E! True Hollywood Story: JBR case

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by AK, Oct 27, 2003.

  1. AK

    AK Member

    I've been flying all over the country and just got home to catch this show, and what a great program it was. I had to laugh that P.R. specialist Michael Tracey was consulted at all, but he seems willing to say anything as long as a camera is available. Considering his "work" in the past, I'm quite sure he babbled on and on this time, but E! in its wisdom edited him judiciously so he actually came off sounding balanced. He's probably kicking himself over that.

    The program's most important point was what Dr. Wecht said about previous sexual molestation. That is the 800-pound gorilla the Ramsey camp just cannot ignore. They try, and to some degree they're successful in creating doubt to people unfamiliar with forensic pathology -- but that will end swiftly when the case goes to trial. There are photos, unambiguous images, that will take people's breath away and plenty of testimony to go with them. What Wecht says is backed by a whole panel of the world's best experts, some of whom go considerably beyond Wecht's 24-48 hours timeline. That has to factor into the reason for the murder and staging, and all the RamFam spin won't be able to explain that away.

    In talking to people these last few weeks it's clear there's still interest in this case and good questions about what they've heard and seen. But I'm comforted to learn that when things are explained point by point --in the manner a prosecutor would do-- issues get clarified and people come away with a better understanding. These are the kinds of folks who will be on the jury one day. They'll need to see real evidence and hear from experts who can translate forensic and medical terms -- but they'll assimilate that and be able to find a guilty verdict.

    That said, I still don't want to see a prosecution until there can be a solid conviction. I'm got great patience until then.
     
  2. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    I wasn't impressed

    But then again, I wasn't surprised either to see that the investigators that were trying to put the case together were as shunned as the were the day JonBenet died, the ones that could verify that the Ramseys lawyered up before their daughters body was removed from the house........Wayyyyy before any media attention was cast their way, .

    The ones that could verify that the Ramseys were coherent enough to appear on CNN all the while ignoring their responsibilities to the only ones that could help them really move past this murder by solving the case.

    The ones that could verify, despite Lin Woods press release, that the Truth was revealed in Patsy's 911 call.

    Chronic is Chronic-
    RR
     
  3. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    I didn't see it

    but I've read about it at the SBTC (Sue Bennett's Trash Can) forum, or at least their slanted version of the show.

    AK, you are the eternal optimist. I agree with you that a good prosecutor MIGHT be able to try this case in court, but how do you propose that Santa theorist Keenan and her intruder theorist "investigators" could ever present this case in a court room, given the statements Keenan has made in the past about agreeing with Carnes? If the DA's office believes an intruder killed JBR, what makes you think they will ever bring the real perps to justice?

    I just don't understand how anyone can think Mary Keenan can present a case that includes all the major points you suggested when she's got her mind made up the Ramseys didn't do it. How does this make sense?

    Your points are crystal clear to me and I agree a brilliant prosecuting attorney might be able to overcome all the problems inherent in this case, though it would be an uphill climb all the way. I do not agree, however, that the present establishment in Boulder has either the desire, the will, or the competence to try the case. Their actions have already proven that to me.
     
  4. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    I thought it was horribly biased. It was one hour straight of Michael Tracy, who is hardly qualified to criticize crime scene investigation, and yet he did ad nauseum. The BPD interviewed, what was it, 400? 600? people? Yet anyone watching that show wouldn't have known that. And what was this crap of having Steven Singular on? For a special whining about unsubstantiated rumors in the press, they didn't hesitate to roll out the kiddie porn conspiracy theorists.

    At least Cyril Wecht was on.
     
  5. Voyager

    Voyager Active Member

    FedX.....

    You give me hope when my patience starts to wane.....the truth and the evidence are out there....Hopefully a competent and caring prosecutor can bring it all together before the knowlegable witnesses and the perps all die off!

    Still here, waiting and advocating.....
    Voyager
     
  6. AK

    AK Member

    The show

    Andrew Cohen and Catherine Crier both made solid points and Schiller and Wecht were proper counterpoint to Tracey and Singular (why they had on the latter is a laugh!).

    What Keenan stated was true when she said it, based on the incomplete case Carnes had to look at -- thanks to Darnay Hoffman who flat-out abandoned his client and case. So I don't have a problem thinking that once properly briefed by current investigators, Keenan will be able to move forward. She is a sex crimes specialist, after all, and I wouldn't be surprised if she prosecutes the case herself.

    We may all come to see that the prosecution will be different than the one that was going after Patsy as the killer motivated by a bed-wetting incident. How much satisfaction could that flawed theory have given any truth seeker? I don't know why everyone isn't up in arms over the thinking that let that theory blossom.

    RR, you're right: Chronic is chronic. And someone has got to be smoking chronic to not understand that. The experts do. The jury will.
     
  7. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    Fed, I will agree with your statements regarding Darnay's inefficient handling of the case as a cause for the stilted judgment entered by Carnes. She only saw the RST's version upon which her opinion became based. However, Keenan's office had the FULL case file and was actively involved in it from the onset, so her public support of Carnes' short-range opinion was utterly outrageous and could not possibly be condoned on the basis of limited knowledge. She's been an intruder theorist from the start! Her statement was a flat-out egregious bias as much if not more so than the BPD's alleged "targeting" of the Ramseys and no one else. If it was wrong for BPD to limit the scope of their investigation, is it not also wrong for Keenan to limit the scope of hers to just an intruder? Isn't that like the kettle calling the skillet "black *ss"??????

    Anyone know how to get in touch with Michael Kane directly?
     
  8. LurkerXIV

    LurkerXIV Moderator

    Yes

    Michael J. Kane
    3300 Trindle Road
    Camp Hill, PA. 17011

    (717) 214-3700

    Kane is always cordial to students of the case who call for information.
     
  9. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    Thanks Lurker!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
     
  10. Shadow

    Shadow FFJ Senior Content Moderator

    SBTC (Sue Bennett's Trash Can) forum - LOL. You break me up, WY!!

    So much BS has been flushed through the media and various internet forums since JBR was killed that I now have no idea what is fact and what is fiction. I only know for sure that the Ramseys hired lawyers and PR "consultants" before JBR's body was cold, refused to cooperate with those investigating her death, and had a falling out with good friends (Whites) who seemed more concerned with finding the killer of their daughter than they did.

    Here's what puzzles me that is never mentioned on any of the JBR TV shows - why did the Ramseys call a cast of thousands to come to their house and 911 which brought police to their front door when the note said their daughter would be beheaded if they did? Next question - why didn't John Ramsey call Lockheed security who would have called the FBI who would have been discrete? One of the few things that I know something about as relates to the JBR case is government defense contractor security. There are protocalls having to do with terrorist actions against defense contractor employees (in effect long before 9/11) that JR did not follow. WHY??

    While none of the above is a sign of guilt, there is nothing there that gives me a "warm and fuzzy feeling" about their innocence either.

    I do not think anyone will ever be charged with killing JBR... I do think, however, a prosecutor with balls (obviously not Keenan) could file obstruction of justice charges against several people associated with this case.
     
  11. AK

    AK Member

    Patience, patience...

    DejaNu, everyone should be an Intruder Theorist until that time when every realistic angle has been eliminated and we lead back to who was in the house at the time of the crime. We readers of this forum have been down those many steps. Keenan has not and I don't expect her to until someone hands her the fruits of the investigation and says 'Let's go.'

    But say Tom Bennett does find info leading into another direction and has enough to make an arrest. Would that disappoint you if it's not a Ramsey? It wouldn't me. I'm not so invested in finding a specific person guilty as I am in solving the case.

    DAs are not investigators. I have only seen one other case where the prosecutor is leading the parade -- and he is waiting for his chief sleuth to give him the go-ahead to make an arrest. (That too is a long-smoldering, complicated case where the DA took over.) That DA's job is to be the point person to the public and primary filter of what gets probed and who gets paid. I imagine Keenan's office works in a similar fashion.

    Keenan inherited a tough case and hopefully will rise to the considerable challenge. She has done nothing to make me think she's ditching her responsibilities -- in fact, quite the opposite. If I were in her shoes I'd be doing the exact thing.

    I think it's worthwhile to list the witnesses, exhibits and other avenues this prosecution might present, as opposed to those which Kane's prosecution was trying to go with. Much different. I sincerely hope things are "no longer going down the wrong path."
     
  12. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    Huh? We should be intruder theorists? Why? On what evidence?

    You start with the people who had proximity to the body. Once they have been deemed not likely to have been involved, you move outwards amongst friends, family and acquaintances. I recall Greg McCrarey being asked if he thought the BPD were wrong in looking at the parents initially--he just kind of chuckled and said "Well-- where else would you look?"

    This is Big Money pushing around a small town police department and nothing more. I am disgusted.
     
  13. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    Thank you, Bob, for being more succinct than I could muster. Fed, I'd be happy to join the ranks of intruder theorists if I ever saw any credible evidence to support such a theory. Smit gave it his best (I guess) and I'm not convinced. The Rs had a host of investigators at various times on an intruder angle and have come up with nothing. Keenan's been working that angle for almost a year now and nothing there either. So until there's something to suggest intruder, guess I'm just stuck in my lil ole rut. Does that mean I'd hang a Ramsey just cuz I have some personal agenda against them? No. I have credible evidence against them, just insufficient to indict right now. My point, and I guess not well made, was that we should all be looking at the evidence and letting it lead where it may, not looking at the cast of characters and hopefuls to see if it fits a favorite perp. But Keenan is doing the same thing they accused BPD of doing and it's just wrong, wrong, wrong in my mind, no matter who's doing it.

    Shadow, YES! Thank you for bringing up a very salient point IMO. Why DIDN'T JR call Lockheed security that morning rather than police and friends? It would've been a much more discreet move if his daughter's head and life were really at risk rather than already wasted away in the basement. Remember, at first the Rs were demanding FBI involvement from BPD. A simple call to Lockheed that morning could've produced what they said they wanted. Another Ramsey inconsistency.....

    I just finished watching Oprah's interview of the Smart family. My God, how remarkably different those parents behaved and handled that situation than the Ramseys. I was in awe at the differences....
     
  14. Ginja

    Ginja Member

    FedoraX

    I have to agree with BobC 100%. You NEVER look outside until you've completely investigated those people in the home at the time of the crime. In working outwards, you then go to people close to the family and who had access/opportunity to the victim on the night in question.

    Before you start theorizing on intruders and strangers, the people inside the house have to be completely cleared first.

    That was never done with the Ramseys.

    This is where the DA erred egregiously! They ignored the family completely and started looking outside the home. This is why the case is still unresolved after 7 years.

    Until the Ramseys can be completely cleared of any wrongdoing, intruder theories have no place in the investigation.

    Now to my question. When did this show air? When I went to the site yesterday, it said October 29th. Everyone's got one leg up on me! lol How'd I miss it?
     
  15. AK

    AK Member

    E! repeats shows ad infinitum, Ginja. Keep checking your TV Guide.

    I didn't make my point well. Yes, of course, check the inner circle, and that did happen here. But don't look for anyone to be cleared first. The guys in charge of this case have wisely cleared very few people. But that doesn't mean some people are simply not suspects now. The umbrella just isn't very big.

    This is an unusual case with numerous red herrings that have come from many parties. Most of them needed to be checked and discounted. Which they were.

    At this stage, is it likely a new person will pop up as a credible suspect? No. But if there is someone, we should embrace a thorough review of his or her situation. There are always those anomalous cases (Crowe, van Dam, Klaas) where there is scant proof of an intruder, but nonetheless an intruder was responsible (I'm guessing that's true of Truit in the Crowe case; he hasn't been found guilty yet).

    The lead investigator on the JBR case by now has gone down most, if not all, the paths that we've seen laid out in nearly seven years. Is it likely he's got info about someone new? No. Is it likely he will look right back at that household? Yes.

    As for what Keenan is doing, she's held her case very close to the vest. We can only guess what she knows, and that's not enough to accuse her of collusion or wrongdoing. When it comes to assigning hero status, she may end up being the one worthy of the trophy.
     
  16. South

    South Member

    Mary Keenan's history with this case does not give much hope of her becoming a hero at this point.
     
  17. Freebird

    Freebird Active Member


    I agree.
     
  18. LurkerXIV

    LurkerXIV Moderator

    Freebird, South

    Ditto.
     
  19. Ginja

    Ginja Member

    FedoraX

    Again, Fed, I have to disagree completely with you...even though you clarified your reasoning:
    NO! it did not happen here. Burke was rushed out of the house at 7:00 a.m. and the Ramseys got off scott free from any police interviews for four months! As I noted, the investigation MUST clear the family members first before moving on to look toward others.

    It goes beyond simply "checking" the inner circle, Fed. This is a homicide investigation of a child, with no signs of intrusion, and only family members in the home at the time of the crime. Police can't just "check" these folks out...they have to put them under the microscope and investigate them thoroughly to the point of either clearing them, or arresting them.

    By "many parties" are you including the BPD? I'm not aware of any BPD red herrings. The only red herrings I'm aware of came from the Ramseys, the BDA, and attorneys, investigators and whatnot hired by the Ramseys...iow, the red herrings came from the prime suspects. Now...if the BDA had stayed out of the investigation as it should have, other than to approve the investigatory tools the BPD needed (i.e., warrants), the police could have done their job without the Ramseys' people meddling and obstructing the investigation, the Ramseys and their people never would have had the time or the opportunity to sling those red herrings! The BPD was forced into wasting time checking and discounting these red herrings when it should have been allowed to haul the Ramseys asses in (without conditions!) to question them under oath for as long as it took, retrieve their clothes, medical, credit, phone, etc. records, and conduct their investigation free of the BDA's intrusion, obstruction and mishandling.

    If that had happened, and the Ramseys arrested, THEN that's the time for the Rams to have "defended" themselves with responding to the police's investigation. That's what trials are for. The state presents its case, and the Rams defend themselves. Instead, the Rams got hold of evidence and were able, on numerous occasions, to change their stories and come up with bogus excuses of this and that. IOW, they've wound up playing this all out in the public arena and give "excuses" that would NEVER be admissible in court. Bottom line, they wouldn't have been allowed to pull the crap they've been pulling for 7 years.

    Actually, the real bottom line here is that money talks. The Ramseys had the money...and the friends...to thwart this investigation completely.

    As far as Keenan's concerned, she's no hero. She's biased, unobjective, and has stacked her investigation team with Ramsey employees. She's abused her powers, colluded with Ramsey defense attorneys, and ignored the evidence. Hero? Hell! she's not even a half-way decent DA.
     
  20. AK

    AK Member

    Not one person here, myself included, knows what kind of job Keenan is doing. Indicting her now without proof is as vicious as what we've seen others do to folks who have been hit by the Ram Fam bus.

    Do you hear Keenan's peers talking out against her? No. That's a big clue. I've had my ears open for that and have gotten nothing. We've seen numerous bad cops on this case who have been publicly and privately condemned by their peers, for good reason. One day I may share your opinion that Keenan is a good-for-nothing, but based on what we have now, no.

    Ginja, picking apart mistakes or maneuvers that were made early on in the case helps the defense. I don't do that. Besides we have only the views of Steve Thomas and his opinions are practically worthless. He didn't understand the DA's job -- why would he have any understanding of the delicate nature of making deals to get info? Fact is, we just don't have enough information to form an opinion here either.
     
  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