dcountmontecristo
Free Thinker
- Joined
- Feb 9, 2019
- Messages
- 104
- Reaction score
- 155
"Here’s what I was doing with the exoneration letter, I was trying to prevent a horrible travesty of justice. I was scared to death that despite the fact that there was no evidence, no psychopathy and no motive, the case was a train going down the track and the Ramseys were tied to that track." Those were the words left by Boulder county ex-DA Mary Lacy during her interview with ABC news in 2016 regarding the announcement of her controversial and unprecedented decision on the JonBenet Ramsey murder case.
Eight years prior, Lacy issued a letter of apology personally addresed to the Ramseys stating they were exonerated by dna evidence.. Lacy, who was then the Boulder County DA from 2001 until 2009, hung her hat on the newly discovered touch DNA found on JonBenet's long johns, which she said was found to belong to an unknown male. She explained that this unknown male DNA matched DNA found in two spots of blood in the crotch of JonBenet's panties. The unknown male DNA, according to her, was the smoking gun that pointed to JonBenet's killer and that killer was not anyone in her family. This made way to the clearing of the Ramseys but taken aback with critical criticism from her personally formed investigating team including her former collegues and other members of the law enforcement body.
But ...what do we really understand about this so called Lacy's "exoneration"?
Let's see what we can find....
Exoneration by legal definition refers to a court order that discharges a person from liability.
A court order is an official proclamation by a judge (or panel of judges) that defines the legal relationships between the parties to a hearing, a trial, an appeal or other court proceedings.
Meaning if the judge or panel of judges has the official power to issue or execute an exoneration then why did DA Lacy issued and even announced publicly an exoneration to the Ramseys? Was it even legal?
In an article :
From: "DNA in doubt: New analysis challenges DA's exoneration of Ramseys"
Presence of 3rd person's genetic markers never before revealed
By Charlie Brennan and Kevin Vaughan
Daily Camera • 9NEWS
POSTED: 10/27/2016 06:37:51 PM MDT
UPDATED: 12/28/2016 02:54:20 PM MST
"Lacy's successor as Boulder's district attorney, Stan Garnett, remembers exactly where he was when he learned of Lacy's decision to exonerate the Ramseys: sitting at LaGuardia Airport in New York waiting for a flight home when news of Lacy's letter crawled across a television screen. Although he called Lacy "an honorable person" and an "honest district attorney," he also said he was — and is — puzzled by her decision.
The job of a district attorney is to file charges in cases where the evidence warrants it, Garnett said.
"Our role is not to issue random exonerations of people in cases, and it's very confusing when that happens," Garnett added.
Exoneration in criminal context occurs when the conviction for a crime is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise.
(A conviction is the outcome of a trial in which a criminal defendant is found guilty. )
If so, how can an exoneration be executed in a case like this that has never moved to trial?
Meaning,
if there was no trial occured then
there was no conviction.
Therefore,
if there was no conviction then
what charge is to be reversed…
what charge is to be exonerated?
The point here, Lacy's " exoneration letter" is nothing but a piece of crap intended only in the courts of public opinion. It was meaningless, unconstitutional, and was made as part of their propaganda to deliberately mislead the public short...mind-conditioning...
now, were the Ramseys "in actual fact" CLEARED? Or were just being taken for a ride again by the magic carpet of justice of the Boulder prosecutor?
you decide...
Eight years prior, Lacy issued a letter of apology personally addresed to the Ramseys stating they were exonerated by dna evidence.. Lacy, who was then the Boulder County DA from 2001 until 2009, hung her hat on the newly discovered touch DNA found on JonBenet's long johns, which she said was found to belong to an unknown male. She explained that this unknown male DNA matched DNA found in two spots of blood in the crotch of JonBenet's panties. The unknown male DNA, according to her, was the smoking gun that pointed to JonBenet's killer and that killer was not anyone in her family. This made way to the clearing of the Ramseys but taken aback with critical criticism from her personally formed investigating team including her former collegues and other members of the law enforcement body.
But ...what do we really understand about this so called Lacy's "exoneration"?
Let's see what we can find....
Exoneration by legal definition refers to a court order that discharges a person from liability.
A court order is an official proclamation by a judge (or panel of judges) that defines the legal relationships between the parties to a hearing, a trial, an appeal or other court proceedings.
Meaning if the judge or panel of judges has the official power to issue or execute an exoneration then why did DA Lacy issued and even announced publicly an exoneration to the Ramseys? Was it even legal?
In an article :
From: "DNA in doubt: New analysis challenges DA's exoneration of Ramseys"
Presence of 3rd person's genetic markers never before revealed
By Charlie Brennan and Kevin Vaughan
Daily Camera • 9NEWS
POSTED: 10/27/2016 06:37:51 PM MDT
UPDATED: 12/28/2016 02:54:20 PM MST
"Lacy's successor as Boulder's district attorney, Stan Garnett, remembers exactly where he was when he learned of Lacy's decision to exonerate the Ramseys: sitting at LaGuardia Airport in New York waiting for a flight home when news of Lacy's letter crawled across a television screen. Although he called Lacy "an honorable person" and an "honest district attorney," he also said he was — and is — puzzled by her decision.
The job of a district attorney is to file charges in cases where the evidence warrants it, Garnett said.
"Our role is not to issue random exonerations of people in cases, and it's very confusing when that happens," Garnett added.
Exoneration in criminal context occurs when the conviction for a crime is reversed, either through demonstration of innocence, a flaw in the conviction, or otherwise.
(A conviction is the outcome of a trial in which a criminal defendant is found guilty. )
If so, how can an exoneration be executed in a case like this that has never moved to trial?
Meaning,
if there was no trial occured then
there was no conviction.
Therefore,
if there was no conviction then
what charge is to be reversed…
what charge is to be exonerated?
The point here, Lacy's " exoneration letter" is nothing but a piece of crap intended only in the courts of public opinion. It was meaningless, unconstitutional, and was made as part of their propaganda to deliberately mislead the public short...mind-conditioning...
now, were the Ramseys "in actual fact" CLEARED? Or were just being taken for a ride again by the magic carpet of justice of the Boulder prosecutor?
you decide...
