Welcome, Guest
You have to register before you can post on our site.



Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 5
» Latest member: jameson
» Forum threads: 1,430
» Forum posts: 4,318

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 16 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 16 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
She shouldn't need fundin...
Forum: Truth about Tricia Griffith and weBsleuths
Last Post: Dave
10 hours ago
» Replies: 7
» Views: 3,756
their last photo question...
Forum: Miguel Sancho and David Tomasini
Last Post: jameson245
Yesterday, 01:21 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 16
Forum: Miguel Sancho and David Tomasini
Last Post: jameson245
Yesterday, 12:58 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 10
Steve Thomas
Last Post: Dave
06-02-2019, 11:55 AM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 393
The basement elevator
Forum: Rooms
Last Post: jameson245
05-19-2019, 03:43 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 141
Beware of this team - JMO
Forum: Miguel Sancho and David Tomasini
Last Post: ujepiyo
05-10-2019, 12:25 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 467
Sancho program comment
Forum: jameson's back
Last Post: jameson245
04-25-2019, 02:53 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 136
sold to
Forum: The House at 755 15th Street, Boulder, CO
Last Post: jameson245
04-23-2019, 03:48 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 129
715 15th St.
Forum: Boulder crimes
Last Post: jameson245
04-22-2019, 03:56 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 103
in the news
Forum: The House at 755 15th Street, Boulder, CO
Last Post: jameson245
04-22-2019, 12:12 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 86

  John Andrew's room
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-20-2017, 03:42 PM - Forum: Rooms - No Replies

From 2001 documentary

Lou Smit was giving a tour of the house.

"This is the door to JonBenét's room and right over here is the door to the guest bedroom.
and there was a real interesting thing that we found out about this room. This window overlooks the garage and the driveway and would be a great vantage point for anyone that would want to see if the Ramseys were coming home that night.
What's interesting about this room Also what was real interesting in this room we did see that some of the drawers in the bathroom right off the bedroom were partially open which look like they were out of place.
Also in this room there was a rope and we don't know where that rope came from. No one can explain why that rope is in this room.
Also what's real interesting in this room, and it's just a small detail, but there was a dust ruffle all the way around the bed that was tucked in except for just a small area right in front of the bed. It seem to have been pulled out. Now does that mean that killer may have been under that bed, we just don't know. But its just an observation.
The dust ruffle is just one of the small things that detectives look for."

Print this item

  Lin Wood Responds to Dismissal of Lawsuit
Posted by: BIZ - 03-20-2017, 02:07 PM - Forum: What is in the news - staying up to date - No Replies

[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]http://www.westword.com/news/jonbenet-murder-claim-lawsuit-burke-ramseys-lawyer-rips-cbs-call-to-dismiss-8876611[/font]

[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]CBS has formally asked a court to dismiss a lawsuit filed on behalf of Burke Ramsey over a 2016 docuseries in which a team of analysts concluded that he'd murdered his sister, JonBenét Ramsey, in their Boulder home on Christmas Day 1996. In response, Ramsey family attorney Lin Wood summarily rejects the arguments made by CBS and Dr[/font]. Werner Spitz, a participant in the docuseries being sued separately for comments he made last September during a WWJ-AM/CBS Detroit interview publicizing the program.

"CBS and the other docuseries’ defendants have recently moved to dismiss Burke’s complaint on essentially the same basis that Dr. Spitz did previously, contending that their accusation against Burke is protected opinion when taken in context," notes the Atlanta-based Wood, corresponding via e-mail. "In both instances, the defense asserts, as it must, that no reasonable mind could have taken the accusation to be one of fact rather than a mere subjective opinion or hypothesis."

Wood feels otherwise.

"CBS — one of the most well-known news outlets in the world — put up seven 'experts' in a four-hour 'documentary' and marketed their 'true-crime' series as giving one 'complete theory' that 'solved' the case, all the while representing the series as a documentary," he maintains.

Specifically, Spitz and the other panelists on the program, titled The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey, concluded that Burke killed his sister with a blow to the head. The following image from the docuseries captures a reenactment; Spitz is seen at left.

[Image: dr.werner.spitz.two.youtube.jpg]Dr. Werner Spitz, left, watches as a child is called upon to act out a theory of how Burke Ramsey could have killed his sister, JonBenét, from the CBS program The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey.


In Wood's view, "It is difficult to understand how, in that context, the accusation against Burke could have been intended and received as anything but a factual accusation. And that is clearly what the viewer expected — a truthful and factual 'documentary' providing insight into this case."

Instead, as the lawsuit alleges, "CBS and the others consciously portrayed false, skewed and misrepresentative facts and recreations throughout the broadcast that stole from the viewers their ability to evaluate the murder of JonBenét Ramsey and CBS’s accusation against Burke," Wood allows. "For this reason, and the issue of objective fact or subjective opinion aside, I do not believe the First Amendment protects statements that are based on a false disclosed basis or an undisclosed and incomplete basis."

Wood also provides an update on the Spitz suit, which was filed in Michigan.

"We had a hearing...in Detroit on the defense’s motion to dismiss the case," he notes. "Interestingly, despite the defense having provided to the court a DVD of CBS’ documentary and stating it was 'central' to their opinion defense, Dr. Spitz never provided to the court a copy of his WWJ radio interview wherein he made the statements complained of in the lawsuit. When the court requested a copy at the hearing, it appeared to my team that his lawyers were reluctant to provide it to the court."

Nonetheless, Wood goes on, "that radio broadcast will be provided to the court and to me....  So we will know more about the context in which Dr. Spitz uttered his accusations against this young man in short order."

Click to read excerpts of Spitz's remarks.

Meanwhile, Wood stresses, he's determined to press forward with both court actions — and he's confident the dismissal calls won't prevail.
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]"As paradoxical as it may seem in light of the many exonerations of Burke by several public officials, Burke will continue his quest to prove his innocence in a court of law," he writes. "We do not expect the court to deny him that opportunity by ruling that these accusations are protected speech."[/font]

[font=San Francisco, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, .SFNSText-Regular, sans-serif]They can delete the tapes from [/font][font=San Francisco, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, .SFNSText-Regular, sans-serif]the[/font][font=San Francisco, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, .SFNSText-Regular, sans-serif] internet and not produce them in court. But we have record of what was said:[/font]
[font=San Francisco, -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, .SFNSText-Regular, sans-serif]
September 20th, 2016, 1:47 PM [/font]

[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]Share66[/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif][font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]Dr. Wener Spitz
A team of investigators, including Dr. Spitz, 89, a retired Wayne State University professor and world-renowned forensic pathologist, examined evidence in the 1996 slaying of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey and concluded Monday night that brother Burke did it.[/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]The conclusion came on the CBS docu-series "The Case of: JonBenet Ramsey." [/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]CBS Detroit reports:[/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]On Monday night’s premiere of the series “The Case Of: JonBenét Ramsey,” Spitz forwarded a theory that Ramsey was killed by a heavy flashlight that was seen in crime scene photographs on the family’s kitchen counter top the next day. He showed through demonstrations on the CBS special that the fatal injury to the 6-year-old’s skull matched the flashlight’s outer rim, though no DNA was ever discovered on the device.[/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]JonBenet Ramsey[/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]The team included retired FBI profiler Jim Clemente and criminal behavioral analyst Laura Richards.[/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]The team believes the parents concocted a story to cover for their son. [/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]“If you really, really use your free time to think about this case, you cannot come to a different conclusion,” Spitz told CBS Detroit. “It’s the boy who did it, whether he was jealous, or mentally unfit or something … I don’t know the why, I’m not a psychiatrist, but what I am sure about is what I know about him, that is what happened here. And the parents changed the scene to make it look like something it wasn’t."[/font]
[font='San Francisco', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, '.SFNSText-Regular', sans-serif]Spitz has worked on a number of high profile cases over the decades including the assassinations of president John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King, Jr.[/font][/font]

Print this item

  Advice from posters
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-20-2017, 09:21 AM - Forum: How to solve this mystery - Replies (12)

Go back to the names of people who were not really good but REASONABLE suspects.  People who were in Boulder at the time and were suspected by others who knew them - co-workers, classmates, family.  Research every one on thatlist to see what they have done Iin the past 20 years.  

The person who killed JonBenet was not like most of us, he was a sadistic person, a pedophile, and I believe he left his DNA mixed with her blood in her panties.  We have a good profile of that DNA.  It was NOT a group DNA found there, just the victim and someone there when she was bleeding from a sexual assault.

This is a quote from Investigator Andy Horita's investigative report to the DA.  (Pg 8 of 16)

Amy Jeanguenat, the DNA expert who anlyzed the panties sample at Bode Technology,  "stated that she saw NO indication that a third party contributed to the mixture and would 'testify in court' to that effect."

That quote is worth repeating.  

Amy Jeanguenat "...stated that she saw NO indication that a third party contributed to the mixture and would 'testify in court' to that effect."

Print this item

  Starting with advice from J&P
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-19-2017, 08:15 AM - Forum: How to solve this mystery - No Replies

VAN SUSTEREN: What would you tell them to do?
P. RAMSEY: I would say: This is the room where all of the evidence is stored. You start from the beginning, start combing, and go.
J. RAMSEY: Go back to the neighborhood, talk to the neighbors, that's never been done by the police. Start from the beginning, start from scratch, sit down with the parents, sit down with anybody that will talk to you within a hundred-yard radius of the house.
VAN SUSTEREN: Didn't they talk to the neighbor, though, who heard a scream at some point?
P. RAMSEY: We don't know, Greta, because no one has ever -- We hear rumors all the time. No one in authority has ever talked with us and told us what they know.
J. RAMSEY: What we know is what we have read or heard on television. We have not heard anything official from the police. So was there a woman that heard a scream? I believe so because I've heard that reported.
VAN SUSTEREN: But you don't know for certain?
J. RAMSEY: I don't know for certain.

(Note, that still has not changed.  The BPD still has not told the Ramseys everything they really KNOW about this case.  Meetings were  held, like the one in Atlanta, and promises were made - - they didn't have that with them but would send on to Lin - and never kept)

Print this item

  What they should have known
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-16-2017, 12:54 AM - Forum: The CBS suit - Replies (13)

I have official documents in hand.  As of 10/21/2003, certain tasks were underway in Boulder - and one was getting a national listing of all purchasers from Air Taser.  That is evidence that as of October 2003, Boulder was NOT dismissing the stun gun as just theory and was actively looking into who owned them.  So if Kolar had access to those papers - - he knew the stun gun was real and promoting the railroad track as the cause of that injury was just wrong.

Print this item

  Werner Spitz lawsuit update
Posted by: Kaligirlsam - 03-09-2017, 10:15 PM - Forum: What is in the news - staying up to date - Replies (1)

NEW- Burke Ramsey's $150 million lawsuit against Dr Werner Spitz
will continue. A Detroit judge today said he needs to hear a recent audiotape where Spitz allegedly said Burke Ramsey killed his sister JonBenet in 1996 in the family's home in Boulder. The defense had asked that the case be dismissed The judge says he won't  make a ruling until he hears that tape. The JonBenet murder case has been world famous since the little girl was killed on Christmas Day or the day after.

-Paula Woodward

Print this item

  Richard Eikelenboom states DNA 10,000 times more likely to be hispanic
Posted by: Summer Dawn - 03-09-2017, 04:24 PM - Forum: What is in the news - staying up to date - Replies (3)


JonBenét Ramsey 20 years later: New theories on DNA, family squabbles and sadistic strangers hit the airwaves

KIRK MITCHELL | kmitchell@denverpost.com | 

First-graders at High Peaks Elementary School in Boulder and competitors at child beauty pageants knew her. But on Christmas Day 1996, JonBenét Ramsey was not a household name.
That changed quickly, however, and by New Year’s Day 1997, the little girl’s first name and face were more recognizable in the U.S. and around the world than Miss America 1996 Shawntell Smith of Oklahoma or Miss Universe 1996 Alicia Machado of Venezuala.[Image: jonbenet-ramsey-017.jpg?w=620]
JonBenét quickly became the [url=http://blogs.denverpost.com/coldcases/2014/08/06/jonbenet-ramsey-24-today/9070/]only beauty queen people talked about
 after the 6-year-old was brutally murdered in her family’s basement on Dec. 26, 1996. Her beaming face had been plastered on newspapers, magazines and tabloids. National TV shows featured video of the girl during pageants.
“There is no question this case has caught worldwide attention and there continues to be speculation as to who committed this crime,” Boulder police Chief Greg Testa said in a Sept. 1 videotaped statement as the 20th anniversary of JonBenét’s murder approaches.
Boulder police have been widely criticized for their handling of the case. But Testa said the reason he wouldn’t do interviews about it was to maintain the investigation’s integrity. He pointed out that the department processed 1,500 pieces of evidence, took 200 DNA samples, interviewed more than 1,000 people in eight states and investigated more than 20,000 tips, letters and e-mails.
Despite Testa’s defense of his department, a new round of anniversary-driven reports and TV shows are dredging up old stories of Boulder police incompetence and in some cases shedding new light on police missteps. The reports point out that detectives alternately accused JonBenét’s 9-year-old brother and her mother, Patsy, for her death, while hiding the fact that a drop of blood from the likely killer was found on her pajamas.
Some of the new media revelations could be groundbreaking — if the facts are confirmed.
DNA testing
For example, A & E’s two-hour documentary that appeared on Mondaydisclosed that new DNA testing that can identify a person’s racial background reveals that the killer is most likely of Hispanic heritage. Such evidence excludes the Ramsey family and could help detectives hone their investigation to only Hispanic suspects.

But those DNA tests were conducted by Richard Eikelenboom, who was allegedly discredited last month during a Denver trial after a prosecutor got him to admit he was self-trained to conduct DNA profiles, “that he had no direct DNA extraction or analysis experience,” and operates a lab that has not been accredited.
Besides doing DNA forensic work in JonBenét’s case, Eikelenboom has testified in high-profile cases for Timothy Masters, Casey Anthony and David Camm. All three have been acquitted of murder charges. But Eikelenboom said he is accredited in Holland and the U.S. by the American Society of Crime Lab Directors.
Two weeks ago, Eikelenboom entered the unidentified DNA profile into national DNA databases and determined that the donor of the blood found on JonBenét’s panties is 10,000 times more likely to be Hispanic than Caucasian or black. He said Boulder police should enter just the Y-chromosome DNA profile of the donor in the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System to possibly get a so-called familial match.
Boulder police have not indicated whether they are focusing on Hispanic suspects based on the results of DNA tests.
Family fight?
The A & E documentary also solidifies what has already been reported about the telling sequence of JonBenet’s injuries. Boulder detectives have long suggested JonBenét’s death was the tragic result of a domestic incident. One theory presented by Boulder police was that Patsy struck her daughter after the girl wet her parent’s bed late Christmas night and that the garroting of the child’s neck was part of an elaborate cover up.
The documentary quotes a Colorado Springs forensic scientist and a team of Great Britain as saying that half-moon marks on JonBenét’s neck found during the autopsy indicate she was still alive when the chord was placed around her neck, which would show it couldn’t have been part of a post-death cover-up.
Another theory advanced by Boulder police was that her brother Burke cracked her over the head during an argument fueled by jealousy.
Doctor Phil has promised to reveal “shocking, never-before heard” detailsabout the “nation’s most talked about cold case” in his season-opening show on Monday. It’s the first installment of a three-part series based on the first-ever media interviews with Burke Ramsey.

Other TV projects also focus on the Ramsey family as the perpetrators including an in-depth package by CBS News, which reunited some of the case’s original investigators including retired FBI profiler Jim Clemente, world-renowned forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee and James Kolar, the former chief investigator for the Boulder District Attorney’s Office.

The six-part series,  quotes investigators expressing doubt that someone would use a stun gun on JonBenét. The intruder theory says a stun gun caused the marks left on the girl’s neck. A trailer for the series quotes an expert saying that he’d never seen anything like the ransom note left at the house.

Sexual sadist intruder
But many law enforcement experts, including some former Boulder police officers, now believe the killer was not a relative, but a sexual sadist who broke into the home.
In the “Dateline NBC” special, “Who Killed JonBenét?” , correspondent Josh Mankiewicz interviews Bob Whitson, a retired Boulder detective sergeant who was in the Ramsey home the day JonBenét’s body was found.
“The behavior at the scene does not match up” with the Ramseys, Whitson tells Dateline. “It matches up with a sexually sadistic person and a psychopath.”

But despite the myriad theories and potential suspects, Boulder police remain committed to finding the killer.
“Publications and movies offer many theories about how this crime occurred and who is responsible. Facts have been surmised and often distorted, which has led to many conclusions,” Testa said. “We remain focused on this investigation and finding justice for JonBenét.”

Print this item

Posted by: jameson245 - 03-07-2017, 12:16 PM - Forum: Answering BORG questions - Replies (17)

The forum might prove helpful in educating those who are not-quite-BORG and seeking information.  I know in some places there are questions put out - - and answered - - but they are on BORG forums and the other side of the story is not being told there.  So please, if so inclined, copy some questions and answer them here.

Print this item

  Posts that might be found in MAD Magazine
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-07-2017, 11:08 AM - Forum: Absolutely insane posts - mostly by BORG - Replies (14)

[Image: quote_icon.png] Originally Posted by Curiousmind48 [Image: viewpost-right.png]

Has anyone considered the possibility that jonbenet tried to kill herself that night, that she was so distraught that she stood on a chair and tied a rope around her own neck? I know she was only six, but even young children can be pushed to a certain limit and crack. Could patsy have found her daughter almost dead from strangulation and because that would blow the illusion of a perfect family, further staging might have taken place. Or the rope was so tight, it would not come off and it was clear she was in great distress and dying. Could someone have finished the job as a way to end her suffering? Of course, that doesn't explain the head injury. I dont believe an intruder was involved, but will say, the simplest explanation is often the right one.

Print this item

  krugman interview
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-04-2017, 06:01 PM - Forum: The Autopsy - No Replies

Burden of Proof - Monday, December 29, 1997

Krugman interviewed on Burden of Proof

Also former FBI profiler Van Zandt

December 29, 1997

This transcript just covers the Ramsey case section

COSSACK: Doctor, you are a leading child abuse expert. The police brought to you the autopsy report of JonBenet Ramsey for your opinion. You concluded that this was not perhaps a case of sex abuse, but perhaps a case of child abuse, why?
KRUGMAN: Well first Roger child abuse to me includes physical abuse, sexual abuse, and a variety of other forms of abuse and neglect. What I said at the time was that I couldn't say with certainty that this was a sexual abuse case. It clearly was a physical abuse case. And it was a physical abuse case because of the massive brain injury, the skull fracture, and because of the strangulation.
COSSACK: Why were you not able to say with certainty about a sexual abuse case, Doctor?
KRUGMAN: Well for one to know with certainty that sexual abuse occurred that night I think one would need some forensic evidence that I'm not sure is available. I haven't seen any certainly to make me feel that way. There are a lot of people around the country who have from afar or even from looking at the autopsy said they are certain she was sexually abused. The problem is that children who are sexually abused may or may not have any physical findings. The reason I wouldn't say with certainty that she was or wasn't is because at least 40% of children have absolutely no physical findings and they are being sexually abused; whereas children who have some physical findings around the genital area, may have been physically abused or may have been sexually abused. And I saw nothing to let me know with certainty that sexual abuse was here in this particular case that particular night.
COSSACK: Doctor you made a statement which almost made it sound though that you believe that the sexual abuse was a coverup to perhaps hide the amount of physical abuse. Do you have a feel on that area?
KRUGMAN: In my view that's certainly a possibility.
COSSACK: Well why would you suggest that it is a coverup? I mean, what is there to suggest sexual abuse being a coverup to perhaps hide physical abuse?
KRUGMAN: Well let's again be careful of our terms. There was a lesion an abrasion on the hymen. That may have been part of sexual abuse. That may have been part of physical abuse. That may have been part of a coverup. I just don't see enough things in the autopsy to say with certainty what happened. And I think the main problem we have with this case and in this country is that we are using the wrong system that is the criminal justice system to try to deal retrospectively with a problem like child abuse, which is an enormous public health problem and has killed over 2,000 other children anonymously since JonBenet died.
COSSACK: Doctor what I am and I agree with you, of course, but what I am particularly interested in is your use of the word coverup here as some sort of way of perhaps hiding something. And I'm trying to get you to explain that to me.
KRUGMAN: Well I'm not sure I can explain it to you Roger other than to say that when you see an injury someplace on a child there can be a lot of different reasons why that injury is there. And if you are involved in an investigation or you are trying to work out diagnostic possibilities you need to think of them all and then you need to have other information that helps you sort out those possibilities.
COSSACK: Alright. Clint, working for the FBI, and we have heard the doctor explain leading abuse expert explain that perhaps there were some things that maybe we use word coverup maybe not. Where does that lead you? I mean, in terms of looking possible suspects, where does that lead you?
CLINT VAN ZANDT: Well you know one of the things you have to look at Roger is we have to differentiate between a pedophile and someone who would abduct a child for ransom two different breeds of cat. We don't have a cross-fertilization, psychologically, between these two different types of individuals. We also look at, from an investigative standpoint, usually it is 12 to one. When we look at the number of children that are killed around JonBenet's age, older, younger, 12 to one it is usually someone it is usually a parent or somebody within the home; somebody who has access to the home, as opposed on an unknown offender. Now, statistics don't make you guilty of anything but those have to play in and have to be part of this. I think perhaps what the doctor may be suggesting and obviously he speaks for himself is we saw a coverup as far as I'm concerned, with the note. I don't think that note was written by someone who actually expected to kidnap JonBenet, carry her away, and get $118,000 ransom. We see other things that were done to the victim the night of the crime, which, to me, suggests a coverup which to me suggests staging, someone trying to make a crime look like something it's not. So perhaps the staging that I see behaviorally might go along with the coverup that he is speaking about medically.
COSSACK: If I understand you correctly, what you are suggesting is that perhaps this child was murdered before that note was written that perhaps that event occurred, and then somebody the murderer, perhaps wrote and planned this elaborate hoax to throw people off. Is that what you are suggesting?
VAN ZANDT: That's what I'm suggesting Roger. The idea that an unknown offender, at least two, perhaps three people would break into the house that night knowing what they were going to do but not have written that note in advance then would be able to find a pad of paper, start to write the note, tear it up, write another 3 page note, take the time to do that. In the note, one reference there is a dozen references we can talk about. One speaks that if the authorities are notified, the victim will be beheaded. That to me suggests that the victim was already dead that the killer already knew the type of ligature damage that was done to the victim and that translated into the note suggesting the victim might be beheaded.
COSSACK: Does that suggest an accidental death?
VAN ZANDT: My opinion Roger is that there was an accidental death that took place on the victim, in the house; and that there was a subsequent cover-up, physical damage, and other things that took place injuries to the victim. So we had an initial accidental injury. We had the death of a victim, and then we had to coverup by subject or subjects whoever were involved in this.
COSSACK: Alright. does that suggest and I want to eliminate, for the purposes of this conversation, the Ramseys? Does it suggest someone who the Ramseys knew? Does it suggest someone within the family?
VAN ZANDT: It suggests someone who knew the house, who knew the family, who knew enough about Mr. Ramsey to make some very interesting remarks in the note. It suggests that the killers either came from that house or had access to that house on a fairly common basis, as opposed to an unknown offender. We can't rule that out because we just don't know. But if we look at statistics, statistically the chances are greater from a behavioral standpoint that the killers either came from that house or had access to the house, as opposed to this unknown offender who just happened to come upon the Ramsey household and carried this off.
COSSACK: Suspicions, theories and media speculations. more than a year has passed since the murder of JonBenet Ramsey, and we have little more than that. There's no trial, there's no suspect in custody, and there's no indictment from a grand jury. Lisa, you've been covering this case from the beginning. There have been allegations of serious police mistakes right from the beginning. List them. what are the alleged police mistakes?
RYCKMAN: Well Roger I think the first and foremost mistake was that they did not secure the crime scene. And that opinion as being their biggest mistake comes from a lot of experts in homicide investigations, not from myself, of course. And as a result of that failure to secure the crime scene, there were a lot of people tramping through the crime scene, possibly contaminating or eliminating evidence. Another mistake that they made subsequent to leaving this crime scene unsecured was to ask John Ramsey, JonBenet's father, to go search his house again, and they allowed him to do this alone that is without a police escort he took two friends with him. This is when he found his daughter's body in the basement room. Of course, his instinct as a father was to go to the child to pick her up, to take the duct tape off her mouth to see if she was still breathing, and then to carry her upstairs out of the dark basement and into the light of the upstairs house and into the arms of her family. Of course, I'm sure your experts can speak to this. All kinds of evidence may have been lost or contaminated to the point where it would make a conviction in this case it would jeopardize it quite possibly.
COSSACK: Lisa, in defense of the police, at that time when they allowed Mr. Ramsey to do all those things they were treating this case as a kidnap rather than a murder. Isn't that true?
RYCKMAN: Well, I think yes of course that was true. But I think that what most police at least outside police investigators say is that it doesn't matter. Kidnapping, murder hey, whatever this is, it's crime, and this was the scene and it should be secured.
COSSACK: Alright. David Schertler, former federal prosecutor, let me throw this case file in your lap now. Where do we go with this?
SCHERTLER: That's the $40,000 dollar question. I think Lisa is absolutely right. This whole you know you have an upstairs bedroom where the child is kidnapped from. You have a ransom note on the first floor. The whole house should have been a crime scene. It should have been roped off. Everybody should have gotten out of the house. And what you would've liked is to have gotten important scientific evidence that could have solved the crime or told you who the killer was. Without that in the case with no witnesses, you don't have a whole lot to go on. You don't have scientific evidence that links anybody with this crime. You have evidence that even though the statistics seem to support the notion that it came from someone inside the home, the evidence doesn't rule out the possibility that it was an outside intruder. Without scientific evidence, somebody talking to you about confessions or statements that the killer might have made to them or without an eyewitness, you have nothing at this point. And I assume that at this point the police have exhausted all those avenues of investigation. Right now, the only thing I see happening in this case to solve it, and it's an unlikely proposition, is that the killer either the killer himself or herself or somebody close to the killer who knows something about the crime would come forward out of consciousness of guilt and tell the police, look, I got to get this off my chest. Here is what happened, or here is what so and so told me about committing this murder. That to me is the only way that you're going to solve this crime.
COSSACK: Alright. now I'm going to come to you and you're the prosecutor in this case, and I just repeat back to you what you've told me. And I say look David we don't have a heck of a lot, but we believe that perhaps there may be some involvement by the family or perhaps a close friend of the family. But we don't have a whole heck of a lot. Do we arrest anybody in hopes that somebody gets behind bars and then cracks or gives up some information?
SCHERTLER: Absolutely not. I think it violates a prosecutor's ethics to do that without significant evidence to establish probable cause that a particular person did it. I don't see anything close to probable cause in this case. All I do see is a lot of speculation, a lot of theories about what might have happened. And some of them, like Clint's, are good theories that make a lot of sense, but there is absolutely no evidence to support it. Even if you said this happened, and it was committed by somebody inside the home; who was it? Was it the father? Was it was the mother? Was it the 11yo brother? We don't know.
COSSACK: Let's go back to Denver for a second. Dr. Krugman you've had the ability to analyze this autopsy report. Was there a time when during your analysis you saw indications that perhaps a taser gun or a stun gun was used on this young girl.
KRUGMAN: No, I didn't.
COSSACK: Was there any marks whatsoever?
KRUGMAN: There were other marks. There were other abrasions noted, and various things noted on the autopsy report. But I think you might need a pathologist to tell you for sure whether or not there was a stun gun. But that speculation has arisen over the last couple of weeks and seems to be filling the airwaves again, and is probably yet another indication of everyone's frustration with the inability to solve this case.
COSSACK: Alright. Clint, is this frustration? I mean, are they just pulling at straws now?
VAN ZANDT: I think right now Roger we're at the point where you start turning the rocks over. We've turned them over once; they got to turn them over a second time. But after a year you know we've got 22,000 known homicide in the U.S. every year only about 65 percent of those are solved. And the scary thing is as we're suggesting right now, without hard, cold forensic evidence that can link an offender to the victim the only think we have is someone raising their hands and says I got to tell you, I feel so bad about what I did. If we don't have that if they had forensic evidence, they would have indicted by now.
COSSACK: There's a new chief investigator in this case, Mark Beckner, who says he wants to reinterview the Ramseys. Why?
VAN ZANDT: He's the new captain of the ship Roger. I don't care what's been done before for the last 367 days it's a brand new investigation as far a he's concerned and he's saying, I want to talk to them. I want to get a feel for them. I want to see the evidence. I want the neighbors re-interviewed.
SCHERTLER: Let me add I think that in terms of investigative tactics that might be the one thing you want to do reinterview potential suspects. If you can get them in inconsistency if somebody may break and say OK let me tell you what happened, that's a real possibility. Now of course, the Ramseys are represented by counsel. I have the feeling that any interviews with the Ramseys are going to be very carefully monitored.
COSSACK: And let me just say even though my cohost Greta Van Susteren is not here today if she were here she would be saying if I were their lawyer I wouldn't let them talk to anybody.

Print this item