Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet? (51 page)

Dear Alex,

It is with great reluctance and regret that I submit this letter of resignation. Even though I want to continue to participate in the official investigation and assist in finding the killer of JonBenét, I find that I cannot in good conscience be a part of the persecution of innocent people. It would be highly improper and unethical for me to stay when I so strongly believe this.

It has been almost 19 months since we talked that day in your office and you asked me to assist you in this investigation. It has turned out to be more of a challenge than either of us anticipated. When we first met I told you that my style of approaching an investigation is from the concept of not working a particular theory, but working the case. Detectives collect and record information from many sources, analyze it, couple that with their experience and training and let “the case” tell them where to go. This process may take days, weeks, or years, depending on the direction the case tells you to go. Sometimes you must investigate “many paths” in order to find the killer. It is not a political speed contest where expediency should outweigh justice, where “resolving” the case is solving the case.

Alex, even though I have been unable to actively investigate, I have been in a position to collect, record and analyze every piece of information given to your office in the course of this investigation. I believe that I know this case better than anyone does. I know what has been investigated and what hasn’t, what evidence exists and what doesn’t, what information has been leaked and what hasn’t. I am a detective with a proven record of successful investigations. I have looked at the murder of JonBenét Ramsey through the eyes of age and experience and a thorough knowledge of the case.

At this point in the investigation, “the case” tells me that John and Patsy Ramsey did not kill their daughter, that a very dangerous killer is still out there and no one is actively looking for him. There are still many areas of investigation which must be explored before life and death decisions are made.

When I was hired I had no agenda one way or the other, my allegiance was to the case, not the Police Department nor John and Patsy Ramsey. My agenda has not changed. I only desire to be able to investigate the case and find the killer of JonBenét and will to do so as long as I am able. The chances of catching him working from the “outside looking in” are slim, but I have a great “Partner” who I’m sure will lead the way. There is no doubt that I will be facing a great deal of opposition and ridicule in the future, because I intend to stand with this family and somehow help them through this and find the killer of their daughter. Perhaps others who believe this will also help.

The Boulder Police Department has many fined and dedicated men and women who also want justice for JonBenét. They are just going in the wrong direction and have been since day one of the investigation. Instead of letting the case tell them where to go, they have elected to follow a theory and let their theory direct them rather that allowing the evidence to direct them. The case tells me there is substantial, credible, evidence of an intruder and lack of evidence that the parents are involved. If this is true, they too are tragic victims whose misery has been compounded by a misdirected and flawed investigation, unsubstantiated leaks, rumors and accusations.

I have worked in this profession for the past 32 years and have always been loyal to it, the men and women in it, and what it represents, because I believed that justice has always prevailed. In this case, however, I believe that justice is not being served, that innocent people are being targeted and could be charged with a murder they did not commit.

The law enforcement Code of Ethics states it very well. My fundamental duty is to “serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property; to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression and intimidation, the peaceful against violence and disorder. To respect the constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and justice.” This applies not only to JonBenét but to her mother and father as well.

I want to thank you and the others in the office for the wonderful support and treatment I have received. You have a great D.A.’s Office and the men and women who work with you are some of the most honest and dedicated people I have ever met. My life has been enriched because of this memorable time together. I have especially enjoyed working closely with Peter Hoffstrom and Trip Demuth, who also have dedicated so much of their lives to this case. I have never met two more fair, honest and dedicated defenders of our system.

Alex, you are in a difficult position. The media and peer pressure are incredible. You are inundated with conflicting facts and information, and “expert” opinions. And now you have an old detective telling you that the Ramseys did not do it and to wait and investigate this case more thoroughly before a very tragic mistake would be made. What a double travesty it could be; an innocent person indicted, and a vicious killer on the loose to prey on another innocent child and no one to stop him.

History will be the judge as to how we conducted ourselves and we how we handled our responsibilities.

Shoes, shoes, the victim’s shoes, who will stand in the victim’s shoes?

Good luck to you and your fine office and may God bless you in the awesome decisions you must soon make.

Sincerely,

Detective Lou Smit

September 28, 1998

January 25, 2007

Chief James Kolar

Telluride Police Department

P.O. Box 372

Telluride, CO 81435

Dear Chief Kolar:

I have reviewed your presentation on the JonBenet Ramsey Murder Investigation. It has also been reviewed by First Assistant District Attorney Peter Maguire, Assistant District Attorney Bill Nagel and Chief Investigator Tom Bennett. We have spent substantial time examining your Investigative Report, Summary Report and PowerPoint Presentation. We have independently arrived at the same conclusions.

I hired you as my Chief Investigator in July 2005. At that time, we discussed your role regarding the Ramsey case. I was clear in my direction to you that we would follow-up leads from law enforcement and other credible sources that had indicia of reliability. That decision was based upon recent history that involved Chief Investigator Bennett having to spend an inordinate amount of time responding to leads that were marginal at best. We made a deliberate decision to put our investigatory priorities on recent cases. You obviously disregarded my direction. You proceeded without my approval and without consulting with me. You were clearly acting outside of your defined role.

When you departed from the employment of the Boulder District Attorney’s Office in March of 2006, your role as an Investigator with this office terminated. The Ramsey case is still under my control. You have continued to proceed outside the limits of your jurisdiction. It appears that you have utilized confidential information that should legally have remained under the control of my office. This is quite concerning to me and to my management staff who placed their trust in your professionalism.

I am going to address your presentation although it galls me to respond to what I consider to be an abuse of authority. Chief Investigator Tom Bennett, First Assistant District Attorney Peter Maguire, Assistant Attorney Bill Nagel and myself are in agreement, reached independently, as to the value of your theory. We are in agreement that the first portion of your presentation is based on the Boulder Police Department’s Case Summary and facts that have been previously documented and debated. There is nothing new in terms of evidence in this presentation. The last quarter of your PowerPoint Presentation which is the final seventy plus frames are not based on facts supported by evidence. You theory is based upon conjecture, which at times approaches pure flights of fantasy. Your conclusions are based upon suppositions and inferences with absolutely no support in evidence or in the record. Your presentation lacks the fundamental substantive factual basis from which reasonable minds cannot differ.

I must repeat, there is no substantive basis to your theory. It is almost pure speculation as to what could have happened rather than evidence as to what did happen.

You requested in your communication of January 5
^th
that your presentation be shared with certain entities in Law Enforcement. It will not be shared with them. We will not be part of this mockery you are trying to market. We take our jobs and our role with regard to this case seriously. When and if we have a serious suspect based upon substantial evidence, we will work closely with all appropriate agencies. This is not that time.

I am requesting that you return forthwith any and all information you obtained while under the employment of the Boulder District Attorney’s Office as it applies to the Ramsey investigation. You were not granted permission to remove any such information from this office. This includes all reports, documents, photographs, CD’s or other materials and anything prepared using such documents.

Finally, I need to remind you that as of the date of your resignation from the Boulder District Attorney’s Office, you are no longer protected by any immunity from civil litigation based on your conduct as an investigator. I recommend that you discuss your unauthorized activities with the City of Telluride’s Risk Management Office to determine what if any liability you current employer might have as a result of your activities.

Mary T. Lacy

District Attorney

Twentieth Judicial District

cc: Attorney General John Suthers

Deputy Attorney General Jeanne Smith