Lin Wood Affidavit for Alex Hunter. Unedited.

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by Tricia, Apr 8, 2004.

  1. "J_R"

    "J_R" Shutter Bug Bee

    As Shakespeare wrote, "For 'tis the sport to have the enginer / Hoist with his owne petar." :doughboy: is definitely in over his head with Fox (if they don't settle) and might finally get his comeuppance especially when this kind of double speak with it's supporting documents (not) come out. JMH&CPO
  2. LurkerXIV

    LurkerXIV Moderator

    Many thanks to Tricia,

    and to Ryan Ross, Fleet White, spade, and others who vigorously ferret out the truth in pursuit of justice for JonBenet.

    The items crossed out by Alex Hunter tell me that Burke Ramsey has never absolutely, incontrovertibly been cleared as a suspect in the killing of his six-year-old sister. I say "killing", rather than "murder", because a child of nine probably cannot form an intent to murder. But it most definitely could have been an accident.

    Although it has been stated that Burke would not have had the strength to inflict the blow to the head, it is conceivable that he could have caused the strangulation. This takes much less physical strength.

    In our town we had an incident a few years ago where a 4- year-old was strangled accidentally by his 5-year- old brother while fooling around with venetian blind cords.

    It does happen.

    But why would Patsy and John cover it up, instead of getting help for Burke?

    This affidavit seems to blow Woody's case against FOX.
  3. imon128

    imon128 Banned

    They might have been saving JAR's :behind: from the death penalty. JMO, of course.
  4. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland


    Candy says that she's had the affadavit for years - just wouldn't post it.

    Interesting that she only contacted Lin Wood about it for comment today! AFTER it had been posted here. I smell a porkie-pie......
  5. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    Big thanks to Tricia, Ryan, Spade, FW et al for obtaining this original and posting it. Since when did case investigation become a competition? Crappy be damned!

    Please note that these are attorneys debating the issue of Burke's culpability in this document, and as such, are using attorney-speak and legal terms in the process. There is great difference between people being labeled "suspects" as opposed to "investigative leads." Initially, all Ramseys and everyone else were "investigative leads" in the case whose status would then have been elevated based on sufficiency of evidence. Also please note that OFFICIALLY no one has EVER been named a "suspect" in the case. This is significant and the foundation for AH's obvious refusal, and Woody's insistence, that Burke has never been named a "suspect." It's wordsmithing--Burke never has been named as a "suspect" because no one ever has. Within that context, Wood's position is the truth. Does that mean that Burke has never been an "investigative lead?" No! Does that mean that there is no evidence that Burke was involved? Not necessarily. We must be careful not to assume facts not in evidence on things like this. And clearly AH was leaving a loophole in the criminal investigation for the future possibility of Burke being named more than an investigative lead should evidence be developed sufficient to elevate his status.

    Furthermore, I have no problem with Wood preparing this draft Affidavit for AH's review/signature. I've done this many, many times in cases over the years when I want the Affiant to address very specific points germaine to the issues of the case. Affiants always have the opportunity to edit these drafts, as AH did. They also have the option to refuse signature or create their own Affidavit. AH's edits to Woody's version clearly indicate that, at least from a legal definition standpoint, Burke, like everyone else, has never been a qualified "suspect" in the case. Big deal. I do think, however, it was lame of AH to agree to provide this document in a civil case when the criminal case was very much active. Lame, lame, lame....

    I too, EW, note both LW's and AH's acknowledgement that JB's death is accepted as a homicidal act. I too challenge the evidence to prove intent by whomever they think the perp is. Certainly there is, and never has been, any evidence that any phantom intruder had intent to commit murder. Without evidence sufficient to prove an intruder beyond reasonable doubt, how could there be evidence to prove intent by that non-existent intruder? And until a true "suspect" IS identified, it would be impossible to prove intent. Yet both Woodpile and AH freely declare this death a murder, underlying clear intent. Incredible!

    Congrats to Fox and their brilliant attorneys for the favorable ruling re discovery. If the BDA cannot limit it, then all is fair game in the criminal case, and it well may be our opportunity to discover so much more than what so far has been made public. Go Fox Go!!!!! See Wood run!!!! Run Wood Run--your Waterloo is finally at hand!
  6. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    FOX won on discovery?

    How did I ever miss this one? Go FOX go.

    Crappy's at CrankySleuths trying to debate Tricia on this issue. Trying to debate with Crappy is like trying to debate with a pet rock, Tricia. Crappy can't even string one sentence together with subject and verb much less debate a point in an intelligent manner. She can't even stay on subject but confuses her topics when trying to prove her point in the original subject.

    It doesn't matter what the opinions of any of the sources are; the fact remains that until someone is arrested and convicted, some of the thinking public will continue to harbor suspicions that he may have been involved. Therefore, in the minds of many, he is still a suspect, irregardless of what anyone says. You just can't stop people from wondering. It's called free will and free thought. And free speech.
  7. Niner

    Niner Active Member

    but didn't Burke go to some kind of counseling after this happenend? Maybe a "secret" court order? - from Sept of '98, there was a poster on the Yahoo forum where I post - says and I quote:
    and then further on that same day:
    all jmho!
  8. Spade

    Spade Member


    The fact that Alex signed this affidavit WON the disclosure battle for the New York Post. IMO it is also the threashold issue on which to base the legal battle to remove the case from the BDA.

    If there is a lawyer reading this forum who wants to help, please make yourself known by PMing Tricia. Now is the time to step up.
  9. Spade

    Spade Member


    witness list for the Fox shakedown includes an Atlanta shrink who is going to testify to Burke's "damage issues". Dougie Stine is another "damage issue" witness.
  10. LurkerXIV

    LurkerXIV Moderator


    The explanation given by that Yahoo poster makes sense to me.

    Deals like this have been made before with wealthy parents of disturbed sons. Reminds me of Michel Skakel and the way his father Rushton took over, made a deal, and sent him to a private rehab place for juveniles. Of course, Skakel was older when he killed Martha Moxley--15--and there was Mrs. Moxley pursuing justice for her murdered daughter for 25 years.

    Who, but us, will continue to pursue justice for JonBenet?

    Someday someone who knows the truth will come forward.

    That person may even be Burke Ramsey.
  11. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef

    Bumped for The World

    Closed the Deal or the Case?
  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