Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1

    Default Incompetent Investigators ~Or..Misleading the Public

    I am still appalled that the verbage in Tracey;'s documentary included that the accomplice "wherever he may be"..."disappeared"

    Was it on Court TV that he said "manhunt".

    How come it took amateur internet sleuths 15 minutes to find him? Jameson 1 day to email him and convince him to call her?


    I just checked Colorado private investigator licensing and found something interesting:

    Colorado is a state that does not license, register, or otherwise regulate private investigators

    http://www.ppiac.org/

    This organization is an organization of investigators where one pays dues and gets to use their membership logo next to their name. Ollie Gray is a member, San Agustin and Getty are not.

    It figures- anyone in CO can basically hang a sign outside their door and call themselves a "private investigator."

    Are these 3 incomptent or are they misleading the public with their "prime suspect" findings?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Something just doesn't sit right about this Michael Tracey documentary, does it?

    Interesting information about the PI's in Colorado, Sabrina.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  3. #3

    Default

    It IS interesting. A convicted felon could hang up a sign on a door and call themselves a private investigator in Colorado. Very scary. I guess I assumed every state had a licensing requirement similar to mine and I just learned this.

    I'd be curious as to these other investigator's credentials. And also why Ollie Gray is considered "world renowned".


    http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos157.htm

    The majority of States and the District of Colombia require private detectives and investigators to be licensed. Licensing requirements vary widely, but convicted felons cannot receive a license in most States and a growing number of States are enacting mandatory training programs for private detectives and investigators. Some States have few requirements, and 6 States—Alabama, Alaska, Colorado, Idaho, Mississippi, and South Dakota—have no statewide licensing requirements while others have stringent regulations. For example, the Bureau of Security and Investigative Services of the California Department of Consumer Affairs requires private investigators to be 18 years of age or older; have a combination of education in police science, criminal law, or justice, and experience equaling 3 years (6,000 hours) of investigative experience; pass an evaluation by the Federal Department of Justice and a criminal history background check; and receive a qualifying score on a 2-hour written examination covering laws and regulations. There are additional requirements for a firearms permit.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default Sabrina

    I believe the "Manhunt" comment was on one of the pre-documentary reviews.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default Margoo

    Margoo says (and not for the first time I wonder if she yells all the time in real-life!):-

    Furthermore, Tracey does not call JSG a killer.
    Well that's correct, he did not use Gigax’s actual name in the documentary. He ‘only’ referred to him as a group of investigators' “Prime Suspect” for the brutal murder and sexual assault of JonBenet Ramsey.


    I think the first time I saw him referred to as a killer was by YOU, in your feeble attempts to defend this guy. Tracey was REPORTING what the investigators have been looking into. He REPORTED the TYPE of person Helgoth was and that someone (unnamed) was known to associate with Helgoth, who also had a somewhat checkered past. Tracey REPORTED that they NEED to talk to this other supsect about Helgoth and about JBR. PERIOD.

    I guess Margoo thinks Tracey’s documentary is not libellous. Now, supposing a documentary were made which described JonBenét’s killer as :-

    • Related to her
    • Used to be a company CEO
    • Owned some sailboats
    • Owned and flew his own plane
    • Showed his d.o.b
    • Showed his social security number
    • Drove down Paces Ferry Rd in Atlanta showing the neighbourhood where the “Prime Suspect” lived
    • Filmed interviews with this person’s friends – Fleet White, Glenn Stine and John Fernie
    • Showed a document for (say) a driving offence with the case number clearly visible


    Would that be libellous? Would it be OK as long as someone didn’t post “Hey, I just looked up that case number and it belongs to John Ramsey and the d.o.b and SS# match his too.

    Now the best bit!

    YOU turned him into someone REAL. Someone with a name. A birthdate. An arrest record. Someone who could be googled into a rolodex. Take it on the chin, Tricia, and admit you screwed up -- and you can take the blame for your whole 'team' of blindfolded confederates.

    Eh? Tell me what am I missing – PLEASE! John Steven Gigax IS a real person with a name, a birthdate, an arrest record. Tricia didn’t turn him into one for heaven's sake! His birthdate and charge sheets were shown on national television. Tricia didn’t conjure them up out of the ether. Nor did they have to be “freeze-framed” to be read – only to be shown as proof that they could be read. They were clearly visible on a portable tv. They were not enlarged or edited in any way. I know – I’ve seen the documentary!

    Margoo’s statement about Tricia “turning Mr X into ‘someone real’” is very telling I suspect. Does she think (or wish) that Tracey’s documentary is just some fairy story about “a bogeyman”? Some convenient (but non-identifiable) intruder whose sole purpose is to take attention away from the confusion which is the evidence in the Ramsey case?

    Finally, regarding Margoo’s claims that Tracey didn’t call Gigax a killer, how blatant do the accusations have to be before Margoo would comprehend them?

    Excerpts from the transcript:-

    [..]The new team of detectives think Helgoth may well have been involved as an accomplice of an even more deadly killer. One who later murdered him to stop him talking after Alex Hunter’s unnerving press conference [..]

    When looking for his possible killer, detectives looked for a violent associate who shared his interest in martial arts and young girls. They immediately came up with one. A close associate who has since disappeared [..]

    Helgoth’s associate lived in this trailer park near the car salvage yard. The makers of this programme know his name, but have decided to withhold it, because he has not been charged with any offence. But the more that has been discovered about him, the more he fits the profile of a stalker and a killer[..]

    If Michael Helgoth and this one associate that we identified were actually involved in the burglaries, they could easily have been involved in the murder also. There’s just too many associated items that could tie him to it that means that he has to be eliminated. We need DNA from him –- wherever he might be[..]

    These investigators see the associate as their prime suspect in the Ramsey case [..]

    Seven years after the murder of JonBenét Ramsey, a prime suspect has been identified for the killing. He’s been identified by new investigators, who have also uncovered disturbing facts about another crime he may have committed [..]
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default Great post Jayelles!

    Keep it coming, Jayelles! You have strong support here!
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  7. #7

    Default Lou Smit

    Clearly the "investigators" working for the Ramseys do seem to be incompetent. And Tracey does seem to have violated the usual ethical codes associated with the production of documentaries by creating a work of pure, unadulterated public relations. But my own personal lenses are focused on one Lou Smit, aka "The Fox." What is HIS role in all this?

    When questioned ages ago regarding his duties, one of the Ramsey private investigators frankly insisted his job was NOT tracking down the real killer, but "protecting" the Ramseys. I.e., developing information which could make them look innocent. Nothing wrong with that. That's what lawyers do and these folks were, technically, hired by the Ramsey legal team.

    But Lou Smit has always claimed that he was NOT in the employ of team Ramsey, that he was investigating this case out of a true committment to justice, that he was out there looking for the killer of a sweet little girl. So what is HIS role in this fiasco? I'm hearing he wasn't directly involved in the making of the documentary but the whole thing is based on his ideas. And it certainly looks like the decision to finger Helgoth and Gigax developed from his research. So why wasn't he able to take that "research" a step further and find this guy? All it would have taken was an internet search. You develope a "prime suspect," you locate him, you interview him, you get your DNA sample, check out his alibi and then you either pass him on to the authorities or drop him as a suspect. Instead the guy is described as having "disappeared"? What does THAT mean?

    Looks to me like Smit is, like the others, not particularly interested in actually tracking down that intruder. Possibly because he doesn't really believe there is such a person. The name of his game also seems to be "protecting" the Ramseys, i.e., doing whatever one can to make them look innocent. Smit has been acting very much like a member of a legal defense team for a long time now. Maybe it's time for him to confess that this IS in fact what he is. And ALL he is.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hornetsville, NY
    Posts
    8,871

    Default

    I wholeheartedly agree with you DocG. I think Smit has been behind much of the garbage that has been put out there by Wood and the rest of the RST. I personally believe that every single case that Smit "solved" in his tenure as an investigator should be reopened and gone over with a fine-toothed comb. He's proven himself to be incompetent, as far as I'm concerned.
    Keep me away from the wisdom which does not cry,
    the philosophy which does not laugh,
    and the greatness which does not bow before children.

    ---Kahlil Gibran---

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    2,308

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Watching You
    He's proven himself to be incompetent, as far as I'm concerned.

    Criminal is the word that comes to my mind. This crockumentary was most foul in the blatant attempt to pin this murder on an innocent person. JMO

  10. #10

    Default

    Smit has been acting very much like a member of a legal defense team for a long time now. Maybe it's time for him to confess that this IS in fact what he is. And ALL he is.
    But he is confessing that very point, DocG, every time his ancient intruder theory morphs into another innocent identity with no evidence at the Ramsey crime scene to support it. As I have long said, Smit was brought into the case by Hunter ala Haddon first to learn what the BPD had and was doing, then to spin off on his own to create sufficient reasonable doubt in the minds of the public soas to taint the jury pool. This is an age-old defense strategy and it has been played out well in the Ramsey case by Smit, but he has always failed to create that reasonable doubt in the majority public's minds. That's why he keeps grasping at straws.

    As you've said, if Smit were truly "investigating" or "policing" this case, each "suspect" he identifies would have better evidentiary support and be hauled off to first BPD then Tom Bennett. But as Mr. Gigax informed Tricia when he called her, Gigax himself contacted Bennett who advised Gigax that he was never or even now considered a "suspect" by the BDA.

    This was just another salacious intruder theory created by Smit and Kenady, promoted by Tracey soas to create public impression that the case was close to being solved just in the nick of time to exhonerate John Ramsey in order to facilitate his party's nomination on Aug. 3rd.

    Someone should prepare a timeline to show what major activity was going on in the Ramseys' lives at each point where Smit has introduced us to yet another "suspect" and I bet we'd see how "coincidental" this all is.

    It's a horrid thing to name an innocent person in a child's murder, and even worse to publicly announce it cast in the worst form of yellow journalism I've ever seen. Yet that's exactly what Smit has continued to do for years without any regard for the people he's falsely accusing. Anyone who continues to fall for Smitchit is choosing to be duped, deceived and publicly defaulted as a result of the utterly transparent efforts to create an intruder!

    The fibers in the ligature match Patsy Ramsey's sweater she was wearing that night; the fibers in JonBenet's panty crotch match John Ramsey's sweater he was wearing that night. No other evidence obtained from the Ramsey crime scene has been able to be as definitely sourced. If it looks like a rose, and smells like a rose, by God, it must be a rose. That's reasonable belief...reasonable belief in the guilt of the parents only. And they just can't overcome it no matter how many intruders Smit creates or how desperately the Ramseys sue the media and proclaim their innocence. Guilty consciences are a condemnation they will never appease.



Similar Threads

  1. Henry Lee: Investigators are still waiting for a DNA hit
    By Moab in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: April 17, 2010, 2:37 am, Sat Apr 17 2:37:44 UTC 2010
  2. The Investigators on Court TV
    By Texan in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: August 5, 2005, 10:12 pm, Fri Aug 5 22:12:38 UTC 2005

Posting Permissions

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