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

Username
  

Password
  





Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 29
» Latest member: Gildedingold
» Forum threads: 1,090
» Forum posts: 3,390

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 19 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 19 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
Q&A
Forum: Answering BORG questions
Last Post: CA4Now
10-28-2017, 12:11 PM
» Replies: 17
» Views: 2,611
partial
Forum: Clues in the Case - May 2001
Last Post: jameson245
10-22-2017, 04:58 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 144
looking for the web
Forum: Broken window/ Spider web
Last Post: Gemini6
10-20-2017, 12:59 PM
» Replies: 13
» Views: 2,283
Important info in "We hav...
Forum: We Have Your Daughter
Last Post: Summer Dawn
10-19-2017, 07:24 PM
» Replies: 12
» Views: 1,499
Kirsten Hatfield
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 06:54 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 58
Jennifer Schuett
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:43 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 66
Charles Lindbergh - 1932
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:37 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 49
Polly Klaas
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:36 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 53
Took her, raped her, AND ...
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:27 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 51
2017 - 6 year old escaped
Forum: OTHER children taken from their beds
Last Post: jameson245
10-18-2017, 05:22 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 57

 
  Ramseys not called to speak
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 08:03 PM - Forum: Grand Jury Indictments - Replies (12)

Parents of slain girl not subpoenaed to testify
By Charlie Brennan
Denver Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer

BOULDER -- The JonBenet Ramsey grand jury will hear from new witnesses
when it returns to work Thursday, according to a source close to the case.
And they're not John and Patsy Ramsey.
The parents of 6-year-old JonBenet, considered suspects in their child's
Christmas night 1996 slaying, still have not been subpoenaed to testify
before the grand jury probing her murder, the source said.
The Ramseys, who now live in Atlanta with their
12-year-old son, Burke, have steadfastly
maintained their innocence.
The grand jury's 18-month term expires Oct. 20.
Exactly who will testify is unclear.
Burke Ramsey is the only family member known
to have testified before the eight-man,
four-woman panel. His testimony came just prior
to the grand jury's May 25 meeting, which was
followed by a layoff lasting all summer.
The list of those not yet called as witnesses
contains another surprise.
A former executive at Access Graphics, the $1
billion Boulder computer software firm where John
Ramsey worked as president and chief executive
in 1996, said no one from that company has
appeared.
"I don't know anybody from Access who has been
called," said the executive who stays in touch with
past and present company officials.
A 21/2-page ransom note Patsy Ramsey said she
found in the house Dec. 26, 1996, when JonBenet
was discovered missing suggested a possible
business connection in the murder.
The note said the culprits represented "a small
foreign faction" who told John Ramsey "we respect
your business, but not the country that it serves."
Former FBI criminal profiler John Douglas, hired
by the Ramseys, also concluded the crime was
likely committed by someone outside the family,
and possibly by someone with a business-related
grudge against John Ramsey.
Scott Robinson, a Denver attorney who has
followed the case closely, said the fact that
apparently, few people -- if any -- from John
Ramsey's former business have testified, could be
telling.
"It means either the Boulder police have
exhausted, independently of the grand jury, every
slimly related lead, or the grand jury -- for
whatever reason -- has focused elsewhere in the
search for JonBenet's killer," said Robinson.
"The police, in general, have long had the
Ramseys as their principle and apparently sole
suspects. But even with that in mind, it would be
beneficial to any eventual prosecution to rule out
business jealousy or business-related anger as a
potential motivation for the murder of JonBenet."
Robinson said the fact that more witnesses are
scheduled to appear before the panel, which
resumes its meetings Thursday after a four-month
break, shoots down one popular theory.
"This suggests that the jury has not been spending
the last few weeks working out the bugs on a
report, in lieu of indictment -- which had been a
plausible explanation for the hiatus," said
Robinson, "and that they have not yet decided
what to do. They want to make sure that no voice
goes unheard before reaching a determination."

Those who have not yet appeared include former
Ramsey neighbor Melody Stanton. Stanton, who
has since moved out of Boulder, lived across the
street from the Ramseys and told police she heard
a child's scream not long after falling asleep
Christmas night.

Her comments to police about the scream have
been the subject of much analysis for what that
scream might say about the possible time of
death, and for what it might say about where, in
the Ramseys' expansive home, the killing might
have taken place.

Authorities have never specified a time of death in
the case. The Ramseys told police they put
JonBenet to bed shortly after arriving home from
a party shortly after 9:30 p.m. on Christmas
night.
Among those witnesses who might still be
scheduled could be some of the same case
investigators who passed through the courtroom
in the grand jury's first days last fall.
Former prosecutor Dave Heckenbach, who ran
grand juries for the Denver district attorney's
office from 1986 to 1992, pointed out that as
recently as early summer, some of those
detectives were still actively interviewing
witnesses and seeking additional evidence.
"If they've done a lot of work, between the last
time they met and now, the grand jury would
have to meet a few times -- or have one
megasession, depending on how much work the
police have done in the interim."
September 22, 1999

Print this item

  could it be heard?
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:45 PM - Forum: The Scream - Replies (4)

Boiler room theory arises in Ramsey killing
Theory supported, in part, by basement window facing street

By Charlie Brennan
Scripps Howard News Service






BOULDER— A key argument supporting a possible intruder in the JonBenét Ramsey case is a belief by some investigators that she was killed in a basement boiler room.
This theory is supported, in part, by the existence of a basement window facing the street, outfitted with an open air duct, the Denver Rocky Mountain News has learned. That air duct may explain how a neighbor could have heard a scream the night the child died.
The boiler room theory is further buttressed, sources say, by the fact that remnants of the paint brush used to fashion the fatal garrote were found just outside that room, which is adjacent to the wine cellar where her body was found.
When grand jurors toured the house and grounds Oct. 29, several were seen studying the boiler room window and its unsealed air duct from the outside.
Lou Smit, who recently resigned his position as investigator on the case for Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter, believes the boiler room theory, sources say, and thinks it argues against a family member's involvement in the crime.
Smit declined to discuss his theories Friday. "I wish I could, but I really can't, at least until I testify before the grand jury," he said.
Smit, a former El Paso County homicide detective who came out of retirement to work for Hunter on the Ramsey case, resigned Sept. 20. He cited frustration with other Ramsey investigators' reluctance to consider suspects outside the family.
"The case tells me there is substantial, credible evidence of an intruder and lack of evidence that the parents are involved," Smit said in his resignation letter. But the 2½-page letter did not detail his reasons for suspecting an intruder.
Melody Stanton, a Ramsey neighbor at the time, told police she woke with a start not long after midnight Dec. 26, 1996, to a frightening scream; her statement was first reported by the Globe supermarket weekly nearly a year later. ABC's "20/20" reported that Stanton typically slept with her window slightly open.
John and Patsy Ramsey have told police they heard nothing unusual after putting JonBenét to bed around 10 p.m. on Dec. 25.
Some investigators have had trouble reconciling that statement with the neighbor's account of a scream.
Smit is among those, however, who think the basement air vent opening toward the street — and no longer connected to anything in the boiler room — could have broadcast the scream toward houses across the street without the same scream being audible in the parents' bedroom on the third floor.
A source close to the family said auditory tests performed by police during a second search of the home in the summer of 1997 determined that sound travels more easily from the basement out to the street than it does up through the home's four levels.
Sources say Smit thinks that if the scream emanated from the boiler room, it's likely where the murder occurred and that Smit can't envision a family member selecting such a space to commit such a crime.
JonBenét was strangled, had a fractured skull from blunt trauma and had injuries consistent with sexual molestation.
"You wouldn't have to take her downstairs if you lived in the house," said an investigator familiar with Smit's thinking, who would talk only speaking on condition of anonymity. "If you were living in the house, you'd sure choose another place besides that."
JonBenét's body was discovered in a windowless basement room next to the boiler room by her father about seven hours after her mother called 911. She reported finding a 2-½-page ransom note demanding $118,000 for the child's safe return.
The child's parents are under suspicion but proclaim their innocence. The murder is under investigation by a grand jury that convened in Boulder on Sept. 15.
Robert Pence, former director of the FBI office for the Rocky Mountain region, sees the logic in Smit's reasoning. "I think that would be one good reason that would point to an outsider," he said. "A lot of these are spur-of-the-moment-type things, a rage or argument, something that got triggered, and wouldn't necessarily call for the person — whether it's a parent or siblings or whatever — to take the victim to an out-of-the-way room. I think it would explode right where it happened."
Even if Smit is right about the murder taking place in the boiler room, Pence still can't completely accept Smit's conclusion that such a scenario bolsters the intruder theory.
One reason is the ransom note, which Patsy Ramsey said she found on the bottom step of a back staircase while heading down to the kitchen early in the morning.
"If it were an intruder, the thing that would be most inconsistent would be the note," Pence said. "If it's an intruder, you're not going to leave the body and that note anywhere near the same crime scene. That just increases the trail of evidence."
An investigator close to the case also sees Smit's theory as flawed because no physical evidence was found in the boiler room.
And, the source said, if an outsider killed JonBenét in the boiler room, why take the time — after a scream loud enough to wake a neighbor — to move her body to yet another room?
"If that scream is loud enough to be heard, then that intruder is gone, because he knows Mom and Dad are upstairs," the police source said. "With this scream, if she (Stanton) in fact heard it, if in fact it happened, why stay? You're out of here. Are you going to waste additional time in there? Nah."


November 9, 1998



(My prints are on this.)

Print this item

  Melody and the scream
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:28 PM - Forum: The Scream - Replies (4)

Melody Stanton
(738 Fifteenth Street)
(Boulder, Colorado)
On December26, 1996, between 12:00 a.m. and 2:00 a.m. she woke from sleep, heard a child's scream that lasted 3 to 5 seconds. Her bedroom was on second floor facing the Ramsey house.  She said she woke her husband Luther, knew it was JonBenet but assumed her parents would take care of her.  Melody went back to sleep immediately.  Luther then heard the sound of metal hitting concrete. 


Melody told this to her neighbor, Diane Brumfitt and Diane reported the incident to the police. 

Information went quickly to the media and reporters started knocking on the Stanton door.  Eventually the Stantons denied knowing anything - - they clearly did not want to be witnesses any longer.  Melody suggested the scream may not have been an actual scream but "negative energy".  Or maybe she heard it another night.   But most believe her first report was the honest one.

In Schiller/Brennan book,  page 610 paperback, this was investigated by Officer Barry Hartkopp on 01-03-1997
but her interview wasn't signed or given under oath.

Print this item

  from Steve Thomas depo
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:09 PM - Forum: Stun Gun - Replies (1)

"Thomas depo 41 - Stun Gun"
 
  
Q. 154, right here, second blocked out, second paragraph, "Experts engaged by the police concluded
there was no stun gun involved at all, but the DA's team never relinquished their claim that such
weapon an exotic weapon was used to subdue JonBenet." Have I read that correctly?

A. Yes.
Q. Who were the experts engaged by the police that you're referring; would you identify those for
me?
A. I know at least one was Dr. Werner Spitz, and Detective Trujillo would be able to identify
additional.
Q. Did any of those -- any police department consultants discuss at either of the presentations in
terms of what they thought about stun guns whether there was consistency. For example, Dr.
Doberson?
A. I'm sorry, run it back by me, Mr. Wood.
Q. Was Dr. Deters -- the Larimer County coroner involved in the investigation by the Boulder Police
Department?
A. No, I'm not familiar with that name.
Q. How about Sue Kitchens of the CBI?
A. I am familiar with her name, but I do not know what extent she may have been involved in the
investigation.
Q. How about Dr. Doberson?
A. I believe Trujillo and Wickman initially visited Dobersen on behalf of the police. But that was
later followed up by investigators Smit and Ainsworth.
Q. Dr. Doberson who I think you have a great deal of respect for?
A. I don't know Dr. Doberson.
Q. Do you recognize him, though, to be respected in the law enforcement community in Colorado?
A. I have no opinion. I don't know anything about Dr. Doberson.
Q. Do you know that he has stated within reasonable medical certainty that the marks on JonBenet's
face and back were caused by a stun gun. Are you aware of that?
A. Well, if you're telling me that's true --
Q. I'm just asking if you're aware of it. You said --
A. I saw that on --
Q. -- you watched some of the stuff. I'm just asking if that's what he said there?
A. Right.
Q. Did you watch the Tracy Mills documentary, two?
A. The second one, two?
Q. Yeah.
A. Two, as in the number two?
Q. Yeah, the second, there was one back a couple years ago, it's one that came out in the last
several months, haven't seen --
A. No, I haven't seen that.
Q. So you don't know what Dr. Doberson said in that, do you?
A. No.
Q. But he wasn't employed by the Boulder Police Department, among other things, to look at the
stun gun issue, true?
A. I don't know that he was employed but they went to him. Trujillo and Wickman I know did.
Q. What did the Boulder Police Department conclude caused these marks found on JonBenet
Ramsey's back?
MR. DIAMOND: Do you want to identify what you're putting in front of him just for --
MR. WOOD: I'm going to mark it and I'll do it by copy. I don't want to mark on this color copy but
this will be Defendants' 4.
MR. DIAMOND: Will you identify what it is for the record?
MR. WOOD: It's an autopsy photograph of JonBenet Ramsey.
MR. DIAMOND: Does it have a number on it or something?
MR. WOOD: I just put a number on it, a 4 just so I can copy it and mark it later. If you'll just hang on
to it. I don't want you to be flipping through there. There is one picture I am going to ask him about in a
moment.
MR. DIAMOND: Yeah.
(Exhibit-4 and Exhibit-5 marked.)
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) What did the Boulder Police Department determine caused those marks on
JonBenet Ramsey's back as shown on Defendants' Exhibit 4?
A. I don't know that the Boulder Police Department as an entity formed a consensus opinion, but
relying on the experts in this case, and Detective Trujillo specifically who was assigned to the stun gun
investigation told us and I remember seeing it that Werner Spitz concluded, I believe, what was believed
to be stun gun marks may have been a patterned object, if I recall correctly, or I think another
explanation was on her back lying on some sort of object.
Q. That was Dr. Spitz only?
A. Well, Dr. Spitz completed a report on that. I think Dr. Lee had some opinion on it. Certainly
Trujillo filed information about that.
Q. I'm going to show you defense Exhibit Number 5, which two photos, one is obviously Number 4
and then 5 is a picture of JonBenet's side of her face. There were two marks on her face. The marks
on her face and the marks on her back were the same distance apart, right?
A. I don't know that those were identical. I have heard --
Q. Do you deny that?
A. I have heard Mr. Smit say that they were identical. I have heard Trujillo say they're not.
Q. That the marks were not -- shouldn't one just measure this, sir?
A. Unfortunately you would have to, I think, triangulate it off of a photo because they weren't
measured, my understanding, at autopsy.
Q. Do you choose to believe Dr. -- Mr. Smit or Mr. Trujillo in terms of that issue or do you just not
have a position one way or the other in terms of the distance part of the two set matched pairs?
A. I don't believe necessarily either of them. But I have heard Mr. Smit and Mr. Trujillo had
conflicting measurements on that picture.
Q. But one thing for sure, you believe, I think you would say and have said before, that if a stun gun
was used on JonBenet that that is significant evidence that would point away from a family member or
parent, right?
A. I don't know where I have said that.
Q. You have never said that?
A. I don't know where I have said that, Mr. Wood.
Q. Do you deny that?
A. Refresh my memory. Where do you think I have said that?
Q. Do you deny that or is that accurate?
A. I think, and for the record let me just say, one other expert that I know the Boulder Police
Department consulted were I think stun gun reps, manufacturers or people in the stun gun industry.
Q. Do you know their names?
A. I don't. I think somebody from Air Tazer.
Q. Were there reports filed?
A. There certainly should be. As far as do I deny -- well, let me put my answer this way. I would
agree to an extent that it may be or would be less likely that a parent would be involved in the stun
gunning of a child. Maybe I'm naive in that thinking, as the FBI agents told us they have seen children
murdered in the most horrendous of ways, but I won't dispute you on that point today.

Print this item

  from Steve Thomas depo
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:02 PM - Forum: Handwriting - Replies (4)

"Thomas depo 17 - handwriting experts"
 
  
Q. (by Lin Wood) Have you ever had an opportunity to review any of Darnay Hoffman's handwriting
experts' reports, that would be a report from David Liedman, Cina Wong and another individual named
Tom Miller?

A. No.
Q. Do you know whether they were ever tendered to the prosecution or to the police department
and rejected as not credible?
A. It's my understanding and this may have been even after I left the police department, that Mr.
Hoffman made his experts available to the prosecution.
Q. And they declined saying that they were not credible or do you know?
A. I don't know.
Q. You don't know that. You do know that there were other experts that reviewed Patsy Ramsey's
handwriting and did not find evidence of authorship, true?
A. Who were those?
Q. Do you think there were not three other people that looked at this and did not find that there was
evidence to find that she wrote the note?
A. I don't know who you're referring to.
Q. Well, there was a Secret Service examiner, Mr. Dusak?
A. Right.
Q. Speckin Laboratories?
A. Mr. Speckin, yes.
Q. Right. And there is one other, help me. I can pull it if you want me to?
A. Alfred, Alford, Edwin Alford.
Q. Did you look at their conclusions and remember them?
A. I did.
Q. What was Mr. Dusak's conclusion?
A. Mr. Dusak, I believe, his official conclusion on his report for courtroom purposes was no
evidence to indicate.
Q. No evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on
the ransom note, was that Mr. Dusak's conclusion?
A. Among other things.
Q. And he was a document analyst for the United States Secret Service, right?
A. Right.
Q. Then we have Mr. Edwin F. Alford, Jr., police expert, examination of the questioned
handwriting, comparison of the handwriting specimen submitted has failed to provide a basis for
identifying Patsy Ramsey as the writer of the letter. Is that his conclusion?
A. I remember Mr. Dusak. If you have a document that would help --
Q. This is Mr. Alford.
A. I know. I remember Mr. Dusak. If you have a document that would help me refresh my
memory on Mr. Alford, I don't recall --
Q. Not beyond what I have just told you, but if that helps you refresh you one way or the other what
I've just told you is I believe Mr. Alford concluded?
A. Will you repeat his --
Q. Sure.
A. -- what he concluded.
Q. The examination of the questioned handwriting comparison with the handwriting specimen
submitted has failed to provide a basis for identifying Patricia Ramsey as the writer of the letter?
A. If that's what the report says. I certainly don't disagree with --
MR. DIAMOND: He's asking you whether that refreshes your recollection.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you recall Mr. Alford coming to that conclusion?
A. To a -- yeah, I think that's the conclusion.
Q. And then Leonard A. Speckin, he said that he found no evidence that Patsy Ramsey disguised
her handwriting exemplars. Did you -- were you aware of that conclusion by Mr. Speckin, a police
expert?
A. Among other conclusions, yes.
Q. You understood enough about the handwriting analysis that a legitimate handwriting questioned
document examiner analyzes not just similarities, but also has to analyze and account for dissimilarities,
right?
A. If you say so, Mr. Wood, I'm not --
Q. I'm asking you, sir.
A. No, I'm not a handwriting expert and don't purport to be.
Q. So you can't --
A. If you're asking me about my layman's knowledge about handwriting science I would be happy to
answer your question.
Q. I'm asking you about your understanding of the science when you were the, quote, one of the lead
detectives. Did you not listen to what the experts were saying and what their bases were and did you
not grasp the fundamental idea when you were listening that they were saying we've got to analyze
both similarities and dissimilarities?
MR. DIAMOND: Objection. Compound. You may answer.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you understand that to be the case or not?
A. That was among many things that I understood them to look at.

Print this item

  offered services to Steve Thomas
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 07:00 PM - Forum: Darnay Hoffman - No Replies

from Steve Thomas deposition:

"Thomas depo 15 - Thomas and Darnay"
 
  
Q. You slipped once, maybe inadvertently, in referring to Darnay by Darnay as opposed to Mr.
Hoffman. When did Darnay Hoffman first contact you about his offer to represent you for free and to
absorb your legal cost in connection with the civil litigation filed against you by the Ramseys?

MR. DIAMOND: Can we just get a predicate that that fact occurred?
MR. WOOD: Yeah. I've got the New York lawyer, you know what I'm talking about, don't you,
Darnay?
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah.
MR. WOOD: For the record, you stated that several months prior months ofApril of 2001, you offered
to represent Steve Thomas pro bono, for free and absorb all of his legal costs, right?
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, at one point I did, yes.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Right. Tell me about that. When did he contact you?
A. I don't know. What's the date on the document you're looking at?
Q. Maybe Darnay can tell us that if you don't know.
MR. HOFFMAN: I don't remember that either.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) But you know he called you? I don't know that --
MR. HOFFMAN: No, I did not call him.
MR. WOOD: How did you contact him?
MR. HOFFMAN: I sent him an e-mail. I don't have a phone number for --
THE REPORTER: Wait. One at a time.
MR. WOOD: E -mail, whatever. I'm not trying to -- I mean, you e-mailed him.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you get the e-mail, Mr. Thomas?
A. This today is the first time that I have ever spoken, correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Hoffman, that I
have ever spoken personally to Mr. Darnay Hoffman.
Q. Thank you.
A. And yes, I do recall not only did he send me this e-mail but that on occasion I would be on an
e-mailing list that would receive e-mails from Mr. Hoffman.
Q. So it is true that Mr. Hoffman sent you, Steve Thomas, an e-mail in which he offered his legal
services to represent you for free, pro bono, and to absorb all of your legal costs in connection with any
litigation brought against you by the Ramsey family; is that true?
A. Very generously so, yes, he did.
Q. Why did you not accept it?
MR. DIAMOND: He had a better offer.
MR. HOFFMAN: Better lawyer, Lin. He got a better lawyer, trust me.
MR. WOOD: Why don't you all let Mr. Thomas figure out what to say about this, without being
disrespectful.
MR. DIAMOND: Where is your sense of humor, Mr. Wood?
A. In addition to that e-mail --
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Why don't you answer my question, Mr. Thomas?
A. I'm trying to, Mr. Wood.
Q. My question is why did you not accept it?
MR. DIAMOND: And you can continue.
Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Yeah, but please, just answer my question and we can move on to something
else.
A. In another e-mail, Mr. Wood also e-mailed me the name and business address and telephone
number of a Mr. Daniel Petrocelli in Los Angeles who he also suggested as a fine attorney.
Q. Let me make sure we get that right. Mr. Wood didn't e-mail you Mr. Petrocelli's name. Are you
saying that Mr. Hoffman did?
A. Yes, my mistake, yes, that's what --
Q. But Mr. -- and was that close in time to his offer with respect to his offer to represent you?
A. I don't recall.
Q. Do you think it was a few days, a few weeks, a few months apart?
A. I don't recall the timing on either of these e-mails. Maybe Mr. Hoffman can help me out.
MR. WOOD: All I know, Darnay, is I've got your e-mail that you posted on April 1, 2001, where you
stated you made the offer to him several months before.
MR. HOFFMAN: Yeah, I don't remember exactly at what point after that I also suggested Daniel
Petrocelli who is, quite frankly, a better lawyer than I am in these areas, so.
MR. WOOD: Well, now we know how Dan Petrocelli gets some of his business. Let's go on to
something else.
MR. HOFFMAN: Through referrals, Lin, just like most lawyers.
MR. WOOD: Let's go on to something else.

Print this item

  do parents use garrotes?
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:56 PM - Forum: Cord ligature - Garrote - No Replies

from Steve Thomas depo:

"Thomas depo 25 - garrote"
 
  
Q. They just -- strike that. The FBI that you rely on also, though, told you that they have not any
reported incident of a parent garroting a child to death; that's what the FBI told you about the garrote,
true?

A. With a ransom note present and an apparent botched kidnapping where the body was found in the
victim's home, that is correct.
Q. Is it your testimony, then, that there are cases that the FBI has in their files where a parent has
garroted a child, has strangled to death a child by use of a garrote; is that your testimony?
A. No, my testimony is I don't know what the FBI has in their files concerning their investigation or
review of child homicides.
Q. Did you ever ask about whether there was any prior case that you could study where a parent
had used a garrote to strangle a child; did you ever ask the FBI that?
A. I don't recall personally asking them that.
Q. Do you know whether anybody in the Boulder Police Department investigation ever made that
inquiry to the FBI?
A. There were several trips and inquiries and phone calls and meetings with the FBI. And I don't
know, but it would sound reasonable that one would ask that.
Q. If one asked, no one ever gave you the answer and you didn't find out about it, right?
A. They did explain that they have seen cases in which parents have feloniously slain their own
children in any number of ways. If garroting was one of those, I'm unaware of that.
Q. Wouldn't that be something you would want to know since you have a garrote involved in this
case?
A. Let me answer it simply. Again, I don't know of the FBI, have any knowledge firsthand or
secondhand, denying or confirming the use of a garrote in a previous child homicide.

Print this item

  some from long ago
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:53 PM - Forum: Questions FOR Borg - Replies (1)

jameson[Image: team_icon.gif]
Charter Member
11546 posts

Jun-14-03, 05:51 PM (EST)
[Image: mesg_add_buddy.gif]  
2. "Be honest"
In response to message #1
 
  
You just did a terrible thing - - you ran over the kid next door - - I won't even make this hypothetical involve your own child. So you ran over the kid next door and in a panic you fled the scene - - and the child died becausehe didn't get help soon enough. His parents went looking for him and he died there in the yard in their arms. You knew the kid - - you like the family - - you are devastated.
You are so upset you know you have to take something to calm down - - valium or alcohol or something.
Oh, how guilty you feel - - this child is DEAD and you have never intentionally hurt a living thing.
But you MUST keep the secret - - you can't tell anyone - - you can't face charges, can't afford a lawyer - - you might lose your home, job, family.... what a terrible situation.
So answer this now....
Are you going to invite the cops to stay with you 24/7 while you are so upset and drinking or taking drugs to deal with the guilt?
I don't think so. I think you would just want to shut the door and avoid being with anyone who might sense your guilt or hear you say something that indicated guilt.
I don't think the Ramseys acted "guilty" at all.

Print this item

  from Thomas deposition in Wolf case
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:44 PM - Forum: Barbie nightgown - Replies (3)

"Thomas depo 23 - nightgown and panties"
 
  
Q. There was a Barbie nightgown found in the wine cellar where JonBenet Ramsey's body was
found, right?

A. Right.
Q. Was there any evidence obtained from that nightgown?
A. Not that I'm aware of prior to departing August of '98.
Q. There was no fiber evidence that you're aware of that was found on that nightgown?
A. Not that Detective Trujillo shared with me.
Q. Was there any blood evidence found on that nightgown?
A. Not that I'm aware of.
Q. Any hair evidence found on that nightgown, to your knowledge, firsthand or secondhand?
A. Not that I'm aware of.
Q. Was there any decision made or conclusion drawn, perhaps is the better way to say it, that you're
aware of, from any source, as to whether the panties that JonBenet Ramsey was found in had been
worn and washed in the past or were new, in effect, fresh out of the package?
A. I believe that was after my departure that that underwear investigation took place.
Q. So, again, the state of the evidence with respect to that issue, you do not know, true?
A. Right.
Q. So, again, the state of the evidence with respect to that issue, you do not know, true?
A. Right.
Q. Do you know whether there were any autopsy photos that showed JonBenet from the standpoint
of being able to look at it to see whether or not the panties, not the other articles of clothing, but the
panties, fit her or whether they were obviously not a correct fit?
A. It's my belief from detective briefings that they were referred to as oversized floral panties.
Q. Thank you. Were there any autopsy photos is my question?
A. Without the long-john over pants covering the underwear, I don't recall seeing any autopsy photos
of just the child in her underpants.

Print this item

  assault during murder
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-24-2017, 06:39 PM - Forum: Prior sexual abuse - Replies (2)

from Steve Thomas deposition

Q. Well, did all the experts agree that JonBenet Ramsey was alive at the time of the injury to her
vagina?

A. Again, I don't know what experts you're referring to but we had --
Q. The ones that you listened to.
A. Let me finish, Mr. Wood.
Q. The ones that your department hired?
A. At times there was, among experts, as was to be expected, there was conflict of opinion. But
regarding the prior vaginal trauma if that's what you're asking about, this blue ribbon panel of pediatric
medical experts they brought in seemed to me to be in agreement on some other conclusions.
Q. I'm talking about the acute vaginal trauma she suffered at the time of her murder. The
agreement was unanimous that she was alive at the time that that vaginal trauma was inflicted, true?
A. Yes, I believe that's correct.
Q. Now, tell me who the members were of what you call the blue ribbon panel of pediatric experts,
give me their names, please.
A. I think the FBI recommended --
Q. Just their names, not the recommendation?
A. -- and tried to -- and he participated, was a doctor from California, Dr. John McCann, from
Miami was Dr., I believe it's, Valerie Rau and the third gentleman from St. Louis, I think he was the
Dean of the Children's Hospital or the pediatrics at Glenn Cannon and I don't recall his name offhand.
Q. Anybody else on this panel?
A. On and off, we saw one of Hunter's advisors, which was Krugman.
Q. Was he on the blue ribbon panel that you keep referring to?
A. Krugman?
Q. Yeah, the blue ribbon panel of pediatric experts that I asked you about. Was Krugman on that
panel?
A. No.
Q. Okay.
A. I think that panel consisted of those three individuals.

Print this item