Let's take a look at the flip flops of Pete Peterson and Dan Abrams: (By the way, Peterson blamed Bill McReynolds in 1999 - AFTER the other little girl, who was 14, not 12, was allegedly raped. He could not have felt too strongly about the other intruder at the time) From the Peter Boyles - 2001, I believe PB: I found out this morning in a private conversation that, somebody I like, Dan Abrams, who I watched the other night and I can't figure out where Dan Abrams is going, but I understand that Lin Wood, the Ramsey's lawyer, gave all the tapes from these day and a half interviews, directly to Dan Abrams of NBC. Along those same lines now comes RW Pete Peterson, and I saw you try and engage Pete Peterson, who now is the champion of the Ramseys, this goofy private investigator from Denver who, what?, held a press conference last August, right Norm? NE: Yes. PB: In LA to announce to the world his findings that Santa Claus McReynolds is the killer. NE: Right. _______________________________________________ 'The Abrams Report' for Dec. 17 Read the transcript to the 6 p.m. ET showUpdated: 1:45 p.m. ET Dec. 20, 2004 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6738138/ UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Private investigator Pete Peterson working on the case of the 12-year-old girl says there are simply too many parallels to ignore between her case and the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. snip ABRAMS: And you know Erin, you may know this as well, but I remember when we first found out about this detail, the prosecutors didn’t know about this detail. Meaning, they had not been informed about this other case that was so similar seemingly to JonBenet’s. ______________________________ Pete Peterson held a press conference in 2001 and claimed that he had examined the ransom note handwriting and was convinced it belonged to Santa Bill. ______________________________ The Santa clause http://www.westword.com/issues/1999-09-30/offlimits.html When former governor Roy Romer lost his seat as chairman of the Democratic National Committee last week, Colorado lost some of its national prominence -- and local detective R. W. "Pete" Peterson lost one of his favorite targets. Back in early 1998, when the Washington, D.C., magazine Insight revealed that it had pictures of the then-newly appointed chairman in a six-minute smooch with his former assistant, Peterson coyly let himself be credited with the Romer scoop, although the video actually came from another snoop. But Peterson's not one to stay out of the limelight for long. In fact, on Friday he thrust himself right back into it, calling a press conference in Los Angeles to reveal that he'd identified a prime suspect in another long-running Colorado story: the murder of JonBenét Ramsey. And who did Peterson finger? None other than Bill McReynolds, the former University of Colorado journalism teacher and part-time Santa beloved by JonBenét, and McReynolds's wife, Janet. Never mind that McReynolds is one of a handful of people actually cleared by the Boulder Police Department during its 33 months of excruciating labor -- we all know journalists are guilty of something. Or at least journalists covering the JonBenét murder, as former "investigative reporter" for the Globe tabloid and born-again ethical crybaby Jeff Shapiro argued in a column published in the Denver Post on September 23. Shapiro, who was so obnoxious in his pursuit of the Ramseys that he was charged with trespassing and harassing a Ramsey family friend and given a year of probation, is quick to admonish his "former tabloid colleagues" and the mainstream media. "Reporters from all publications would do well to remember that they are paid to report the news as it happens, impartially, honestly and without regard to class or financial status, not to act as either judge or jury," he writes. Thanks, Jeff. Maybe you can take McReynolds's spot at the CU journalism school. Then again, maybe not. ____________________________________ In the following exchange, Peterson himself says the DA was informed of the other child's attempted rape... August 2, 2000, Wednesday LENGTH: 2042 words HEADLINE: SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE SIMILAR TO JONBENET RAMSEY MURDER CASE IS DISCOVERED ABRAMS: ...someone would be in someone's house, an intruder would be in a little girl's house while the mother is home, sexually assaulting the girl, that in and of itself even happening once seems extremely unlikely in Boulder. And the fact that the Ramseys have always maintained that that's exactly what happened in their house in the JonBenet Ramsey case is something at the very least worth looking into. (this even though there are at least 38 sex offenders within a 10 mile radius of the former Ramsey home) snip Mr. PETERSON: Well, let's put it this way. We think there's--there's a possibility of that. I don't know that I'm directly convinced. There is--we investigated it for about a year and a half, as well as the Ramsey case. We got involved in that because of it. There are d--some--some definite parallels with regard also to handwriting, and some of the people... RIVERA: How come you didn't tell anybody, Pete? Mr. PETERSON: I did. You know, the only reason--this is a new development--it's not a new development; this has been there for three years. And somebody by the name of Charlie Brennan, a reporter, picked it up. I mean, we were out there with it--we were out there with it. We talked to the DA; we talked to Lou Smit. RIVERA: So you did--did you talk to the DA? RIVERA: So you did--did you talk to the DA? Mr. SILVERMAN: Right. So--so the Ramseys have known about this for a long time. Let's... ABRAMS: No, if--if--but wait... Mr. SILVERMAN: Let's put the cards out that we know. Ellis Armistead, a private investigator, quit the case. I'm sure he had knowledge of this situation. ABRAMS: If the Ramseys knew about this, it would have been in their book. Mr. PETERSON: No, I don't think he had knowledge of it. ABRAMS: If the Ramseys knew about this... RIVERA: I agree with Dan. ABRAMS: ...I guarantee you it would have been in their book. This would be a bombshell for the Ramseys. Mr. SILVERMAN: You know... ABRAMS: Why wouldn't they want to make it public if they'd known about it? Mr. SILVERMAN: Dan--Dan, you make a good point about this being somewhat rare in Boulder. But here, a few miles away in Denver, I prosecuted a lot of rapists who sneak into the house and wait for their prey. ABRAMS: Yeah, but--and, Craig... Mr. SILVERMAN: That happens. ABRAMS: Yeah, but--but that--that--that's not what I'm talking about. The reality--no--no, it's not... Mr. SILVERMAN: But there are so many innocent people nowadays, Dan. Mr. PETERSON: But, gentlemen, it's not rare in Boulder. ABRAMS: It is rare in Boulder. Mr. PETERSON: It's not rare in Boulder. ABRAMS: It is rare. RIVERA: Wait, what do you mean--what do you mean by that, Pete? What do you mean by that? Mr. PETERSON: It's not rare in Boulder. ABRAMS: He's wrong. Mr. PETERSON: Hold up, hold up, the talking heads there, please. It's not rare in Boulder. This happened on three different occasions during a one-month period close to this case. There was another lady we talked to who had a gentleman hiding in her apartment. Now you can go back... ABRAMS: Right, but we're talking about children. Mr. PETERSON: ...go back and--go back and check the police reports. ABRAMS: Yeah, but wait... Mr. PETERSON: There were three other incidents just like this, like the case we investigated, and we talked to at least two of these people. RIVERA: All unsolved, Pete? Mr. PETERSON: Right. And these were people that were secreted in their house for a period of hours until they came home or while they were home. ABRAMS: But--but what makes this--but what makes this different... RIVERA: Let me just explain to the folks... Mr. PETERSON: Now this is common. This is fairly common in Boulder. RIVERA: All right. Dan, I'm going to let you finish. I just--if the g--the intruder theory is that the guy was in--was--was there when they all went to bed. I mean, in this--in this other case, Pete--Pete's case, the intruder had to be there because there was an alarm system on the house Mr. PETERSON: He was there. They set the alarm at 11 PM. RIVERA: ...and the alarm only triggered when the mother and the--and the child fled the house to go to the cops. Mr. SILVERMAN: Yeah, but, Geraldo, what if the Ramseys--what if the Ramseys... ABRAMS: Right, but--but here we're talking about attacking a child, Geraldo. RIVERA: Dan, go ahead. ABRAMS: That's the--that's the difference. In Boulder, it has happened that people have come into people's houses, particularly college students. It's happened fairly often that intruders end up in women's homes. Mr. SILVERMAN: Right. ABRAMS: The difference is here you have a child who is being attacked, a female child, while the parent is in the house. Mr. SILVERMAN: Right. But what has happened after that, Dan... ABRAMS: That is the comparison that makes it particularly unique. Mr. SILVERMAN: Dan, what has happened after that at the Ramsey house... RIVERA: OK, listen, we're going to do more on this. And, Dan, certainly when you're in this seat on--on Monday, you're going to--you're going to follow it up, on--I'm positive. (Wow, they cut Peterson right off) ______________________________________ http://64.176.35.165/ Peterson's website (LOL, if he's so good, why couldn't he find Gigax?) MISSING PERSONS or THINGS Locating people who are hiding from everyone, or the old acquaintance who you have just lost touch with. We also find adoptees, or natural parents. Same phone number as Peterson's Agency? Name: Angel Hair Category: Personal Serrvices > Beauty, Hair, Nail, Tan Salons Description: xxxx Products Wanted: Products Offered: Address: 1130 E Colfax Av Country: 80218 Phone: 303.830.1900 Multi-talented Fax: E-mail: Click Me When you click, it is anywhere.com (Sorry this is jumbled, ran out of time)
"UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Private investigator Pete Peterson working on the case of the 12-year-old girl says there are simply too many parallels to ignore between her case and the murder of JonBenet Ramsey." This was part of the 48 Hours crock with the alleged parallel a sexual assault of young female they called Amy in the presentation. The first obvious contradiction is that JonBenet was not sexually assaulted. There was a genital assault with an object, but no evidence of anything implying sexual except as part of the clumsy staging to try to make it look like sexual assault and murder by strangulation. Take it item by item and you will see that except for being young females living in the same general area, there is no similarity to the cases at all. Keep in mind, Peterson and the other "inventigators" see no need to limit their theories by facts. If they did, they wouldn't be working for the Ramseys; paid or not paid.
"The first obvious contradiction is that JonBenet was not sexually assaulted. There was a genital assault with an object, but no evidence of anything implying sexual except as part of the clumsy staging to try to make it look like sexual assault and murder by strangulation." EW, Meyer's autopsy report not only indicated acute vaginal trauma, like the staging assault with the paint brush, but also chronic vaginal injuries indicating at least one former sexual assault prior to JB's death. So at least according to the coroner, JB was sexually assaulted on at least 2 occasions. Many experts were consulted by BPD when the autopsy report was finally in hand, and apparently the majority, especially Wecht, agrees with the coroner's conclusions. But the real disparity between the Ramsey case and the one worked by Peterson is that JonBenet was 6 years old when she was murdered. The girl in the other assault, not rape, case, was 14 at the time. While both girls were under 18 and therefore minors for legal purposes, true pedophiles don't jump from little girls to teenage girls unless the supply of little girls is minimal to non-existent. "Pedophiles" who are into teenage girls stick to teenagers generally speaking. To try to link these cases is as much an imagination stretch as connecting one or both to a case of an adult female being accosted by a lurking intruder as Dan Abrams points out in the above transcript. Erin Moriarty kept referring to "Amy" as a "little" girl, and once under her breath mentioned that "Amy" was 12, which helped to tie the two cases together even further. Moriarty ignored entirely Amy's true age of 14 and that she was indeed not "little" in the sense that JB was. I also read a transcript where Peterson mentions that in the "Amy" case, he suspected that her intruder assailant was a boyfriend of the mother's! Case closed.This is a great thread for documenting Peterson's self-impeachment throughout the years.
Funny, I cannot find a California P.I. license for him, and all licensed and newly suspended individuals should be in the state data base. A private investigator must be licensed in California. There is nothing for him. And he says he operates in Los Angeles and San Diego. Nothing in the San Diego yellow pages either. There is a R.L. Peterson Investigations owned by Robert L. Peterson in Burbank, but the infamous JonBenet insertee Peterson uses R.W. Peterson or Pete Peterson. http://www2.dca.ca.gov/pls/wllpub/wllqryna$lcev2.startup?p_qte_code=PI&p_qte_pgm_code=2420
DEJA NU: “EW, Meyer's autopsy report not only indicated acute vaginal trauma, like the staging assault with the paint brush, but also chronic vaginal injuries indicating at least one former sexual assault prior to JB's death. So at least according to the coroner, JB was sexually assaulted on at least 2 occasions. Many experts were consulted by BPD when the autopsy report was finally in hand, and apparently the majority, especially Wecht, agrees with the coroner's conclusions.†Deju Nu, I am obliged to friendly, but firmly disagree. The problem some “experts†have with a reputation to uphold, they forget to say the words, “I don’t know.†Instead they often go off on a tangent far removed from the evidence and fill the air space with pretense. Wecht is just such a glory hound that opens mouth before putting mind in gear. There are many times and places I do take the word of person I believe to be more in the know than I on a given subject. However, there is no time I take the word of an “expert†when it contradicts what I know to be fact. Dr. Wecht is one of the ilk. A million agreements with an “expert†spouting fallacy, does not make it true. I cite a non flat earth as evidence. Dr. Meyer did the autopsy. He gave a detailed description of genital trauma. However, he did not state the conclusion of sexual assault. I can’t imagine him not saying if he had that conclusion. I do not doubt the genital damage. What I do doubt is that if there was earlier genital damage it necessarily came about by sexual abuse as opposed to perhaps bad hygiene, itching leading to intrusive damage, or by some other means. Extensive research failed to turn up any criteria by which this distinction can be made; yet Dr. Wecht has no doubt. In light of all his other blunders, I am not at all inclined to trust his “expertise.†(No, I cannot say with absolute certainty that JonBenet had never been sexually abused. What I do say is that I seriously doubt it for many reasons and do say even if it did happen, it does not fit into the scenario of that night that the evidence tells.) “Cyril Wecht entered the case via a phone call from a supermarket tabloid, the Globe. He did not know the case he was being asked to review, only told that it was on the "west coast." When he got the photos, he realized the case was that of JonBenet Ramsey. From what he could see, he thought she had been bound with the intent to restrain, not kill. It even hinted of a sex game gone wrong. The fact that the killer had written a ransom note as an afterthought, rather than bringing it along, also seemed strangely unprepared for a kidnapping, as did the note's complexity, content and length. Wecht decided that molestation was the primary motive and that the death itself was accidental.†(From website promo of Dr. Wecht’s book.) So, as a Globe recruit, and from some photos, Wecht concluded it was a sex game gone wrong; that molestation was the primary motive. Great tabloid story. The problem is he is totally lost from the outset. He never considered the “garrote scene†as staging. Although he didn’t have a clue as to what he was looking at, he chose a direction and went with it regardless of the facts he encountered refuting his theory. He dismissed the note as an “afterthought.†It’s a mystery and confusing only in trying to fit it into fallacy. It fits perfectly in the staged crime scene as does ALL of the other evidence. Do you notice how often these “experts†will come up with a piece of the puzzle they can’t fit, but never consider that the reason it doesn’t fit is because their theory contradict the piece. No matter. On they go full steam ahead throwing out pieces left and right if it doesn’t suit what they prefer to believe. They don’t even have the fundamental knowledge that truth and evidence is always consistent. Some investigators! I posted the “garrote analysis†on another forum a long time ago. Although I don’t need back up, I will bring in some to emphasize that Wecht was way out in left field. Since I posted the analysis, there has been only one post indicating a thorough understanding of what I was saying. It was made by an Aussie chap with the hat, Hobey 86. He not only understood it, he added detail I had left out for sake of brevity. FROM HOBEY 86 POST 2. A perpetrator wishing to geuinely use a garotte for torture and strangulation wants something that is effective and functional, tightens easily with minimum effort, tightens as the victim struggles and LOOSENS when the perpertrator wants it to. That is, and importantly, a garotte design that GIVES CONTROL. That is what torture and punishment and bondage is all about. CONTROL. The garotte as found does none of these things as easywriter you correctly point out. It is my opinion that the garotte as found on JB was made by someone who has never used a garotte before. If they had thay would have not used the design they did as it is totally ineffective and as I have pointed out there is a far superior designs. Also if this garotte was actually used to try and strangle JB it would have been totally ineffective. Further I agree with you easywriter that this garotte is unlikely to have caused complete circular ligature furrow around the neck.†(End) This is copy and paste from his post. We had some minor disagreement as to whether it was staging or not, but no disagreement as to the horrendous flaws making the contraption not at all suited to circumferential strangulation, nor suited to sex games. It is the opposite of these truths that Wecht takes as fact and builds his theory. DR. WECHT STUFF "I have learned that the police called in three separate child sexual abuse experts," he reports. "They separately and independently came to the same conclusion that there was evidence of prior sexual abuse. Not that I needed anybody to hold my hand, but for saying that same thing I took abuse on national television from self-appointed Ramsey defenders and sycophants.†(Ibid) Who did the autopsy? Did any of these three? What is the criteria by which prior sexual abuse can be positively distinguished from other causes of genital damage? (If someone has the answer to the last question, please post. I could not find it. “But it's the most ridiculous thing in the world, a little girl with half of the hymen gone and she's dead, and you've got a tiny abrasion, a tiny contusion and a chronic inflammation of vaginal mucosa. That means it happened more than 72 hours earlier; we don't know how long, or how often it was repeated, but chronic means it wasn't from that night. This was a tragic, tragic accident. This was a game that had been played before." (Ibid) I presume he means by “played before†the sex game that never was. “Wecht was also troubled by the blow to the head, an eight-and-a-half inch fracture that had split the bone. Around it was an area of hemorrhaging, while under the skull there had been more bleeding, but the report on that was a surprise. There was much less blood found than he had expected. He believed that meant that at the time of the blow, she'd had a relatively weak, even nonexistent, heartbeat. "If you inflict a blow like that on someone whose heart is beating," he asserts, "the heart doesn't stop, because the cardiac and respiratory centers are at the base of the brain. You're not damaging that with a blow to the top of the head. It'll become compromised as the brain swells, but initially there's no compromise. They control your heart and lungs. The heart continues to beat. The blood continues to flow. But in the Ramsey case, they got less than a teaspoon and a half of blood. If you have a beating heart and the carotid arteries are carrying blood, this person doesn't die right away. That means that blow was inflicted when she was already dead or dying." (ibid) “That means that blow was inflicted when she was already dead or dying." Well, there goes my theory - if there was a word of truth in it. From personal experience and from extensive research I find that a very severe head trauma does not necessarily result in extensive blood flow. If Dr. Wecht doesn’t know this, he must have missed class that day. (Too bad he wasn’t around while I was having my head sewed up.) What he did do in the above was to fill in with a lot of declarations to suit his theory without factual backup, medical, or crime scene evidence. Disgusting. Sounds like Lou Smit. “He also had seen a partial transcript of an interrogation of John Ramsey from very early in the case, which supported his ideas. "The cops were asking him what he knew about the experts on the case, and he said he'd heard different things. Among the things was that an expert had said that the blows were inflicted when she was dead or dying. I've been saying that for several years." (ibid) Are you getting this? John said experts said. Now that real evidence isn’t it. Did Lou Smit write that. “blows were inflicted when she was dead or dying†? If we believe what Wecht says, we can all pack it in. We don’t have a case. On the other hand, I think I will stick around a while. I have some questions for Dr. Wecht. Get him online. Now wouldn’t that be fun. If you get the impression that I am totally fed up with these “experts†and their cockamamie theories, you’re right. When they come p with the nonsense like “blows were inflicted when she was dead or dyingâ€, they are in the Ramsey camp and do more damage than the official RST.
