BORG media making a difference?
#1
Ramsey pens letter to Camera
Investigation flawed, JonBenet's dad says
By ALLI KRUPSKI
Camera Staff Writer
Friday, September 5, 1997
Correction: Clarification published 9/6/97 follows: A story in Friday's Daily Camera failed to include information that police did not locate child pornography in the home of John and Patsey Ramsey while investigating their daughter's death.
In a scathing, signed letter to the Daily Camera on Thursday John Ramsey berated the Boulder Police Department and pleaded for a shift in leadership of the investigation into his daughter's murder.
Ramsey also cited a Daily Camera article Wednesday regarding detectives verbal inquiries about search warrants for an airplane hangar and Ramsey's office. The Boulder County District Attorney's Office informed police that detectives did not have probable cause to investigate the hangar or the office.
"... had the police simply asked for access to my office, our company's hangar space, or any other facility, it would have been granted," Ramsey wrote. "... my airplane (which by the way is a 27-year-old airplane, not a sleek jet, as is commonly reported) is, and has been, stored in a public hangar, not the Access hangar space which is used for the storage of Access historical financial records.
"If the police thought my airplane was stored in the Access hangar, they obviously didn't do their homework very well."
Authorities, however, did not submit written requests for search warrants related to the airport hangar or Ramsey's office to Boulder County District Attorney Alex Hunter.
"A warrant needs to be in writing," Hunter recently told the Camera. "There may well have been preliminary discussions to the drafting of a warrant concerning those items, but it never progressed beyond discussion."
Police searched the Ramseys' University Hill house at 755 15th St. for eight days following the slaying of JonBenet, the 6-year-old found strangled in the basement of her family's home.
Ramsey's letter, included in today's Open Forum, marks the latest in a series of statements expressing "profound dismay" with the Boulder Police Department:
In April, Ramsey lawyers issued a blistering, 2-page letter to Hunter addressing a police decision to suddenly cancel two separate interviews scheduled with the parents of the slain beauty queen.
The family's attorneys lashed out at police in July after the Daily Camera reported police had searched for child pornography inside the Ramseys' home and asked an Arvada police detective to investigate child pornography computer databases in connection with the case.
Later in July, John Ramsey revealed his plan to hunt down the child's killer. Ramsey's press release included a profile of the type of person who might murder a 6-year-old girl and an announcement that the family would run a series of local newspaper ads seeking the perpetrator.
Wednesday, Ramsey attorney Hal Haddon called the police "cowards" and claimed the department leaked the ransom note Patsy Ramsey discovered Dec. 26 to the press.
City spokeswoman Leslie Aaholm did not return calls seeking comment about Ramsey's letter Thursday. In the past, police have said they understand the family's frustration and acknowledged "the unfortunate miscommunication" between investigators and the family.
In other developments Thursday:
Detectives reportedly found a broken paint brush in Patsy Ramsey's art supplies that matched the brush segment used to strangle her daughter, sources close to the case said. The killer allegedly connected the wooden stick to a cord and strangled the girl.
Police completed an interview with Boulder Police Commander John Eller regarding an allegation of misconduct against the 18-year Boulder Police Department veteran. Police internal investigators have interviewed 22 people in connection with a complaint raised by Sgt. Larry Mason against Eller, who has supervised the Ramsey case.
Mason, who worked on the Ramsey investigation in the first few weeks after the slaying, has also filed a notice of intent to sue Eller.
Eller did not return Daily Camera telephone calls Wednesday or Thursday.
Police will not begin an investigation to determine who furnished a copy of the note to Vanity Fair, according to Aaholm.
Reply
#2
Some truth from Paula Woodward's book


"To add to the growing media circus around the Ramsey murder investigation, most "experts" booked on talk shows and quoted in newspaper columns related to the case were anti-Ramsey and not involved in the investigation in any way. Little verification of the accuracy of statements made bu such "experts" was done, creating an open forum for uninformed opinions. The host interviewing such experts on broadcast shows would also slip in damaging buzzwords like the "secret room", one of the rumored names for the storage room where JonBenét's body was found, in order to influence listeners and keep them coming back for more."
Reply
#3
From Jim Fisher's book:

"Lou Smit resigned because no one was listening to him. No one wanted to hear about evidence of a criminal intrusion because they had made up their minds that the Ramseys were guilty. For the past five months, deputy district attorney Michael J. Kane had been presenting a case against the Ramseys to a grand jury. The prosecution ball was rolling and there was no way to stop it. The media had already convicted the Ramseys and prosecutors were desperate to make it official. With Lou Smit off the case, investigative reason, objectivity, and professionalism got trampled in the stampede to incarcerate the Ramseys."

My comment - - I remember first coming onto the Internet and being shocked at the venom already being heaped on the family. Posters saying they had been victims so knew it was a family matter. They had already tried and convicted the parents and any suggestion they wait to see the evidence was unappreciated. I posted that it made no sense to me that the parents would do this WITHOUT ANY HISTORY OF PRIOR NEGLECT, ABUSE, MENTAL ILLNESS, ETC.

I made a lot of enemies in those early days but the evidence eventually did prove me right. The best investigators saw evidence of an intruder, the DNA tests verified what they had seen. A federal judge saw it as well and wrote a 93 page report saying just that. The family was cleared by DA Mary Lacy and even today the search is on for the source of DNA specimen GSLDPD99178617.

The tabloids have changed their tune - the stories now cover intruder suspects - and I am glad.

But most of the media and LE in Boulder remains unmoved from their BORG position and I have to wonder why? These are not stupid people - - but they not only can they DO ignore the intruder evidence and continue beating what truly is a "dead horse" - - a case against the family.
Reply
#4
(07-16-2017, 01:58 PM)jameson245 Wrote: But most of the media and LE in Boulder remains unmoved from their BORG position and I have to wonder why?  These are not stupid people - - but they not only can they DO ignore the intruder evidence and continue beating what truly is a "dead horse" - - a case against the family.

My take on this:

Boulder is one of the most arrogant communities I've ever heard about.  John and Patsy were outsiders who had moved in.  John and Patsy dared to suggest that there was someone dangerous running loose in Boulder that could kill innocent children.  John and Patsy repeatedly suggested that BPD didn't seem to know what they were doing.  Because of all this, I think that the safest thing for the local media to do is to continue to favor those reporters who think that they Ramseys are guilty because this will sell papers and magazines plus cause people to tune into the local news.

Surrounding Boulder are other communities that don't particularly like Boulderites.  They are also happy to hear about how the family is guilty because they are engaged in a kind of class warfare against people who have any money or privilege that they don't have.

I believe that anyone in that general area that tries to publicize an intruder theory is going to be very unpopular on all fronts and will not sell their newspapers, magazines, and TV shows.  Any LE that questions the initial thrust of the investigation is going to be accused of being corrupt and/or incompetent hence may lose their job.
Reply
#5
Part of the problem was the fact that the Ramseys made it clear they were not going to go back to that house, probably nbot ging to stay in Boulder or even Colorado.

That set up a situation where the police felt less invested in solving the crime over time - one cop told me very simply - we have local crime here every day, the Ramsey case is old and cold and the family is in Georgia.  Of course we are going to do all we can to solve this if we can BUT the priority is the residents living here, giving them a much needed sense of security.  Running all over Boulder asking questions and possibly exposing more details of the Ramsey case is not in OUR best interest.

Media spoke to me as well and made it clear the Ramsey story was a big deal, but the larger picture is that they had to deal with the BPD and others in Boulder every day for the next 20-40 years while the Ramseys were, simply put, far removed from their reality.  If they upset the police and the police wanted to make their life much harder - - well,  they knew what could happen so were not anxious to publish anything terribly negative.

I will give a pat on the back to Charlie Brennan who often did take a stand and ask questions even when he knew he could make some really angry.   I know sometimes it wasn't easy on him and he was flogged by BORG for daring to even SUGGEST some intruder evidence was real, that the crime against AMY needed to be considered.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)