jameson's Links  Terms of Service  News  Chat  Forum Archives  Cord Photos  Email  

jameson's WebbSleuths

Subject: "Patsy in Atlanta 2"     Previous Topic | Next Topic
Printer-friendly copy    
Conferences Deposition discussion Topic #56
Reading Topic #56
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-04-03, 08:21 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
"Patsy in Atlanta 2"
1 Q. You identified Priscilla White as
2 a suspect back in June of '98. Is there
3 anything since that time that -- is there
4 any additional information that keeps her on
5 your suspect list?
6 MR. WOOD: And, you know, you got
7 a lawsuit from Chris Wolf. I am not sure
8 of the terminology, Michael, that was used
9 precisely as I sit here, but I know you all
10 asked a lot of questions in the course of
11 your investigation, and information that is
12 provided to you may be in your minds
13 indicating someone is a, quote/unquote,
14 suspect. I am never sure what a suspect is
15 other than somebody that might be someone
16 that should be investigated.
17 I don't really think there is a,
18 quote/unquote, suspect list. I think that
19 carries with it a connotation that there is
20 reason to have evidence to say somebody did
21 this, and I think it is more of a list of
22 people that are leads or possibilities that
23 should be investigated. And I just don't
24 want somehow somebody to start, besides Chris
25 Wolf, filing lawsuits claiming that we've

1 identified them as a, quote/unquote, suspect.
2 That is my concern. I think you would
3 appreciate it.

Clearly Lin was sensitive to this issue - he did not want it to be said his clients were making accusations - - but the BORG sure did put that out as fact anyway.

4 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Well, obviously
5 this is not -- I mean, we don't intend to
6 make this information public, but in the
7 course of the investigation, we need to know
8 if there is additional evidence other than
9 what we -- what you offered back in June of
10 1998 that would suggest that Priscilla White
11 was a viable suspect in this case, or
12 someone that cannot be excluded?
13 A. Well, it is kind of like Lin
14 said. We early on provided a list of people
15 who were, A, in our home, B, worked for us.
16 You know, we wracked our brains about, you
17 know, who this might have been because we
18 were told early on that it, you know,
19 possibly was someone that was close to us.
20 And, you know, those were -- they were close
21 friends of ours.
22 Q. Was Susan Stein ever a suspect?
23 MR. WOOD: By who, the police?
24 Q. (By Mr. Kane) No, by you.
25 A. No. I mean, the reason the

1 Whites, I think, kind of came up on the
2 radar screen was subsequent to JonBenet's
3 death they just seemed to act, to us, in a
4 very unusual manner in terms of being very
5 confrontational, and, you know, jumping in on
6 meetings with our priest, and writing
7 voluminous letters to the governor. To me
8 that just seemed unusual, and I wondered to
9 myself why someone would act that way.
10 Q. And it was this, the way they
11 were acting, is what, in your mind, made
12 them suspects, potential suspects?
13 A. Well, potentially, yes. But, I
14 mean, if I knew from you or from whomever
15 about a lot of people, whether, you know,
16 handwriting has thoroughly been checked, DNA
17 has been checked, et cetera, et cetera, you
18 know, that would help it cross off in my
19 mind.

Sound to me like Patsy was all but begging for K&C to let her know if they COULD clear the Whites in their minds. But K&C certainly did not do that.

I hope the Whites are reading this - - they aimed their anger at the Ramseys - - seems to me they had the wrong target.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Patsy in Atlanta 2 [View All], jamesonadmin, 08:21 AM, Nov-04-03, (0)  
Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-04-03, 08:27 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
1. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #0
20 Q. Other than the thing that you
21 talked about the amount of blood indicating
22 that the asphyxiation occurred before the
23 blow to the head, are there any other
24 details that you have that would suggest the
25 sequence that you know of?

1 MR. WOOD: From the forensic
2 people?
3 MR. KANE: From any source.
4 THE WITNESS: That a stun gun was
5 used to silence her.
6 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Where was that
7 information? Where did you get that
8 information?
9 A. I believe that came from Lou
10 Smith.
11 Q. Have you talked to anybody other
12 than Lou Smith -- well, let me ask you that.
13 Have you talked to Lou Smith directly
14 yourself?
15 A. Yes.
16 Q. About that?
17 A. Yes.
18 Q. Have you talked to anybody else
19 other than Lou Smith about a stun gun having
20 been used?
21 A. Yes.
22 Q. And who was that?
23 A. Ollie Gray.
24 Q. Was Mr. Gray, did he offer up
25 conclusions about that, that a stun gun was

1 used?
2 A. Yes.
3 Q. And have you talked to any
4 medical people about whether a stun gun was
5 used?
6 A. I have not myself.
7 Q. Have you heard indirectly from any
8 medical people about a stun gun having been
9 used?
10 A. I believe so.
11 Q. Who was that that you heard it
12 from?
13 A. I don't know the names.
14 Q. What have you heard from these
15 people?
16 A. I have heard that it has been
17 substantiated that a stun gun was used.
18 Q. What was it that substantiated the
19 use of a stun gun?
20 A. Whatever they do to test markings
21 against known markings of a particular stun
22 gun.
23 Q. And so that is what it is, the
24 markings?
25 A. (Witness nodded head

1 affirmatively).
2 Q. Have you ever, to your knowledge,
3 you or Mr. Ramsey, ever hired a forensic
4 expert to look at that issue, to look at the
5 autopsy report or look at any other evidence
6 that might be available that would have a
7 bearing on whether a stun gun was used?
8 A. I can't say for sure. John may
9 know that.
10 Q. But to your knowledge, you
11 haven't?
12 MR. WOOD: I think she told you
13 she hasn't.
14 MR. KANE: She said she can't say
15 for sure.
16 THE WITNESS: I don't know.
17 MR. WOOD: I think when you say
18 you can't say for sure, is there anything to
19 add to that, Patsy?
20 THE WITNESS: No. I don't know.
21 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Mrs. Ramsey, in
22 the course of your conversation with Mr.
23 Schmidt concerning the stun gun, do you
24 recall whether or not he sat down and showed
25 you photographs of the injuries he believed

1 to be stun gun injuries?
2 A. I believe he did.
3 Q. Did you or, at your request, were
4 copies of those provided to any other medical
5 people, copies of the photographs to assist
6 them?
7 A. I don't know.
8 MR. LEVIN: Are you done, Mike?
9 MR. KANE: Yes. I have other
10 questions, but take a minute.

AARGHHH!!! It is clear to me that K&C were trying to investigate the Ramseys and their investigation and contacts and not trying to get to the killer.

Patsy said she knew a stun gun was used. Not one question about who may have had a stun gun - - not one question about tips that may have gone to the Ramseys about people who had stun guns.

If I had been Patsy or Lin, I would have been tearing my hair out in frustration.

How anyone can read this transcript and still support Kane is beyond me. He (and his team) did a terrible job.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-04-03, 08:29 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
2. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #1
11 Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) We know what
12 you said about Priscilla White. I am just
13 -- my question is, since we talked to you
14 last, have you developed any evidence that
15 would confirm your suspicion as far as
16 Priscilla White is concerned, anything that
17 you know of in the course of the
18 investigation that you have conducted that
19 would keep her on this list, independent of
20 what you might think we know, that kind of
21 thing?
22 A. No.
23 Q. How about Fleet White, anything
24 that you have developed since the last time
25 we spoke to you that would keep him on this

1 suspect -- or that would keep him on this
2 list?
3 MR. WOOD: Are you talking about
4 whether their investigators have developed
5 information as opposed to like an event
6 occurring such as filing a criminal civil
7 case, which is a little odd?
8 Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) Anything new
9 that we don't know about Fleet White that
10 you have developed or your investigators have
11 developed?
12 A. I can't remember any. The only
13 -- I just heard recently that we have come
14 across a copy of his statement to you folks
15 or to the police department on or the day
16 after JonBenet's death and that he was asked
17 about the ransom note and could very closely
18 recite the content, which seemed unusual.

Oh yeah - - the BORG was right - - the Ramseys were really throwing their best friends to the sharks - - NOT!!! K&C seemed anxious to get the Ramseys to jump on that bandwagon - - didn't happen.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-04-03, 08:33 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
3. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #2
19 Q. The same, I guess, the same
20 question in regard to Mr. McReynolds, and I
21 am sorry I don't remember Mr. McReynolds'
22 first name.
23 MR. WOOD: Is it Bill?
24 MR. LEVIN: Yes.
25 MR. MORRISSEY: William, yes.

1 Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) Anything, I
2 know his name came up, and I was wondering
3 if anything since the last time you spoke
4 to, I believe it was the Boulder district
5 attorneys, I think after the formal
6 discussion you had on tape and everything,
7 then you went -- and I heard an audiotape --
8 where you were focusing on Mr. McReynolds
9 himself with Mr. DeMouth and a couple of
10 other people. I was wondering if anything,
11 any follow-up had been done as far as your
12 investigation is concerned, any new
13 information on Mr. McReynolds' possible
14 involvement.
15 A. I don't know.

Morrissey didn't even remember Santa's first name? Geesh!
So he asked about Santa and Patsy made it clear that she was not involved in the details of the investigation Ollie was running... Ollie was in the room - - maybe they should have had him pull a chair up to the table and asked HIM what was going on.

But knowing Ollie, I think he might have insisted on a bit of tit-for-tat there - - brainstorming and not this idiotic one way street of half-asked questions (did ya get it? :-))

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-04-03, 08:40 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
4. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #3
16 Q. And Mr. Wolf? I mean these,
17 Bruce asked you these kind of in a group of
18 four. I was interested specifically, since
19 we last spoke to you, what have you
20 developed, if anything, about Mr. Wolf?
21 A. Well, I think subsequent to that,
22 I know we have a tape from his one-time
23 girlfriend.
24 Q. Ms. Dilson?
25 A. Dilson. She videotaped herself

1 imploring John and me to help her. She is
2 very frightened of him. She believes that
3 he did this. She is in hiding.
4 Q. Have you ever spoken to Ms.
5 Dilson in person or --
6 A. I can't, I can't remember.
7 Q. Okay. But you viewed this tape
8 of her asking for your help?
9 A. Yes, uh-huh, uh-huh.
10 Q. Anything other than the tape that
11 would indicate to you or keep Mr. Wolf in
12 that position that he was in last time we
13 spoke?
14 A. I just can't think of anything
15 right now.
16 MR. KANE: Can I ask a question?
17 MR. LEVIN: I was going to just
18 follow-up on that, Michael.
19 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Have you sent
20 your investigators out to interview Ms.
21 Dilson or try to locate her to follow up on
22 this tape?
23 MR. WOOD: Well, let me help you
24 a little bit. Chris Wolf has filed a
25 lawsuit against John and Patsy Ramsey, so you

1 can rest assured that Chris Wolf and Ms.
2 Dilson, in terms of information, are being
3 developed about that in terms of the defense
4 to that case, among other things. So if we
5 come across anything in the course of that
6 civil litigation, we will get it as quickly
7 as we can copy it and get it to you.
8 Obviously we have begun to study a lot of
9 his appearances in some other things.
10 Q. (By Mr. Levin) So, Mrs. Ramsey,
11 I take it then that the answer to my
12 question as far as to date is no, that no
13 one has gone out and attempted to interview
14 Ms. Dilson on your behalf?
15 MR. WOOD: If you know.
16 MR. LEVIN: If you know.
17 THE WITNESS: I don't know.
18 Q. (By Mr. Levin) Have you received
19 any reports or any summaries from any
20 investigator that would cause you to believe
21 that she was contacted directly by your
22 representatives?
23 A. I just don't know. That would be
24 -- John, perhaps, would know.
25 Q. You have no recollection, as you

1 sit here, of seeing any follow-up information
2 in any form?
3 A. That is correct.
4 Q. This tape, was that unsolicited on
5 the part of your family?
6 A. Oh, yes.
7 Q. When did you receive that?
8 A. Probably sometime last spring.
9 Q. The spring of '99?
10 A. No. Spring of -- I think spring
11 of 2000 or maybe fall of 2000.
12 Q. Well, it wouldn't be fall. So
13 maybe spring of this year?
14 A. I mean spring, yes.
15 Q. Or fall of '99?
16 A. I'm just thinking of, I know we
17 saw it in our apartment. I am trying to
18 think when, how long we have been in that
19 apartment.

The subject was abruptly changed by K&C.
This was a waste of time, IMO.

Patsy made it clear that she did not play investigator - but they keep going back to that.

What difference does it really make if Patsy spoke to Jackie on the phone or in person? Didn't the BPD have Wolf as a suspect very early on? Didn't they talk to him themselves and take his handwriting sample? If they knew they could clear him, why not say so? if they knew they could not clear him, why not go investigate him - - talk to Jackie themselves?

THAT might advance the investigation.

How did this exchange advance the investigation?

Please - - someone explain.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-04-03, 09:00 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
5. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #4
21 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Have you had any
22 forensic people look into the issue of the
23 pineapple that was found in JonBenet's
24 digestive tract?
25 MR. WOOD: Let me ask you this,

1 Michael. Are you stating as a matter of
2 fact that it was pineapple without any
3 question?
4 MR. KANE: That was stated two
5 years ago in the interview. Yes. There is
6 no doubt about it.
7 MR. WOOD: Are you stating it as
8 fact?
9 MR. KANE: Lou Smith told Mr.
10 Ramsey that too.
11 MR. WOOD: I just want to make
12 sure it's clear that you're stating it as a
13 matter of fact and not opinion that it is
14 pineapple.
15 MR. KANE: It is pineapple.
16 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Why did you state,
17 let me ask you, why did you state in your
18 book that it was pineapple?
19 MR. WOOD: Are you going to
20 withdraw the last question?
21 MR. KANE: Lin, look, this is not
22 -- we are not in court.
23 MR. WOOD: But we are making a
24 record, and it is important, because I looked
25 at some of the stuff in the past, and it is

1 jumping back and forth. I want to make sure
2 that, if there is a question pending, the
3 record accurately reflects that she either
4 has answered it or at this point in time
5 you're not insisting upon an answer and you
6 will come back to it later.
7 I think from what you are telling
8 me is you are going to hold off on the last
9 question about forensics and go to the book.
10 MR. KANE: I'll ask it, but I
11 was going to preface it with the book, but I
12 will do it in the reverse order.
13 MR. WOOD: Okay.
14 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Have you talked to
15 anybody about findings of pineapple in her
16 digestive system?
17 A. No.
18 Q. In your book you said that this
19 was -- that that became an urban legend.
20 MR. LEVIN: Hang on a second.
21 MR. WOOD: Hang on one second,
22 Michael.
23 MR. LEVIN: Do you want to have
24 him change the tape?
25 MR. WOOD: He's got about nine

1 minutes, I guess.
2 MR. MORRISSEY: Can I ask a
3 question or are we just on break or
4 something?
5 MR. WOOD: While he goes to get
6 a book, yes, of course.
7 Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) Mrs. Ramsey,
8 will you have any trouble, problems with us
9 seeing this Dilson tape, at some point
10 getting us a copy of that?
11 A. Sure. That would be fine.
12 MR. MORRISSEY: I mean, I don't
13 know if --
14 THE WITNESS: I am not sure where
15 it is right now, but I am sure we can run
16 it down.
17 MR. WOOD: Rest assured that, if
18 you have any kind of request like that, if
19 you'll make it to me, you know, I'll
20 carefully consider it. And if in any way
21 possible, I will try to get that stuff to
22 you. That is the kind of thing that's gonna
23 be clearly coming out in the civil case,
24 so --
25 MR. MORRISSEY: Right. That is

1 why I wasn't sure. I just wanted to ask
2 her, but I wasn't sure what your position
3 was going to be --
4 MR. WOOD: Well, you know --
5 MR. MORRISSEY: --because I know
6 that is kind of a shadow case, but I would
7 sure like to see that tape.
8 THE WITNESS: She was very upset.

It is clear from this exchange that brainstorming and sharing could benefit the investigation - - but it is not being handled right.

Yes, it was pineapple in JonBenét's intestine - - at least K&C says so - - they have not shared that lab report either. (But yes, it is pineapple. That is a fact.)

The Ramseys don't know when she ate it - - this line of questioning is, IMO, a waste of time here - - ground already covered in past interviews.

Back to the Dilson tape. This interview took place on the 28th - the investigators were still there talking on the 29th - - why didn't they ask for the Ramseys to try to locate that tape and bring it in the next day if it was important? I don't know. I do know K&C never got that tape - if they had, I believe we would have heard about it by now.

But - - and I hate to write this again - - what the hell difference did that tape make to the investigation? The cops had Wolf on their list - they had spoken to him and had access to Jackie if they wanted it...

If they had cleared Wolf for good reason, why go for the tape.

If they had not cleared him in their minds, why didn't they really go after it?

How did this line of questioning advance the investigation?

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-04-03, 09:08 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
6. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #5
14 Q. (By Mr. Kane) You say
15 apparently, during the autopsy, an issue was
16 raised about the possibility of JonBenet
17 having eaten pineapple. Do you recall -- do
18 you recall, during the interviews in June of
19 1998, being told that there was, in fact,
20 pineapple in her system?
21 A. I don't remember the specific
22 discussion. I believe someone said there may
23 have been something that looked like
24 pineapple.
25 Q. Okay.

1 A. I'm not - no one ever has told
2 me that it was definitively pineapple.
3 Q. All right. Did John -- so John
4 never told you that Lou Smith told him that
5 it was definitely pineapple?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Have you, whether it was pineapple
8 or any other type of fruit, it is your
9 understanding that you haven't asked any
10 forensic experts to, gastroenterologist or
11 someone of that nature, someone with a
12 medical background, what their opinion of
13 that being in her system is?
14 A. I don't know. That may have been
15 part of the presentation that was being
16 prepared.
17 Q. Well, the presentation was Dr.
18 Sperry. Let me just clarify this. Was
19 anybody else besides Dr. Sperry going to take
20 part in that presentation, to your knowledge?
21 A. To my knowledge, there were
22 several people involved.
23 Q. But you don't know who these
24 people are?
25 A. No.

1 Q. Do you know what their fields of
2 expertise were?
3 A. I am sorry, I don't.
4 Q. And you didn't learn subsequent to
5 January who these people are and what their
6 fields of expertise are?
7 MR. WOOD: Specific names, I
8 think she's told you.
9 THE WITNESS: I mean, I think, I
10 think I was told, probably, you know, this
11 name, this name, and this is who he is and
12 that is and that is. They are all like
13 names with degrees this long. I just knew I
14 was very impressed by the caliber of the
15 individuals consulting on this.
16 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Okay. All right.
17 And you don't have any problem with giving
18 us those names, do you, afterwards if you
19 and Mr. Ramsey --
20 MR. WOOD: Whatever names were
21 offered to you and Pat Burke, I will tell
22 you, whatever names were offered in January
23 of 2000 by Pat Burke when that offer was
24 rejected, we will certainly provide you with
25 those names if you don't already have them.

1 MR. KANE: Well, I'll tell you
2 right now there was only one name that was
3 offered to me, and that was Dr. Sperry from
4 GBI.
5 MR. WOOD: That may be true, but
6 my understanding is there were other
7 individuals either contemplated in that
8 presentation, that it was more than one, but
9 you've got his name and if there were
10 others --
11 THE WITNESS: And if we want to
12 do the presentation, we can do it.
13 MR. WOOD: - we will get those
14 names to you, no question. In fact, what we
15 can do at some point, if we can figure out
16 an appropriate time, but like this Dilson
17 tape, or these names, et cetera, if you can
18 get a list and you all can get it to me,
19 and then we will try to go through it and
20 see what we can get to you if you don't
21 have it.
22 MR. LEVIN: Mr. Wood, I am taking
23 maybe incorrectly, I am taking your statement
24 that if we wanted to personally just directly
25 contact Dr. Sperry that we can do that?

1 MR. WOOD: I would have to make
2 that decision. I haven't thought about it.
3 MR. LEVIN: I don't want to --
4 MR. WOOD: I wouldn't make a seat
5 of the pants decision on something like that.
6 MR. LEVIN: Sure.
7 MR. WOOD: Obviously he is a
8 retained expert.
9 MR. KANE: Can I clarify that?
10 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Has he been
11 retained by you? That was the whole issue
12 that was presented to us when Pat Burke was
13 suggesting this meeting. I asked whether he
14 had been retained by you. Was he retained
15 by you?
16 MR. WOOD: If you --
17 MR. KANE: If you know.
18 THE WITNESS: I don't know.
19 MR. WOOD: That is probably
20 something she wouldn't know the legal
21 niceties of.
22 THE WITNESS: I mean, I don't
23 know who.
24 MR. WOOD: Listen, we'll sort out
25 the question of Sperry's status.

1 MR. KANE: Okay.
2 MR. WOOD: And you know,
3 unfortunately I don't have the direct
4 knowledge that Pat Burke has, but we will
5 sort out that in terms of what he
6 contemplated offering you all and what their
7 status is and how available they will be. I
8 will get those answers to you one way or the
9 other.
10 MR. KANE: I just have one thing
11 to follow up on, Bruce.
12 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Bruce said that
13 Ellis Armistead had been hired in 1997. Do
14 you recall that Mr. Armistead, in fact, was
15 hired in December of 1996?
16 A. I can't say for sure. I don't
17 know.
18 MR. WOOD: I think that he was,
19 just if that helps you.
20 MR. KANE: Yeah, I just wanted to
21 clarify, Mr. Levin said '97.
22 MR. WOOD: He said as far back
23 as '97, as I recall.
24 MR. KANE: But it was as far
25 back as 1996.

1 THE WITNESS: I just remember he
2 was there very -- you know, my days are
3 really foggy then. I just remember we were
4 intensely afraid for our safety, and he -- I
5 just remember, you know, in my trauma,
6 looking up at this big guy and thinking,
7 boy, am I glad he is here. So I don't
8 know what day that was, or --
9 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Did he ever
10 interview you?
11 A. Quite possibly. I can't remember.
12 Q. You don't have any recollection of
13 ever being interviewed by Mr. Armistead or
14 anybody else working for him?
15 A. I mean, we talked, certainly. I
16 don't know if you would say it was an
17 interview.
18 Q. Did Mr. Armistead or any other --
19 I guess it was Jennifer Getty worked for
20 him. Do you recall her?
21 A. Uh-huh, uh-huh (affirmative).
22 Q. John Foster, do you recall him?
23 A. Yes.
24 Q. David Williams, do you recall him?
25 A. Yes.

1 Q. Did any of these people ever take
2 statements from you about what happened?
3 MR. WOOD: Subsequent to June of
4 1998?
5 MR. KANE: No.
6 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Of the events of
7 December 25th, 26th, of 1996.
8 A. I can't remember.
9 Q. You don't have any recollection of
10 being interviewed?
11 MR. WOOD: She told you she can't
12 remember.
13 MR. KANE: Lin, if you are going
14 to object to every question --I asked you --
15 THE WITNESS: I can go back and
16 look.
17 MR. KANE: Because I am asking a
18 clarifying question.
19 MR. WOOD: No, no. I am not
20 objecting. I am just making sure that we
21 are fair here. You know, when she says I
22 can't remember and you look over and go, you
23 mean you can't remember, I mean, the tone of
24 that implies that there is something wrong
25 with a truthful answer being I can't

1 remember. That is all -- she tells you
2 something, you know, you don't have to beat
3 her over the head with her answer. Once
4 ought to be enough.
5 MR. KANE: Well, is that your
6 objection, that I am beating her over the
7 head?
8 MR. WOOD: It is not an
9 objection. No, no.
10 MR. KANE: I think, you know, we
11 came down here with the understanding that we
12 could ask questions. And what you are
13 trying to do is channel those questions into
14 a certain tone. And I --
15 MR. WOOD: No, I am not. I
16 really am not. I mean, you came down here
17 under the request of Chief Beckner to ask
18 new questions about information that has been
19 obtained by you since June of 1998 or
20 developments that have arisen since June of
21 1998. That was the request. We agreed to
22 that.
23 MR. KANE: Okay.
24 MR. WOOD: And all I am saying
25 is that, in the process of giving

1 information, there may be an answer that to
2 you strikes you, as you can't remember that.
3 If she can't remember, Mitch, that is the
4 truth, and, you know.
5 MR. MORRISSEY: I am Mitch.
6 MR. WOOD: I don't mean the
7 phrase, I am sorry, Michael. I don't mean
8 to use the phrase -- I don't think you beat
9 her over the head. I am just using the
10 phrase that sometimes lawyers do tend to beat
11 witnesses over the head when they don't
12 either like or necessarily react favorably to
13 an answer. You haven't beat her over the
14 head here today. I wouldn't let you do
15 that. And I don't mean to suggest otherwise
16 on the record.
17 MR. KANE: Okay.
18 MR. LEVIN: Lin, if I, if I can
19 just follow up your statement a little bit,
20 we are, the four of us, extremely experienced
21 trial lawyers, and I can't imagine that, in
22 the course of your practice, you have not
23 either, during the course of a deposition or
24 in formal interview with a witness or in a
25 courtroom, gotten a witness who says I can't

1 remember and then not follow it up to see if
2 you can kind of spark their memory. I think
3 that is all we are trying to do.
4 MR. WOOD: I am not going to
5 prevent that type of follow-up, and I know
6 you guys are experienced. And I have
7 managed to do a little bit of that myself
8 over the last 23 years. So I fancy myself
9 as quite experienced in trial law also.
10 And I understand the difference,
11 though, between an interview and a
12 cross-examination. In a cross-examination,
13 you might follow up and, as we lawyers say,
14 beat on the witness a little bit. This is
15 not a cross-examination of my client. And
16 there is a difference.
17 This is an interview where you
18 are here to get information about the new
19 questions, as I have earlier stated. But I
20 am not sitting here saying, Patsy Ramsey has
21 been offered up for you skilled trial lawyers
22 to cross-examine her.
23 MR. LEVIN: We have no intention.
24 MR. WOOD: That is the
25 difference.

1 MR. LEVIN: I'm sure it is
2 apparent to you that we are not
3 cross-examining your client.
4 MR. WOOD: Listen, I think we are
5 doing very well so far. I am pleased.
6 MR. LEVIN: I'm just saying that
7 we try to prod her memory a little bit, if
8 we get a --
9 MR. WOOD: I have no problems
10 with you trying to jog someone's recollection
11 at all.
12 MR. LEVIN: Great. I appreciate
13 that.
15 make a tape change. One moment.
16 (A recess was taken.)

If K&C wanted to know who the Ramsey experts were and what they had, they should have met with them as the Ramseys had asked them to. This line of questioning angered me - and I thought Lin was being quite well-behaved where someone else might have been less... patient with them.

(The patience did not last forever, though - we all know that. But even in the beginning, I think that K&C were wasting time and I wonder if they were not doing it intentionally hoping to get the whole thing cut short so they might accuse the Ramseys of being uncooperative.

Why did Kane have the plane reservation for the next afternoon? They could have been there a week - - he knew they wouldn't. How?)

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Member since Nov-29-02
1402 posts
Nov-16-03, 08:58 PM (EST)
Click to send private message to Margoo Click to add this user to your buddy list  
7. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #6
   Did the Ramseys EVER have that presentation by their investigators and their experts made to LE? In 2000? In 2001? In 2002? With Keenan's New Team?

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-16-03, 10:20 PM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
8. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #7
   Honestly don't know. The new investigation is being done very quietly.

I do know that the Ramseys have always been willing to talk to Lou Smit - - from the very beginning, long before the new team took over - - and I am sure they would meet with Tom Bennett and the others at any time.

I know some of the Ramsey group has met with the new investigative team, don't know how many or how formal that was but... little things have reached me so - yes - there has been some sharing.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Member since Jul-4-03
663 posts
Nov-16-03, 11:00 PM (EST)
Click to EMail Rainsong Click to send private message to Rainsong Click to view user profileClick to add this user to your buddy list  
9. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #8
   I think they did sit down with Mary Keenan, but what was discussed has not been made public.

But I could be mistaken.


  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
1948 posts
Nov-17-03, 07:36 AM (EST)
Click to EMail DonBradley Click to send private message to DonBradley Click to add this user to your buddy list  
11. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #9
   >they did sit down with Mary Keenan, but what was discussed has not been made public.
No, I don't think it has been revealed.
However, I doubt it was all that helpful anyway.
"We went to sleep, we woke up in the morning but had heard nothing unusual during the night".

I'm sure DA Keenan did not waste time with Burke's security arrangements in Atlanta several years after the murder that took place in Boulder.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
1948 posts
Nov-17-03, 07:32 AM (EST)
Click to EMail DonBradley Click to send private message to DonBradley Click to add this user to your buddy list  
10. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #0
   The purpose in Atlanta was to dredge up bad material on the Ramseys, it was not to investigate the case or advance the investigation one iota.

Consider the recently gained knowledge that FW had an excellent grasp of the note's text soon after the crime.

What do we have here? Something Patsy had recently learned of and it did not in any way lead Kane to ask a question such as 'do you have any opinion as to his memory skills based on incidents that you experienced with him'? Which might have elicited such things as 'in restaurants he could never even remember the menu or what he had ordered, in CHX he had to write down where the sailboat was kept because he had such a poor memory' or it might have elicited things like 'I had a general impression that he never forgot an appointment and could recall verbatim late in an evening conversations that had taken place earlier that day'. Anything like this would have clarified matters and advanced the investigation albeit on very tangential issues.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
13618 posts
Nov-17-03, 08:33 AM (EST)
Click to EMail jameson Click to send private message to jameson Click to add this user to your buddy list  
12. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #10
   Well, the 2000 transcripts are here - - we have some discussion - not as much as I had hoped...

I am hardly surprised that the BORG sites haven't much to say at all.

Kane and company made it sound like the Ramseys had been uncooperative - - I read this and I think the Ramseys cooperated - - and K&C wasted a lot of time..

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top
Charter Member
2293 posts
Nov-17-03, 09:34 AM (EST)
Click to EMail Mikie Click to send private message to Mikie Click to add this user to your buddy list  
13. "RE: Patsy in Atlanta 2"
In response to message #12
   Well, the case is pretty old now, no news for months, Borg are Bord?

The investigators were trying to gather information regarding the Whites, McR's and Wolf because they know they are involved but similarly have little proof or simply cannot pursue any direction without sufficient evidence. Or, in my opinion, they wanted to make sure that the Ramseys are not getting too close to the truth.

  Alert | IP Printer-friendly page | Edit | Reply | Reply With Quote | Top

Conferences | Topics | Previous Topic | Next Topic