CBS docudrama "The Case for JonBenet Ramsey

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by RiverRat, Aug 17, 2016.

  1. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    Exactly!!! If only the Ramsey's cared as much about the casualties their Cover-Up created as we have for Their Daughter ~ She's Six Years Old....that will forever ring in my ears.
     
  2. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    Silly! Of COURSE I was wondering and you know me...I am never alone!

    I could very easily make the jump over to BDI but something is telling me to stick to my guns with the Drama Mama. Speaking of which.....Did anyone else notice that my favorite avatar was used quite frequently during these shows?! Especially when they were making a point about how hinky Patsy was about everything LOL I knew I had to keep that treasure alive for a lot longer than the original blip it got way back when so me and my avatar and my Gut Calls are here as needed.
     
  3. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    Chisel THAT One in Stone!!!

    Ohhhhh Punisher THANK YOU for showing up for the party! It would not have been the same without you as you have already so beautifully proved...we deserve this moment, my warriors! Be PROUD of yourselves for being a righteous good soul in a world eaten alive by evil. Let all of this information sink in while remembering we know more than the average bear and that a lot of this IS brand new to a lot of ears and let that give you hope that we just might finally have a legitimate shot of our quest for justice...I do Believe I do Believe I do Believe :justice:
     
  4. heymom

    heymom Member

    "She's six years old...she's blonde...six years old."

    I loved it when the analysts pointed out that on a call like this, when a parent needs help, they will stay on the phone until help arrives, the dispatcher is seen as their lifeline at that moment. Instead, Patsy delivered her lines and then wanted to get away before the dispatcher had other questions. So revealing.
     
  5. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    You Better! :banme::gomods::rs::bee::mame:

    LOL Dayummm That felt good!!! It HAS been way too long
    :mears:
    RAT
    :rrcrown:
    (Yep Still Fits)
     
  6. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    It took everything I had not to finish that sentence in it's entirety...felt too Patsy Ramseyish and even now it is hard for me to say but I could not go there, Pal ~ ;)
     
  7. Learnin

    Learnin Member

    I was a late arrival for this case, but I'm sure glad I happened upon this forum. My thanks to Tricia, RR, and all who kept it going for these many years of ups and downs. This forum provided me with a wealth of information that would have taken months to find on my own. I miss koldkase.

    As another poster mentioned, the 911 operator sure made a poignant remark when she said that victims stay on the phone because that connection is their lifeline to help...the only comfort they have at that time. Patsy couldn't stay on the line until the police arrived because she had to get her friends over there before the police discovered the body. To her dismay, they didn't.
     
  8. heymom

    heymom Member

  9. Daniel XVI

    Daniel XVI Member

    If a Ramsey family member did this, then I agree Burke is far and away the most likely one. Indeed, that was my first hunch. I didn’t think it likely that either of the parents would lie for the other but both would lie for their son. They had just lost one of their two mutual children and now they (thought, at least) they stood to lose the other. It was unlikely in the extreme that they knew that Burke was too young to be charged. (Also, there was the golf club incident.) However, like Mr. Smit and many others, after a more thorough review of the available facts and evidence, I came to believe the intruder theory, albeit it with a different spin than anyone else I’m aware of. In 2006, during the absurd episode regarding Karr, I posted here my theory, much to dismay of almost all present then. I wish to iterate my appreciation to our host who expedited my request to join the forum in the rush of such applications then due to the emergence of Karr even though she knew I believed the family innocent, much against the tenor of her forum.

    To recap: Those who believe the intruder theory of the crime all seem to take it for granted that the intruder entered while the family was at the White’s for Christmas dinner. I, on the other hand, have always believed that an intruder broke in after the family returned and retired for the night as the intruder noted by the lights going out. No, I don’t believe the intruder had the audacity to sit down and write such a long, bizarre note while the family slept. On the contrary, he or she brought it with him or her (along with the false start which was part of the act to further make it appear as it the note was written then and there). The paper and pen were lifted from the house previously, very likely at the holiday party on the 23rd, which is why the paper was removed from the middle of the pad so Patsy wouldn’t notice. Nor would she be likely to notice a missing, cheap pen or think anything of it if she had. For an intruder to be present while the family returned would take nerves of steel and a penchant for unnecessary risks. Who knows how long they would remain up and where could an intruder hide all that time where he or she would be certain no one would look? How long would he or she have to hide out before being certain all were in bed?

    The motive here was revenge over some issue, real or perceived; maybe business, maybe social. It was an attempted double barrel blast of revenge, killing the child and framing her parents in the process. The note was deliberately preposterous (including the seemingly bizarre ransom demand amount which comes very close to matching JR’s bonus amount that year) in an attempt to implicate the Ramseys staging an attempted cover up under pressure. It came close to working. This crime has the hallmark of something very personal. Abandon the pedophilia motivation. It doesn’t hold water. Mr. Smit reached the right conclusion for the wrong reasons.

    I admit that this documentary is compelling, but it leaves out some essential information. Mary Lacy exonerated the Ramseys because there was trace DNA evidence from the same male on two separate articles of clothing. This documentary tries to dismiss this DNA consideration by pointing out that even newly unwrapped articles of clothing can have trace DNA on it, probably from a factory worker. But the same factory worker handled the same two articles of clothing? Were they even made in the same factory or country? I’m skeptical as was Ms. Lacy.
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2016
  10. Daniel XVI

    Daniel XVI Member

    The web on the basement window

    P.S. to my previous post just above: The documentary makes much of the cobweb (made by a spider) allegedly seen on the grate attached to the basement window where the positioned intruder was said to have most likely entered. Here is an excellent, objective site that discusses this consideration and also other possible points of entry:

    http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682499/Potential Points of Entry
     
  11. heymom

    heymom Member

    Have you ever read Chief Kolar's book?

    And are you aware that the Grand Jury charged both John and Patsy with neglect leading to homicide? Odd how they would do that if there was an intruder.
     
  12. Daniel XVI

    Daniel XVI Member

    No to your first question. What does he say regarding the web, please, and how does it stand up in light of the considerations discussed in the link i provided that answers the web consideration pro and con? For example, a spider can re-spin a broken web in less than twelve hours. Can it be definitely established when this web was observed by the police?

    Yes to the second. Innocent people have been convicted by juries let alone indicted by grand juries where the threshold is much less, only dealing with probable cause.
     
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2016
  13. Daniel XVI

    Daniel XVI Member

  14. heymom

    heymom Member

    The spider web(s) would not have been reconstructed in the dead of winter. I have Kolar's book but he doesn't include an index, unfortunately. However, imagining that an intruder came in through that window and then a spider re-spun the webs (it was not a simple one-strand thing) in less than 12 hours on December 26 when the temperatures were about 9 degrees F is just plain silly.

    Kolar's book deals with more important aspects of the case.

    The grand jury took their job seriously and looked at 30,000 + pieces of evidence, interviewed 30 witnesses, and took 13 months to do their job, handing Alex Hunter's office at least 2 indictments against the parents. Don't mock our justice system, it is the best and fairest in the world. Not perfect as this case clearly shows, but still, the best and fairest.
     
  15. Daniel XVI

    Daniel XVI Member

    From the link I provided, conflicting accounts; the site attempts to be objective and provides both sides of controversial aspects of the case:

    Evidence the Web Was Not Attached to the Grate

    "Wickman had an argument at the Ramsey house with Detective Greg Idler, who had carefully lifted the metal grate above the broken window and found that the spiderweb between the window well bricks and the grate wasn't necessarily attached. Wickman challenged Idler's findings" (Thomas 2000a:108, citation from Internet poster Margoo.).

    Net Assessment

    Whether the observed web was attached "matters" only if the web was observed early enough that it could not have been spun during the morning of December 26.

    Regardless of when the web was observed, Detectives Everett and Wickman disagree with Detective Idler about whether the web was attached to the grate; absent a photograph, this conflicting eyewitness testimony would appear to be unresolvable.

    Was a Police Photograph Taken of the Web?

    Yes.

    "On April 2, Detective Michael Everett of the Boulder PD called entomologist Dr. Brent Opell of the Virginia State University Department of Biology, who was known as Mr. Spider Man. Opell told the police that there are two general types of spiderwebs. The first, which are called cob or funnel webs, once established are constantly reworked and added to by the spider. The second, manufactured by orb-weaving spiders, is regularly replaced by the spiders and can be completed at any hour of the day, in less than twelve hours. The police also learned that if the grate covering the window well had simply been lifted and the web damaged, the type of web would be hard to identify, but if something the size of a man had passed through the web, it would have been destroyed" (Schiller 1999a:344, citation from Internet poster Margoo.).

    "Everett sent Dr. Opell an enlarged photo of the type of web in question. The entomologist said it appeared to be of the funnel type" (Schiller 1999a:344, citation from Internet poster Margoo.).
    Six months later, on October 25, Everett traveled to Vancouver Island and met with another expert, Dr. Robert Bennett of the British Columbia Ministry of Forests. The detective had with him a newly enlarged and enhanced photograph of a (sic) the strands of the web that had covered part of the window grate. Bennett confirmed that it was a funnel web" (Schiller 1999a:344, citation from Internet poster Margoo.).

    "This grate was photographed and collected for evidence...In May, the photos were submitted to Brent Opell, Professor of Biology at the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University in Blacksbury,sic Virginia" (Sauers 1998).

    Thus, Schiller and Sauers concur Opell was given a police photograph (although they disagree on the month this occurred) and Schiller further adds that a blown-up version was given to Bennett; but note that Schiller alludes to Opell being given photos "of the type of web in question" which may or may not have been of the original web.

    No.

    "The original web had never been photographed or committed to a report, a huge error that would become extraordinarily controversial in months to come" (Thomas 2000a:108, citation from Internet poster Margoo.).

    "In December both Sergeant Wickman and Detective Mike Everett had seen at least three strands of a spiderweb reaching from the brick window well upward to the covering grate. No one had photographed it" (Thomas 2000a:219, citation from Internet poster Margoo.).

    ***

    It would seem that the cobweb aspect of this case is far from certain.

    As to you second point, again a grand jury only determines if there is probable cause, a less stringent requirement than the beyond a reasonable doubt required by a jury for a conviction on a charge. Again, juries are composed of humans and humans err. How is noting that “mocking†our criminal justice system? The chance, however slight such is or isn’t, of being falsely convicted of a crime is the price we all must pay to avoid the far worse alternative of anarchy.

    The distinct attorney at the time (Alex Hunter) declined to sign the true bills because he strongly believed he lacked sufficient evidence to obtain a conviction by meeting the beyond a reasonable doubt requirement. He knew that if a jury acquitted he could not retry the case even if compelling evidence was later discovered against the Ramseys. Even some members of the police department reluctantly agreed with him on this point.

    By the way, I researched from various reviews the book by James Kolar you mentioned. It’s not surprising the book doesn’t have an index. It appears to be self published and is replete with spelling and other errors. It also appears to be basically a rehash of Steve Thomas’s book, which I have read, and contains little if any additional information. Mr. Kolar spent little time on the case before leaving (for whatever reason) after having been hired by the Boulder DA’s office.
     
  16. Daniel XVI

    Daniel XVI Member

    Oh, what a tangled web...

    P.S. If it is “just plain silly†to think that a spider re-spun the web in the dead of winter, then why is it not just plain silly that it spun it in the first place in the dead of winter?
     
  17. questfortrue

    questfortrue Member

    It’s too bad we couldn’t have the Case of audience hear Chero’s linguistic analysis – more in depth than anything I’ve read anywhere. But I think some of the nuance is difficult to communicate via the electronic media.

    If some of the important elements of the case, which were captured in Kolar’s Foreign Faction, were not included in Case of, undoubtedly and imo, it is to lower the threshold for liability. However, it also seemed as though the program was designed for an average viewer who might not have been as familiar with the case. By including the statement analyst expert - Stan Burke – to provide his interpretation of how the RN seeks to hard sell the idea of a kidnapping and by allowing the 911 operator to give her impressions that the tone of Patsy changed completely after she attempted to hang up, a viewer should have been able to understand the amount of deception which launched the ‘Foreign Faction’ kidnapping.

    We now witness the efforts of the R attorney to diminish the program with threats, but the barn door was thrown open with Kolar’s book several years ago. What conclusions the uninformed public will take away from Case of, remains to be seen. However, I can’t help but wonder if the participants in the program weren’t truly anticipating the reaction from the R legal representative. The response of the CBS attorneys was to the effect – ok, we’ll see you in court. If they depose BR and JR I’m wondering if those medical records might be finally subpoenaed? Well, obviously the 'ride' is not quite over.

    (Oh, btw, there are a few on the sidelines cheering that the Intruder theory has been laid to rest. http://denver.cbslocal.com/2016/09/22/former-gov-bill-owens-commends-cbs-in-ramsey-murder-series/ - Former Gov. Owens: CBS Ramsey Series ‘Dispelled Theory Of An Outside Intruder’)
     
  18. heymom

    heymom Member

    That web was not spun recently. It had been there for a long time. I'm tired of answering the same old questions.

    THERE WAS NO INTRUDER!

    You can't read reviews of a book and pretend that you know what it contains. Chief Kolar's book is NOTHING LIKE Steve Thomas' book. Thomas did the best he could at the time with the case materials he saw; Kolar saw it ALL and reached different conclusions. You want to denigrate him for self-publishing? Go ahead. I admire him because he wanted the public to know what he saw in the case. Between his book and the Grand Jury indictments, I no longer have doubts about how JonBenet died and what happened afterward.
     
  19. Moab

    Moab Admin Staff Member

    Agree...plus, Thomas and Kolar both wrote their books with different intents. Thomas was showing the inner workings (or non-workings) of the political side of the case. Kolar was doing so much more on so many levels especially with the evidence. It is moot to try and compare the two, as we all know.
     
  20. JC

    JC Superior Cool Member


    Thank you for this; it's the first time I've seen it. No doubt Wood can hardly wait to sue, sue, sue. Hahaha. He neglected to mention that the grand jury indicted Patsy and John. And as far as I'm concerned, Alex Hunter is just as guilty as the Ramseys.

    I have no idea where the truth lies either. It is all just too crazy. I had wondered about dna on the panties matching dna on the pjs. Seems like that was said on Dr. Phil, and now I'm thinking that is just something someone made it to confuse things.

    Anyway, the CBS documentary didn't convince me that Burke did it. Burke convinced me he did it on the Dr. Phil show.
     
  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