PASSAGE OF THE DAY: "The biggest piece of evidence that suggests an intruder killed the child is DNA from an unidentified male that was found on JonBenét. According to the docuseries, there are also a number of other objects from the crime scene that were sent to the crime lab but were never actually tested. The things that were tested were done so nearly 30 years ago, and technological advances since then mean that retesting is in order. Meanwhile, the existing DNA isn't linked to any of the family members and it is problematic because it is mixed with JonBenét's blood. The docuseries makes a case for separating the two samples with new technology and then putting the unidentified sample into genealogical DNA. Doing so, it claims, will give police a better chance of identifying the murderer."
--------------------------------
REVIEW: "Netflix's JonBenét Ramsey Docuseries Offers a Compelling Case to Clear the Ramsey Family of Murder," by TV Critic Amber Dowling, published by TV Guide, on November 26, 2024."
SUB-HEADING: "The infamous case remains unsolved"
SUB-HEADING: "It's been 28 years since six-year-old JonBenét Ramsey was found dead in the basement of her home in Boulder, Colo. on Boxing Day 1996. In the years since, the beauty queen's photos have sold numerous tabloids, populated countless newscasts, and propelled public speculation in an unprecedented way."
GIST: "With so much material out there for a case that's never been officially solved, you have to wonder what new information a Netflix documentary could possibly provide. As it turns out, a lot. In the streamer's new three-part series, Cold Case: Who Killed JonBenét Ramsey, Oscar-nominated director Joe Berlinger presents a case that he hopes will lead to an arrest.
What happened to JonBenét Ramsey?
When Patsy and John Ramsey woke up on Dec. 26, 1996, they found a ransom note that informed them their daughter, JonBenét, had been kidnapped. The worried parents immediately called the police, who had little experience with this kind of thing in their peaceful community. After an initial search of the house they were stumped. Eight hours later they asked John to take another look around in case they had missed anything.
When John went into the basement he discovered an open window and, tragically, his daughter's lifeless body in a room the police hadn't searched. He brought his little girl upstairs, allegedly accidentally contaminating the crime scene in the process.
It was later ruled that JonBenét had been sexually assaulted and died from strangulation. She had also been hit on the head with a blunt object postmortem. Little did the grieving parents know that the death of their daughter was just the beginning of the nightmare.
In the days, months, and years that followed, police put the case in the court of public opinion by reportedly leaking false stories that painted the parents in a negative light. According to the documentary, certain investigators in the department were so focused on Patsy and John being the killers that they failed to actively pursue other leads.
Why was the JonBenét Ramsey case so sensationalized?
A major theme throughout the docuseries is the media coverage of the case and the way it was reported on. As time went on the case was sensationalized in part due to JonBenét's pageant history. Thirty years ago, people weren't used to that world in the way they are post Toddlers & Tiaras, and blamed the parents for putting their daughter in harm's way by exposing her to potential pedophiles.
Because there were also so many photos and videos of JonBenét from those pageants, there were plenty to choose from for tabloid covers. Almost everyone who frequented a grocery store saw photos of the six-year-old all dolled up and in Vegas-style showgirl clothes, which opened up a lot of public debate. Add in the parents as initial suspects, and the case continues to be a pop culture milestone from the '90s.
How does the JonBenét Ramsey series attempt to clear Jonbenét's parents of the murder?
The way the Ramseys were treated and how many people believed them to be guilty because of shoddy police work, irresponsible media coverage, and the rise of social media may be the biggest takeaway from the three-hour series. Over three episodes, Berlinger uses archived footage and interviews to present the past while interviewing lawyers and journalists in the present who covered the case, using years of perspective to cast doubt on the guilt of the Ramseys.
John Ramsey, Jonbenét's father, is prominently featured in interviews conducted just for the series, explaining what the past three decades have been like for him. He speaks on behalf of his late wife, Patsy, who lost her battle with cancer in 2006. He also represents his son Burke, who was nine years old at the time of his sister's death and has been publicly accused of murdering his sister by some who have followed the case, with one prominent theory stating that he killed Jonbenét over a dispute about snacks.
As the documentary points out, Burke was cleared by police at the time, yet because the discourse surrounding his involvement has been so overwhelming, he declined to participate in the series. However, JonBenét's older half-brother, John Andrew Ramsey, appears on camera to talk about what life has been like for the family since that tragic day.
By putting all of the examples of how they were targeted together, the series shows just how wronged this family was. In one part, it reveals how Geraldo Rivera's mock trial — an irresponsible televised staged takedown of the Ramseys complete with a jury, lawyers, and judge who were not connected to the case at all — sent a distressed Patsy to bed for two days. Part of the footage includes a supposed child abuse expert claiming JonBenét "masturbated" with a saxophone onstage during a performance. The doc then shows that footage, which is clearly just a child pretending to play an instrument.
There's also a strong case for how police potentially wanted the public to come down on these parents. Investigators kept the results of DNA evidence, which cleared John, Patsy and Burke, a secret for months. Meanwhile, they also twisted bits of information around. They reportedly told one reporter there couldn't have been an intruder because there were no footprints in the snow. However, it was proven that there was no snow on the ground that night, so there couldn't have been footprints.
In the third episode, the series reminds viewers that in 2019, CBS paid an undisclosed amount to Burke after he and his family filed a $750 million defamation suit over a 2016 special claiming he did it.
Another compelling voice in the series is late homicide detective Lou Smit, considered one of the best in the business. At the time of the murder he came out of retirement to help investigate the case, but he left 18 months later out of frustration over the close-minded way his colleagues were handling things. Berlinger uses recordings of Smit speculating about the case and explaining why it had to have been an intruder who killed the little girl that night.
Smit continued working privately with the Ramseys after he quit, and he petitioned to testify to a grand jury that was ordered, despite the department reportedly trying to block him from doing so because he countered their theory. He was convinced until his death that John and Patsy didn't do it, and if investigators would just drop the theory and pursue other avenues, they would have solved the case years ago.
The biggest piece of new information the series tackles, however, is the DNA evidence itself. Over the years, that evidence has been used to clear several suspects, including the Ramseys, but as John speculates in the doc, he believes there's a problem with the sample and he wants it retested.
Why were John and Patsy Ramsey the main suspects?
According to the docuseries, one of the main reasons the Ramseys became suspects in their daughter's murder was because of the ransom note found by Patsy. The note itself was quite long, which is unique, but it also asked for a very specific sum of money that happened to equal John's bonus that year.
Multiple handwriting experts ruled that it couldn't have been Patsy or John who wrote the letter. Still, when police found no signs of forced entry and no actual kidnapping, investigators began to suspect the note was written to send them in the wrong direction.
Why wasn't anyone ever charged in the case?
Even though police suspected the Ramseys and did everything they could to prove they were the killers, they were unable to find enough evidence to ever charge them with anything. At one point they even tried to indict the couple on child abuse charges, but they were eventually cleared as suspects by a grand jury and the District Attorney.
What evidence is there in the JonBenét case?
The biggest piece of evidence that suggests an intruder killed the child is DNA from an unidentified male that was found on JonBenét. According to the docuseries, there are also a number of other objects from the crime scene that were sent to the crime lab but were never actually tested. The things that were tested were done so nearly 30 years ago, and technological advances since then mean that retesting is in order.
Meanwhile, the existing DNA isn't linked to any of the family members and it is problematic because it is mixed with JonBenét's blood. The docuseries makes a case for separating the two samples with new technology and then putting the unidentified sample into genealogical DNA. Doing so, it claims, will give police a better chance of identifying the murderer.
Who are the other suspects in the JonBenét Ramsey case?
The docuseries brings several other suspects into the conversation, including an intruder who was caught sneaking into the home of a 12-year-old girl in Boulder months after JonBenét died, a former teacher who even confessed to the crime but was never charged, and a convicted pedophile who lived in the area, was caught with a cutout of JonBenét in his backpack, had a history with the knots used to tie her up, and owned a stun gun similar to the one used on the little girl.
In all cases it was the DNA evidence that cleared these men.
Where else can I learn more about the case?
This docuseries very clearly takes the family's side and believes them to be innocent. There are other projects out there that don't take the same route. There is also an upcoming dramatized limited series about the case starring Melissa McCarthy and Clive Owen at Paramount+. So far, no one from the Ramsey family has been contacted about the project, Berlinger revealed in an interview with Variety.
Netflix also has a weird hybrid project you can check out called Casting JonBenet. In it, local actors from Boulder give their hot takes on what happened as they compete to play roles in a dramatized version of the case.
Additionally, there are a slew of specials, news reports, and docs dedicated to the subject of JonBenét Ramsey and her horrific death. From CNN reports, Nancy Grace Mysteries, Barbara Walters reports, and Dateline, you can check out a list here."
The entire review can be read at:
https://www.tvguide.com/news/netflix-jonbenet-ramsey-docuseries-cold-case/
PUBLISHER'S NOTE: I am monitoring this case/issue/resource. Keep your eye on the Charles Smith Blog for reports on developments. The Toronto Star, my previous employer for more than twenty incredible years, has put considerable effort into exposing the harm caused by Dr. Charles Smith and his protectors - and into pushing for reform of Ontario's forensic pediatric pathology system. The Star has a "topic" section which focuses on recent stories related to Dr. Charles Smith. It can be found at: http://www.thestar.com/topic/charlessmith. Information on "The Charles Smith Blog Award"- and its nomination process - can be found at: http://smithforensic.blogspot.com/2011/05/charles-smith-blog-award-nominations.html Please send any comments or information on other cases and issues of interest to the readers of this blog to: hlevy15@gmail.com. Harold Levy: Publisher: The Charles Smith Blog.
- SEE BREAKDOWN OF SOME OF THE ON-GOING INTERNATIONAL CASES (OUTSIDE OF THE CONTINENTAL USA) THAT I AM FOLLOWING ON THIS BLOG, AT THE LINK BELOW: HL:
https://www.blogger.com/blog/post/edit/120008354894645705/4704913685758792985
———————————————————————————————
FINAL WORD: (Applicable to all of our wrongful conviction cases): "Whenever there is a wrongful conviction, it exposes errors in our criminal legal system, and we hope that this case — and lessons from it — can prevent future injustices."
Lawyer Radha Natarajan:
Executive Director: New England Innocence Project;
—————————————————————————————-
FINAL, FINAL WORD: "Since its inception, the Innocence Project has pushed the criminal legal system to confront and correct the laws and policies that cause and contribute to wrongful convictions. They never shied away from the hard cases — the ones involving eyewitness identifications, confessions, and bite marks. Instead, in the course of presenting scientific evidence of innocence, they've exposed the unreliability of evidence that was, for centuries, deemed untouchable." So true!
Christina Swarns: Executive Director: The Innocence Project;
