Part 1 of 3: Boulder detectives still seek answers in JonBenet Ramsey case

Nov 12, 2013 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Denver Post

On his death bed in August of 2010, famed Colorado Springs Det. Lou Smit could have spoken about the 200 murder cases he'd solved during a storied career going back three decades.

Comments
21 - 40 of 61 Comments Last updated Nov 21, 2013
Just Wondering

Beckley, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Nov 16, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Unfortunately, religion is used by too many to mask their evil.

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Nov 16, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

2

Bias is a powerful thing. It makes you see things that don't exist and ignore things that do.

Lou Smit came to this investigation with a pot full of bias. The media had already turned this case into 24 hour, seven day per week marathon.

Since this case was already a world wide sensation when Lou was called to action, Lou was given an opportunity to become an instant phenomena and the only way he could become famous is to arrive at, and prove, that an intruder was responsible because investigators, the media and the world had already decided that the Rams were #1 suspects.

Few people could resist such an opportunity for fame; few could resist that one chance for immortality that proving everyone wrong would have done for Smit.

Therefore, when everyone saw the Ramseys as hindering the investigation, ole Lou saw Christians. When everyone saw intact spider webs in the window well, ole Lou saw a point of entry.
When ole Lou saw an intruder, the Grand Jury saw the Ramseys. Yes, bias does strange things to ones mind.

Since: Feb 12

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Nov 16, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

learnin wrote:
Bias is a powerful thing. It makes you see things that don't exist and ignore things that do.
Lou Smit came to this investigation with a pot full of bias. The media had already turned this case into 24 hour, seven day per week marathon.
Since this case was already a world wide sensation when Lou was called to action, Lou was given an opportunity to become an instant phenomena and the only way he could become famous is to arrive at, and prove, that an intruder was responsible because investigators, the media and the world had already decided that the Rams were #1 suspects.
Few people could resist such an opportunity for fame; few could resist that one chance for immortality that proving everyone wrong would have done for Smit.
Therefore, when everyone saw the Ramseys as hindering the investigation, ole Lou saw Christians. When everyone saw intact spider webs in the window well, ole Lou saw a point of entry.
When ole Lou saw an intruder, the Grand Jury saw the Ramseys. Yes, bias does strange things to ones mind.
Hi learnin,
I really don't think it was bias when it comes to Lou Smit. What you must remember, is he was an investigator with over 200 cases of experience. Anyone who has had that kind of experience would not dismiss anyone as a suspect until 100% cleared. Lou Smit dismissed the Ramseys as possible suspects from the beginning, with no evidence of any intruder.

Remember, he came to the case weeks after the incident. What he was supposed to do, was gather up all of the evidence, review them, then seek suspects, which the initial investigating team already did.

Instead, Smit tried to "create" an intruder.

I only wish that they made Lou Smit take a polygraph test regarding his "findings" on this case.

What Lou Smit attempted to do, was create something from nothing. There was no evidence whatsoever of any intruder, and the police initially at the scene noted that there were no footprints in the snow. Lou Smit went by photographs taken on the day of the incident HOURS after the first police arrived, and claimed there were areas in the yard where there was no snow.

As I see it. Lou Smit was on the take. He met with the Rams early in his investigation, and "concluded" for some reason that they could not have done it. I think that "some reason" was money.
CC

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Nov 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Smit's car reeks of something... When did he buy the Delorean? It's not your typical retired cop-mobile. Were there any hinky cases he was involved in before he had money to afford? Did he get some other windfall that can be accounted for? It's even possible there is an innocent soul rotting away in prison because of his actions.

Smit was a dirty cop. Praying with the prime suspects is not in the textbooks of proper police procedure. As wrong as allowing Pam to take away objects of potential interest from the crime scene.

If Smit had the opportunity to bump into the Ramseys 'returning to the scene of the crime' he should have turned on his radar to see what was the reason for their visit, what did they do, why were they there, how long were they there, and what did they remove this time.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#27
Nov 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Somebody in Hunter's office contacted the Ramseys or their attorneys to arrange for the 'chance' meeting / prayer in a van vigil. To bad old Lou's detective skills weren't advanced enough to track that one down. If Alex Hunter ever is prosecuted that would be a good question to get answered.

Just like Alex Hunter, Lou Smit has the blood of other victims on his hands.

Since: Feb 12

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#28
Nov 17, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

moonjack wrote:
Smit's car reeks of something... When did he buy the Delorean? It's not your typical retired cop-mobile. Were there any hinky cases he was involved in before he had money to afford? Did he get some other windfall that can be accounted for? It's even possible there is an innocent soul rotting away in prison because of his actions.
Smit was a dirty cop. Praying with the prime suspects is not in the textbooks of proper police procedure. As wrong as allowing Pam to take away objects of potential interest from the crime scene.
If Smit had the opportunity to bump into the Ramseys 'returning to the scene of the crime' he should have turned on his radar to see what was the reason for their visit, what did they do, why were they there, how long were they there, and what did they remove this time.
Hi MJ,
I find that quite interesting! A Delorean is NOT a cheap car. It would be interesting as to when he bought that car. Also, while trying to find out when he bought the car, I found that John Mark Karr ALSO drove a Delorean.
CC

Since: Jul 10

Crimson Tide Bulldozed

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#29
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

I think it was an ‘older’ car MJ, he probably got it used for a song, but I think it cost around 12k to produce, and sold for 25k back then I think. He reminds me of “Columbo” in that respect. In that TV show, Columbo drove an old Peugeot. Only difference is the script was better in the TV show than in the Ramsey Ransom Note, LOL, AND Columbo always got his guy. Smit never could find that ole intruder!

As far as the opportunity to “bump” into the Ramseys, I would think a detective worth his salt would have observed the Ramseys upon seeing them lurking around the house, not gone and introduced himself to them and prayed with them.

I would think a real detective would have noted the day and time, observed their actions, taken some pictures of them there, and added those notes to the case file, maybe even using that information in questioning later on. But no, Mr. Apple Dumpling himself decided to go and chat with them, and pray with them. Screams conflict of interest to me from day one!
moonjack wrote:
Smit's car reeks of something... When did he buy the Delorean? It's not your typical retired cop-mobile. Were there any hinky cases he was involved in before he had money to afford? Did he get some other windfall that can be accounted for? It's even possible there is an innocent soul rotting away in prison because of his actions.
Smit was a dirty cop. Praying with the prime suspects is not in the textbooks of proper police procedure. As wrong as allowing Pam to take away objects of potential interest from the crime scene.
If Smit had the opportunity to bump into the Ramseys 'returning to the scene of the crime' he should have turned on his radar to see what was the reason for their visit, what did they do, why were they there, how long were they there, and what did they remove this time.

Since: Feb 12

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#30
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DrSeussMd wrote:
I think it was an ‘older’ car MJ, he probably got it used for a song, but I think it cost around 12k to produce, and sold for 25k back then I think. He reminds me of “Columbo” in that respect. In that TV show, Columbo drove an old Peugeot. Only difference is the script was better in the TV show than in the Ramsey Ransom Note, LOL, AND Columbo always got his guy. Smit never could find that ole intruder!
As far as the opportunity to “bump” into the Ramseys, I would think a detective worth his salt would have observed the Ramseys upon seeing them lurking around the house, not gone and introduced himself to them and prayed with them.
I would think a real detective would have noted the day and time, observed their actions, taken some pictures of them there, and added those notes to the case file, maybe even using that information in questioning later on. But no, Mr. Apple Dumpling himself decided to go and chat with them, and pray with them. Screams conflict of interest to me from day one!
<quoted text>
Hi Dr S,
Smit had really nothing to "observe". He came into the investigation weeks after the murder. What was available to him, was the evidences, which included the 911 call, the autopsy report, the items taken as evidence, and the actual police reports.

He obviously did not "observe" the Ramsey expressions, but prayed with them and concluded that they didn't commit the murder. I find that VERY strange for an investigator with over 200 investigations of experience.
CC

Since: Jul 10

Crimson Tide Bulldozed

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#31
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Doesn't make any difference if he had done 500 investigations or 1,000 in the past. You can only be as good as the ones you get right. I have never believed Smit was very sharp or very astute. He was tenacious, but even tenacity won't help when you are barking up the wrong tree.
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Dr S,
Smit had really nothing to "observe". He came into the investigation weeks after the murder. What was available to him, was the evidences, which included the 911 call, the autopsy report, the items taken as evidence, and the actual police reports.
He obviously did not "observe" the Ramsey expressions, but prayed with them and concluded that they didn't commit the murder. I find that VERY strange for an investigator with over 200 investigations of experience.
CC

Since: May 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#32
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

1

I agree with Bakrti on this..it was prearranged when the Rams 'just happened' to return to hellhole the day Smit showed up to hold hands and pray..they think we're stupid and apparently many are if they believe that was a chance meeting. Smit was hired to throw a wrench in the works, just as Meyer was told to go iffy on the molestation. Linda Arndt saw it and knew what she saw, so then did Meyer who suddenly 'wasn't sure'.
Alex Hunter really earned that ranch of his on a salary that shouldn't have afforded him a shack in Boulder. Corruption pays handsomely, no?

Since: Feb 12

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#33
Nov 18, 2013
 
DrSeussMd wrote:
Doesn't make any difference if he had done 500 investigations or 1,000 in the past. You can only be as good as the ones you get right. I have never believed Smit was very sharp or very astute. He was tenacious, but even tenacity won't help when you are barking up the wrong tree.
<quoted text>
Hi Dr S,
I don't think Smit was REALLY stupid. I think he was stupid enough that he believed he could fool most of the people he worked with, and most of the public.

With over 200 investigations of experience, the one he was on should have been quite simple. He started with only 3 suspects, and could not positively add any more. He did not see the ransom note as a phony, and managed to argue the initial observation of "no footprints in the snow".

To me, it was a 2+2. Smit was on the take.

And, BTW, a Delorean even today, is not a cheap car in the used markets.
CC

Since: Feb 12

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#34
Nov 18, 2013
 
realTopaz wrote:
I agree with Bakrti on this..it was prearranged when the Rams 'just happened' to return to hellhole the day Smit showed up to hold hands and pray..they think we're stupid and apparently many are if they believe that was a chance meeting. Smit was hired to throw a wrench in the works, just as Meyer was told to go iffy on the molestation. Linda Arndt saw it and knew what she saw, so then did Meyer who suddenly 'wasn't sure'.
Alex Hunter really earned that ranch of his on a salary that shouldn't have afforded him a shack in Boulder. Corruption pays handsomely, no?
Hi RT,
While we agree, I really would love to see all those with Smit's "beliefs" to take a polygraph test on it. My bet is some would refuse because they don't want to be exposed. Especially Mary Lacy.
CC

Since: May 11

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#35
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi RT,
While we agree, I really would love to see all those with Smit's "beliefs" to take a polygraph test on it. My bet is some would refuse because they don't want to be exposed. Especially Mary Lacy.
CC
Agreed. She should take one about the burnt fish fairytale she told as she broke into the war room.
Steve Eller

Bronx, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#36
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. She should take one about the burnt fish fairytale she told as she broke into the war room.
While there is no direct evidence proving it, I would not be surprised if Alex Hunter and Mary Lacy knew that this was not a kidnapping even before JonBenet's body was "disovered".
candy

East Lansing, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#38
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Bottom line, even Mary Lacy woke up about Lou and FIRED him. How many people know that?

Lou was just blowing smoke, none of his "suspects" were ever worth a damn. He just threw the same old false suspects under the bus. He was over even before Tracey and Karr as having any real clout. He had cried Wolf too many times, pun intended, and people saw he was just bent on his theory come hell or high water.

As far as the DeLorean, or any other money, people should know, Lou was involved in the investigation into the actor Kelsey Grammer's sister's murder, and Kelsey Grammer was eternally grateful, and a ton richer than John Ramsey. Kelsey Grammer offered to pay for expensive treatments for Lou when he found out he had cancer, I doubt that's all he's ever done for Lou.

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#39
Nov 18, 2013
 
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi learnin,
I really don't think it was bias when it comes to Lou Smit. What you must remember, is he was an investigator with over 200 cases of experience. Anyone who has had that kind of experience would not dismiss anyone as a suspect until 100% cleared. Lou Smit dismissed the Ramseys as possible suspects from the beginning, with no evidence of any intruder.
Remember, he came to the case weeks after the incident. What he was supposed to do, was gather up all of the evidence, review them, then seek suspects, which the initial investigating team already did.
Instead, Smit tried to "create" an intruder.
I only wish that they made Lou Smit take a polygraph test regarding his "findings" on this case.
What Lou Smit attempted to do, was create something from nothing. There was no evidence whatsoever of any intruder, and the police initially at the scene noted that there were no footprints in the snow. Lou Smit went by photographs taken on the day of the incident HOURS after the first police arrived, and claimed there were areas in the yard where there was no snow.
As I see it. Lou Smit was on the take. He met with the Rams early in his investigation, and "concluded" for some reason that they could not have done it. I think that "some reason" was money.
CC
I respect your opinion, Bakatari, but can't accept, from what little I know, that Smit was on the take. Even though ST argued again, and again, with Lou over his intruder theory, ST stated that Smit was a fine man and good detective.

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#40
Nov 18, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DrSeussMd wrote:
I think it was an ‘older’ car MJ, he probably got it used for a song, but I think it cost around 12k to produce, and sold for 25k back then I think. He reminds me of “Columbo” in that respect. In that TV show, Columbo drove an old Peugeot. Only difference is the script was better in the TV show than in the Ramsey Ransom Note, LOL, AND Columbo always got his guy. Smit never could find that ole intruder!
As far as the opportunity to “bump” into the Ramseys, I would think a detective worth his salt would have observed the Ramseys upon seeing them lurking around the house, not gone and introduced himself to them and prayed with them.
I would think a real detective would have noted the day and time, observed their actions, taken some pictures of them there, and added those notes to the case file, maybe even using that information in questioning later on. But no, Mr. Apple Dumpling himself decided to go and chat with them, and pray with them. Screams conflict of interest to me from day one!
<quoted text>
All good points, Seuss. A detective would have observed the Rams actions, etc., but, as I believe, ole Lou had already decided he needed an intruder to become real famous. In our own way, all of us have that need to become immortal. Lou was presented a prime opportunity if only he could have come up with an intruder!

Since: Feb 12

Honolulu, HI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#41
Nov 18, 2013
 
learnin wrote:
<quoted text>
I respect your opinion, Bakatari, but can't accept, from what little I know, that Smit was on the take. Even though ST argued again, and again, with Lou over his intruder theory, ST stated that Smit was a fine man and good detective.
Hi Learnin,
Smit MIGHT have been a good detective until he got to the Ramsey case. His errors in the Ramsey case were quite obvious. Remember, Smit said he believed that the ransom note was authentic, and that $118,000 was about a million Mexican pesos.

Along with his "claim" that the garrote was a "favorite weapon amongst pedophiles," which cannot be supported by anything concrete, I would have to say, that Smit was either VERY stupid, or on the take. I don't think Smit was VERY stupid.
CC

Since: Sep 11

Germiston, South Africa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#42
Nov 19, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Lynette,
I have some homework for you.
Lou Smit claimed that the garrote was a favorite weapon for pedophiles. Please find us a source on that? I looked for it all over the WEB, but could not, EXCEPT for Lou Smit's claim.
Lou Smit believed that the phantom intruder came in through the basement window, while most will agree that even IF there was an intruder, that was NOT his point of entry OR exit. The spider webs on the grate above that window were undisturbed, and it was claimed that spiders will re-spin their webs in freezing weather. This is TRUE in the arctics, but find a species of spider that does not hibernate in the winters in Colorado?
Do you actually believe that the ransom note was NOT a phony? Lou Smit believed it was authentic, and he had over 200 cases of experience!
How about the "stun gun"? Do you agree, that the marks on JBR was NOT from a stun gun? Lou Smit claimed that is where the marks most likely came from.
Lou Smit might have been an "honorable man" prior to the JBR case. BUT, he was NOT one when he did his investigation on THIS murder. I don't think ANY investigator with 200 cases of experience would buy the ransom note as an "authentic" means to extort money from a "kidnapping". Lou Smit did! Was Lou Smit on the take? Stupid? Or dishonest? I don't think Lou Smit was stupid.
CC
CC
Hi Bakatari. Would you mind sourcing for me please where Lou Smit claimed "a garrote is a favourite weapon of paedophiles"? I don't believe I've ever seen that. He believed the garrote used on JonBenet was a sexual device and her killer was a sexual sadist, but that's not quite the same thing, so just for the record and to keep the facts straight, I'd appreciate you posting your source.

While you're about it could you also please source Smit saying he believed the ransom note was "authentic"? You're not perhaps alluding to him theorizing that the killer's plan may have been to remove her from the house in the suitcase? In that case, I can understand his reasoning, because fibres from the blanket in the suitcase were found on her clothing, which has led many to believe her killer put her inside the suitcase at some point.

I absolutely believe those marks on her body were from a stun gun. Smit explained in detail how he came to his conclusions. He consulted with experts like Dr Michael Dobersen and Sue Kitchen from the CBI, both of whom had had experience with victims who'd suffered stun gun injuries and they agreed the marks could have been from a stun gun. The coroner, the coroner's investigator and even the BPD felt it could be a stun gun, the latter only changing their minds when they realized it did not "fit" with their RDI theory. Dr Werner Spitz believed they were made by "snaps" or pebbles or something to that effect and Kolar thinks they were train tracks, lol, but I don't believe any expert has ever backed him up on that!

As regards the spider web, the BPD consulted with an entomologist, a Dr Robert Bennett, and this is what he had to say (PMPT page 345):

"If a spiderweb is destroyed in winter, a spider will emerge if it's warm enough..."

"In your situation - Boulder, winter snow falling, then melting away, then falling, the weather warm enough - the spider would definitely be out".

On the next page, he goes on to say: "Again in your case, a web was broken one night when someone came by. The temperature rose the next day, and that day or thereafter, a new web could have been spun."

Since: Sep 11

Germiston, South Africa

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#43
Nov 19, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

3

learnin wrote:
<quoted text> Even though ST argued again, and again, with Lou over his intruder theory, ST stated that Smit was a fine man and good detective.
And that was the consensus among everyone who knew him. The only ones who malign him are forum posters who look for bad where none existed. Deplorable to do that to a decent man who did so much good in his lifetime. I think some people see in others the bad things they themselves are capable of.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" 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.

15 Users are viewing the JonBenet Ramsey Forum right now

Search the JonBenet Ramsey Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
Jeffrey MacDonald Is Guilty (Sep '08) 2 hr glazier 7,456
"Mr Ramsey Listen Carefully!" New book released... 23 hr candy 17
Before I Die Thu Guilty 6
Note-odd detail? Wed Undrtheradar 221
I know what really happened to JoneBEnnet Jul 29 Biz 69
Snow Prints? Jul 29 Biz 34
Sid Wells mother complains (Mar '08) Jul 28 candy 26
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••