This thread should be used to show evidence to believe the BPD was biased and the Grand Jury was not told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

I will start with a quote from Susan Stine that appeared in Paula Woodward's book - We Have Your Daughter - Hard cover page 359

"It was very clear to me that the prosecutors were out to get the Ramseys.  That's how their questioning was shaped.  Their questions were filled with facts and evidence that the police and prosecutors should have already known wasn't accurate."
Lou Smit said he had "never been treated more terribly" than he was in the grand jury that day.

He told me personally that they persecutors were treating him like someone to be dismissed, the jurors could tell the prosecution was not supporting a word he said.
Howard Rile, handwriting expert, told Paula Woodward the questioning had been aggressive and confrontational. He was testifying that the writing was most likely NOT Patsy's. Very VERY improbable that she wrote that.
Quotes from PI David Williams

"The BPD knew that the DNA eliminated the Ramsey family but that did not deter them from continuing an investigation aimed at the parents."

"The Ramseys had been targeted. Police were looking for evidence that was incriminating. When they found evidence that was exculpatory, it was set aside."
One of the most disturbing behaviors of BPD personnel was that even though hypothesis after hypothesis resulted in failed predictions for the existence of incriminating evidence, these people kept at it. 

For example, the hypothesis of sexual abuse resulted in denial of evidence from the pediatrician; the hypothesis that Patsy certainly wrote the ransom note is rejected by nearly all handwriting experts; the hypothesis of JonBenét being slammed against the edge of a bathtub or something similar is rejected by the size and nature of the punched-out region of skull; the hypothesis that the Ramseys were lying about Burke's being in his bedroom because of purported voices at the end of the 911 call is rejected by the finding that the noises at the end of the call cannot be voices from the kitchen being transmittted over a phone line; when DNA testing was done, all family members were excluded; when investigators looked for the predicted existence in the house of tape and rope matching those used in the homicide, they fail to find anything.
Again and again and yet again we find that hypotheses suggesting guilt of the Ramseys are soundly rejected.  Whenever a prediction of existence of incriminating evidence is manufactured, it fails to produce anything.  If the theory that the Ramseys were guilty of the homicide were a scientific theory, it would have been relegated to the trash bin years ago.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)