Mr. Clean v. The State and The Tabloids

[Toth]

>I think Toth was using Oliva as an example of the lack of thoroughness of
>the BPD, not actually meaning Oliva was still a good suspect.
Yes.
>But I don't agree with Toth that the cops thought they'd "solved" the crime
>in the first few hours. I think they were highly suspicious of the Ramseys
>after the body was found, as any cop would naturally be under the
>circumstances.
The slapdash job they wanted to do forensically, the statement by the detective to AuntPam, it all shows an early targeting of the parents.
Cops should not have been 'highly suspicious under the circumstances'.


>I bet there were far more people questioned as suspects in JBR's murder
>than in the average murder case.
what a drag this is! I have to put down my donut and go out and talk to some yokel who wants to tell me the Ramseys are good people and would never kill anyone, much less their own daughter. Oh well, I gotta go out and talk to the idiot, doesn't mean I have to believe any of the nonsense or even write it down. However, it sure means 'one more person question in the case'. Atleast the stats will look good.

 

[Shylock]

I was referring to the material from the corpse.
As to the pineapple in the home being sent for genetic analysis: do you really believe that? Do you think Dole Pineapple Company likes variety?

It was fresh pineapple Toth, not canned. Get the facts will ya, Dole will appreciate it.
And Sissi, I guess you never trimmed a fresh pineapple. It's pretty hard to get all the rind off it without wasting a lot of the good part.

 

[Toltec]

Like it or not Toth...Ramseys lawyered up LESS THAN 24 HOURS of finding JonBenet. How could they possibly know the BPD was targeting them as #1 Suspect???

Actions speak for themselves.

 

[Toth]

Mike Bynum was no fool. Fortunately for the course of justice.
He hired the lawyers who were able to derail the railroad train despite the efforts of the Ramseys.

 

[Jayelles]

Mike Bynum was no fool. Fortunately for the course of justice.
He hired the lawyers who were able to derail the railroad train despite the efforts of the Ramseys.

Eh? Surely you jest? Don't you mean "derail the investigation"? Are you suggesting John Ramsey IS a fool? John Ramsey built an ran a successful business. Rest assured, HE was in control of his lawyers - not the other way around.

 

[Toth]

His lawyers repeatedly told John and Patsy it was wrong to speak to the police, but they insisted that the meeting be arranged.

If there ever was an investigation, it was the BPD who promptly derailed it with an obsession about the parents coming to police headquarters instead of the BPD going to their lawyer's conference room.

 

[Imon128]

I believe it's common for the investigators to start looking first at the inner circle of those close to JB and move to the outer circle. John and Patsy were at the core of that inner circle. All they had to do was go talk to LE. They had lawyers in place already, so why wouldn't they?

 

[BlueCrab]

I believe it's common for the investigators to start looking first at the inner circle of those close to JB and move to the outer circle. John and Patsy were at the core of that inner circle. All they had to do was go talk to LE. They had lawyers in place already, so why wouldn't they?

Why? Because the coverup was already in place and had been from Day One. IMO the coverup started in the wee hours of Dec. 26, prior to the 911 call.

JMO

 

[Nehemiah]

His lawyers repeatedly told John and Patsy it was wrong to speak to the police, but they insisted that the meeting be arranged.

If there ever was an investigation, it was the BPD who promptly derailed it with an obsession about the parents coming to police headquarters instead of the BPD going to their lawyer's conference room.

For the life of me, I've never been able to understand why parents whose child was murdered, would not do whatever it took to clear themselves and allow an investigation to proceed. There'd be nothing wrong with doing it on police terms, IF it allowed the investigation to go beyond the inner circle. IF they had just taken their sleeping bags and gone to the police station and said "we're camping out here until you find the killer of our daughter"....that would have made much more sense than their actual behavior of lawyering up with many lawyers for all family members, and then setting the parameters for everything. Why not just answer the questions truthfully and be a stepping stone instead of a stumbling block? Something is not right with that scenario, IMO.

And, if they are innocent, why not come out and say "you know...we goofed in the beginning. We should have allowed ourselves to have been interrogated and cleared..." or whatever the heck. It just seems that they, or no one in their camp, can admit that they made any mistakes or used any bad judgement, or have failed in any way... and that takes credibility from
them; it does not add credibility to them. Instead, they seem intent on blaming others, a la OJ, apparently the case standard to which they or their hired help aspire. As I've always heard, no matter how thin you slice the bacon, there's still two sides.

 

[Barbara]

Don't you find it so interesting that out of all the people questioned, sampled, and more than once, some pretty frequently, ONLY the RAM$EYS had lawyers.

Now I am also prone to believing that innocent people need lawyers.... Do they need a team? Do they need them for every extended member of the family?? Fishy at best. Given that, WITH A TEAM OF LAWYERS, THEY STILL WOULDN'T COOPERATE!

CAN ANYONE FIND ANOTHER EXAMPLE ANYWHERE WHERE THE PARENTS OF A MURDER VICTIM REFUSED TO SPEAK TO POLICE?

I've been asking that for years, and yet nobody, even the most diehard RST can come up with a single parent who did what the Ramseys did.

Psst, if the RST believe that there is not a thing suspicious about that, I want them to know that here in Brooklyn, the Brooklyn Bridge is now under my ownership and I will sell to the highest bidder!

 

[Jayelles]

His lawyers repeatedly told John and Patsy it was wrong to speak to the police, but they insisted that the meeting be arranged.

If there ever was an investigation, it was the BPD who promptly derailed it with an obsession about the parents coming to police headquarters instead of the BPD going to their lawyer's conference room.

Going to the police station is normal procedure - surely? They have interview rooms especially set up with recording equipment (well they do in the UK). Why did the Ramseys have an obsession with NOT going to the police station? Who was running the investigation? Who do you THINK should have been running the investigation.

The Ramseys will go down in history as the parents who demanded special treatment and conditions before they would assist the police with their enquiries into their child's death. They had a moral duty to do that and they failed in that moral duty. Only the RST seem to think that was OK and they call everyone else a lynch mob for thinking otherwise.

Don't you understand that the more the Ramseys haggled and shirked, the more suspicious it made them look? The police had questions, the Ramseys had answers. They were key witnesses who also had "opportunity" and they needed to be eliminated. It was the Ramseys who prevented that from happening. They expected the police to eliminate them without investigating them and they took the hump when the police wouldn't do things THEIR way.

 

[BlueCrab]

Toth,

With all due respect my friend, you interpret the Ramsey crime scene evidence like some people interpret the Bible. They make it say anything they want it to say.

You make up a fictitious intruder story about the JonBenet murder and then disregard the common sense interpretation of the known hard evidence, and make up evidence of your own without ever providing sources, to try to make your fictional story seem plausible.

Why don't you take Lou Smit's advice about murders being exactly what they seem to be?

JMO

 

[Maxi]

The police wanted to interrogate John and Patsy seperately and at a hotel (the first night) or at the station for two reasons. First, that would be the usual police procedure, and, second, Patsy gave contradictory information in her informal statements to the police.

My recollection is that almost all the stalling moves were justified by John at the time as a need to protect Patsy from getting more upset. But why, then, didn't John go in to be interrogated? It's not like Patsy was clinging to him every minute, and he didn't want to leave her alone. Yet he insisted that they be interviewed together, and then added all the other demands (doctor present, limited time, lawyers, place, etc.) If John had been interrogated seperately and earlier than Patsy, it would have looked very strange if he were to insist on being with her when she was interrogated.

There were no lawyers involved when John made the first decision not to be formally interrogated. He later said he did not realize he and Patsy would be the prime suspects until Mike Bynum explained it to him. The picture doesn't hang together logically for me, and makes me wonder if John had an ulterior motive for keeping Patsy away from the police.

 

[Toth]

>out of all the people questioned, sampled, and more than once, some
>pretty frequently, ONLY the RAM$EYS had lawyers.
Jeff Merrick said 'If you come back, I'll have my lawyer here'.
Others may not have been able to afford lawyers.
Others were not targets.

>Do they need a team?
Separate lawyers for John, Patsy and Burke is ethically required.
>THEY STILL WOULDN'T COOPERATE!
Yes they would, the BPD would not.


>CAN ANYONE FIND ANOTHER EXAMPLE ANYWHERE WHERE THE PARENTS OF
>A MURDER VICTIM REFUSED TO SPEAK TO POLICE?
Look for intelligent parents who are not now in prison.

 

[Nehemiah]

>out of all the people questioned, sampled, and more than once, some
>pretty frequently, ONLY the RAM$EYS had lawyers.
Jeff Merrick said 'If you come back, I'll have my lawyer here'.
Others may not have been able to afford lawyers.
Others were not targets.

>Do they need a team?
Separate lawyers for John, Patsy and Burke is ethically required.
>THEY STILL WOULDN'T COOPERATE!
Yes they would, the BPD would not.


>CAN ANYONE FIND ANOTHER EXAMPLE ANYWHERE WHERE THE PARENTS OF
>A MURDER VICTIM REFUSED TO SPEAK TO POLICE?
Look for intelligent parents who are not now in prison.

Include in that JAR, Melinda, Paughs, etc...

 

[Shylock]

>CAN ANYONE FIND ANOTHER EXAMPLE ANYWHERE WHERE THE PARENTS OF
>A MURDER VICTIM REFUSED TO SPEAK TO POLICE?
Look for intelligent parents who are not now in prison.

Don't you mean look for parents that are the PRIME (and only) SUSPECTS in the murder?
You should go back and study the Van Damm case, Toth. It will show you how INNOCENT parents act when their child is murdered. INNOCENT parents work with the police and do anything they can to help solve the crime, even though they/themselves are the initial suspects.

The Ramseys are guilty, and they acted that way from the moment they picked up the phone and called 911.

IMO/JMO

 

[tipper]

Don't you mean look for parents that are the PRIME (and only) SUSPECTS in the murder?
You should go back and study the Van Damm case, Toth. It will show you how INNOCENT parents act when their child is murdered. INNOCENT parents work with the police and do anything they can to help solve the crime, even though they/themselves are the initial suspects.

The Ramseys are guilty, and they acted that way from the moment they picked up the phone and called 911.

IMO/JMO

In the van Dam case you had a missing child and by the time her body was found they had Westerfield as a suspect. So it's difficult to compare the two cases. I wonder what the van Dams would have felt if their two boys had come out of their interviews in tears because the police tried to browbeat them into saying their father had molested them?

 

[Jayelles]

In the van Dam case you had a missing child and by the time her body was found they had Westerfield as a suspect. So it's difficult to compare the two cases. I wonder what the van Dams would have felt if their two boys had come out of their interviews in tears because the police tried to browbeat them into saying their father had molested them?

There were people who protested that the evidence against Westerfield was circumstantial. No trace evidence of him in the home. No previous "history or pathology" that was known about.

There were unknown fingerprints in the house too. Not all of the fibre evidence was identified come to that. If the police hadn't had the guts to proceed with their case against David Westerfield and browbeat him into offering a plea bargain which told them they had their man..... OR .... if he had lawyered up to the hilt and refused to be interviewed unless he could dictate the conditions, then the SAnDiego police might STILL have been hunting the person whose upside down and back to front fingerprints were found on the van Dam stair bannister.

 

[Barbara]

"Look for intelligent parents who are not now in prison."

Name ONE!

 

[Barbara]

>
>THEY STILL WOULDN'T COOPERATE!
Yes they would, the BPD would not.

Toth,

Because you made that statement as a serious one, and don't seem to realize how silly that sounds, and because I am that kind of gal ...

As I said earlier, the Brooklyn Bridge has come into my posession and I'm willing to sell to the highest bidder, but for you 'cause I like you, I'll give it to you for a real discount