Peter Boyles Show - Wednesday, August 4, 1999
"Peter Boyles/Ramsey Roundup"
Posted by Panico on Aug-04-99 at 08:45 AM (EDT)
He said will be in the next hour (7 MDT). Yesterday he said he would have Carol McKinley, Julie Hayden, Craig Silverman and Craig Lewis. I have recorder ready to go and will panuscribe. LOL
8 . "Don't mean to "
Posted by Panico on Aug-04-99 at 10:41 AM (EDT)
keep you on edge of your seats, but this is a great show. Only way I can get every word is to record and can't type and do that at same time. This last half hour is just PB and Carol McKinley very candidly discussing her report on Fox last week. Great conversation. Have over 40 minutes of actual good stuff to panuscribe LOL
10 . "Here tis"
Posted by Panico on Aug-04-99 at 11:48 AM (EDT)
PB: Just think, JonBenet Ramsey, she was just a little girl when she was killed, would have been celebrating her 9th birthday this Friday. It's hard to believe..she was 6 when she was murdered. Where does the investigation stand? The person who, I don't know if he was selected or he just simply got the duty to be the media spokesperson for the Das, Adams County's DA Bob Grant. Good Morning.
PB: Long time, no talk
BG: Well, we're busy guys, you know
PB: I guess there are so many people who have focused on this case now, and it's hard to believe that had this little girl lived, she would be 9 on Friday.
BG: Yeah, it's amazing
PB: And it's now almost 3 years — this Christmas — and people don't think there's been anything even remotely done. Where do we go and how do you respond to that?
BG: Well, of course the GJ has been impaneled since April and in session since September, not in session lately.. But that doesn't mean that things haven't been happening. You know what happens when you have a GJ investigation is you get down to investigation by committee, almost, and folks want to make sure that they hear everything there is to hear before decisions are made. I think you can suppose based on all this time, that were the case solved, that we wouldn't be talking now. There would be something going on in court, or be over. The fact of the matter is the case remains under investigation and the only thing we can say for sure in this case is the GJ's work is over in October.
PB: There was a moment in April that a number of people that I have a lot of faith in, sources, believed that Patsy Ramsey was about to be indicted. And then, if we are to believe what we hear, then Lou Smit, the Fox, the guy that was hired by Alex Hunter, to be his own investigator, we understand that Lou Smit made an appearance before the GJ and everything changed. To the best of your knowledge, or whatever you can talk about, is there any truth tot that scenario?
BG: Obviously I'm bound by the GJ secrecy provisions and can't tell you who has or has not appeared before the GJ, but I cam say this, it would be foolish for investigators, prosecutors, grand juror investigators to overlook any source of information. So, it is not my belief that there has been any particular turning point. It was not my belief in April when I read all those media accounts that anything imminent was going to happen. That seemed to be coming more from the media than anywhere else. But certainly, all sources of information are going to be plummed.
PB: In defense of the media, Bob, these people weren't pulling rabbits out of hats and saying... I mean there were a number of indications, or indicators, I guess, and sources that were saying that Patsy was going to be ...as a matter of fact, we were told that her lawyers, or John's lawyers...we'll call ‘em John's lawyers cause he's paying all of them, that they actually made a trip to Atlanta to brace her to get ready for that.
BG: The GJ is an investigative process... It comes to points where the investigators and the grand jurors and the prosecutors say OK here we've presented all the things that we have, and we know now---what else do you want us to do--what else do you want to hear--what else should we be looking at. And an investigation can go two ways from there---it can say OK, we're done, we're ready to make decisions, OR let's look back at this thing. Remember, they heard months and months of testimony. So they can say, well, here's an angle, here's an area of investigation that we think deserves more attention, and we think you ought to do this and that and the other thing. So, clearly, any investigative GJ comes to a number of those points.
PB: We're going to take a quick break here... If it's true that, and I'm sure it is, what you say, that they should be listening to everybody, why won't they bring in the Ramseys?
PB: This is our lead guest this am.....I have a couple of questions here, I deduce by logic, which is a bad thing for me to do, but knowing what I do about Mike Kane, the chief prosecutor, head of the GJ, Mitch Morrissey, who I know and you know very very well, and these young guys who are involved in this investigation, Alex Hunter aside if I can for a minute, Alex Hunter is a man who in the 60s , he's had a long career as a DA, he's made a public announcement he doesn't run for office again. But these men, and they're really kinda young guys and they're hard chargers and they're career prosecutors. If they at this point knew that they had no chance of indicting anyone in this little girl's death, it would be, I think, career suicide to continue to ask for more and more money to continue to ask for more and more time to then only appear some time this fall, or whenever they're going to appear, and say "Gee, we don't have...there's nothing happening here." And Alex Hunter is going to ask Thursday for another $60,000/ Now for Morrissey and Kane and those guys, that's career suicide.
BG: Well, you know, I suppose people have a tendency to want to think about it that way. The fact of the matter is Mike Kane, Mitch Morrissey, Bruce Levin, they are career prosecutors and they're dedicated not to public opinion, not to elections, not to anything more than solving the case--that seeing that somebody is brought to justice for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. If they, at this stage, knew that there was no hope of doing that, they wouldn't be wasting their time spinning their wheels.
PB: I say that all the time
BG: They are ... they're not going to give up on this investigation or this case, until they're sure that they know everything there is to know and the GJ knows everything there is to know. They see all of the media criticism about how long it's taking and they have to put that aside and say ‘that's not my concern---my concern is getting to the end of this thing and making sure that everything that can be found out, is found out'
PB: The question of the Ramseys appearing before the GJ. I've heard people explain that it's a game of chicken. That the Ramseys want to talk, or that's what their lawyers say, they want to talk, we know that it was bizzarre to get them to talk even the first time, but now they claim they want to talk, but the subpeonaes have not gone out for them. Is that some kind of a game of chicken?
BG: Again, I can't talk specifics Peter, but when you're talking about anyone coming before an investigative GJ that has the potential of being indicted, the potential of being a suspect, you don't bring those kinds of people, they're called targets in GJ language, you don't bring those people before the GJ until all the information is in and you're willing to make decisions about releasing the entirety of the investigation, or as much as they would have to, to them... and whether or not there are immunity issues or questions being raised. They don't make those decisions until the last. You know, any investigative GJ, any prosecutor that works GJs will tell you that.
PB: After we've now seen Alex Hunter go back to the city of Boulder and boulder County, and ask for more money, and now he will go again, I understand, this Thursday and ask for another $57,000 to take this GJ through the 20th of October, there has to be something going on. I know that some of it is salary money for the men you've mentioned and others, but some of it's for the work itself.
BG: Frankly, I don't know anything about the financial stuff other than Michael Kane's salary is being paid on that kind of a basis, Bruce Levin and Mitch Morrissey are still on the payroll of Denver and Adams Co. DAs office, respectively, so I really can't answer that question. I know that there are forensic tests being done and I know that those things are taking time , more time than people had hoped. But again, those things aren't things that are being sent out to private cost-a-lot-of-money laboratories.
PB: Do you expect to see the Ramseys in front of this GJ?
BG: That'd be pure speculation on my part and I try not to engage in speculation.
13 . "More"
Posted by Panico on Aug-04-99 at 12:50 PM (EDT)
PB: Now, Alex Hunter will ask for another $57,000 to fund the GJ through October 20th, so many people have speculated on the end of this thing...is there any reason to think that we can see an end to this thing in the fall?
BG: Well, we know we will because the GJ, by law, has 18 months to work, but in conversations with Alex and with conversations with the people that are intimately involved with it, and being privvy to the GJ information myself, I know that nobody is just going to let this thing fritter out. There will be resolution--whether it's an indictment or a statement publicly as to why there is no indictment--that stuff will happen before the GJ term ends--I'm sure of it.
PB: I've read so much about the psychology of GJs, and I don't pretend to know any of this, but in fact, I'm told that grand jurors generally bond with the prosecutors or with the DA. Is that fairly true?
BG: Sure. I mean, you can't work together for that length of time without there becoming some closeness and conversely, it also can and does happen that there are grand jurors who have negative impressions. That's human nature, when you work that closely together on that emotional of a thing for that length of time--there's going to be all kids of human relationships.
End of that segment
PB: Joining us now, she's my friend, she's my colleague, from Channel 7, she has become the best reporter in the city, Carol I think has done the greatest national work, and Julie of course is a TV reporter, Julie Hayden. Good morning
JH: Good morning, Peter, thank you.
PB: Thanks for doing this. It's hard to believe JonBenet would have been 9 years old this Friday.
PB: And her brother is now 13.
JH: You know, when you think about it, I have a 13 year old daughter, and when you think about just the changes that kids go through, the changes that you would have gone through from being a 6 year old to a 9 year old, it breaks your heart to think that that never got to happen.
PB: What are we to believe...Bob Grant, who — I mean he's like a crab's rear end..you know voice tight...you can't get anything out of Bob... Some recapping, you and I and Carol McKinley and so many people, Chuck Green, believed that we were going to see Patsy Ramsey indicted in April. I don't know if you believed that but I certainly did.
JH: I think so, I think certainly that was the indication that we were getting--that it would be done Aprilish. It wasn't just us, I think every reporter who's covering this story was getting the same sort of indication.
PB: I think so as well.. And having said that, we are led to believe that Lou Smit makes an appearance before the GJ, as does John Douglas, who was the profiler that the Ramseys hired, which I thought that was bizzarre, but
PB: And these people all go into the GJ and then things seemed to change.
JH: I know that --yeah, I think RMN Charlie Brennan is the one that sort of touched on that. I will say this, that I talked to a source I have about that, and he said that, while he didn't know for sure and even if he did, couldn't comment on what people did or didn't talk about in the GJ, he pointed out that neither one of those people had any real direct knowledge of anything. He said, first of all, John Douglas only knows what the Ramseys told him.
PB: Thank you
JH: And he said Lou Smit --all he knows is what was in the reports and it was like he was given a book review.
PB: umm hmm
JH: So he said, hopefully, any prosecutor worth their salt, would be able to point out to grand jurors that these people, while certainly it was interesting to hear from them and important to hear from them, that they key people were the detectives or the witnesses who actually saw things, who actually did the work...not the people who read the reports about it. So my source seemed to sort of downplay that saying that he wouldn't think that Lou Smit would have had such an impact....But then, I think as rlie Brennan pointed out in his story, the timing sort of speaks for itself.
PB: We are about a month away from a one year anniversary of the GJ, they got together September 15th I think,
PB: And they haven't met since May and now we're in the first part of August and...
JH: I think for people who are hoping for some kind of conclusion, I think the one good thing is that the fact that tomorrow AH is gonna go in front of the county commissioners and ask for more money. I think that's significant...I was told early by Suzanne Laurion, who was talking on the record, and she's the spokesperson for the DAs office, she said, you know if we do that, that's a sign that there's still work being done... I mean there's been some speculation that maybe AH is going to kinda let the GJ die a slow death...just not do anything until its term expires and that'll be all. But I think this is a pretty clear sign that that's not happening.
PB: I agree with you. I have said this locally and on the national shows ... AH aside for a minute, which I don't want to lay off on Alex, you have some remarkable young prosecutors, Mike Kane, Mitch Morrissey, Bruce, those guys... and they're not going to trash their own careers
JH: Oh yeah, exactly. These guys all have to go back and practice in their offices...and I think that's right. I keep having other people .. like when I call this source and say ‘nothing's ever going to happen' and they say ‘no' They say exactly what you just pointed out--that their integrity is on the line--their reputations are on the line and they're not going to ... You know, AH may or may not run again, but these people are still going to be working.
PB: (Introducing Jeff Rutledge) We're sort of putting things together and where we stand, Jeffrey, what's your best guess, and as Julie point out, Charlie Brennan wrote about it and a number of people, that AH goes before the county tomorrow and asks for another $57,000 and change to fund this GJ through October 20th.
JR: I think I heard that Laurion, his spokesperson, said that doesn't necessarily mean he will need all that money. What I've said before was that they're just waiting for the return of the DNA, and so I think where we're heading is where I've felt all along--indictments,
JH: Jeff, to sort of jump on that, I think that one thing Suzanne clarified to me a couple of weeks ago, is that if they don't spend all this money on the GJ, it can just go to continue for the prosecution. And that's a good sign, because I think knowing the politics of the Boulder county commissioners office and the DAs office, they've got ...they're trying to fund a new office in Longmont and things, I think the Boulder DA is not inclined to ask for money that he doesn't need from a county commission that doesn't want to hand any more out.
JR: It's interesting, you know, you're absolutely right. These imaginations behind the scenes, and with the money and that, is almost as interesting as the case itself. It's pretty funny.
PB: I asked Bob Grant this, and I've been told that in most cases, and Bob Grant said it's true, that a GJ will bond together and they will bond with the lead prosecutor, who we all know is Mike Kane, and as Julie and I and others have said, Mike Kane is a career prosecutor...he's a young guy, Alex is in his early 60s, and I don't think Mitch Morrissey and Bruce Levin ---I don't think these guys are gonna continually ask for more money knowing they don't have a case
JR: Absolutely. It would be suicide, and you know one point worth noting is they brought Kane from outside and why would you keep this guy on for basically nothing in the end result. There's going to be an indictment, I'm sure of it.
JH: That's what everyone keeps telling me..it's taking longer than anyone thought, but yeah, there will still be an indictment
JR: I don't know what you're hearing Julie, but I always heard that the reason it's so long is because it's a defensive posture in anticipation of questioning DNA ala OJ or something.
JH: You know, I think I have heard that same thing also, I have to admit, not specifically from anyone that knows, but from people who know how GJs work, and particularly an investigative GJ.
JH: That's what I've been told... that if you're the prosecutors and you know that once you have an indictment, and the whole thing goes to a trial, why not get all that stuff done now.
PB: I ran that question hypothetically by a source that I have, ‘suppose John and/or Patsy are indicted.. And Jeffrey, you believe that Patsy will be indicted...
JR: No question...I would be on it--I don't see how you can avoid it
PB: OK, having said that, I said, ‘how long before there would be a trial' and this person who is a very knowledgeable person said, "John and Patsy have enough money to fight every single motion including what happened in the GJ...that there will be a long protracted, drawn out legal battle way before you see either one of them or one of them in the dock. Their lawyers will spend millions of $s trying to discredit anything and everything that's done by the GJ..way before there's ever a trial...that a trial could conceivably be 2 years from now"
JR: Isn't that interesting...
JH: I know some of that sorta depends on whether bond is granted. I think if you're somebody sitting in jail, you might want to tell your lawyers to just get on with it.
PB: That's what OJ did, and Jeffrey, you covered OJ
JR: Absolutely, and there was an extremely great move on their part on the OJ case because the idea was they had to rush everything...and we saw the results. The case was just poorly put together and now we can look at certain things in the OJ case and say why wasn't this and that brought out. But in the Ramsey case I think it's going to be different. I think the idea of delaying it will work to their advantage. I don't know how they can do it, but give me 10 lawyers and I can give you 10 different ways.
17 . "More"
Posted by Panico on Aug-04-99 at 01:22 PM (EDT)
PB: ....(recapping) One of the things that Julie I know you agree, and Jeffrey, I think you agree, is to see to what Morrissey and Kane and Bruce and these guys, they're young hard chargers, they're not gonna throw away their careers. If they didn't have a mission here, if they didn't think there was going to be an indictment, I think that they would step up right now and say "The case isn't here, I'm sorry, we will not spend any more of the taxpayer's money. Because they are going to have to go on with their careers, and I don't think any one of the 3 of them wants to drag this bag the rest of their careers.. Julie do you find agreement with that?
JH: You know, I do, I totally agree. And I think that all these people and their offices know how to sort of send that message out if they wanted to. I think Bob Grant could be sort of indicating ‘don't expect anything, don't expect anything' and instead he's saying ‘there'll be a conclusion, there'll be a conclusion'
PB: Yes, he said that on the air this am, that one way or the other, you will see a conclusion. Trying to read through Bob is difficult, but ...
JH: I totally agree with you...I think that the public relations aspect of this would be a little bit different if nothing was going to happen. Obviously we could be wrong, but I think we're not getting any signals like that. I think the signals are ‘hey, this is taking longer than anyone thought, but ..' I've had sources say to me, and they have a point, the only people who really get all bent out of shape about that is the reporters
JH: The grand jurors and the DAs who are handling the whole thing feel like they're doing things the way they should
PB: Jeffrey, AH's time in office expires 2001. He has said that he's not going to run again, but if they're indicted, or someone's indicted, then I would almost bet he will run for office again.
JR: Well, now that's interesting. I ... to be frank, and we've talked about this before, I tend to take a different attitude... I don't see how he can. I think his behavior in all this is just absolutely amazing, atrocious...I mean, I don't know how to describe it. It was interesting in those tapes of Shapiro... you hear Hunter is calling on another line for the guys at the Globe. But, you know, you're probably right, in the sense that he's just not going to walk away from a big case like this.
PB: There has to be a conclusion.
JR: Yeah, certainly, so it's just amazing that he's been able to survive...I can't stress enough how fascinated I am by that
PB: Jeff Shapiro has now taped everything and the tapes are now out on the internet
PB: And when you listen to them, it's ...you think to yourself, who was running the asylum?
PB: Julie, have you heard any of these tapes?
JH: No, I haven't, I haven't bothered, but I have to say that a part of me is like, I mean I'm not a lawyer, but in CO it's illegal to tape someone and then publish those tapes. I mean, you know this being in radio, that without their permission. And I mean, if I'm Jeff, I'm a little worried that I've opened myself up to some kind of lawsuit
PB: He's as nuts as they come
JH: You know what kills me is that he keeps getting this mainstream media attention and that blows me away
PB: He was a stringer for Time magazine during the Columbine tragedy
JH: And I have my questions about that..
PB: Me too
JH: I saw him out there and Jeff's a nice guy...and he's a persistent reporter, but I kinda have my questions about that.
PB: One more question, why haven't the Ramseys been brought before this GJ, Julie?
JH: From what I've been told, it's because grand jurors don't need to hear from them, that they've heard hours of their interviews, and I think that there's a sense that they don't have anything to say that would really help the grand jurors and also, I think the prosecutors don't want to get into that very muddy area of what statements do they have to give the Ramseys before they would appear.
PB: I would agree with that, Jeff, why do you think the Ramseys....
JR: The same thing. No question. Kane's not about to give up anything they don't have to yet and, you know, that can' just lead to more doors open as far as a legal battle...what is the interpretation of the law--which I think Schiller talked a lot about in his book..so it's definitely that...they don't need ‘em....for what?
PB: I agree with that, I really do. They don't need them unless they're gonna play chicken with them.
Back with Carol McKinley
19 . "Last segment"
Posted by Panico on Aug-04-99 at 02:53 PM (EDT)
PB: You simply cannot cover the JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation without talking to this woman. She has clearly emerged as the premiere national reporter on the Ramsey investigation. She is my friend and she's my pal--from Fox News, the lovely and talented Carol McKinley
CM: Well, Peter, how nice...geez...you took a nice pill today (PB laughing) So what do we do now..it's August.
PB You know, we've had Bob Grant on this am, had Jeff Rutledge on, and we're trying to get Craig Lewis to see what the tab guys say, and of course, there is no Ramsey show without you.
CM: I don't know if that's a compliment or a criticism.
PB: You did, and you told me about this story, I watched when you did it, this piece that you did on JonBenet, and on the marks on her neck...that really led me to do a lot of thinking and a lot of re-listening and a lot of going back and a lot of looking at some parts of the autopsy. Carol, I'll just turn the story over to you because often times, although Fox is building their big studios right now here in Denver, often times a lot of your reports that are done national, don't get a lot of airing here in town, and so I think it's significant for you to go back over the piece that you did.
CM: OK. At this point in August, I think it's important to look at some alternative theories from the ones we've been presented, and as I started listening to some of the detectives, and the scientists, and people from different departments...people who'd had rifts before, they all seem to be telling me that they believe that JonBenet clawed at her neck as she was dying. There are some marks on the autopsy report that are called non-patterned marks..in other words there's the furrow from the ligature, then there are bruises and abrasions which are non-patterned, which means that they aren't in the pattern of the line that the furrow made around her neck, and they're in the left, right and center of her neck. And it's consistent with her own clawing, that she clawed herself as she was dying, or trying to get a breath. And that was opposite of what I had thought, which was that she was hit on the head so hard that she was just knocked out and never came to again. To me, the big part of that is, that even after this long, it kinda gave me a stomach turn thinking about how she died... you know it's different if she died with unconsciousness and never really felt anything after that, but if we know she was gasping for breath and trying to get a finger underneath that cord as she was dying, it just makes us look at it a little differently. Now those non-patterned marks don't have to be from her clawing, that's just what a lot of the cops and some of the scientists think it's consistent with. I mean it could be, and police have also told me, that the ligature was moving up and down as she was being strangled, and scraped at, or ...
PB: That's horrible
PB: I mean, it really is, when Carol told me this story a couple of weeks ago and we started talking about it, you said that you believed that the little girl, JonBenet, was actually awake. Now we've all believed that she was alive when she was strangled, she'd been struck. Now does that turn you around on whether she was struck first or strangled first?
CM: You know, it only makes me look at it from a different angle. It only makes me open another door, is all. It's important to know whether she was strangled or struck first, and the autopsy report doesn't say which happened first. And if she was strangled first, someone meant to kill her or set out to do it, and that's .... if it was Patsy Ramsey, then she's nuts.
PB: When you told me this, and I re-thought all this stuff and went back and looked at the autopsy, not that I could understand reading it, but I did read it again, and looking at all this stuff, and I'm thinking to myself, OK, if what McKinley says is true, I mean, if what you have come up with is true, that would throw everything off, and I personally believe that the little girl was struck before she was asphysicated (sp?)/strangled.
CM: And that's a great argument. A lot of coroners I talked to swore up and down that she was struck in the head first, and the police still maintain that's what happened first. But if she were, then how would she have had the strength to grab and claw at her neck after that blow to her head?
PB: And that's why the next part of this...there have been long discussions and to some degree, arguments about how long she was alive after being struck on the head. There are people that believe up to 2 hours, there are people who believe an hour, there are people who believe 45 minutes, there are people who believe 15 minutes
CM: umm hmm
PB: Any one of those things lead you to another conclusion, it's called pre-meditated murder, that whoever murdered her, after striking her, meditated, contemplated, whether or not to take her life.
CM: Especially with that slip knot. I won't call it a garrotte because the police have stopped calling it that
PB: They have?
CM: They want to refer to it as a slip knot, because garrotte brings to mind military style killings that take a lot of time to get the knot together and what mother would ever have thought to have created something like that. All of this still doesn't tell us who killed her, but at least it gives us another idea...as long as we're sitting around waiting for the GJ to come back, let's look at some of these things, you know...
PB: Along those same lines, if, in fact, and you and I have had this conversation, so accidentally, God forbid, somebody hits their daughter with what I believe is a flashlight, and I believe it was Patsy, instead of waking John up, if in fact John wasn't there, and most people believe John was in bed, and then bundling her up in the blankets, putting her either in the Jaguar or in the Jeep, and flying like the wind to Boulder Community Hospital, somebody sat, or some people sat and thought what to do next. And as she lay there with a severe hemorrage to the side of her head, laid there, and watched her and watched her and said "What the hell, I might as well kill her", which is precisely what....that's meditation, that's consideration, that's planning, and that's first degree murder.
Break---last segment coming up
PB: The other story, and Carol, you and I talked about it, the red knife story..
CM: Oh yeah
PB: Charlie Brennan, the red knife and the Ramsey mystery, and this was actually an old story that Charlie re-visited. Talk about that if you would.
CM: Well, I guess I felt like that didn't tell us anything because Linda Hoffman Pugh hid that knife 3 weeks before the murder. If I were a kid, I'd be up trying to find that knife. Now who knows if Burke went in and grabbed the knife and started whittling away with it again? Who knows if they had two or 3 knives? I just don't think it tells us a whole lot, and besides that, it was out in the tabloids at least, what was it, at least 3/4 of a year ago or so?
PB: A long time ago
CM: So, we'd already seen it, we'd already heard it. I guess it was worth exploring again, but to me, I just don't think the knife story means much. What do you think?
PB: Well, I think it's significant. I think, and again, ti's the knife that Burke Ramsey had, it's a Swiss army knife I'm told
CM: umm hmm
PB: and that he used it to whittle, and the housekeeper Linda Hoffman Pugh said if you keep whittling and making a mess I'm going to take the knife, he continued to do it, and she took the knife, and the knife, of course, was found later...it was found on the 26th, and used probably to cut the white cord that was used to strangle JonBenet.
CM: How do you know that?
PB: Well, I'm guessing.
CM: Were there any finger prints on it?
CM: So that doesn't do us any good
PB: I don't even know if there were fingerprints on it. That's a good question...I don't.
CM: It probably had Burke's fingerprints on it, and then again, if it had family fingerprints on it, what good is that going to do?
PB: I agree. However, what Linda Hoffman Pugh did say, was she hid that knife where noone could find it, and so her conclusion is that nobody ---nobody except a family person--no intruder came into the house and killed that little girl, predicated just on the knife part. Now Linda Hoffman Pugh said a lot of things that are very damning to John and Patsy Ramsey, but this story is, I think, is a legitimate part of this, but you say no.
CM: Not to me...Not as an objective observer.. I don't think it tells us anything. It's another one of those things....well, the blanket should have been in the dryer. You know, well, that's great, but the last time Linda Hoffman Pugh was in the house was the 23rd. How does she know what happened the other 2 days?
PB: Fair enough
CM: I just don't think it's anything that's gonna prove anything. But you know, when I talk to some of the police, they still tell me that this GJ has bonded with Michael Kane, like you say. And ...
PB: And Kane wants Patsy
CM: Yeah, and what they say is...who can't we exclude as author of the note. Let's take the knife away, let's take the strangulation away...
PB: This has been an hour and a half Roundup of the Ramseys, and I think the best way to go out is with Carol McKinley. We were talking at the pause about, and my personal belief is that the GJ has bonded with Mike Kane. I said this with Bob Grant on, I said it with Julie Hayden, I said it with Jeff Rutledge. I can't imagine Carol, and this is logic, but particularly the three that are in charge of this GJ, Kane, Levin and Morrissey, they're young guys, they're career prosecutors. They continue to ask for more help and for more money. Now Alex Hunter goes in for more money...another 60 grand...if these guys did not have something, what would their careers be like if after this is over they say 'we didn't have it, we didn't have it in April, we didn't have it in February, mind you, this GJ sat for the first time Sept 15th, their careers, I mean what they're going to look like is gonna be terrible.
CM: Yeah, well, they'll do the talk show circuit, and they'll do some speeches, they'll do the Marcia Clark thing, some of them, and the rest of them will duck their head and go back to their normal lives, I imagine, but you know, there are a lot of people out there who say they don't have it...that this thing is gonna go on a shelf and it's the only logical thing to do because if they blow their wad now, they'll never have anything later on if they do come up with something.. Maybe a confession. I think they're still hopeful that someone is going to confess to this in the next month or so. Can you imagine the pressure of wondering if you're going to be indicted if you're Patsy or John Ramsey?
PB: That's the question I've asked a long time. Now Jeff and Julie believe, and a lot of others believe that there's this...well, actually they don't believe that, they believe that they don't need the Ramseys in front of the GJ because they don't want them in front of the GJ, because they have what they want. The other side of that is, are they playing this game of chicken with the GJ. And Bob Grant said, well, maybe Ramseys will come in at the very end of this GJ.
CM: I doubt it
PB: I'm like you..I doubt it too
CM: But you know, you have to be open to the fact that this thing might not get solved by October
PB: I agree
CM: And that's gonna be as much of a story as if it is, because we're all going to be going well, but didn't they have this. You know, who was in the house when she was killed, what about the pineapple, how can we look at this note and say Patsy Ramsey didn't write it if Foster says he's pretty sure that she did...
PB: Sure, she wrote it
CM: I mean, there's plenty of stuff we know about, but geez. Well, that's if you think Patsy Ramsey did it. And you know, it's funny, I'm on the street a lot talking to people about it, and there are a lot of folks out there that the longer this goes, who start questioning 'did she really'...They're starting to give this family a chance. The longer this goes, the more people are wondering whether the Ramseys are responsible for the murder of JonBenet
Break for final comment
PB: Final comment from Carol McKinley. No sense in holding your breath and waiting for an end to this on the Ramsey investigation...
CM: Well, I don't know. I still have hope that something will happen..it's more of a hope thought than anything I've gotten from any inside source. It' just, I think, logically, it's what you said, why would they be spinning, spinning, spinning right now the way they are. They're running out, still interviewing people, still asking about potential suspects,. Probably closing doors. ...If they're not going to try to do something.
PB: I agree. If there was no hope, Morrissey, the rest of these guys are smart enough to know that they'd be dragging that bag the rest of their career. I'm serious.
CM: Well, they knew that when they took this on, though.
PB: Yeah, but when they took it on, they took it on when this GJ sat Sept 15th last year,
CM; hmm hmm
PB: That's one thing, but to find out later, say maybe by January they knew there was never any hope to indict, that there was no way they could solve this, and to continue to spend taxpayers $s and draw this out, this ain't gonna look good on paper
CM: Well, I think that some of the questions that have come up with people like Lou Smit who has been in there and maybe John Douglas, and maybe some of the friends or whatever, I think it ticks them off...because they're tired of running around eliminating everything and everybody.
PB: I agree
CM: And so they're ticked off, but they're doing it.
And thhhhaaattt's all folks. Sorry it took so long, have phone ringing inbetween.