Why GJ Likely Solved Case In 1999

[Nehemiah]

There's a lot of excellent info in this thread, esp in light of Kolar's book. I'd like to hear some of your thoughts on some of these posts. There's one by KkkAngel that is very interesting and may hold a clue as to why Hunter backed off, even though the GJ came up with the child abuse for the Rs.

 

[TripleA]

It has always been my gut feeling that BDI. I cannot believe that children cannot be prosecuted in CO. If they commit a crime then they should be held accountable - at a juvenile level of course, but still accountable. If it was an accident then why would they cover it up?

 

[Nehemiah]

There are some interesting theories on that buried in these very old posts, TripleA. X.

 

[BOESP]

If Colorado Code concerning juvenile offenders explains why this case never went to trial then someone should have put a gag order on John and Patsy Ramsey.

 

[Nom de plume]

If Colorado Code concerning juvenile offenders explains why this case never went to trial then someone should have put a gag order on John and Patsy Ramsey.

IMO someone should still put a gag on JR! Oops! Guess I should have said "gag order".

 

[BOESP]

IMO someone should still put a gag on JR! Oops! Guess I should have said "gag order".

:floorlaugh::floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

He just makes me gag.

 

[otg]

Thanks for bumping this thread, Nehemiah. Did you ever find out what ever happened to BlueCrab? Did you trying PM'ing him? After reading some of his posts you referenced before, I couldn't help but wonder if he had some kind of an inside track on what was going on in Boulder. Even more so now on this thread with the recent revelation about the GJ.

 

[DeeDee249]

Before I started posting here, I spent months lurking and reading nearly every thread. Blue Crab was firmly in the BDI mode, and at the time I strongly disagreed. Now, over time and with all I have since learned, I agree with him.

 

[Nehemiah]

Thanks for bumping this thread, Nehemiah. Did you ever find out what ever happened to BlueCrab? Did you trying PM'ing him? After reading some of his posts you referenced before, I couldn't help but wonder if he had some kind of an inside track on what was going on in Boulder. Even more so now on this thread with the recent revelation about the GJ.

I pm'd him a few times but to no avail. I asked Tricia if she knew what happened to him but she didn't. He hasn't logged in here in years, or at least not under the name Blue Crab. In hindsight he obviously had an inside track because time has proven him to be correct on so many controversial issues. I still wonder about some of the things he said that have not come out (yet). Things like bicycle tracks in he snow on the morning of Dec. 26; someone who spent the night in the home on Christmas night... Just so many little tidbits that really angered people here at the time. I enjoy finding his old posts and comparing them to Kolar's book. I often wonder if he were a member of LE, the GJ, or a main case player. If he's here under a different name now, I wish he would PM me just to say he's alive. I can certainly keep a secret.

 

[otg]

(bbm)

It hasn't been leaked because the "leaker" would immediately be arrested, criminally convicted per se, be sent to jail and heavily fined, and lose his job and professional license to make a living.

The court gag order slapped on the case when the grand jury permanently adjourned in October of 1999 tells the whole story.

The story can also be told by studying the name index in PMPT pb. (There are about 500 names listed in PMPT's name index.) Publication of PMPT pb was being held up pending the adjournment of the grand jury. When the powerful GJ finally adjourned in October of 1999, after 13 months of investigation, PMPT rushed to publication. It's pages were edited to conform with the GJ's findings and to obey the court's gag order. As a result, there were names removed from the text but, because of the rush, at least one name, although listed multiple times in the name index in the back of the book, appears just once in the text. Another prominent name does not appear at all.

BlueCrab

I don't have a copy of PMPT. Does anyone who does have a copy know the inititals of the names of people BlueCrab was referring to here? I'm thinking it was DS and FW3, but I wouldn't want to assume it.

(I know... I really need to buy and e-book version so I can search.)

 

[eileenhawkeye]

DS is mentioned as being on nine pages in the index, but only appears once in the book.

FW3's name is listed on five pages in the index. Mentioned three times in the book.

LF's name does not appear at all the book. Not sure if that is the prominent name that is not mentioned that he's talking about though.

 

[Chrishope]

So if it was BDI all along, wouldn't "The Ramseys" have brought it to a quiet resolution within a few days?

Here's what I mean. A big part of BDI theory is that "The Ramseys" covered for something BR did because - a) They may not have known about the CO statute exempting persons under 10 years of age from being charged with a crime, and b) they wanted to protect the image and reputation of the family.

So, surely within a few days of the murder "The Ramseys" had been fully informed by their lawyers that BR could not be charged - with anything.

And within a few days, to at most a few weeks, it should have been obvious that a media circus had developed that would severely damage the family reputation.

Additionally, JR and PR, especially PR, were prime suspects and headed down the track to possible indictment for murder.

And of course, the way it was handled - the investigation dragging on and on for almost 3 years (not counting the "ongoing" investigation" which obviously is going nowhere)

The result has been severe damage to the family rep. and damage to JR's business. Many believe the adult Rs were involved in the murder of their daughter, and many believe BDI.

So, I wonder, why didn't they just go the the DA, through their lawyers of course, and say "Hey, it's BDI. We'll give you enough details to satisfy you of this fact if you'll agree not to prosecute us for obstruction of justice, evidence tampering etc." ?

Hunter's office was a deal making office. To put it mildly, Hunter had little interest in prosecuting for murder, so was he going to be hard-nosed about the lesser charges (if any) ?

The case would of course remain open, officially. But with no real ongoing investigation there would be nothing for the media to feed on. A few public statements about "the intruder" would keep the IDI angle alive, and since the DA/police would know the truth, nothing much would be coming from them; in terms of statements to the press.

The fact that they allowed the investigation to drag on, at great damage to their reputation, and much speculation about BR, suggests it wasn't BDI?

Thoughts?

 

[UKGuy]

So if it was BDI all along, wouldn't "The Ramseys" have brought it to a quiet resolution within a few days?

Here's what I mean. A big part of BDI theory is that "The Ramseys" covered for something BR did because - a) They may not have known about the CO statute exempting persons under 10 years of age from being charged with a crime, and b) they wanted to protect the image and reputation of the family.

So, surely within a few days of the murder "The Ramseys" had been fully informed by their lawyers that BR could not be charged - with anything.

And within a few days, to at most a few weeks, it should have been obvious that a media circus had developed that would severely damage the family reputation.

Additionally, JR and PR, especially PR, were prime suspects and headed down the track to possible indictment for murder.

And of course, the way it was handled - the investigation dragging on and on for almost 3 years (not counting the "ongoing" investigation" which obviously is going nowhere)

The result has been severe damage to the family rep. and damage to JR's business. Many believe the adult Rs were involved in the murder of their daughter, and many believe BDI.

So, I wonder, why didn't they just go the the DA, through their lawyers of course, and say "Hey, it's BDI. We'll give you enough details to satisfy you of this fact if you'll agree not to prosecute us for obstruction of justice, evidence tampering etc." ?

Hunter's office was a deal making office. To put it mildly, Hunter had little interest in prosecuting for murder, so was he going to be hard-nosed about the lesser charges (if any) ?

The case would of course remain open, officially. But with no real ongoing investigation there would be nothing for the media to feed on. A few public statements about "the intruder" would keep the IDI angle alive, and since the DA/police would know the truth, nothing much would be coming from them; in terms of statements to the press.

The fact that they allowed the investigation to drag on, at great damage to their reputation, and much speculation about BR, suggests it wasn't BDI?

Thoughts?

Chrishope,
The GJ appeared to reject any notion of BDI. So they apparently know something we do not, since they indicted JR and PR.

The R's might not have felt comfortable having a quiet chat with the DA, since there is always issue of their assistance in the staging and the possibility one of the parents actually asphyxiated JonBenet.

Legally the R's were not in a good place, so they simply used their wealth to purchase influence, and that took time, since the resolution of pork barrel politics involves running down the clock until, hopefully, everyone forgets, then a deal is usually announced.

.

 

[midwest mama]

Don't you think if the R's would have tried to cut a deal with the DA a few days after JB's death, putting it onto BR, that they would have gone through all that they did, maybe even more so? Even if AH would have let them off the hook, their public disgrace over creating a phony kidnapping right down to leaving a RN and getting BPD so wrapped up would have ended everything publicly for them anyway. No, I think they had to play it out the way they did - no concrete evidence against anyone that way.

I agree that the GJ must have been giving BDI a pass, based on the evidence they saw, and instead were allowing for the fact that one of the parents did bear the ultimate responsibility for her death. Their vote to indict on the charges they stated was based on PROBABLE CAUSE. If AH would have been willing to prosecute, by the time they got to trial, the charges could have been far worse, and more defined.

If there was evidence enough that BDI was JB's killer, I would think the GJ would have brought no vote to indict. Because there was a gag order, it would have been easy for them to walk out without ever having to give a reason why they had no indictment. They simply would have declared there was insufficient evidence presented to arrive at a decision to bring charges against anyone at that time.

And also, why would ML in 2006 go through with the JMK fiasco if it was known behind closed doors that BDI? I can't believe her payoff would have been big enough to do that. She took a massive hit to her credibility.

 

[DeeDee249]

I think everything that the Rs did and ML did and AH did still allows for BDI. The Karr fiasco included. It showed that they were never going to look inside the family, and would only look outside the family, regardless of how inane, illogical it was. In fact, the outlandishness of the Karr fiasco makes me believe even more that it was BDI. There was no deal to be cut....with BDI, nothing could be made public and I believe any "deal" would have to be. They did the only thing they could, as far as they believed, and that was to do and say nothing and to threaten to accuse anyone who even tried to point to any of them. Though they knew these accusations would could never be actually proven (because they were baseless), the threat of financial ruin and public suspicion would have been enough to keep many mouths shut. Still works, too, with LW threatening to this day to sue anyone (including LE, unbelievably) who even hints at family involvement.

 

[Chrishope]

Don't you think if the R's would have tried to cut a deal with the DA a few days after JB's death, putting it onto BR, that they would have gone through all that they did, maybe even more so? Even if AH would have let them off the hook, their public disgrace over creating a phony kidnapping right down to leaving a RN and getting BPD so wrapped up would have ended everything publicly for them anyway. No, I think they had to play it out the way they did - no concrete evidence against anyone that way.

Maybe. It's hard to say what would have happened. But we can be sure things were going badly for the Rs yet, if it was BDI, they did not -apparently- tell that to police or the DA. They remained suspects and as we know now, the GJ wanted to indict them.

I agree that the GJ must have been giving BDI a pass, based on the evidence they saw, and instead were allowing for the fact that one of the parents did bear the ultimate responsibility for her death. Their vote to indict on the charges they stated was based on PROBABLE CAUSE. If AH would have been willing to prosecute, by the time they got to trial, the charges could have been far worse, and more defined.

If there was evidence enough that BDI was JB's killer, I would think the GJ would have brought no vote to indict. Because there was a gag order, it would have been easy for them to walk out without ever having to give a reason why they had no indictment. They simply would have declared there was insufficient evidence presented to arrive at a decision to bring charges against anyone at that time.

I agree. I guess I'm just saying they could have reached the same point years earlier if the evidence for BDI was there.

And also, why would ML in 2006 go through with the JMK fiasco if it was known behind closed doors that BDI? I can't believe her payoff would have been big enough to do that. She took a massive hit to her credibility.

I think that makes sense. I think if it really was BDI it would have been quietly placed on the back burner, with occasional reference to some mysterious intruder.

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,
The GJ appeared to reject any notion of BDI. So they apparently know something we do not, since they indicted JR and PR.

The R's might not have felt comfortable having a quiet chat with the DA, since there is always issue of their assistance in the staging and the possibility one of the parents actually asphyxiated JonBenet.

That's true. I was thinking of a BDI scenario in which BR did everything but the staging - including the garrotting. Technically if one of the adult Rs did the garrotting, it's not BDI, or at least not solely BDI.

Legally the R's were not in a good place, so they simply used their wealth to purchase influence, and that took time, since the resolution of pork barrel politics involves running down the clock until, hopefully, everyone forgets, then a deal is usually announced.

.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Is it possible that Mary Lacy actually does believe that the Ramseys are innocent? Or is that too far fetched?

 

[otg]

So if it was BDI all along, wouldn't "The Ramseys" have brought it to a quiet resolution within a few days?

Here's what I mean. A big part of BDI theory is that "The Ramseys" covered for something BR did because - a) They may not have known about the CO statute exempting persons under 10 years of age from being charged with a crime, and b) they wanted to protect the image and reputation of the family.

So, surely within a few days of the murder "The Ramseys" had been fully informed by their lawyers that BR could not be charged - with anything.

So how long after they reported the kidnapping and found that JonBenet was dead would anyone have known to tell them, “Ya know, if BDI, he couldn’t be charged with it because he was three weeks shy of being held criminally responsible.” Why would anyone think to tell them that? There was no evidence of it at that time. And since they created the IDI scenario and altered the crime scene, they were already up to their necks in felony charges if they had admitted their part in a cover-up. So at whatever point they might have found out that BR couldn’t be charged, they stuck with their story because it already looked like there wasn’t enough evidence to get anyone into a courtroom.

And within a few days, to at most a few weeks, it should have been obvious that a media circus had developed that would severely damage the family reputation.

Additionally, JR and PR, especially PR, were prime suspects and headed down the track to possible indictment for murder.

And of course, the way it was handled - the investigation dragging on and on for almost 3 years (not counting the "ongoing" investigation" which obviously is going nowhere)

The result has been severe damage to the family rep. and damage to JR's business. Many believe the adult Rs were involved in the murder of their daughter, and many believe BDI.

So, I wonder, why didn't they just go the the DA, through their lawyers of course, and say "Hey, it's BDI. We'll give you enough details to satisfy you of this fact if you'll agree not to prosecute us for obstruction of justice, evidence tampering etc." ?

Hunter's office was a deal making office. To put it mildly, Hunter had little interest in prosecuting for murder, so was he going to be hard-nosed about the lesser charges (if any) ?

The case would of course remain open, officially. But with no real ongoing investigation there would be nothing for the media to feed on. A few public statements about "the intruder" would keep the IDI angle alive, and since the DA/police would know the truth, nothing much would be coming from them; in terms of statements to the press.

Who’s to say that there wasn’t some sort of a meeting, or a discussion at least, about exactly what you describe between the R’s and Hunter? Isn’t that just about exactly what happened at some point? Except that if Hunter knew the truth, he might not want to share that information with BPD or anyone else. He had already learned by that time that anything he tells someone can very easily end up in headlines at the tabs once he confides in someone. So he could have just made the decision not to push it and let it play out until people lost interest and the whole thing just blew over.

But it didn’t.

The fact that they allowed the investigation to drag on, at great damage to their reputation, and much speculation about BR, suggests it wasn't BDI?

The damage to their reputation because of speculation is less (IMO to them) than what it would be if the truth were to come out. And the longer they let it go on, the worse it would be if it did come out. But speculation about BDI is still minimized, unless it becomes public in a way they can send LW after. So far, they seem not to be able to go after Kolar because of how careful he was in dancing around the issue without really stating what he makes obvious.

 

[otg]

Don't you think if the R's would have tried to cut a deal with the DA a few days after JB's death, putting it onto BR, that they would have gone through all that they did, maybe even more so? Even if AH would have let them off the hook, their public disgrace over creating a phony kidnapping right down to leaving a RN and getting BPD so wrapped up would have ended everything publicly for them anyway. No, I think they had to play it out the way they did - no concrete evidence against anyone that way.

I agree with all of the above. A gambler might say that once they were dealt their hand and they chose to bluff, they had to play it through to the end.

I agree that the GJ must have been giving BDI a pass, based on the evidence they saw, and instead were allowing for the fact that one of the parents did bear the ultimate responsibility for her death. Their vote to indict on the charges they stated was based on PROBABLE CAUSE. If AH would have been willing to prosecute, by the time they got to trial, the charges could have been far worse, and more defined.

And IF (I know we’re just speculating here) if BDI, isn’t more than just one parent ultimately responsible? Maybe they should have voted to charge BOTH parents. Oh, that’s right... we know now that they did.

If there was evidence enough that BDI was JB's killer, I would think the GJ would have brought no vote to indict. Because there was a gag order, it would have been easy for them to walk out without ever having to give a reason why they had no indictment. They simply would have declared there was insufficient evidence presented to arrive at a decision to bring charges against anyone at that time.

It wasn’t the position for the GJ to make any kind of declaration -- that was Hunter’s job. They voted to charge the only people who could be charged with anything with ultimate responsibility. And Hunter declared then exactly what you said in that last sentence.

And also, why would ML in 2006 go through with the JMK fiasco if it was known behind closed doors that BDI? I can't believe her payoff would have been big enough to do that. She took a massive hit to her credibility.

I’m sorry. I think ML is just a dunce. She doesn’t know her brain from Shinola. But I don’t think Hunter passed along a memo to future DA’s that he knew but didn’t pursue.