Wolf vs Ramsey 911 Response Motion

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by ACandyRose, Mar 16, 2003.

  1. ACandyRose

    ACandyRose Super Moderator

    United States District Court
    Northern District of Georgia
    Atlanta Division

    Robert Christian Wolf, )
    )
    Plaintiff,)
    )
    v.)
    )
    John Bennett Ramsey & )
    Patricia Paugh Ramsey, )
    )
    Defendants.)

    Plaintiff's Response to the City of Boulder's
    Motion for a Protective Order

    The plaintiff Chris Wolf, by his attorneys, response to the City of Boulder's motion for a protective oder as follows:

    The City of Boulder claims that it is involved in an "ongoing investigation in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. Recently published newspaper reports, however, would seem to contradict this representation in the City's motion papers. The Rocky Mountain News, in two separate February 10, 2003 articles, observed that "there is little outward signs of activity in the probe." (Exhibit A). The City of Boulder has, morevoer, ignored forensic evidence presented to such agencies as the Boulder Police Department and the Boulder District Attorney's Office. (Exhibits B and C).

    The City of Boulder has also allowed former Boulder homicide detective Lou Smit to resign from the JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation with "top secret' crime scene photographs and reports, which Smit then subsequently disseminated to the public via network television programs, such as The Today Show. Smit was also allowed to comment on the evidence and its significance to the murder investigation. This was done with the express written approval of the City of Boulder and in direct violation of the confidentiality clause in Smit's employment contract with the Boulder District Attorney.

    The plaintiff would normally not take a postition with respect to the City of Boulder's request for a protective order if it were not for the rank hypocrisy of its motion. As a result, the plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court deny the City of Boulder's application for a protective order.

    Respectfully submitted this 18th Day of February, 2003.

    Evan M. Altman
    Georgia Bar No. 01406
    Law Offices of Evan M. Altman
    6085 Lake Forrest Drive
    Atlanta, Georgia 30328
    (404) 845-0695

    Signature on document is as follows: Evan M. Altman by DH w/express permission

    Exhibit A: (4 pages including cover) Rocky Mountain News article, "DA keeps lid on Ramsey Death Probe" dated February 10, 2003 and Rocky Mountain News article, "City ducks lawsuit over slaying" dated February 10, 2003
    Exhibit B: (26 pages including cover) Exhibit of Letter Combinations and Unique Features
    Exhibit C: (11 pages including cover) Ransom Note vs Patsy Ramsey letters A thru Z

    ================================

    I also have the full .pdf file downloaded here showing all exhibits:

    http://www.acandyrose.com/02182003dh911motion.pdf

    and link listed at the bottom of this web page:

    http://www.acandyrose.com/legaldocuments.htm

    Thank You,
    ACandyRose

    edited to correct typos. ACR

    and to add: Signature on document is as follows: Evan M. Altman by DH w/express permission
     
    Last edited: Mar 16, 2003
  2. Tricia

    Tricia Administrator Staff Member

    Thank you ACR. As usual you are right on top of things for us.

    What do you think will happen?
     
  3. ACandyRose

    ACandyRose Super Moderator

    Do I look like a mind reader? :)

    I don't know but the exhibits on handwriting examples attached in the .pdf file are extremely interesting.

    I just realized how many typos I made. Sorry about that as I was in a rush. I think you get the idea. :)

    I went back and made type corrections plus to add that the hand written signature is as follows:

    Evan M. Altman by DH w/express permission

    ACandyRose
     
  4. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    I agree. How anyone can look at those samples and not know Patsy wrote it is beyond me. This note, it must be stressed, was not found in a ravine in the mountains somewhere--it was found inside a locked house with a dead child and a staged crime scene.

    We needn't make it more complicated than that folks!
     
  5. DocG

    DocG Banned

    Interesting

    The handwriting comparisons are very interesting. And some show quite a bit of similarity for sure. However, as you know, both Fausto Brugnatelli and myself have found some strong similarities with John's printing. Clearly neither Patsy NOR John can be ruled out. But to really accuse either John or Patsy of writing this document, one needs to show comparisons with some sort of control group. If in fact an unbiased expert could pick Patsy's or John's printing out from among a group of similar samples by different people using a similar printing style, then that would be truly compelling evidence that might have some impact in a trial. Without such control, we can only speculate. There are indeed a great many people with similar styles of printing, possibly millions in fact.

    The bottom line for me is that I can see no REASON for Patsy to have written a self-incriminating "ransom" note.
     
  6. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    Self incriminating? Yeah in hindsight! People write fake ransom notes like this to stage crime scenes all the time. What makes Patsy Ramsey incapable of making the same mistake hundreds of others have done?
     
  7. purr

    purr Active Member

    john's handwriting experts

    as i understand it, john hired his own handwriting experts, and NONE of THEM....thought John had written the note.

    correct me if i am wrong.

    purr
     
  8. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    That's right, Purr.
     
  9. DocG

    DocG Banned

    Thanks again, purr

    (I don't think BobC gets it. ;-) But that's OK, there's a LOT that sails over this guy's head!)

    John hired HIS OWN experts to "rule" him "out." For some reason a couple of other "experts" bought it. But in actual fact only a very few forensic doc people have EVER actually examined John's exemplars. These have, in fact, been kept a deep dark secret from the public. And there was NEVER any effort to locate historic exemplars from John as there was from Patsy. There was certainly no warrant ever issued for his exemplars.

    As far as the one exemplar from John that HAS been made public, (the deposition that's been out there for so long) that HAS been confirmed, by Patsy's sister Pam, as indeed John's printing. What she has called his "chicken scratch." A phrase that could be used to describe the note itself. (Patsy's style is much more flowing and even.) Patsy did NOT write that for him, which should be obvious to anyone comparing her (much neater) printing to this document.

    Bob, I don't know how to break this to you, but you are NOT much of sleuth (though you can be amusing). I suppose there could be many people who have penned phoney ransom notes to cover their :(:(:(, but NOT under circumstances remotely resembling the Ramsey note. If the body had been found outside the house, then yes maybe the note might have worked for her. But SHE is the one who called the police and because of that call the body was found IN the house. If you are dead set on Patsy as your favorite perp, I suppose that won't matter. To everyone else it will -- and HAS. Patsy did NOT write that note. And if you won't take my word for it, then just look at the history of this case. EVERY effort to implicate Patsy has gone nowhere. This is NOT an issue anymore, except for a few diehards. Patsy dunnit is DEAD. Find another suspect!
     
  10. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    uhhhh Doc. You poor, goofy thing. Patsy Ramsey was this close to being arrested several times. As another poster here stated ever so accurately several times, this case was solved long ago --it's just not ready for court. The feds know the deal, but don't need the hastle of going public with the info.

    Patsy wrote the ransom note. It is the opinion of every hand-writing expert consulted thus far. People who do hand-writing anaylsis for the military and the feds, you know, for a living. Now, just because you and Jameson don't think Patsy wrote it, doesn't cancel out their opinion.

    Now regarding my sluething ability--yes, I'm sorry to tell you but my abilities are so refined, so incredibly vast, that a mind such as yours must block it all out, lest you go mad. You examining my reasoning faculties would be like a fruit fly gawking at the Big Bang --the very beginning of existance, you poor thing. Please don't try--I can't take resonsibility for the trauma you may experience. The majesty of my worldview should only be admired in shock and awe from afar, preferably with protective lenses.
     
  11. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    You two

    Do what you do in style!

    I still have to side more with Bob for one reason. Being the murderer is the only that justifies Patsy's post homicide unusual behaviour.

    RR
     
  12. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    I just look at what the experts say. Discussion is one thing and that's cool, but when people start thinking they know more about these areas than the CBI and FBI, well, I think that says it all.
     
  13. DocG

    DocG Banned

    The experts

    Bob, Bob, Bob, you are a gas, you really are. I enjoy your posts, I do.

    But, c'mon. Neither the CBI or FBI experts have ever fingered Patsy and you know it. The best any of the REAL experts can do is "not ruled out." That ain't good enough to nail her. And Darnay's "experts" have made the most elementary errors -- and they had access to only a very small number of doubtful samples, one of which (Rainbow Fish Players) was probably written by Burke.

    The really experienced people, with access to ALL the exemplars have NOT been willing to accuse her. So why, if you have such respect for these experts, are you?

    My take on John is simply that he too cannot be ruled out. And I think there's good evidence for that. Experts can be wrong (as I'm sure you'll agree) and I think they are wrong on that. Many other experts claim it's impossible to rule out a viable suspect wherever deliberate deception is involved. I would never claim I or anyone else can PROVE John wrote that note. Nor can it be proven that Patsy did it.

    It's only when we look at things like motive and logic that it becomes clear that JOHN is our real suspect, NOT Patsy. She'd have had no REASON to write such a note. John might well have.
     
  14. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    Doc, Doc Doc. Oh but yes they did.
     
  15. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    Doc why is all the other evidence pointing to Patsy then? It's not John's fibers, paint tote, pad, pen, blah blah blah.

    MOMMIE DID IT!
     
  16. DocG

    DocG Banned

    BobC

    >Doc why is all the other evidence pointing to Patsy then? It's not John's fibers, paint tote, pad, pen, blah blah blah.

    I think this is one of the real sources of serious misunderstanding in this case. We have two adults in that house, only two. And as far as can be determined, every item used in the crime or coverup came (or could have come) from inside the house. It stands to reason, therefore, that items used in the crime would be linked with Patsy or John. Even if there were an intruder that would be the case. So the mere fact that there is some sort of link to someone living in the house is NOT really evidence against that person. You have to have something stronger than just a link. If Patsy did it, then maybe she would have used her own pad, her own pen, her own paintbrush, etc. But the same items could have been used by an intruder. And the same items could have been used by John. As I see it, if Patsy were our perp she'd have avoided using her own things. Same for John. And since Patsy's things were used and John's weren't, then for ME that points to John and NOT Patsy. If he did it and he's covering his own :(:(:(, WHY would he have used things that would point to HIM?

    As far as the fiber evidence is concerned, there is a simple explanation for Patsy's fibers being on the tape, as I'm sure you know. The crime scene was compromised by John and Fleet, the tape was removed and placed gummy side down on the blanket. The blanket could very well have had Patsy's fibers on it for perfectly innocent reasons. The paint tote likewise -- after all it was used by her on many occasions. These fibers are, for that reason, NOT evidence.

    I'm much more intrigued by other fiber evidence that the police have been holding very close to their chest. In the NE book we learn that John was told by one of the interrogators that there was a match between fibers from his shirt and fibers found in JonBenet's crotch. John challenged that statement, called it bull :(:(:(:( and the matter was dropped. Was there really a match? We still don't know. If so, that is FAR more compelling fiber evidence than Patsy's, because there is NO innocent explanation for fibers from JonBenet's father being found in that particular, very private, place. That's more than just a link and cannot so easily be explained.
     
  17. Tricia

    Tricia Administrator Staff Member

    A friend just e-mailed me. Said it's being reported that the judge dismissed the Wolfe case. Wish I could say April Fools but I can't. Seems to be true.

    Evil wins again.

    You know what? This has been a crappy day.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice