Why GJ Likely Solved Case In 1999

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Touch DNA can be transferred via secondary transfer. JonBenet, Patsy, John, Burke, anybody, could have picked up the DNA anywhere then transferred it to JonBenet's clothing. The housekeeper could have had it on her hands and in the act of folding and placing JonBenet's clothing then transferred the touch DNA. The long johns could have been picked up by someone at the Ramseys for the Christmas events prior to the 25th and flung them across the bed. There just is no way to connect that touch DNA with JonBenet's killer unless the donor can be identified and then shown to have been in the Ramsey home on the night JonBenet was killed.

I seriously doubt the DA in this case wanted the Grand Jury to hand over a true bill so I don't understand what you mean about "They are willing to give the DA what they want." Regardless, your negative opinion of Grand Jurys conflicts with what is known about the accuracy of Grand Jury true bills that are taken to trial.

Without transferring their own DNA? That seems unlikely to me. I can see ignoring it if it was on her coat, gloves but underwear??? I have seen cases solved by the police doing specific DNA testing based on where the attacker would touch them and pull down their pants, underwear. I can not ignore that.

I don't have negative feelings about grand juries. I just know they have a history of indicting almost everything/one brought to them. They did not indict them for murder even though that is what the police/ DA most likely wanted.

I wonder often if it was not a compromise of giving the DA something because they knew they wanted it so bad.
As far as I can see there is no history of abuse/ neglect with the family on record. I understand people see sexual abuse in this case and I read CW's findings, but I still don't see this as an abusive family and just because people may feel she was abused it does not automatically point to immediate family. It could have been a friend of the family, other relative, someone on the fringe, who knows. But I don't think that is a beeline to the family without evidence. I just don't see that here yet.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

how do you know the unknown DNA didn't get in her pants AFTER the crime (not during)
the phone records are missing.we don't know whether the Ramseys called someone over that night or not.
IF the DNA in her pants was deposited there that night it still doesn't prove that the owner killed her,period.
did they collect DNA from all the doctors the Ramseys knew?from all JR's friends who work in security?I DOUBT IT.
that DNA doesn't prove anything nor does it clear people,not until you know who it belongs to.

The phone records are missing? How would that be possible. That sounds more convenient to me than something that points anywhere. So you think JBR was killed and the Ramseys had people over to stare at her and touch her and what? That does not make sense to me. I think that if that were the case then that DNA would be tied to someone somehow in the circle. Sorry That does not work for me. OMO

 

[madeleine]

The phone records are missing? How would that be possible. That sounds more convenient to me than something that points anywhere.

huh?

So you think JBR was killed and the Ramseys had people over to stare at her and touch her and what? That does not make sense to me.

if it was an accident,yep,I think it's possible they called their dear good friend dr.Beuf over ...or someone else ,another dr,a friend,etc

I think that if that were the case then that DNA would be tied to someone somehow in the circle. Sorry That does not work for me. OMO

did they test every person the R's knew?doubt it...or maybe you know otherwise

 

[bettybaby00]

The phone records are missing? How would that be possible. That sounds more convenient to me than something that points anywhere.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say? Convenient for whom?

if it was an accident,yep,I think it's possible they called their dear good friend dr.Beuf over ...or someone else ,another dr,a friend,etc

I'm not so sure. The lengths they went to, even before the murder, to push the idea of a perfect family makes me think they wouldn't have called anyone......yet...there is always a yet isn't there? Yet, those phone records were suppressed, and then ultimately lost. HUGE red flag.

And that's the thing about this case. Nearly all of these types of things, taken individually don't mean very much, but combined are very, very damning. As Kolar states several times, one has to consider ALL the physical, behavioral and statement evidence durning an investigation. In this particular case that wasn't an easy task. Between the effects of staging, missed opportunities, damn good defense lawyers, and the apparent collusion of the DAs office, this case was doomed.

 

[madeleine]

So you think JBR was killed and the Ramseys had people over to stare at her and touch her and what? That does not make sense to me.

That's exactly what they did.
The RN said she will DIE if they call anyone.What did they do?not only did they call the cops BUT 6 friends and the priest.pfff.
when her body was found they were all holding hands in a circle, praying next to the body,yeah,pretty much like you (ironically) put it,they had people over to stare at her.and yep,it doesn't make sense to me either and that's why I'm RDI.

but it does make sense to call a friend over or a doctor friend if an accident happens and you have reasons(like abuse) to hide something from 911/ambulance folks

 

[madeleine]

it's very simple to me

and I won't talk about kids when giving examples,let's talk about pets

if the vet tells you,DON'T give that pill to your dog or he DIES...and the next moment that's exactly what you do,you give that pill to your dog....what to think of you?that you're an innocent dog owner who wants what's best for his/her dog?


if you find your dog one morning brutally killed on your front lawn and there's a note saying the dog was killed because of YOU....wouldn't you be angry and curious to know what on earth did you do so wrong and who did you pi$$ off?would you just say bwah.whatever,my dog's in a better place?

human nature and human instinct is what gave The R's away IMO

 

[questfortrue]

huh?

if it was an accident,yep,I think it's possible they called their dear good friend dr.Beuf over ...or someone else ,another dr,a friend,etc

did they test every person the R's knew?doubt it...or maybe you know otherwise

Madeleine, I also looked at Dr. B as much as able in my “sleuthing”. In my view Dr. B was like others who “bought” JR’s sanctimony. There was a bit of controversy about Dr. B which hasn’t been proved (or disproved) Back in 1997 Boulder Weekly ran a story which included allegations that before coming to Boulder Dr. B left his Arvada position with some unfavorable comments. ( A nurse for Dr. B voiced concern that he did too many urinary catheterizations. However, we can’t put too much credence in it since there is no paper trail.)

Most everyone remembers it was reported that the evening following the discovery of JB, JR went for a solitary walk (accompanied by Dr. B and perhaps attorney MB , don’t recall for sure whether it was MB or host JF who was the third person. MB did come over to the F’s home that evening though.) Guess one can construe that Dr. B was given some information that evening, brought into the fold so to speak, and he ended up standing by his original thesis that JB was a normal, well loved child and showed no signs of abuse.

Sorry it this has been repeated on another thread, but I found the story became strange when Dr. B went so far as to lock up JB’s medical records in a safe deposit box, and then claimed that someone broke into the safe deposit box. The other strange part to Dr. B’s story is that he even gave an interview to Paula Woodward, and, you guessed it, JR’s lawyers were in the room to make certain nothing untoward was asked or said.

The latest on Dr. B is that after a long pediatric career he served on the Boulder Medical Society Executive Board as recently as 2008. He also was nominated for an award for his volunteer efforts within the Boulder community.

A comment aside all of this, in the last 10 years the Colorado Board of Medicine has become very vigilant about doctors who prescribe narcotic prescriptions (heavy sedatives, etc.) without a medical relationship to the person prescribed the drugs. Since Dr. B was the physician to BR and JB, his prescription for PR would be considered against their standards, and he might be evaluated and temporarily sanctioned for it today. Back in the mid 90’s he’d be given a pass.

 

[bettybaby00]

That's exactly what they did.
The RN said she will DIE if they call anyone.What did they do?not only did they call the cops BUT 6 friends and the priest.pfff.
when her body was found they were all holding hands in a circle, praying next to the body,yeah,pretty much like you (ironically) put it,they had people over to stare at herand yep,it doesn't make sense to me either and that's why I'm RDI.

but it does make sense to call a friend over or a doctor friend if an accident happens and you have reasons(like abuse) to hide something from 911/ambulance folks

BBM...god when you put it like that! sometimes i think i'm too naive to have proper perspective on this case!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

That's exactly what they did.
The RN said she will DIE if they call anyone.What did they do?not only did they call the cops BUT 6 friends and the priest.pfff.
when her body was found they were all holding hands in a circle, praying next to the body,yeah,pretty much like you (ironically) put it,they had people over to stare at her.and yep,it doesn't make sense to me either and that's why I'm RDI.

but it does make sense to call a friend over or a doctor friend if an accident happens and you have reasons(like abuse) to hide something from 911/ambulance folks

Not to look at her, They did not know she was there then, That is my opinion on it.. They were freaking out. And I would call people too. I would call the police and my closest friends and yes my Pastor.

EVERY ransom note says not to call the police.. but we all know that you call the police and the FBI and whoever can help.

I don't understand why praying over her was a horrible thing either. I can see people praying with the hope of a mother who is praying for a miracle. I can not imagine what it is like to find your baby dead..
omo

 

[CherCher]

If we can believe Hunter--and some of us obviously don't--there is no question that the Grand Jury lacked sufficient evidence to pursue a prosecution:


>October 13, 1999
Web posted at: 10:04 p.m. EDT (0204 GMT)

BOULDER, Colorado (CNN) -- The grand jury that has been examining the JonBenet Ramsey murder case for 13 months will not issue any indictments, Boulder County District Attorney Alex Hunter announced Wednesday evening. He said the panel has been discharged.

"We do not have sufficient evidence to warrant the filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time," Hunter told reporters in a brief statement......

Hunter did not mention the girl's parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, whom he earlier had said were "under an umbrella of suspicion."

He did praise the members of the panel.

"The grand jurors have done their work extraordinarily well, bringing to bear all of their legal powers, life experiences and shrewdness," said Hunter.

The prosecutor said that under Colorado law all proceedings of the grand jury are secret. A court order was distributed to journalists, telling them to stay away from the grand jurors or risk being in contempt of court.

"Under no circumstances will I, or any of my advisers, prosecutors, the law enforcement officers working on this case or the grand jurors discuss grand jury proceedings -- today or ever -- unless ordered by the court," Hunter said.

But he announced he would answer questions from the media on Thursday.

Colorado Gov. Bill Owens said he will review the case and decide whether to appoint a special prosecutor.

"While I am not presently in a position to comment on the work of this grand jury, I do know one fact: A little girl was brutally murdered in Boulder, Colorado, and the killer or killers remain free today," he said.

"STUMPED" was the boldface, full-spread banner headline in an "Extra" edition printed by the local newspaper, the Boulder Daily Camera. "Grand jury takes no action in JonBenet Ramsey case," the sub-headline said.


Ramseys: 'Find the real killer'

About an hour after the announcement, a family friend from West Virginia, Linda McLean, told CNN she had spoken with Patsy Ramsey, a former Miss West Virginia.

"We were on our knees holding hands when the statement came out," she quoted Patsy Ramsey as saying. "We are relieved and thankful to God. Now we can proceed with trying to find the real killer."

Pam Paugh, Patsy Ramsey's sister, said she was glad the Ramseys weren't indicted. But she said on CNN's "Larry King Live" that she was disappointed the jurors could not solve the case.

There is no statute of limitations on murder in Colorado. The investigation is >expected to stay open and active.


Gag order? What gag order?

Here you go.

 

[WhereAreTheyNow]

I stumbled across a 125-page theory posted online in 2006 by "Michael R. Yerkey". My summary: The author is career military, born-again Christian and believes is the root of all evil. His theory is SCDI (Santa Claus Did It). I found this one part interesting (and possibly connected to the topic of this thread):

"This Juror’s Final Verdict in the Matter of the State of Colorado vs. John and Patsy Ramsey:

In conclusion it is without question that the Ramseys failed to protect their daughter and were thus guilty of negligence. They were not however guilty based on the evidence or this juror’s judgment based on his own experiences guilty of murder in the first degree, involuntary manslaughter, staging, or a cover up. The Ramsey’s only crime was failing to protect a six-year-old girl from a world that did not care about her as much as they did. The Ramsey’s neglect of safety was due more to lack of consideration of the dangers around them than inattention to their child. JonBenet was given more than enough attention, love, and basic rules to protect her from all but the most aggressive and determined criminals. Unfortunately it was the determined criminal that saw a chink in the Ramsey’s armor and exploited John B. Ramsey’s lax physical security, and his failure to question his daughter’s understanding of Santa Claus. Both are common mistakes in the United States of America, many parents do a poor job of physical security and of listening to and reacting to what their children say to them. As a juror in the case of Colorado vs. Ramsey’s this juror would have to vote innocent due to a reasonable doubt."


This is not mainstream media. I am posting a portion of the link only out of respect for the author.

https://www.apus.edu/content/dam/online-library/.../Yerkey-2006.pdf

 

[zencompass]

Did the Ramsey grand jury, after investigating the JonBenet Ramsey murder for 13 months and interviewing an estimated 100 witnesses, solve the crime back in 1999? It appears this could be so.

But if so, why hasn't the name of the killer been released to the public? The only answer that could fit this question is that it would be against the Colorado Children's Code to release the name of a juvenile too young to even be charged with a serious crime.

IOW, if the JonBenet murder was solved by the grand jury in October of 1999, it has been a legal coverup ever since.

By following the money, this scenario makes sense. Boulder had spent over a million dollars to investigate the case through 1999. Since then the Boulder budget to actively investigate the crime has been cut back to nothing.

Mary Keenan was elected to the office of district attorney and assumed her duties in January of 2001 with a promise to pursue the investigation -- but she hasn't requested as much as a penny to continue the investigation. Keenan took over the case from the Boulder Police Department on December 20, 2002 with the conveient comment that she "will not discuss the case".

Keenan hired retired detective Tom Bennett on June 12, 2003, at $25 an hour, to head up the investigation with Lou Smit. The money for Bennett's position is being paid from the funds previously budgeted to hire an attorney for the DA's office. But Bennett and Smit, both working part-time, have produced virtually nothing new.

It's also interesting that Keenan has not asked for any assistance from other LE agencies in Boulder, such as the BPD; the Sheriff's Department; or the CBI. Keenan's two investigators, Linda Wickman and Joe DeAngelo, work on other cases.

Mary Keenan's so-called "new investigation" into JonBenet's murder is obviously a sham. There is no new investigation -- there seems to be nothing but lies and a coverup that appears to be legal. Legal because, under the Colorado Children's Code, it is lawful to lie to protect the identity of children involved in a serious crime, such as murder.

In my opinion, it is highly likely the grand jury solved the JonBenet murder in 1999.

BlueCrab

In my opinion you are absolutely correct, BlueCrab

 

[mauidreemn]

In my opinion you are absolutely correct, BlueCrab

Grand jury's do NOT solve crimes.

 

[zencompass]

Looks like the Grand Jury, in voting for indictments of both J.R. and P.R. was trying to tell us something:


Grand Jury voted for indictment of both parents:

Note: (Below - also exact wording in indictment against Patsy Ramsey):


"On or between Dec. 25 and Dec. 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colo., John Bennett Ramsey did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health, which resulted in the death of JonBenet Ramsey, a child under the age of sixteen."

Note: (Below - also exact wording in indictment against Patsy Ramsey):

"On or between Dec. 25 and Dec. 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colo., John Bennett Ramsey did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death."

 

[mauidreemn]

Looks like the Grand Jury, in voting for indictments of both J.R. and P.R. was trying to tell us something:


Grand Jury voted for indictment of both parents:

Note: (Below - also exact wording in indictment against Patsy Ramsey):


"On or between Dec. 25 and Dec. 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colo., John Bennett Ramsey did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health, which resulted in the death of JonBenet Ramsey, a child under the age of sixteen."

Note: (Below - also exact wording in indictment against Patsy Ramsey):

"On or between Dec. 25 and Dec. 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colo., John Bennett Ramsey did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death."

Have you ever been on a grand jury?

 

[TheOtherChristina]

Have you ever been on a grand jury?

I have, and I'm not sure what you're implying. We most certainly did not rubber stamp every charge we heard, and these were largely possession cases. Between cases and on breaks, I had a chance to speak with some of the AUSAs at length about procedure and convention, which is a large part of why I find Hunter's refusal to sign the indictment so telling.

 

[mauidreemn]

I have, and I'm not sure what you're implying. We most certainly did not rubber stamp every charge we heard, and these were largely possession cases. Between cases and on breaks, I had a chance to speak with some of the AUSAs at length about procedure and convention, which is a large part of why I find Hunter's refusal to sign the indictment so telling.

I think DA Hunter's refusal to sign interesting also. But he didn't. The politics of this case are mind blowing

 

[zencompass]

You asked whether I have served on a Grand Jury.

Not the one which voted for indictments for both J.R. and P.R. which is the one that is being discussed in this thread.

It is the one directly related to the Ramsey family whose daughter was heinously murdered
in her home in 1996.

It is the one that concluded that each of JonBenet's parents:

" did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health, which resulted in the death of JonBenet Ramsey, a child under the age of sixteen."

and that each of JonBenet's parents:

"did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death."


It does not matter whether I have been on a Grand Jury once or more times. The Grand Jury that matters in this case is the one which voted for indictments for
both of the parents of JonBenet.

When discussing this case - the only Grand Jury that relates to this case is the one that voted for the aforementioned
indictments.

That little six year-old child deserves answers and justice. Perhaps towards this end - another Grand Jury will be convened for that very purpose. There is always hope.

 

[mauidreemn]

You asked whether I have served on a Grand Jury.

Not the one which voted for indictments for both J.R. and P.R. which is the one that is being discussed in this thread.

It is the one directly related to the Ramsey family whose daughter was heinously murdered
in her home in 1996.

It is the one that concluded that each of JonBenet's parents:

" did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health, which resulted in the death of JonBenet Ramsey, a child under the age of sixteen."

and that each of JonBenet's parents:

"did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death."


It does not matter whether I have been on a Grand Jury once or more times. The Grand Jury that matters in this case is the one which voted for indictments for
both of the parents of JonBenet.

When discussing this case - the only Grand Jury that relates to this case is the one that voted for the aforementioned
indictments.

That little six year-old child deserves answers and justice. Perhaps towards this end - another Grand Jury will be convened for that very purpose. There is always hope.

An indictment does NOT mean guilty

 

[Heymom]

An indictment does NOT mean guilty

No, but it does mean that they have found sufficient evidence to bring the case to court. If they had not found sufficient evidence they would not have brought indictments.