The FBI had no presence at the crime scene AT ALL until AFTER the discovery of the body, plus it took them approximately three and a half hours between the time they were informed of the "kidnapping" to the time they arrived in Boulder. There were NO FBI agents outside the home during the kidnapping phase. They went straight to BPD headquarters and stayed there. It doesn't matter how they were involved AFTERWARDS, they did not go near the crime scene BEFORE the discovery of the body, they did not take control of the investigation, they did not question the parents, the did not preserve the crime scene, they did not set up roadblocks. They did none of the things one would expect them to do. And since the body had not yet been discovered, they had no way of knowing for certain that the RN was a hoax. For all they knew, the were playing around with a child's life. An anti-American "foreign faction" was threatening to behead her, yet even that did not jolt them into action. Maybe they were suspicious, maybe they smelt a rat, but at that point they couldn't be sure of anything, yet there was no apparent urgency to find her.Just because the FBI did not have an overbearing presence at the house does not mean they weren’t involved from the get go, and also as the investigation progressed.
***Inside the home was found a handwritten, multi-page ransom note, one of the longest notes ever seen by the FBI in a kidnapping case.
***FBI agent(s) were outside the home
***FBI Agent(s) were at the police station
***During the course of this investigation, Boulder police officers presented case evidence to the FBI’s Child Abduction and Serial Killer Unit (know to the media as the Behavioral Science Unit). Here almost two dozen experts reviewed the materials and suggested that this was the only known case in America where so young a victim had been sexually assaulted and strangled to death in her own home with the killer(s) leaving a ransom note behind them. The FBI’s experts also believed the crime scene had been staged and was not suggestive of the act of an unknown intruder.
*** Following the historic Lindbergh kidnapping (the abduction and murder of Charles Lindbergh's toddler son), the United States Congress adopted a federal kidnapping statute—popularly known as the Federal Kidnapping Act 18 U.S.C.§ 1201(a)(1)(also known as the Lindbergh Law, or Little Lindbergh Law)— WHICH WAS INTENDED to let federal authorities step in and pursue kidnappers ONCE THEY HAD CROSSED STATE LINES WITH THEIR VICTIM.(CAPS emphasis is mine)
Smit testified because he proved to someone what he had to say was directly connected to the crime. Ravitz and McFarland weren’t granted the same because they could not prove the pedophile ring was even remotely connected to the crime. The horse is dead on that one Lynette – stop abusing the corpse.
You are wrong in that the FBI will only take control of a kidnapping when state lines have been crossed.
"In 1932, Congress gave the FBI jurisdiction under the "Lindbergh Law" to immediately investigate any reported mysterious disappearance or kidnapping involving a child of "tender age" - usually 12 or younger. There does not have to be a ransom demand and the child does not have to cross state lines or be missing for
twenty four hours."
They operate on the theory of "rebuttable presumption", meaning that it could be presumed that federal laws have been broken and therefore the FBI, until instructed otherwise, will take control.
Ravitz and McFarland had evidence, including NAMES, which they wanted the grand jury to investigate and they were prevented from contacting the grand jury foreman as was their LEGAL RIGHT. NO ONE had the right to deny them their legal rights, not even DA's and judges, who themselves are not above the law.