Tuesday, October 22, 2013

John Ramsey Objects to Release of Grand Jury Documents


John and Patsy Ramsey were indicted in the death by child abuse of their daughter, Jonbenet, but then District Attorney, Alex Hunter, refused to sign the indictment, thereby hindering justice for Jonbenet.  
Statement Analysis has shown that both parents were deceptive, and John Ramsey used language consistent with child sexual abuse.  

From the Daily Camera:  

John Ramsey has objected to Boulder District Attorney Stan Garnett submitting any secret grand-jury indictment in his daughter's case to a judge to review and release.
In a letter to Garnett dated Sunday on behalf of Ramsey, his attorneys Harold Haddon and Bryan Morgan objected to the release of any indictment without the release of the entire grand jury record.
"Public release of the allegations of an unprosecuted indictment only serves to further defame (John Ramsey) and his late wife Patricia," the letter reads. "Mr. Ramsey will have no access to whatever evidence the prosecutors presented to the grand jury and will have no ability to disprove those allegations in a court of law. Nor will the public have any ability to evaluate the propriety of the indictment unless the entire grand jury record is unsealed and opened to public view."
John Ramsey letter to DA Stan Garnett regarding JonBenet Ramsey grand jury indictment
This is the letter sent on behalf of John Ramsey by his attorneys to DA Stan Garnett regarding the possible release of a 1999 grand jury indictment in connection with the death of Ramsey's daughter JonBenet. It also included a copy of the letter then DA Mary Lacy sent the Ramseys in 2008 exonerating them of any wrong doing in connection with the death of their daughter.
Chief Trial Deputy Sean Finn filed a notice to the court with Ramsey's letter on Monday. However, he wrote, "This filing does not alter the position of the office of the District Attorney as stated in its response to order to show cause."
Daily Camera reporter Charlie Brennan and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed a lawsuit in September seeking the release of the un-prosecuted indictment of John and Patsy Ramsey on charges relating to their 6-year-old daughter's death.
The Camera reported earlier this year that the Boulder County grand jury investigating the Ramsey case voted in 1999 to indict the slain 6-year-old's parents on charges of child abuse resulting in death, but that then-DA Alex Hunter refused to sign the document and prosecute the Ramseys.
The Camera is not a plaintiff, but supports the current lawsuit.
After hearing oral arguments Oct. 11, retired Weld County Judge Robert Lowenbach ruled Thursday that releasing the document sought by Brennan would not be a breach of grand-jury secrecy rules and ordered Garnett to show cause why it should be kept secret.
In response, Garnett offered to file under seal "any such document in our possession" in the JonBenet Ramsey case to a judge to review and release "as the court deems appropriate."
But John Ramsey's attorneys contend in the letter that Ramsey was not contacted by the DA's office about the release of any grand jury documents and pointed out that he and his late wife were exonerated by former District Attorney Mary Lacy in 2008.
Ramsey's attorneys said that if any indictment is to be released, the entire grand jury record should be released as well.
"The District Court found 'transparency' to be the determinative factor in its order to show cause. 'Transparency can only be accomplished if the entire record is made public,' " the letter reads. "It is therefore John Ramsey's respectful request that you advise the District Court in response to its order to show cause that if the unprosecuted indictment is to be publicly released, the court should also order release of the entire grand jury record, including all witness testimony, all exhibits, all colloquy discussions between prosecutors and the grand jury and all drafts of potential indictments presented by the prosecutors of the grand jury."
Garnett said he filed Ramsey's letter with the court because "My office's position is as a custodian of archival documents, and it is my duty to handle them in a way that's fair and forthwith with the court and doesn't interfere with the possibility we could prosecute this case in the future for a charge in which the statute of limitations has not run."
"We felt it was appropriate to file this with the court," he said.
JonBenet Ramsey was found dead Dec. 26, 1996, in the basement of her family's Boulder home, 755 15th St., several hours after Patsy Ramsey called 911 to say her daughter was missing and that a ransom note had been left behind.
In October 1999, more than a year after the case went to a grand jury, then-DA Hunter announced that the grand jury investigation had come to an end and that no charges would be filed due to a lack of evidence.
But in January of this year, the Camera reported that members of the grand jury confirmed they had voted to indict both John and Patsy Ramsey and that Hunter had refused to sign the indictment, believing he could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt.
The 3-year statute of limitations on the charges in the reported indictment would have expired in 2002.

52 comments:

Anonymous said...

Anyone out there who understands legally where this case could go?


And would it not benefit John to have all the information that was used against him in this case? Then he could try to work to discredit it?

And, since this was murder, could they still pursue charges?

I am just not clear what this all means should there have clearly been enough to pursue murder charges.



C5H11ONO said...

I believe this is Ransey's attorneys trying to find out exactly what evidence there was on the case.

Generally isn't the evidence released when they are going to trial?

It shows me that there is concern on the part of team Ramsey that there is significant evidence out there that they want to get a sneak peak at.

john said...

OT Update:

EXCLUSIVE: Relative of Hannah Anderson breaks her silence in new book to brand the kidnap victim's behavior 'downright disturbing' since her mother and brother's brutal double-murder
New book explores inconsistencies in the kidnapping and double murder
Bodies of Christina Anderson, 44, son Ethan, 8, and the family dog were discovered in burnt out wreckage of family friend Jim DiMaggio's home
DiMaggio, 40, was shot dead and Hannah rescued after a seven day manhunt led the FBI to the River of No Return wilderness in Idaho
Author and criminal profiler discovered a family 'at odds with itself' in the aftermath of the shocking crimes
Describes relatives as being troubled by unanswered questions
Author points to questions over whether Hannah was drugged with Ambien after being kidnapped
Also asks why Hannah put knee brace on different leg on same day.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2470793/Hannah-Andersons-relative-brands-victims-behavior-disturbing.html#ixzz2iUe0U6ar
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

elf said...

Ramsey doesn't want Jon benets case looked at again. Has he been looking for the 'real' perpetrator all this time? Or has he just moved on because his accomplice is dead now?
I still don't understand how after the grand jury handed down an indictment on the Ramsey's they weren't prosecuted? Doesn't the prosecuting attorneys office work for the people? Isn't a grand jury representative of the people?

Fatnhappy said...

elf said... "doesn't the prosecuting attorneys office work for the people?"

Well no. Alex Hunter worked for Alex Hunter.

Shelley said...

So I just was about to share the Hannah Anderson update but looks like it was already shared.

Wth is LE doing? Clearly this case is not closed.

And the photo alone she had up that say bye Hollywood, hello River...

Seriously there is something wrong.

MrsRob said...

Off Topic:

Something is off with the "Apostle" Ron Carpenter's story about his wife/Co-Pastor, Hope. He is clearly being deceptive in his statements quoted in this article as well as during the "Message to the Congregation." I wonder who has any concern for this woman's actual whereabouts or her general state of well being???

http://m.wbtv.com/#!/newsDetail/23701174

MrsRob said...

Off Topic Cont...

Here's another link to a news story that has a link to the "Message to the Congregation" dated 10-13-13. This is a local "MegaChurch" in my area. Questions to ask? Deception indicated? Where is Hope?

http://www.foxcarolina.com/story/23701174/pastors-sermon?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

Skeptical said...

I have more questions than conclusions. Was it lawful for members of the grand jury to speak out if the first place if proceedings are to be kept secret? Would it be a violation of the grand jury secrecy to release all the documents? If the indictment is released but not taken to trial, then I think all the evidence that the indictment was based on needs to be released also. At this point it seems it would only serve as information. If John Ramsey were to be tried, wouldn't a grand jury have to be called to indict him again?

Trigger said...

I can understand John Ramsey's desire to have the grand jury records kept confidential.

He and Patsy were the accused.

If these records were made public, then John faces another media barrage of questions and answers that he might find embarrassing and uncomfortable.

Why stir the caldron and light another fire concerning the murder of Jon Benet with John Ramsey in the center of it all? He might get burned.

Anonymous said...

As Paul Harvey would say "and that's the rest of the story!"

However, the whole story has not been told here. The REST of the story is that Johns' atty said John does not want just the grand juries recommendation made public, he wants their ENTIRE investigation and witnesses statements made public if they plan to release their recommendations.

And THAT'S the rest of the story!

Anonymous said...

No matter what accusations are made,the simple fact is that her parents "sexualised"their toddler daughter,and as such should be jailed.DIRTY pedophile scum.

Dee said...

OT - new search for Ayla. News conference with update on search at 3 p.m.

http://bangordailynews.com/2013/10/23/news/mid-maine/30-law-enforcement-officials-searching-area-in-oakland-for-ayla-reynolds/

Sus said...

I'm not sure about this, but it may be a ploy to get the judge to change his ruling.

They center on the fact that the judge used the word TRANSPARENCY to justify releasing the indictment. Their reasoning is that the entire grand jury testimonies should be released to be be fully transparent then.

The folly of this is that legally a grand jury convenes in private. The members and witnesses are protected by secrecy.

Tough call.

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 9:51; how do you know this to be a fact? Were you there? Have you seen the evidence against the Ramseys? Are you competent to professionally analyze this evidence?

What is your claim to fame that makes you an expert?

If you are so sure of the accusation you state, why don't you post your real name so John Ramsey can SUE YOU for defamation of character and force you to present your proof, instead of hiding behind your fake anonymous post?

Anonymous said...

They are not protected by secrecy Sus, when the members of this grand jury had their photos and names published all over news reports like these were.

john said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
john said...

Hi Mrs Rob.

This is from your first link.

Iv'e picked out a couple of points.

"In the state which I saw my wife leave I wouldn't want anyone anywhere to have access to her. It is that bad," said Carpenter.

"In the state which I saw my wife LEAVE".

I'm not sure s if this comes under the umbrella of the word LEFT which we highlight as blue giving it the highest form of sensitivity along with,"So,because Etc. I say this because, it is wife "Leaving" and not him.

""In the state which I saw my wife leave"

What state was she in, and how bad was it when she left ?.

"I wouldn't want anyone anywhere to have access to her".

I found this an odd statement to make. Why doesn't he want anyone anywhere to have access to her ?.
Wouldn't her family and friends like to know were she is so they could comfort her and help with her recovery ?.

Her refers to her a "SHE" when talking about when she was the love of his life, and when thing's started going bad.He then changes to "My Wife" when he tell us she she left. There is a change in reality with her leaving justifying
the change in language.


"She" is distancing language and shows indication of a possible bad relationship,and given what he is telling us we can see why.

"My Wife" is better he is taking ownership of his words.

The one thing he doesn't say all the way through this short statement is call her by her name.

I cannot see deception in his statement just a lot of questions to be asked around her leaving and him not wanting anyone to know were she is.

I may be wrong..


http://m.wbtv.com/#!/newsDetail/23701174

john said...

"In the state which I SAW my wife leave I wouldn't want anyone anywhere to have access to her. It IS that bad," said Carpenter.

Change of from past tense to present tense.

Ney said...

OT
Dee said...
OT - new search for Ayla. News conference with update on search at 3 p.m.

http://bangordailynews.com/2013/10/23/news/mid-maine/30-law-enforcement-officials-searching-area-in-oakland-for-ayla-reynolds/
October 23, 2013 at 9:54 AM

__
"The entrance to the search area Wednesday is cordoned off with police tape."

Dee, it sounds like they got a tip from someone, doesn't it?
They have to find little Ayla.

Ney said...

OT

"An update press conference at the search site was originally scheduled for 3 p.m., but at 11 a.m., McCausland announced it had been changed to 1:30. No reason for the change was given."

http://www.onlinesentinel.com/news/Search-for-Ayla-Reynolds-has-begun-in-Oakland-.html

Dee said...

@Ney...It was because of a tip. I wonder about the time being moved up, wonder if that means they found something. It's well past time for Ayla to be found. I hope this means progress.

"The step dad of Trista, Aylas mother, told CBS 13 News that the family was notified Tuesday about the search, and says officials are following up on a tip."

http://wgme.com/news/top-stories/stories/wgme_vid_19318.shtml

Jen said...

OT
Hi John & Mrs Rob-

I just read this article and I find It very strange.My hinky alarm is going off!

He chooses to begin by condemning his wifes decision to leave the ministry, saying...

"The fairy tale ended however on Easter Sunday 2004 when Carpenter said Hope changed."She totally removed herself from ministry, totally removed herself from women of Hope, she never spoke, she never preached," he said."

He depicts her as a very troubled woman, with infidelity being 5% of her total problems, and in my opinion, he insinuates either mental instability or substance abuse problems. He even claims that she was living a 'double life', saying...

"There were two distinct double lives. This is not a fling. Not an affair. There was a whole other life and culture and dress code and friends," explained Carpenter.

If the things he alleges are true, then why does he states that their problems began on Easter 2004, when she chose to withdraw from the ministry? He claims that she admitted to affairs years later so why would her leaving the ministry really be a concern in light of these allegations of multiple affairs and double lives. Would he want her ministering to others while living such a deception?

I also find his statement about the 'good times' to be strange, because of the last line which indicates he is now considering 'giving his heart away again'..

"It was amazing; she was the absolute love of my life. It was the first time I've ever given my heart away - never intending to give it away again," Carpenter explained.

Finally the most concerning thing to me is that he states that he won't be reconciling with the 'love if his life' after treatment, setting up the congregation not to anticipate her return at the end of her YEAR of treatment. He speaks of her year of treatment as a definite/predetermined time of stay. This is typically NOT how rehab/recovery programs operate. First, she is able to leave at any time, so there's no guarantee she will stay a year. Second, 'active treatment' usually lasts for a shorter period of time (90 days is considered an extended stay), and even that usually isn't established upfront...rather the patient is evaluated periodically, and may be encouraged to extend their stay based on their progress). He also says...

"In the state which I saw my wife leave I wouldn't want anyone anywhere to have access to her. It is that bad"

He says he 'wouldn't' (future conditional) want 'anyone anywhere' to have access to her, but isn't she currently somewhere (in a facility) where someone (facility workers/counselors) have access to her??

Taken together, it doesn't make alot of sense. He seems focused on her lack of participation in the ministry, (while also claiming she is unstable and unfaithful) which should be his focus. He makes comment about her other life including a different 'culture, clothes, and friends', which sounds to me like she tried to move away from his control, and live in a way that he didn't approve of...otherwise how would he know about this other culture, dress code, etc.(He claims to have only learned about all the infidelity after the fact). He mentions the idea of giving his heart away again, and prepares the congregation to never see her again after her long period of treatment at a mystery facility.

Does anyone know more about the story? Has anyone in her extended family outside of her husband or church members, (parents, siblings, cousins) confirmed that she has these issues and has sought treatment? If not, someone needs to file a missing persons report, and get LE involved to verify his story about where she is.


Nanna Frances said...

OFF TOPIC:
Ayla Reynolds was not found.
http://www.wmtw.com/news/maine/state-police-update-ayla-reynolds-search/-/8792012/22586294/-/hghkbiz/-/index.html

Jen said...

OT-missing pastors wife

I just read the other article/comments and I don't want to step on any toes, (mrs Rob if this is your church) but this guy sounds even MORE shady...and 'cult' like! (which would explain his talk about other 'dress codes, cultures, etc'.)

He calls himself a self appointed, 'Apostle Ron', and he has multiple body guards. I was also shocked to read that he shared this info not only with his congregation, but he also gave an INTERVIEW detailing the same claims about his wife!

Why is he sharing this very personal information about his wifes 'struggles' with the public (if it's even true). I don't even understand him sharing these details with his church, much less broadcasting it. She has a right to privacy, and he has no right to make these public comments while she is 'isolated', (another cult term) in treatment out of state. Does he want her to live in the shadow of her alleged mistakes for the rest of her life, or does he KNOW she is not coming back?

Do they have kids? He should be ashamed of himself regardless! I am now more convinced we will likely be hearing more about this story.

Anonymous said...

They dressed her in sexy seductive clothing,put adults make up on her ie lipstick etc.you are acting like a pedophile u dirty freak.YOU need investigating your a perverted pedophile.

Anonymous said...

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Nw2tkYiCrqg/UFzkCtfoL2I/AAAAAAAAEoc/hIsJy019878/s1600/images.jpeg

Fatnhappy said...

OT- Jose Baez is going to represent the defendant in the Sedwick bullying suicide case...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-57608887-504083/rebecca-sedwick-update-jose-baez-casey-anthonys-attorney-to-represent-fla-girl-accused-of-bullying-12-year-old-who-committed-suicide/

dadgum said...

Casey's dad did that, too...

Anonymous said...

Caseys' dad did what? Casey who?

Anonymous said...

FROM today's abc article, the judge denied ramsey's lawyer's request...

From the article:

A reporter for the Boulder Daily Camera newspaper and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press sued current Boulder County District Attorney Stan Garnett in September, seeking to have the documents made public.
Garnett’s office turned over 18 pages of documents to judge Lowenbach for review earlier this week.
Garnett also submitted to the judge a letter on behalf of attorneys for John Ramsey Monday that said, in part, “if the unprosecuted indictment is to be publicly released, the Court should also order the release of the entire grand jury record.”


Judge Lowenbach denied that request. Garnett has not returned ABC News’ request for comment.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2013/10/jonbenet-ramsey-judge-orders-grand-jury-documents-released/

dadgum said...

referring to post above mine..if Baez is defending..then George did it..

john said...

Hi Jen,

Thank you for your exstensive analysis. i only had a little time to make a comment on it.

Jen, everything you have said now reading it back,in my opinion is spot on. You are right for your instincts to kick in..All's not well with what he is stating..

Hobnob said...

A Colorado judge has ordered the release of the 1999 grand jury indictment in the killing of six-year-old JonBenet Ramsey.

The documents, which will be released on Friday, could shed light on why prosecutors decided against charging JonBenet's parents over her death.

A reporter for the Daily Camera and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press filed a lawsuit to seek the records.

In the ruling, Senior District Court Judge J Robert Lowenbach noted that district attorney Alex Hunter prepared possible charges against John Ramsey and his wife, Patsy, three years after the girl’s death.

The Daily Camera reported in January that members of the grand jury tasked with investigating the case had voted to indict John and Patsy Ramsey in 1999.

The indictment has remained sealed for 14 years because Mr Hunter decided against pursuing charges against the girl's parents.

Officials have never explained that decision.

JonBenet's body was found bludgeoned and strangled in her family's home in Boulder on December 26, 1996.

Former District Attorney Mary Lacy said in 2008 that DNA evidence suggests the killer was a stranger, not a family member, and she announced that she planned to treat the Ramseys as victims of the crime.

JonBenet Ramsey's mother, Patsy, died of cancer in 2006.

Earlier this week, John Ramsey asked officials to release the entire grand jury record if the unprosecuted indictment was made public.

However, the judge said transcripts of grand jury proceedings and evidence presented to it are not considered "official action" under the law governing criminal court records.

An attorney representing John Ramsey said he was confident that no evidence in the grand jury case implicated the Ramsey family and the public should be able to see that for themselves.

"Anything less than the release of all of the proceedings is a gross injustice to the Ramsey family," L Lin Wood said.

The unsolved case became the centre of media attention for a second time in 2006 when former primary school teacher John Mark Karr claimed he killed the former Little Miss Colorado "by accident".

No charges were filed against Karr after his DNA failed to match a sample found on JonBenet's clothes.

http://news.sky.com/story/1158856/jonbenet-grand-jury-documents-to-be-released

Anonymous said...

This is a link to an interesting article/theory on the death of JonBenet Ramsey.

http://www.jayweidner.com/InnocentMurder.html

Hobnob said...

HARTFORD, Conn. – A Connecticut judge on Wednesday granted a new trial for Kennedy cousin Michael Skakel, ruling his attorney failed to adequately represent him when he was convicted in 2002 of killing his neighbor in 1975.

The ruling by Judge Thomas Bishop marked a dramatic reversal after years of unsuccessful appeals by Skakel, the 52-year-old nephew of Robert F. Kennedy's widow, Ethel Kennedy. Skakel is serving 20 years to life.

Bridgeport State's Attorney John Smriga told The Associated Press that prosecutors will appeal the decision.

Skakel's current attorney, Hubert Santos, said he expects to file a motion for bail on Thursday. If a judge approves it, Skakel could then post bond and be released from prison.

Skakel argued his trial attorney, Michael Sherman, was negligent in defending him when he was convicted in the golf club bludgeoning of Martha Moxley when they were 15 in wealthy Greenwich. Santos called the case weak.

Prosecutors contended Sherman's efforts far exceeded standards and that the verdict was based on compelling evidence against Skakel.

During a state trial in April on the appeal, Skakel took the stand and blasted Sherman's handling of the case, portraying him as an overly confident lawyer having fun and basking in the limelight while making fundamental mistakes from poor jury picks to failing to track down key witnesses.

Santos argued that the prosecutors' case rested entirely on two witnesses of dubious credibility who came forward with stories of confessions after 20 years and the announcement of a reward. Skakel had an alibi, he said.

Santos contends Sherman was "too enamored with the media attention to focus on the defense." Sherman told criminal defense attorneys at a seminar in Las Vegas six months before the trial that one of his goals in representing Skakel was to have a "good time," Santos said.

"Defending a murder charge is not about enjoying oneself, it is about zealously advocating for the client and providing him with the assistance guaranteed by our constitution," Santos wrote in court papers. "It is not about getting invited to A-list parties in New York City, or launch parties for the trendy new television show, or going to the Academy Awards and all the 'cool parties' afterwards."

Sherman has said he did all he could to prevent Skakel's conviction and denied he was distracted by media attention in the high-profile case.

Hobnob said...

Santos contends Sherman failed to obtain or present evidence against earlier suspects, failed to sufficiently challenge the state's star witness and other testimony and made risky jury picks including a police officer.

Prosecutors countered that Sherman spent thousands of hours preparing the defense, challenged the state on large and small legal issues, consulted experts and was assisted by some of the state's top lawyers. Sherman attacked the state's evidence, presented an alibi and pointed the finger at an earlier suspect, prosecutors said.

"This strategy failed not because of any fault of Sherman's, but because of the strength of the state's case," prosecutor Susann Gill wrote in court papers. "If the evidence on which the jury based its verdict is not considered compelling, then many verdicts upheld in this state must truly be on shaky ground."

The state's case included three confessions and nearly a dozen incriminating statements by Skakel over the years, Gill said. She also said there was strong evidence of motive.

"His drug-addled mental state, coupled with the infuriating knowledge that his hated brother Tommy had a sexual liaison with Martha, and the fact that Martha spurned his advances, triggered the rage which led him to beat her to death with a golf club," Gill wrote.

Gill said what Sherman did with his personal time was irrelevant. She said the evidence cited by the defense was not significant and that Sherman had sound strategic reasons for his decisions.

Skakel, who maintains his innocence, was denied parole last year and was told he would not be eligible again to be considered for release for five years.

___

Christoffersen reported from New York City.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/10/23/kennedy-cousin-skakel-wins-new-trial-in-175-killing-after-appeal-over-lawyer/

marietje said...

Probably some of you have seen this if you signed any petition for Ayla Reynolds. It focuses on how Ayla got into Justin's custody to begin with. P.S. Has anyone ever seen a happy photo of Ayla with Justin? I haven't. http://www.aylareynolds.com/anon/The%20Taking%20of%20Ayla%20Reynolds.pdf.

MrsRob said...

Jen, I saw this story on Fox Carolina as their lead story. I am not a member of this "church" nor have I ever visited there. I've been reading this blog since the Hailey Dunn disappearance and have learned a lot. Something just seemed SO OFF about his statements on the news and especially in his "Message to the Congregation" dated 10-13-13 on their website. He flipped back and forth referencing her in the past tense many times. No other local news outlet picked up on this "story" nor has anyone in her family spoken on her behalf (to my knowledge). He's said she asked him to speak on her behalf. Yet he has slandered and humiliated her to anyone who will listen. There are red flags everywhere. How can @foxcarolina only report on one side of THIS story???

MrsRob said...

Hi @ Jen & John...

Thanks so much for taking the time to review the "Apostle" Ron Carpenter's statements regarding his wife Hope. His congregation does behave in a cult-like manner. @Jen: Excellent work! This guy has been a very controversial figure. I worry for Hope Carpenter's well being.

Jen said...

OT
Hi MrsRob-

Thanks for sharing the links, I did a little more reading and I was more shocked by every quote from 'Apostle Rob'! He and Hope do have children (I never read how many) and all of the quotes I read from his 'sermon' (smear campaign) were self serving and made him out to be a martyr. Did he even think about his kids before revealing all of this to the public?!

He even commented in his sermon that HE was paying for her 'very expensive treatment' by 'religious counselors' and 'psychiatric professionals', (since they are married it's just much her her money as his, if there really is 'treatment' being paid for) and the only behavior that he cited to support his claims that she was 'very sick', and 'not right', was the supposed 'inappropriate relationships'. As if anyone who has an affair is mentally ill, and in need of hospitalization! Another thing, I also think by saying inappropriate relationship he wants us to assume he means affair...when in reality it could be she didn't want to be part of his ministry and tried to pull away and associate herself with people who could help her get out of his control.

As I said before, I hope this is investigated. I find it hard to believe a mother would leave her kids behind for a year for any reason, as she would basically be surrendering any chance at future custody, or chance at a normal relationship with them.

Anonymous said...

Jen, I believe you are right on target. I googled this man's sermon where he divulged all this low-down degradation towards his wife to his full-house congregation.

He completely destroyed his wifes' reputation and probably any chance that she would have a single friend left in that area after he got through with her. He did an awful thing! Awful, awful, after twenty-nine years of (legally wed) marriage to her and three kids together. Not one word he spoke was necessary to explain their separation, without giving ugly details.

He had some years earlier admitted he was into pornography, which I feel sure took its' tool on her as well as his acting out total control of her. I suspect the poor badgered and psychologically abused woman just wanted to have a normal life if she could find such a thing.

Further, I would recommend that someone track down her whereabouts; exactly what "might" he have done to her, since he made such a big deal out of covering his tracks in her mysterious disappearance for 'one year'? Somethings' not right here!

Anonymous said...

HER pedophile parents killed her.dirty evil scum.

marietje said...

Portion of the Grand Jury Indictment. From a link on the Denver Post. http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site36/2013/1025/20131025_081406_JRamsey-Grand-Jury.pdf.

marietje said...

Found this article from the Boulder Daily Camera. Interesting and with comments by locals, like this one, "Mr. Ramsey hid behind lawyers Haddon and Wood for many years. If he wants the truth out, he can let the police administer a real polygraph test. The Ramseys refused the official invitations and shopped around until they found a compliant tester. Let the cops ask the questions and run the box John. Tell your story while you're hooked up. Get that evidence out you're so supposedly concerned about." I can't eliminate Burke as a possible perpetrator. The Ramseys absolutely fought tooth and nail to prevent him being interviewed. On the other hand remember family friend Fleet White and wife said JonBenet told them people in black robes with hoods were visiting her.http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_24381455/jonbenet-ramsey-indictment-released-john-patsy#idc-cover.

marietje said...

Don't forget Detective Lou Smit, whom John Ramsey prayed with at his deathbed. He definitely was biased in favor of the Ramseys. One last question. Why doesn't John Ramsey continue to look for his daughter's killer? http://blogs.denverpost.com/coldcases/2012/06/28/boulder-jonbenet-ramsey-boulder-beaten/4464/.

NOTjohnmarkcarr said...

Also, don't forget about Det. Arnette, who was adamant that she exchanged stares with Mr. Ramsay as he found & carried JonBenet's body upstairs. --- she was SURE that John Ramsay held Guilty Knowledge of his child's death.

Anonymous said...

HER "FATHER"is a child fiddler.jail it.

marietje said...

From Burke's facebook page. It's open to the public.https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=129630337229405&set=a.118918174967288.1073741832.100005473182779&type=1&theater.

marietje said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Anonymous said...

marietje said...
From Burke's facebook page. It's open to the public.https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=129630337229405&set=a.118918174967288.1073741832.100005473182779&type=1&theater.

October 26, 2013 at 10:37 PM

Oh yeah! Burke is a real charmer. The language of an abuser. Sex and violence intertwined... I suppose it's natural to think he could have done it. I had that thought in the beginning. Possibly both he and Jon Benet were being sexually abused.

Anonymous said...

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0005/31/lkl.00.html

THOMAS: Let's hear your theory. I'm waiting.

P. RAMSEY: We're waiting for you to finish. Tell me exactly step by step how you envision...

THOMAS: I wasn't there.

P. RAMSEY: You must have conjured something in your head for you to come out and call me a murderer of my child. I want to hear one through 10. When did I write this ransom note? Before or after I killed JonBenet?

This may have been addressed before, but could Patsy Ramsey's statement on Larry King Live be considered an embedded confession ? (BBM)