Fleet, Priscilla White denied officia...

Fleet, Priscilla White denied official Ramsey exoneration statement by DA

There are 200 comments on the Daily Camera story from Jan 24, 2014, titled Fleet, Priscilla White denied official Ramsey exoneration statement by DA. In it, Daily Camera reports that:

Boulder District Attorney Stan Garnett released a letter Friday showing he, too, had been pressed recently by acquaintances of John and Patsy Ramsey to issue a public statement exonerating them in JonBenet Ramsey's death, but that he declined to do so.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Daily Camera.

whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#113 Jun 8, 2014
candy wrote:
There is NOTHING to "refute or corroborate" in NK's "testimony." She's FRUIT LOOPS. There's NO sex ring, nothing to investigate. SHE'S the only witness that has ever come forward and she's NEVER had any proof of anything. There was nothing for the BPD or FBI to EVER investigate, and she never took her "proof" to anywhere else, like the mainstream media or international law enforcement. She's one of the mentally ill people that glom on to these high profile cases.
Law enforcement doesn't know what is relevant until they charge someone. All they know is she came forward for the JonBenet Ramsey homicide, and everything she had to say about that is in the case file. Ariana Pugh's "investigation" is pure hot air as well. You DON'T go declassifying these "investigations" credible or not" until AFTER the case has been closed.
How do you know there is no sex ring? Have you personally investigated these allegations? How can you say, with a straight face, that BPD had no reason to investigate the claims of a person with provable connections to one of the people who found the body of a murdered child? A murdered child who showed signs of acute AND chronic sexual abuse?

Do you deny that sex rings exists? Do you deny that child pornography exists? Who do you think produces and distributes such material? People who take part in child molestation 'rings' might also try to make a profit.

Does it not bother you or strike you as relevant that JonBenet showed signs of both acute AND chronic sexual abuse? Does this fact tend to RULE OUT a sex ring in your eyes?? If so, why??

Does it not bother you that Nancy's mother Gwen continued to associate herself with the convicted child molester who had molested Nancy, provable by perusing the court records? This behavior on the part of NK's mother is indicative of..what? Normal, everyday family dynamics? Or is it evidence that some sort of strange goings-on was occurring in the immediate vicinity of her family circle of which the W family was a part of like it or not? I realize this isn't PROOF of NK's allegations but let's not go overboard and pretend NK had NO connection to this case. FW Sr. was Godfather to her mother. FW Sr. was provably in Aspen over the holidays. Boulder is just a short, private plane ride from Aspen...Did any of these people have to submit to DNA testing? If you claim they did then I want to see documented proof thereof.

It is clear NK's family was connected to the W's so don't pretend she came out of nowhere and 'glommed' onto a case that had nothing to do with her.. LEST THIS FACT BE GLOSSED OVER: NANCY CAME FORWARD BECAUSE SHE WAS CONVINCED HER NIECE HAD WITNESSED THE MURDER OF JONBENET.

Nancy has court documents and therapy records to prove she was molested as a child so don't pretend nothing like her allegations had ever happened to her. According to NK's allegations, it HAD happened to her and according to her it involved some of the SAME people who were involved in this case. In light of these facts, to say she had no right to weigh in on what she knew and what she had experienced or to connect any of it to the case of a murdered, sexually molested child, particularly given her fears for her niece, is just pure malicious misinformation.
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#114 Jun 8, 2014
candy said: " There was nothing for the BPD or FBI to EVER investigate,"

If they didn't investigate NK's claims then what is contained in the case files that the W's kept trying to obtain?

candy said: "she never took her "proof" to anywhere else, like the mainstream media or international law enforcement."

Why would she take a domestic case to 'international law enforcement'?[presumably you mean Interpol?] As for msm, perhaps since Sanduskey, Saville, etc the media will be more open to reporting this aspect of the case...if the files are ever released.

candy said: "Law enforcement doesn't know what is relevant until they charge someone."

This is just silly. Almost a non-sequitur in light of the fact that the don't charge anyone until they have a collection of relevant evidence. But also, a judge has told the White's and the public, officially, in a court of law: "DISCLOSURE OF THIS MATERIAL MAY IMPACT....the investigation." Like it or not a judge has deemed this material relevant to the investigation.

Now the question of whether this material would have an impact on the **W's** is another matter. For all anyone knows, including the W's apparently, the ~secret NK investigation implicates someone we've never heard of in a sex abuse ring which also exonerates the W's. Perhaps the W's understand this and this is why they want the file released and nobody would blame them.

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#115 Jun 9, 2014
candy wrote:
There is NOTHING to "refute or corroborate" in NK's "testimony." She's FRUIT LOOPS. There's NO sex ring, nothing to investigate. SHE'S the only witness that has ever come forward and she's NEVER had any proof of anything. There was nothing for the BPD or FBI to EVER investigate, and she never took her "proof" to anywhere else, like the mainstream media or international law enforcement. She's one of the mentally ill people that glom on to these high profile cases.
Even though I believe by engaging the "two alter egos" ~ you are wasting your valuable time, what you have said above is "golden".

Nancy wasn't normal. Attempting to insert herself into a high profile case isn't normal, yet she had done it prior to this case. Listening to, and doing everything her Rice Krispies told her to do wasn't "normal" ~ it was "Nancy-Normal"!
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#116 Jun 9, 2014
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>
Even though I believe by engaging the "two alter egos" ~ you are wasting your valuable time, what you have said above is "golden".
Nancy wasn't normal. Attempting to insert herself into a high profile case isn't normal, yet she had done it prior to this case. Listening to, and doing everything her Rice Krispies told her to do wasn't "normal" ~ it was "Nancy-Normal"!
Saying something over and over and over again won't make it true. I know you and your comrades have your marching orders to discredit Nancy at every turn from White family friend Tricia of Websleuths---you know, the forum owner who gave the sister of her convicted child molester moderator Windchime a platform to accuse Windchime's child victims of being liars--- but you can't wave a wand and wish away NK's proven connections to this case. The connections are real, like it or not, and blathering on about how 'crazy' NK is won't make them go away..

It's just so..so ~interesting~ how the usual suspects all come out of the woodwork and spew the exact same unsubstantiated bile against NK, over and over again, and you all do your level best, over and over agin, to shut down the convo each and every time jer name comes up. You all might want to take a good hard look at the people whose water you carry so clumsily.
The Truth Hurts

Farmington, MI

#117 Jun 9, 2014
So whodunnit - you think John Ramsey was part of this sex ring? Is that what you're saying?
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#118 Jun 9, 2014
The Truth Hurts wrote:
So whodunnit - you think John Ramsey was part of this sex ring? Is that what you're saying?
It's not a matter of what I think. It is NK's firm belief that Ramsey was part of the sex ring.. In any case NK identified her 'Uncle Johnny"--a man whom Nancy alleges both molested her and filmed others molesting her for profit [choking was part of the 'routine' sorrysorry]---as John Ramsey. Nancy provided a couple of pieces of evidence that could/should have been checked into. one [and my memory is very fuzzy on the details so forgive and check the transcript for yourselves], was an extant letter having to do with Uncle Johnny selling his car. Did they track down the car and the full name of it's owner? I seem to recall the letter provided enough detailed information that BPD could have/should at least attempted to identify the owner of the car.. R supporters allege JR was not in Cali at the time NK alleges he was participating in the ring but I would like to know what does the evidence actually say? WERE his movements and/or business ties during the time period in question closely examined? R supporters say JR didn't know the White's. who, like NK are from California, prior to the family moving to Boulder but what does the evidence say?

These are just some of the 'Uncle Johnny' questions that need answering. Is JR = UJ? I won't make up my mind one way or the other when I see the case files, without which we have no way of judging the extent and quality of the BPD investigation into her allegations. Same goes for the allegations against the W's, but it is a fact that NK testimony---as well as the indictment*---accounts for all of the forensic evidence.[and much of the circumstantial]

*Namely, something happened to JBR at the party and the parents were forced to take her home and 'cover up' by staging a phony crime scene. Was the child "Asleep" or Not "Asleep" when the family returned home from the party/late night gift delivery?

As an aside, Tricia at WS likes to say that the sex ring allegation is bogus because none of the films have ever turned up. Well, does she expect pedophiles to turn them over to LE if they run across one? Duh?
In any case, the following article kills 3 birds with one stone: 1. Provides a place to begin searching for the films 2. Provides a clue to Topix readers as to the level of society some of these perps come from: 3. Makes the people who deny this activity exists on such a scale look silly..or worse.

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Charges...
real Topaz

AOL

#119 Jun 9, 2014
whodunnit wrote:
<quoted text>
It's not a matter of what I think. It is NK's firm belief that Ramsey was part of the sex ring.. In any case NK identified her 'Uncle Johnny"--a man whom Nancy alleges both molested her and filmed others molesting her for profit [choking was part of the 'routine' sorrysorry]---as John Ramsey. Nancy provided a couple of pieces of evidence that could/should have been checked into. one [and my memory is very fuzzy on the details so forgive and check the transcript for yourselves], was an extant letter having to do with Uncle Johnny selling his car. Did they track down the car and the full name of it's owner? I seem to recall the letter provided enough detailed information that BPD could have/should at least attempted to identify the owner of the car.. R supporters allege JR was not in Cali at the time NK alleges he was participating in the ring but I would like to know what does the evidence actually say? WERE his movements and/or business ties during the time period in question closely examined? R supporters say JR didn't know the White's. who, like NK are from California, prior to the family moving to Boulder but what does the evidence say?
These are just some of the 'Uncle Johnny' questions that need answering. Is JR = UJ? I won't make up my mind one way or the other when I see the case files, without which we have no way of judging the extent and quality of the BPD investigation into her allegations. Same goes for the allegations against the W's, but it is a fact that NK testimony---as well as the indictment*---accounts for all of the forensic evidence.[and much of the circumstantial]
*Namely, something happened to JBR at the party and the parents were forced to take her home and 'cover up' by staging a phony crime scene. Was the child "Asleep" or Not "Asleep" when the family returned home from the party/late night gift delivery?
As an aside, Tricia at WS likes to say that the sex ring allegation is bogus because none of the films have ever turned up. Well, does she expect pedophiles to turn them over to LE if they run across one? Duh?
In any case, the following article kills 3 birds with one stone: 1. Provides a place to begin searching for the films 2. Provides a clue to Topix readers as to the level of society some of these perps come from: 3. Makes the people who deny this activity exists on such a scale look silly..or worse.
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Charges...
seems to me Alex Hunter would have moved heaven and earth to make NK's allegations stick..but, as you know, it didn't pan out. That's because nothing she said in relation to that night and who was there, turned out to be true.
IF there's a sex ring, it still falls on JB's parents for ALLOWING their baby to be used. Play, you pay.
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#120 Jun 9, 2014
real Topaz wrote:
<quoted text>
seems to me Alex Hunter would have moved heaven and earth to make NK's allegations stick..but, as you know, it didn't pan out. That's because nothing she said in relation to that night and who was there, turned out to be true.
IF there's a sex ring, it still falls on JB's parents for ALLOWING their baby to be used. Play, you pay.
Agreed, by this theory it all comes down to the parents.

However, you say NK's allegations didn't pan out. You are basing this assertion on the fact that AH didn't prosecute?. this would be the same DA's office that ignored GJ indictments of the Ramsey's and kept it secret from the public for years, and then allowed them to be 'cleared' KNOWING they had been indicted? I think it is possible to look at the lack of prosecution another way, based on Hunter's known behavior with the indicement: Hunter might have had the evidence to back up NK, just like he had an indictment, but he declined to prosecute even tho he was armed with ample ammunition.

The indictment could very well have been written with NK's testimony in mind because this is exactly what she hypothsized:[not saying it WAS written as such just that it COULD have been]

the Ramseys did "unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death."

Denver Post agrees with my/NK's hypothesis:

The charges didn't directly accuse the Ramseys of killing their daughter. Instead they alleged that the parents permitted JonBenét to be placed in a dangerous situation that led to her death and it accused them of helping whoever killed the girl.

IOW, a cover up. WHY COVER UP? Must have been pretty heinous circumstances if they decided it was better to stage a crime scene rather than just make up an 'accident' story and take their chances.[chronic AND acute sexual abuse evident at autopsy did make that tactic rather difficult]
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#121 Jun 9, 2014
real Topaz wrote:
<quoted text>
seems to me Alex Hunter would have moved heaven and earth to make NK's allegations stick..but, as you know, it didn't pan out. That's because nothing she said in relation to that night and who was there, turned out to be true.
IF there's a sex ring, it still falls on JB's parents for ALLOWING their baby to be used. Play, you pay.
Again, just to make it short and sweet, ya'll keep saying NK's allegations didn't pan out but all you have to base this on is the DA's word.[the same DA who kept the indictment a secret while continually clearing the indicted parties] WE DON'T KNOW HOW DEEPLY NK'S ALLEGATIONS WERE INVESTIGATED BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE CASE FILE. Until we see those files nobody is under any obligation to take the word of a DA's office who declined to prosecute two rich, indicted parents of a murdered child as to whether or not anything 'panned out' or not.
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#122 Jun 9, 2014
Just to be clear, I don't believe AH was completely morally bankrupt I think he got freaked out. Scared off.

OTOH: Because of public pressure AH had no choice but to take the case to a GJ. Hunter's lie by omission made it seem like his own evidence was so paltry, so measly, so scant that even a ham-sandwich-indicting GJ declined to hand down a true bill. If this WASN'T the impression he intended he could have just been partially 'honest' with the public at the time by admitting to the indictment and making the same excuse they made when the truth came out, namely that the DA's office declined to prosecute on the grounds that they 'couldn't win the case' due to lack of evidence..This way, public suspicion of the R's and demands for arrest/indictment was made to 'officially' seem like a lynch mob based on nothing. Smit, the R's, et al were completely vindicated. For a while, until the truth came out.....
real Topaz

AOL

#123 Jun 9, 2014
whodunnit wrote:
<quoted text>
Again, just to make it short and sweet, ya'll keep saying NK's allegations didn't pan out but all you have to base this on is the DA's word.[the same DA who kept the indictment a secret while continually clearing the indicted parties] WE DON'T KNOW HOW DEEPLY NK'S ALLEGATIONS WERE INVESTIGATED BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE CASE FILE. Until we see those files nobody is under any obligation to take the word of a DA's office who declined to prosecute two rich, indicted parents of a murdered child as to whether or not anything 'panned out' or not.
the same DA that kept the indictment quiet kept it quiet because he didn't want to prosecute the Ramseys. He had NO PROBLEM going after FW, if you recall. He wanted all the dirt the Globe could find and made a negative comment upon meeting FW. FW was pulled over for no reason at all, then in trouble for driving w/o insurance. FW sat in jail for no good reason other than the DA putting heat on him.The same DA believed NK and said if 13% of what she claimed was true, it was good enough for him. He would have been elated to blame FW, are you kidding? You can take it to the bank, NK's story was investigated enough to figure out she's nuts.
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#124 Jun 9, 2014
real Topaz wrote:
<quoted text>
the same DA that kept the indictment quiet kept it quiet because he didn't want to prosecute the Ramseys. He had NO PROBLEM going after FW, if you recall. He wanted all the dirt the Globe could find and made a negative comment upon meeting FW. FW was pulled over for no reason at all, then in trouble for driving w/o insurance. FW sat in jail for no good reason other than the DA putting heat on him.The same DA believed NK and said if 13% of what she claimed was true, it was good enough for him. He would have been elated to blame FW, are you kidding? You can take it to the bank, NK's story was investigated enough to figure out she's nuts.
If I took any of this to the bank the vault would still be empty. This is all FW spin talking, not substantiated, documented evidence of anything. You WS RDI people are as bad as the blind, clueless IDI people with your blind defenses of FW. If you want substantial evidence of somebody inserting themselves into a case why don't you ask FW what he was doing inserting himself into the domestic case of NK's attorney Lee Hill.

Maybe AH had good reason to be suspicious of FW. Maybe he had his 'reasons' for not pursuing the case, which I suspect are the same 'reasons' he didn't pursue the R's.

As you well know FW sat in jail because he ignored subpoenas.

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2001/...
candy

East Lansing, MI

#125 Jun 9, 2014
There is no sex ring, and there never was. Chris Anderson investigated it, Carol McKinley and other reporters investigated it, and came up with NOTHING.

But there is a big cover up - by the Whites themselves of his TESTIMONY IN THE WOLF CASE. That's a 1000 percent COVER UP. The people of Boulder would be a lot more interested in what White said under oath than a bunch of documents where THE NEXT DAY, Alex Hunter backed all the way down and away from. The witchhunt lasted ONE DAY in the mainstream press. What White testified to was NOT about Krebs, it was all Ramsey. Priscilla talked about "transparency", and I'm surprised their noses didn't grow right then. Since when are THEY transparent? No interviews with hard questions EVER , a cover up since 2001 of his testimony in the Wolf case, 30 days in jail for refusal to show up for the Miller trial. WHAT IS TRANSPARENT ABOUT ANY OF THAT? At some point, since he's keeping his face in the public eye, someone will do some DIGGING and open what Fleet White doesn't want YOU to know about, FINALLY.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#126 Jun 9, 2014
The Whites were saying Alex Hunter used the Krebs allegations to smear the Whites and help the Ramseys. THOSE ALLEGATIONS ACCOMPLISHED NEITHER. Hunter reversed himself in supporting her FAST. Why Fleet White was not used as a witness in the Fox News case had NOTHING to do with Krebs and Alex Hunter, and everything to do with White's own actions in the Miller and Wolf cases. HIS OWN ACTIONS, not Alex Hunter's.
real Topaz

AOL

#127 Jun 9, 2014
whodunnit wrote:
<quoted text>
If I took any of this to the bank the vault would still be empty. This is all FW spin talking, not substantiated, documented evidence of anything. You WS RDI people are as bad as the blind, clueless IDI people with your blind defenses of FW. If you want substantial evidence of somebody inserting themselves into a case why don't you ask FW what he was doing inserting himself into the domestic case of NK's attorney Lee Hill.
Maybe AH had good reason to be suspicious of FW. Maybe he had his 'reasons' for not pursuing the case, which I suspect are the same 'reasons' he didn't pursue the R's.
As you well know FW sat in jail because he ignored subpoenas.
http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2001/...
I am not, nor have I ever been a member of WS. You shouldn't assume.
For all I know, FW's a real sob, but there's nothing putting him at JBR's murder.Ignoring a subpeona ain't murder, either. Funny how they'll throw the book at FW for ignoring a subpeona, but be perfectly satisfied with Lou Smit's "interrogation" of JR where he asks JR to "swear to God" he didn't kill JB. Oh, OK JR, you wouldn't lie to God or Lou, so LE in Boulder's satisfied. lol
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#128 Jun 10, 2014
real Topaz wrote:
<quoted text>
I am not, nor have I ever been a member of WS. You shouldn't assume.
For all I know, FW's a real sob, but there's nothing putting him at JBR's murder.Ignoring a subpeona ain't murder, either. Funny how they'll throw the book at FW for ignoring a subpeona, but be perfectly satisfied with Lou Smit's "interrogation" of JR where he asks JR to "swear to God" he didn't kill JB. Oh, OK JR, you wouldn't lie to God or Lou, so LE in Boulder's satisfied. lol
You shouldn't assume I am satisfied with ~anything~ Smit, Ramsey, or LE did during the investigation.[In fact I found Smit to be wholly unqualified for the title 'detective']You've only to read my posts in this thread to know I do not 'support' the Ramsey's innocence. I think it's pretty clear the indictment probably had it right: John and Patsy covered up the murder of their daughter.[ransome note only the beginning of the evidence for a staged crime scene]

WHY would they do that? I believe NK provided the best, most plausible answer to that question. In any other scenario,[Patsy killed her over toilet issues etc] a faked kidnapping for ransom simply wasn't necessary. A faked kidnapping for ransom, hiding the body, staging the body etc., only became necessary in the presence of evidence of sexual assault. This too could have been explained away by the parents feigning ignorance SHOCK ZOMG what stranger has done this to my child?? No, the staging was necessary because the time and place of the murder,~~the circumstances surrounding the death~~~, had to be obscured.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#129 Jun 10, 2014
Again, against why Fleet White should get government documents in an open homicide case, the government didn't invent Krebs or bring her to Boulder. Just as I remember, in an article in the Denver post on 2/26/00, the ONLY article the Denver Post did on this story until the BPD issued their statement on 5/15/00, ending their investigation, saying Krebs had no relevant information for the Ramsey homicide. On how Krebs came to Boulder:

www.denverpost.com
2/26/00
California woman suggests JonBenet, sex ring link

"The woman's allegations are reminiscent of those made in a 1999 book about the case. Stephen Singular's 'Presumed Guilty: An Investigation Into the JonBenet Ramsey Case, the Media & the Culture of Pornography,' speculates that JonBenet was part of a child-pornography ring that thrives in Boulder, and that she was killed by one of its members.

Hill is among those whom Singular dedicates the book to in the opening pages.

But Hill said the woman was 'completely unaware' of Singular's book and is no Ramsey-case groupie.

The woman came forward after hearing broadcast excerpts from a deposition John Ramsey gave in a civil case, Hill said.

She contacted Hill because he is involved in that case."
M_B_M

Mobile, AL

#130 Jun 10, 2014
I've always said, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." I know that Stew Webb is looked upon as a nutcase and most people won't read anything he's penned simply for that reason. But, like I said...

And Stew Webb claims that Fleet White lost a child in similar circumstances to the way JonBenet died, claiming all this happened back in Calif some years ago.

So since I have always maintained that "something" brought FW to Boulder, second door from the Ramseys, I believe that "something" was a prior friendship between him and John Ramsey. I believe if it can be established that John Ramsey was the John Ramsey named by NK, it's a pretty sure bet that he and FW knew one another back when. So, back to what SW claims about FW losing a child in similar circumstances, plus FW and JR having engaged in child molestation (according to NK), can it be possible that SW knows whereof he speaks? When using EA on a child, according to what some say, it must be done carefully or it can prove fatal to the child.

Considering SW is correct, wouldn't that give FW reason for following his friend, JR, to Boulder? Especially if LE was breathing down his back in investigating the death of a child who died in "similar circumstances to JonBenet?"

And, for all we know, FW just MIGHT be trying to find out if there is any mention of this in BPD records...

If LE in Boulder was so prone to closing their eyes or even if some LE officials there were themselves members of the huge pedo rings in operation at the time, it would seem logical that FW would seek refuge there alongside his friend. IMO, he always seemed to be wanting to keep Boulder out of the national limelight, "protecting Boulder" -- is one way to look at it.

Just wondering and expressisng my opinion and curiosity...
whodunnit

Mobile, AL

#131 Jun 11, 2014
M_B_M wrote:
I've always said, "Where there's smoke, there's fire." I know that Stew Webb is looked upon as a nutcase and most people won't read anything he's penned simply for that reason. But, like I said...
And Stew Webb claims that Fleet White lost a child in similar circumstances to the way JonBenet died, claiming all this happened back in Calif some years ago.
So since I have always maintained that "something" brought FW to Boulder, second door from the Ramseys, I believe that "something" was a prior friendship between him and John Ramsey. I believe if it can be established that John Ramsey was the John Ramsey named by NK, it's a pretty sure bet that he and FW knew one another back when. So, back to what SW claims about FW losing a child in similar circumstances, plus FW and JR having engaged in child molestation (according to NK), can it be possible that SW knows whereof he speaks? When using EA on a child, according to what some say, it must be done carefully or it can prove fatal to the child.
Considering SW is correct, wouldn't that give FW reason for following his friend, JR, to Boulder? Especially if LE was breathing down his back in investigating the death of a child who died in "similar circumstances to JonBenet?"
And, for all we know, FW just MIGHT be trying to find out if there is any mention of this in BPD records...
If LE in Boulder was so prone to closing their eyes or even if some LE officials there were themselves members of the huge pedo rings in operation at the time, it would seem logical that FW would seek refuge there alongside his friend. IMO, he always seemed to be wanting to keep Boulder out of the national limelight, "protecting Boulder" -- is one way to look at it.
Just wondering and expressisng my opinion and curiosity...
Although I suppose it's possible to keep a death like that under wraps under quieter circumstances a cover up of a similar death is highly unlikely to hold under the blaring lights of a high profile murder case like JBR. I just don't buy was Webb is selling here.

OTOH, I agree with Stephen Singular who claimed a pedo ring consisting of powerful individuals was operating in Boulder at the time. It would explain why the 'investigation' never turned up evidence of such a ring. and indeed, it would explain why the 'investigation' was such an unmitigated disaster from beginning to end.

The daughter of 'Santa' Bill McReynolds wife Janet was kidnapped and sexually assaulted 22 years to the day before JBR was murdered.[was NK correct, something about those holiday parties hmmm?] Two years later Janet was over it. No emotional scars from the experience whatsoever, apparently. as she wrote a play in which a fictional child was tortured and abused in a basement. Who could do that? I hope her and Gwen Boykin were friends since they seemed like two peas in a pod, so sanguine about the abuse of their children. Oh, and throw Nedra Paugh into that little circle too since she claimed JonBenet was only molested 'a little bit'. Weird bunch of people.

For an example of what can happen to investigations of this kind one only needs to look into the 'Dutroux Affair' in Belgium:

"It’s worth reminding ourselves of the events surrounding Belgian paedophile abductor Marc Dutroux. Institutions that are meant to protect society can sometimes contribute to misdeeds of the most sinister kind. The Dutroux case was characterised by deliberate police incompetence and behind-the-scenes murder of witnesses"

More: Pay particular attention to what happened to Regina Louf, the Nancy Krebs of the Dutroux investigation:

http://www.whale.to/c/marc_dutroux1.html
M_B_M

Mobile, AL

#132 Jun 11, 2014
whodunnit wrote:
<quoted text>
Although I suppose it's possible to keep a death like that under wraps under quieter circumstances a cover up of a similar death is highly unlikely to hold under the blaring lights of a high profile murder case like JBR. I just don't buy was Webb is selling here.
OTOH, I DO think it's possible to keep a death like that under wraps when the person is a very influential, rich, and powerful character like FWsr. Although it wasn't his daughter, she would have been his granddaughter and more than likely, if this is true, then it would have happened at one of the "gatherings" of the groups described by NK. And, while he was able to keep it quiet and under wraps for a long time, he could have felt it was time to move on, IF some enterprising detective was getting too close to the truth. But with another "Dr. Beuf" and others who were acting in collusion with "sr", he might have thought he had it made, that is, until the "enterprisig" detective got too close.

So, "sr" moves to Aspen, where he had a summer home anyway and his move didn't appear to be suspicious. And shortly thereafter, "jr" follows and moves to Boulder, second door from his buddy, JR (who likely was involved in the orgy that caused the death.)

I'm just trying to show that it can be very possible to have gotten away with what allegedly (by SW) happened. And thus we have an explanation of why "jr" was so interested in keeping attention to the JBR case out of the national spotlight. Because once in the national news, the JBR case would have come to the attention of a nosy detecrtive out in California.

And speaking of strange happenings in California, do you think it strange that from among over 300,000 items of evidence that were moved when Sonoma built a new evidence storage facility, the hard drives from JMK's computers were the ONLY items to have been 'LOST'?

Whodunnit, you might be correct, but after reading about all that happened in Belguim, I believe anything is possible...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Boulder Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Colorado is Full....Now go Home ! 8 hr CO Rules 4
News Feeling the heat, Boulder looks to bring ice cr... Mon Ban Boulder 3
News Boulder hopes to move Xcel off long-term commit... Jul 24 litesong 2
News Students hack into school system, change grades (Apr '07) Jul 21 Sydna 668
News Old evidence at new trial (May '06) Jul 21 Abudia 1,125
News La Choza expands in Boulder as owner's 'dream i... Jul 15 Kalizar 2
News Colorado Tibetans want to build a center for cu... Jul 14 Preacher Man 7

Boulder Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Boulder Mortgages