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



Search Forums

(Advanced Search)

Forum Statistics
» Members: 12
» Latest member: JusticeforJonBenet
» Forum threads: 1,311
» Forum posts: 3,996

Full Statistics

Online Users
There are currently 48 online users.
» 0 Member(s) | 48 Guest(s)

Latest Threads
Schiller's OVERKILL - 12/...
Forum: What is in the news - staying up to date
Last Post: CA4Now
11-30-2018, 06:10 PM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 135
Early Tests
Forum: DNA found in panties
Last Post: Susan
11-25-2018, 07:23 PM
» Replies: 10
» Views: 2,173
The Hoffman/Miller FAX
Forum: Handwriting
Last Post: jameson245
11-24-2018, 07:58 PM
» Replies: 5
» Views: 2,661
at least three
Forum: The House at 755 15th Street, Boulder, CO
Last Post: Dave
11-18-2018, 01:32 PM
» Replies: 1
» Views: 128
Boulder child assaults ne...
Forum: Boulder crimes
Last Post: jameson245
11-17-2018, 04:27 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 81
Chuck Green
Forum: Names to remember
Last Post: jameson245
11-14-2018, 10:24 AM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 88
Roscoe Clark
Forum: Absolutely insane posts - mostly by BORG
Last Post: jameson245
11-06-2018, 09:18 AM
» Replies: 10
» Views: 5,308
Nyla's obit
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
11-02-2018, 05:37 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 130
Nyla's obit
Forum: Fleet and Priscilla White
Last Post: jameson245
11-02-2018, 05:27 PM
» Replies: 0
» Views: 105
Lynn Wilcox
Forum: Housekeepers, workers in the house
Last Post: CA4Now
10-29-2018, 08:56 PM
» Replies: 2
» Views: 655

  My own partial review of Woodward
Posted by: meibomius - 03-03-2017, 02:26 AM - Forum: We Have Your Daughter - Replies (6)

My thoughts from partial reading (about 1/2, plus various sections on specific subjects). Would be very interested to hear others' opinions:

For what it's worth, for those interested: I've gotten through nearly half of WHYD by Woodward, and it strikes me as very well researched and documented, pretty reliable and accurate, but far from perfect. Of course, no book on such a subject can be. But I am disappointed that she so often lets her pro-Ramsey bias show so plainly. Mind you, I don't think she misrepresents events or masquerades conjecture or opinion as being fact—in my estimation she is solid on facts and she documents nearly everything with sources. But she often goes overboard in her criticism of the media or the Boulder Police Dept., splitting hairs on borderline items in order to compile as long a list of errors/untruths as possible.
I fully appreciate that assembling such a book is a monumental task, and some number of errors is inevitable, but it's disappointing to see such simple errors as repeatedly referring to the contents of JBR's "stomach" when the autopsy clearly specifies small intestine. She may be biology-challenged and think there's no significant difference, and that stomach is close enough and easier for the reader, but the distinction goes to the heart of the debate she is describing, and her error will cause confusion and likely add many pages of unnecessary arguing to threads on forums like this.

Woodward also overdoes it in her criticism of Ofcr. French—not that he didn't make a lot of mistakes, but she throws everything but the kitchen sink at him, and for instance makes a very obvious error criticizing his decision not to open the wine cellar door and look inside. While it certainly was a mistake, his underlying logic is sound, i.e., they were investigating a kidnapping, and he was looking for points of entry/exit; the latch was on the outside of the door, so no one could have left by that route and then closed the latch behind them, and couldn't have entered that way if the latch was closed when they came in. Woodward doesn't even consider this.

But the errors I have found are few and far between, and quite frankly the most annoying thing to me is her refusal to use the names of people such the Whites, Stines and Fernies, constantly referring to them merely as "friends" (and, oddly enough, she does the same with a few BPD officers, too). This makes the narrative confusing at times (which friend is she talking about now?), and difficult to cross reference, and seems totally unnecessary since the names of these people and their respective roles in events have been public knowledge for many years. She makes it difficult to wholeheartedly recommend her book when the names Fernie, Stine and White are nowhere to be found in the index.

All in all, I think it is a top-notch addition to the literature of the JBR case, and I hope some RDI with any sort of open mind can look past the bias and shortcomings, and be able to recognize the contribution Woodward's extensive research and documentation makes to a clearer understanding of the case.

Print this item

  skid marks
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 05:05 PM - Forum: Feces - Replies (3)

From the 1998 interrogation with Tom Haney

PATSY RAMSEY: It looks like her underwear
8 drawer, one of the drawers there in the bathroom
9 cabinet.
10 TOM HANEY: What is in there?
11 PATSY RAMSEY: It looks like underwear, a
12 hair band or something, and a pencil, a pen, a pen back
13 there. (Inaudible). A magic marker or something. I
14 don't know why that would be in there, but --
15 TOM HANEY: And in the normal course there at
16 home would just underwear be in there or would other
17 items be in there, too.
18 PATSY RAMSEY: Primarily underwear, but
19 she -- often times things would be on the top and fall
20 down in the drawers. But that be unusual for a pen
21 like that to be in an underwear drawer.
22 TOM HANEY: How about other clothing items,
23 would they end up in there or would they be there?
24 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, yeah, you know, those
25 two or three drawers would be underwear, pajamas, you

1 know. So, you know, they may not get in the exact
2 right drawer every time.
3 TOM HANEY: Could there have been the long
4 underwear.
5 PATSY RAMSEY: Yes. I think I had long
6 underwear.


16 TOM HANEY: How about 378?
17 PATSY RAMSEY: This is JonBenet's floor, her
18 pants.
19 TOM HANEY: Do you recall those particular
20 pants, when she would have worn those last?
21 PATSY RAMSEY: Not for sure. Probably
22 recently because they are dropped in the middle of the
23 floor, but I don't remember exactly.
24 TOM HANEY: They are kind of inside out.

1 TOM HANEY: 379 is a close up of it.
2 appears they are stained.
4 TOM HANEY: Is that something that JonBenet
5 had a problem with?
6 PATSY RAMSEY: Well she, you know, she was at
7 age where she was learning to wipe herself and, you
8 know, sometimes she wouldn't do such a great job.
9 TOM HANEY: Did she have accidents, if you
10 will, in the course of the day or the night, as opposed
11 to just bed wetting?
12 PATSY RAMSEY: Not usually, no, huh-uh. That
13 would probably be more from just not wiping real well.

14 TOM HANEY: Okay. Do you know how long those
15 would have been in that position in 378 on the floor in
16 there?
17 PATSY RAMSEY: It depends when she wore them
18 last.
19 TOM HANEY: Again, do you recall?
20 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't remember.
21 TOM HANEY: On Christmas day were you in that
22 bathroom at all?
23 PATSY RAMSEY: Very likely, but I can't say
24 for sure.
25 TOM HANEY: Had you been in there that day,

1 would you have done something with them?

2 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I got, you know -- that
3 night I got -- I know I got the long Johns for her out
4 of that bathroom.
5 TOM HANEY: Right, out of one of the draws in
6 there.

8 TOM HANEY: Do you recall seeing those on the
9 floor that night when you got the --
11 TOM HANEY: -- underwear.
12 PATSY RAMSEY: They could have been there. I
13 don't know.
14 TOM HANEY: Could have.
15 PATSY RAMSEY: Could have been there, yes.
16 Don't know for sure.
17 TOM HANEY: Is it possible that some point
18 during the night she would have gotten up and put those
19 on or thrown them down there or changed in some way;
20 trying to account for those being there.
21 PATSY RAMSEY: I just -- I can't imagine
22 that. No, because I put those -- she was zonked out
23 asleep, so I put her to bed. And she had those, she
24 had worn the black velvet ones to Priscilla's.
25 What she had on earlier that day, I just

1 can't remember. It might have been those. I just
2 can't remember. Could have taken those off, you know,
3 gotten the dress to go to Priscilla's and then left
4 them there.

Print this item

  Smit and Kane questioning John
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 04:55 PM - Forum: Broken window/ Spider web - Replies (1)

I'm going to show you these
2 and see if, first of all, can you explain to me
3 how you got into that window, while I'm showing
5 JOHN RAMSEY: Well you can just lift the
6 grate out and slide it out, lay it on the ground
7 and then jump down into the well.
8 LOU SMIT: And when you slide it out, what
9 do you mean by sliding it out?
10 JOHN RAMSEY: Well, I think there was a
11 couple of supports on the side (INAUDIBLE) went
12 here and just lift that up. I didn't lift it up.
13 LOU SMIT: Right, and then straight down.
14 JOHN RAMSEY: I think I probably lifted it
15 up and just pulled it away from the hole.
16 LOU SMIT: And then did you have any trouble
17 getting in?
19 LOU SMIT: And how much do you weigh? Right
20 about then?
21 JOHN RAMSEY: Probably about what I do now:
22 195.
23 LOU SMIT: And you're how tall?
24 JOHN RAMSEY: Five ten, nine and a half.
25 LOU SMIT: And you say that you went down

1 in there and you had taken your clothing off?
2 JOHN RAMSEY: I had my suit on, so I took
3 my suit coat off and my pants off so I wouldn't
4 (INAUDIBLE). I might have taken my shirt off. But
5 it's not difficult to get in. it would be
6 difficult to get out; you needed something to step
7 on. But basically you just open the window and
8 just let yourself drop down on the ground.
9 LOU SMIT: Have you ever gotten out that
10 way?
11 JOHN RAMSEY: No. I've (INAUDIBLE) the house.
12 LOU SMIT: Do you know anyone that has?
13 JOHN RAMSEY: No, I don't.
14 LOU SMIT: So you say you just went down into
15 the window well where you kicked out the window.
16 Then what did you have to do? What's your next
17 step?
18 JOHN RAMSEY: Then you had reach in to
19 unlatch the window, and if it's stuck, you just
20 pop it open. I mean, I don't remember if I slid in
21 face forward or a turned around. Probably turned
22 around, turn around backwards and put your needs
23 on the ledge here and let your feet in and then
24 just drop down. That's probably how I would have
25 done it?

1 LOU SMIT: Now you say that the time that
2 you went into this window, that was nighttime?
3 JOHN RAMSEY: Um hmm.
4 LOU SMIT: And you say it was about 11:30 at
5 night? Obviously it would be dark at that time?
6 What's your recollection of the difficulty of
7 getting into the house then?
8 JOHN RAMSEY: Well I guess I remember the
9 unknown harm is when you drop the last foot or two
10 in the basement. Because that basement room is
11 always kind of a mess. You're not quite sure what
12 you're going to land in.
13 Once I was in the basement I could find my way to
14 the door. The light switch is over by the door. So
15 you got to be careful because there's a lot of
16 junk in there.
17 LOU SMIT: But you could make your way
18 around? Would you be able to even see?
19 JOHN RAMSEY: Well, I remember being able
20 to see real well, I think. Cause there's not
21 (INAUDIBLE) light in that basement room. So unless
22 there was light left on or something in one of the
23 rooms you wouldn't have been --
24 LOU SMIT: So even if (INAUDIBLE) you know
25 where it was? Where's the light switch at if you

1 look at the diagram?
2 JOHN RAMSEY: Right here.
3 LOU SMIT: So you're pointing just to the
4 end of the train room table there?


22 LOU SMIT: Great. Great. But again, that
23 is the window well. And I'm going to show you some
24 photographs of the window well. And again those
25 are photographs number 418 through 425.


1 MIKE KANE: Can I ask a quick question of
2 John?
3 LOU SMIT: Sure, go ahead.
4 MIKE KANE: You said that this was in the
5 summer. Can you be more specific (INAUDIBLE). You
6 said that Patsy probably got delayed?
7 JOHN RAMSEY: Well, I don't remember exactly.
8 I'm just guessing.
9 MIKE KANE: When did she usually go up to --
10 JOHN RAMSEY: They went up usually in the
11 first week of June then came back in the last week
12 of August. So it would have been in that
13 timeframe.
14 MIKE KANE: And she always (INAUDIBLE)?
15 JOHN RAMSEY: Right.
16 LOU SMIT: I'll start off first with these.
17 These are photographs that were taken on the 30th
18 of December. And this is a series of photographs,
19 like I mentioned 418 through 425.
20 JOHN RAMSEY: I was really (INAUDIBLE) the
21 ivy is under the grate.
22 LOU SMIT: And what does that signify to
23 you?
24 JOHN RAMSEY: That it had been moved fairly
25 recently. I would have expected that the ivy to be

1 dead. It was (INAUDIBLE) like that
2 LOU SMIT: (INAUDIBLE) because we had seen
3 that also. And I don't want to mislead you.
4 Because, obviously all of us have seen that. And
5 at first we didn't know exactly why that was. But
6 we think a perhaps an officer may have moved that
7 grate. So I just wanted you to know that. Because
8 it's very easy to make the conclusion that it was
9 done.
10 But we have had some real discussion on this and
11 did find out that an officer had moved that grate.
12 I usually don't tell you whether we know about
13 that. But otherwise that's misleading.
14 But that's the same grate in the same area then?
16 LOU SMIT: Now you replaced that grate
17 completely with a new grate, is that correct?
18 JOHN RAMSEY: Well I think it was replaced,
19 yeah.
20 LOU SMIT: A question I'm dying to ask, does
21 anybody have any photos before the officer thinks
22 he moved the grate?
24 DAVID WILLIAMS: We can put an end to this
25 if the officer had any recollection.

1 LOU SMIT: That's something that we're still
2 looking into.
3 JOHN RAMSEY: Can we find out what it is that
4 (INAUDIBLE) that the dirt and dust had been
5 disturbed?
6 LOU SMIT: If that's your observation, then
7 it's good.
8 JOHN RAMSEY: When I was there it was July,
9 that was six months earlier.
10 LOU SMIT: I would like to just add something
11 though before we move too much further. I would
12 like to do that. (INAUDIBLE) the wind was very
13 strong in that area. Is It possible that the wind
14 could have done this? That it could have blown
15 into the --
16 JOHN RAMSEY: Disturb the --
17 LOU SMIT: Right.
18 JOHN RAMSEY: It would have blown a lot of
19 dust in there. (INAUDIBLE) to clean it off. I
20 mean, there was a nasty window well with spider
21 wells. It was just dirty.
22 LOU SMIT: And for your information also,
23 there is some spider webs also. I just want to
24 make sure that you're not misled.
25 JOHN RAMSEY: I appreciate it. I mean these

1 spots look clean; cleaner than the rest. That's
2 glass there. A piece of glass there. I don't know
3 why -- I mean if there's enough wind, it kinds of
4 kicks things up. I don't know why this would have
5 been cleaner than the next two. I wouldn't have
6 been down there for six months. I would have
7 expected a more uniform (INAUDIBLE).
8 That's kind of an odd state to be in too.
9 LOU SMIT: Do you remember anything
11 JOHN RAMSEY: Oh, maybe the top corner
12 where that little circle thing is.
13 LOU SMIT: And you're sure the last time
14 that you were in there was in the summer?
15 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah. I'm sure.
16 LOU SMIT: Any questions you'd like to?
17 MIKE KANE: Well I have a lot of questions
18 about the things that we've covered. But I just
19 didn't want interrupt you.


18 LOU SMIT: I just have one more window.
19 MIKE KANE: I mean, I have other areas.
20 LOU SMIT: What I'm going to show is
21 photograph number 252. In fact, I'll maybe hold it
22 up for the camera, and I'll ask Mr. Ramsey, what
23 does that show?
24 JOHN RAMSEY: Well it shows the window
25 open and the suitcase. But the suitcase, when I

1 first saw it, the suitcase was flat up against the
2 wall and for some reason I felt like that window
3 opened to the other side.
4 LOU SMIT: Any other observations that you
6 JOHN RAMSEY: I don't know. I realize it
7 looks like just kind of marks on the wall, but I
8 can't --
9 LOU SMIT: On the diagram, John, can you
10 show us where that is?
11 JOHN RAMSEY: We're here.
12 LOU SMIT: Now is that the area that you
13 observed earlier on the 26th and then a little bit
14 later with Fleet White?
15 JOHN RAMSEY: Right.
16 LOU SMIT: Does that look similar to that?
17 JOHN RAMSEY: Except for when I was there
18 the suitcase was flat up against the wall.
19 MIKE KANE: When you say flat up against the
20 wall, how do you mean?
21 JOHN RAMSEY: It was standing up like this,
22 only it the light surface was against the wall.
23 LOU SMIT: You said you moved it? Did you
24 mention that?
25 JOHN RAMSEY: I moved it a bit just to see

1 if there was glass. It's funny how you remember
2 things. I swear that window opened from the other
3 side. I guess other than that, I can't see
4 anything.
5 LOU SMIT: Now is this the suitcase you
6 described as John Andrew's suitcase?
7 JOHN RAMSEY: Well it was -- I mean, it
8 looks like it. It looks a little darker but I
9 think it's cause the room is darker. It was like a
10 hard case, a Samsonite suitcase that I think, I
11 think, John Andrew when he came to college, he
12 brought all his stuff out and left it at our
13 house.
14 LOU SMIT: Now you said that you picked up
15 pieces of glass.
16 JOHN RAMSEY: Um hmm.
17 LOU SMIT: A few little pieces.
18 JOHN RAMSEY: Um hmm.
19 LOU SMIT: And did you say you put them on
20 the window well or on the suitcase or do you
21 remember?
22 JOHN RAMSEY: I don't remember for sure.
23 There wasn't enough there for me to be convinced
24 that the window was broken that morning. I was
25 assuming that it had been broken by me and it


1 hadn't really been fixed.


9 LOU SMIT: How about in the
10 basement?
11 JOHN RAMSEY: Not at all unless it
12 was just accidental.
13 LOU SMIT: If you were to go down
14 in that basement at night, would you be able to
15 see your way around down there?
16 JOHN RAMSEY: It would be tough.
17 But no lights on, it would be difficult. And
18 there is always a lot of junk around. You know,
19 it was open, the door here usually the light was
20 on in this hall and if you left the door open,
21 it wasn't a very long stairway, it would have
22 provided some illumination probably in this
23 area. But.
24 LOU SMIT: Where was the light
25 switch for that basement?

1 JOHN RAMSEY: It seems to me it
2 was either against that wall or as you went into
3 the basement. Right now I don't remember for
4 sure. There was a light, I think a light bulb
5 right there. You might have had a little street
6 light in this window at night.
7 LOU SMIT: Where was the street
8 light located at?
9 JOHN RAMSEY: Hum, I don't
10 remember. I think there's a telephone pole
11 right in here somewhere.
12 LOU SMIT: In front of the --
13 JOHN RAMSEY: I mean there is one
14 down here maybe. Yeah, they are in front of the
15 house. No, that's not right. The telephone
16 pole is in back of the house. We had a lawn
17 light that was out at the edge of the drive --
18 edge of the sidewalk.
19 LOU SMIT: Was that normally on or
20 off?
21 JOHN RAMSEY: I think it was
22 normally on. It usually was left on all the
23 time.

Print this item

  from interviews
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 04:50 PM - Forum: Broken window/ Spider web - Replies (1)

Quote: 1997-04-30: John Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo

John Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo
Also present, Pat Burke, Bryan Morgan, Pete Hoffstrom, Jon Foster
April 30, 1997 - Boulder, Colorado

JR: Ah, well, I remember they took me aside, and we sat in John Andrew’s room which is the one next to JonBenet’s and she went through what I should do when we talked to the caller and I must insist that I talk to JonBenet and that we need until 5 o’clock to raise the money. I’d actually called my (inaudible) and arranged for the money. Ah, and I think we had by that time started to wonder if one of the housekeepers might be involved. And there was some activity around that direction. We waited until past 11 and then we, and then I think we were in the living room and Linda said why don’t you take someone and look through the house and see if there’s anything you notice that’s unusual. And Fleet and I, Fleet was standing there and said he’d go with me. And we went down to the basement, went into the train room, which is, you know, the train set is, and that’s really the only window that’s, would let in entrance into the basement.
And actually I’d gone down there earlier that morning, into that room, and the window was broken, but I didn’t see any glass around, so I assumed it was broken last summer. I used that window to get into the house when (inaudible) I didn’t have a key. But the window was open, about an eighth of an inch, and just kind latched it. So I went back down with Fleet, we looked around for some glass again, still didn’t see any glass. And I told him that I thought that the break came from when I did that last summer and then, then I went from there into the cellar. Pull on the door, it was latched. I reach up and unlatched it, and then I saw the white blanket, (inaudible).

ST: Well, let me follow up on this John. John I’m very sensitive to how tough this is, and you’ll appreciate that we need to get through this. On that trip to the basement, shortly after 1 p.m. on the 26th, Fleet showed you the window, the broken basement window.
JR: No, I, I think was the first one to enter the room.
ST: OK, but . . .
JR: I said, you know, this window’s broken, but I think I broke it last summer. It just hasn’t been fixed. And it was opened, but I closed it earlier and we got down on the floor and looked around for some glass just to be sure that it hadn’t been broken again.
ST: And Fleet had talked about earlier being down there, I think alone at one point, and discovering that window. When you say that you found it earlier that day and latched it, at what time of day was that?
JR: I don’t know. I mean it would have been probably, probably before 10 o’clock.
ST: Was that prior to Fleet’s first trip down?
JR: I didn’t know he was in the basement. I didn’t know that. I mean other than that trip with me.
ST: And on the trip that you latched the window, were you alone when you went down and latched the window?
JR: Yep.
ST: And on this, what I’m assuming is only your second trip to the basement on the 26th with Fleet, how much time did you spend in the basement before moving to the cellar room door?
JR: Not very much time. A minute maybe, or less, probably less than that.

ST: And on the morning of the 26th, you made one trip alone to the basement, and it was only on the second trip with Fleet that you, then shortly thereafter that you went to this basement room?
JR: Right.
ST: OK. When you had previously broken that basement window to gain entry to the home when you had been locked out, can you approximate what month that was?
JR: Well, I think it was last summer. Because Patsy was up at Lake (inaudible) all summer, and it would have been July or August probably, somewhere in that time frame.
ST: Did you remove that grate and get down into the window well?
JR: Uh-huh.
ST: And what did you use to break the pane?
JR: Ah, I don’t remember. Might have been my foot, I don’t know.
ST: OK. You reach in, I’m assuming, unlatched it and gain entry through that small window.
JR: Yeah.
ST: Did you then replace the grate onto that window well?
JR: Oh I probably would have done it that night. I’m sure I didn’t the next morning or, you know, or thereafter.
ST: Did you remove that whole grate off onto the, off the well, to jump down there and get in?
JR: Ah, probably. I don’t remember.
ST: Is there any reason that window went unrepaired?
JR: No. I mean it’s, Patsy usually took care of those things, and I just rarely went to the basement, so it just, I guess, got overlooked. Although she did think that she asked the cleaning lady’s husband to fix it over Thanksgiving when they were doing some repair work there, but I don’t know if that’s ever been confirmed whether he fixed it or not.
ST: And you mentioned when you went down in the morning, the 26th, and it was unlatched, did that strike you as odd or did you bring that to anybody’s attention?
JR: I, I don’t know. I mean when I was, I think, yeah, I think it probably struck me as a little odd, but it wasn’t, I mean sometimes that window would be open because the basement got hot, or one of those windows would be opened. So it wasn’t . . .
ST: Particularly unusual?
JR: It was dramatically out of the ordinary, but, that is, I thought about it.

JR: I mean, based on what I understand, there was a practice not and all of that. Somebody obviously spent some time there, and I guess found their way around the house the same time, but my, I mean my theory is that someone came in through the basement window.
Because it was a new Samsonite suitcase also sitting right under the window, and you would have had to, you could have gotten into the house without that, but you couldn’t have gotten out that window without something to step on. And to even have known those windows were there, wouldn’t have been obvious to somebody who just was walking by. But . . .

ST: You talking about the window in the back, was not obvious?
JR: Yeah. No, I mean, yeah, it’s not obvious, but that is to me because that is the way to get into the house, and we know that the grate could be pulled off and the windows were not painted shut and, you know, it’s just I guess that’s why we never gave it much thought about . . .
??: And we asked a couple of times that that grates kind of out of the way, and you have to, I wouldn’t have known it was there. I mean, you can’t see from the back alleyway, you can’t see from the front. It’s out of the ordinary, out of the way picture, excuse me, out of the way window.

TT: OK. And let’s also hop back to the grate for just a second, cause I picked the grate up, it’s really heavy, I mean fairly heavy. Picked it up, moved it out of the way, kind of hopped down, I mean first peaked into that window, hopped down into that window well, you ended up, have to kick the window, break the window somehow, reach in and unlatch it. How far of a drop is it, or is it difficult I should say, to drop from the window well.
JR: No.
TT: It seem like it’s, for me I think it’s probably . . .
JR: That high.
BM: Do you want an estimate of that?
TT: Certainly.
JR: it’s probably, I don’t know, four feel maybe, five feet.
TT: OK. But on the outside you’ve got that kind of skinny narrow window well. Did you have an difficulty sliding into that or sliding down the wall?
JR: Yeah, well, as I recall, I did it at night and I had a suit on, and I took my suit off and did it in my underwear. But, it’s not easy, I mean you can get in that way, you get dirty, but.
TT: It’s not a graceful way to get in.
JR: No, no.
TT: It’s difficult because of the angles.
JR: Right.
TT: All right.
ST: Tom, let me just ask John this. Do you sit down and slide through, buttocks first if you will, through a window like that or, do you recall how you went through the actual window, John?
JR: I don’t I mean, I don’t remember. Seems like, I mean, I don’t remember, but I think I would probably gone in feet first.
ST: Feet first, backwards?
JR: Yeah.
ST: And when you went through in your underwear, were you wearing shoes or?
JR: I still had my shoes on, yeah.
ST: And were those with a suit, were they business shoes.
JR: They were probably, probably those shoes.
St: OK. And what are those shoes?
JR: Business shoes.
ST: And for the record, are those, brown lace-up, men’s business
JR: Oxford, not these shoes, but they are shoes that I wear with a suit, just a pair of business shoes, dress shoes.
TT: John, when you went down in the basement the first time and found the broken window, it was unlock, you latched it, did you notice that the window, excuse me, if you notice if the room was overly cold or anything like that?
JR: No, it wasn’t. I didn’t notice that it was.

Quote:1997-04-30: Patsy Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo

Patsy Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo
Also present, Pat Burke, Bryan Morgan, Pete Hoffstrom, Jon Foster
April 30, 1997 - Boulder, Colorado

TT: Okay. Do you remember if John ever went down to the basement to check any of the windows down there before the police arrived?
PR: You know I, you’re just going to ask him I don’t . . .
TT: Okay.

TT: When did John break that window in the basement?
PR: He, I don’t know exactly when he did it, but I think it was last summer sometime when we, the kids and I were at the lake.
TT: In Charlevoix.
PR: In Charlevoix and he told me to come back from out of town or whatever and he didn’t have a key and the only way he could get in was to break the window.
TT: Okay.
PR: The little um, like door, little window to the basement there.
TT: He had to life the grate out of the way to, to get in there.
PR: Yeah, that’s the one, um hum.
TT: Okay. Any reason why that one wasn’t replaced or the pane wasn’t fixed or anything?
PR: No, I don’t know whether I fixed it or didn’t fix it. I can’t remember even trying to remember that, um, I remember when I got back, uh, in the fall, you know . . .
TT: Um hum.
PR: . . .uh, went down there and cleaned up all the glass.
TT: Okay.
PR: I mean I cleaned that thoroughly and I asked Linda to go behind me and vacuum. I mean I picked up every chunk, I mean, because the kids played down there in that back area back there.
TT: Um hum.
PR: And I mean I scoured that place when, cause they were always down there. Burke particularly and the boys would go down there and play with cars and things and uh, there was just a ton of glass everywhere.
TT: Okay.
PR: And I cleaned all that up and then she, she vacuumed a couple of times down there.
TT: To get all the glass.
PR: In the fall yeah cause it was just little, you know, pieces, big pieces, everything.
TT: Do you ever recall getting that window replaced?
PR: Yeah, uh, I can’t remember. I just can’t remember whether I got it replaced or not.

PR: And uh, they also washed the windows, so they may be able to recall whether that window, and he was going to do some odd jobs.
TT: Mervin was?
PR: Uh huh.
TT: Okay.
PR: Uh, fix some shelves in the playroom and some uh, closet doors that had come off their track and some stuff like that.
TT: Um hum.
PR: And so I would, it seems to me like she and I talked about that window or did, somehow I vaguely remember that if it would have gotten fixed he very likely would be the one to fix it. And at any rate they were going to wash all the windows, so they would have known……
TT: Whether it was fixed or not?
PR: Yeah.

ST: And I have spoken with Linda, and she’s identified this suitcase as belonging to, well not necessarily belonging to, but a suitcase that she has used and that John Andrew has used, and that John Andrew likely had left at your house.
PR: Right.
ST: Do you recognize that blue suitcase?
PR: Yes.
ST: OK. Can you tell me anything about it?
PR: Well, just it’s old hard Samsonite or whatever, you know.
ST: And what this something that John Andrew let at the 15th Street home while he went to school at CU?
PR: Yeah, yeah, that’s to my recollection. Yeah, he moved out here with a bunch of stuff and then he left a lot of stuff t our house that he didn’t want to take to the dorm.
ST: Do you know where he kept that in your home, or where you last saw that?
PR: No, I don’t remember where I last saw it.
PR: He, I don’t know.
ST: Where would John Andrew store his other items and affects?
PR: Some of the things are in his room I think, in the closet, and I think he put a bunch of stuff down in the basement. A computer, he had a computer and a printer, and I think that might have been in the basement too. It’s pretty big, I think it was in the basement.
ST: Do you know what room in the basement he would have, his stuff was stored in? Was it in the train room, or the…
PR: It wasn’t, I don’t know now, there was so much stuff down there. I can, it could have been anywhere.

Print this item

  Patsy's parents
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 04:28 PM - Forum: other family members - Replies (3)

Don and Nedra Paugh

Print this item

  After the friendship turned sour....
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 04:22 PM - Forum: Frank Coffman - Replies (7)

Boulder Weekly - 02-29-1999 - What I saw at the feeding frenzy

In the Boulder Weekly - February 29, 1999

What I saw at the feeding frenzy
A between-the-lines look at the Ramsey case
by Frank Coffman

In the beginning, the Ramsey murder case seemed simple to solve. The day after the murder, as the Ramsey's housekeeper was leaving the Boulder police station, a detective working on the case told her, "I am confident we'll have an arrest by Sunday."

Instead of an early arrest, the Ramsey case turned into an interminable murder mystery and a feeding frenzy for the media. Children are killed everyday in this country, but the death of JonBenet was different. People around the nation and the world wanted to know all about it.

Almost overnight, Boulder was deluged by national media. The town resented the intrusion on its comfortable neighborhoods and on its image as an ideal place to live. At first, city spokesperson Leslie Aaholm refused even to acknowledge that the crime was a murder, referring to it as an "incident." Reporters ran up against a police department with little to say, except for a crabby police chief who scolded them for covering the story.

The Ramseys and their friends were also tight-lipped or hostile to the media. On one occasion, when a TV journalist drove up to the house of the Fernies (friends who were in the Ramseys' house on the morning of the murder), John Fernie walked up and spat on the vehicle before the journalist even got out. This was going to be a tough story, indeed.

To penetrate the wall of silence around the case, tabloid newspapers and TV shows employed methods that the mainstream news media wouldn't dream of using. The TV show American Journal paid the Ramseys' housekeeper $15,000 to appear on camera. the National Enquirer paid $40,000 for photos of JonBenet. One tabloid TV program used private detectives to pry into the Ramseys' telephone call logs and financial records, tracking the couple's whereabouts by keeping tabs on their credit card purchases.

In the months after the murder, tabloid reporters trailed the Ramseys wherever they went. Craig Lewis of the Globe recalls, "In the early days, we had three cars following the Ramseys-one car with reporters and two cars with photographers." Scott McKiernan, of Zuma photo agency, followed the Ramseys and staked out places they frequented. He also used a radio scanner to listen in on the cellular phone calls of former Ramsey friend Fleet White, overhearing him on one occasion tell his father that the Ramseys were trying to cast him as a suspect in the murder.

When the Ramseys moved into the Boulder home of friends Glen and Susan Stine, one tabloid publication convinced neighbors who disliked the Stines to allow reporters to use their house as a base of operations. A video camera was set up in a front window, taping the unwitting Ramseys as they came and went.

National Enquirer reporters grabbed the Stines' trash, gleaning scraps of information on the Ramseys such as the name of their psychiatrist, the kinds of anti-depressants they'd been prescribed, and other leads about their activities.

One day in February 1997, the Stines struck back at the press when Globe reporter Ken Harrell tried a more direct approach. Instead of parking up the street like other reporters, he walked straight up, knocked on the Stines front door and asked to speak with the Ramseys. Susan Stine, who is sometimes called "Patsy's pit bull," opened the door a crack and asked to see his identification. As Harrell held up his wallet to show her his ID, Mrs. Stine grabbed it and slammed the door in his face. She then called the police to report a "stalker" at the front door. Officers arrived to find Harrell agitated to a degree that he indeed bore some resemblance to a crazed stalker. They put him on the ground and handcuffed him, before they realized how Mrs. Stine had contrived the situation.

John Ramsey, who was in the house when the incident occurred, later laughed about how Mrs. Stine handled the Globe reporter. At an employee meeting at the offices of his company, Access Graphics, Ramsey brought up the episode as an example of how to deal with the news media. Diane Hallis, who worked at Access Graphics, recalls that John Ramsey would look out the third floor windows of the offices trying to spot reporters. "He hated them," she says. "His anger was directed toward the media, but never toward the killer. He never mentioned the killer."

"You bastard!"

John Ramsey said on CNN six days after the murder that he wasn't angry about the crime; however, he seemed enraged at photographers who confronted him. In Atlanta in 1997, John Ramsey and Glen Stine chased a National Enquirer photographer down the street and into a restaurant, where the photographer managed to elude them by hiding in the kitchen.

In January 1998 in the Atlanta airport, John Ramsey tussled with a Globe photographer who was waiting for him in the airport. Spotting a photographer at a street carnival in Charlevoix, Michigan in the summer of 1997, John Ramsey jumped up on a picnic table, pointed a finger at him and screamed at the top of his lungs, "I told you to get your motherfucking ass out of here!"

I got a taste of the Ramsey temper in Boulder one evening last December when I tried to photograph John as he stood on a downtown street corner. "You bastard!" he said, lunging at me. Grabbing my arm and a fistful of jacket, he tried to throw me to the pavement. "Don't, John-it's not worth it!" yelled his attorney, Michael Bynum. Ramsey then released me and rejoined Bynum, "Pasta Jay" Elowsky and his son, John Andrew. As they walked away, I raised my camera for another shot. Ramsey's cool demeanor returned. "Nice camera," he said, sounding almost amiable.

Of course, the tabloids are liable to provoke anger from anyone who feels hounded. But contrary to the notion that tabloids make up their stories, tab reporters sometimes go to extraordinary lengths to get a story. They are willing to use methods that make the mainstream media cringe, such as paying sources for information.

"We do develop sources," says Don Gentile of the National Enquirer. "Instead of getting a source from inside, we get a source from left-field, which may be just as good."

In the Ramsey case, the Globe and the National Enquirer were willing to pay huge sums for a copy of the ransom note. The Globe knew that the Ramseys had a good quality photocopy of the ransom note, given to them by the police. Ramsey lawyers had given copies of the note to handwriting experts for comparison to the Ramsey's writing. In April 1997, two Globe reporters came to the home of one expert in Evergreen. The reporters brought $30,000 in cash (in $100 bills) to induce this expert to give them a copy of the ransom note. He refused and later called the Jefferson County DA with a complaint of "commercial bribery." But the reporters couldn't be charged with a crime. What they did was not against the law.

On a mission from God

Jeff Shapiro, a 24-year old novice reporter under contract with the Globe, moved to Boulder from Florida in March 1997.

Though he came as a journalist to cover the Ramsey murder, Shapiro felt he'd also been sent by God to help solve the crime. His e-mail address: "JBsAvenger" (i.e. JonBenet's Avenger).

Shapiro's plan was to go undercover and work the story from the inside out. Renting a place next door to the Chi Psi fraternity house where John Andrew lived, Shapiro succeeded in befriending Ramsey's son. He even joined the Episcopal Church that the Ramseys attended. But his persistent questions about the murder case blew his cover. John Andrew's friends became suspicious and warned the younger Ramsey off his engaging, earnest neighbor.

Shapiro was forced to move on to conventional news sources.

Surprisingly, the inexperienced reporter succeeded in cozying up to a crucial figure in the case: District Attorney Alex Hunter.

From May until October 1997, Shapiro was in almost constant contact with Hunter, who didn't seem to look upon him so much as a tabloid reporter, but as an energetic, likable young man who happened to have an infatuation with the case. The avuncular DA even gave the tabloid tyro his private phone numbers. Later he allowed a Globe photographer into his office to take his picture, though he had previously condemned the tabloid's publication of stolen coroner's photos of the crime scene and implements as "reprehensible." And by July 15, 1997, the Globe was quoting Hunter praising the paper's $500,000 reward offered for information leading to an arrest and conviction in the case.

Police detectives were also talking with Shapiro. The young reporter had won their favor when he informed them where they could get white nylon cord identical to the kind used in the murder. Detectives promptly went to the store and bought up all the cord. Although Shapiro was glad to take credit for the discovery, he actually learned about the cord when I mentioned it to him in a phone conversation in May 1997.

Shapiro's subjects didn't always appreciate his attention. Learning that the DA's office considered Fleet White a potential suspect in the case, Shapiro took to following White around. One day White noticed Shapiro tailing him in a car and angrily swung his vehicle around and went after the kid reporter. As Shapiro desperately jockeyed for an escape route, White repeatedly cut him off. The two raced across town until Shapiro got ahead in traffic and escaped through a changing traffic light.

Shapiro also found himself in the middle of the clash between Alex Hunter and the police department. The Ramsey investigation was then run by John Eller, an abrasive police commander who rubbed the DA the wrong way. Hunter tipped Shapiro that Eller was being accused of sexual harassment. (That allegation turned out to be false.) Shapiro in turn tipped police about Hunter's tip. In his bolt-from-the-blue resignation letter last August, Thomas alluded to the episode, writing melodramatically that "an informant" had told police of the DA's "plan to destroy a man's career." Last week, the hyperbolic Thomas again called for the Hunter's resignation over the Shapiro/Eller episode, charging that "the DA engaged the tabloids in a smear campaign." In a recent TV interview, Thomas claimed that Shapiro acted as his "mole inside the DA's office." Shapiro calls that characterization "ridiculous," though he concedes that Thomas did try to push him into such a role.

The reporter's tip to police ended up costing him his cozy relationship with Hunter.

Thomas too suffered repercussions when Police Chief Tom Koby chastised him for investigating the DA when he should have been investigating the murder of JonBenet. Koby also warned Thomas that he would be fired if he had any further contact with Shapiro-a directive that the reporter claims Thomas violated.

Shapiro's rapport with Thomas won him certain privileges. On at least one occasion, Thomas allowed Shapiro to sit in on a sensitive investigation. In July 1997, Thomas asked me to come to the police station to phone Pam Griffin, a friend of Patsy Ramsey, so that he could surreptitiously tape the conversation. The detective wanted to document a remarkable assertion that Griffin had made to me: Patsy Ramsey admitted to her that she wrote the so-called "practice note."

However, said Griffin, Patsy claimed that it was just the aborted start of an invitation to some event which Patsy couldn't recall. Thomas allowed Shapiro to monitor my conversation with Griffin. The session was a bust, though, when Griffin dismissed her previous comments as "speculation" about Patsy's actions.

Shapiro came to believe that his acceptance by Thomas made him a kind of junior detective on the Ramsey case. Others in the department considered him a pest and ignored his theory that Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter as part of a religious sacrifice. When Thomas resigned, he broke off ties with Shapiro, leaving the reporter crushed. Shortly after the resignation, Shapiro showed up unannounced at Thomas' home in Arvada, allegedly to warn him that the Globe planned to use pressure tactics to get an interview with him. The former detective responded with a warning of a restraining order if Shapiro ever came there again.

Having lost his official sources, Shapiro began drawing closer to the Ramsey camp. He finally came full circle, apologizing to John Ramsey for his paper's accusations against him. Fired by the Globe two weeks ago, Shapiro would now like to join the FBI. In the meantime, he intends to go on CBS' 48 Hours program to expose his former employer for using what he now believes were unethical methods.

Jeff Shapiro seemed to think that the case revolved around him, and for a brief time, it almost did. Incredibly, he managed to insinuate himself everywhere and gain the confidence of major figures in the case. He achieved enviable access, but he couldn't keep anyone's trust for long.

Sleaze and vanity

In mid-1997 Ann Bardach of Vanity Fair arrived in Boulder. At the height of tension between the police and the DA, an investigator on the case leaked inside information, including the wording of the ransom note, to Bardach. To cover her source, she pressured me to tell the police a false story that would, in her words, "throw sand in the gears of the investigation." When I refused to help with her scheme, she screamed that I couldn't be trusted. Her paranoid accusations stunned me. She then spread the word that I was trying to steal her article. Finally I broke all contact with her. Editor's note: Ann Bardach calls the above anecdote "categorically false." She emphasizes that there was no professional relationship or any other kind of relationship whatsoever between her and Frank Coffman, and the only confrontations she had with him were restricted to her attempts to "elude his harassment."

While Bardach's secret source at the Boulder PD has never been identified, certain clues point to Steve Thomas.

The complaints about the DA's office that he expressed in his resignation letter are strikingly similar in tone and content to complaints voiced to Bardach by her source. In September, 1997, before Koby canceled his plan to polygraph the detectives to identify the leaker, Thomas expressed fear that he would be blamed. And at about the time that Bardach arrived in Boulder, Thomas made inquiries about the reputation of Vanity Fair.

According to Bardach, she used several sources in investigative agencies on the case, including the FBI, CBI, DA's office and Boulder Police Department. She refuses to comment on the identity of any particular sources.

The media frenzy around the Ramsey case appalled her, Bardach adds. "I've never seen such ethical lapses on the part of journalists-if that's what you can call them; many of them hardly seemed legitimate. The tabloid reporters were all working the story with check books."

Bardach's taste for tabloid reporters didn't improve when the Globe wound up with her article before Vanity Fair appeared on newsstands. The piece was stolen from the printer and faxed to The Denver Post, among other publications.

A Globe editor left a message on Bardach's machine "gloating" over their acquisition of the piece, says Bardach.

Information from her story ended up in newspapers before her magazine article could hit the streets.

Ann Bardach came and went from Boulder, but probably not soon enough for Lawrence Schiller, author of the recently released book, Perfect Murder, Perfect Town. According to The New York Post, Schiller tried to discourage sources from talking with her by spreading the rumor that her story had been canceled. (When I asked him about it, the author refused to address the point on the record.)

Schiller, who has a reputation for hardball tactics, has been tagged a "perfectly amoral profiteer" by author Jeffrey Toobin, who like Schiller, wrote a book about the O.J. Simpson murder case.

Schiller's book has been called "an encyclopedia" of the Ramsey case. It is the most thorough account of the investigation to be published thus far. However, from my personal knowledge of certain events depicted in the book, I believe Schiller often embroiders the truth. For instance, while he was working on the book, he quoted a passage to me. I told him that he had somewhat misquoted what Steve Thomas said to me and I advised him to change it, but he kept the inaccurate quotation in the book. Worse, Schiller's paraphrased reconstruction of my conversation with Lou Smit regarding traits of the note's writer (Page 448) is mostly Schiller's concoction.

Others had the same problem. The Ramseys' former housekeeper, Linda Hoffmann-Pugh, confirms most of what Schiller writes about her, but she objects to several apparent fabrications, such as the claim on Page 561 that the authorities showed her a photograph of the Ramseys' dryer with JonBenet's sheets inside. She was never shown such a photo, she says.

Schiller relied heavily on the uncorroborated statements of Jeff Shapiro. Some statements from Hunter and Thomas that appear as verbatim quotations are actually just recollections from Shapiro.

Some of Schiller's sources cooperated with him on the condition he wouldn't use their names-a condition he violated. For instance, the Ramseys' former Boulder nanny talked to Schiller once he promised to keep her anonymous. Later, before the book was finished, she became alarmed that Schiller might violate their oral agreement. I relayed her concerns to Schiller, but he refused to take her name out of the manuscript. (Schiller declined to respond to the accusation for this story.)

Others, however, were permitted anonymity in the book. Clay Evans, columnist for The Daily Camera, hides behind the fictitious name "Cordwainer Bird" on Page 426.

Schiller has already issued an errata list, but it barely scratches the surface. Jeff Merrick, a former Access Graphics' employee who knew John Ramsey, says that "very little of what he writes about me is accurate." For instance, Merrick insists that he never threatened John Ramsey and he never claimed that the company owed him close to $118,000 or any other specific amount. He calls the numerous errors "almost comical."

The Ramseys' defenders

The Ramseys have managed to find sympathetic media ears. Dan Glick at Newsweek became a virtual apologist for the couple, all the while claiming that he was "agnostic" about their guilt or innocence.

On the Internet, "Jameson's Timeline" web site presents a lengthy defense of the Ramseys. "Jameson" is the pseudonym of a housewife in North Carolina who had a vision while taking a shower two days after the murder that the Ramseys were innocent. She has met John and Patsy Ramsey and has even managed to insert herself into the police investigation. In April 1997, a tip from Jameson persuaded Boulder police detectives to fly to North Carolina to interview an imprisoned pedophile as a possible suspect. In another episode in the summer of 1998, Jameson sicced authorities, including the CBI, on the family of a former employee of the Ramseys, alleging that they were part of a child pornography operation. The only thing that came of the investigation was pain for a wrongly-accused family. Now, "Internet sleuth" Jameson, again claiming to have important evidence, is trying to prod the DA's office into summoning her to testify before the grand jury investigating the murder.

When the public first became curious about the Ramsey case, then Boulder Police Chief Tom Koby termed the murder "a sick curiosity." Sick or not, it is a preoccupation shared by the media, by law enforcement and by a large part of the public. Incredibly, the size of the investigation into the murder of one little girl approaches in magnitude the official investigation of the Kennedy assassination. Until the case is solved, there will be a pack of reporters chasing after every scrap of information to serve up to a public that hungers to know who killed JonBenet.

Frank Coffman is a long-time Boulder resident and part-time writer.

Print this item

  David Duffy
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 03:58 PM - Forum: Names to remember - No Replies

Police were called to the Regal Harvest House hotel about 11 a.m. Wednesday after a maid found a body in a room, McNeill said. The Boulder County coroner's office identified the deceased as David Duffy, 58, of Boca Raton, Fla.

A ruling on cause of death is pending an autopsy today. Medical investigator Dan Pruett said the death did not appear to be suspicious.

Duffy, a native of Manchester, England, was an Enquirer reporter for 21 years, senior editor Charlie Montgomery said.

Duffy had high blood pressure and had been feeling ill. He was supposed to see a doctor Wednesday, Montgomery said.

"I've been in the business for 35 years and he's one of the best reporters I've ever run into,'' Montgomery said.

February 27, 1997

Print this item

  Marilyn Van Derbur Atler
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 03:57 PM - Forum: Names to remember - No Replies

Quote: 1997-02-27: Cops interviewed Atler in Ramsey case

Cops interviewed Atler in Ramsey case
By Kevin McCullen
February 27, 1997
Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer


BOULDER -- Police investigating the slaying of JonBenet Ramsey recently interviewed noted incest victim Marilyn Van Derbur Atler.

Atler, the 1958 Miss America, did not disclose the questions detectives asked her. But one of the topics involved incest, she said.

Meanwhile, as the investigation reached the two-month mark, authorities said a National Enquirer reporter covering the story was found dead in his Boulder hotel room Wednesday. Police said there did not appear to be any sign of foul play.

Atler has become an outspoken national figure against incest and child abuse since her revelation six years ago that her father had sexually abused her as a child.

She said she was happy to help. "I was absolutely used as a resource person. I did not ask them anything,'' Atler said.

Atler is one of more than 120 people interviewed by Boulder police in Colorado and elsewhere since JonBenet's body was found in the basement of her parents' Boulder home on Dec. 26. She had been strangled, sexually assaulted and her skull was fractured.

Atler was contacted because she "has information that may or may not be of use in this case,'' said Boulder police spokesman Kelvin McNeill.

Print this item

  7/11/97 Chuck Green (BORG) column in Denver Post
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 03:48 PM - Forum: Darnay Hoffman - No Replies

N.Y. lawyer steps in
By Chuck Green
Denver Post Columnist

July 11 - More than 1,600 miles away, a New York City attorney has fired a shot across the metaphorical bow of District Attorney Alex Hunter in the Colorado town of Boulder. It's certainly a long shot, as measured by distance. And some might say it's an even longer shot in terms of legal argument.
Lawyer Darnay Hoffman, though, believes he has launched a legal missile aimed at the heart of the investigation into the 1996 Christmas night murder of JonBenet Ramsey.
Hoffman, an attorney who describes himself as an advocate for victims' rights, has become intensely interested in the case of the 6-year-old beauty queen found bludgeoned and strangled in her wealthy family's home.
The case is not unlike another 6-year-old murder victim's, Lisa Steinberg, who died in New York 10 years ago and whose adopted father, millionaire attorney Joel Steinberg, was sentenced to prison for her death.
Hoffman, who worked on that case, says that Steinberg and his wife, Hedda Nussbaum, were arrested within hours after Lisa - found in a coma - was rushed to a hospital. And he says New York police made the arrests with less evidence than exists in the JonBenet Ramsey murder case.
Now Hoffman wants to know why Boulder police haven't arrested JonBenet's parents - a move he believes would eventually solve the case.
"In cases of domestic violence, you usually don't get a conviction based on forensics. It's usually based on a confession by someone who knows what happened," Hoffman says. In the Steinberg case, Hedda Nussbaum - after sitting in jail for a while - eventually agreed to testify against Joel Steinberg. He was convicted of voluntary first-degree manslaughter for causing Lisa's death.
Hoffman has written Hunter demanding access to the Ramsey investigative file, serving notice that he intends to sue the DA for not filing criminal charges.
Hunter's chief assistant, Bill Wise, has responded to Hoffman by telling him that "we do not accept your approach," and "we must therefore refuse your 'demand discovery.' " But by sending his letter to Hunter, the New York attorney has paved the way toward a legal challenge and court review of the Ramsey investigation if no one is arrested for murdering JonBenet.
A little-known Colorado law allows "persons who believe that a prosecuting attorney is not pursuing a case with diligence to petition the court to review the status of the case" and to order charges to be filed.
A Colorado Court of Appeals case confirmed that the law is "a mechanism created by the (legislature) to prevent abuses in connection with the prosecutorial decision." Hoffman says he is pursuing his "prefiling investigation" into Hunter's conduct with himself as the client, as a victims' rights advocate, but sources say he might eventually represent a national victims' rights organization in the case.
Technically, Hoffman's action appears premature. It's considered unlikely that a court would take his requests seriously until the Ramsey case is obviously stalled or abandoned - a status that would take many more months to become arguable.
Meanwhile, Hunter has been put on legal notice that there's a serious New York lawyer looking over his shoulder.

Print this item

  David Liebman
Posted by: jameson245 - 03-01-2017, 03:36 PM - Forum: Handwriting - Replies (5)

David Liebman, M.A., C.D.E.

Certified Document Examiner/President of NADE

981 South Quail Street o Norfolk, VA o 23513 p (804) 853-4722 622-9606


EDUCATION Master of Science, 1980, Old Dominion University Major Specialty: Biology Education

Minor: Psychology

Bachelor of Science, 1969, Old Dominion University Major Specialty: Earth Science Education

Minor: Psychology

0Additional study toward a Doctorate in Psychology and Biology.

EMPLOYMENT 9Instructor at Old Dominion University.

adjunct Professor at Tidewater Community College.

*Owned a scientific supply company for eleven years.


CERTIFICATION a National Association of Document Examiners.

ADDITIONAL a Forensic document photography at Eastman Kodak Company,

TRAINING Rochester, New York, 1987.

a Statistics and the use of optical, chemical, laboratory, and scientific measuring equipment.

a University science courses requiring technical and specialized knowledge in the use of various types of laboratory equipment and writing lab reports.

ADVANCED t National Association of Document Examiners

TRAINING 1994-1989 Washington D.C.: 1991 Los Angeles, California, 1992 Atlanta, Georgia; 1994 Concord, Massachusetts; 1995 San Antonio, Texas; 1996 Baltimore, Maryland- 1997 Las Vegas, Nevada.

RESEARCH Old Dominion University: Handwriting disturbances.

AND Forensic photography techniques,

DEVELOPMENT Advanced techniques of document examination.

FACILITIES Including a library of over 500 books and articles on hand. writing and forensic document examination; laboratory; and. photo lab.

PROFESSIONAL National Association

ASSOCIATIONS of Document Examiners

Positions held: ]Education Chairman

Election Committee Chairman

Board of Directors

Second Vice President

Currently: President since October 1994

F-Eastman Kodak

Position held: Chairperson for Spring Seminar on @cd and

Ultra-Violet Forensic Document Photography.

LECTURES National Association of Document Examiners.

Photographic techniques and the Document Examiner.

Tidewater Law Board.

Old Dominion University Law Enforcement, Business and

Finance Security Control Departments and Handwriting

used in the business sector.

9 Chamber of Commerce.

& Retail Merchants Association.

o Tidewater Personnel.

& C&P Telephone Company.

COLLEGE 9 Completion of a College Level Course in Questioned Document-

COURSE ments. Northern V' ' 'a College, Annadale, VA. Instructed by

Larry Zieglar, current Questioned Document Examiner for the

FBI. 1995

COURT * Depositions, Hearings and Arbitrations.

EXPERIENCE o, Court qualified as an expert witness in the following courts:

Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.

General District Court - Civil Division

General District Court - Traffic Division

Circuit Court

U.S. District Courts

PUBLISHED a National Association of Document Examines Journal:

WORKS Articles concerning forensic document photography.

LABORATORY Magnification devices, Microscopes...

EQUIPMENT o Forensic photography equipment.

Infrared and Ultraviolet (longwave and shortwave lamp)

* Calipers and measuring devices.

Print this item