Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet? Read online

  Archuleta asked her supervisor if police had listened to the 911 tape and was told that they had already obtained a copy of the recording: “What about the end of the call? Have they listened to the tail end of the call after Patsy Ramsey had stopped talking?”

  The supervisor looked back at Archuleta with a puzzled look on her face. “What are you talking about?” she asked.

  The 911 call didn’t end when Patsy stopped talking to her, Archuleta explained. The telephone line had not disconnected immediately, and she had heard a definite change in the tone of Patsy Ramsey’s voice before the call was fully terminated. Archuleta explained that the hysterical nature of Patsy Ramsey’s voice appeared to have dissipated, and she thought that she had been talking to someone nearby at her end of the telephone line. Investigators needed to listen to that extended part of the 911 call, Archuleta told her supervisor.

  The 911 tape was subsequently sent to the Aerospace Corporation located in Los Angeles, California, and technicians determined that there was an additional several seconds of recording at the tail end of the call before the recording had been fully terminated. It was theorized that Patsy Ramsey had placed the handset of the telephone into its wall mounted cradle after discontinuing her conversation with the dispatch center, but that it had not fully settled into place to disconnect the call.

  Aerospace technicians were tasked with attempting to enhance the tail end of the 911 call to determine if the voices heard there could be better understood. Through a series of electronic washings, technicians were able to reduce the background noise associated with the transmission of the telephone call and identified three distinct voices conversing at the tail end of the 911 call.

  Several technicians listened to the enhanced version of the tape and compared notes on what they thought they had heard. Each technician reportedly had heard the same conversation. It was time to call Boulder authorities.

  Boulder Police detective Melissa Hickman flew to California in late April 1997, and met with the technicians. She, too, was provided the opportunity to listen independently to the enhanced version of the 911 tape.

  After Hickman has listened to the tape several times, she shared her observations of what she thought had been overheard with the technicians. Producing a previous set of handwritten notes, the technicians revealed their interpretation of the words spoken by the voices heard on the tail end of the tape.

  They all stared in amazement. Everyone who had listened to the enhanced version of the 911 tape had independently identified the same words and gender of the people speaking them. There were three distinct voices heard on the tape and the conversation was identified as follows:

  Male (angry): “We’re not speaking to you!”

  Female: “Help me Jesus. Help me Jesus”

  Young male: “Well, what did you find?”

  The discovery of this conversation, taking place in the family home after Patsy Ramsey thought she had terminated her 911 call, was of significant importance. It was a piece of evidence that pointed to deception on the part of the Ramsey family. They had continued to maintain throughout their statements that Burke had remained asleep in his bedroom during the events of the morning and that they had never awakened him or asked him questions about JonBenét’s kidnapping.

  Proof of the Ramsey’s deception was beginning to erode the foundation of the kidnapper / intruder theory in the eyes of Boulder Police investigators, and they contemplated the questions:

  Why would the Ramseys feel the need to mislead authorities about their son being asleep at the time of the 911 call?

  Were they attempting to conceal information that he may have had about the circumstances of his sister’s death?

  Intruder theorists seemed to discount this evidence of deception as inconsequential.

  For others, those voices at the end of the 911 tape pointed to family involvement and some type of cover-up.

  Chapter Ten

  Lou Smit for the Defense

  Ramsey attorneys continued to hold Boulder Police investigators at bay, refusing to come to terms for a follow-up interview with the family and claiming that the department was centering the entire focus of their investigation on Patsy and John Ramsey. This was not the case, but Boulder investigators were not about to talk publically about the steps they were taking in an active murder investigation.

  The division between the District Attorney’s Office and the Police Department had been widening, but Alex Hunter and Tom Koby mutually agreed that it would help to bring an experienced homicide investigator into the fold. From there, however, their opinions diverged.

  Boulder Police wanted to bring retired Denver Police Homicide Division Chief Tom Haney on board. Haney, retiring from the Denver Police Department in January 1997, was a long-term veteran of the department and had extensive experience in their homicide bureau.

  Hunter’s crew wanted to hire retired Colorado Springs Detective Lou Smit. A devout Christian with an equally impressive resume, Smit was situated outside the immediate Denver-metro area and not necessarily known to all of the law enforcement community in Boulder County.

  Hunter eventually prevailed, and Smit began his work at the D.A.’s office in mid-March, 1997. Smit was joined by Boulder County Sheriff’s Department investigator Steve Ainsworth, and they were tasked with taking a look at the evidence in the case from the perspective of the defense team: a valuable strategy when you are trying to identify the weaknesses in a case that you might one day be prosecuting.

  Smit began in earnest, and it wasn’t long before he had discounted the involvement of a group of individuals in JonBenét’s kidnapping and focused his efforts on proving that a single intruder, a violent pedophile, was responsible for the murder of this child.

  He pointed to the back yard that concealed the grate of the Train Room window well and thought this an excellent location through which entry could be gained to the residence. Smudges in the dirt covering the exterior windowsill led Smit to believe that an intruder had used this location to enter and exit the home and a scuff mark located on the interior wall below the window further bolstered his opinion on the matter.

  The odd placement of the Samsonite suitcase beneath the window was not a key element necessary for the intruder’s entry to the home, but Smit felt it was a critical piece of evidence that had assisted the intruder in their escape. Given its height above the floor, something was needed to step upon in order to climb out of the Train Room window.

  And then there was the impression of the poon of a “Hi-Tec” brand hiking boot found in the mold on the floor of the Wine Cellar, next to where the body of JonBenét had been discovered. Smit theorized that the impression had been made by the boot of the intruder when he had hidden JonBenét in that obscure and remote basement room.

  Photo 12 - Interior view of Train Room, Samsonite suitcase, and open window to window well, thought to be point of entry / exit by intruder theorists. Note the elongated scuff mark on the wall between the suitcase and window frame. Source: Boulder PD Case Files / Internet

  A latent palm print had been lifted by CSIs from the exterior side of the Wine Cellar door and it had not yet been identified when Smit first joined the investigation. The question loomed: Had this latent fingerprint been left by an intruder as well?

  It would take a couple more months of work, but Smit would see similarities in some of the marks on JonBenét’s face and back and develop the theory that a “stun gun” had been used to silence her during the kidnap.

  Photo 13 - Twin abrasions on JonBenét’s lower left back that intruder theorists believe were created by the use of an Air Taser brand stun gun. Source: Boulder PD Case File / Internet

  He reviewed the autopsy photographs of murder victim Gerald Boggs, who had been murdered in his Steamboat Springs, Colorado home in October 1993 by his wife and a male accomplice / boyfriend.

  His wife, Jill Coit, would become known as the “Black Widow.” She had been married eleven (11) times to nine (9) differen
t men, and Boggs had been number eight (8). Coit and her boyfriend were eventually convicted of the murder and are currently serving terms of incarceration in the Colorado Department of Corrections.

  Steamboat Springs investigators determined during their investigation that Boggs had been beaten with a shovel, shocked with a stun gun, and shot with a .22 caliber pistol.

  The stun gun had been applied on the right side of his face, the electrical probes of the device making contact with his ear lobe and cheek. The deteriorating mark on his ear lobe looked strikingly similar to the orange-colored mark on JonBenét’s cheek. Smit theorized that a smaller red mark closer to her mouth accounted for the location of the second probe.

  It was difficult to determine the exact positioning of the stun gun probes on JonBenét’s face, however, and Smit turned to the twin abrasions on her back to test out his theory of the use of this device. These marks, described as “abrasions” by Dr. Meyer when he examined them during autopsy, were much more distinct and easily measured. Smit and investigators from the Boulder County Sheriff’s Department would later conduct a series of tests with a number of stun guns with the intention of bolstering the intruder theory.

  Photo 14 - Lou Smit experiments with a stun gun on anesthetized pigs. Source: Boulder PD Case File / Internet

  Smit sought the assistance of Dr. Michael Doberson, Coroner for Arapahoe County, who had been involved in the Boggs murder investigation. Dr. Doberson had used anesthetized pigs to test a stun gun found in the trunk of Coit’s vehicle to determine if it matched the injuries observed on the body of Gerald Boggs. He provided critical testimony about his experiments during the Boggs trial, and some thought his observations were paramount in convicting the people responsible for his murder.

  Smit arranged to have the same type of experiments conducted in JonBenét’s investigation, and he would eventually declare that the Air Taser brand stun gun was most likely the instrument used in this crime.

  It was Smit’s contention that a single intruder had entered the Ramsey home late on the night of Christmas, and used the stun gun to render JonBenét unconscious. He then carried her downstairs to the basement and physically tortured and sexually assaulted her. It was his belief that the garrote had been repeatedly tightened and loosened over the course of attack, and that the blow to her head came last, almost at the time of her death.

  Boulder investigators had contacted the manufacturer of the Air Taser stun gun that Smit ultimately declared to be the weapon used in this murder, and they were told in no uncertain terms that the marks on JonBenét’s body would not have been created by their device.

  This did not deter Smit, or other investigators and attorneys in the D.A.’s office, however, from holding tight to their belief in the intruder theory.

  Boulder PD investigators would find written materials in the Ramsey household that suggested John Ramsey may have at one time been researching the purchase of a stun gun, or that he had owned one. Nothing ever came of this lead, however, and Smit continued to theorize that the marks of a stun gun found on JonBenét pointed to an intruder being involved in her death. He felt that the parents would have no need for a stun gun to control or silence their daughter.

  Smit thought that the ransom note had been written before the death of JonBenét because it referenced her still being alive when the demand for ransom was being made. He was aware that Patsy’s notepad and a pen from the kitchen had been used for the note, and he considered it possible that the intruder had actually crafted the note in the home on the night of the murder.

  But from there, his opinion diverged from that of the other police investigators working the case.

  Document examiners had not been able to rule out Patsy Ramsey as the author of the note, but Smit was dubious about the police view that she had authored it. He didn’t think JonBenét’s murderer would have had the composure to write the note after having committed this brutal murder. Smit just didn’t buy into the concept that the note was crafted as a part of the staging of a cover-up.

  I am aware that Smit had a number of spirited conversations with Boulder investigators regarding some of the evidence collected in the case. He and Steve Thomas went round and round over the spider webs in the Train Room window well and the scuff mark located on the wall beneath that window. Boulder PD investigators didn’t believe anyone used that window to either enter or exit the home, and the broken window glass and scuff mark were explainable by John Ramsey’s earlier forced entry into the home.

  Smit would later tell reporters that photographs of JonBenét’s room showed no signs of a struggle and, more importantly, that the sheets on her bed were clean. According to him, there was no sign of urine on the sheets, and no evidence that she had wet her bed that night.

  It was his theory that there had been no struggle because the intruder had used the stun gun to silence / subdue JonBenét while she was asleep in her bed.

  Smit discounted observations made by the investigators and CSIs who had processed the scene shortly after the murder: the sheets on JonBenét’s bed reeked of urine.

  Smit and Hoffstrom would subsequently share their theory of the use of the stun gun with the Ramsey family and their attorneys in an interview conducted in June 1997. Boulder PD investigators were noticeably absent, and the Ramsey team must have felt that progress was finally being made in the search for their daughter’s murderer.

  The evidence that Smit believed pointed to an intruder bitterly divided the detectives. He had only been on the job for three days before he opined that he didn’t believe the parents were involved in the death of JonBenét.

  His reputation as a renowned criminal investigator was quickly dissolving in the eyes of Boulder PD investigators, and they could not understand how he so easily dismissed certain pieces of physical evidence.

  For Smit, he thought Boulder investigators were spending too much time focusing their efforts on the parents and not enough time looking for an outside intruder. He could find nothing that pointed to the family’s involvement in the death of their daughter. His work and his theory would eventually amass a group of “intruder believers” in certain segments of the D.A.’s office.

  This division would plague the progress of the investigation for years to come.

  Ramsey family ad again offers $100,000 reward

  The family of JonBenét Ramsey placed a quarter page ad restating their $100,000 reward for information about their daughter’s killing in Sunday’s edition of the Boulder Daily Camera.

  Next to a school picture showing the child beauty queen without makeup, the ad offers $100,000 “for information leading to the arrest and conviction of the murderer of JonBenét Ramsey.”

  The ad says the 6-year-old girl was murdered Christmas night “…in her home by an unknown person or persons.”

  It says the reward is offered by the JonBenét Ramsey Children’s Foundation and “the family urgently requests that if you have any knowledge which can assist in solving this crime, please contact (303) 443-3535 or Crime Stoppers at (303) 440-7867.”

  JonBenét’s body was found in the basement of her parent’s Boulder home on the morning of December 26 after Patsy and John Ramsey reported finding a ransom note demanding $118,000 for the girl’s return.

  —Boulder Camera

  April 28, 1997

  “Police spokeswoman Leslie Aaholm told CNN Wednesday that Patricia Ramsey has yet to turn in a fifth handwriting sample requested by investigators, who have ruled out her 53-year-old husband as the writer of the note. But she said investigators expect her to do so.”

  —CNN U.S. News,

  April 30, 1997

  Chapter Eleven

  Coming to Terms

  Boulder investigators were anxious to have another opportunity at interviewing the parents after they had suddenly ceased communication on Saturday, December 28, 1996. There were many unanswered questions that they wanted to ask, and they wanted to further clarify information that had been gathered on the day of
the kidnapping.

  The F.B.I’s Behavioral Analysis and Child Abduction and Serial Killer Units, the premier federal law enforcement investigative agencies that dealt with these types of cases, were in direct consultation with Boulder Police and offering advice on how to arrange and conduct these follow up interviews.

  It was apparent from the standpoint of Ramsey attorneys that they didn’t want their clients walking through the doors of the police department and being subjected to interrogation style interviews. They wanted to control the environment and the setting and continuously rejected investigator’s requests that the Ramseys come to the station like every other victim, witness, or suspect.

  Patsy Ramsey continued to be emotionally fragile, and her attorney at one point had suggested that she be interviewed for no longer than an hour at a time and that she be in the company of her physician. The proffer was made that detectives would be allowed to see her at one of the Ramsey attorney’s offices, but no visit to the police department building would be permitted.

  These terms were unacceptable to the investigators. They were perplexed by the Ramsey’s early decision to obtain legal counsel and felt that they were attempting to hide something. They wanted to speak to Patsy Ramsey in particular due to the similarities of her handwriting to the ransom note. This and the fact that the note had been written on a pad of paper belonging to her put Patsy in the “bucket” of suspects as Steve Thomas would later describe it.

  The negotiations went on for weeks and were frequently played out in the press. Just when it seemed that everyone had agreed to a set of conditions, something would change, and the Ramsey PR team usually blamed authorities for being inflexible and insensitive to the victims of the crime.

  Eventually, a date and time would be set: April 30, 1997. Investigators would be permitted the opportunity to separately interview John and Patsy Ramsey, and they could use the time in any manner they saw fit. Each would be represented by his or her attorney, of course, and a member of the D.A.’s office would also sit in as an observer.