Garnett on Caplis and Silverman

http://www.khow.com/cc-common/podcast/single_...

Go to 4pm hour left click listen tab or right click download and then open to download.

When topix removes the link search 630khow, go to home page, curser shows, click Caplis and Silverman, click podcast, then find 10/11/2010 Monday and go to 4pm hour.

Actually it is the 3pm hour.

I love the way he disses Lacy and gives a wink and a nod to indictments by the Grand Jury.

It was good to hear they're not bound by Lacy's exoneration of the Ramsey's. Now, John and Burke should let them hypnotize them and maybe they might recall something that was said or that happened. I would if I had nothing to hide. In other words, THAT will never happen! HA!

BrotherMoon wrote:

I love the way he disses Lacy and gives a wink and a nod to indictments by the Grand Jury.

Interesting. First I ever heard about possible indictments being handed down by the Grand Jury. Garnett did not confirm that there were, indeed, indictments, but, he didn't deny it either. I think we can say, without doubt, that Lacy's exoneration means nothing to the current DA's office and BPD.

BrotherMoon wrote:

I love the way he disses Lacy and gives a wink and a nod to indictments by the Grand Jury.

Is there a more simple way to access this? Can't someone post a direct link?

Old South wrote:

<quoted text>
Is there a more simple way to access this? Can't someone post a direct link?

Try this:

http://www.khow.com/cc-common/podcast/single_...

Left click on "Listen" tab at the 3pm hour slot.

Thanks so much for this Brother Moon! Thanks to the two skilled lawyers, they elicited a lot of info from Stan Garnett.

***MOST IMPORTANT POINT*** Lacy's exoneration of the Scams doesn't LEGALLY apply to HIS case. Kudos to Caplis for this.

2) The questioning of Burke is wanted NOT as the killer, but in another capacity, either as witness and or being involved in a coverup. Again, the skill of Craig Silverman in CLEVERLY eliciting this, by asking if a 9 year old were capable of fashioning the garotte, writing the note, etc.

3) Stan Garnett's first experience of Lin Wood's BULLYING, he said that Wood's statement was more a closing argument than an interview on the Today Show. TOUCHE. He's not intimidated by Wood at all. Stan is very intelligent, a skilled litigator in complex civil litigation, and a million miles more tough and ABLE to lead this investigation TO CHARGES than anyone that has come before him.

I wonder about his motivation. Is his public "action" on the case politically motivated?
Afterall, he is running for state AG. He gets free face and ear time with the appearance of a get tough crime fighter in an era of a conservative upswing.

Even if this is political, and the case will drop from the radar after the election, he did reveal that Mary Lacy's exoneration is irrelevant along with the DNA and he all but revealed there were indictments handed to Hunter who, like Lacy, acted with unsupportable and unprofessional personal bias.

I predict things will only get better for US (RDI and PDID) after the elections. The conservative mindset of identifying, persecuting and prosecuting Evil is 180 degrees opposite from Boulder's insular, arrogant, eletist mindset. The Strange Boulder Theosphical Culture is a target of the conservatives and the Ramsey case can be a vehicle for retribution. Some justice for JonBenet may come of this yet, even though it is secondary to political wrangling.

BrotherMoon wrote:

I wonder about his motivation. Is his public "action" on the case politically motivated?
Afterall, he is running for state AG. He gets free face and ear time with the appearance of a get tough crime fighter in an era of a conservative upswing.
Even if this is political, and the case will drop from the radar after the election, he did reveal that Mary Lacy's exoneration is irrelevant along with the DNA and he all but revealed there were indictments handed to Hunter who, like Lacy, acted with unsupportable and unprofessional personal bias.
I predict things will only get better for US (RDI and PDID) after the elections. The conservative mindset of identifying, persecuting and prosecuting Evil is 180 degrees opposite from Boulder's insular, arrogant, eletist mindset. The Strange Boulder Theosphical Culture is a target of the conservatives and the Ramsey case can be a vehicle for retribution. Some justice for JonBenet may come of this yet, even though it is secondary to political wrangling.

I didn't hear that Garnett say that the DNA was irrelevant? Where was that in the interview? I don't think he would dare say that because he has several cases whose prosecution was won due to DNA and even Touch DNA....

I do think this is political, especially due to the fact that Garnett is not thought to be a winner in this election. First reason he's facing an incumbent. Another big reason for this is that he's from Boulder...and given Boulder's bad rep for investigating and prosecuting crime, he is trying to show his tough prosecutor side.

Mame wrote:

<quoted text>
I didn't hear that Garnett say that the DNA was irrelevant? Where was that in the interview? I don't think he would dare say that because he has several cases whose prosecution was won due to DNA and even Touch DNA....
I do think this is political, especially due to the fact that Garnett is not thought to be a winner in this election. First reason he's facing an incumbent. Another big reason for this is that he's from Boulder...and given Boulder's bad rep for investigating and prosecuting crime, he is trying to show his tough prosecutor side.

He gave the finger to Lacy's exoneration which was based on the DNA, thus giving the finger to the DNA IN THIS CASE not to the science of DNA as a whole. Did you really need that expalained to you?

Brother Moon, Did you hear Caplis say Wood is on today on their show??? Be sure to tune in today and please give us a link.

Stan IS a tough crime fighter. He put away Scott Lee Kimball, who the current AG and FBI DISASTEROUSLY used as an informant. He brought in Ryan Brackley, a REAL prosecutor with experience in the Manhattan DA's office,

He's intelligent and interested in the Ramsey case, not scared by it, like especially Hunter was.

learnin wrote:

<quoted text>
Interesting. First I ever heard about possible indictments being handed down by the Grand Jury. Garnett did not confirm that there were, indeed, indictments, but, he didn't deny it either. I think we can say, without doubt, that Lacy's exoneration means nothing to the current DA's office and BPD.

Garnett doesn't seem to be up to speed about this Grand Jury indictment matter. It was discussed with Lin Wood at the Steve Thomas deposition in 2001:

24 Q. But what you did know and you had

25 actual knowledge of was that a grand jury had

203

1 met for some 13 months and had not issued an

2 indictment against John and Patsy Ramsey,

3 right?

4 A. I don't know that. Do you know

5 that?

6 Q. Sir, was an indictment issued? Do

7 you have information there was an indictment

8 of my clients that nobody has bothered

9 telling them or me about?

10 MR. HOFFMAN: Actually, Lin,

11 Patrick Burke has information that he should

12 have told you about which he announced to the

13 media that according to him the grand jury

14 actually took a straw poll. Why don't you

15 ask Patrick Burke.

16 MR. WOOD: Let me tell you,

17 Darnay, that won't count against my time.

18 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay.

19 MR. WOOD: But you're right, it

20 was a straw poll; it was a vote not to

21 indict. Thank you for bringing something to

22 my attention that I already knew.

23 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay.

24 Q.(BY MR. WOOD) Would you answer

25 my question, sir? It's pretty simple. You

204

1 know that no indictment was issued by the

2 grand jury, true?

3 A. I don't know what the grand jury

4 did.

5 Q. I'm not asking you what they did

6 in terms of whether they voted or not, sir.

7 MR. DIAMOND: I think he's asking

8 you --

9 Q.(BY MR. WOOD) I'm asking you

10 whether they issued an indictment to indict

11 John and/or Patsy Ramsey?

12 MR. DIAMOND:-- are you aware of

13 any public report of such an indictment.

14 A. No.

candy wrote:

Brother Moon, Did you hear Caplis say Wood is on today on their show??? Be sure to tune in today and please give us a link.
Stan IS a tough crime fighter. He put away Scott Lee Kimball, who the current AG and FBI DISASTEROUSLY used as an informant. He brought in Ryan Brackley, a REAL prosecutor with experience in the Manhattan DA's office,
He's intelligent and interested in the Ramsey case, not scared by it, like especially Hunter was.

I would agree with you...

BUT, anyone running for statewide office in Colorado has a huge problem being from Boulder...especially a prosecutor. I think Garnett is using this race to position himself for future plans for political office.

I'm holding out about how I feel about him. I've heard some pretty dark tales about him, that have little to do with the Ramsey case. We'll see.

And thank goodness he brought in Ryan Brackley because if he weren't prosecuting the Chase case it might well have been lost due to BPD screw ups.

Oh Henri, Stan Garnett as DA FOR SURE he knows if there were prepared indictments or not.

BrotherMoon wrote:

I wonder about his motivation. Is his public "action" on the case politically motivated?
Afterall, he is running for state AG. He gets free face and ear time with the appearance of a get tough crime fighter in an era of a conservative upswing.
Even if this is political, and the case will drop from the radar after the election, he did reveal that Mary Lacy's exoneration is irrelevant along with the DNA and he all but revealed there were indictments handed to Hunter who, like Lacy, acted with unsupportable and unprofessional personal bias.
I predict things will only get better for US (RDI and PDID) after the elections. The conservative mindset of identifying, persecuting and prosecuting Evil is 180 degrees opposite from Boulder's insular, arrogant, eletist mindset. The Strange Boulder Theosphical Culture is a target of the conservatives and the Ramsey case can be a vehicle for retribution. Some justice for JonBenet may come of this yet, even though it is secondary to political wrangling.

In a DA's office, I think politics is always entwined through the various activities which take place. But, the DA in Boulder, wanting to show a tough hand against crime, would only have to call for a task force to take a fresh look into the case. If the DNA is legit, and the DNA definitely points to an intruder, then, it would be a political gamble to stir this up and begin questioning a Ramsey, etc.

I don't believe Garnett is about to do what he has done (handing the case back to the BPD, and dissing Lacy's exoneration) unless there is very incriminating evidence against you know who.

learnin wrote:

<quoted text>
In a DA's office, I think politics is always entwined through the various activities which take place. But, the DA in Boulder, wanting to show a tough hand against crime, would only have to call for a task force to take a fresh look into the case. If the DNA is legit, and the DNA definitely points to an intruder, then, it would be a political gamble to stir this up and begin questioning a Ramsey, etc.
I don't believe Garnett is about to do what he has done (handing the case back to the BPD, and dissing Lacy's exoneration) unless there is very incriminating evidence against you know who.

I don't think they sent it back because they had incriminating evidence. Garnett wanted to build bridges and heal wounds with the BPD. AND it's not shocking that in this election he got the nod and endorsement of a statewide police group...

I do think with Trujillo in charge they will do everything they can to go after the Ramseys. But that darn DNA is standing in their path...

learnin wrote:

<quoted text>
In a DA's office, I think politics is always entwined through the various activities which take place. But, the DA in Boulder, wanting to show a tough hand against crime, would only have to call for a task force to take a fresh look into the case. If the DNA is legit, and the DNA definitely points to an intruder, then, it would be a political gamble to stir this up and begin questioning a Ramsey, etc.
I don't believe Garnett is about to do what he has done (handing the case back to the BPD, and dissing Lacy's exoneration) unless there is very incriminating evidence against you know who.

The DNA is not legit. Lacy and Bode could actually be prosecuted. Their out card is an oral report of personal opinion done without legal channels. Lacy is gone and the Bode rep resigns, end of story.

Garnett's actions most probably are not driven by new info or insights. Too bad. I think this is all about political heat.

candy wrote:

Brother Moon, Did you hear Caplis say Wood is on today on their show???

Yes, 630khow, 3pm mountain time, 5 pm eastern. Stream it everyone.