Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 60
  1. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1 View Post
    No one could have stated this any better, Cherokee! Well said!
    Thank you, Elle. None of us could have imagined the twists and turns the Ramsey case would take through all these years, or the amazing cast of characters that would be part of the charade, but at least we gained some knowledge along the way, and most importantly, some life-long friends who will always be a part of us.
    Last edited by Cherokee; May 10, 2011, 6:16 pm at Tue May 10 18:16:05 UTC 2011.

  2. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynic View Post
    BBM

    Do you ever recall this kk?

    Darnay Hoffman:
    Myth #4: Identifying the ransom note writer still doesn't mean the district attorney can get a murder conviction.

    This is not only wrong, it is the closest thing to a "Big Lie" being perpetrated by the district attorney's office. This "Whopper" goes something like this: Even if we know the ransom note writer, how can a jury convict them of a murder without more evidence of their physically participating in the actual killing of JonBenét? Simple. Colorado's felony murder statute makes anyone participating in such dangerous crimes as kidnapping equally responsible for any murder resulting from such activity. Much like the get-away-driver to a bank robbery where a guard is killed (who is later found guilty of murder despite not even being in the bank during the robbery and murder) the JonBenét ransom note writer can be charged with first-degree murder even if the police can't prove the writer actually killed JonBenét. Yet Alex Hunter persists in naively stating that even if the ransom note writer were identified and arrested and jailed, they would be immediately eligible for bail. This is also not true because felony murder is not a bailable offense in Colorado. The ransom note writer would have to sit in jail until they went to trial or made a deal to reveal JonBenét's murderer to the district attorney.

    http://classic-web.archive.org/web/1...man/5myths.htm
    I don't remember ever seeing it, cynic.

    Are you asking me my opinion on it? I'd really like to hear yours.

    And welcome to FFJ. Sorry it took me so long to respond, but life has been running me around lately.

    I must say that your posts on Tricia's thread at WS, of case evidence and arguments, are purely brilliant. Bravo.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  3. #27

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee View Post
    Thank you, Elle. None of could have imagined the twists and turns the Ramsey case would take through all these years, or the amazing cast of characters that would be part of the charade, but at least we gained some knowledge along the way, and most importantly, some life-long friends who will always be a part of us.
    You have stated the case very well in this and your last post, Chero.

    I will add one thing: it has all taught me the U.S. of A. has a long way to go to restore the damage done to the credibility, honor, and integrity of our justice system, thanks to Alex Hunter and Mary Lacy. I am now fully surprised when I see anything like blind justice take place in our courts. I will never forget that it can be and is bought and sold every day.

    People like Hunter, Lacy, Smit, Wood, and the Ramseys think nothing of it, because they played the system to deny justice for their own benefit.

    I cannot speak for others, but I can say that their selfish crimes not only destroyed the life of a six year old, but my faith in our justice system entirely. If it's that easy, that simple, to buy and sell the "truth" in a child murder, then there is no case or court in the land which can stand as even reasonably fair and just.

    Our system is blatantly corrupt, therefore broken. Possibly irreparably.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  4. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee View Post
    Welcome to FFJ, Cynic!
    Thank you Cherokee, and thank you for your outstanding ransom note analysis which helped me and I’m sure many others.
    Yes, many posters have gone on with their lives (as they should) since the Ramsey case will never be brought to a conclusion. There was no intruder, the ransom note writer is dead, and the Ramseys lawyer, Lin Wood, threatens to sue anyone who speaks or publishes the truth about what happened that night. John Ramsey will take that truth to his grave. The case will remain "open" into eternity, so the case files will never be released. That is not only to protect the Ramseys, but also to protect those who protected the Ramseys and saved them from prosecution. So many backroom deals, so little time. And that doesn't include the absolute idiocy and gall of Mary Lacy and her bogus "exoneration" of the Ramseys.

    I do hope I live longer than John Ramsey and Lin Wood so that perhaps an excellent investigative reporter will be able to write and publish the definitive book on the Ramsey case and proclaim the truth of the Ramsey's involvement in JonBenet's death and the subsequent cover-up. I hope that same reporter excoriates the current media, their fawning worship of the Ramseys, and their lack of interest in discovering the truth instead of reading from a Ramsey/Lin Wood-approved cue card. Until then, the Ramsey case will remain perpetually in limbo because the perpetrators escaped justice, but no one in Boulder, Colorado is willing to admit they let that happen.

    So all that's left is us old die-hards, the ones who have fought in the trenches together all these years. We can't let go of the comraderie, or the faint hope that, eventually, the truth of Ramsey involvement will be made known to the general public, even if the case is never prosecuted. We do what we can to keep case knowledge and discussion available to those who seek it, and Tricia has graciously continued to provide life for FFJ. Without it, a lot of of documentation and excellent posts would be lost.

    So welcome to the show that never ends! It's been a circus from the beginning. None of us knew that when we signed on, but 14 1/2 years later, we all know we were taken for a ride.
    An excellent summation.

    I suppose the most we can hope for is that JR will be relegated to live out the remainder of his life as a pariah. The efforts here at FFJ and over at WS to counter the lies and spin by Ramsey stooges (like Aphrodite Jones) will help make that a reality.

    And that doesn't include the absolute idiocy and gall of Mary Lacy and her bogus "exoneration" of the Ramseys.
    It was good to see Stan Garnett un-exonerate the Ramseys, but unfortunately the story was never picked up by the mainstream media.

  5. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    I don't remember ever seeing it, cynic.

    Are you asking me my opinion on it?
    Yes I was.
    And welcome to FFJ. Sorry it took me so long to respond, but life has been running me around lately.
    Thank you, and I’m sorry for being late as well.
    I must say that your posts on Tricia's thread at WS, of case evidence and arguments, are purely brilliant. Bravo.
    Well coming from you, that means a lot. I have a very, very long way to go to before I catch up to you.

  6. #30

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    I'd really like to hear yours.
    I was asking for your opinion on it, but I’d be happy to give you mine.
    Just remember, you asked. LOL

    With regard to the Midyette case, it was great to see that despite the big dollar defense, that both of these wretched parents were convicted.
    I agree that filing charges under the child abuse statute may have worked in the Ramsey case, however, I also believe that felony murder has a greater degree of built in flexibility for a successful prosecution in a case where the “principal actor” is unclear or there is a chance that the accused parties will blame each other.
    As you’ve said, it’s a commonly held view that one of the most compelling reasons why the Ramseys were not prosecuted is because it would be too difficult to prove which of the parents was responsible for ending JonBenet’s life, or similarly that the parents would blame each other and, consequently, both would walk free.
    Wendy Murphy, Vincent Bugliosi and Bill Ritter have all echoed that sentiment.

    Wendy Murphy: It‘s why the JonBenet Ramsey parents are both free, because you can‘t try the father, he‘ll blame the mother. You can‘t try the mother, she‘ll—so they both walk.
    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9119000/...direct-august/

    Bugliosi continued, “If we come to the conclusion that JonBenét was not murdered by an intruder, the inevitable question presents itself: which [parent] did it? A prosecutor can’t argue to a jury, ‘Ladies and gentlemen, the evidence is very clear here that either Mr. or Mrs. Ramsey committed this murder and the other one covered it up…’ There is no case to take to the jury unless [the DA] could prove beyond a reasonable doubt which one [of them] did it.” Later in the show, Bugliosi told Vargas, “Even if you could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note, that doesn’t mean that she committed the murder.”
    Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, page 737

    Of course, not everyone agrees. One of the BPD’s “dream team,” Dan Hoffman, thought that prosecuting under the felony murder statute would have worked. Beckner also agreed with that view. (And, as I posted previously, Darnay Hoffman concurred.)

    Even after DeMuth’s recital of our shortcomings, I felt we held a decent hand. Commander Beckner told me later that he felt we had gone far beyond showing probable cause. “I think she [Patsy Ramsey] did it,” he said. “We should just charge them both with felony murder and aiding and abetting.”
    JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 335

    Daniel Hoffman, one of the lawyers (and former dean of the University of Denver Law School) working pro bono for the police, remarked to Denver DA Bill Ritter during an earlier break, “Looks like they got it.”
    “Got what?” Ritter countered.
    “Felony murder,” Hoffman said confidently.
    Ritter didn’t see it. The felony-murder statute in Colorado allowed for a murder conviction even when the intent to kill couldn’t be proved, if it could be shown that the death occurred during the commission of a felony such as arson, burglary, or sexual assault. Ritter knew that none of those secondary felonies could be proved in the Ramsey case—not even sexual assault. If JonBenét was penetrated after death, it wasn’t a sexual assault; it was abuse of a corpse. But that wasn’t Ritter’s main reservation about Hoffman’s suggestion. Even if the evidence someday proved that a sexual assault had preceded the child’s death, the prosecution would still have to prove which parent was responsible for the assault. That left prosecutors with the troubling question of which parent—if indeed either parent—had knowingly caused the child’s death. Until investigators could identify each parent’s individual actions, two suspects meant no suspects.

    Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 670 - 671

    So, who’s right?
    I think that the Colorado felony murder statute has enough latitude to handle the issues of the Ramsey case.

    In the state of Colorado, the common law felony murder rule has been codified in Colorado Revised Statutes § 18-3-102. The statute classifies a homicide as first degree murder when committed during one of these predicate felonies:
    Committing or attempting to commit arson, robbery, burglary, kidnapping, sexual assault, or a class 3 felony sexual assault on a child
    Or if in the course of one of these crimes or the immediate escape from it, anyone causes the death of a person other than one of the participants


    Colorado (Col. Rev. Stat. Sec. 18-3-102)
    It is first degree murder for someone, acting alone or with others to (1) commit or attempt to commit arson, robbery, burglary, kidnapping, sexual assault, class 3 felony sexual assault on a child, or escape and (2) in the course of or in furtherance of the crime or in immediate flight from it, anyone causes the death of a person other than one of the participants. The crime is subject to the death penalty or life in prison.

    http://www.cga.ct.gov/2008/rpt/2008-r-0087.htm

    Felony Murder Doctrine
    A rule of criminal statutes that any death that occurs during the commission of a felony is first-degree murder, and all participants in that felony or attempted felony can be charged with and found guilty of murder. A typical example is a robbery involving more than one criminal, in which one of them shoots, beats to death or runs over a store clerk, killing the clerk. Even if the death were accidental, all of the participants can be found guilty of felony murder, including those who did no harm, had no gun, and/or did not intend to hurt anyone. In a bizarre situation, if one of the hold-up men or women is killed, his/her fellow robbers can be charged with murder.

    http://www.criminal-lawyer-colorado....sglossary.html

    The second way that the crime of murder can be charged under Colorado law is “felony murder”. Felony murder is actually another way that a person can commit the crime of 1st degree murder without the elements of “deliberation” (or premeditation) or “intent”. Felony murder occurs when a person commits certain felony crimes specified by Colorado statute (such as sexual assault, burglary, robbery, arson, or kidnapping) and in the course or furtherance of that crime, another person (who is not involved in the commission of the underlying crime) dies. Here, the crime of murder does not require deliberation or intent to cause the death of a person. In fact, the actor may only have the intent of the underlying felony that he or she is committing and still be charged with murder when a person dies during the course of the commission of that underlying felony. Possible sentencing for felony murder is the same as described above for 1st degree murder.
    http://frankfurt-trani.com/criminal-...nse-attorneys/

    If we look at the above, it’s clear that the only possible underlying felony that fits the evidence in the Ramsey case would be class 3 sexual assault on a child. I’ve outlined the particulars of that felony below:

    Sexual assault on a child. 18-3-405.
    (1) Any actor who knowingly subjects another not his or her spouse to any sexual contact commits sexual assault on a child if the victim is less than fifteen years of age and the actor is at least four years older than the victim.
    (2) Sexual assault on a child is a class 4 felony, but it is a class 3 felony if:

    (a) The actor applies force against the victim in order to accomplish or facilitate sexual contact; or
    (b) The actor, in order to accomplish or facilitate sexual contact, threatens imminent death, serious bodily injury, extreme pain, or kidnapping against the victim or another person, and the victim believes that the actor has the present ability to execute the threat; or
    (c) The actor, in order to accomplish or facilitate sexual contact, threatens retaliation by causing in the future the death or serious bodily injury, extreme pain, or kidnapping against the victim or another person, and the victim believes that the actor will execute the threat; or
    (d) The actor commits the offense as a part of a pattern of sexual abuse as described in subsection (1) of this section. No specific date or time must be alleged for the pattern of sexual abuse; except that the acts constituting the pattern of sexual abuse must have been committed within ten years prior to the offense charged in the information or indictment. The offense charged in the information or indictment shall constitute one of the incidents of sexual contact involving a child necessary to form a pattern of sexual abuse as defined in section 18-3-401 (2.5).


    Therefore, I believe that class 3 sexual assault on a child could be the underlying felony on route to a felony murder charge if a pattern of sexual abuse could be proven.
    (“Pattern,” by the way is defined as two or more incidents.)

    "In mid-September, a panel of pediatric experts from around the country reached one of the major conclusions of the investigation - that JonBenet had suffered vaginal trauma prior to the day she was killed. There were no dissenting opinions among them on the issue, and they firmly rejected any possibility that the trauma to the hymen and chronic vaginal inflammation were caused by urination issues or masturbation. We gathered affidavits stating in clear language that there were injuries 'consistent with prior trauma and sexual abuse' 'There was chronic abuse'. . Past violation of the vagina'. . .'Evidence of both acute and injury and chronic sexual abuse.' In other words, the doctors were saying it had happened before. One expert summed it up well when he said the injuries were not consistent with sexual assault, but with a child who was being physically abused."
    Such findings would lead an investigator to conclude that the person who inflicted the abuse was someone with frequent or unquestioned access to the child, and that limited the amount of suspects.
    Every statistic in the book pointed to someone inside the family.

    Steve Thomas, JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation p. 253

    Prosecuting Patsy would have been quite feasible.
    I really do believe that the ransom note evidence would have played very well in front of a jury, devastating IMO.
    The beauty of the felony murder statute is that the prosecution need not prove which of the Ramseys definitively caused the skull fracture or wrapped the ligature around JonBenet’s neck.
    If the jury would agree that Patsy wrote the note, her involvement would make her liable for the crime of felony murder.

    Even Hofstrom seemed to agree that the combination of chronic sexual abuse and the ransom note was the key.
    “If experts could determine prior vaginal abuse, and we could get an expert to identify the author of the ransom note, then the investigation would have reached a “turning point” toward prosecution."
    Steve Thomas, JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, page 244

    What’s frustrating is that the DA was too much of a coward to try. Good things can happen for the prosecution when people are arrested and suddenly face the harsh reality of a jail cell.
    BTW, I checked out Darnay’s statement that bail would not be an option if the Ramseys were charged with felony murder, and it appears to be true.

    FAQ: Colorado’s Bail Bonding System - Typical Bond Schedules and Other Information - Pretrial Release Services
    In the United States, an individual accused of a crime is innocent until proven guilty. Most defendants have the right to be released on bail that is not excessive rather than remaining in jail pending the outcome of a trial.
    However, some serious crimes are not bailable offenses under Colorado law, including murder, kidnapping, and treason. In addition, persons arrested for a violent crime who have been previously convicted of a violent crime, or who are out on bail for a violent offense, are also not eligible for bail.

    http://colorado-domestic-violence-la...-Laws.html?P=Y

    Why, why did the DA not try this?
    John and Patsy behind bars, how long would the solidarity last?

  7. #31

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynic View Post
    It was good to see Stan Garnett un-exonerate the Ramseys, but unfortunately the story was never picked up by the mainstream media.
    Of course, it wasn't! It didn't go with the their fawning worship of the "innocent" Ramseys! Even if there IS a writer or an editor with a brain in their head who sees through all the smoke and mirrors, they also have to keep an eye on the Ramsey's junkyard bulldog, Lin Wood. One step out of line, and they get slapped with a lawsuit!

    It really is frustrating!!! How can we ever get the truth out there when the media isn't interested? They are too lazy to investigate Mary Lacy's unethical, illegal and bogus "exoneration" of the Ramseys. The media just accepted Lacy's word with no questions asked! They didn't even press her to see the Bode Lab DNA documents when she said they wouldn't be made available!!! Like sheeple, they dropped the subject and moved on.

    It's unbelieveable! Why hasn't the media filed a Freedom of Information Act on Lacy's DNA documents? Why haven't they investigated how a prosecutor can exonerate someone when that it not in their power AND how they can do it while refusing to release documents and taking NO questions about it? Have we suddenly become a nation of peasants who blindly accept decrees from tin-pot dictators like Lacy?

    Ooooh, it makes my blood boil just to think about it! I can't stand injustice, and the Ramsey case has been one injustice after another for 14 1/2 years! It's hard to know the truth and realize it doesn't matter. The Ramseys and their protectors have won.

    There will never be a prosecution of the case, and I don't care about that anymore. All I want is for the TRUTH to be known, once and for all, to the general public ...

    THERE WAS NO INTRUDER,
    THE RAMSEYS WERE INVOLVED SOMEHOW IN JONBENET'S DEATH,
    PATSY WROTE THE RANSOM NOTE AS PART OF A STAGED CRIME SCENE,
    AND
    THE BOULDER DA'S OFFICE PARTICIPATED IN THE COVER-UP THAT FOLLOWED!
    Last edited by Cherokee; May 22, 2011, 1:51 am at Sun May 22 1:51:37 UTC 2011.

  8. #32

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynic View Post
    Why, why did the DA not try this?
    Because the DA was in on the cover-up. Alex Hunter never intended to prosecute the Ramseys for ANY reason. It was all for show. If Steve Thomas hadn't written his book exposing the corruption and what really went on behind the scenes in the Ramsey case, we would never have known the truth of Ramsey involvement or Hunter's complicity. Hunter didn't know Thomas was going to blow the whistle, and he assumed the furor would die down eventually after the Ramseys moved back to Georgia.

    Hunter eventually got what he wanted - a dead case, no prosecution, and the Ramseys safely out of reach. Because of Steve Thomas and the advent of the internet (with people who were interested in the truth), Hunter had to wait for it longer than he originally thought.

    This kind of corruption goes on all the time and has gone on forever. It's just that we never hear about it unless someone has the courage to report it.

    John and Patsy behind bars, how long would the solidarity last?
    Exactly! It would have been worth a shot. But of course, Hunter wasn't interested in either spouse turning on the other one. That would blow the whole backroom-engineered cover-up out of the water!

  9. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    I haven't finished reading all of the last few posts, but can someone please tell me if I am in a UNIVERSITY CLASS LEARNING THE LAW ON CRIME? *cough* WOW! For the last few days, I have been struggling with a new computer and Windows 7 and I thought, I'll give myself a break and go to the JonBenét case on my old computer and see what's happening. To say I am impressed is to say the least.

    I hope you don't mind me enquiring Cynic. Are you a lawyer? You certainly sound like one. I am 82 and I have learned a lot from the younger ones here who have posted on this case for a few years.

    Have a nice weekend. I'll be back to finish up on my reading in this university class girls and boys. Elle
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  10. #34
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    Thank you for that wealth of information. I was particularly caught by the "abuse of a corpse" comment. It certainly seems like LE were very aware that poor JB's body had been penetrated after death as part of the staging.

    More and more I realize we know NOTHING about this case. There is SO much more that is being kept from the public. ST was right. He said the public knows less than 10% of what LE really knows.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  11. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    Thank you for that wealth of information. I was particularly caught by the "abuse of a corpse" comment. It certainly seems like LE were very aware that poor JB's body had been penetrated after death as part of the staging.

    More and more I realize we know NOTHING about this case. There is SO much more that is being kept from the public. ST was right. He said the public knows less than 10% of what LE really knows.
    I was quite taken aback by this information on the "abuse of a corpse" too, DeeDee. Made me feel sick! Yes, Steve Thomas was right!
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  12. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cherokee View Post
    Of course, it wasn't! It didn't go with the their fawning worship of the "innocent" Ramseys! Even if there IS a writer or an editor with a brain in their head who sees through all the smoke and mirrors, they also have to keep an eye on the Ramsey's junkyard bulldog, Lin Wood. One step out of line, and they get slapped with a lawsuit!

    It really is frustrating!!! How can we ever get the truth out there when the media isn't interested? They are too lazy to investigate Mary Lacey's unethical, illegal and bogus "exoneration" of the Ramseys. The media just accepted Lacey's word with no questions asked! They didn't even press her to see the Bode Lab DNA documents when she said they wouldn't be made available!!! Like sheeple, they dropped the subject and moved on.

    It's unbelieveable! Why hasn't the media filed a Freedom of Information Act on Lacey's DNA documents? Why haven't they investigated how a prosecutor can exonerate someone when that it not in their power AND how they can do it while refusing to release documents and taking NO questions about it? Have we suddenly become a nation of peasants who blindly accept decrees from tin-pot dictators like Lacey?

    Ooooh, it makes my blood boil just to think about it! I can't stand injustice, and the Ramsey case has been one injustice after another for 14 1/2 years! It's hard to know the truth and realize it doesn't matter. The Ramseys and their protectors have won.
    I have a difficult time trying to sort out whether the problem with the current media coverage of the case is down to laziness, incompetence, fear of litigation, or perhaps more sinister reasons. I suppose I should stop trying to figure that out and accept that it’s probably a blend. It doesn’t make it any easier to accept, though.
    Given that the 15th anniversary is coming up, I’m bracing for an onslaught of IDIocy.
    So far, Aphrodite Jones is in the lead.



Similar Threads

  1. Butts Triple Homicide
    By JC in forum Butts - Triple Murder Case
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: August 12, 2007, 8:38 am, Sun Aug 12 8:38:18 UTC 2007
  2. Butts triple homicide, thread III
    By JC in forum Butts - Triple Murder Case
    Replies: 213
    Last Post: November 13, 2005, 8:22 am, Sun Nov 13 8:22:23 UTC 2005
  3. 1992 Butts Triple Homicide
    By JC in forum Butts - Triple Murder Case
    Replies: 149
    Last Post: June 1, 2005, 10:57 am, Wed Jun 1 10:57:39 UTC 2005
  4. Case will be ruled a double homicide....
    By Tez in forum Laci Denise Rocha Peterson
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 25, 2003, 1:34 pm, Tue Mar 25 13:34:56 UTC 2003

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •