JONBENET RAMSEY: Found dead in Boulder, Colorado on Christmas Day 1996 - Age 6

GrandmaBear said:
Right, it is amazing in close quarters in any case where a body is found in the house and people were there but I won't deny it has happened and does happen once in awhile.

I am fuzzy on some things but I thought there were questions about that room and whether it was locked earlier or something and that she was missed earlier by John or something or the room was like avoided or it was not looked into? I know he carried her/touched her. I am not going to say an upset parent might not react and do that but there we go again with messed up crime scene or evidence. I did remember the friend was with, Fleet I guess...

Blanket, clothing, etc. I know that has been hashed to no end and I don't recall what was speculation, rumor or fact.

The note bothers me in a number of ways. I don't know that it can be told when it was written but would an outside the family perp leave a note on the stairs and then get the child and take the child downstairs to do as was done when a family member could come across the note before he is out of there and LE be called in and swarm the home at any time? It seems so much like cover up or after the fact, it just smacks of it to me. On the other hand, someone living/staying in the home would have time and know they did and that no one would be coming until they called LE...

That's just a few of many things--for me there is too much to explain.

As to the indictment, from my understanding, things are sent to a grand jury to come to a decision and then prosecutors/DAs charge if it is recommended and go with the decision of the jury or they wouldn't send it to one. It is far from typical to have a grand jury's opinion and decision asked for and then go against their findings/recommendations. To me if you are worried about re-election or your job, you do what the people decided... Not the opposite unless....?

There is just soooo much that is so questionable. Imo.

I just don't, at minimum, see it being someone unfamiliar with the house, the family, etc. No way, no how. And more likely, a family member.

Jmo.
Click to expand...
First of all, I just want to say that I hope you aren’t feeling like you’ve needed to defend your opinion.
Indeed, my interest isn’t to argue opinions, but to share what I know (or remember, lol!) about the facts and circumstances.
About the grand jury, that’s an aspect of the case that’s never interested me, although I will say that based on what I know of the evidence, there’s no question in my mind but that Hunter made the right decision, which is what I’d expect- that he do what he think is right despite anything else.
 
Regina said:
First of all, I just want to say that I hope you aren’t feeling like you’ve needed to defend your opinion.
Indeed, my interest isn’t to argue opinions, but to share what I know (or remember, lol!) about the facts and circumstances.
About the grand jury, that’s an aspect of the case that’s never interested me, although I will say that based on what I know of the evidence, there’s no question in my mind but that Hunter made the right decision, which is what I’d expect- that he do what he think is right despite anything else.
Click to expand...
No, I don't feel the need to defend but appreciate that you ask. I also am not 100 percent at all on an opinion, just a leaning. I just like to discuss opinions and cases and how we arrive at what we think likely happened even if we cannot be 100 percent on any opinion in most cases.

I don't disagree that it can be debated if a prosecuting office would think there was enough to convict and proceed with charges, however, they generally then don't put it to a grand jury to decide that for them do they? But even if that is the case, that he made the right decision in your opinion, the man hid this decision and news from what I understand and that bothers me a great deal.

I'm always just discussing or debating so you know, and always try to do it respectfully.

Happy 2022 to you! And I appreciate as well you helping refresh recollection on this case. It definitely is a case that gripped many a person and still does.
 
GrandmaBear said:
No, I don't feel the need to defend but appreciate that you ask. I also am not 100 percent at all on an opinion, just a leaning. I just like to discuss opinions and cases and how we arrive at what we think likely happened even if we cannot be 100 percent on any opinion in most cases.

I don't disagree that it can be debated if a prosecuting office would think there was enough to convict and proceed with charges, however, they generally then don't put it to a grand jury to decide that for them do they? But even if that is the case, that he made the right decision in your opinion, the man hid this decision and news from what I understand and that bothers me a great deal.

I'm always just discussing or debating so you know, and always try to do it respectfully.

Happy 2022 to you! And I appreciate as well you helping refresh recollection on this case. It definitely is a case that gripped many a person and still does.
Click to expand...
I appreciate all you said, thank you, and happy 2022 to you, too!

As for Hunter hiding the decision, I don’t know the first thing about that. I thought I’d look into it, starting with video of the press conference, but can’t find it.

As for a grand jury, it’s my understanding that another purpose is for further investigation, which in this case, I think might have been Hunter’s primary reason for having presented it.
 
Regina said:
I appreciate all you said, thank you, and happy 2022 to you, too!

As for Hunter hiding the decision, I don’t know the first thing about that. I thought I’d look into it, starting with video of the press conference, but can’t find it.

As for a grand jury, it’s my understanding that another purpose is for further investigation, which in this case, I think might have been Hunter’s primary reason for having presented it.
Click to expand...
Thank you.

That's true, grand juries do allow questions and further investigation, and even juror questions I think--I hadn't thought of that.

My memory is fuzzy but grand juries are somewhat secretive as we know but it seems to me what happened is jurors started wondering why no indictments and reporters found out or latched on etc. I know I wasn't satisfied with his explanation. And usually we hear that a grand jury hands down indictments and the people are indicted so it did seem against the norm...

However, it is a case where there is and was so much gossip, sensationalism and rumors or speculation that probably became fact to some, etc. that who knows right?
 
GrandmaBear said:
Thank you.

That's true, grand juries do allow questions and further investigation, and even juror questions I think--I hadn't thought of that.

My memory is fuzzy but grand juries are somewhat secretive as we know but it seems to me what happened is jurors started wondering why no indictments and reporters found out or latched on etc. I know I wasn't satisfied with his explanation. And usually we hear that a grand jury hands down indictments and the people are indicted so it did seem against the norm...

However, it is a case where there is and was so much gossip, sensationalism and rumors or speculation that probably became fact to some, etc. that who knows right?
Click to expand...
Well, the grand jurors would have been informed of no charges at the time of the press conference, but just generally speaking, I think it undermines the integrity of the process to publicize anything about such proceedings in the event of no charges....
I read from some article (surely, from a local news org.) where a grand juror said he didn’t think there’d have been a conviction...well, I don’t know how he voted, but if that’s what he thought, then I think he most certainly should have voted against an indictment, right?
 
Regina said:
Well, the grand jurors would have been informed of no charges at the time of the press conference, but just generally speaking, I think it undermines the integrity of the process to publicize anything about such proceedings in the event of no charges....
I read from some article (surely, from a local news org.) where a grand juror said he didn’t think there’d have been a conviction...well, I don’t know how he voted, but if that’s what he thought, then I think he most certainly should have voted against an indictment, right?
Click to expand...
Hard to know what to think any longer. I just know it is yet another thing in a total messed up case that is questionable in a case full of questionable things. It's atypical imo his decision and I wouldn't think the grand jury would move for indictment if they didn't feel there was enough but there could be more reason than that and could they prove it? Hard to say but probably not beyond a doubt. I guess it is largely just the frustration I feel, and I think most of us feel, that no one has been charged with this little girl's death and the handling of it as well.

I don't really have anymore to add to that part and it doesn't make any difference anyhow I guess.

Perhaps one day it will be solved and someone charged but I have little faith in that. I have little faith in the recent talk of DNA and hoping it advances, etc. and helps in this case as I have little faith in the "evidence" they might have anyhow.
 
GrandmaBear said:
Hard to know what to think any longer. I just know it is yet another thing in a total messed up case that is questionable in a case full of questionable things. It's atypical imo his decision and I wouldn't think the grand jury would move for indictment if they didn't feel there was enough but there could be more reason than that and could they prove it? Hard to say but probably not beyond a doubt. I guess it is largely just the frustration I feel, and I think most of us feel, that no one has been charged with this little girl's death and the handling of it as well.

I don't really have anymore to add to that part and it doesn't make any difference anyhow I guess.

Perhaps one day it will be solved and someone charged but I have little faith in that. I have little faith in the recent talk of DNA and hoping it advances, etc. and helps in this case as I have little faith in the "evidence" they might have anyhow.
Click to expand...
Well, you said it bothered you and so I thought I’d look into it, and what I’ve found is that it appears you’re correct, that is, according to the judge who released a few pertinent documents, Hunter “misled” the public, which, of course, I think is wrong, period.
Now, perhaps I should share that although I’d heard about this case when it happened, I hadn’t paid any attention until sometime well after those grand jury docs were released, and so I think coming in so long after the fact was why I never developed any interest in learning about anything but the crime scene and evidence. Of course, I’m aware of the conflicts between the police and the DA’s office, and watching a press conference from Feb ‘97, I see that there was also a certain amount of animosity between the media and the BPD...Good Lord! And the mayor of Boulder said there wasn’t a murderer on the streets...well, I’d known she’d said that but she went on to say that she hadn’t talked to the police but got her info from what the media reported! Anyway....
I’m optimistic; I think it’s a solvable case, indeed!
 
Regina said:
Well, you said it bothered you and so I thought I’d look into it, and what I’ve found is that it appears you’re correct, that is, according to the judge who released a few pertinent documents, Hunter “misled” the public, which, of course, I think is wrong, period.
Now, perhaps I should share that although I’d heard about this case when it happened, I hadn’t paid any attention until sometime well after those grand jury docs were released, and so I think coming in so long after the fact was why I never developed any interest in learning about anything but the crime scene and evidence. Of course, I’m aware of the conflicts between the police and the DA’s office, and watching a press conference from Feb ‘97, I see that there was also a certain amount of animosity between the media and the BPD...Good Lord!...The mayor of Boulder said there wasn’t a murdereron the streets...well, I’d known she’d said that but she went on to say that she hadn’t talked to the police but got her info from what the media reported! Anyway....
I’m optimistic; I think it’s a solvable case, indeed!
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure it could have been solved much sooner if the case wasn't so bungled at the time.
 
Regina said:
Well, you said it bothered you and so I thought I’d look into it, and what I’ve found is that it appears you’re correct, that is, according to the judge who released a few pertinent documents, Hunter “misled” the public, which, of course, I think is wrong, period.
Now, perhaps I should share that although I’d heard about this case when it happened, I hadn’t paid any attention until sometime well after those grand jury docs were released, and so I think coming in so long after the fact was why I never developed any interest in learning about anything but the crime scene and evidence. Of course, I’m aware of the conflicts between the police and the DA’s office, and watching a press conference from Feb ‘97, I see that there was also a certain amount of animosity between the media and the BPD...Good Lord! And the mayor of Boulder said there wasn’t a murderer on the streets...well, I’d known she’d said that but she went on to say that she hadn’t talked to the police but got her info from what the media reported! Anyway....
I’m optimistic; I think it’s a solvable case, indeed!
Click to expand...
Yes, he did mislead the public or the way I recalled it "hid" the fact so to speak and that alone brings suspicion, how can it not? You don't hide something without reason generally... It was wrong.

I didn't realize you looked into it after in the case. I don't think I followed it too closely in the early days but maybe I did, it was so big and not just on every tabloid but TV, etc. too and for not having internet or social media etc in the way we now do, wow was there major coverage and national interest. And yes, rumor, innuendo, infighting between LE and higher ups or prosecutors, mayors, etc. maybe as I recall. Media and LE. The case was just so messed up or so it seemed and too many questionable things with the handling and investigation...

I wish I remembered things better but the female cop who was on her own at the house, wasn't it her that later quit and talked at some point? Or was that someone else? I seem to recall things about she couldn't get back up, it seems she was told to handle the family with kid gloves or something on that order due to who they were, etc. I stress I am unsure of the details I give here and may have it wrong... And then this case has so many conflicts in accounts of some things, it is difficult to know who to believe... Can we believe her or was that to get money or attention or because she either quit or lost her job, I can't quite recall... Politics even on local levels often play in...

I have my opinion of what is most likely and logical but it sure isn't proof and is just an opinion based on what is known. I personally feel that a portrayal of a picture perfect life often hides much. It takes a lot to maintain that and it is stressful. Holidays are stressful and even though we want that picture perfect holiday, the reality never quite matches the dream. I think we have someone who snapped most likely and then a very overdone elaborate cover up. I have looked at this case on or off during the years and a lot out there on it and I keep coming back to the same thing. But that's just me. And jmo.
 
Guess Who said:
I'm pretty sure it could have been solved much sooner if the case wasn't so bungled at the time.
Click to expand...
I agree. I have no faith this case will be solved and if they ever say it is solved, I feel I will doubt the outcome.

It was and is too messed up and I think chain of evidence alone would be an issue.
 
GrandmaBear said:
Yes, he did mislead the public or the way I recalled it "hid" the fact so to speak and that alone brings suspicion, how can it not? You don't hide something without reason generally... It was wrong.

I didn't realize you looked into it after in the case. I don't think I followed it too closely in the early days but maybe I did, it was so big and not just on every tabloid but TV, etc. too and for not having internet or social media etc in the way we now do, wow was there major coverage and national interest. And yes, rumor, innuendo, infighting between LE and higher ups or prosecutors, mayors, etc. maybe as I recall. Media and LE. The case was just so messed up or so it seemed and too many questionable things with the handling and investigation...

I wish I remembered things better but the female cop who was on her own at the house, wasn't it her that later quit and talked at some point? Or was that someone else? I seem to recall things about she couldn't get back up, it seems she was told to handle the family with kid gloves or something on that order due to who they were, etc. I stress I am unsure of the details I give here and may have it wrong... And then this case has so many conflicts in accounts of some things, it is difficult to know who to believe... Can we believe her or was that to get money or attention or because she either quit or lost her job, I can't quite recall... Politics even on local levels often play in...

I have my opinion of what is most likely and logical but it sure isn't proof and is just an opinion based on what is known. I personally feel that a portrayal of a picture perfect life often hides much. It takes a lot to maintain that and it is stressful. Holidays are stressful and even though we want that picture perfect holiday, the reality never quite matches the dream. I think we have someone who snapped most likely and then a very overdone elaborate cover up. I have looked at this case on or off during the years and a lot out there on it and I keep coming back to the same thing. But that's just me. And jmo.
Click to expand...
At this point, I think Hunter must have been rather strategic with his language, but no, I’m not suspicious as to why, I’m just not of complete understanding of the circumstances.
 
www.nbcnews.com

Police investigating unsolved murder of JonBenet Ramsey to seek help from cold case team

"This crime has left a hole in the hearts of many, and we will never stop investigating until we find JonBenet’s killer,” Police Chief Maris Herold said.
www.nbcnews.com www.nbcnews.com

Nov. 10, 2022, 11:01 AM EST
By Minyvonne Burke

Police in Boulder, Colorado, will consult with a state cold case team as they continue to investigate the 1996 murder of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey.

Authorities have received more than 21,000 tips, letters and emails about the case, and have traveled to 19 states to speak with more than 1,000 people, but the murder remains unsolved.

"This crime has left a hole in the hearts of many, and we will never stop investigating until we find JonBenet’s killer," Police Chief Maris Herold said in a news release Wednesday ahead of the 26th anniversary of JonBenet's death.

The Colorado Cold Case Review Team is made up of professional investigative, analytical and forensic experts from across the state. Police said the team "is another tool to help further cold case homicide investigations."
 
Boulder shall forever be known for this. Totally failing a little girl and the chance for justice. When I hear Boulder, nothing at all comes to mind but JonBenet Ramsey and the subsequent total failure of Boulder PD.

Maybe not nice but just saying it's a fact. That is all that comes to mind.
 
I don't believe in cover ups and conspiracies alot of the time. I think some I do people agree on. But I get a gut feeling that there was a cover up here. A BIG cover up. That little turd a few years ago flown back from Asia to give a DNA sample. Because he was going to be picked up on a child crime there. I was really pizzed that he led everyone on. All the people close to this case were just let down again. 1996. Time goes so fast. She would be turning 33 this year.
 
People will talk about this case till the end of time. Even the professionals can’t always agree. Here’s another take. I like this one because I’ve come up with a lot of the same questions.

 
Kimster said:
People will talk about this case till the end of time. Even the professionals can’t always agree. Here’s another take. I like this one because I’ve come up with a lot of the same questions.
Click to expand...
I'm almost 7 minutes into that video where he'd started with the ransom note and expressed his opinion about the reason for the 118,000 and I want to stop there and say that right off the bat, I don't agree that the note took about 15-25 minutes to write...
It comes to mind what John Ramsey finally said about such speculation, that "whoever did this is just a demented, evil person; you gotta just take that as a fact and not try to figure out a warped mind".
Indeed, to me, it's only when the perp's identified that questions- and the reason for it's existence in the first place- will be possible to analyze and answer with any sort of certainty.
Re professionals who've disagreed, I'd like to hear Gregg McCrary explain why he believes the note was written after the fact since John Douglas doesn't believe it's possible that anyone could have.
I'd really like to hear those two discuss this particular aspect!
 
Regina said:
I'm almost 7 minutes into that video where he'd started with the ransom note and expressed his opinion about the reason for the 118,000 and I want to stop there and say that right off the bat, I don't agree that the note took about 15-25 minutes to write...
It comes to mind what John Ramsey finally said about such speculation, that "whoever did this is just a demented, evil person; you gotta just take that as a fact and not try to figure out a warped mind".
Indeed, to me, it's only when the perp's identified that questions- and the reason for it's existence in the first place- will be possible to analyze and answer with any sort of certainty.
Re professionals who've disagreed, I'd like to hear Gregg McCrary explain why he believes the note was written after the fact since John Douglas doesn't believe it's possible that anyone could have.
I'd really like to hear those two discuss this particular aspect!
Click to expand...
He revisits the note later in the video. He lays down one idea on evidence, then looks at it from the other side.

For example, early in the video he says that people think it was an intruder because of the suitcase under the window. Then later on he says he doesn't agree because a person wouldn't leave it out like that, they would put it against the wall for stability. That's what I've always thought, too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
3,039
Messages
246,169
Members
985
Latest member
teatalkswiththeresa
Back
Top Bottom