E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSIn 1999, the district attorney in Boulder Colorado made the decision that there was not enough evidence to file charges against anyone in the death of JonBenet Ramsey, but members of the grand jury in the case are now revealing they voted to indict Ramsey's parents. NBC's Erica Hill reports.
A Colorado grand jury voted to indict the parents of slain child beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey more than 13 years ago, but prosecutors reportedly refused to go forward on the case, according to the Boulder Daily Camera newspaper.
The grand jury voted in 1999 to indict John and Patsy Ramsey on charges of child abuse resulting in death, three years after their 6-year-old daughter was bludgeoned and strangled in the basement of her family's house on Christmas Day.
But former Boulder County District Attorney Alex Hunter declined to sign the indictment, believing he could not prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt, the Daily Camera reported.
"I and my prosecution task force believe we do not have sufficient evidence to warrant the filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time," Hunter told reporters in October 1999.
June 24: Patsy Ramsey, the mother of murder victim JonBenet Ramsey died of cancer at 49. NBC's Mark Mullen looks back at Patsy Ramsey's life and her daughter's unsolved murder.
"Child abuse resulting in death" is a Class II felony punishable by up to 48 years in prison, according to the Daily Camera.
"We didn't know who did what," a juror told the Daily Camera on the condition of anonymity. "[B]ut we feel the adults in the house may have done something that they certainly could have prevented, or they could have helped her, and they didn't."
Hunter, who left his post in 2008 after 28 years as district attorney, declined to discuss the grand jury's decision, according to the Daily Camera.
But in a 2001 interview with NBC News, Hunter said he had no regrets about his decision not to charge anyone.
"I have enough people that I respect that have said to me, 'You know, you made a tough call, you made a call the public didn't like. But you were true to the law, you were a good prosecutor, and that's plenty for me.'"
Dec. 20: As the anniversary of JonBenet Ramsey's murder approaches, her father John Ramsey -- once considered a suspect -- tells TODAY's Katie Couric that the family is confident the killer will be caught.
Lin Wood, John Ramsey's attorney, backed up Hunter's decision in a statement to NBC News.
"The DNA tests performed after the time of the Boulder grand jury not only prove the Ramseys to be innocent and the grand jury wrong, they also make D.A. Alex Hunter a hero who wisely avoided the miscarriage of justice," Wood said.
Patsy Ramsey died of ovarian cancer in 2006. The couple and their older son, Burke Ramsey, were exonerated in the case in July 2008, even though they were never formally charged in connection with JonBenet's death.
"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," former Boulder County District Attorney Marcy Lacy wrote in a letter to John Ramsey in 2008. "No innocent person should have to endure such an extensive trial in the court of public opinion."
Ramsey family via AP, file
This image made from an undated family video shows JonBenet Ramsey performing during a beauty pageant.
Leave a Comment:
All these jealous idiots on here saying, "money " got them out of it.
Read the story, the grand jury indited but all they get to hear is only one side, and it normally is swayed all it can be.
The DA knew that there was not evidence to convict, so he choose not to go to trial at the time, ( I am sure hoping for more evidence in future)
Then in later years, DNA evidence proved that they were innocent.
The DA made a good but hard decision, but he was right.
Money had nothing to do with it.
Today, in cases such as Travon Martin, the press angered enough idiots to demand a trial. ( using race as the primary ingredient)
Was not the case then.
Buck, the DA is the office that provides evidence to a grand jury.
Why are we still talking about this?
Someone is a REALLY sick/disturbed person for hurting this child...
After all this time and NOW the media comes out with the fact that the parents were going to be indicted? No one will ever truly know what happened to that poor child...her mother eventually died of breast cancer and I don't know if he is still living....the little ones suffering has been over for a very long time......I guess the only justice there is is the PUBLIC knowing the the satisfaction that the parents would be held responsible for their child's death....so, so sad.....
Dianec57 they where proven to be INNOCENT of this crime in 2008 through the use of DNA testing of the DNA found on the body. So if they have been convicted then they would have been released.
Now if your fine with potentially innocent people going to prison for nearly 10 years.,. why not head down to your local jail. Save them some time in the future.
"Personally I believe this..." "Personally I believe that..." (See above) Personally I believe that most of the people posting on this story are a bunch of opinionated fools.
Personally I believe that anyone involved in beauty "pageants", whether for adults or for children, are white trash. You won't find the greatest beauties being bred-out from among the ranks of the white trash.
Better an opinionated fool, than a proven idiot. Look in the mirror imbecile.
"White trash"? Really? What an imbecile to drag the RACE card into this.
"Better for everyone to think you're a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."
"We didn't know who did what," a juror told the Daily Camera on the condition of anonymity."
Typical modern American jury; why let something such as a lack of evidence stand in the way of an indictment.
This is why the American legal system scares me.
The media (journalists), should just leave it alone. The Ramsey's had their time in court; their has to be "proof" in order to convict. Guilty until proven innocent is the new justice. Their were many people before DNA who wrongly convicted; we only hear about the ones who weren't put to death. Must be a living nightmare to know one is innocent and have to live their days behind bars or face the day that they will die. I am pleased to know that if I would be wrongly accused the new forensics will give me a better chance to be proven innocent.
As can be seen from some of the comments here it would have impossible to seat an impartial jury. Some of you posting on this thread would have voted for conviction with no evidence whatsoever, simply because you feel that "somebody must pay for this" and the family members were convenient.
not really..the evidence in the ramsy death points to a cover up of the facts by the parents, that fact is insurmountable, when you draw that obvious conclusion it leaves only there son to be looked at..why else would they coverup the murder unless he or one of the partents were molesting the child and as she got older feared it would come out...like the g/jury said they knew it was one of them but the coverup confused just who it was....but more than enough to indict them and let the system work it out rather than leave them out there were they could tamper with the evidence and continue to shelter the only other person in the home at the time.....there wasnt any break in and the dna could have been planted by the parents they had controll no one else.
The son was 9, the older son was no where near the scene at the time. There was Foreign MALE DNA found on the body, now I do believe they states she was in her PJs which means she would have been in bed. Why is MALE DNA of someone NOT A MEMBER of her family on her body?
But that fact means nothing to you does it, the fact they proved beyond a doubt that the DNA recovered on the body was not any relation to JonBennet on her PJs on Christmas day oh no that could have been there from anyone. IF someone found foreign dna on my kids PJs.. I want that @!$%#er found so I can kill them.
If your stating it could have been there before, do you think Patsy would give her kids soiled clothes to sleep in? She was much to tidy and wanted to be too perfect for that.
@Tim cox
I'm happy to learn that not only are you privy to all of the evidence presented to the grand jury, you've also perused the entire case file hald by the Boulder DA's office.
Way to go; I bow to your superior information.
Now prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.
It's Obama's fault!
The parents were as innocent as Casey Anthony!!
The mother died of ovarian cancer...the husband just got remarried...there were 36 known sex offenders in a two mile radius of the house they lived in...although none of them did it....dna was found in the girls underware, but hasn't been matched to the national database yet (and is checked weekly).
So don't think for a minute the father or the brother did it....someone actually broke into the house and did it. Bottom line, DNA does not lie.
Yeah, and a sex offender sits down and writes a pages long letter about this and that. NOT!!!!
That's been explained a million times.. that DNA, a miniscule amount most likely belonged to someone that manufactured, packaged the underwear.. it could have come from skin, a sneeze, an open cut, anything.. The Ramsey's were never exonerated by DNA evidence...
Patsy Ramsey is with her daughter now. Hopefully they can rest in peace.
Not quite yet. Not until judgement day and all the souls are sorted and counted.
I followed this case for quite sometime in the past, the parent's are guilty...If my daughter was missing or found dead I would be heart broken, devestated...both parents were not....randsome note was written on the same note paper the mom would use...handwriting experts linked the mom's handwriting to the randsome note...money that was asked was the same amount dad received as a Christmas bonus...no signs of forced entry...window that was broken was broken on the inside...footprints were not accounted for, since the idiot police were all over the scene instead of marking everything as a crime scene...this just shows how you can get away with murder if you are rich or no someone in law enforcement...like O.J simpson trial and Casey Anthony...all murderers who were found innocent.
What is a randsome note? Is that like a RANSOME note? Another product of public schools....but they can dance, sing and paint like a pro!
A little trivia: many public schools have eliminated arts education.
A little more trivia: the word 'ransom' contains neither a 'd' nor an 'e'.
Doesn't sound like you followed the case too closely Leeler78, because both parents were very distraught and judgemental people who thought they had the answer to everything only compounded that worry. The window pieces were found inside, indicating that the window would in fact have been broken from the outside. Also there was a suitcase under the window that was used for someone stepping in from the window. There was no snow in that particular area around the house, thus the lack of footprints. You may think you know everything, but its a little harder to admit that you could be wrong eh?
To quiet theories that the older brother could have committed the crime they should simply test his DNA now. After all, his DNA was never taken, but DNA was found at the crime scene that has yet to be identified.
Actually he was cleared as well,. Given that they tested John who is the boys father his Y Chroms would have been the same as his father. If her 9 year old brother had committed the murder, the cover up, etc he would have been found out in 2008.. of course if a 9 year old can get away with murder..
Who knows how it would have turned out if the police hadn't let the parents in the house before going in to gather evidence.
You do know they lived there right? They woke up inside that house. NOW if you meant they had made them leave the house and examined it for evidence then I agree.
What is the reason for this article? There is nothing new to report. No need to remind me about Jon Benet. It is a tragedy that nobody will forget. I'm sure everyone involved agrees (although some wouldn't say it out loud) that there is no way someone would be able to walk into a home, leave a ransom note and then murder the child in the basement and leave her there for her father to find without someone hearing something. The police botched the investigation. There was more than enough evidence to charge somebody. Even if the Ramsey's didn't do the killing they certainly had an idea as to who did. Makes them no better than the murderer. They are the poorest example of parents I have ever seen. Karma caught up with Patsy and it will catch up with the others.
So glad you're the perfect parent C-Girl. Why don't you write a book of instruction or do something constructive. And don't forget, before you judge, Karma catches up with everybody sometime.
@ProudWestVirginian....Wow! And just what would your book say? Hmmmm.....interesting!!!
Her mother, instead of protecting and guiding her, made her into an outrageous sex object to share with the public; I'm sure that had a lot to do with what happened to her. Pedophiles probably really appreciate Patsy's parenting style- usually they'd have to pay big money for seductive little girl pictures like Jon Benet's....sick, sick,sick.
That makes them weird not murders. Not a crime.
Then it should be a crime.
You people are so damn stupid it's unbelievable. These people had nothing to do with it and the DNA proved it. By the way the story didn't mention the DNA they found was a pubic hair. Another murdering pedophile on the lose. Then you a$$holes make comments about being rich and getting away with murder. You make me want to puke. Please don't have any kids to contaminate the rest the world.
There was no forced entry to the house, and lack of DNA did not prove that a family member did not kill her. Patsy hit her on the head with the flashlight and then used the paint brush garrote, which would have her own fingerprints and skin cells.
Rex are you saying it is appropriate for a 6 year old to have a foreign pubic hair in her panties? I doubt the little beauty queen would put on soiled panties and I doubt at 6 she had pubic hair of her own. The dna run on that hair also proved it was not anyone from the house.
Now I have to ask you Rex what is more likely, That she was being molested and was killed by the molester OR she was being molested, and then her parents killed her for some separate reason?
It's pretty sad as a society that we don't go after the obvious guilty people in these cases vs. kids... JonBenet's parents get away with murder, then recently Casey Anthony gets away with it.
So the fact that DNA Proved that the pubic hair found in the 6 year olds panties was not her father or brothers (The brother being 9 btw) makes no never mind to you.
So following your brand of logic I think your guilty of every murder committed today.. and should be executed accordingly.
Christian sociopaths who got away with killing their daughter. Nutbag patsey did it and the perv dad helped cover it up as he valued his $$$$$$ more than his tasty little daughter. Wecht proved beyond any doubt that they were playing sex games with the girl for years! Keep believing she was innocent SAPS!
The murder was creepy. Christmas time, in the basement of the home, the note that was written and the lack of DNA evidence from someone outside the home. The fact that the parents really pushed the child into those beauty pageants. She was a child made up to look like a grown adult . I know that these events are popular, but they appeared to take it to another level. The behavior of the parents was not up to what really happened and the brother who was a suspect who never really surfaced until he turned of age. It was no wonder the parents were the prime suspects. The father turned on one of the people who was a friend first and then worked for John later and did everything in his power to blame him and drag him and his family through the mud. I worked with the guy and his wife and he could no more do it than the nut case that surfaced in the Far East who said he did it. My personal opinion is the father did it and you can draw your own conclusions bout the how and why and the weak mother was part of the bogus cover up.
What does it take to prove to some people they are wrong? The DNA proved the Ramseys innocent. I don't care how bad you want them to be guilty, there is no case involving the Ramsey family. I honestly believe that a person at the party was guilty of this. The cops wasted too much time trying to prove two innocent people were guilty to concentrate on the one that actually did the crime. But after watching Toddlers and Tiaras, I question the parents judgment into exposing this child to that kind of >>>>>>>>>.
LACK of DNA proves nothing.
What lack of DNA, the pubic hair in the little girls panties was not a Match to the DNA of anyone in the family how is that lack of DNA?
In this case DNA cannot be the only evidence taken into consideration. Doesn't anybody remember the facts surrounding the ransom letter? In addition to a handwriting expert saying it could have been written by Patsy, there was a "practice" note (if I remember correctly) and it contained information that a random "intruder" could not have possibly known. It seemed to be a lousy attempt to purposely point the finger outside the walls of the home and the three people inside (and I do mean THREE, not four including an intruder). Not to mention it defies reason to think a murdering intruder would risk spending the time to write such a note, especially when there would obviously never be a ransom payout because the body was left right in the house! The intruder theory is absolutely riDICulous, and I am sure there are reasonable explanations for all of the evidence that falsely point to an intruder. And how about the fact that the phone recording seems to include the sound of Burke's voice in the background while Patsy and John said he was not present? Another lousy attempt at cover up. Not sure if this was proven, but it was also reported in doctor's records from before the murder indicating that Jon Benet had possible signs of sexual abuse. But the proof of that fact is irrelevant, the acute circumstances surrounding the case and other evidence as I mentioned above is enough for me to agree they should have been charged and the case taken to court. However, by the looks of these comments, I must say there would have been a good chance that another jury would have come to the same conclusion as in the Casey Anthony case. So, maybe in the end, the failure to indict prevented a huge amount of money being flushed down the toilet.
My belief is that Patsy walked-in on either John or Burke in the act of sexually abusing Jon Benet, so Patsy grabbed something to strike the offender and accidently struck Jon Benet instead. If that was the case, and if the truth would have been told, Patsy would not have been charged with murder, but John or Burke would have been charged with rape. So really, it was a cover up that most benefitted John or Burke, not so much Patsy.
You are aware the brother who was at the house was 9 right? I doubt a 9 year old is gonna get charged with rape unless its Texas.
However, the pubic hair in the panties of the little girl was not a match to either of her brothers (One half brother does exist and he is old enough to be a potential threat but police stated he was not in the area at the time of the murder) or her father.
if the ramsey's didn't do or casey didn't do it or OJ didn't do it....then that means the killers are still out there why they hell aren't they still looking for the killers...once a case is finished why aren't they still not looking for the killers
Are you familiar with the term"cold case?"
cold case or not it if they weren't the killers...then that means the killers are still out there...
One killer is dead, her husband is a bit worried today, and the other killer declared bankruptcy.
Rex I am gonna surprise the hell out of you with this statement but, brace yourself... YOU ARE NOT GOD.
No credible evidence has been presented in either this or the Anthony case to connect the accused to the actual commitment of a crime. There is circumstantial evidence that may lead to charges such as tampering with evidence, obstruction, or conspiracy after the fact but not Manslaughter or Murder.
We have a Legal System so that just because people assume you didn't doesn't mean you did. If your wife, god forbid, had a heart attack and fell down the stairs and died and the coroner could not confirm if the heart attack happened at the top or bottom of the stairs you could be looked at for murder. Now just because you might be the killer does that mean we should arrest you and convict you on a POSSIBLE chance or would you rather there be evidence.
And The sick scum of the Earth is still most probably out there doing what he loves to do...molesting and killing little harmless children......This is why I'm all for dowsing them with Gasoline and throwin in a lit match to boot when one of these THINGS are caught!
thats extreme, but to say these monsters can be rehabiltated and then released back into population is the first mistake.....sex crimes are deep seeded and in my opinion in cases were they have been proven to molest and or kill a child it should be the death penalty with a fast appeal and then done in some form were the general population understands we as americans draw the line right here....somehow these monsters have gone from just fantasy to acting out with no remorse or guilt of any kind to killing and mollesting out children...I for one have had enough of watching this stuff on tv just the reporting of it on tv is ruinning any chance kids can grow up in an enviromnet were this type of thing doesnt happen nor occur to them, and if we took this seriouly enough we could stop it but honestly most people find it easier to join some save the whale foundation than fight the good fight and do some heavy lifting by pushing back on all this anti god imorral behavior that is all to often the root cause of this and many of our social probelms today.