Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey

[AddieBoo]

I think it was the same juror who indicated that based upon the evidence he saw, he had a pretty good idea of who did it. He only spoke for himself, but I think it indicates that there was evidence that pointed in a certain direction.

There have always been dark rumors about the community. Some things lead to the thought of where there’s smoke, there's fire. The amount of cases involving “unpleasant” issues that had Hunter’s hand on them is concerning. Sign of the times? Coincidence, or something more sinister? It’s a dark, deep rabbit hole that I think does deserve some attention. The mystery pictures conversation is getting some traction recently.

I wish I knew!

There were definitely some powerful and well connected people involved in this case. It feels like there’s something there that had to be protected. And it feels like it went beyond John Ramsey, I don’t think he was that important, it’s a bigger picture/ story that he’s just at the tip of. Just my opinion, of course.

Agree. JR is a cog in the wheel…

I wish for release of the rest of those 18 pages too, at the very least. The Whites seem to be the only ones pursuing that.

They last filed a lawsuit in 2014 (I think) in Boulder County. There was only 1 judge who could hear the case, every other judge had at one time worked in some capacity in the DA department and so had to be ruled out. The judge concluded that release of the GJ decision had already been adjudicated, and let the decision to have only released the 4 pages stand.

In other Colorado cases the press has gone to court for full release of documents. No one seems to want to take this case on in that respect for some reason. There seems to be a lot of reluctance. Perhaps the renewed interest might help push some buttons.read that initially JR had fought the release of those pages. But it wasn’t clear if anything to do with the release of those pages could be litigated by a defendant, or maybe that was all decided with the previous ruling you mentioned.Colorado did pass that statute that FW writes about in his second letter - but haven’t dove into that yet

I think it could be as simple as this.
If BR was responsible and parents were attempting to cover it up, their attorney's meet with the DA and say "look, this isn't a prosecutable case, parents have suffered enough, let it go".
Now, there's a lot of undoing that needs to be undone because of the staging. The public won't ever be told the truth to protect BRs privacy per Co. law and there is where many conspiracies are born. I think the only cover up was done by the parents and this created a quagmire for the DA to undue and protect a minor.
This is just my theory..it has zero factual basis. I just think a simple explanation is most likely once the stage had been set. How could they undue it?

Please poke holes were you can.
Theories are just that!

That makes sense. I try to keep it simple too but details just keep knotting me up.
Just hard to believe that BR did it all. Not because he wasn’t physically mentally able - but because it’s so horrid.

Could it be the possibility that, with DNA matching constantly improving, decision-makers were concerned that, should a specific "guilty" verdict be handed down, contradictory dna evidence could turn up, thereby resulting in them having egg on their faces - "cost to the tax-payer" etc.
I'm unsure whether or not it was known at the time of the DA's decision, that the dna on Jonbenet's underwear belonged to an unknown male, but it was proven that none of said dna belonged to any of the three Ramseys (ie John, Patsy and Burke).

If that were known at the time, then that would explain the decision.
Pure speculation on my part. JMO

 

[AddieBoo]

Imagine how those who were falsely accused and dragged into this nightmare feel. They were victims of a conspiracy to save someone's a$$.

Like JAR and the suitcase…?
So weird.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

I’m not sure I understand what you understand regarding the facts of the case. But you be you.

It's the basic concept of a grand jury and probable cause. That's what I'm trying to convey as there appears to be a popular misunderstanding of what they mean in this case.

IMO, based on what is known of the case and publicly, there is only one individual that seems to fit the ‘person being assisted’ as described above……

It's not Burke.

IMO Alex Hunter was never going to prosecute the Ramseys. It appears that there was no smoking gun (at least that we know of) and the case was circumstantial. He used that as his excuse to say there was not enough evidence to prosecute. And while there is certainly an argument to be made for that conclusion, many prosecutors are very hesitant to take a case to court that they don't think they can win and may be perceived as wasting taxpayer dollars, the disappointment of the prosecution team was palpable when Hunter made his pronouncement.

Let's hear from one of them, Mitch Morrissey, part of the DA grand jury team (BBM):

Silverman: “Was that a good decision on his part?"

Morrissey: “It was the right decision. Was it a good decision? Well, I don’t know. The answer to that question was not really my bailiwick, but I was brought up—and you were brought up—not bringing cases where you don’t have a reasonable likelihood of conviction. That is your standard. That’s what you live by as a prosecutor. You don’t charge people where you don’t have a reasonable likelihood of conviction. So was it a good decision? Did it answer things? I don’t know. But it was the right decision. Because we did not have a reasonable expectation of conviction of the Ramseys.”

Silverman: “But there was probable cause, right?”

Morrissey: "There was probable cause. How many times, Craig, in your career, did you sit there with an outstanding detective across the table from you, saying, 'Why are you not filing on this case? We’ve got probable cause.' You had probable cause. The grand jury said we had probable cause. That one grand juror they had during that whole time, they asked him that question, they said, 'Would you have convicted him?' He said, 'No. But there was probable cause.' You don’t file cases based on probable cause.

I had a lot of people say to me, 'Why don’t you just file it and let the jury decide?’ Because that’s not ethically correct to do. If you don’t have a reasonable expectation of conviction, you cannot bring the charge. And Alex Hunter, he gets blamed for that. But I’ll tell you, we were advising him of that."

That doesn't seem like a one man act to me. It seems like the prosecutors and investigators involved not only understood Hunter's actions but approved of them.

In a word, no.

The DA's office was responsible for a lot of leaks pushing the narrative that the police completely blundered the case. Did they make mistakes? Yes, absolutely. But the conduct of the DA and his office in actively obstructing the investigation cannot be ignored. I think there's another reason why charges were not brought. One needs to take a close look at the relationships between the DA, his deputies and the Ramsey legal team. Namely Haddon and Morgan. They were running the show, not Alex Hunter.

Conspiracy theories rarely pan out. But it has been a convenient excuse for failed investigations.

There have always been dark rumors about the community. Some things lead to the thought of where there’s smoke, there's fire. The amount of cases involving “unpleasant” issues that had Hunter’s hand on them is concerning. Sign of the times? Coincidence, or something more sinister? It’s a dark, deep rabbit hole that I think does deserve some attention. The mystery pictures conversation is getting some traction recently.

Sadly, this case, like a lot of similar ones, have attracted satanic panic/Pizzagate style nonsense (like Krebs). "Dark rumors" does nothing to explain the case and how it turned out.

I just can’t get over these indictments.
The GJ chose every frickin serious criminal adjective in the criminal words book.. along side murder in the first degree. The charges are not ambiguous. The language is bold and in your face. They must have heard something that was particularly abhorrent. Even if it was circumstantial…WTH..?

The grand jury didn't come up with the wording. These were charges prepared by Alex Hunter.

I wish for release of the rest of those 18 pages too, at the very least. The Whites seem to be the only ones pursuing that.

Hardly that. John Ramsey also wants them released (BBM):

John Ramsey had asked the court to release all of the grand jury report, rather than just the unprosecuted indictment portion released Friday. He argued that a partial release would give a skewed view of the case.

It certainly doesn't sound like there is incriminating info for the Ramseys in those pages.

Could it be the possibility that, with DNA matching constantly improving, decision-makers were concerned that, should a specific "guilty" verdict be handed down, contradictory dna evidence could turn up, thereby resulting in them having egg on their faces - "cost to the tax-payer" etc.
I'm unsure whether or not it was known at the time of the DA's decision, that the dna on Jonbenet's underwear belonged to an unknown male, but it was proven that none of said dna belonged to any of the three Ramseys (ie John, Patsy and Burke).

If that were known at the time, then that would explain the decision.
Pure speculation on my part. JMO

The DNA evidence was already known at the time. The profile in CODIS wasn't fully mapped yet, but they already knew it excluded the Ramseys. With the CODIS entry in 2003-4 and the discovery of matching touch DNA in 2008, the DNA evidence has only grown stronger.

 

[Charlot123]

BR is well into adulthood now, late 30s? If I was him, and tired of all the speculation, I’d voluntarily release my medical and school records. Take all the talk, questions, accusations, nip it in the bud. It’s his life and his info, personally, I’d share it and end the discussion.
IMO

Not sure I would do it.

Imagine there is no history and it is not Burke, but someone like him. If I were describing a man like Burke to a girl’s mother, is would be“he’s a typical IT guy, you know. Talented, shy but trying. Nerdish, so he loves women who fill pauses in a conversation. Your daughter is social, he’d be smitten by her. He is very good looking and seems kind.”

Haven’t we seen such guys? They all say that they struggled socially, but we don’t see how they were at 14, 16… around 19, the nature makes a second major attempt at readjustment, and many idiosyncratic traits don’t stand out. The reason women marry these guys and have families with them is because, among other considerations, all our best and the bestest geniuses came from this group. There is a chance that there may be another son like Einstein or a daughter like Marie Curie in one of such marriages. Or, at least, a high-achieving child.

Now. It is bad enough that Burke and his family have a history like that JBR’s death. It must have ruined a lot of possible relationships and friendships for him, the poor man. Releasing all childhood struggles that probably look harsh on paper (because for the diagnosis you, essentially, have to register all the deviations from the norm) will be totally counterproductive for his normal life.

Now, I don’t know if Burke is married and has a child. The internet is silent about it. Perhaps he doesn’t. If he does, then probably sharing the documents with his partner and the child’s doctors will be important, whether the child has Burke’s traits or not. Just for the future of the child. If he is unmarried and has no child, I wish him to have a stable partnership, get a good prenatal counseling and try at least once.

Let us be honest - the family, on both sides, was high-achieving but dysfunctional. These are the parents who turned it into a problem, no matter who did it.

JMO. Maybe it used to be functional before Patsy’s diagnosis of ovarian cancer. I don’t know the scheme used in the 90es, but steroids cause manic-like symptoms, as to cis-platinum, if it causes ponyneuropathies, it may cause a similar process in the brain. My feeling is, Patsy after her diagnosis and chemo was not Patsy who married JB or even the one who bore the two kids. Maybe this is all that is to the story, essentially. Mother who is sick with a “silent killer” cancer and while able to present the look of the house, is failing as the mother for an obvious reason. The dad who is the provider, and two kids, each with own problems. Add to it, mother is the second wife.

I totally believe that it was an accident, regardless of who the culprit was. The parents’ response was not normal. However, imagine another fact: they thought JBR was dead (she wasn’t initially, but they were not doctors). If PDI - she goes to jail, her cancer comes back and she has no time to spend with her only child. Chances are, they’d divorce, too. If JR did it - he loses his job, insurance, gone is their house, and there are two people, Patsy and BR, who need medical help.

If BDI, then, here comes a hysterical woman who lost one child, is deadly sick and can’t even imagine what her child is going to go through.

If BDI, I think they absolutely made the wrong choice. In the other two cases, as we see now, they too made a huge mistake (because JBR was still alive after that trauma.) However, that decision was made by a woman who was very ill (oncologists were brutally honest about 5-year-survival rate at that time) and a man who was holding that already sinking ship together.

They looked functional. They were not. I think “chemo brain” has to be factored into the story.

Their tendency to litigations is not a nice trait, but maybe it is the aftermath of the whole craziness the press made out of it.

All JMO, of course. Patsy was diagnosed with Stage IV ovarian cancer when her daughter was not yet 3. She was in remission (but we know how remissions are achieved) till 2002. I think we have to factor it all in.

 

[Ponytale]

No one seems to want to take this case on in that respect for some reason.

Probably has something to do with the fact that Ramsey's try to shut out and sue everyone who dares to say anything that would not go with their narrative.

 

[Ponytale]

I think it could be as simple as this.
If BR was responsible and parents were attempting to cover it up, their attorney's meet with the DA and say "look, this isn't a prosecutable case, parents have suffered enough, let it go".
Now, there's a lot of undoing that needs to be undone because of the staging. The public won't ever be told the truth to protect BRs privacy per Co. law and there is where many conspiracies are born. I think the only cover up was done by the parents and this created a quagmire for the DA to undue and protect a minor.
This is just my theory..it has zero factual basis. I just think a simple explanation is most likely once the stage had been set. How could they undue it?

Please poke holes were you can.
Theories are just that!

YES!
I theorize the same. I believe that if they could have taken Burke out of the equation, we wouldn't be where we are. There is no way that GJ believes that Burke does not play any part in this. The secrecy, hiding, not making clear statements, IMO only points to Burke being involved.

 

[DutchMirjam]

I have lot of proof. But it's not my proof. It's proof from the professionals who have looked at this case. Yes it is my opinion but my opinion is based on proof. There are mountains of proof. I have to head out but over the weekend I will present some of the proof that points to no intruder. Until then feel free to ask questions and I will do my best to answer them.

I was on the fence, but the note is too close to home to be ignored and not really explained how/why.

 

[Roy23]

It's the basic concept of a grand jury and probable cause. That's what I'm trying to convey as there appears to be a popular misunderstanding of what they mean in this case.



It's not Burke.



Let's hear from one of them, Mitch Morrissey, part of the DA grand jury team (BBM):



That doesn't seem like a one man act to me. It seems like the prosecutors and investigators involved not only understood Hunter's actions but approved of them.



Conspiracy theories rarely pan out. But it has been a convenient excuse for failed investigations.



Sadly, this case, like a lot of similar ones, have attracted satanic panic/Pizzagate style nonsense (like Krebs). "Dark rumors" does nothing to explain the case and how it turned out.



The grand jury didn't come up with the wording. These were charges prepared by Alex Hunter.



Hardly that. John Ramsey also wants them released (BBM):



It certainly doesn't sound like there is incriminating info for the Ramseys in those pages.



The DNA evidence was already known at the time. The profile in CODIS wasn't fully mapped yet, but they already knew it excluded the Ramseys. With the CODIS entry in 2003-4 and the discovery of matching touch DNA in 2008, the DNA evidence has only grown stronger.

So thank God I see another IDI after coming back from time out. We will see it get solved this year i believe.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Probably has something to do with the fact that Ramsey's try to shut out and sue everyone who dares to say anything that would not go with their narrative.

I do think that's a big part of it.

One thing that has struck me about Ramsey litigiousness........they have settled every single case for $$$$. They have never fought for retractions or removal of what they sued for as being defaming, libelous or false information. Steve Thomas's book is still readily available, Kolar's book, the CBS documentary is still out there for viewing, etc.

 

[CloudedTruth]

From Mike Kane's interview with the Daily Camera, December, 2001

Case haunts DA's aide who led grand jury

Kane says he never felt that Ramseys gave him the straight story By Charlie Brennan, News Staff Writer

December 18, 2001

Michael Kane says he still thinks about the JonBenet Ramsey murder every day.

"And at least once a week, when I'm out running or something, this case will be running through my head," he said, "and I'll think, 'What if we did this now?' or 'What if that happened?' "

Kane, 49, joined former District Attorney Alex Hunter's team in June 1998, about 18 months after JonBenet was found beaten and strangled in the basement of her Boulder home.

He led the 13-month-long grand jury probe that concluded Oct. 13, 1999, with no indictments issued in the case.

JonBenet's parents remain under an "umbrella of suspicion" in the death.

Kane spent many hours questioning John and Patsy Ramsey about their daughter's murder. He said he believes they have yet to give him the straight story.

"When I met with them, I never felt that they were genuine," Kane said. "I always felt like I was talking to a press secretary who was giving responses with a spin.

"I always felt like their answers were very careful and, in some cases, scripted. And that caused me a lot of concern."

Kane said one of the biggest mistakes in the case was that officials didn't take it to a grand jury in the early going.

"I think the major problem with this case was the hard-core evidence gathering," Kane said.

He believes a grand jury should have been impaneled promptly - not necessarily to secure a rapid indictment, but in order to use a grand jury's broad powers to subpoena witnesses and, equally important, personal records.

"I had this argument with them until the day (former Boulder prosecutors) Pete Hofstrom and Trip DeMuth were off the case" in August 1998, Kane said.

"That's what a grand jury is for, because a grand jury can order someone to produce documents. It's up to the DA's office to say, 'There's an awful lot of things we need to know about, and the only way we're going to know about it is by getting these records.' Instead, it was almost two years later when we started issuing subpoenas for information, and the trail sometimes grows cold. A lot of businesses don't keep records that long," Kane said.

Alex Hunter did not want to impanel a grand jury. Alex Hunter sat on subpoena requests from the PD so that phone records were not obtained in a timely manner, articles of clothing, etc. could not be obtained or tested in a timely manner. There seems to have been a reluctance early on from the DA's office to solve this case.

 

[ShadyLady]

I wonder how much information has still not been disclosed to the public. Even what the DA held back from the GJ.

 

[AddieBoo]

It's the basic concept of a grand jury and probable cause. That's what I'm trying to convey as there appears to be a popular misunderstanding of what they mean in this case.



It's not Burke.



Let's hear from one of them, Mitch Morrissey, part of the DA grand jury team (BBM):



That doesn't seem like a one man act to me. It seems like the prosecutors and investigators involved not only understood Hunter's actions but approved of them.



Conspiracy theories rarely pan out. But it has been a convenient excuse for failed investigations.



Sadly, this case, like a lot of similar ones, have attracted satanic panic/Pizzagate style nonsense (like Krebs). "Dark rumors" does nothing to explain the case and how it turned out.



The grand jury didn't come up with the wording. These were charges prepared by Alex Hunter.



Hardly that. John Ramsey also wants them released (BBM):



It certainly doesn't sound like there is incriminating info for the Ramseys in those pages.



The DNA evidence was already known at the time. The profile in CODIS wasn't fully mapped yet, but they already knew it excluded the Ramseys. With the CODIS entry in 2003-4 and the discovery of matching touch DNA in 2008, the DNA evidence has only grown

It's the basic concept of a grand jury and probable cause. That's what I'm trying to convey as there appears to be a popular misunderstanding of what they mean in this case.



It's not Burke.



Let's hear from one of them, Mitch Morrissey, part of the DA grand jury team (BBM):



That doesn't seem like a one man act to me. It seems like the prosecutors and investigators involved not only understood Hunter's actions but approved of them.



Conspiracy theories rarely pan out. But it has been a convenient excuse for failed investigations.



Sadly, this case, like a lot of similar ones, have attracted satanic panic/Pizzagate style nonsense (like Krebs). "Dark rumors" does nothing to explain the case and how it turned out.



The grand jury didn't come up with the wording. These were charges prepared by Alex Hunter.



Hardly that. John Ramsey also wants them released (BBM):



It certainly doesn't sound like there is incriminating info for the Ramseys in those pages.



The DNA evidence was already known at the time. The profile in CODIS wasn't fully mapped yet, but they already knew it excluded the Ramseys. With the CODIS entry in 2003-4 and the discovery of matching touch DNA in 2008, the DNA evidence has only grown stronger.

Fleet White sued to have those pages released to the public because he wanted his testimony heard. He was not successful. The journalists were.
Given the severity and seriousness of the four charges, what the remaining pages hold is significant.

 

[ShadyLady]

Fleet White sued to have those pages released to the public because he wanted his testimony heard. He was not successful. The journalists were.
Given the severity and seriousness of the four charges, what the remaining pages hold is significant.

wow....I bet he had something to say....

 

[AddieBoo]

wow....I bet he had something to say....

Got that right. All he has been through because of that family.
His integrity is inspiring. And he isn’t quitting. I believe JR fears FW more than anyone…

 

[AddieBoo]

Could it be the possibility that, with DNA matching constantly improving, decision-makers were concerned that, should a specific "guilty" verdict be handed down, contradictory dna evidence could turn up, thereby resulting in them having egg on their faces - "cost to the tax-payer" etc.
I'm unsure whether or not it was known at the time of the DA's decision, that the dna on Jonbenet's underwear belonged to an unknown male, but it was proven that none of said dna belonged to any of the three Ramseys (ie John, Patsy and Burke).

If that were known at the time, then that would explain the decision.
Pure speculation on my part. JMO

If all the profiles of each DNA sample were identified- there would be 6 people at the house that night… or something like that.
I do not side with the “DNA can solve this case” side. IMO it’s the last ditch effort that JR has to be forever innocent and delay his prosecution in a court of law. But that will never happen IMO. The innocence part I mean.

 

[cenazoic]

That doesn't explain why they weren't released.

They weren’t released because they ate typically statutorily sealed. See 2020 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 13 - Courts And Court Procedure :: Article 73. Statewide Grand Juries :: Section 13-73-107. Return of indictment or presentment - designation of venue consolidation of indictments - sealing of indictment.

“(2) The court, upon motion of the attorney general, shall order the indictment to be sealed and no person may disclose the existence of the indictment until the defendant is in custody or has been admitted to bail except when necessary for the issuance or execution of a warrant or summons.”

The Grand Jury could have dismissed the charges.

No, they couldn’t. They don’t bring or dismiss charges, DAs do. They could have issued a no true bill, (which they apparently did for 8 of the 12 potential charges), but not dismissed them.

And there you have one of 4 conclusions that the Grand Jury agreed upon.

But that does NOT mean that there was enough evidence to ‘win’ a trial. A grand jury’s burden of proof is ‘probable cause’. A trial jury’s burden is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. So while there may have been enough evidence to convince a grand jury there was smoke, that does not mean there was enough to convince a trial jury taht there was fire.

The Ramsey grand jurors who have commented on their experience over the years have basically all said that they understood why Hunter didn’t bring the case to trial.

I have difficulty believing some known or unknown intruder is the killer, but I can also believe that as intriguing/compelling/incomprehensible much of the evidence and/or the Ramseys’ behavior seems, that it still doesn’t rise to the level of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. To this day, the DNA/UM1 situation alone guarantees that.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Alex Hunter also didn’t feel the need to prosecute to the fullest extent of the law other cases where there was plenty of evidence of child abuse. His record needs to be held up to scrutiny and exposed for what it was. He reduced charges when there was no reason to, he plea bargained cases that could have been won and should have been prosecuted.

It's downright

They weren’t released because they ate typically statutorily sealed. See 2020 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 13 - Courts And Court Procedure :: Article 73. Statewide Grand Juries :: Section 13-73-107. Return of indictment or presentment - designation of venue consolidation of indictments - sealing of indictment.

“(2) The court, upon motion of the attorney general, shall order the indictment to be sealed and no person may disclose the existence of the indictment until the defendant is in custody or has been admitted to bail except when necessary for the issuance or execution of a warrant or summons.”



No, they couldn’t. They don’t bring or dismiss charges, DAs do. They could have issued a no true bill, (which they apparently did for 8 of the 12 potential charges), but not dismissed them.



But that does NOT mean that there was enough evidence to ‘win’ a trial. A grand jury’s burden of proof is ‘probable cause’. A trial jury’s burden is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. So while there may have been enough evidence to convince a grand jury there was smoke, that does not mean there was enough to convince a trial jury taht there was fire.

The Ramsey grand jurors who have commented on their experience over the years have basically all said that they understood why Hunter didn’t bring the case to trial.

I have difficulty believing some known or unknown intruder is the killer, but I can also believe that as intriguing/compelling/incomprehensible much of the evidence and/or the Ramseys’ behavior seems, that it still doesn’t rise to the level of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. To this day, the DNA/UM1 situation alone guarantees that.

I am not surprised the GJ understood the difficulty in prosecuting the case. I believe that is less to do with who they thought was responsible and more to do with the crime scene contamination and intentional misdirection of evidence. Others imply that it was a weak case against the Ramseys, as though they lacked guilt. Legally that is true but I think the GJ had enough information to see through the rouse and they didn't buy the fantasy the Ramseys were peddling and JR continues to SELL They had 13 solid months to sort the nonsense, double speak, selective memory, and gaslighting. They said" No thank you"

 

[FergusMcDuck]

They weren’t released because they ate typically statutorily sealed. See 2020 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 13 - Courts And Court Procedure :: Article 73. Statewide Grand Juries :: Section 13-73-107. Return of indictment or presentment - designation of venue consolidation of indictments - sealing of indictment.

“(2) The court, upon motion of the attorney general, shall order the indictment to be sealed and no person may disclose the existence of the indictment until the defendant is in custody or has been admitted to bail except when necessary for the issuance or execution of a warrant or summons.”



No, they couldn’t. They don’t bring or dismiss charges, DAs do. They could have issued a no true bill, (which they apparently did for 8 of the 12 potential charges), but not dismissed them.



But that does NOT mean that there was enough evidence to ‘win’ a trial. A grand jury’s burden of proof is ‘probable cause’. A trial jury’s burden is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. So while there may have been enough evidence to convince a grand jury there was smoke, that does not mean there was enough to convince a trial jury taht there was fire.

The Ramsey grand jurors who have commented on their experience over the years have basically all said that they understood why Hunter didn’t bring the case to trial.

I have difficulty believing some known or unknown intruder is the killer, but I can also believe that as intriguing/compelling/incomprehensible much of the evidence and/or the Ramseys’ behavior seems, that it still doesn’t rise to the level of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. To this day, the DNA/UM1 situation alone guarantees that.

Thank you, I have been trying to say this for several pages now, but you said it better.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Also from Mike Kane, December 7, 2024 interview with Dan Abrams.

You know, there's a lot of stuff. I spent 13 or 14 months on the grand jury. There's an awful lot of information that was developed in that grand jury after, like, Lou Smit was off the case that people don't have access to. They don't know it. I can't talk about it, but it's significant.

 

[FMB]

They weren’t released because they ate typically statutorily sealed. See 2020 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 13 - Courts And Court Procedure :: Article 73. Statewide Grand Juries :: Section 13-73-107. Return of indictment or presentment - designation of venue consolidation of indictments - sealing of indictment.

“(2) The court, upon motion of the attorney general, shall order the indictment to be sealed and no person may disclose the existence of the indictment until the defendant is in custody or has been admitted to bail except when necessary for the issuance or execution of a warrant or summons.”



No, they couldn’t. They don’t bring or dismiss charges, DAs do. They could have issued a no true bill, (which they apparently did for 8 of the 12 potential charges), but not dismissed them.



But that does NOT mean that there was enough evidence to ‘win’ a trial. A grand jury’s burden of proof is ‘probable cause’. A trial jury’s burden is ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. So while there may have been enough evidence to convince a grand jury there was smoke, that does not mean there was enough to convince a trial jury taht there was fire.

The Ramsey grand jurors who have commented on their experience over the years have basically all said that they understood why Hunter didn’t bring the case to trial.

I have difficulty believing some known or unknown intruder is the killer, but I can also believe that as intriguing/compelling/incomprehensible much of the evidence and/or the Ramseys’ behavior seems, that it still doesn’t rise to the level of ‘beyond a reasonable doubt’. To this day, the DNA/UM1 situation alone guarantees that.

Which Grand Jurors stated they understood why Hunter did not bring the case to trial?? Grand Jurors are sworn to secrecy....

No indictment is ever contingent on definitely securing a guilty verdict, Its pure speculation as to what the verdict would have been. The result of a trial can never be predicted. Maybe additional evidence is found for the trial that had not been presented to the GJ, maybe someone cracks and confesses at the trial etc etc etc

Hunter plea bargained almost every case brought before him, He was a lousy prosecutor, sure he was going to say there was not enough evidence for a trial, he never wanted to take it to trial to begin with.

Hunter intentionally misled the world regarding the Grand Jury Indictment. It was a total abuse of process. His actions may have even been unlawful under Colorado law.