Lin Wood Affidavit for Alex Hunter. Unedited.

[Tricia]

My thanks to Ryan Ross helping with this information.

If you haven't read Ryan Ross' article about the JBR case then you must do so. It is very compelling.

http://www.crimemagazine.com/solvingjbr-main.htm

Feel free to take the following Affidavit to other forums for discussion purposes. Please just mention where it came from.

Before I go any further I want to make something clear. By posting this information I am not suggesting Burke Ramsey was involved in any part of his sister's death. I have always been a Patsy did it person. I am posting the information for several reasons.

1-It's a free country
2-It inovles the Ramsey case
3-It shows how cozy Wood and Hunter really were.

What I am uploading is an Affidavit from Alex Hunter. It involves the Burke Ramsey case against the Star.

The first page is a cover letter sent to Bill Wise from Lin Wood. Seems that Wood saved Hunter the time of doing his own affidavit in the Burke Ramsey/Star case. Wood typed one up for him.

Not knowing what type of communication Hunter and Wood had before this letter was sent it's hard to guess why Wood was putting words into Hunters mouth. As you will read you will see that Hunter manually changed a few things. A few very important things.

The only thing I edited out was Mr. Wood's Fed Ex number.

[Tricia]

My favorite quote from the letter:

"While there are no guarantees. hopefully this Affidavit will minimize or negate any further appearances by Alex or a representative of the D.A.'s."

In other words Alex sign this and we will leave you alone. But alas he did change a few things.

Page number 2

[Tricia]

Page three.

Take note of what Alex Hunter changed.

[Tricia]

Page four.

Note Alex Hunter took out all of paragraph nine.

[Tricia]

I hope the people involved in the Fox News suit filed by Wood looks at this

Wood is trying to turn the Fox suit into a "Burke suit." Yet this affidavit shows that Alex Hunter left the door open in case Burke had to be put back on the suspect list.

Thoughts?

[Thor]

Wow. I go back & forth between 3 male Ramseys in this case, being involved somehow, someway. I do believe Patsy was in on the coverup up to her eyeballs for sure, no question, plus possibly Lizard Tongue. But this information is amazing. I am now back to my original perp.

[Tricia]

Thor what really bothers me is Alex Hunter was the sitting prosecutor when he did this.

Imagine if O.J. Simpson's civil attorney asked Marcia Clark to sign an affidavit for the O.J. case. I crack up just thinking about it.

I would think as the sitting prosecutor in an on-going investigation he would not allow himself to be involved in civil suits.

Keenan did become involved in the C.U. mess but remember there was no on-going investigation in her office concerning the rapes and recruiting issues.

[Tricia]

Maybe this is just the way business is done.

Or perhaps it's just Business in Boulder.

I don't know.

[Tricia]

Thor to me this seems like a major CYA. Cover Your A$$ for Hunter.

Take paragraph six last sentence.

"No evidence has ever been developed in the investigation to justify elevating Burke Ramsey's status from that of a witness to suspect."

Hunter then adds, "From December 26 1996, to the date of the affidavit."

That's a big CYA in my opinion merely because Hunter knows he is going out of office and he has no idea what might develop when he is gone.

Hunter then lined out all of paragraph 9 which reads, "From December 26th, 1996 to the date of this Affidavit, Burke Ramsey has not been and is not at present a suspect in the investigation into the murder of his sister JonBenet Ramsey."

I think it was the phrase, "Has not been." As in past tense.

Everyone was a suspect at one point. It would be false for Hunter to state that Burke has never been a suspect. Everyone in that house was a suspect.

Burke is clearly not a suspect now in the eyes of Keenan.

I go over and over the possible scenarios in this case.

Other than I am certain that one or both parents have guilty knowledge of their daughters death I don't know what happened in that house.

All of my statements are my opinion based on interpretation of evidence.

[Jayelles]

Tricia and to Ryan Ross. This is interesting. Goodness, how do people get hold of this stuff????

[EasyWriter]

The fact that LW had the audacity to prepare an affidavit for
Alex Hunter to sign tells of Wood’s assumption of total control
of the situation. The fact that Alex Hunter didn’t send the
unsigned affidavit back to Wood with instructions where to put it
tells of Hunter’s “pliability” and incompetence.

Wood’s assessment of Hunter as mentally incapable of writing his
own affidavit appears to be correct, but also negates the
credibility of said witness. Furthermore, in the absence of
naming and proving a party or parties as perpetrator(s)of the
crime, all with ability and opportunity are suspects by logical
inference.

I suspect you folks are tired of hearing me hammer this point,
but it is a crucial point and horrendous error that has directly
and indirectly supported the RST from the beginning; so, I’m
going to have another go at it.

“On or about December 26, 1996, JonBenet Ramsey, a six (6) year
old minor child, was murdered in her home in Boulder, Colorado.”
(From Hunter’s affidavit)

Notwithstanding all the legalese of “degrees” of killing, if one
person causes the death of another, it is necessarily by
conscious intent, or by accident. If there is conscious intent to
initiate force and it accidentally culminates in the death of the
subject, the perpetrator is cause regardless of what legal
designation may be applied.

That being said, the core issue here is whether by accident, or
by conscious intent. It is rather obvious that if you START with
the conclusion of murder, one’s viewpoint of the overall scene is
colored (directed) by the conclusion. The Ramsey-serving
conclusion of murder by strangulation has had and still has much
publicity and presented in a manner as if there is no doubt. I do
doubt and ask point blank by what alleged evidence does Hunter
and\or others reach the conclusion of murder, meaning conscious
intent?

From autopsy report:

“CLINICOPATHLOGIC CORRELATION: Cause of death of this six year
old female is asphyxia by strangulation associated with
craniocerebral trauma.

Dr. Meyer makes it clear that he was unable to pinpoint cause of
death, yet the persistent story making the public rounds for
years is that JonBenet was murdered by strangulation. I submit
that this conclusion is false; that it is derived from taking the
staging at face value and jumping to an erroneous conclusion
rather than relying on facts and physics to expose the truth.

I do not challenge Dr. Meyer’s medical expertise. In fact, I
would rely on it were I in a position to cross examine him as a
witness. However, cords, ropes and knots are not in the realm of
medical expertise, and I do question his call on this.

First, he reported a double knot. A double knot by definition is
a double throw knot with the second throw locking the first,
meaning a non slip arrangement. There is no double knot in the
crime scene. There is double hitch turn in finishing, but no
double knot. (A hitch is different from a knot, but explanation
is not required here.)

Second, the evidence showed oxygen deprivation. What is did not
show is the cause of the oxygen deprivation. Although oxygen cut
off by the cord is possible, there are any number of ways that
oxygen deprivation could have happened BEFORE the cord was TIED
around the neck. In further indirect support of this possibility,
Dr. Meyer did not report any internal throat damage consistent
with force sufficient to strangle.

Take a close look at the autopsy photo with the cord around the
neck and see if you get the same evidentiary read that I do.

The hair entwined in the knot tells that it was TIED around the
neck. Even Lou Smit observes this. What he doesn’t observe is
that this contradicts the idea of strangulation by noose action.

Imagine the body face down. (Which could have been oxygen cutoff)
From a position of straddling the body, or from the left side of
the body, a cord is run under the throat and around the neck
bringing it back to the other part of the cord held in the left
hand. The cord brought around the neck is then brought over (or
under) the cord area held in the left and back to the area of the
neck cord creating a loop over the left hand cord. The end of the
cord is then wrapped two or three times around the cord coming
from around the neck and finished by putting the end through the
opening created by the loop-around, then pulled to tighten.

Cross pulling a cord around a neck can exert considerable
pressure. The arrangement as shown in the autopsy photo is a
different matter. In this TYING arrangement, even if you pulled
as hard as you could, very little pressure would be applied
around the circumference of the neck. Nearly all of the pressure
would be at the point of the tie, which in this case is the
left\rear side of the neck, not the throat. This truth is
magnified by the use of a small cord tending to compress upon
itself and further reduce circumferential pressure. (Try it and
you will see what I mean.)

The evidence, i.e., hair entwined in the knot, material chosen,
type of construction, etc., all tell there was no conscious
intent to strangle by noose action or otherwise. The evidence
does not proclaim murder by strangulation. To the contrary, the
gross amateurishness of the “garrote scene” tells of such an
inept attempt at staging that only incompetent, blind fools
believe it.

Since staging by definition is designed to hide the truth, what
truth is there to hide except the truth about the head trauma?
Why would anyone want to hide this? Is there really an logical
doubt.

BTW, if Mr. Wood would like this for an affidavit, I will be not
only be happy to oblige, but ready and willing demonstrate in
court as well.

Of course, this is not going to happen any more than a member of
the RST is going to meet me online and answer some questions
about the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder. Need more be
said?

Note: I incorporate by reference all other arguments I have
submitted in the case inclusive of the letters to DA, (Dally
Around), Keenan.

[Watching You]

lets FOX News know about this affadavit and letter and this thread as well. EasyWriter, I never tire of your posts. The RST have comprehension problems, though, most of your reasoning will go right over their heads. Wood will comprehend; I expect him to start spinning his wheels any time if this gets out to general public. Oops, it just did.

Regarding Burke - I don't care what anyone in Boulder or elsewhere says about Burke's being cleared. That is just indicative of how incompetent this investigation really has been. JR's children in Atlanta were cleared because they had alibis. By virtue of the fact that he was inside that house that night, Burke has no alibi, just like his parents. In fact, he was smack dab in the middle of the crime scene, just like his parents. Why, then, would anyone clear him when it is possible, since he was there, that he could have been involved?

The fact is, there may have been some pacifying statements made about Burke by Hunter's office, but nothing can take away the suspicion in some people's minds that Burke may have been involved. Wood can threaten anyone who dares breathe Burke's name, but he can't stop people from suspecting. Neither can any statements put out by LE. The only thing that will stop the suspicion dead in its tracks is for LE to finally arrest and convict the killer(s) of JBR.

That's because people have brains and can think for themselves. I don't happen to be one of those who thinks Burke was involved, but I understand why others may think he was. And, who is to deny free thought and free speech? Who thinks he is God and can dictate whom others are supposed to suspect and not suspect? Oh, that's right. That would be the god, Wood. Not.

It is one thing for LE to feel Burke had nothing to do with his sister's death; it's quite another to prove it. I don't THINK he had anything to do with it, either, but nobody has proven to me who did do it, and as long as there is no perp, Burke will be a suspect in much of the public's eye. He may not be a serious suspect, but he cannot be ruled out. Maybe that's what we should be saying - Burke cannot be ruled out for the simple reason that he was in the house when JB was killed and nobody has been arrested or convicted yet.

I've said it a hundred times, I'll probably say it a hundred times more - if LE can eliminate Burke through the evidence and not just through guesswork, then I'd like to hear about it. If they can eliminate Burke from the suspect list, then they must have solid evidence that someone else committed the crime, right? So, where's the perp?

Here's the clincher - when Hunter was still in office, John and Patsy Ramsey were the ONLY suspects - for good reason, IMO. No one in LE gave credence to the Burke-did-it theory because all roads led back to his parents. The RST keeps saying we are behind the times - still working on "old" evidence, but it would appear that's exactly what they do, when it benefits them. The fact is, Burke has not been cleared or Hunter would not have struck those paragraphs out of the Wood-created affadavit (how queer, why didn't lawyer Hunter write his own affadavit? He did know how, didn't he?)

If Burke had been cleared, there would have been none of that duck-walking around the wording on the affadavit - Hunter would have just come out and said, we have evidence that Burke was not involved. He can't say that, because they do not have evidence that Burke was not involved. They only believe he was not involved, but they don't have anything to back that belief up with.

What all this means to me is they were whistling Dixie then and they are still whistling Dixie - IOW, they are INCOMPETENT BOOBS. The best detectives they had were scoffed at, scolded, and run out of town on a rail. If not for Steve Thomas, we would still be in the dark as to what really happened in that investigation. We might even think it's a good thing that the investigation is now in the biased hands of the Ramsey loving DA and Ramsey loving detectives. Anyone who can't see the conflict of interest and/or corruption in that is either blind, deaf, or just plain stupid.

Fantastic find, Tricia, and Ryan Ross, you rock.