Page 7 of 14 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 73 to 84 of 166
  1. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1 View Post
    KoldKase wrote:

    KK,

    If a paintbrush had been used to cover up previous sexual abuse, it's hard to think that young Burke himself would have known what measures to take here; therefore Patsy, or both Ramseys went to his rescue. Plus, I have trouble with the fact if previous abuse was present, Patsy Ramsey had to have known this from bathing her young daughter. Surely JonBenét must have suffered extreme pain in her vagina more than a few times (?). I am absolutely baffled by this.
    Good points.

    And I will always believe Patsy knew who was doing this to the child, as well.

    "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.

  2. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heymom View Post
    Maybe the prior abuse happened on December 17th, when 4 separate phone calls were made after office hours to the pediatrician.
    Or at least that's when Patsy found out, or found out it was continuing?

    "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. #75
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    Good points.

    And I will always believe Patsy knew who was doing this to the child, as well.
    At least on December 17th, she must have.
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  4. #76

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    The coroner and many forensic specialists who studied the autopsy ALL found evidence of PRIOR sexual abuse. Prior also described as "chronic" In the medical sense "chronic" also means prior and it could have been as recent as a DAY before. It need not have been a long time before and it need not have been on more than ONE other occasion. There should be NO one following this case who is still unsure of this. The evidence was there, and it was found and documented. Not being able to accept it is denial and nothing more.
    There was NO cross dressing. The panties on her were already in the basement, wrapped with other gifts for JB's cousin, for whom they had been bought. The parents dressed her in them.
    Bubble baths do not cause bleeding, bruising, erosion of the hymen or widening of the vaginal canal or bruising of the labia. ALL were found in JB. The pink nightgown was found stuck on the white blanket that JB was wrapped in. It may have come out of the dryer stuck to the blanket, or she may have been wearing it when the abuse took place- BR and Patsy's DNA were found on it, as were droplets of JB's blood.
    BR wouldn't have fit in her clothes. He was nearly 4 years older and larger.
    Hey, DeeDee. Every the logical one with the impeccable memory for details that elucidate the issues.

    In LI_Mom's defense, I must point out that what we now know of the plethora of evidence of prior sexual abuse was obscured, if not outright buried, for more years than we've know the truth.

    It's a hard won knowledge for some of us who have spent many years and countless hours of research putting all of this together. We didn't have those LE transcripts of the Ramseys being questioned until after the NE published their book of them--edited, as well.So much of what I take for granted now came from those, and they seemed to just appear one day on this forum. I've asked and it's still fuzzy as to who put them online first. Same with "The Bonita Papers." We went YEARS trying to get ONE DOCTOR online to explain that autopsy report, but the only one who ever did--briefly--was adamant we NEVER EVER speak her name or copy her professional opinion anywhere.

    We didn't have podcasts and radio shows published online, youtube videos, etc., in the abundance we now do. That's really only been available to many of us for maybe five years or so because lots of the stuff we now have wasn't even posted to those sites until the recent past.

    I can imagine that anyone who hasn't been keeping up for the last six or seven years missed a lot of important stuff we learned. Lots of that was buried under the ubiquitous Karr circus and then the additional Lacy scam of "touch" DNA "discovered" on the long johns, then the following and the fake "exoneration" of the Ramseys--which was only Lacy's OPINION, as even she calls it, if we actually read her letter.

    A couple of years back I heard none other than MOUTHPIECE Nancy Grace tell a guest on her show who brought up the prior molestation, I NEVER HEARD THAT, are you sure? At which point the guest BACKED OFF, confused!

    Like cynic said, all we get from news anchors and TV lawyers now are DISINFORMATION, MORE CONFUSION, and TEAM RAMSEY SPIN.

    Even JEFFRY TOOBIN was spouting the smoke screen about the DNA and the NON-EXISTENT "exoneration" letter today! This man is one I always thought knew the law...and turns out today he demonstrated he doesn't know the legal definition of "exoneration" OTG dug up for us!

    It is discouraging, but thank you so much for keeping the record straight. No one can argue the details of the autopsy report like you.

    "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.

  5. #77
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    Like cynic said, all we get from news anchors and TV lawyers now are LIES, MORE CONFUSION, and TEAM RAMSEY SPIN.

    Even JEFFRY TOOBIN was spouting the smoke screen about the DNA and the NON-EXISTENT "exoneration" letter today! This man is one I always thought knew the law...and turns out today he demonstrated he doesn't know the legal definition "exoneration" OTG dug up for us!

    It is discouraging, but thank you so much for keeping the record straight. No one can argue the details of the autopsy report like you.
    The news clip my hubby caught about an hour ago ended with the "DNA exoneration" - at least HE understands that the parents were NEVER cleared! Sigh....it's all so depressing.
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  6. #78

    Default Here's the Pearl in the Oyster

    Mark Beckner finally gets to speak the Truth. This pretty much says it all, regardless of the Media Rubes shilling for John Ramsey now:

    https://bouldercolorado.gov/pages/oc...sey-true-bills

    Oct. 25, 2013 - Boulder Police Department Statement About Release of Ramsey True Bills

    OCT. 25, 2013 - BOULDER POLICE DEPARTMENT STATEMENT ABOUT RELEASE OF RAMSEY TRUE BILLS

    Friday, Oct. 25, 2013
    Contact: Kim Kobel, Boulder Police, 303-441-3370

    Boulder Police Department statement about release of Ramsey true bills

    Today, Judge Robert Lowenbach released true bills that had been issued by the JonBenet Ramsey grand jury back in 1999. The decision by Judge Lowenbach to publicly disclose the existence of these true bills provides confirmation to the public that the investigation pursued by the Boulder Police Department was, in fact, based on the information and evidence available. The grand jury of 12 objective jurors ultimately agreed with investigators that probable cause existed for the filing of charges. “Until this release, it was difficult to remain silent in reference to our knowledge of the true bills for so many years,” stated Police Chief Mark Beckner.

    Investigators at the time were disappointed in the then district attorney’s decision not to issue indictments. Cases are rarely perfect and often contain conflicting evidence. As a result, the opportunity to present the entire case to a jury may be lost forever. We also understand the criteria for taking a case to trial is higher than probable cause.

    What we have learned from this experience is how important the relationships are between police departments which investigate cases and the district attorneys who ultimately prosecute cases. These roles should always remain clear. At the same time, both agencies must work collaboratively together as a team. Under District Attorney Stan Garnett, we’ve been able to develop a team approach – with both agencies aiming for similar goals - to achieve unprecedented success in prosecuting cold cases, most of which had been rejected for prosecution under previous district attorneys. Justice, and the public interest, is better served with this type of collaboration and shared focus.

    The status of the Ramsey investigation today is that of a cold case. The case is still open, but is not actively being investigated and there are no new leads. While we believe at this point it is unlikely there will ever be a prosecution, the Boulder Police Department still holds out some hope that one day the district attorney and the Boulder Police Department will be able to put together a case worthy of presenting to a jury.

    -- CITY--
    [Thanks, Tadpole at Websleuths, for finding this.]

    "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.

  7. #79
    RiverRat's Avatar
    RiverRat is offline FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Left is Patsy Ramsey)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    NoneYa Beessness
    Posts
    7,824

    Cool

    Now thinking I don't know what to think about Who Patsy was in Cahoots with ~ still Loving the Validation that she indeed penned the Ransom Not(e) & all that phony acting from her was indeed just that ~ All a Lie!!!

    Many things are pointing to Burke ~ I cannot deny this ~ Insert drugged out Patsy here ~ Keep Your Babies Close ~ was she really losing it during that sound byte because she knew she kept her Babies too far away all alone on the 2nd floor?!?! Watch it again ~ that's is what my gut told me for the first time so now I have to figure out whether to listen to it or not...
    "Don't play dumb with me, RR! You're no good at it." The Punisher

    "Although no one is anticipating a prompt resolution to this long and much-detoured case, perhaps - just perhaps - might we see one of those moments “when a chance arrow of history scores a perfect bullseye on a deserving target”? Steve Thomas 2009

    "Justice hasn't had a chance so far. Anyone who doesn't have this as their prime goal, we'll have a falling out with." Fleet White - Time Magazine

    "What happens is that evil comes in," Fleet says. "If you don't have truth, all you have are lies, then what comes in is evil. And evil just does its thing. In the Ramsey case, it just did its thing, and it's eaten up so many people."

  8. #80

    Default

    The status of the Ramsey investigation today is that of a cold case. The case is still open, but is not actively being investigated and there are no new leads. While we believe at this point it is unlikely there will ever be a prosecution, the Boulder Police Department still holds out some hope that one day the district attorney and the Boulder Police Department will be able to put together a case worthy of presenting to a jury.
    It's obvious he thinks RDI cause if IDI there are pretty good chances there will be a DNA match someday,no?
    M. Lacy: "You know, no-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction, in court beyond a reasonable doubt. And I don’t think you will get any prosecutor… unless they were present with the person at the time of the crime… to clear someone."

  9. #81

    Default

    http://www.denverpost.com/editorials...e=rss#comments

    Lacy was of course right to consider the DNA "very significant and powerful evidence." But she was in no position actually to exonerate a couple who were in the house at the time of the murder so long as the crime remained unsolved. And Lacy said as much herself in 2006 after an embarrassing fiasco in which John Mark Karr was briefly considered a suspect and even brought back from Thailand on that basis.




    @bold
    we all agree yet NOTHING is being done about it.

    believe it or not,right now,if I could choose,I would rather wanna see AH ,ML and their slaves aka DeMuth and Hofstrom grilled in court,not JR or BR....
    M. Lacy: "You know, no-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction, in court beyond a reasonable doubt. And I don’t think you will get any prosecutor… unless they were present with the person at the time of the crime… to clear someone."

  10. #82

    Default

    http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boul...sed-john-patsy

    "I think a lot of people think (Lacy) stepped over the line by exonerating the family," Kolar said. "She was relying heavily on the DNA, and I don't know that it was appropriate."

    Added Wise, "I never would have done it. I'm not in the business of exonerating people until you have a conviction of somebody, and they don't have a conviction."

    Wise did say that future prosecutors are not bound by the exoneration.

    "When one DA exonerates, the next DA may say, 'No dice,'" he said.

    But Bob Grant, who at that time was the district attorney for neighboring Adams County and was among a small group of prosecutors with whom Hunter met monthly, said the exoneration could still "torpedo" any future trial.

    "Mary Lacy would become a witness for the defense, and that's a position a prosecutor never wants to be in," he said.

    Lacy could not be reached for comment Friday.





    I disagree on one thing...ML always acted like part of the defence so I don't think that would bother her much,by a witness for the R defence and claim it was an intruder...
    M. Lacy: "You know, no-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction, in court beyond a reasonable doubt. And I don’t think you will get any prosecutor… unless they were present with the person at the time of the crime… to clear someone."

  11. #83

    Exclamation

    After the release of the indictment this is ALL they got in their defence ,that stupid exoneration letter.

    And this is the most important thing...they don't have the DNA tests&results ,they got a LETTER,a useless piece of paper,a personal OPINION of a biased person.


    Cause the DNA reports show much more,Lacy picked what was CONVENIENT.
    M. Lacy: "You know, no-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction, in court beyond a reasonable doubt. And I don’t think you will get any prosecutor… unless they were present with the person at the time of the crime… to clear someone."

  12. #84
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Consider this: All of our frustration lies in the fact that no one pursued JonBenet's killer, and we don't understand why. Her parents said they felt no anger toward the killer, an inappropriate statement under the circumstances. Her older step-brother said the killer should receive, "forgiveness." The DA at the time must have seen a lot of the evidence, and had a GJ's true bills in front of him, yet...he didn't charge the parents and bring them to trial. The next DA, a woman, also did not pursue the case. In fact, she did the opposite - she led us all on a wild goose chase that found a mentally ill man in Thailand to blame the crime on! (Goulder residents should have ridden her out of town on a rail, but no, in the end she even got to offer her opinion and created an "exoneration" for the parents. I'm sure she thought she was doing the right thing by them, not to defend her, but...)

    Chief Kolar wrote an entire book on his review of the case files, yet he still did not name the killer at the end of the book.

    Can you think of one reason why all of these people seem to be protecting someone? Is it just corruption in Boulder, or is it a kind of pity?
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!



Similar Threads

  1. Ramsey grand jury voted to indict parents in 1999, DA refused to prosecute!
    By BobC in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 146
    Last Post: November 7, 2016, 6:48 pm, Mon Nov 7 18:48:57 UTC 2016
  2. Judge has ruled Ramsey Grand Jury indictment must be released
    By wombat in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 192
    Last Post: August 21, 2016, 5:17 am, Sun Aug 21 5:17:22 UTC 2016
  3. Judge Who Dismissed JonBenet Ramsey Grand Jury To Retire
    By Little in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 7, 2009, 2:49 pm, Fri Aug 7 14:49:57 UTC 2009
  4. Grand Jury is NOT looking into anything Ramsey
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: June 4, 2004, 9:33 pm, Fri Jun 4 21:33:19 UTC 2004

Posting Permissions

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