The Grand Jury indictment of John and Patsy Ramsey

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by cynic, Oct 25, 2013.

  1. madeleine_ws

    madeleine_ws Member

    Lacy was of course right to consider the DNA "very significant and powerful evidence." But she was in no position actually to exonerate a couple who were in the house at the time of the murder so long as the crime remained unsolved. And Lacy said as much herself in 2006 after an embarrassing fiasco in which John Mark Karr was briefly considered a suspect and even brought back from Thailand on that basis.

    we all agree yet NOTHING is being done about it.

    believe it or not,right now,if I could choose,I would rather wanna see AH ,ML and their slaves aka DeMuth and Hofstrom grilled in court,not JR or BR....
  2. madeleine_ws

    madeleine_ws Member

    "I think a lot of people think (Lacy) stepped over the line by exonerating the family," Kolar said. "She was relying heavily on the DNA, and I don't know that it was appropriate."

    Added Wise, "I never would have done it. I'm not in the business of exonerating people until you have a conviction of somebody, and they don't have a conviction."

    Wise did say that future prosecutors are not bound by the exoneration.

    "When one DA exonerates, the next DA may say, 'No dice,'" he said.

    But Bob Grant, who at that time was the district attorney for neighboring Adams County and was among a small group of prosecutors with whom Hunter met monthly, said the exoneration could still "torpedo" any future trial.

    "Mary Lacy would become a witness for the defense, and that's a position a prosecutor never wants to be in," he said.

    Lacy could not be reached for comment Friday.

    I disagree on one thing...ML always acted like part of the defence so I don't think that would bother her much,by a witness for the R defence and claim it was an intruder...
  3. madeleine_ws

    madeleine_ws Member

    After the release of the indictment this is ALL they got in their defence ,that stupid exoneration letter.

    And this is the most important thing...they don't have the DNA tests&results ,they got a LETTER,a useless piece of paper,a personal OPINION of a biased person.

    Cause the DNA reports show much more,Lacy picked what was CONVENIENT.
  4. heymom

    heymom Member

    Consider this: All of our frustration lies in the fact that no one pursued JonBenet's killer, and we don't understand why. Her parents said they felt no anger toward the killer, an inappropriate statement under the circumstances. Her older step-brother said the killer should receive, "forgiveness." The DA at the time must have seen a lot of the evidence, and had a GJ's true bills in front of him, yet...he didn't charge the parents and bring them to trial. The next DA, a woman, also did not pursue the case. In fact, she did the opposite - she led us all on a wild goose chase that found a mentally ill man in Thailand to blame the crime on! (Goulder residents should have ridden her out of town on a rail, but no, in the end she even got to offer her opinion and created an "exoneration" for the parents. I'm sure she thought she was doing the right thing by them, not to defend her, but...)

    Chief Kolar wrote an entire book on his review of the case files, yet he still did not name the killer at the end of the book.

    Can you think of one reason why all of these people seem to be protecting someone? Is it just corruption in Boulder, or is it a kind of pity?
  5. madeleine_ws

    madeleine_ws Member

    I have 2 problems with BDI:

    1.why did so many people risk their careers (AH,ML,etc) for a 9year old who couldn't have been prosecuted anyway?

    2.put yourself in their shoes (R)...they lost two kids.she got cancer.the remaining child has mental problems.the whole world thought they were abusers,child killers.must be a living HORROR NIGHTMARE.yet they acted like not much happened.doesn't make sense to me
  6. madeleine_ws

    madeleine_ws Member

    there are these clips from the funeral video,when they greet the priest outside the church...I am not crazy but JR is acting like he's attending a wedding or something!at least PR tries to act like a grieving mom (bad performance anyway)...something is just not right with these people....
  7. heymom

    heymom Member

    Yeah, I know, the whole funeral was a sham, Burke was cutting up in church, had no appropriate response. You can say it was his age, but my mother died when I was 10 and I understood what had happened, and that she was gone forever. I loved her. If Burke had had any sort of attachment to his sister he would have had some sort of emotional reaction, at SOME point.

    John must have felt a sort of relief because JonBenet's body would be put into the grave, which meant no more examination by LE. "Whew," we're just about out of danger. I'm sure he knew that once the funeral had taken place, they were going to be a little further out of the spotlight. And he may have some narcissistic traits himself, which means that he can't form proper attachments to people in the first place.

    Patsy may have been so drugged up at that point that she hardly knew where she was. Or maybe like John, there was some sense of closure and that she could let JonBenet go and move forward with the 1 remaining child she had. It would freak me out tremendously to live in a house with a child who had done such a horrendous thing, but I guess if I thought it was his only hope for any kind of a normal life, I could try to manage. It explains the fact that John seems to have no relationship with Burke now. He did what he could for Burke and now, just can't continue with it.
  8. Tril

    Tril Member

    BPD statement

    Full statement

    Snip from the Boulder Police statement regarding the release of the grand jury indictments:

    “Until this release, it was difficult to remain silent in reference to our knowledge of the true bills for so many years,†stated Police Chief Mark Beckner.

    So, the BPD knew all along that true bills indicting John and Patsy had been issued by the grand jury? Was the BPD sworn to secrecy?
  9. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Good point, Rat.

    But I noticed Patsy couldn't force one teardrop out of her eye when she said that, though she was clearly trying her best. I find that so telling.
  10. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Oh, worse than that: Alex Hunter went on public record a few times threatening to torture and bury anyone who dared utter one word of the Grand Jury findings or procedures.

    Okay, I exaggerated...a little.

    Here's what's funny: Larry Schiller had a Grand Juror on his case documentary aired on the night of Patsy's burial in 2006. That woman showed her face, talked right into the camera, and was edited to make it appear the grand jury didn't believe the Ramseys were culpable in any way.

    Now we know that not only was that misleading, it was a downright lie told through editing. Did Mary Lacy go after that grand juror? Ha! And for some reason, all those talking heads on TV who are in high dudgeon over the pitiful Ramseys being so put upon by LE don't seem to have a clue about all the lies and double standards carried out by Team Ramsey for 16 years...or care!

    We know that Schiller knew the truth about the Grand Jury indictments because Peter Boyles is now on his radio show telling us Schiller told him during the hour BEFORE Hunter went to his press conference and said NO INDICTMENTS.

    Then Hunter locked the Grand Jury Indictments into his own safe so the statute of limitations could run out in Dec., a mere 2 months later.

    How's that for a bunch of lowdown skullduggery from a D.A.? Oops, I meant TWO D.A's.
  11. Tril

    Tril Member


    koldkase, I knew there were a lot of shenanigans going on with the case, but it never dawned on me that the grand jury had indeed indicted John and Patsy and that Hunter had refused to charge them...not to mention all the other underhanded tricks he pulled. Locked the GJ documents in his safe? Sheesh.

    On a Cold Justice episode I saw, the team's investigation of a murder case brought to light the fact that a grand jury had indicted a certain suspect, but that the DA had not taken the case to trial. An update at the end of the episode stated that the DA was now under investigation for not doing so. I guess it's different in Boulder. I guess lots of things are different in Boulder.
  12. Elle

    Elle Member

    There were only three people in this house, hm and if Patsy and John Ramsey wanted to save their son, they would have had to do whatever they could with the end result being to destroy the evidence already present in JonBenét's vagina. This is where the evidence was present of this little girl being tampered with.
  13. heymom

    heymom Member

    I know, Elle, but I can see another scenario where the scene was basically already in place before Patsy came across it, including the paintbrush insertion, and perhaps even the cord around JonBenet's neck. In other words, maybe the parents didn't think to try and destroy the previous evidence, maybe they didn't get that clever. Maybe they really didn't know the extent of the previous molestation, I don't know. But more molestation could have happened that night including the paintbrush.

    We will never know.
  14. Tril

    Tril Member

    That's how I see it, heymom - the scene was pretty much already in place.

    The cord around the neck, which I think was part of the game the siblings were playing, may have been John and Patsy's inspiration for the threat in the ransom note that JonBenet would be beheaded if the Rs didn't follow instructions. Garrotes are sometimes used in internal decapitation beheadings, a type of execution in which the skull is separated from the spinal cord.
  15. heymom

    heymom Member

    I guess it's a possibility. I am thinking that once the head blow was struck, JonBenet was unconscious, so whatever was done to her, she wouldn't have responded. She may have been stuck a couple of times with pieces of a train track (to see if she'd wake up), had a paintbrush put inside her, and then had a cord wrapped around her neck. I know that's something not a lot of people have considered - that the perpetrator did the whole thing (minus the ransom note of course) - but I have always had a problem with either John or Patsy "finishing JonBenet off," so to speak. But once you take away a normal sibling relationship, and a normal conscience, anything is possible.

    Maybe the scene wasn't staged as much as the ransom note was adapted to the scene that was already there.

    In any case, we'll never know.
  16. Tril

    Tril Member

    heymom, your ideas make sense too. I doubt we’ll ever know exactly how it happened, but I do believe that the ransom note was written to fit the scene.

    Like you, I’ve never been able to accept the idea that John and Patsy finished her off. It seems clear to me from reading the ransom note (“...we have your daughter in our posession...â€) that they’d initially planned to remove the body from the house and put it someplace where it would be quickly found.

    Maybe it wouldn’t fit in the duffel bag, or maybe they were afraid of being seen, but I also think it’s possible that when it came down to it, they couldn’t bear the thought of dumping the body of their beloved daughter out there in the cold night, alone, where animals could find it. I don’t think of John and Patsy as heartless, and I can’t imagine them finishing her off or harming the body to stage the scene.
  17. Elle

    Elle Member


    I honestly find it difficult to comprehend this whole scenario. Putting myself in Patsy's shoes. Coming home from the White's Christmas party with an early rise in the morning - flying to Charlevois. My first thought is getting my two children into bed and falling into bed myself.
    I do think after putting the two children to bed, they may have wakened up again because it was Christmas night and both children decided to get up and play with their new games etc.

    I do have trouble seeing some sexual play from Burke, but if he was into the habit of doing this, then it was force of habit, and it all backfired on him! (?). I just don't know (?). I also find it hard to believe Burke himself created this garrote. This part I think was part of the cover-up with Patsy and John Ramsey's efforts to create a scene by a supposed intruder - which we all know did not exist. Oh how I wish we could all find out what really happened to this poor little girl who lost her life on Christmas night.

    So sorry we didn't hear anything these last few days to give us all closure.[​IMG]
  18. cynic

    cynic Member

    The juror in question is Michelle Czopek.
    The documentary was JonBenet: Anatomy Of A Cold Case, Court TV, Director: Lawrence Schiller, Aired: July 7, 2006

    I bumped an old thread with some discussion about this.
  19. BOESP

    BOESP Member

  20. heymom

    heymom Member

    Yes, I think you're right, that the scenario Patsy had drawn with her ransom novel, would have required that JonBenet be left somewhere outside the house. But they must have known that if they took the car out, they'd be seen and the motor would be warm, tracks would be there, etc. If we detach from the horror of the crime, they actually did a fine job of subterfuge considering how obvious it should have been. If someone had checked the "wine cellar" earlier, things might have gone in a different direction, however. But they were also anxious to get out of the house and as time went by and the BPD did not find the body, they must have been in a kind of hell, knowing that JonBenet was already decomposing in the basement and that their chances of getting away with the cover-up were dwindling. When Det. Arndt was left there alone, it was John's chance to finally get things finished up and get OUT. Probably what she sensed was his determination to finish what they'd started and not allow anything or anyone to get in his way. Being a woman, she wasn't sure how to interpret his mannerisms so she assumed that he had been the perpetrator.

    Now, I don't know for sure who did what or when, but I don't think it would be hard to misinterpret a fierce determination to get out of the house at all costs with some sort of threat. Or maybe John intended to intimidate her, as a male he probably knew it wouldn't be too difficult.

    Anyway, speculation at this point is rather pointless. We'll just never know, will we?

    RIP JonBenet.
  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