bettybaby00
Active Member
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2013
- Messages
- 3,981
- Reaction score
- 12
Why, oh why didnt investigators follow up with the right questions? Shouldnt they have asked Patsy if it was customary to put JonBenets hair up like that for bed? They knew what her hair looked like at the Whites Christmas party, so shouldnt they have asked if it was rearranged by her after they got home? They didnt even ask about why she would let her go to bed wearing her jewelry. I dont think a small chain necklace would last many nights before it might get broken, and an intruder wouldnt have done these things before taking her to the basement. So many missed opportunities :sheesh: .
Venom, the round mark has always bothered me as well. The color makes it look like it could be a dried blood scab, a bruise, or it might even be some kind of burn. But not just a light burn causing a blister, but one in which the skin is charred to that color. Each of these types of injuries would give us an idea about when they might have been inflicted in relation to death. The medical examiner could have (should have) tested it to determine exactly what caused it. If he did, we dont know what the results were and it leaves us to only speculate. Until or unless some other information comes out (which I doubt), I dont think well be able to figure it out. But I dont think it is similar to any marks caused by a stun gun or a taser.
The central issue concerning the BBM reflects the Rs refusal to cooperate. Consider how days after JRBs death, the parents informed law enforcement that they were unwilling to meet with investigators and all questions should be submitted in writing via the DA. These questions--some of which sought info about what JRB wore to bed--took weeks to be answered, with little to no chance of having an unfettered back and forth between the Rs and LE. Moreover, after months of stonewalling, certain lines of questioning were specifically excluded during interviews, and potential pieces of evidence were never subpoenaed and effectively witheld from the investigation.
Innocent parents don't act this way. Feel you need a lawyer fine, I don't necessarily agree with that, but it's everyone's right. You can't, however, turn around and attempt to manipulate the perception that you are cooperating when its evident you're not. Refusing to sit down formally and speak with police for 4 months after the brutal murder of your daughter is not normal.
The Rs forced LE to investigate hundreds of people, and leads, yet all of it led right back to that house.
I am continually drawn back to Doc Miller's piece...
The Politics of Delay
Ellis Armstead, by his constant presence and interference was a huge source of frustration for Boulder Police detectives trying to put their case together against John and Patsy. When police detectives arrived to interview a relevant witness, they often found that Armstead had already been there to take a statement that would favor the defense. This strategy gave the Ramseys several important advantages.
When a police investigator takes a statement, the information becomes discoverable to defense attorneys only after charges are filed. However, statements taken by the defense before charges are filed don't get into the hands of the prosecution unless the information is favorable to the defendant. The defense investigator getting a jump on the police has an opportunity to lead the witness to make the "right" kind of statement. In the Ramsey case, leaks from Hunter's office reached Haddon's law firm, and thus provided Armstead with the knowledge as to whom the police next planned to interview. By getting to the witness first, Armstead could influence not only what the witness said, but what that witness would recall in any subsequent police interview.
Ellis Armstead himself acknowledged his professional, rather than moral commitment, to John and Patsy once he resigned. "It was not like I was naive. It wouldn't have changed how I did anything. It really didn't matter to me whether they did it or didn't do it." In Armstead's own words, he exposes an utter absence of moral character, the sickness and greed within the American criminal justice system.
Bolstering the Rs legal team were the actions of the DAs office...
"The Boulder County Grand Jury has completed its work and will not return. No charges have been filed." Hunter praised the American criminal justice system, claiming he had never been so proud of it and the work of the grand jury.
After learning of the TBs how can this be viewed as anything other than less than truthful?
And the final pièce de résistance of course was/is MLs exoneration. It's been waved around more than an American Flag at a Fourth of July parade.
Behind every claim of proof that the Rs are innocent, is irrefutable evidence showing how flawed, biased, incomplete and generally misleading that claim actually is. LSs intruder theory campaign helped portray the Rs as victims, while obscuring critical evidence that proved unfavorable. The recent discussion regarding LSs testimony regarding "hairs," is a particularly good example of this slight of hand.
Miller also wrote:
Can You See My Hand?
Defense lawyers use a lot of tricks to capture the imagination of a jury in their opening arguments. A defense lawyer raises the palm of his hand toward the jurors and asks, "Can you see my hand?" The lawyer gives his shoulders a shrug, tosses a glance over his shoulder to the prosecutor, takes a moment for eye contact with each juror, then rhetorically and dramatically answers his own question. "No," the defendant's combatant says, turning his hand over, "you can only see half of my hand." He lowers his head to engage the jury, "The other side is what I'm going to show you."
http://www.tommillerlaw.com/Chapter...ution-of-Justice-by-Thomas-C-Doc-Miller.shtml
All moo, moo, moo, etc., etc.