Why GJ Likely Solved Case In 1999

[otg]

I just got a copy of PMPT this week at a used book store, I've searched the index and can't find anything.

Edited to add: Have been looking at BlueCrab's posts, could DS be Doug Stine??

You would be correct about the DS, Venom, but be careful using full names here. Because of possible liabilities, forum administrators prefer us to try not to use full names of people when implying any responsibility. We all slip occasionally, and some who have already been named as possible suspects are obviously allowed. I think BlueCrab's violation of this rule might have earned him a reprimand. Not giving credence to any of the possibilities, but I'll give you the initials of the non-R juveniles whose possible involvement have been suggested (If you can't figure them out, send me a PM and we can discuss.): DS, FW-III, NI.

My copy of PMPT doesn't even have an index.

I have to use this http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/02181999pmpt-index.htm

Chrishope, I'm not sure how that listing was developed, but it has several glaring deficiencies. A better index can be found here.

 

[Venom]

You would be correct about the DS, Venom, but be careful using full names here. Because of possible liabilities, forum administrators prefer us to try not to use full names of people when implying any responsibility. We all slip occasionally, and some who have already been named as possible suspects are obviously allowed. I think BlueCrab's violation of this rule might have earned him a reprimand. Not giving credence to any of the possibilities, but I'll give you the initials of the non-R juveniles whose possible involvement have been suggested (If you can't figure them out, send me a PM and we can discuss.): DS, FW-III, NI.


Chrishope, I'm not sure how that listing was developed, but it has several glaring deficiencies. A better index can be found here.

Thanks, didn't even think about typing the full name. Will try to edit it out.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

That link didn't work for me. I googled it and the chart I'm looking at says the average 10-year-old boy weighs 74 1/2 pounds. I weigh the kids every time we go to the market, just for the hell of it because the scale is there, and my 10-year-old weighs 110 pounds. He looks normal size to me, maybe an inch or two taller than average, but he's solid as a rock and they say muscle is heavier than fat.

Of course, build also has something to do with it. I'm 5' 10" and weigh 185, but people often guess my weight as around 165, probably because I have no beer belly.

Burke Ramsey also seemed taller than average because he towered over JonBenet in some of the later photos and seemed as tall as his mom in at least one. I'm gonna keep my guess of Burke's weight at around 90 pounds, twice that of JonBenet.

Not at all average of a 10 yr old. In fact that may be in the Obese category on the BMi based on height.

That does not help the case as it is just you guess and has no reference or base in fact.


ETA after reading the rest of the thread..

Why at this point I don't believe that BR had anything to do with this crime??
Because if this is the thing he was capable of at 9, he would surely not been able to control it after that. He would have committed some act after that, or been involved in other crimes.
That is a big thing for a 9 yr old. And not one at that age I think they could control. A 9 yr old committing such and act would have compulsion issues and most like a sexual disorder and would not be able to keep that under wraps.

This thread is interesting but still does not point me to the R's guilt.

Still reading and working on this..

 

[DeeDee249]

If BR was the one responsible, I do not think it was intentional. I think he was abusing her, she screamed, and he bashed her on the head with the flashlight. Even at his age, the very heavy maglight would have been wielded with sufficient force to punch that hole in JB's skull and put her into a coma and eventual death.
I would not expect to see him kill someone again. However, there may be some very troubling behavior pattterns (then as well as now) of which we are not aware, so we cannot just assume that he couldn't be responsible because he never did anything else like it.

 

[UKGuy]

If BR was the one responsible, I do not think it was intentional. I think he was abusing her, she screamed, and he bashed her on the head with the flashlight. Even at his age, the very heavy maglight would have been wielded with sufficient force to punch that hole in JB's skull and put her into a coma and eventual death.
I would not expect to see him kill someone again. However, there may be some very troubling behavior pattterns (then as well as now) of which we are not aware, so we cannot just assume that he couldn't be responsible because he never did anything else like it.

DeeDee249,
I tend to agree with you. A non-intentional BDI looks like the best solution. I also think the R's wealth paid for the best counselling available, so hopefully any demons have been exorcised. Although some of the details from Kolars book make you wonder just what was going on in that house?

JR might surprise us all with a death bed confession or posthumous admission of guilt in a statement to be read out after his death.

Would you believe this or think its just to deflect attention away from BR?


.

 

[Chelly]

DeeDee249,
I tend to agree with you. A non-intentional BDI looks like the best solution. I also think the R's wealth paid for the best counselling available, so hopefully any demons have been exorcised. Although some of the details from Kolars book make you wonder just what was going on in that house?

JR might surprise us all with a death bed confession or posthumous admission of guilt in a statement to be read out after his death.

Would you believe this or think its just to deflect attention away from BR?


.

I wouldn't believe a word JR says, death bed or no death bed, although the masses might. However, we have read volumes about JR's arrogance, pride, narcissism. I doubt he'd falsely confess for BR. JR most likely thinks he has done more than enough during his lifetime to protect his son.

 

[Chrishope]

I wouldn't believe a word JR says, death bed or no death bed, although the masses might. However, we have read volumes about JR's arrogance, pride, narcissism. I doubt he'd falsely confess for BR. JR most likely thinks he has done more than enough during his lifetime to protect his son.

A death bed confession, by JR can be taken more than one way, and will be, depending on some people's favorite theory.

Those of us who think JR did it will of course be inclined to believe the confession. Those who are BDI will claim he's simply covering for BR.

It will never be resolved.

 

[bettybaby00]

Ahhhhh, the deathbed confession.

See this is why to me BDI is plausible. It's the only way the Rs stick together and cover for each other. If not BDI, then it seems likely its JR....If you believe DocG's analysis, then PR is oblivious when she makes that 911 call.

When I read that I thought ok, makes sense...but then theres the pesky issue of prior sexual abuse. how does PR reconcile that??????? Clearly she's not stupid....if she comes to know her husband was abusing JRB why would she cover for him? Yes it happens that spouses cover for each other, but why take it to her grave? Are we to believe that there was still any affection left between them after nearly 10 years of perpetrating such a lie????

Their refusal to turn over ALL of both BR and JRBs medical records is a big issue for me.

 

[CanManEh]

so are you saying the grand jury came to the conclusion that burke ramsey did this .were not talking about any other kids right just burke ..and all this time not one person has leaked that ..I find that hard to believe

 

[questfortrue]

Ahhhhh, the deathbed confession.

See this is why to me BDI is plausible. It's the only way the Rs stick together and cover for each other. If not BDI, then it seems likely its JR....If you believe DocG's analysis, then PR is oblivious when she makes that 911 call.

When I read that I thought ok, makes sense...but then theres the pesky issue of prior sexual abuse. how does PR reconcile that??????? Clearly she's not stupid....if she comes to know her husband was abusing JRB why would she cover for him? Yes it happens that spouses cover for each other, but why take it to her grave? Are we to believe that there was still any affection left between them after nearly 10 years of perpetrating such a lie????

Their refusal to turn over ALL of both BR and JRBs medical records is a big issue for me.

Valid thoughts. Why take this to one’s grave? Could be many reasons we’ll never know. One is to protect BR. Another is to keep a family shame hidden. If revealed, others who were thrown under the bus might have cause to sue for defamation of character. Also, from what I’ve heard most incest is not reported to authorities, and both perps and survivors take this to their graves.

I’m not promoting any particular theory here by reiterating spouses cover for each other all the time in the event of crimes. To keep an open mind, I don’t think one can make the assumption that because of their “stature”, or religious beliefs, that JR and PR didn’t realize the repercussions if they didn’t cover for each other. (Possibly, a charge of murder for one of them and accessory to murder for the other one) This does not even address the public humiliation for the entire family. Their best chance to survive was to stick together. One reason they avoided being interviewed separately for so long. Moo ‘ Course, Dr. B prescribed such heavy medication to PR, she was medically too disabled to speak for some time except for their public interview on CNN, ‘not angry with the killer,’ they said,’ just wanted to know why this happened.'

And I’m not the first poster to recognize how over the top their cover went. Example - one avenue of questioning the BPD pursued was history of JR’s past trysts. He only admitted to one mistake when he was married to wife #1, yet there was “smoke” in Boulder about other peccadillos’. However, JR had lawyer’d up his past wife too, so that BPD couldn’t question her in any depth. Even PR’s pastor in Atlanta was afraid to talk to the BPD without a lawyer present. Omerta or what?

And, if BDI, repercussions also would have been huge: They could have been charged with murder after the fact if BDI, even if BR couldn’t be named or charged. (Sourced through a Colorado attorney)

If you review Sharon Aranji’s research about SBP (the theory Kolar promotes), she makes it pretty clear that this psychological disorder does not arise out of nowhere, in a vacuum.

OTG made an excellent point regarding BDI. The parents are ultimately responsible.

 

[bettybaby00]

Valid thoughts. Why take this to one’s grave? Could be many reasons we’ll never know. One is to protect BR. Another is to keep a family shame hidden. If revealed, others who were thrown under the bus might have cause to sue for defamation of character. Also, from what I’ve heard most incest is not reported to authorities, and both perps and survivors take this to their graves.

I’m not promoting any particular theory here by reiterating spouses cover for each other all the time in the event of crimes. To keep an open mind, I don’t think one can make the assumption that because of their “stature”, or religious beliefs, that JR and PR didn’t realize the repercussions if they didn’t cover for each other. (Possibly, a charge of murder for one of them and accessory to murder for the other one) This does not even address the public humiliation for the entire family. Their best chance to survive was to stick together. One reason they avoided being interviewed separately for so long. Moo ‘ Course, Dr. B prescribed such heavy medication to PR, she was medically too disabled to speak for some time except for their public interview on CNN, ‘not angry with the killer,’ they said,’ just wanted to know why this happened.'

And I’m not the first poster to recognize how over the top their cover went. Example - one avenue of questioning the BPD pursued was history of JR’s past trysts. He only admitted to one mistake when he was married to wife #1, yet there was “smoke” in Boulder about other peccadillos’. However, JR had lawyer’d up his past wife too, so that BPD couldn’t question her in any depth. Even PR’s pastor in Atlanta was afraid to talk to the BPD without a lawyer present. Omerta or what?

And, if BDI, repercussions also would have been huge: They could have been charged with murder after the fact if BDI, even if BR couldn’t be named or charged. (Sourced through a Colorado attorney)

If you review Sharon Aranji’s research about SBP (the theory Kolar promotes), she makes it pretty clear that this psychological disorder does not arise out of nowhere, in a vacuum.

OTG made an excellent point regarding BDI. The parents are ultimately responsible.

Yes, very valid reasons to take secrets to her grave. But I was speaking specifically of JDI as outlined by DocG. His theory purports that he alone is guilty, and that PR made the 911 call without knowing his guilt. In this scenario, I can envision a deathbed confession b/c he is the one to mostly suffer the consequences. Yes, it wouldn't be an ideal situation for BR, but certainly he would understand?

If it was BR, then yes, I definitely see her taking that to her grave!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

so are you saying the grand jury came to the conclusion that burke ramsey did this .were not talking about any other kids right just burke ..and all this time not one person has leaked that ..I find that hard to believe

Just speculation. There is no proof that is what the Gj decided and I believe it was quite the opposite. Especially since we know now that they voted to indict John and patsy for abuse.

So I find this thiery debunked

 

[DeeDee249]

Just speculation. There is no proof that is what the Gj decided and I believe it was quite the opposite. Especially since we know now that they voted to indict John and patsy for abuse.

So I find this thiery debunked

It is a fact that the GJ voted to indict the parents. It is not speculation. It was the DA who refused to allow it. However, since the charge was as you stated, " child abuse leading to death", I feel even more strongly that it was BR. The Rs were seen to have ignored his behavior, which led to JB's death. I believe the sexual contact she suffered that night made her scream, and the scream caused the abuser to bash her to shut her up. That led to her death.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

It is a fact that the GJ voted to indict the parents. It is not speculation. It was the DA who refused to allow it. However, since the charge was as you stated, " child abuse leading to death", I feel even more strongly that it was BR. The Rs were seen to have ignored his behavior, which led to JB's death. I believe the sexual contact she suffered that night made her scream, and the scream caused the abuser to bash her to shut her up. That led to her death.

It is speculation that it had anything to do with BR. Their findings to me don't lead there.

 

[otg]

I ran across something recently I didn't realize which I'll post for the benefit of those who have argued that Alex "Monty Hall" Hunter didn't file charges because he thought it better to wait until he might have a better case (thereby avoiding double jeopardy). Apparently the GJ returned the true bill just two months before the statute of limitations would have expired on theClass II felony. It was Hunter's last and only chance before the expiration, so he couldn't have been waiting for more evidence on the Child Abuse Resulting in Death charge, and it would have no effect on a possible murder charge later (which has no statute of limitation).

From http://www.crimemagazine.com/murder-jonben%C3%A9t-ramsey:

The Boulder Daily Camera reported on January 27, 2013 that the Boulder Grand Jury convened in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey voted in 1999 to indict both John and Patsy Ramsey on charges of child abuse resulting in death in connection with the events of Christmas night 1996 at the Ramsey home in Boulder. Former Boulder First Assistant D.A. Bill Wise confirmed the grand jury's vote. The Daily Camera quotes him saying, "It names both of them, John and Patsy Ramsey."

The indictment on child abuse resulting in death, when charged as "knowingly or recklessy," is a Class II felony in Colorado that carries a sentence of four to 48 years. The statute of limitations on that charge in Colorado is three years from the date of the crime. The vote for the indictment was in October of 1999, over two months before the statute of limitations would have taken effect.

Then D.A. Alex Hunter refused to sign the indictment, presumably because he did not believe there was sufficient evidence to win a courtroom conviction. There is no doubt that the completely botched crime scene would have enabled the defense to put up strong resistance to any allegations advanced by the prosecution.

On the other hand, in refusing to sign the indictment, Hunter did not follow the Colorado statute governing grand jury practices. The statute stipulates that "every indictment shall be signed" by the foreman of the grand jury and the prosecuting attorney. As University of Colorado Law School Professor Mimi Wesson told the Daily Camera, the proper legal procedure would have been for Hunter to sign the indictment -- also know as a true bill -- file it with the court and then move in open court to dismiss the charges. "That would be the more transparent and responsible course, in my opinon," she said.

Rather than follow the dictates of the statute pertaining to grand jury matters, Hunter kept it secret that indicments had been handed down. Instead of going for transparency, as advocated by Professor Wesson, Hunter elected to keep the deep suspicion the grand jurors had for JonBenet's parents from the public. Upon disbanding the grand jury, which had met for the previous 18 months, Hunter held a news conference on October 13, 1999 where he issued this statement: "I and my prosecution task force believe we do not have sufficient evidence to warrant a filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time."

"We don't know who did what," one of the grand jurors interviewed by the Daily Camera said, "but we felt the adults in the house may have done something that they certainly could have prevented, or they could have helped her, and they didn't."

​

 

[bettybaby00]

I ran across something recently I didn't realize which I'll post for the benefit of those who have argued that Alex "Monty Hall" Hunter didn't file charges because he thought it better to wait until he might have a better case (thereby avoiding double jeopardy). Apparently the GJ returned the true bill just two months before the statute of limitations would have expired on theClass II felony. It was Hunter's last and only chance before the expiration, so he couldn't have been waiting for more evidence on the Child Abuse Resulting in Death charge, and it would have no effect on a possible murder charge later (which has no statute of limitation).

From http://www.crimemagazine.com/murder-jonben%C3%A9t-ramsey:

The Boulder Daily Camera reported on January 27, 2013 that the Boulder Grand Jury convened in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey voted in 1999 to indict both John and Patsy Ramsey on charges of child abuse resulting in death in connection with the events of Christmas night 1996 at the Ramsey home in Boulder. Former Boulder First Assistant D.A. Bill Wise confirmed the grand jury's vote. The Daily Camera quotes him saying, "It names both of them, John and Patsy Ramsey."

The indictment on child abuse resulting in death, when charged as "knowingly or recklessy," is a Class II felony in Colorado that carries a sentence of four to 48 years. The statute of limitations on that charge in Colorado is three years from the date of the crime. The vote for the indictment was in October of 1999, over two months before the statute of limitations would have taken effect.

Then D.A. Alex Hunter refused to sign the indictment, presumably because he did not believe there was sufficient evidence to win a courtroom conviction. There is no doubt that the completely botched crime scene would have enabled the defense to put up strong resistance to any allegations advanced by the prosecution.

On the other hand, in refusing to sign the indictment, Hunter did not follow the Colorado statute governing grand jury practices. The statute stipulates that "every indictment shall be signed" by the foreman of the grand jury and the prosecuting attorney. As University of Colorado Law School Professor Mimi Wesson told the Daily Camera, the proper legal procedure would have been for Hunter to sign the indictment -- also know as a true bill -- file it with the court and then move in open court to dismiss the charges. "That would be the more transparent and responsible course, in my opinon," she said.

Rather than follow the dictates of the statute pertaining to grand jury matters, Hunter kept it secret that indicments had been handed down. Instead of going for transparency, as advocated by Professor Wesson, Hunter elected to keep the deep suspicion the grand jurors had for JonBenet's parents from the public. Upon disbanding the grand jury, which had met for the previous 18 months, Hunter held a news conference on October 13, 1999 where he issued this statement: "I and my prosecution task force believe we do not have sufficient evidence to warrant a filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time."

"We don't know who did what," one of the grand jurors interviewed by the Daily Camera said, "but we felt the adults in the house may have done something that they certainly could have prevented, or they could have helped her, and they didn't."

​

It is a fact that the GJ voted to indict the parents. It is not speculation. It was the DA who refused to allow it. However, since the charge was as you stated, " child abuse leading to death", I feel even more strongly that it was BR. The Rs were seen to have ignored his behavior, which led to JB's death. I believe the sexual contact she suffered that night made her scream, and the scream caused the abuser to bash her to shut her up. That led to her death.

The "charges" are beyond telling IMO. Especially when coupled with the timing of BRs testimony to the GJ and AH's affidavit which was the Rs attempt publicly clear BR. The wording and what was crossed out is crazy. I've read it numerous times and to me it reads like a version of who's on first.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Grand juries are notorious for indictments. We all know the ham sandwich line. I am just not sure why it makes it more relevant that grand jury had any decision.
I wonder what the ratio is on cases brought vs indictments.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

http://www.cleveland.com/rule-29/index.ssf/2010/11/grand_juries_gatekeepers_or_op.html

I just wonder since a subsequent DA cleared the Ramseys and then a judge in a civil case said it was most likely an intruder how that just gets thrown out.

 

[BOESP]

Grand juries are notorious for indictments. We all know the ham sandwich line. I am just not sure why it makes it more relevant that grand jury had any decision.
I wonder what the ratio is on cases brought vs indictments.

Didn't you originally state that there was no indictment therefore the Ramseys were not likely guilty (or words to that effect)?

Somewhere in this topic I posted a link to a statement made by a Federal judge in a case where I live. The gist of what he said was that Grand Jurys usually got it right (meaning a true bill usually indicated guilt when the case went to trial).

Touch DNA means little in proving an intruder was the killer (if that is what you base your IDI theory on).

 

[BOESP]

http://www.cleveland.com/rule-29/index.ssf/2010/11/grand_juries_gatekeepers_or_op.html

I just wonder since a subsequent DA cleared the Ramseys and then a judge in a civil case said it was most likely an intruder how that just gets thrown out.

You might want to read the details on the civil case. It was a case supposedly to decide whether or not a victim had been slandered by the Ramseys when they tried to accuse him of killing JonBenet. It had nothing to do with determining the guilt of JonBenet's killer.

Until someone is tried and convicted no one is cleared. I suppose some DA's are arrogant enough to think the public can be fooled into thinking they have that kind of power. DA's are just lawyers. Lawyers represent people and appear in court on behalf of others. They do not legally act as a judge and/or jury ... ever ... unless they happen to become judges or sit on a jury as a common man (which isn't likely to happen).

You do know that the investigating team on JonBenet's reopened case stated that no one had been cleared or exonerated and the Ramseys remained under that umbrella of suspicion? Those investigators do have the legal right to say and do that.