey defense team would have thought they would have gotten a not guilty verdict...or so they say. AH was no psychic and he had no way of knowing what would have happened, but obviously, he wasn't willing to take the chance of getting a guilty verdict. Him thumbing his nose at the the jury's vote, is pretty arrogant, IMO. and as far as I'm concerned, there's no excuse for it.

BINGO!! He wasn't worried about losing, he was worried about winning!!

 

[Tadpole12]

notes from Perter Boyle Show:

re: [ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10212"]Peter Boyles talks about the recent Grand Jury revelation! (January 28 & 29, 2013) - Forums For Justice[/ame]

guest Craig Silverman (former Chief Deputy to Stan Garnett) ,

Part 2:BP2013B, at 25:07:

PB: Now what will Stan Garnett do, Craig, as an attorney,
now this falls into ...

CS: ....Let's remember, the grand jury said child abuse resulting in death,
there's a 3 year statute of limitations on that so....
unless it's first degree murder,
I don't think that anybody can be prosecuted.
Statute of limitations has run ..

 

[OpenMind4U]

...without mention the name of the blog, here are snippets from today's Boyles radio show. He has Tom Miller as his guest.

'Doc Miller said that the movie RANSOM was played on that Christmas night at Fleet and Priscilla White's house!

Doc said he believes Alex knew the Boulder DA's office could not win against the skill of the $$$$$ megabucks Haddon law firm.

Doc said that publishers in the US WILL NOT publish a book unless it is pro Ramsey on this case. He could not find a publisher for his book, nad had to publish it in Japan, though now he says he may self publish it. As he noted the first chapter is on his website. '

'Doc said Craig Lewis of The Globe called Jeff Shapiro "idiot boy." He said Shapiro would come over to Judith Phillips house unannounced whnever he wanted for information.

He said Craig Lewis was heads above the other tabloids, because he moved to Boulder, he had private investigators in Denver, had fist fulls of cash from The Globe, could get PRIVATE PHONE RECORDS, so so much for any conspiracy theory about any phone records, because Craig Lewis knows if that is true or not that they exist or not.

Craig Lewis plays himself in "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town", instructing the new reporter Shapiro. After the Globe supposedly threatened Steve Thomas was info about his mother if he didn't give them an interview after he resigned, Shapiro went to the FBI about The Globe and Craig Lewis and Tom Miller. The Globe took a deal for $100,000 donation to CU's journalism school for Craig Lewis. Tom Miller did not take a deal, he took the case to trial, and won. '


Hope I wouldn't get in trouble by posting this....lease:

Here is the link to listen this show:

http://www.khow.com/player/?station...t&program_id=fullshow_boyles.xml&mid=22839066