Ramsey’s Indicted In JonBenet’s Murder In 1999- DA Alex Hunter Refused To Prosecute

Posted by Christina Stoy | Alex Hunter,John Ramsey,JonBenet Ramsey,Patsy Ramsey | Monday 28 January 2013 12:32 pm

According to a new report exclusive by the Daily Camera- Both John and Patsy Ramsey were indicted by a grand jury in 1999 for child abuse leading to her death- but prosecutor Alex Hunter refused to sign the indictment because he did not feel there was sufficient evidence to secure a prosecution against either parent.

1

The report lays to the rest years of lingering rumors that although the grand jury which was suspended more than once while hearing the Ramsey case was never polled.

In July 2008 then Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy, publicly exonerated the Ramsey’s in an open letter after Touch DNA testing proved the suspect in Jon Benet’s assault and murder was an unrelated male whose profile matched DNA in a blood stain within the child’s underwear.

… The match of Male DNA on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of the murder makes it clear to us that an unknown male handled these items. There is no innocent explanation for its incriminating presence at three sites on these two different items of clothing that JonBenét was wearing at the time of her murder. … To the extent that we may have contributed in any way to the public perception that you might have been involved in this crime, I am deeply sorry. No innocent person should have to endure such an extensive trial in the court of public opinion, especially when public officials have not had sufficient evidence to initiate a trial in a court of law. … We intend in the future to treat you as the victims of this crime, with the sympathy due you because of the horrific loss you suffered. …

 

In 2001 John and Patsy Ramsey also passed a polygraph examination given by Dr. Ed Gelb  and corroborated via  quality control analysis Cleve Baxter.

Patsy Ramsey died in 2006 after over a decade of battling ovarian cancer.

In his book, The Other Side of Suffering, John Ramsey believes his daughter’s murderer was someone the family came into contact with  either at a Holiday gathering or at a pageant appearance shortly before her murder on Christmas Day.

JonBenet’s murder remains unsolved.

Related Posts:

126 Comments

  1. Rose says:

    How does garden variety D&D (which I know zero about) fit with the garrotte
    tying special french knot capability (presumed SM-experienced)?
    Compliments to those so up on the evidence & its interpretation.

  2. @Rose
    I was referring to the beheading reference as a possibility.

  3. Löni says:

    Blink i didn’t follow this case. Only one question about the footage of the police report: could the suitcase have been a help for some potentially intruder to get out of the house? Then if so it could tell a lot about the intruder. ( intruder(s) size and age ) did the brother of Jonbenet have some weird friends?

  4. JaninaWalker says:

    I paid attention at the time and tried often to find a way to contact the police focused on the case. Way back then there was reference to a certain man that John Ramsey worked with at his then place of work, who was quite annoyed at the amount of salary John Ramsey was getting and it was around the time of company bonuses. I don’t remember the details now as it is so much later in time, but I wish John Ramsey would get a list of all the people he worked with and have them investigated. He could point out the men most likely to be the one who was really upset.
    This is the first time I have seen this site. I am not one to become obsessive about crime, but I have followed several HLN shows for 10 years. And I did follow this case from the beginning when it was covered on CNN. I wish CNN would have a way of searching transcripts of shows with boolean search terms, so they could help with crime resolution. CNN mentioned the fellow at work who was so mad he made some comments I can not remember verbatim. But it was something about being mad about the huge bonus John Ramsey got. Was that not written in some note left at the scene, referencing the amount of money that matched the bonus amount? Likely that man has left the country long ago to avoid detection. Such an individual would not be a danger to others, if his anger was very specific. So that might be why they decided not to pursue it.
    That must be why John Ramsey says it could be someone who knows them.

  5. lyla says:

    @Mom3.0 says:
    January 29, 2013 at 1:17 am
    “Ahh But Blink it does matter”
    ——————————————————————–
    I will be upfront. I believe the parents were involved.

    Think about it: Would an intruder take the time in the Ramsey home to clean up the crime scene i.e. douche JBR’s vaginal area, construct a nonsensical ransom note and practice ransom note (JBR was not kidnapped) and leave it on the stairway inside the home.

    The crime scene was not secured by the detective on the scene. John Ramsey allowed Fleet White and his wife to enter the home. At the detectives request John joined Fleet in searching the home. I’ve provided links below some of which are graphic.

    See the evidence for yourself:

    http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682513/The%20Body

    http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/index_1b.html

    lyla- that submission did not and would not get an indictment, and since then a significant DNA profile has been established in this case that not only matches “itself”, but excludes the family entirely.

    This was an intended kidnapping that ended in JonBenet’s death- by a sexual sadist.

    To believe that the ramsey’s were involved means they could fake that or stage same. Impossible to do so without detection, imo.

    B

    B

  6. Stuart says:

    What do you guys think about the “Paul Douglas Peter” did it theory? His method was he used a BASEBALL BAT to threaten the girl when he was caught after putting the collar bomb on the other girl, and in the Ramsey case an extra baseball bat was found in the Ramseys yard in 1996. And in the collar-bomb case he left an email contact with a screen name from a character out of a James Clavell novel, while an extra James Clavell novel was found in the Ramsey house after the 1996 murder there. Here is the rundown from a link: http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/showthread.php?p=4798857#post4798857

    I do not believe there is any connection. JBR’s offender is a sexual sadist.
    B

  7. Julie says:

    The author of the book Foreign Faction: Who really kidnapped JonBenet by James Kolar probably has the case solved. Written by a lead LE professional, he had to be discreet in order not to be sued, but his introduction of evidence not seen before, and his analysis (though subtly pinpointing what occurred) will give you in-depth understanding of all the pieces of the puzzle. The best evaluation on the garrote’s validity was done by Delmar England and one can find information on it on http://www.acandyrose.com. If you’ve already made up your mind on this case, no need to bother.

    Julie-

    respectfully, Kolar was a disgruntled investigator and he self-published because his “theory” is ridiculous. It is NOT supported by evidence or medical finding. It is pure conjecture and it flat out states that the stun gun marks are caused by a piece of train track on 2 separate and distinct areas of her body that could not and would not cause the marks on JBR.

    O, and the train tracks were never taken into evidence, and never tested to see what scientific experiment could produce a similar wounding pattern that matches the balance of the autopsy finding.

    The whole thing is silly and embarrassing, imo.

    B

  8. Rose says:

    back to here from Kyron site.
    similarity: offender knew family, not sure of reciprocal.
    Are you going to write more on this case.

  9. Jo Lawrence says:

    The police never found real evidence of an intruder, either outside the house or inside.
    The DNA was touch DNA, and tests showed that it could have come from the clothing manufacturer in Asia. Or even ended up there by other means, since the child always asked for toilet assistance.
    The exoneration vis a vis the touch DNA was leveraged by the parents’ attorney who threatened to sue the DA.
    Only 4 experts (who were not hired by the Ramsey’s)at the civil trial in Atlanta, by Judge Carnes, stated that the ransom note was not written by Mrs. Ramsey. There were a slew of 6-8 experts who claimed it looked like Mrs. Ramsey’s handwriting – one who testified on the Ramseys’ behalf claimed the likelihood of the note having been written by an intruder to match Mrs. Ramsey’s handwriting was absolutely infintestinal, and another said that out of 100 people reviewed, only Patsy Ramsey couldn’t be eliminated.
    Lastly, the majority of expert forensic scientists believed the vagina of the child showed chronic abuse. The Intruder would have had to have been able to get into the home on multiple occasions.
    ‘Nuf said. Know you have your mind made up. But thought some other readers might be interested.

    Sigh. I was not aware that intestinal length had any effect on handwriting similarity but thanks for that tip.

    Sorry, had to be a bit of a nudge with a post like this. It is just wildly inaccurate. This child was murdered by a sexual sadist, period.
    B

  10. Jo says:

    Nudge accepted. Sorry, mispelling corrected to read Infinitesimal.

  11. Liam says:

    Hi all,

    Just some thoughts…

    The amount stated in the ransom note ($118,000), is known to be the same amount John Ramsey received in a bonus from his work.

    Is this coincidence?
    If this is not a coincidence, surely the number of people with access to this information is limited in numbers, even if John Ramsey was boastful among friends, there can`t be too many he would be this relaxed around. If this information could`ve been obtained through his office, again, the numbers of who could do this must be small.
    In 1996, what would be the ways of obtaining this information other than the ways mentioned above?

    Spending hours in the home and reading the bank statements would be one way.

    Working security in the building and going through open mail, etc. It is not as small as one would think, unfortunately.
    B

  12. Liam says:

    Thanks for the clarification Blink.
    Just another couple of queries while I have the room,…

    Can it be determined if it was a garrotte or an exotic asphyxiation device around her neck? Excuse my ignorance but I do not know the purpose of either, especially in regards to this crime.

    If this was an intruder and was a sexual crime, what gratification did they get from this and why no semen to accompany the unknown male DNA?

    Yes, it was a definite garrote- it’s function in this crime based on my training, education and experience was dual- as a form of torture and for sexual penetration. It is common for this type of offender to have what is called “retarded release”- it would surprise me frankly if semen was found.

    If a stun gun was used in the process, at what point the skull fracture, how and why the need?

    My personal opinion is the stun gun was used while JBR was sitting at the table eating pineapple, and again after her mouth was taped.

    Was there any traces of pineapple found on the clothes JonBenet was wearing at the time she was found?

    No.

    Over time I am leaning back towards the possibility of an intruder, I actually hope this is eventually proven true. If so, this person must surely have done this again.

    I know I need to write on this case. I have studied it previously as a layperson, and more recently with specificity as a criminal investigative analyst. It is not an endeavor I can schedule at the moment, but the grand jury release may push me into it.

    This was a definite intruder.

    B

  13. Mom3.0 says:

    Just came to see if you had posted a new story on Jonbenet given the order to release the indictment.

    Sorry to see you have not.

    I am still eager to read your analysis on this case even more so after reading your thoughts in response to Liam.

    I must say your assurance that this was a DEFINITE intruder…well that has me scratching my head as with all known evidence how can you be so certain? What more must you Blink know to formulate a definite conclusion and to state it with such confidence…

    The info must be very illuminating.

    I mean its one thing to review and come up with a well thought out theory based upon your analysis which then has you leaning toward an intruder. But to state as a definite conclusion that this killer was a definite intruder… to disregard/rule out all other seemingly reasonable theories that is far different than stating a mere theory.

    And what do you mean by intruder….intruder as in definite stranger or intruder as in family friend/acquaintance…

    A Stranger intruder is far different than friend, acquaintance-or enemy…

    I realize this is an “old” case but
    How how I wish you would share your thoughts/analysis with us.

    AJMO Peace

  14. Cindy says:

    @14 Rose says:
    I heard on the radio that this information will be released today.

  15. Rose says:

    @Mom3.0. Can you share your definition of a “DEFINITE intruder…”?
    If DNA testing rules out all 3 family members, and no nonfamily member slept
    in the home that night by invitation or knowledge, I’m not sure what other
    alternative exists than an intruder?

    Looks like a very bizarre indictment per press accounts.
    . Failing to prevent danger (in her own home).
    Collusion to coverup for an unknown unidentified assailant. (The latter
    reminds me of Horman vilifiers.) These charges hadn’t the merit to prosecute as
    child abuse charges even with more evidence.

  16. Liam says:

    For an intruder, this was a high risk crime given that he was entering a home and murdering a child while her family were asleep. Even more so because it was sexually motivated. The potential for leaving behind incriminating evidence is enormous given the nature of the crime. It`s not logical that an intruder would leave behind a body and a ransom note, some say he had plenty time to be meticulous, others would suggest the Ramsey`s had just the same. There are elements of staging in this crime which simply cannot be ignored and the grand jury indictment is conformation of this.

    Neither theories are impossible, the DNA found is just as questionable as the evidence of chronic sexual abuse is.

  17. Mom3.0 says:

    @ Rose

    I am not sure how my definition of a definite intruder would help clarify Blinks statement of

    “This was a definite intruder.”

    For you see I was unclear as to what Blink meant- first because we havent read her complete analysis and second because, as I posted- there are many degrees of intruder…

    For instance, we have learned from the Jodi Arias case a once welcomed guest can be determined to be an “intruder” Once it is clear that the victim would no longer extend an invitation- as in during a burglary or a date rape or as in Travis’ case a tryst which suddenly turned into a burglary (if gun was his or rope…) or as with the shooting/knife attack which ended his life A was obvious not a welcomed guest.. but instead an intruder.

    Rose I understand that many tend to believe that the DNA touch analysis “ruled out” the family but unfortunately that is not the case -

    Mary Lacy was just wrong in “clearing” the Ramseys based upon such evidence- IMO

    Just because the DNA which was collected ten years after the murder seemingly turned up none from family members -does not clear the Ramseys-
    just as finding some evidence of their DNA would not have solved the case with clear convictions of the Ramseys either- as it was afterall their home/ their loved one-
    and to go even further still- if the profile turned out to be Fleets or one of the partygoers or the maids or Santas etc- this would not have necessarily pointed to any one of them as being Jon Benets killer…
    As touch DNA is just that touch DNA skin cells- that transfer- – given that it is known that little JonBenet did not wash her hands diligently- and asked anyone and anyone within earshot of the bathroom for help-
    it is not out of the realm of possibility that the DNA was transferred from prior innocent contact or from little JonBenets own dirty fingernails

    Lets keep in mind only certain areas were tested and even though an unknown male profile was found that does not necessarily mean that it is definitely the marker of JonBenets killer.

    Could it be- yes

    but it is also just as likely that the profile originated thru cross contamination or came about thru chain of custody issues.

    First Patsy was unclear as to exactly where and when the PJs came from whether they were laundered or dirty- or when she changed into them or whether she was put in them by her killer…. whether the undies were in the package unopened or whether they were wrapped amongst the presents downstairs-or whether or not they were in Jon Benets dresser…
    Point being we dont know- as Patsy at first denied them as being Jon Benets but then said she relented in giving them to her even though they were several sizes too large…

    Can anyone really say with any degree of certainty that all those who came in contact with JonBenet before during and in the aftermath were excluded as possible profile matches?

    Can anyone really say with ANY degree of certainty that Jon Benets clothing was clean- or if it wasnt mishandled in the autopsy room or by others in the years since the crime?

    Just because things like this are not supposed to happen does not mean they do not- as we learned in the sad case of Sandy Hook- when Jean Henry invited her husband into the morgue so he could look at and possibly photograph the body of Adam Lanza -

    And we again learned of such occurrences with the sad case of Micheal Stevie and Chris and the WM3- where evidence was tampered with damaged or lost or stolen- some find a weird gratification in handling or seeing or owning real crime artifacts…

    For all the reasons above and more I do not think ANYONE can rule any scenario out of the mix as to the where and whys of the DNA profile or lack thereof…

    Rose, the Ramseys were unclear on so much and they lied about so much-

    such as denying the bowl; and the spoon was theirs etc..

    Point being I do not think we can rely on their word alone that no one was in the home other than the 4

    nor can we say whether an intruder was a complete stranger or was an acquaintance or business associate or sworn enemy or other-

    Careful Rose I wouldnt want anyone to call you insensitive for “comparing” this case to Kyrons case. J/K as I do understand the importance of applying knowledge and info gathered from other cases that may apply to a new case… as I am sure you do as well

    But yes I too see some similarities- the biggest right now being that both grand juries were suspended several times and it would seem that with the newest revelations that the grand jury voted to indict yet we never heard about it till YEARS later I think it is safe to assume that no assumptions can be made on what the Grand Jury may or may not be doing in Kyrons case and whatever they may believe on guilt or innocence oit matters not in the “Grand” scheme of things sadly with Hunters decision to keep mum- and Lacys decision to first arrest Karr then “clear” the Ramseys both mistakes IMO

    it almost makes the whole process meaningless-

    What I have learned is it is still true – what Blink once wrote- when she stated (pp) a case can be as close to “solved” as possible but not be prosecutable- and that usually happens when there has been mistakes made early on that can never be resolved…and still LE can get it wrong and the innocent always pay regardless if it is the victim themselves the wrongly accused, or we the people who long for justice- and get nothing but strung along

    I look forward to reading Blinks analysis on this as I am sure she as alot of details and ideas that could aid us in figuring out exactly what she meant and why she seems so confident in her statements.

    Interesting enough the more time that passes the more info seems to come out and with each new piece instead of the culprit becoming more clear it seems a light is shown on more possible suspects or more confusing possible scenarios–

    Take for instance the Martha Moxley case- I thought I knew everything there was to know about that case
    turns out I was wrong- with the latest trial being ordered
    I hope Blink will do a write up on that “old” case as well- because she always seems to come up with some alternative info or witness or theory that slams me on my behind-

    Peace Rose

    AJMO

  18. Rose says:

    TY for information & analysis Mom 3.0.
    I read a bit on Skakel retrial & watched RFK Jr’s TV interview.
    The latter boiled down to he has prayed every day & sees this as a
    divine answer, believes passionately Skakel is innocent, & passionately blames Furhmann & D Dunne (now deceased) for the conviction. I plead to insensitive wrt my opinion of his opinion.
    Maybe Skakel’s attorney was louzy, but so are multitudinous criminal defense attorneys.

  19. Paula says:

    On the child abuse count, the grand jury wrote that the Ramseys “did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child’s life or health, which resulted in the death of JonBenet Ramsey.”

    On a second count of accessory to a crime, it alleged that each parent “did render assistance to a person” with the intent to prevent their arrest or prosecution, knowing they had “committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death.”

    Admittedly, I have not followed this tragic case closely for years, as some have done. However, it seems ludicrous to me that anyone can feel vindicated by the above 2 paragraphs, which represent the total of a grand jury’s indictment of these poor parents. And yet, the bungling Denver police department feels that those same paragraphs validate and vindicate them for their absurd persecution of John and Patsy Ramsey, to this very day.

    The horrendous mistakes by LE in this case should have provided sufficient evidence of the incompetence of its early responders and their superiors. This is so very reminiscent of little Kyron’s still unsolved case. Both cases speak loudly and clearly to LE’s training for such terrible events. The immediate mindset that family is ALWAYS responsible needs to be revisited and the protocol rewritten to avoid such miscarriages of justice and more importantly, to catch the pure evil that preys on innocent children and escapes unscathed.

  20. Randie says:

    Mom3.0 Amen!

    I haven’t commented for along time, as a matter of fact I have almost quite coming and reading @ blink on crime….

    I have always admired! blink’s sense of justice, however, jmo I have been dumb founded with articles about John and Patsy….(and articles about Kyron)…

    There are some of us that do not see/agree that John and Patsy are “cleared”…so we shake our heads and decide to keep quiet or… go and read somewhere else.

    I am glad you are speaking up. I also appreciate the thought out questions and inquiries!

  21. Mom3.0 says:

    Greetings and Salutations Randie,

    Thank you from the bottom of my heart for taking the time to post that comment to me.
    I so appreciate the courage it took for you to write it.

    I thank Blink for being such a fair moderator.
    I often times think she must hate me and my never ending debate of ALL sides of an issue/case. I think the same could be said for many contributors…

    So it was really great to hear from you “out there” in support

    I feel the same regarding the touchDNA, as you know-

    Still I do feel the need to point out that I do not claim that the ramseys are guilty either-

    From all the information I have read or seen for every piece of “evidence” that points toward a ramsey- there is just as much if not more that points to someonelse -

    This is very frustrating for me and why I really look forward to reading Blinks analysis.
    Perhaps she can shed a light on something that will tip the scales.

    Regardless I will be here to ask questions and debate the issues
    Ad nauseam

    my apologies in advance to all, mostly Blink :)

  22. Mom3.0 says:

    Rose, youre most welcome-

    Blink if you will allow Id like to discuss the Moxley case for a moment- I do so hope you write something….

    ANyway Rose I used to feel much the same as you regarding the Moxley case-

    But in truth his defense was not suffice- as IMO it would have been quite easy to poke holes into the “Michael did it” prosecution

    I recently reviewed the case and with a fresh pair of eyes clear of emotion- it was scary just how much LE got wrong and mishandled this case.

    I do think there is a strong possibility that much of their interpretations of the crimescene and perp were wrong-

    The dragging alone could have unclothed Marthas bottom half- and although I do think that some form of sexual motivation could have been at play…I think there is a possibility that the perp may have been a female with jealousy issues or a couple of perps-

    IIRC the profile was of someone between the ages of 13 and 18 under the influence of alcohol or other– with anger issues -sibling rivalry issues and mommy issues

    Well as I remember that could be most of the teens in Belle haven-

    I was also was shocked by some info which I dont remember reading during the trial- regarding her brother and his friends behaviors in the aftermath

    None of this however rules out Michael or his family
    we all know The Skakels were a large family and IF there was a coverup of some sort it isnt hard to imagine that evidence was tampered with

    But at the same time it isnt hard to imagine that The unruly skakel boys may have been easy scapegoats- they were blamed for much of what went wrong in Belle Haven long before the murder-

    With a closer look it becomes apparent most of the teens were not that different in family dysfunctions, behaviors or temperament or in their chosen vices –

    and everyones alibis for that night are not as sound as some would like to think- and as we all sadly realize the time of death is a rather large window of time.

    For me this is another case to ponder over

    Who killed Martha did we get the right perp as i hope- and if so is he the only perp or is it possible we got it all wrong?

    IDK
    Mom3.0 walks off with head down as the melancholy “snoopy” music plays on…

    AJMo
    Peace

  23. Soundbeach says:

    OMG. All I can say is that I have followed this case since this child was murdered. My daughter was the same age as Jonbenet and I remember all the sleepless nights I had thinking of this child and the horror she went through. I also never had any doubt that it was one of the parents who killed her. So much evidence to support the theory that it could only been them. It is your opinion that she was killed by a sexual sadist and the sexual sadism here is obvious…but since when may I ask, are parents mothers or fathers not able of sexual sadism against their own children…? Who sits there and writes a 3 page ramson note that makes absolutely no sense not only in its content but on its intention..? Since when does a killer leave behind such senseless evidence that contradicts what actually happened since she was not kidnapped but murdered? I know this case like the back of my hand and I have never for an instant wavered in my belief of who killed her. And I even have a theory as to why she was killed which I have never heard anyone else discuss. And Thank you for allowing me to express this opinion which I have held inside for so many years….

    soundbeach- this was a sexual sadist, likely pedophile, but not necessarily. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind. Having studied this “profile” as well as this case under different disciplines directly under FBI protocol as much as I hate to say this- this crime was not staged, it was not perpetrated by a parent designed to stage some outrageous act- it is solely the work of an intruder known to this family with his DNA on 3 separate and distinct areas of physical evidence of the victim. 3 sources that match, one if which is comingled with JBR hemo.

    Facts form theory- not the other way around.

    B

  24. Soundbeach says:

    And please excuse my after thoughts of which I have a million, but whether Patsy R new it or not, she was sexualizing this child consciously or subconsciously and anyone qualified could come up with a psychological profile that could link anyone of these two parents with potential psychopathological sexual deviant behavior.

    Soundbeach, that is inaccurate. There was absolutely no history of sexual deviance with either parent. I am not a fan of throwing such terms around at folks- most especially since 1997 no professional ever has in this case. I do agree that the whole child pageant thing is unhealthy, stereotypical propaganda and to pedophiles- it can be arousing. The very fact that is a true and factual statement should be enough to dissuade any Mother from being interested in this path.

    I realize I may offend some, that is not my intention. Consider it a respectful wake-up call.

    B

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment