Case Analysis.
Third Party Male Assailant (Murderer)
Father: John Ramsey & Mother: Patsy Ramsey (Accessories To Murder).
Motive: Insurance Money For Business.
John Ramsey, the father of the decedent, had tampered with evidence by removing the decedent's body after he had discovered her dead. (I). By removing the body from the basement, he violated the crime scene through tampering, which is against the law. There was no sign of forced entry into the house by an intruder. According to the DNA, the Ramseys did not commit the murder, but, I believe that it is someone that they both knew, example, a hired killer because, the murder took place shortly after he received a work bonus of $118, 000.00.There was no mention of what happened to all of the money. John Ramsey needed money to also help his growing computer business in which any life insurance would have come in good use. …show more content…
There was no investigation of any police officers who had a past history of accepting bribes. People only botch evidence just to cover up guilt. (III). The Boulder Police work was sloppy because there was no evidence of forced entry or break in, including the fake ransom note, the Ramseys should have been taken into custody as main suspects. (IV). District Attorney Mary T. Lacy was too quick to dismiss the Ramseys as suspects, which is not logically based on the evidence.(V). I feel that there should have been an investigation of any social clubs that both Mary T. Lacy and the Ramseys could have been affiliated with because, without evidence of innocence, Mary T. Lacy was too quick in declaring Ramsey’s innocence regardless of the evidence. (Saferstein, 2015). (VI).I believed that the Boulder police department was a part of the cover up or on the take because, the police failed to investigate what Patsy was trying to cover up based on the botched ransom note, which should automatically make her an
Third Party Male Assailant (Murderer)
Father: John Ramsey & Mother: Patsy Ramsey (Accessories To Murder).
Motive: Insurance Money For Business.
John Ramsey, the father of the decedent, had tampered with evidence by removing the decedent's body after he had discovered her dead. (I). By removing the body from the basement, he violated the crime scene through tampering, which is against the law. There was no sign of forced entry into the house by an intruder. According to the DNA, the Ramseys did not commit the murder, but, I believe that it is someone that they both knew, example, a hired killer because, the murder took place shortly after he received a work bonus of $118, 000.00.There was no mention of what happened to all of the money. John Ramsey needed money to also help his growing computer business in which any life insurance would have come in good use. …show more content…
There was no investigation of any police officers who had a past history of accepting bribes. People only botch evidence just to cover up guilt. (III). The Boulder Police work was sloppy because there was no evidence of forced entry or break in, including the fake ransom note, the Ramseys should have been taken into custody as main suspects. (IV). District Attorney Mary T. Lacy was too quick to dismiss the Ramseys as suspects, which is not logically based on the evidence.(V). I feel that there should have been an investigation of any social clubs that both Mary T. Lacy and the Ramseys could have been affiliated with because, without evidence of innocence, Mary T. Lacy was too quick in declaring Ramsey’s innocence regardless of the evidence. (Saferstein, 2015). (VI).I believed that the Boulder police department was a part of the cover up or on the take because, the police failed to investigate what Patsy was trying to cover up based on the botched ransom note, which should automatically make her an