General Discussion /Post Karr

[chatwuann]

Tried to find my JonBenet thread in the CL Notorious Murders Board and although it is listed in the heading I can't find it even when I bring up the last posts for the last 20 days which I have been able to find it that way before. I have PM the CL mod but haven't gotten a response yet. Can anybody help me.




chatwuann

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by koldkase
I did a search of the whole board yesterday and couldn't find it either. My guess is it got culled to free up bandwidth.

It's sad, but a case doesn't get any colder than hers. The DA's Office has firmly decided to bury this case forever to cover their own butts, IMO. I requested some files from them over a year ago, and you wouldn't believe the lame law they practice there. The correspondences from them and excuses for subverting the FOIA were pathetic. The files I requested have already been released to a private citizen years ago and publicly aired on TV across the world. Yet the Boulder DA said no, they belong to Lou Smit, who was paid by the people of Boulder to compile them from evidence gathered by Boulder LE, and then Smit stole them, to boot, when he quit working for Hunter. Next he blackmailed Hunter into getting them legally freed for Smit's private use and distribution during his propaganda shill programs with Michael Tracey. If they actually believe the crap they spin, then why not let everyone see the whole PowerPoint? "Let the chips fall where they may," as someone loves to say.

However, Colorado apparently doesn't believe in the FOIA. They pick and choose which private citizens get access to government files, it seems. Propaganda is the name of their game, after all, and they have no love for the truth, so damn it and bury it and move on to the next hot tub party.

So the case continues to lay dead in the water, which is what the DA wants and will have. I fully expect these case files to disappear through the years. By the time anyone outside the DA's Office gets close enough to figure that out in about 20 or 30 years, it'll be too late and still business as usual. They're not going to open up the Hunter can of worms, exposing how corrupt their office is and has been for probably ever. The DA has the cloak of Colorado law giving them the right to hide their misdeeds for eternity. It's a criminals' paradise.

It's sad but true: whoever you believe molested, beat and murdered this six year old little girl on Christmas night in 1996, the Boulder DA's Office set them free long ago. Colorado law and politics shut the door and locked it for them.

Just my opinion, of course. Maybe Coldwater will let you start a new thread for JonBenet. All we can do now is remember her, that she lived a short life, was a sweet little child who died a terrible death and has NO ONE to speak for her in this world now, since her own family wants her death buried as deeply and completely as the DA's Office does.

Shame on them all.

I heard from the cl mod and she is looking into it. She didn't delete that thread. She is going to try to put it back. I don't want the memory of JonBenet to die. She deserves to be remembered.





armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Originally posted by chatwuann

I heard from the cl mod and she is looking into it. She didn't delete that thread. She is going to try to put it back. I don't want the memory of JonBenet to die. She deserves to be remembered.
armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Someone needs to remember "That child", it sure is not going to be her parents.

I wonder how that charity they had for JonBenet is working out?

[chatwuann]

Under what context did the Ramseys refer to JonBenet as "That Child" and in what form transcript or interview? I have heard it mentioned before by posters but I haven't heard where.





armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

I decided to look up SBTC on the internet. The website for the Small Business Technology Council came up. Just thought that was interesting. AAJMO






armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Originally posted by chatwuann
Under what context did the Ramseys refer to JonBenet as "That Child" and in what form transcript or interview? I have heard it mentioned before by posters but I haven't heard where.
armchair detective/trucrmbuf

I'll have to find a link, but I think it was during the police interview (the one they actually showed up for) and Patsy referred to JonBenet as "that child". I'll find it for you. It may take a while.

Here is Patsy, in her own voice, calling JonBenet "that child" while claiming she loved her daughter. (Yet, we have never heard Patsy refer to John as "that man" or Burke as "that boy.")

http://www.cnn.com/US/9705/01/ramsey...30sec.313k.wav

This case will haunt me forever.

No one wants to talk about it.

I think it is dangerous if they don't pursue the case. I think her brother did it.

because during police interview in Atlanta Ga, more than a year after her death, he told detectives he had been shocked on the White's electric deer fence the night of the murder.

The police ignored this statement.

If he says he was burned on the white's electric deer fence the night of the murder, this means that both children received electrical burns on the same night.

this is bizaare and needed to be investigated.

[quote]Originally posted by Jojokitoma
This case will haunt me forever.

No one wants to talk about it.

I think it is dangerous if they don't pursue the case. I think her brother did it.

because during police interview in Atlanta Ga, more than a year after her death, he told detectives he had been shocked on the White's electric deer fence the night of the murder.

The police ignored this statement.

If he says he was burned on the white's electric deer fence the night of the murder, this means that both children received electrical burns on the same night.

this is bizaare and needed to be investigated. [/QUOTE} I feel the parents may have done it. I feel the father was may have molested and the mother jealous of her. I think the mom did bebecause she missed herself no longer getting the attention from when she used to be a model, her husband may have lost some interest since she had been sick several times and she might have know that he was molesting her and killed her for these reasons and he helped cover it because he blamed himself for what she did. Have you ever seen the movie about this? This was so terrible and I still can't believe it has not been solved. I thought for sure they would have made a arrest. It makes me so sick to my stomach when children are murdered. I guess it is always possible that Birk could have done it because he himself may have been jealous of her getting so much attention, but my first guess was Patsy.

I've never referred to any of my children as "That Child." It really shows her state of mind, doesn't it? Her child is murdered and Patsy calls her daughter, "That child."

Speaks loudly- doesn't it.

[chatwuann]

Thanks for answering my question about Patsy referring to JonBenet as "that child." Who knows why Patsy said that but it doesn't point to her guilt imo. It sounds bad but the Ramseys can't win for losing because everything they do looks and sounds bad to people. They were either involved or it just looks that way. AAJMO




armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Huntress1
I've never referred to any of my children as "That Child." It really shows her state of mind, doesn't it? Her child is murdered and Patsy calls her daughter, "That child."

Speaks loudly- doesn't it.

Calling JonBenet "that child" may speak loudly to you but it doesn't to me. I think it has been blown out of proportion and has been given greater significance than it deserves. I asked the question because I was curious under what circumstances that child was used but it seems now that this is a sore point for a lot of people who lean toward the guilt of the Ramseys. AAJMO






armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Originally posted by chatwuann

Calling JonBenet "that child" may speak loudly to you but it doesn't to me. I think it has been blown out of proportion and has been given greater significance than it deserves. I asked the question because I was curious under what circumstances that child was used but it seems now that this is a sore point for a lot of people who lean toward the guilt of the Ramseys. AAJMO
armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Would you refer to your dead child as "that child"??? I sure wouldn't. While I think that is completely abnormal and innapropriate, its your right to think the Ramsey's are innocent.

Originally posted by Huntress1


Would you refer to your dead child as "that child"??? I sure wouldn't. While I think that is completely abnormal and innapropriate, its your right to think the Ramsey's are innocent.

I have never formed an opinion about the Ramseys but as far as the "that child" references it was not so long ago that some posters were hanging Steve Groene (sp) for refering to his children as "these kids" or "those kids". It does not speak guilt to me.
However my knowledge of the whole Ramsey case is fairly skimpy so I ofer no opinion as to their quilt. JMO

Originally posted by Jojokitoma
This case will haunt me forever.

No one wants to talk about it.

I think it is dangerous if they don't pursue the case. I think her brother did it.

because during police interview in Atlanta Ga, more than a year after her death, he told detectives he had been shocked on the White's electric deer fence the night of the murder.

The police ignored this statement.

If he says he was burned on the white's electric deer fence the night of the murder, this means that both children received electrical burns on the same night.

this is bizaare and needed to be investigated.

I think it is extremely disturbing that ppl are actually taking the Nation Enquirer stuff seriously and blaming that poor little boy. Shame Shame

[quote]Originally posted by girl_without_fe

Originally posted by Jojokitoma
This case will haunt me forever.

No one wants to talk about it.

I think it is dangerous if they don't pursue the case. I think her brother did it.

because during police interview in Atlanta Ga, more than a year after her death, he told detectives he had been shocked on the White's electric deer fence the night of the murder.

The police ignored this statement.

If he says he was burned on the white's electric deer fence the night of the murder, this means that both children received electrical burns on the same night.

this is bizaare and needed to be investigated. [/QUOTE} I feel the parents may have done it. I feel the father was may have molested and the mother jealous of her. I think the mom did bebecause she missed herself no longer getting the attention from when she used to be a model, her husband may have lost some interest since she had been sick several times and she might have know that he was molesting her and killed her for these reasons and he helped cover it because he blamed himself for what she did. Have you ever seen the movie about this? This was so terrible and I still can't believe it has not been solved. I thought for sure they would have made a arrest. It makes me so sick to my stomach when children are murdered. I guess it is always possible that Birk could have done it because he himself may have been jealous of her getting so much attention, but my first guess was Patsy.

what a load of rubbish...

Originally posted by Icefog

I think it is extremely disturbing that ppl are actually taking the Nation Enquirer stuff seriously and blaming that poor little boy. Shame Shame

I believe it's more disturbing to see two parents give a rats arse less about their murdered daughter. Of course, they killed her, so as long as people are looking the other way and not at them, they are happy campers.

They can't believe anyone is still following this case. They moved on, why shouldn't the rest of the country?

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Huntress1


Would you refer to your dead child as "that child"??? I sure wouldn't. While I think that is completely abnormal and innapropriate, its your right to think the Ramsey's are innocent.

Of course I wouldn't refer to my dead child or any dead relative in that way. This is an abnormal case. People have different standards as to what is and isn't apropriate. Thank you for acknowledging that it is my right to think the Ramseys are innocent. Everybody has the right to be thought of as innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. AAJMO






armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Originally posted by Huntress1


I believe it's more disturbing to see two parents give a rats arse less about their murdered daughter. Of course, they killed her, so as long as people are looking the other way and not at them, they are happy campers.

They can't believe anyone is still following this case. They moved on, why shouldn't the rest of the country?

evidence was found that points to someone else committing this crime-I doubt the parents will ever be able to'move on ' and get over losing their daughter.

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Huntress1


I believe it's more disturbing to see two parents give a rats arse less about their murdered daughter. Of course, they killed her, so as long as people are looking the other way and not at them, they are happy campers.

They can't believe anyone is still following this case. They moved on, why shouldn't the rest of the country?

If the Ramseys are guilty of killing JonBenet why haven't they been indicted by the present DA in Boulder? And why didn't Alex Hunter indict them? And why is it that 2 Grand Juries didn't hand down an indictment against them? These are people who know the evidence that the BPD had on the Ramseys and none of them indicted them. If they had real hard evidence on the Ramseys they would have been indicted in a heartbeat. But they weren't. Answer me that.







armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

I think this case is still unsolved because it was dead in the water from the very beginning. They had no clear-cut evidence that it was the parents or that it was an intruder. And how can you trust a crime scene that was contaminated by the many people who traipsed through it that morning. I am afraid we will never know who killed JonBenet Ramsey. IMO if they try at some point the Ramseys for this they will be trying the wrong people. AAJMO







armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by liz-marie

evidence was found that points to someone else committing this crime-I doubt the parents will ever be able to'move on ' and get over losing their daughter.

The best evidence pointing to someone else is the house itself and the arrangement of the rooms. Not to mention the already broken window and the doors that were unlocked which meant he or they didn't have to break in. AAJMO





armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by seawolf4


I have never formed an opinion about the Ramseys but as far as the "that child" references it was not so long ago that some posters were hanging Steve Groene (sp) for refering to his children as "these kids" or "those kids". It does not speak guilt to me.
However my knowledge of the whole Ramsey case is fairly skimpy so I ofer no opinion as to their quilt. JMO

I didn't think too much of it when Steve Groene referred to Shasta & Dylan as "these kids". or "those kids" It was just a figure of speech.





armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Huntress1


I believe it's more disturbing to see two parents give a rats arse less about their murdered daughter. Of course, they killed her, so as long as people are looking the other way and not at them, they are happy campers.

They can't believe anyone is still following this case. They moved on, why shouldn't the rest of the country?

Moving on and forgetting are two different things. They still had to live life even though JonBenet was gone. They all still raising Burke and there were bills to pay and food to buy. Not to mention grand children. And Patsy's cancer came out of remission and had to be treated. Just because the Ramseys aren't wearing sackcloth and ashes and walking around with doleful faces doesn't mean they still aren't dealing with JonBenet's death and feeling sad about it. AAJMO






armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Originally posted by chatwuann

If the Ramseys are guilty of killing JonBenet why haven't they been indicted by the present DA in Boulder? And why didn't Alex Hunter indict them? And why is it that 2 Grand Juries didn't hand down an indictment against them? These are people who know the evidence that the BPD had on the Ramseys and none of them indicted them. If they had real hard evidence on the Ramseys they would have been indicted in a heartbeat. But they weren't. Answer me that.armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Here is the answer: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The Ramsey's hired an attorney from the beginning of this case. They refused to meet with the police, they lied and said they'd start a foundation in the name of their murdered daughter and didn't...and- what are they doing to find the "real killer?"

A good site for info on this case is: www.acandyrose.com

Originally posted by chatwuann


If the Ramseys are guilty of killing JonBenet why haven't they been indicted by the present DA in Boulder? And why didn't Alex Hunter indict them? And why is it that 2 Grand Juries didn't hand down an indictment against them? These are people who know the evidence that the BPD had on the Ramseys and none of them indicted them. If they had real hard evidence on the Ramseys they would have been indicted in a heartbeat. But they weren't. Answer me that.







armchair detective/trucrmbuf

These are influential people this is a big part of peoples decision. It is sad but very true. Look at all of the other cases where a person goes to trial based on no evidence, but yet they are found guilty. Have you ever seen some of these profiles? The are sickening. Statistics show......a person poor person is more likely to kill before a rich person......a tatooed person is more likely to commit a crime before a person with no tatoo.....a person of a divorced home is more likely to commit a crime before a person with both parent still together. Them not being indicted means nothing to me. The reason these stastics are so because they focus on all of the other ones and how many rich do you have sitting in prison for crimes you know they did but got away with. One of the first questions ask in a case is where do you work? What the heck does your job have to do with anything? If that is where it took place then maybe, but c'mon. My house was robbed, they asked me how much insurance I had. I said thank God I had none. No finger prints were taken, no photos of my back door being busted in with glass all over the floor, how much money did you have invested in your jewelry? This was the only thing that was taklen. I had several $1000.00 I could not believe this. I called a friend of mine from another town and told him what was going on. He is a police officer. He told me they should have taken prints and have questioned neighbors, and then he told me it sounded like they just didn't want to do anythin. I did.....he told me of some pond shops, I went to them and guess what? Not all, but some of it was there./ I contacted the police and got chewed out for having gone there that it was not in thier jurisdiction, but it was because it was state because I did not live in the city limits. They finally went and saw the signature on the sales slip and got what jewelry they had, but guess what? No charges were ever filed. Don't tell me there are not crooked cops, pros. det. jurors, etc. because there are. The Ramseys had money. Money talks, b.s walks.

Originally posted by chatwuann


Moving on and forgetting are two different things. They still had to live life even though JonBenet was gone. They all still raising Burke and there were bills to pay and food to buy. Not to mention grand children. And Patsy's cancer came out of remission and had to be treated. Just because the Ramseys aren't wearing sackcloth and ashes and walking around with doleful faces doesn't mean they still aren't dealing with JonBenet's death and feeling sad about it. AAJMO






armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Moving on? They left Boulder before she was even to be buried. This is not moving on, this is getting out of dodge. They had to feed Birk, they had maids and friends to help with this. At least Patsy had only cancer and it is sad, but still she had a little baby girl murdered. They don't need to go to work almost immediately because I am sure they had enoough money to get by until they were able to get back to work and it does not take every day of the month to pay one. He said he took a milagram of meletonin. !2 miligrams don't even knock most children out, so how is it 1 knocked him out and not able to wake? Whatever! I feel sorry for Patsy for the cancer, but the only thing that would prevent me from helping my child is if I was dying or just not able to get out of bed. Thats is what thishas been about from the start. Get those sympathy wheels a rolling. All about her.

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Huntress1


Here is the answer: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The Ramsey's hired an attorney from the beginning of this case. They refused to meet with the police, they lied and said they'd start a foundation in the name of their murdered daughter and didn't...and- what are they doing to find the "real killer?"

A good site for info on this case is: www.acandyrose.com

I know about the website you mentioned and I have been there occassionally. It is a good source for transcripts and such, I don't know what the chat is like. i don't know if it's participants think the Ramseys are guilty though. The Ramseys were only sticking up for their civil rights which is a gift for every american citizen. It is unfortuneate that for some american citizens it doesn't always work that way. IMO lack of evidence and not money or attorneys is what kept 2 grand juries, DA Hunter, and DA Keenan Lacy from indicting the Ramseys for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. I am sure if my opinion is wrong someone will let me know. AAJMO






armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by girl_without_fe
These are influential people this is a big part of peoples decision. It is sad but very true. Look at all of the other cases where a person goes to trial based on no evidence, but yet they are found guilty. Have you ever seen some of these profiles? The are sickening. Statistics show......a person poor person is more likely to kill before a rich person......a tatooed person is more likely to commit a crime before a person with no tatoo.....a person of a divorced home is more likely to commit a crime before a person with both parent still together. Them not being indicted means nothing to me. The reason these stastics are so because they focus on all of the other ones and how many rich do you have sitting in prison for crimes you know they did but got away with. One of the first questions ask in a case is where do you work? What the heck does your job have to do with anything? If that is where it took place then maybe, but c'mon. My house was robbed, they asked me how much insurance I had. I said thank God I had none. No finger prints were taken, no photos of my back door being busted in with glass all over the floor, how much money did you have invested in your jewelry? This was the only thing that was taklen. I had several $1000.00 I could not believe this. I called a friend of mine from another town and told him what was going on. He is a police officer. He told me they should have taken prints and have questioned neighbors, and then he told me it sounded like they just didn't want to do anythin. I did.....he told me of some pond shops, I went to them and guess what? Not all, but some of it was there./ I contacted the police and got chewed out for having gone there that it was not in thier jurisdiction, but it was because it was state because I did not live in the city limits. They finally went and saw the signature on the sales slip and got what jewelry they had, but guess what? No charges were ever filed. Don't tell me there are not crooked cops, pros. det. jurors, etc. because there are. The Ramseys had money. Money talks, b.s walks.

The fact that the Ramseys weren't indicted tells me a lot. It tells me the evidence just isn't there. I don't buy it that the Ramseys are influential. Who knew the Ramsey family existed except those living in Boulder until their daughter was murdered. Only one person knew and that was the one who murdered their daughter. I know there are crooked cops pros det, jurors, etc in this country. But there is no evidence that there was corruption in this investigationon the part of any public or elected official or 24 jurors who sat on 2 grand juries. That would have to be a pretty large conspiracy. No grand jury or DA will ever indict the Ramseys because the people of Boulder don't want to pay for a trial. I think they want this case to go away. The evidence against O.J. Simpson was overwhelming and he walked anyway and they have no evidence on the Ramseys and people are upset they aren't in prison. Go figure.




armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by girl_without_fe
Moving on? They left Boulder before she was even to be buried. This is not moving on, this is getting out of dodge. They had to feed Birk, they had maids and friends to help with this. At least Patsy had only cancer and it is sad, but still she had a little baby girl murdered. They don't need to go to work almost immediately because I am sure they had enoough money to get by until they were able to get back to work and it does not take every day of the month to pay one. He said he took a milagram of meletonin. !2 miligrams don't even knock most children out, so how is it 1 knocked him out and not able to wake? Whatever! I feel sorry for Patsy for the cancer, but the only thing that would prevent me from helping my child is if I was dying or just not able to get out of bed. Thats is what thishas been about from the start. Get those sympathy wheels a rolling. All about her.

Would you be able to sleep another night in the house your daughter was murdered in? I wouldn't. And if I was afraid that the people who killed my daughter would come after my other child I would get the heck out of the state.As far as the Ramseys going back to work is concerned work can be cathartic for some people and better than sitting around having time to think.

When you are in rem sleep nothing will wake you but the sound of a shrill alram. People are under the impression that a parent will instinctively know their child is in danger and will wake up and I don't know of any cases where that has happened.That is why it is recommended that you have smoke detectors in your home in case of a fire at night because not even the smell of smoke will wake you if you are sound asleep. And the Ramseys bedrooms weren't on the same floor as that of JonBenet and Burke which is the way homes are built nowadays so parents can have privacy. If I had children I would want their bedrooms to be on the same floor as mine. Jessica Lunsfords parents didn't wake up when she was removed from her bedroom. Neither did the Van Dams or the Smarts or the DeWallabes,(Quite sure I didn't spell that right) or the Crowes. And Stephanie Crowe was stabbed to death in her home.

I feel sympathy for Patsy because she has been wrongly accused of killing her child. I would feel sympathey for any mother or father or any person who has been wrongly accused. And JonBenet is in heaven where she will never suffer the suffering she suffered when she was killed. Her mother is still alive and fighting cancer so I feel sorry for her as I would anyone who had to go through cancer treatment or suffer any illness. IMO the Ramseys are just as much victims as JonBenet was. I am sure there are posters who will disagree with me as is their right. AAJMO








armchair detective/trucrmbuf

It's always bothered me that one of the first people they hired after the murder was an "image consultant." What on earth would they even need an "image consultant" for? And how could their minds possible have been on how they were going to come off to the public??

If my child were brutally murdered in my own home, I would care less how I looked. Danielle Van Dam's mother, before the trial, gave an interview in which she said (and I'm paraphrasing here), "Let them say what they want about us. Let them tear our lives to shreds. We want justice for our daughter." And they certainly went through hell, but they got justice. That would've been me.

Just that "image consultant" bit has always made me look at the Ramseys with some degree of skepticism.

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by koldkase
You have all hit the highs and lows of many of the arguments about who murdered JonBenet. I'm tired of arguing about this now, because it's always the same answer in the end: no one will ever be arrested or convicted for this murder. Blame or thank whomever you please, but NEVAH expect Boulder to give a rip again.

An opinion is an opinion, and by its nature, subjective. Your points about the debate are based in interpretation of untried evidence, gossip, and almost 9 years of a media frenzy only matched by OJ. Much has been corroborated, twisted, and/or spun by LE, lawyers, private detectives, "reliable sources," "insiders," and whackos full of manure, and lots of actual evidence in the way of pictures and testimony, evidence like the ransom note and expert opinions galore can be found online and in many documentaries, books and articles--all open to interpretation, never tested in a court of law, as I said..

Most discussion on this case today is chock full of either misinformation, disinformation, or mistakes, pure and simple. A few steadfast case followers who have the information and do the work, some who are pros in related fields, can straighten the facts from fiction when the mood strikes them, but it's really a cold case that won't ever warm up again, so most have left or only drift in and out from time to time.

I used to know a good bit about the case, collected a boatload of info and research, but now I'm too old and tired to remember it all off the top of my head.

Which brings me to my question for you, Chatwuann:

I don't remember two grand juries in Boulder who investigated this case. My mind isn't what it used to be, that's for sure, so could you refresh it? The only grand jury I remember is the one Hunter finally called which ended in 1999, I believe. It ended in October or November of that year with Hunter announcing he would not indict anyone. When and where was the second grand jury? I am completely blanking on any other being called.

A very oft repeated piece of misinformation, by the way, put out by the Ramsey spin team, headed by Lin Wood, is that the Grand Jury in Boulder voted for "no indictment" in this case. That is not true. Wood is telling tales or he should be arrested for revealing the grand jury results, because Hunter has repeated that anyone involved in the grand jury who revealed its actions would be arrested. It's against Colorado law to do so. How would Wood know? Gossip? The Ramsey's lawyers? Neither of those parties was in the Grand Jury, so how did they know? Gossip? Neither of those parties is unbiased, either. They have professional reason to spread misinformation that can't be rebutted because IT'S AGAINST COLORADO LAW for us to know the truth. Hence, Wood can lie and spin all he chooses, and no one WHO KNOWS FIRSTHAND can stand up and say Yeah, the Grand Jury did indict! Also, the Grand Jury might not have even voted, as Hunter could have told them not to even write a report--his choice.

All we can say is Wood may well be lying through his teeth. Because what we do know is this: the Grand Jury had three options: vote to indict; vote not to indict; no vote. Hunter made the final decision, and Dr. Lee is on record in his very own book stating he advised Hunter not to indict at the time. The only conclusion anyone can draw from that is that Hunter had the option to indict. That means the Grand Jury did NOT vote "no indictment." If they had, Hunter wouldn't have been contemplating whether to indict and asking Dr. Lee for advice.

All that leaves is either the Grand Jury voted to indict or did not vote. Since the Ramseys have been the only prime suspects LE has had in all these 9 years, it's easy to reason they would have had their names on that Grand Jury indictment, not some unknown subject with no name to put on an indictment.

In my opinion, there is plenty of evidence against the Ramseys. No point in picking at it anymore, but if it was any blue collar family and the exact same evidence in their home...they'd be making licence plates today in my state.

JMO

My mind is full of little facts that I have heard and read. I don't always remember where I heard or read it. My posts are my opinion and I pick up little facts from other posters who know more than I do. I didn't know that I had to thoroughly research this case before I could express an opinion on it. When I have actual facts I put them in. I believe the Ramseys are innocent and you don't and that is okay. Differences of opinion is what makes this world as interesting as it is. Maybe I am wrong about a second grand jury. I will have to do some research and see if I can find an article on the internet about it.

I wish you well in this journey we call life.



armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Mandymax
It's always bothered me that one of the first people they hired after the murder was an "image consultant." What on earth would they even need an "image consultant" for? And how could their minds possible have been on how they were going to come off to the public??

If my child were brutally murdered in my own home, I would care less how I looked. Danielle Van Dam's mother, before the trial, gave an interview in which she said (and I'm paraphrasing here), "Let them say what they want about us. Let them tear our lives to shreds. We want justice for our daughter." And they certainly went through hell, but they got justice. That would've been me.

Just that "image consultant" bit has always made me look at the Ramseys with some degree of skepticism.

Different Parents, Different Personalities, Different Reactions, and Different PD's, Different Perpetrators, Different Case. The only common denominator is that both parents lost a female child.





armchair detective/trucrmbuf

[Jayelles]

I always thought your posts seemed "familiar". Now the penny has dropped!

Koldkase - good post above (as always). I'd like to add that contrary to what someone posted above, it is precisely due to the lack of conclusive evidence of an intruder that the parents have not been cleared. The Boulder DA made a statement last year to say that they had not been excluded from investigation.

There was a second Grand Jury thing but it wasn't to decide whether to indict someone for the murder. I cannot recall the precise details but I think a second GJ were asked to consider some other aspect of the investigation - was it perhaps to decide whether a Special Prosecutor should be appointed? I just can't remember but I'm sure it was something *like* that.

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Jayelles
I always thought your posts seemed "familiar". Now the penny has dropped!

Koldkase - good post above (as always). I'd like to add that contrary to what someone posted above, it is precisely due to the lack of conclusive evidence of an intruder that the parents have not been cleared. The Boulder DA made a statement last year to say that they had not been excluded from investigation.

There was a second Grand Jury thing but it wasn't to decide whether to indict someone for the murder. I cannot recall the precise details but I think a second GJ were asked to consider some other aspect of the investigation - was it perhaps to decide whether a Special Prosecutor should be appointed? I just can't remember but I'm sure it was something *like* that.

LOL You make it sound like I copy others posts word for word. You better pick up that proverbial penny before a toddler chokes on it. No one can say with absolute certainty that an intruder wasn't in the Ramsey house that Christmas night in 1996. Or visa versa. And the crime scene was compromised by all the people traipsing in and out and around the house that morning that valuable evidence of an intruder might have been destroyed.

I was pretty sure that there was a second Grand Jury. I wonder if it was the one that Michael Kane tried to barr Lou Smit from because he didn't want the jury to hear about the intruder evidence.

DA Keenan Lacy is in politics and it is the politically safe thing to make a statement that the parents haven't been excluded from the investigation. AAJMO




armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Chatwuan- Jayelles is the most fair poster involved in the JBR case. And, she thinks that the Ramsey's could be innocent.

Jayelles. Hugs.

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Huntress1
Chatwuan- Jayelles is the most fair poster involved in the JBR case. And, she thinks that the Ramsey's could be innocent.

Jayelles. Hugs.

Huntress1 I wasn't attacking Jayelles. Jayelles made a reference to my posts seeming familiar and I was responding in a sarcastic way which is the way my sense of humor works. I know Jayelles is fair and even though I don't always agree with the opinion he or she expresses I respect it as I do everyone elses on this board.




armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Originally posted by chatwuann
Huntress1 I wasn't attacking Jayelles. Jayelles made a reference to my posts seeming familiar and I was responding in a sarcastic way which is the way my sense of humor works. I know Jayelles is fair and even though I don't always agree with the opinion he or she expresses I respect it as I do everyone elses on this board.
armchair detective/trucrmbuf

Crikes. I didn't mean for it to sound like I thought you were attacking Jayelles. I simply meant that she rocks!

[Jayelles]

Originally posted by Huntress1


Crikes. I didn't mean for it to sound like I thought you were attacking Jayelles. I simply meant that she rocks!

Now you've got me blushing....

I seem to have touched a nerve but the fact is that I just realised where I know Chatwuann from (under a different hat of course).

[chatwuann]

Originally posted by Huntress1


Crikes. I didn't mean for it to sound like I thought you were attacking Jayelles. I simply meant that she rocks!

Just wanted to set the record straight in case you did. Jayelles certainly is a good source of information on the Ramsey case since she is so well read on it. You're not the only one that likes her other posters have mentioned that they like her as well.





armchair detective/trucrmbuf