Ramsey case haunts DA's aide who ran ...
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#22 Oct 30, 2013
you can certainly speculate that BM, but since you haven't seen the GJ stuff, you can't back that up. I think I am with L_E on this one because Hunter's past record of prosecuting cases is public knowledge, and public record. I also think money talks and perps walk in Boulder.
BrotherMoon wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever Hunter's thinking was it can be said his refusal to prosecute was backed up by the lack of evidence supporting the indictment.
Nobodyudno

Cub Run, KY

#23 Oct 30, 2013
BrotherMoon wrote:
<quoted text>
Whatever Hunter's thinking was it can be said his refusal to prosecute was backed up by the lack of evidence supporting the indictment.
I'm curious about something. I've seen "lack of evidence" given dozens of times as the reason Hunter didn't indict. I've read that 90% of the evidence has never been made public. So, how does the public actually know there wasn't (isn't) enough evidence to take the case to trial? Sorry, but, at this point, just saying it doesn't cut the mustard with me.

BrotherMoon

“Sandy Stranger killed JonBenet”

Since: Jan 08

Not Boulder, Co.

#24 Oct 30, 2013
A juror was quoted as saying "We didn't know who did what."
All the evidence they saw could not clear up who did what between John and Patsy.
Hunter could have proceeded with designs to clear that up in court, and I think Thomas wanted him to do just that, but he chose not to.
The indictment is rather nonspecific.
In my opinion Boulder LE kept trying to fit a sqaure peg into a round hole, meaning both parents invovled in an accident/cover-up when the evidence does not support that.
Nobodyudno

Cub Run, KY

#25 Oct 30, 2013
BrotherMoon wrote:
A juror was quoted as saying "We didn't know who did what."
All the evidence they saw could not clear up who did what between John and Patsy.
Hunter could have proceeded with designs to clear that up in court, and I think Thomas wanted him to do just that, but he chose not to.
The indictment is rather nonspecific.
In my opinion Boulder LE kept trying to fit a sqaure peg into a round hole, meaning both parents invovled in an accident/cover-up when the evidence does not support that.
I understand what you are saying yet it doesn't prove the statement about there not being enough evidence to take it to trial vs the Grand Jury issued a true bill of indictment on two people, two counts each.

I think the public is being asked to just swallow the "not enough evidence" statement. Since Hunter did not use what I understand to be the proper channel (take the true bill into court and sign off on it, one way or the other, by indictment or a motion to dismiss) it seems questionable to me that there isn't enough evidence. It seems more like trying to hide that the Grand Jury did, in fact, vote to indict.

There is a six-year-old little girl lying dead in her grave. Who killed her? It seems to me it would be better to take it to court, win, loose, or draw, and get on with it. Seems to me like JonBenet has become a cash cow instead of a little dead six-year-old child whose death didn't mean enough to take it to court and let the chips fall where they may.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

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.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ransom Note vs Patsy's Writing 54 min berrytea333 20
My theory 2 hr Anti-K 1,559
Intruder theories ONLY 4 hr Latisha 67
Missing Strand of Christmas Lights! 4 hr Jolamom 7
Random thought about the Stines (Jan '15) 6 hr DedRed 92
The Evil Super Family 6 hr DedRed 708
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 9 hr DedRed 665
Patsy Ramsey x Christmas Day 18 hr Spraguestephens 88
More from around the web