Page 4 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 62

Thread: Linda Arndt

  1. #37

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee
    It's the THREAT of being sued thats stops people, too. I was under the impression that you can't be sued for saying or writing anything that is true. So my guess would be that, as the only eyewitness(s) were also the killer/stager(s) that no one can really say or write the whole truth, but only opinions (which are also protected). Unless someone states a complete lie, even of they were sued, they'd win the case, but of course, at their own-possibly great- expense.
    I am under that impression too, or else every single newspaper or news show in the US, could be sued for just printing or reporting the truth.

  2. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Eastern North Carolina
    Posts
    2,322

    Default

    Actually, you can be sued for most anything. If you do not respond, the person who sues can get a "judgement" against you. So, you either respond by settling or getting a lawyer to fight the suit. I assume this is no great deterrent to a newspaper, magazine, TV network, etc., but could be for an individual that has little money.

    In response to something said earlier about Linda giving info to the Ramsey lawyers, I don't know what she gave them of value, but I do know that according to the FBI the DA and his merry men continually gave the Ramsey lawyers information that LE never gives to lawyers of suspects. I believe some of these people later went to work for the Ramsey lawyers.
    “Politicians are like diapers. They both need changing regularly and for the same reason.” -- Anonymous

  3. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow
    Actually, you can be sued for most anything. If you do not respond, the person who sues can get a "judgement" against you. So, you either respond by settling or getting a lawyer to fight the suit. I assume this is no great deterrent to a newspaper, magazine, TV network, etc., but could be for an individual that has little money.

    In response to something said earlier about Linda giving info to the Ramsey lawyers, I don't know what she gave them of value, but I do know that according to the FBI the DA and his merry men continually gave the Ramsey lawyers information that LE never gives to lawyers of suspects. I believe some of these people later went to work for the Ramsey lawyers.
    It just makes me want to

    "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.

  4. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default Linda Arndt

    I just looked this up on Youtube again. Linda Arndt was completely certain who committed JonBenet's murder. It's rather hard to argue with this.

    Linda Arndt speaks about being there when John brought JonBenet's body up from the basement

    She was really the first person to see John with JonBenet's body. She says they had a non-verbal exchange while bending over the body. I wonder what John was communicating...A threat?

    How could she be wrong - of course she didn't know about the head blow at that point. She did not suspect Patsy the same way.
    "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!

  5. #41
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    I had forgotten that she later backed off...I wonder if she was threatened or bribed? She seemed so certain in that interview.

    However, her description of Patsy's theatrics was quite sympathetic, wasn't it? Perhaps she was filtering through her own experience and really didn't give Patsy enough credit for being involved in what had happened.

    Well, regardless, we will never know. 16 years later and still no justice.
    "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. #42
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heymom View Post
    I just looked this up on Youtube again. Linda Arndt was completely certain who committed JonBenet's murder. It's rather hard to argue with this.

    Linda Arndt speaks about being there when John brought JonBenet's body up from the basement

    She was really the first person to see John with JonBenet's body. She says they had a non-verbal exchange while bending over the body. I wonder what John was communicating...A threat?

    How could she be wrong - of course she didn't know about the head blow at that point. She did not suspect Patsy the same way.
    There are some things to keep in mind about Arndt. She was trained as a rape victim specialist, not a homicide detective. She had a natural inclination to view women as victims and men as aggressors. With that in mind, she did not actually spend a lot of time observing Patsy, who was always in a different room from JR. I feel Arndt just observed JR more closely, and of course thanks to her, he was sent BY her to look around the house. This was an unforgivable breach of protocol in an active crime scene, and even thought at that point it was still considered a kidnapping, Ardnt had already become suspicious of his behavior. When she saw him bring up his daughter's body, his actions signaled guilt. But I don't think she stopped to consider that other people who were in the house that night may have been involved as well- she saw only a male aggressor and two female victims.
    She was not there the whole time, either. She was not there to see Patsy feigning sobs and peeking through her splayed fingers to see if anyone was watching her, the way Officer French did. She was not there to see and hear the FBI make their statement "you're going to be finding her body".
    To Arndt, the suspicion never moved from JR because she never allowed herself to consider that the mother was involved.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  7. #43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    There are some things to keep in mind about Arndt. She was trained as a rape victim specialist, not a homicide detective. She had a natural inclination to view women as victims and men as aggressors. With that in mind, she did not actually spend a lot of time observing Patsy, who was always in a different room from JR. I feel Arndt just observed JR more closely, and of course thanks to her, he was sent BY her to look around the house. This was an unforgivable breach of protocol in an active crime scene, and even thought at that point it was still considered a kidnapping, Ardnt had already become suspicious of his behavior. When she saw him bring up his daughter's body, his actions signaled guilt. But I don't think she stopped to consider that other people who were in the house that night may have been involved as well- she saw only a male aggressor and two female victims.
    She was not there the whole time, either. She was not there to see Patsy feigning sobs and peeking through her splayed fingers to see if anyone was watching her, the way Officer French did. She was not there to see and hear the FBI make their statement "you're going to be finding her body".
    To Arndt, the suspicion never moved from JR because she never allowed herself to consider that the mother was involved.
    I think you summed that situation up rather well. Yea, I think she was biased toward a male being involved. And of course, even if John had been completely ignorant of his daughter's demise (which I doubt), he had it pretty much figured out when he carried the body up the stairs. In other words, there was no doubt John was thinking (when looking into Arndt's eyes), "you're not wise to this, are you?"

  8. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    There are some things to keep in mind about Arndt. She was trained as a rape victim specialist, not a homicide detective. She had a natural inclination to view women as victims and men as aggressors. With that in mind, she did not actually spend a lot of time observing Patsy, who was always in a different room from JR. I feel Arndt just observed JR more closely, and of course thanks to her, he was sent BY her to look around the house. This was an unforgivable breach of protocol in an active crime scene, and even thought at that point it was still considered a kidnapping, Ardnt had already become suspicious of his behavior. When she saw him bring up his daughter's body, his actions signaled guilt. But I don't think she stopped to consider that other people who were in the house that night may have been involved as well- she saw only a male aggressor and two female victims.
    She was not there the whole time, either. She was not there to see Patsy feigning sobs and peeking through her splayed fingers to see if anyone was watching her, the way Officer French did. She was not there to see and hear the FBI make their statement "you're going to be finding her body".
    To Arndt, the suspicion never moved from JR because she never allowed herself to consider that the mother was involved.
    All very good points. I hadn't remembered that she was a rape victim specialist. Yes, that could cause bias. In her case, I guess she was biased against John before she even arrived, since she described his greeting at the door as "cordial," but in a way that suggested it was somehow ominous as well.
    "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!

  9. #45
    BobC is offline Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript and Book Reviewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,435

    Default

    For those of you who never heard this Arndt interview, you really should. It's chilling:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Aly2fPK-XE

  10. #46
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobC View Post
    For those of you who never heard this Arndt interview, you really should. It's chilling:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Aly2fPK-XE
    Thank you so much for posting this interview, Bob. This is the first time I have seen it. As Linda Arndt stated herself; she was a scapegoat from the minute she entered the Ramsey home .She was left with this scene for three hours by herself. The Boulder Police should have been ashamed of themselves. I'm spitting tacks right now! I cannot understand why this hasn't been given more attention by the Media!?

    I don't recall reading anything about this interview with Linda Arndt from reading
    excerpts from Chief Skolar's book(?). Maybe this has still to be discussed! (?).
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  11. #47
    BobC is offline Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript and Book Reviewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,435

    Default

    C--it got tons of publicity at the time. Linda wanted to go public about what REALLY happened that morning, but was told by the department that it would jeopardize the investigation. She sued saying her 1st Amendment rights were violated--that she should be able to tell her side of the story. She lost.

    Before you get too angry, the truth is the following: LA was seen in the department as a detective who was good with victims of crimes--she knew how to talk to them, calm them, get info from them etc. This kind of talent was valued in Boulder because it is a liberal small town that prefers a "hands off" approach to police work. Tough cops weren't tolerated. Steve Thomas once complained that the Koby's approach to police work was more like "social work" and in a sense he was right. That is what Boulder residents wanted, and that is what they got.

    Now--Linda A had one view of what occurred that morning and it reflected her background in sexual assault cases. She never wavered on that, as she said in the interview, and that bugged a lot of investigators. Most of the evidence had not yet come in so jumping to that conclusion was premature. This played right into the Ramsey's hands. They used Arndt to back up their cry baby assertions that the police made up their minds from minute one that the family, or at least one specific member, killed JBR. This caused enormous damage and the Ramseys played it for all it was worth.

    Don't get me wrong, I believe Arndt when said she she felt on a gut level that it was possible that nobody was going to get out of that house alive. The tension was off the charts. But as Kolar points out in his book, if you are smart enough to read between the lines, that there was more than one explanation for how those sexual injuries got there.

    I am 100% with Kolar and his "unstated" view. I never believed John Ramsey molested JBR. I have my reasons.

  12. #48

    Default

    Very interesting. Good observations, DeeDee. I haven't heard it put this way before, and I think you're spot on.

    We all carry our baggage with us in life, and I think Arndt was holding onto hers tightly in this case.

    The primary training as a victim advocate is this first: Believe the victim.

    So I think you're right about this: Arndt was sympathetic to Patsy immediately.

    I also think Kolar is right: Burke was given a pass so fast because of his age, no one seriously considered his part in this, from the BPD officers and supervisors to the DA. Patsy's ransom note did a good job there, didn't it?

    And this is where I think John gave himself away: John told the story to LE that neither he nor Patsy woke Burke up, asked him if he heard anything, and rushed Burke out the door past the BPD officers, telling them he knew nothing. Kolar questions this with great detail, listing John's change of story over time, as well.

    I think the plan all along was once the body was found, that plane that was ready to fly to Charlevoix was going to be on its way to Atlanta, far from the BPD, far from probing questions, into the bosom of the family and lots of lawyers, where they could protect Burke and themselves from arrest while they sorted it out.

    Arndt was out of her league. I believe seeing that murdered child carried by her father shook her to her core. Those thousand points of light (I think she described it that way to Barbara Walters) she saw are a clue: she truly had a life-changing experience, probably PTSD as a result.

    I've always thought her statement about counting bullets on her belt was an indication of her distress at that moment. What did she think was going to happen? Was she going to shoot everyone in the house? Or did she think John might, so she'd need to shoot him a dozen times? It made no sense to me.

    Thanks for the link, BobC.
    Last edited by koldkase; August 9, 2012, 12:14 pm at Thu Aug 9 12:14:28 UTC 2012.

    "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.



Similar Threads

  1. Linda Arndt Deposition - March 8, 2000
    By Tricia in forum Transcripts: Ramsey murder case
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: September 27, 2010, 11:18 am, Mon Sep 27 11:18:22 UTC 2010
  2. Linda Arndt speaks (with forked tongue)
    By Watching You in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: June 29, 2006, 1:28 pm, Thu Jun 29 13:28:05 UTC 2006
  3. Globe and Linda Arndt/FFJ Article
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 93
    Last Post: December 10, 2004, 11:17 pm, Fri Dec 10 23:17:49 UTC 2004
  4. Linda Arndt's Deposition
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: October 26, 2004, 11:32 pm, Tue Oct 26 23:32:36 UTC 2004
  5. RMN - Arndt Appeal
    By RiverRat in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: May 9, 2003, 3:28 am, Fri May 9 3:28:26 UTC 2003

Posting Permissions

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