Pete Peterson & Dan Abrams

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by VP, Dec 23, 2004.

  1. VP

    VP Member

    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

    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.


    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

    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


    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)


    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

    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

    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)
    ______________________________________ Peterson's website
    (LOL, if he's so good, why couldn't he find Gigax?)

    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
    E-mail: Click Me When you click, it is

    (Sorry this is jumbled, ran out of time)
  2. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    "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.:)
  3. Deja Nu

    Deja Nu Banned

    "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.
  4. Sabrina

    Sabrina Member

    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.$lcev2.startup?p_qte_code=PI&p_qte_pgm_code=2420
  5. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    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.â€

    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.â€
    (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.


    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.


    "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.â€

    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

    “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

    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.
  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