[ACandyRose Logo] A Personal view of the Internet Subculture
Surrounding the JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

This web page is part of a series covering found materials regarding individuals, items or events that apparently became part of what is commonly known as the vortex of the JonBenet Ramsey murder case Christmas night 1996. The webmaster of this site claims no inside official Boulder police information as to who has been interviewed, investigated, the outcome or what information is actually considered official evidence. These pages outline found material which can include but not limited to materials found in books, articles, the Internet, transcripts, depositions, legal documents, Internet discussion forums, graphics or photos, media reports, TV/Radio shows about the JonBenet Ramsey murder case. Found materials are here for historical archive purposes. (www.acandyrose.com - acandyrose@aol.com)
This webpage series is for historical archive and educational purposes on found materials

John and Patsy Ramsey
The Polygraph Issue

Steve Thomas (April 30, 1997) to John Ramsey:
"And I’ll ask you point blank, at some point in this, would you take a polygraph?"


01. 1997-04-30: John Ramsey Police Interrogation, Boulder Colorado (Polygraph issue)
02. 1997-04-30: Patsy Ramsey Police Interrogation, Boulder Colorado (Polygraph issue)
03. 1997-09-10: ABC Primetime Live - The Mystery of JonBenet Ramsey (Mike Bynum re: Polygraph)

04. 1999-02-18: Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, JonBenet and the City of Boulder Book released

05. 2000-03-17: John and Patsy Ramsey on Barbara Walters Show (Polygraph question)
06. 2000-03-21: John and Patsy Ramsey on the Today Show (Part 2) (Polygraph question)
07. 2000-03-23: On Denver Channel 9 Interview, John Ramsey identified conditions for polygraph
08. 2000-03-27: John and Patsy Ramsey guests on LKL Live Show (Polygraph question)
09. 2000-04-10: BPR#73: BPD met with DA's office, FBI to explore polygraph options with Ramseys
10. 2000-04-10: BPR#73: BPD will not comment on Steve Thomas' recent released book
11. 2000-04-11: JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation Book released by Steve Thomas
12. 2000-04-11: BPR#74: BPD accepts Ramsey polygraph conditions, arrangements are being made
13. 2000-04-11: Mark Beckner FAX to John and Patsy Ramsey c/o Lin Wood Office

14. 2000-04-17: Gerald Toriello conducted polygraph tests on John Ramsey in Atlanta (Inconclusive results)
15. 2000-04-18: Gerald Toriello conducted polygraph tests on Patsy Ramsey in Atlanta (Inconclusive results)
16. 2000-04-25: BPR#75: No Polygraph exams scheduled for John and Patsy Ramsey #75
17. 2000-04-28: Ramseys on BOP: Can't answer if previously polygraphed as it's lawyer-client privilege

00. 2000-05-05: Steve Thomas on APBnews.com message board Internet chat (Polygraph question)
18. 2000-05-06: Dr. Ed Gelb conducted Ramsey polygraph between May 6th and May 17th 2000.
19. 2000-05-06: Dr. Ed Gelb conducted Ramsey polygraph in Atlanta and Las Angeles, California
20. 2000-05-06: Gelb Equipment: Axiton (ph) computerized polygraph calibrated to factory specifications
21. 2000-05-06: Gelb Technique: a zone comparison technique was utilized for all of the examinations
22. 2000-05-06: Dr. Ed Gelb final conclusion: John Ramsey passed polygraph examination
23. 2000-05-06: Dr. Ed Gelb final conclusion: Patsy Ramsey passed polygraph examination
24. 2000-05-24: Greta Van Susteren, CNN: Ramsey Lie Detector Tests Press Conference
25. 2000-05-24: Gerald Toriello was unable to attend Ramsey polygraph press conference
26. 2000-05-24: Lin Wood said Gerald Toriello was scheduled for minor surgury, unable to travel
27. 2000-05-24: Dr. Ed Gelb of California attended/spoke Ramsey polygraph press conference
28. 2000-05-24: Cleve Baxter agreed to do to quality control of Dr. Ed Gelb's test.

29. 2000-05-24: BPR#77: Mark Beckner says BPD will add Ramsey polygraph data to their files
30. 2000-05-25: Steve Thomas (CNN: Burden Of Proof) says he did ask Ramsey to take polygraph in '97
31. 2000-05-26: Steve Thomas online interview w/CNN Legal Analyst Greta Van Susteren
32. 2000-05-26: Ed Gelb on LKL: If clients fail polygraph it would be attorney-client privilege, not made public.
33. 2000-05-27: NEWS Daily Camera: Tester: Polygraph results unexplained
34. 2000-05-30: Geraldo Rivera Live (Edward Gelb, Daniel Petrocelli, Dori Ann Hanswirth)
35. 2000-05-31: Larry King Live (Steve Thomas vs John and Patsy Ramsey guests)
36. 2000-06-08: Cybersleuths Forum transcript by "Puma" on Peter Boyles show (Gene Parker guest)
37. 2000-06-08: Gene Parker on Peter Boyles said he was approached re: Ramsey polygraph testing

38. 2001-09-21: Steve Thomas Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia) Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Action (Polygraph issue)
39. 2002-11-19: Cutter's webpage: Gelb's resume states he received doctorate degree at LaSalle University in LA
40. 2001-11-19: Cutter's webpage: LaSalle University in Louisiana is a mail-order diploma mill
41. 2001-11-19: Cutter's webpage: LaSalle University in Louisiana was investigated and raided by the FBI
42. 2001-11-19: Cutter's webpage: Thomas Kirk, LaSalle's owner guilty of fraud, got 5 years in federal prison
43. 2001-11-19: ACRII Forum: "Ed Gelb and his space aliens? Cleve Backster and his crying house plants?"
44. 2001-11-19: ACRII Forum: Link to Gelb Polygraph Research: http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/polygraph/
45. 2001-11-19: ACRII Forum: "Sabreenakatz" posts link to Phoot of Cleve Backsters Office Door
46. 2001-11-19: ACRII Forum: "Sabreenakatz" posts Gene Parker was asked in 1997 to polygraph the Ramseys
47. 2001-11-26: Mark Beckner Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia) Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Action (Polygraph issue)
48. 2001-11-26: Mark Beckner Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia): "Internally John and Patsy are considered suspects"

49. 2003-01-21: Jameson's Webbsleuths posts "letters concerning the polygraph"
50. 2003-02-03: Jameson's Webbsleuths posts "Polygraph information"
51. 2003-07-05: Puragory II: "Sabreenakatz" posts forum discussion "Gelb has a fake PHD?"
52. 2003-07-05: Puragory II: Cutter's link: http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/polygraph/index.html
53. 2003-07-05: Puragory II: "Jayelles" posts link to Ed Gelb's resume from Webbsleuths
54. 2003-07-05: Puragory II: "Sabreenakatz" posts snip transcript "Lin Wood said on LKL"
55. 2003-00-00: Edward I. Gelb Resume transcribed by ACR from graphic posted at www.webbsleuths.com

56. 2006-08-16: Anderson Cooper 360 Degree Show - Guest: Ed Gelb on Arrest of John Mark Karr
57. 2006-08-29: Mary Lacy: "No-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction"


1997-04-30: John and Patsy Ramsey Police Interrogation, Boulder Colorado
During the April 30, 1997 meeting, Boulder Detective, Steve Thomas asked both John and Patsy Ramsey in separate interviews if the police were to ask them to take a polygraph, would they do it? John Ramsey said he was be insulted and Patsy Ramsey said she would take ten of them.

John Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo. Also present, Pat Burke, Bryan Morgan, Pete Hoffstrom, Jon Foster April 30, 1997 - Boulder, Colorado

STEVE THOMAS: "John, one of the things, as you know better than anybody, at some point, if you’re not involved in this, we’ve got to take you out of the bucket. And you’ve been in it for four months and you certainly know why you’re in that bucket is you’re in the house, and I don’t need to say anything more than that. But, and I ask this question of Patsy, and where it might come out if (inaudible), but I’ll ask it. And I’m not asking you to take one, but if you were to take a polygraph, how would you do?"

JOHN RAMSEY: "Well, what I’ve been told is that, and I felt tremendous guilt after we lost JonBenet, because hadn’t protected her, like I failed as a parent. And was told that that’s, with that kind of emotion you shouldn’t take a lie detector test because you did have that guilt feeling, and, but, so I don’t know about the test, but I did not kill my daughter if that’s what you want to ask me. She was the most precious thing to me in the world. So if the lie detector test is correct and it was done correct, I’d pass it 100%."

STEVE THOMAS: "John, let me tell you this, I feel like an encyclopedia salesman sometimes, because I‘ve gone to a number of people in this thing, and it’s hard to convince somebody to take a polygraph test. But I’ve been successful on occasion with some people that I’ve been concerned about, and used what I’ve been told, is one of the ten best FBI calligraphers to do that. And I’ll ask you point blank, at some point in this, would you take a polygraph?"

JOHN RAMSEY: "I would be insulted if you ask me to take a polygraph test, frankly. I mean if you haven’t talked to enough people whose telling you what kind of people we are. You guys, I mean, I will do whatever these guys recommend me to do. We are not the kind of people you’re trying to make us out to be."

Patsy Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo. Also present, Pat Burke, Bryan Morgan, Pete Hoffstrom, Jon Foster April 30, 1997 - Boulder, Colorado

STEVE THOMAS: "Patsy, if we each that point that we’re able to move past you."

PATSY RAMSEY: "What does it take to move past me?"

STEVE THOMAS: "Well, let me ask you this, and I know Pat Burke’s going to jump all over me. And I know, well, let me ask you his way. I’m not asking you to take one, but hypothetically, if you took a polygraph, how would you do?"

PATSY RAMSEY: "I’m telling you the truth. I would, I mean I don’t know how those things work, but if they tell the truth, I ‘m telling the truth. I’ve never ever given anybody a reason to think otherwise. I want to find out who did this, period."

STEVE THOMAS: "Does that mean, yes, you’d pass it?"

PATSY RAMSEY: "Yes, I would pass it. I’ll take ten of them, I don’t care, you know. Do whatever you want."

STEVE THOMAS: "Patsy, let me make this clear to you. As much as you feel, and certainly from the media."

PATSY RAMSEY: "I don’t care what the media says. I do not give one diddly squat what the media says. Sorry, I didn’t mean to interrupt you. I just want to find out who did this."


Transcript # 97091003-j08 T


DIANE SAWYER: Polygraphs -- have they taken a lie detector?
MICHAEL BYNUM: Not to my knowledge.
DIANE SAWYER: Should they? Will they?
MICHAEL BYNUM: Not if I ever have anything to say about it.

MICHAEL BYNUM: Oh, that's -- that's ouija board science, number one. And I will also tell you, to my knowledge, that request has not been made of John and Patsy.



[Perfect Murder, Perfect Town]1999-02-18: “Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, JonBenet and the City of Boulder”
Written by Lawrence Schiller, February 18, 1999

PMPT Page 381

"Patsy was asked about the ransom note. How did she feel about the fact that some handwriting experts believed she wrote it? She didn't know that to be the case, she said. What about the fact that her pen was used to write it? She replied: "It was?" Thomas asked why the handwriting looked like hers. "It looks that way because it may have been written by a woman," she answered.

"I did the best I could. I just put her to bed," Patsy said in answer to one question. "I just don't know that," she would say again and again.

There were several breaks before lunch, during which Hofstrom allowed Patsy and her attorneys to use his office. Thomas worried that they were telling John Ramsey what his wife was being asked, to make sure that his story would not be at odds with hers.

After the first break, she was asked if she would take a polygraph. "I'll take ten of them," Patsy replied. Later, when the detectives requested that a test be administered to her, Patsy's

PMPT Page 382

attorney and Pete Hofstrom were unable to agree on the terms."

PMPT Page 384

"The detectives asked Ramsey why, just minutes after finding JonBenet's body, he had called his pilot to have his private plane take him and his family out of state that after- noon. Ramsey said that he had wanted to get back to Atlanta-where he and his family would be safe. Reminded that he had made the phone call within twenty minutes of finding his daughter's body, Ramsey repeated that he had felt his family would be safer in Georgia.

Finally, he was asked what he thought of polygraph tests. He said, "If they are accurate, I'm for them."

"What if I asked you to take one?" Thomas said.

"I have never been so insulted in my life as by that question," Ramsey said angrily.

"Will you take one?" the detective asked.

"No," was Ramsey's answer."


[ABC News 20/20]2000-03-17: John and Patsy Ramsey on Barbara Walters ABC News 20/20


BARBARA: (V/O) But it would, in fact, be four months before the Ramseys would sit down with detectives for formal interrogation. There was a mutual distrust between the Boulder Police Department and the Ramsey family.

BARBARA WALTERS: Why didn't you take a lie detector test?

PATSY RAMSEY: No one ever asked us…


PATSY RAMSEY: … to take a lie detector test.

BARBARA WALTERS: Police never asked you to take a lie detector test?



JOHN RAMSEY: I was asked, during my interview with Steve Thomas, a hypothetical question—

BARBARA WALTERS: One of the policemen.

JOHN RAMSEY: One of the policemen that investigated this murder. He said, if I were to ask you to take a lie-detector test, what would you say. And I said I would be offended. That's what I would say. I wasn't interested in proving my innocence at that point. That...that [OVERLAP] was… a non-issue.

PATSY RAMSEY: We were frightened… there was a murderer loose.

BARBARA WALTERS: Mr. Ramsey, would you now take a lie-detector test—

JOHN RAMSEY: I would, certainly.

BARBARA WALTERS: Would you, Mrs. Ramsey?

PATSY RAMSEY: Yes, I would take a lie-detector test.


[http://today.msnbc.com/]2000-03-21: John and Patsy Ramsey on the Today Show (Part 2)


COURIC: Did you all take a lie detector test?

Mr. RAMSEY: We were never asked to take a lie detector test. That's another...

COURIC: Why not volunteer to take one?

Mr. RAMSEY: It didn't occur to me, first of all. That wasn't our motive.

Ms. RAMSEY: I understand that lie detector tests are not admissible in court anyway. It's kind of a voodoo science.

Mr. RAMSEY: I would, if I was asked, certainly I would. But the fact is, I was never asked.

COURIC: And you never volunteered?

Mr. RAMSEY: I never volunteered. It never crossed my mind. I was not interested in proving my innocence. I was interested in finding the killer of my daughter


[John Ramsey LKL March 27, 2000]2000-03-27: John and Patsy Ramsey guests on LKL Live Show

LARRY KING: First on, something directly current, and then we'll get into a little history. You had said recently in an interview that you were willing to take a lie detector test, and apparently the Boulder police are now saying let's set it up. Will you do it?

JOHN RAMSEY, FATHER OF JONBENET RAMSEY: We have -- we were asked, "Had we been asked to take a lie detector test?" We said no. We were asked, "Would we?" We said certainly we would. We would expect it to be fair, and we would expect the results to be public.


KING: And as you said earlier, you would make your lie detector public.

J. RAMSEY: We would insist that it be made public. If we're going to do it, let's make it public.

P. RAMSEY: Make everything public. You know, I said, you want to see an interview? Publish the interview that I had with Tom Haney. Let's talk about...

2000-04-10: Boulder Police Chief responds to Ramsey-related media questions. #73

News Release
April 10, 2000
Contact: Jana Petersen, Media Relations, (303) 441-3090
City's Home Page www.ci.boulder.co.us

Boulder Police Chief responds to Ramsey-related media questions. #73

In response to inquiries from the media about the status of the Ramsey investigation, Chief MarkBeckner has issued the following statements.

Related to whether the Ramseys will be asked to take a polygraph examination:

"Boulder Police investigators did meet today with members of the DA's office and agents from the FBI to further explore the issue of whether to offer a polygraph examination to John and Patsy Ramsey. The process is ongoing and we will not disclose the content of the discussion or make any further statement at this time."

Related to Steve Thomas' book:

"We are not releasing information on strategies or tactics used on our investigation."

"I have not read the book, therefore I am unable to comment on its contents."

Chief Beckner also has made the following statement on the book in recent days:

"Although I have not seen a copy of Steve Thomas' book, it's my understanding that he is highly critical of me for not being more aggressive in investigating the Ramsey parents. This stands in sharp contrast to past assertions made by the Ramsey attorneys and the Ramseys themselves in recent weeks, and a former investigator with the DA's office, who accused the Boulder Police of being too aggressive. Perhaps that contrast in opinion illustrates the fairness and objectivity with which we have approached this investigation."

Chief Beckner will have no further response at this time.


2000-04-11: Statement from Police Chief Mark Beckner regarding polygraph tests in the Ramsey case

News Release
April 11, 2000
Contact: Jana Petersen, Media Relations, (303) 441-3090
City's Home Page www.ci.boulder.co.us

Statement from Police Chief Mark Beckner regarding polygraph tests in the Ramsey case:

(Ramsey Update #74)

"In recent weeks, John and Patsy Ramsey have publicly offered their willingness to take a polygraph examination. The Boulder Police Department, after consultation and agreement with the Boulder County DA's office and the FBI, has decided to accept the Ramsey's offer. D.A. Alex Hunter now agrees that the polygraph exam would be a worthwhile tool for the investigation.

Arrangements have been made to conduct an exam in accordance with the conditions identified by John Ramsey in late March, 2000. We have notified the Ramsey's through their attorneys and await a reply to schedule a date for the exam."

No further comment will be made at this time.


[JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation]2000-04-11: “JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation”
by Steve Thomas and Don Davis, April 11, 2000

ST Page 128

"While we were in disarray, Team Ramsey was running like the proverbial well-oiled machine, and they were kicking our butts. John Ramsey had gotten his money's worth. His people were absolutely relentless, and no matter what they were given, they always asked for more. Pat Korten, Ramsey's PR man, peddled the spin that the Ramseys had never been asked to take a polygraph and were in daily contact with the "authorities." Those "authorities" to whom he referred did not mean the police.

The Ramseys had not been asked to take a polygraph because Hofstrom never made the request. He and DeMuth said they "didn't believe in" lie detector tests."

ST Page 134

"To me, it seemed that their priorities were seriously out of order. One morning I listened to the radio as the father of another murdered girl called for the Ramseys to take lie detector tests. Marc Klass, the father of Polly Klass, had a special perspective on our case since he had gone through a similar hell when his daughter was slain and he was considered a suspect. Despite negative publicity, the man had almost lived at the police station during his ordeal, baring his soul to detectives, helping in any possible way. He urged the Ramseys to do as he had done and ask to be polygraphed so that police would not have to waste any more time investigating them. That was the sort of response I had always expected but never got from John and Patsy Ramsey, their relatives, and their defenders."

ST Page 174

"As we neared the end of the interview, Ramsey said, "I've seen a lot of effort and time and money being spent trying to categorize Patsy and I as child abusers, and that couldn't be further from the truth."

I told him a lot of effort had been made to make the crime look like something it wasn't. "One theory is that something happened in that house that may have been accidental, that turned to panic, that turned to cover-up."

"That's a false theory," he almost snarled. "Anyone who knows Patsy and I can tell you that is total bullshit."

"John," I asked, "are you involved in any way in the death of your daughter?"


"John, are you involved in any way in the preparation of that note?"

"No. . . I will spend every dime I have, every minute of time I have, if that's what it takes to find who killed her."

Before concluding each interview, I asked if they would take lie detector tests, and the responses were decisive and totally opposite.

Patsy became the forthright, wrongly blamed victim and snapped, "I don't know how those work, but if they tell the truth, I'm telling the truth. I've never given anybody a reason to think otherwise."

Does that mean yes, you'd pass it?

"Yes, I would pass it. . . . I'll take ten of them. Do whatever you want."

Now a detective never refuses a suspect who offers to take a polygraph, and we had been using an FBI polygrapher on other suspects.

He should have been set up and waiting in the next room for just such an eventuality. But Pete Hofstrom, who didn't believe in lie detector tests, had told me that if we asked, the Ramseys would 'just say no." But Patsy Ramsey had just said yes. It was a golden opportunity, and we weren't allowed to capitalize on it.

John Ramsey appeared ready for the question. "What I've been told is that I felt tremendous guilt after we lost JonBenet because I hadn't protected her. You know, I'd failed as a parent. I was told that with that kind of an emotion, you shouldn't take a lie detector test because you do have that guilt feeling. So I don't know anything about the test, but

ST Page 175

I did not kill my daughter, if that's what you want to ask me. She was the most precious thing to me in the world. So if the lie detector test is correct and it's done correctly, I would pass it one hundred percent."

I told him that others had already been polygraphed and then asked point-blank if he would take one. He grew angry, a remarkable attitude change in just one question. "I would be insulted if you asked me to take a polygraph test. Frankly, I mean if you haven't talked to enough people to tell you what kind of people we are . . . I will do whatever these guys [indicating his attorneys] recommend me to do, but we are not the kind of people you're trying to make us out to be. It's a tragic misdirection I think that you're on, and the sooner we get off of that, the sooner we'll find who killed JonBenet."

In later months, Team Ramsey would insist that the Ramseys had never been asked to take a polygraph. I had asked both of them, and neither ever did."

ST Page 218

"The FBI also wondered, since the police had not been offensive or confrontational in December 1996, why had the parents lawyered up so fast? Hofstrom answered that the attorneys only came aboard after "a police supervisor" had tried to "ransom the body" to get an interview. That was false, since Mike Bynum was giving advice and more lawyers and private investigators were being brought aboard long before the body became an issue.

An agent wanted to know why Patsy, who had volunteered to take ten polygraphs, had not been given the opportunity to do so. No one had an answer.

Did "anyone look good on the handwriting?" Detective Gosage said that of the dozens of people examined so far, Patsy Ramsey could not be eliminated as the author of the note. Deputy DA Hofstrom said handwriting analysis was an art, not a science, and had the gall to de- scribe to disbelieving agents how "John and Patsy" had been invited into his own home to give a handwriting example. They just stared at him."

ST Page 314

"And John Ramsey's pledge to Alex Hunter of "unlimited and unconditional cooperation" collapsed into a flurry of bargaining between the DA's office and Team Ramsey attorneys. Smit would later tell me that Hofstrom was negotiating about whether the Ramseys could even be asked "the polygraph question." They weren't."

2000-04-25: No Polygraph exams scheduled for John and Patsy Ramsey #75

News Release
April 25, 2000
Contact: Jana Petersen, Media Relations, (303) 441-3090
City's Home Page www.ci.boulder.co.us

No Polygraph exams scheduled for John and Patsy Ramsey #75

After several discussions with Boulder Police, an attorney for John and Patsy Ramsey today informed police Chief Mark Beckner that the Ramseys will not take polygraph examinations.

On April 11, the Boulder Police Department accepted John and Patsy Ramsey's public offer to take polygraph exams regarding the death of their daughter, JonBenet. The department agreed to the conditions as set forth by John Ramsey in a March 23 television interview as follows:

The exam be conducted by an examiner independent from the Boulder Police Department
The exam be conducted in Atlanta
The results of the exam be made public.

Boulder Police arranged to have FBI specialists conduct the examination in Atlanta. After consulting with others in law enforcement, Boulder Police selected the FBI polygraphers specifically for their international reputation in criminal polygraphs and their independence from the Boulder Police Department. Other factors that weighed heavily in selecting the FBI were the specialist training received by FBI examiners, the quality control implemented in their examinations and supervisory oversight that is provided for every exam.

During subsequent discussions, Ramsey attorney Lin Wood told Boulder Police that the Ramseys were reluctant to take an exam administered by the FBI, as they believed involvement of the FBI and the FBI laboratories in the JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation prevented them from being "independent" examiners.

As a compromise to the Ramseys' concerns, the FBI agreed to assign an examiner who had no prior knowledge or involvement in the Ramsey case, and the Boulder Police Department agreed not to be involved in selecting the specific FBI examiners

This did not satisfy Ramsey concerns with the FBI involvement, and the Boulder Police Department is not willing to further compromise on this issue, so there will be no polygraph exams at this time.

"Obviously, we're disappointed that the Ramseys have declined to take the polygraph exams, after very publicly saying they would," Beckner said. "However, our offer still stands, should the Ramseys decide to change their position."


2000-04-28: CNN Burden Of Proof - John and Patsy Ramsey Discuss 'The Death of Innocence'


COSSACK: Patsy, let me ask you a question. When I was a lawyer and before I would let my clients take a lie detector test, I used to made sure that they could pass their lie detector tests. I know you have very excellent lawyers, I know some of your lawyers. Have you privately taken a lie detector test? either of you? or both of you? and have you passed it already?

J. RAMSEY: You were asked the question, go ahead.

P. RAMSEY: I think that is kind of an inappropriate question, if you're so up on -- i think that's lawyer-client privilege and I don't wish to ruin that but...


VAN SUSTEREN: Let me ask the question -- and don't mean to invade the attorney-client privilege, but this whole -- I mean, frankly, I'm with Roger and I don't care how innocent my clients are, I never want them to take polygraph tests because people can fail them who are innocent. So it's always a problem. But given that, have you -- you know, have you actually done -- have you been polygraphed on this particular issue -- either one of you at this point?

J. RAMSEY: We can't answer that, Greta. That's, I believe, is an attorney-client privilege. What we have said is we will take a fair and independent polygraph test.


[Old APBnews.com message board 2000]2000-05-05: APBnews.com message board Internet chat with former Boulder Detective Steve Thomas from 5/5/2000 to 5/15/2000

APBnews.com message board - May 05, 2000
Thread: "Initial Comments from Steve Thomas"

SteveThomas (May. 09, 2000 04:43 PM)
MissyToddler (read)

Dear MissyToddler,

Thakns for the good questions --

"Regarding the polygraphs: the time to have pushed for polygrpahs was in the days following Dec 26, 1996. Three and a half years later makes the results questionable at best, I beleieve. But as I have said, cops never refuse a suspect willing to take a poly, because even now it can be a useful tool to elicit further comments and dialogue from a suspect, even it the test results are inconclusive. But in what I feel has been the Ramseys most remarkable public faux paus to date, they said they were never asked to polygraph (wrong!), then declared to the world they would take one. So when the police department agreed to all their stipulations, I found it interesting they rescinded their offer."

[John and Patsy Ramsey]2000-05-24: Experts Say Ramseys Passed Lie Detector Tests

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, CNN ANCHOR: We now go to Atlanta, Georgia where Ramsey attorney Lynn Wood is holding a press conference

LIN WOOD, RAMSEY ATTORNEY: "On April the 11th of this year, I learned from several phone calls from the media that the Boulder Police Department had apparently issued a press release, that Chief Mark Beckner had issued a press statement saying that he was going to accept the Ramseys' offer and wanted them to appear by a date certain to submit themselves to an FBI polygraph examination.

I actually thought when I received the letter -- despite the fact that it was publicized before I got it, I actually thought that perhaps Chief Beckner would, with some discussions and negotiations, actually be willing to allow John and Patsy Ramsey to take a truly fair and independent polygraph examination. And I did at that time what had not been done before, but what I believe any good attorney would do, and I then arranged for John and Patsy to be privately tested.

And I retained the services of an individual who was represented to me to be competent, qualified and fair: a gentleman by the name of Jerry Toriello, T-O-R-I-E-L-L-O, of Clifton, New Jersey. Jerry Toriello is not able to be here today. He had a minor surgical procedure on Friday and is not able to travel until the end of this week. Otherwise, Jerry Toriello would have been here.

Consistent with their honesty and their candor, I will tell you that John and Patsy Ramsey, when tested by Jerry Toriello, ran what is referred to in the field as inconclusive charts, inconclusive examinations. Jerry Toriello recommended that John and Patsy be retested. But in making his recommendation, he made it clear to me that the appropriate protocol to be followed would be for someone else to perform the retest. He told me, if you want to go to the best in the country for a retest, you go to Dr. Edward I. Gelb in Los Angeles.

I check out Dr. Gelb. Dr. Gelb's reputation was as represented by Jerry Toriello. He was, from everyone that I spoke with, considered to be the foremost polygraph examiner in the country: over 30,000 polygraph examinations conducted, former president of the American Polygraph Association, performs polygraph examinations on a regular basis for five law enforcement agencies in California, a man that was represented to me as one that could not be bought, that could not be fooled, a man of integrity, a man of ethics, one of the, if not the most qualified polygraphic examiners in the United States.

I discussed Dr. Gelb with John and Patsy Ramsey, and said this, apparently, is the person that we should try to get to do the re-test, and John and Patsy said no, that if Dr. Gelb was as represented, if he was the best, and if he was fair, that they wanted me to go directly to Chief Mark Beckner and offer to take the test from Dr. Gelb. I did that having never spoken to Edward Gelb.

I called Mark Beckner, and I said: John and Patsy Ramsey will take the test from Ed Gelb of Los Angeles, California. We made the offer fully aware of the fact that the test results from Dr. Gelb would be made public and, as part of the process Dr. Gelb would be fully aware of, and it would also be public that John and Patsy had run inconclusive tests from Jerry Toriello.

Within a matter of a few short hours, Mark Beckner called me back and rejected the offer of Dr. Gelb without explanation. For the first time, I then called Dr. Gelb, told him what I had done, in offering his name, asked for his permission to use his name if I was asked who I has offered, and asked him if he would consider doing a private retest. He told me he did not want to discuss a private retest, that he would prefer to wait a period of time to see if Chief Beckner might learn of his reputation and standing and perhaps reconsider and ask him to do to test.

I waited approximately one week. With each passing day, it became more clear that Mark Beckner was not going to reconsider. I called Dr. Gelb and asked if, in fact, he would be retained by me to perform the polygraph examinations. I also upon, his agreement, retained Cleve Baxter from San Diego, California. I had been told that if you want the best quality control review of a polygraph examination in the United States call Cleve Baxter. Cleve Baxter is the originator of the Baxter Zone Comparison Technique, and the originator of the numerical scoring system for polygraph examinations, both of which are now standard protocol in the field of polygraphy. This is the gentleman thought to be, literally, the father of the modern polygraph testing techniques, Cleve Baxter. He agreed to do to quality control of Dr. Gelb's test.

John and Patsy Ramsey made a commitment to the public. They made a public commitment to take a fair and independent polygraph examination and to make the results public. They had hoped and we tried to get the Boulder Police Department to participate in a truly fair and independent examination.

We offered for the examination to be conducted by a non-FBI examiner with FBI oversight of the entire process. That offer was rejected. We offered to have the FBI polygraph group come up with a list of non-FBI polygraph examiners that they felt were reliable, qualified, and trustworthy, and we would pick one of those examiners, and we would take the test, and that offer was rejected.

My belief has been from very early on in this process that Boulder Police Department never intended to allow John and Patsy Ramsey to take a truly fair and independent polygraph examination in which they would participate. And my belief was confirmed May 16, when Mark Beckner rejected the offer of the American Polygraph Association to provide an examiner and a test that would be fair to both sides."


ED GELB, POLYGRAPH EXPERT: Thank you, Lin. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.

I think, in the interest of time, my reading to you the result report of the polygraph examinations may be the most succinct way to provide you with the information that I gleaned from all of the examinations that I conducted with the Ramseys. So I think that I will actually read the report to you. We'll have time for questions and answers, but I think this will give you a basic understanding of the process.

This is a report that was directed to L. Lin Wood, the attorney in this matter. "Psychophysiological detection of deception examinations of John and Patsy Ramsey. This is summary report covering a series of examinations of John and Patsy Ramsey, conducted between May 6 and May 17 of the year 2000. The examinations were conducted in Atlanta, Georgia and Los Angeles, California. The issues under consideration dealt with the allegation that the Ramseys were involved in the murder of their daughter, JonBenet, who was found dead in the Ramsey home in Boulder, Colorado, December 26, 1996. Case information was provided by attorney L. Lin Wood and, through numerous reports of the murder in print.

"During extensive pre-test interviews, both John and Patsy Ramsey denied involvement in JonBenet's murder. These examinations were requested by the Ramseys who agreed that the results of the examinations could be given to the authorities prior to their knowing the outcome themselves.

"The equipment utilized, an axiton (ph) computerized polygraph calibrated to factory specifications were used for the five series of examinations.

"Technique, a zone comparison technique was utilized for all of the examinations with three polygrams being collected for each of the five series conducted. The zone comparison technique has been validated in numerous studies conducted for United States governmental agencies. The resultant polygrams were numerically scored on a 7- position scale by the primary examiner Edward I. Gelb, Ph.D, and then subjected to quality control and blind scoring by Cleve Baxter, the originator of the numerical scoring system.

"John Ramseys examinations: Two series of single-issue examinations were conducted with John Ramsey. In a single issue examination all of the relevant questions are necessarily included in one and are designed to mean the same thing; hence, it is a single- issue examinations.

"The first examination was conducted to determine if he had direct involvement in the murder. In other words, whether John inflicted the injuries that caused the death of JonBenet.

"The second examination was conducted to determine whether John knew who killed JonBenet.

"The questions asked during the two single-issue examinations follow with John Ramsey's answers.

"Series one, John Ramsey. Question 1: Did you inflict any of the injuries that caused the death of JonBenet. Answer: no.

"2. Regarding JonBenet, did you inflict any of the injuries that caused her death. Answer: No.

"3. Were those injuries that resulted in JonBenet's death inflicted by you? Answer: No.

"Conclusion: Based on the numerical scoring of the examination in this series, John Ramsey was telling the truth when he denied inflicting the injuries that caused the death of his daughter, JonBenet. "Series 2, John Ramsey, Question 1. Do you know for sure who killed JonBenet? Answer: No.

"Regarding JonBenet, do you know for sure who killed her? Answer: No.

"Are you concealing the identity of the person who killed JonBenet? Answer: No.

"Conclusion: Based on the numerical scoring of the examinations in this series, John Ramsey was telling the truth when he denied knowing who killed JonBenet.

"Patsy Ramsey's examinations. The first polygraph examination was unusable due to distortions. Appropriate cautions were suggested to eliminate the artifacts so that conclusive results could be obtained. Three series of single-issue examinations were conducted with Patsy Ramsey. The first examination was conducted to determine if Patsy Ramsey had direct involvement in the murder. In other words, whether Patsy inflected the injuries that caused the death of JonBenet. The second examination was conducted to determine whether Patsy knew who killed JonBenet. The third examination was conducted to determine if Patsy wrote the ransom note that was found at the scene.

"The questions asked during the three single-issue examinations follow with Patsy Ramsey's answer.

"Series one, Patsy Ramsey: Did you inflict any of the injuries that caused the death of JonBenet? Answer: No."

"Regarding JonBenet, did you inflict any of the injuries that caused her death. Answer: No.

"Were those injuries that resulted in JonBenet's death inflicted by you? Answer: No.

"Conclusion: Based on the numerical scoring of the examinations in this series, Patsy Ramsey was telling the truth when she denied inflicting the injuries that caused the death of his daughter, JonBenet.

"Series two, Patsy Ramsey. Do you know for who inflicted the injuries that caused the death of JonBenet? Answer: No.

"Regarding JonBenet, do you know for sure who killed her? Answer: No.

"Are you concealing the identity of the person who killed JonBenet? Answer: No.

"Conclusion: Based on the numerical scoring of the examinations in this series, Patsy Ramsey was telling the truth when she denied knowing who killed JonBenet.

"Series 3, Patsy Ramsey: Did you write the ransom note that was found in your house? Answer: No.

"Question 2: Regarding the ransom note, did you write it? Answer: No."

"Question 3: Is that your hand-writing on the ransom note found in your house? Answer: No."

"Conclusion: Based on the numerical scoring of the examinations in this series, Patsy Ramsey was telling the truth when she denied writing the JonBenet ransom note.

"Quality control: A separate report covering the quality control of these examinations has been written by Cleve Baxter, who is one of the world's foremost experts in the field of detection of deception and the person who originated numerical scoring. Baxter's independent analysis corroborated the findings of the undersigned primary examiner.

"Final conclusion: Based on extensive polygraph examination, neither John nor Patsy Ramsey were attempting deception when they gave the indicated answers to the relative questions."

2000-05-24: Statement from Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner

News Release
May 24, 2000
Contact: Jana Petersen, Media Relations, (303) 441-3090
Jennifer Bray, Media Relations, (303) 441-3090
City's Home Page www.ci.boulder.co.us

Ramsey Release #77
Statement from Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner regarding Ramsey news conference

"We did receive a fax this morning from the Ramseys' attorney at the same time the press conference was happening. We will accept any information they are willing to provide regarding the polygraph examinations, just as we're happy to receive any information from others who come forward. That's part of our job, to collect all information, no matter what the source, and add it to the investigation. Certainly, how information is obtained and under what circumstances affects the reliability of the information, no matter who provides it.

"At this point, nothing has changed the way this case will be investigated. We remain committed to solving this crime through legitimate, accepted, credible investigative methods. Contrary to the myths of the pundits and lawyers, we have not focused our investigation solely on the Ramseys. In fact, we've spent well over half of our investigative time in the past three-and-a-half years on information not specific to the Ramsey family. The Ramseys and their attorneys are fully aware of this.

"What's unfortunate about our position as a law enforcement agency is that we don't have the luxury to provide many explanations. This is an active homicide investigation, and we can't afford to compromise our ability to provide justice in this case simply to satisfy public curiosity."


2000-05-25: CNN Burden Of Proof "Ramseys Pass Private Polygraph" (Steve Thomas)


GRETA VAN SUSTEREN: Authorities in Boulder say the independent polygraph exam the Ramseys took and passed proves nothing and is not going to be considered in their investigation.

Steve, clear this up: Did you ask the Ramseys to take a polygraph examination any time, and did they refuse or agree?

THOMAS: Yes, quite clearly, in April of 1997 when they finally decided to grace us after four months and answer some basic questions,
I put that question to both of them -- John Ramsey in the form of two questions: a hypothetical, which detectives will occasionally use, and then quite directly and got what I call a non-answer. And then in the hypothetical I posed to Patsy, she volunteered to take 10. So a direct question was not necessary.

But, yes, the polygraph question was most certainly posed to them.


2000-05-26: Ed Gelb on Larry King Live "Can High-Tech Advances Help Close Open Murder Cases?"
(Sitting in for Larry King, defense attorney Gerry Spence)


SPENCE: Well, supposing, just supposing that in this case the Ramseys, who hired you to do this, who paid you the money, had come up with a negative result, and you came to your conclusion that these people had lied, would you have gone on national television to tell us all that?

GELB: Certainly not. I would imagine that the attorney would have said this was done under attorney-client privilege and this will never see the light of day.

SPENCE: Well, that's -- that's understandable, but I think America needed to hear that and understand that, Ed.


[CNN Greta Van Susteren Show]
2000-05-26: Steve Thomas online interview with CNN Legal Analyst
Greta Van Susteren

"(CNN) -- In an online interview with CNN Legal Analyst Greta Van Susteren, former Boulder police detective Steve Thomas says the results of John and Patsy Ramsey's lie detector test should be taken with "a grain of salt" because the test was not administered by an FBI examiner.

The Ramseys say their recent polygraph test proves they were not involved in the death of their 6-year-old daughter JonBenet. The little beauty queen was found beaten and strangled in the basement of her parents' home in 1996.

Thomas is the author of the book, "JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation," in which he accuses Patsy Ramsey of killing her daughter, and John Ramsey of covering up his wife's crime."

2000-05-27: Tester: Polygraph results unexplained

Tester: Polygraph results unexplained
By Christopher Anderson
Camera Staff Writer
May 27, 2000

The polygraph examiner whose tests on John and Patsy Ramsey came up inconclusive says he can't explain the results.

Gerard Toriello, of Clifton, N.J., said Friday he conducted three tests on the couple in an Atlanta law office on April 17 and 18 - the first polygraph tests the Ramseys took.

The Ramseys underwent the tests six days after Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner Beckner announced his offer for the couple to take lie detector tests conducted by the FBI.

On April 17, Toriello tested John Ramsey for three hours. On April 18, he tested Patsy Ramsey for four hours and John Ramsey again for about two hours.

They were asked if they inflicted the injuries that caused the death of their daughter, JonBenét, in December 1996. The wording, Toriello said, was similar to that in polygraph tests the Ramseys later passed.

Toriello said all three tests he conducted came out inconclusive, based on a numerical score and using the "zone comparison" technique, the same type of test the couple later passed under a second polygrapher who re-tested the couple.

Asked why the tests were inconclusive, Toriello echoed what the Ramseys' attorney, Lin Wood, has been saying for three days: "If we knew what caused an inconclusive test, it wouldn't be an inconclusive test. We would be able to address that factor."

Reasons for inconclusive results can include anxiety, mental fatigue or physical fatigue, Toriello said.

He said both John and Patsy were taking Prozac when he administered the tests. Toriello said the medication can dull the galvanic skin responses during the test, but the results of the tests would not necessarily be affected.

The examiner can factor in the medication's affects when reviewing the charts, he said. The medication would not cause one response to be higher on one question and not on another, he said.

Toriello said he could not disclose the scores or the charts that accompany the test until Boulder police and prosecutors first have a chance to evaluate them.

After Toriello's tests, the Ramseys retook polygraph tests with Los Angeles polygrapher Ed Gelb. Patsy Ramsey's first test with Gelb had "artifacts," most likely because of her physical movement or animated gestures when answering questions, Wood said.

After three marred tests, the Ramseys went on to pass five polygraph tests by Gelb.

Those test results were quality-checked by San Diego polygrapher Cleve Backster, called the grandfather of modern polygraph techniques. Backster confirmed that the Ramseys passed the tests.

The Ramseys paid for all the tests. They say they want the Boulder police and the Boulder County District Attorney's Office to review the results.

Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner said police are willing to look at any information that could help the case, but the results will not remove the Ramseys from suspicion.

The couple refused to take polygraph tests administered by the FBI. Polygraphs are not admissible as evidence in Colorado courts, although they are used frequently by law enforcement agencies as an investigative tool.

In a Friday interview on Larry King Live, Gelb said his tests can only determine whether someone was attempting deception when answering questions. He said the tests are 95 percent accurate.

"I don't think a polygraph has anything to do with guilt or innocence," he said.

May 27, 2000

2000-05-30: Geraldo Rivera Live - Tuesday, May 30, 2000

Guests: Edward Gelb (polygrapher), Daniel Petrocelli (trial atty), Dori Ann Hanswirth (media atty), Gerald Shargel (criminal defense atty)

GERALDO: John and Patsy Ramseys' lawyer. Of course, they say that the privately administered polygraph proves that they're innocent. But even before they triumphantly released the favorable results of their lie detector test last week, results which of course have little legal consequence in a murder case - or any other case, for that matter, in criminal law - they have already begun to file lawsuits.

That was the Ramsey attorney, Lin Wood. He's the guy who filed five lawsuits on behalf of JonBenet's brother, Burke. In March, the Ramseys settled a $25 million lawsuit against the Star magazine tabloid. Now they're suing the New York Post and Time-Warner for $4 million a pop. In addition, they're also seeking $35 million from the company that owns the Globe supermarket weekly.

But that's not all. Attorney Wood now says that he plans another lawsuit or two on Burke's behalf, after which he will start suing people who have allegedly libeled John and Patsy. Now, the defamation suits would target the couple's fiercest critics. The Governor has been mentioned, Governor William Owens, and of course the Denver radio talk show host, Peter Boyles.

In the attorney's words: "I have a list. The only person I can say for certain will be sued is Steve Thomas." Thomas is of course the cop who wrote the book. Wood continues, "The Ramseys are entitled to certain rights and protections . . . In my mind, Governor Owens has trampled on these people's rights."

What role, if any, will the lie detector test play in the libel suit? We don't know, but our first guest is the man who administered the test to the Ramseys. He is Dr. Edward Gelb. He has conducted more than 30,000 polygraphs - is that right, Ed? 30,000?

GELB: That's right, Geraldo, 30,000.

GERALDO: He is the former president of the American Polygraph Association, and Ed joins us from Los Angeles. Welcome aboard, Doctor. Nice to see you in this context.

GELB: Thank you.

GERALDO: First off, I must ask: You are indeed the examiner who examined Orenthal J. Simpson in the days following the brutal double-homicide in Brentwood, are you not?

GELB: OJ who? If that exam was conducted, it would have been conducted under attorney-client privilege. And you only seem to hear about the ones people pass, not the ones they fail.

GERALDO: That was my question exactly. Is it that you only hear about the polygraphs people pass and not the ones they fail?

GELB: Certainly. And if I was an attorney, which I'm not, I wouldn't want to be gone after for malpractice for having clients take polygraph tests willy-nilly without knowing how they were going to do.

GERALDO: So you neither confirm nor deny that you administered a polygraph to OJ Simpson that he failed miserably?

GELB: You're correct.

GERALDO: Okay [laughing]. Dan, I've got to talk to Ed one-on-one, but I want you to stow this information away in your mind. Is it not a fact, though, Dr. Gelb, that you administered tests to the Ramseys that they did not pass?

GELB: No, that's not correct. The only tests I administered, they passed. In fact, there were five separate polygraph examinations and they passed all of them, and those examinations were blind-scored by the person, Cleve Backster, who created the numerical scoring system.

GERALDO: But is it not a fact that you administered a series of tests, the results of which were inconclusive?

GELB: No, that's not correct.

GERALDO: Then where does that report come from? To the best of your knowledge, have the Ramseys ever taken a lie detector test the results of which were inconclusive?

GELB: Yes they did, with Gerry Toriello in New Jersey.

GERALDO: And when, timewise, were those tests.

GELB: Well prior to the examinations that I conducted.

GERALDO: So, prior to the examinations that you conducted, they took and did not pass a lie detector test?

GELB: They did not fail; they ran inconclusive or what the government calls, "no opinion." And based on that result, their attorney offered that they take a polygraph test with me without even notifying me that that offer had been made.

GERALDO: So, you admit as you sit there, Dr. Gelb, that another polygraph examiner - and his reputation is what? Will you fill us in? Is he a reputable polygrapher?

GELB: Yes he is.

GERALDO: And you admit that his results were different, significantly, than yours?

GELB: Of course. They were inconclusive, no opinion.

GERALDO: So, what happened between their taking that test and their taking your test?

GELB: Well, there's an adage in the business, Geraldo, and it says that, "The clean get cleaner and the dirty get dirtier." People can take polygraph tests and run inconclusive. They can subsequently be re-tested by another examiner and prove to be conclusively truthful, and those are the results I stand by: A well-conducted examination by a recognized expert. That's me.

GERALDO: But you said that the other fellow was a well-recognized expert. Can we not presume that his tests were as well administered?

GELB: Oh yes, and I've run inconclusive examinations too in my life.

GERALDO: Is this a classic reason why polygraphs are deemed, legally speaking, unreliable?

GELB: Well, they're not deemed unreliable. The accuracy runs around 94-95%. What is the fact is that we don't have trial by polygraph in this country. We have trials by judges and juries. Those are the people who decide guilt and innocence, not polygraph examiners.

GERALDO: But Ed, are you not troubled by the fact that this other fellow, of equal renown, came to a different conclusion?

GELB: Absolutely not. He came to no conclusion, or as the United States Government calls it, "no opinion."

GERALDO: And that doesn't affect your confidence in your own results?

GELB: Absolutely not. I'm very confident in my results, to a certainty of 94-95%.

GERALDO: Did you administer a blood or urine test to determine whether or not they had taken any drugs? Sodium pentothal, or something like that?

GELB: Well, if they had taken sodium pentothal, which is commonly known as truth serum, I don't think that I would have had anything to do with that. They were fit subjects for polygraphs.

GERALDO: Is the answer no, Ed?

GELB: They were not given urinalysis tests or blood tests by me, no.

GERALDO: Can those drugs, of whatever stripe, affect a person's physiological response measured by your polygraph machine?

GELB: No. To pass a test, there must be presence of reaction. If you're going to mediate the reactions or eliminate the reactions with drugs, you wouldn't pass a polygraph test. There's no drug that we know of that selectively affects the zone of influence. In other words . . .

GERALDO: How about lithium?

GELB: I'm sorry?

GERALDO: Lithium.

GELB: Lithium does not select one zone of influence and not the other. The entire test would be affected, not one zone or the other, and that's what we do. We compare zones of influence.

GERALDO: Do you expect to be subpoenaed in a civil lawsuit as a plaintiff's witness?

GELB: I have no idea whether I'm going to be subpoenaed or not.

GERALDO: Well, you didn't come here in response to a subpoena. Thanks for being a voluntary witness. I have no further questions, Dr. Ed Gelb. We'll be right back, ladies and gentlemen, and we'll discuss what you just heard. Stay tuned.


[John Ramsey LKL May 31, 2000]2000-05-31: Larry King Live "Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey?"

LARRY KING, HOST: Tonight, a first in the JonBenet Ramsey homicide case: Her parents, John and Patsy, square off against former Boulder police detective Steve Thomas. He believes that Patsy killed her daughter on Christmas night, 1996. It's exclusive, it's next on LARRY KING LIVE.

Since last with us, the Ramseys took a lie detector test, not under FBI order. And your lawyer said that you didn't want the FBI to do it. Why?

JOHN RAMSEY, FATHER OF JONBENET RAMSEY: We didn't necessarily not want the FBI to do it. We wanted someone that was fair and independent.

KING: Do you think the FBI would have been partial, Patsy? I mean, do you think the FBI cares?

PATSY RAMSEY, MOTHER OF JONBENET RAMSEY: I'm not saying that, I'm not accusing that at all, just that was not the definition of independent.

KING: Do you think they come with a degree of opinion?

J. RAMSEY: I don't know, but we eliminated that possibility by insisting they be independent. We went to the best polygrapher in the country, had the results quality control by the person who invented the polygraph system.

KING: And he was going to release the results no matter what, right?

P. RAMSEY: Absolutely.

KING: There was a given understanding that it would be made public, no matter what they found.

J. RAMSEY: That was the condition we agreed to.

KING: Steve, did that appeal to you?

STEVE THOMAS, FORMER BOULDER POLICE DETECTIVE: Well, it certainly didn't satisfy the Boulder Police Department. They are putting little stock in this polygraph. And quite frankly, it took Patsy, if I'm not mistaken -- and I don't think I am -- three tries to pass a polygraph: We had an inconclusive test, a second test that showed distortion, and finally, a third test with another examiner. She passed truthfully.

KING: Was that examiner respected?

THOMAS: Certainly nobody is testing or challenging the credentials of the examiner, but again, it's not the government authorities who want to conduct that polygraph.


KING: Now back on the FBI thing for a moment, one would assume that the FBI, all they want to do is gather evidence. They don't care if you did it or didn't do it.


J. RAMSEY: I don't know. I have friends in the FBI. They're good people. All I know is they're not independent. The Boulder police stated to us it would take them a week to get the polygrapher from the FBI ready to ask us questions. That shouldn't be necessary unless there's other motives in mind. The question is very simple: Did you kill your daughter? Did you write the ransom note? Do you know who killed your daughter? If we answered those truthfully...

KING: (UNINTELLIGIBLE) more than that, do you? I know the Boulder police said they'd -- the polygrapher needed to know more. What did he need to know more to...

THOMAS: Well, in a polygraph there's no legal consequence to a polygraph at this point. And the chief of police...

KING: In Colorado.

THOMAS: Yes. The chief of police has even said he's not accepting the results of this polygraph, and it doesn't make or break the case one way or the other. But you've now based a polygraph. Will you not submit to an FBI polygrapher?


J. RAMSEY: I don't know, but all I asked for was independent. Look, we were never asked to take a polygraph test. When we were asked...

KING: It's not -- Colorado doesn't allow it in a court, right?

J. RAMSEY: Wrong. Steve, let's address that right now. The cover of your book -- your book, your disgraceful book. "Why? His inside story answers a wide range of important questions. Why were the Ramseys handled with kid gloves and never asked by law enforcement to take lie detector tests?"

THOMAS: Because the D.A. carried you in their pockets during...

J. RAMSEY: But then don't tell me it was wrong. It's in your book that you were never asked.


THOMAS: At the press conference they released a press packet in which they gave the verbatim transcript. And I think even Alex Hunter has said that anybody reading that transcript, a monkey could understand what was asked. Let's call that ancient history. I'm asking you today, not three years ago...

J. RAMSEY: Larry, if I'm reading this wrong, correct me.

THOMAS: And again, Larry, he's not letting me answer the question. But three years ago we're talking about. We're right here at the table tonight. Will you take an FBI-sponsored polygraph? And the answer is?

P. RAMSEY: Why will they not review the polygraphs that were taken? Why has he made a statement that says they're unacceptable when he has not even taken the time to look at them?

THOMAS: Well, when you're at the police department next week, ask them these questions.

[www.cybersleuths.com]2000-06-08: Cybersleuths Forum (www.cybersleuths.com),
Topic: Radio Alert: Peter Boyles show on Friday, June 9, 2000

Member posted 06-08-2000 09:45 PM
I was tied up most of today so just got to this. The devil is in the details, so to speak...Did you all catch the sparks with Shep Smith and OJ on Fox this afternoon?

Here's the transcript from Boyles with Gene Parker this am.

PB: This man's name came up in a couple of news articles and news stories when John and Patsy Ramsey first announced to the entire world that they had passed the polygraph test. Please say "Good Morning" to Gene Parker. Mr. Parker has himself a former Police Chief . He also has been well involved in the polygraph business. Mr. Parker, Good Morning.

GP: Why Good Morning, from Meeker, Colorado.

PB: Thanks for coming on the show. There seems to be a number of things. I spoke with Mr. Parker yesterday in a private conversation. There's been an awful lot of talk about your involvement or on-involvement in this case. So let me bring up a couple of the questions that seem to be out there quite a bit. Did you ever do any work for John Ramsey or for his company prior to this?

GP: No, I never did.

PB: OK. Had you ever met the Ramseys?

GP: No, I never had.

PB: Who approached you to do this exam initially?

GP: Back on 11 December, '97 I was requested by a national newspaper to confirm the authenticity of a Diane Hollis, who is a former executive secretary of John Ramsey, as to her statement as to, ahh, what had occurred in, ahh, conversation in the Ramsey office.

PB: For the folks in our audience, what did Ms. Hollis say had occurred in terms of a conversation?

GP: She stated that, ahh, there was conversation going on with, umm, some remorse as to, ahh, what had taken place at the murder scene.

PB: Could you go further, elaborate further from that, Gene, if you would?

GP: Ohhhh, let me see. I'm looking at a deposition that I wrote at the time and, uhhh, regarding, uhh, the accuracy of the examination. But, the gist of it was that, uhhh, "Were you told that John Ramsey was molesting JonBenet? That Patsy saw it, swung at John but hit JonBenet instead?" And there was a 88% probability that Miss Hollis was truthful with her "Yes" response utilizing an instrument of the United States Government polygraph for that purpose.

PB: That's why this is significant. That, there's another very significant part of this as well. Again, if you would, Gene, the best of your knowledge who was Miss Hollis and what was her job working for John Ramsey?

GH: She was an executive secretary
PB: And how did she come across this information?

GH: That, at this point, with due respect to your very fine radio station, I would be unable to provide for you, other than the fact that records show that Miss Hollis was an executive secretary for John Ramsey.

PB: And you tested Miss Hollis?

GH: Yes.

PB: And when Miss Hollis told you what you've just told us that she said, she tested out which way, true or false?

GH: Way to the absolute probability of truthfulness. That same, the same question was formulated three different ways and to each of those three different ways, uhhh, she, uhhh, the results of the examination shows that she was, the probability of truthfulness was very accurate, in the high 90's. The examination took approximately three hours and the actual exam itself about, uhh, 5 minutes times 3 times that was given to her.

PB: Now what's important about this is the Ramseys now tell us that they have total faith and trust in all polygraphs. And yet here comes this. And I don't know how much of this has ever gotten attention before so I wonder what their reaction will be, and I'm not asking for a comment from you. If we could then move on.
Were you ever requested or did anyone ever come to you about doing the Ramsey polygraph on John and Patsy?

GH: Yes.

PB: Yep.

GH Some short period of time ago I received a telephone call from some people that identified themselves as attorneys for John Ramsey.

PB: Did they mention names or could you mention their names?

GH: Yes, they mentioned names but I'm not at liberty to give those out, with due respect.

PB: All right. Fair enough.

GH: At which time I said "yes" since I had done the first one that...

PB: By the way Gene, did they know you had done the Hollis exam?

GH: Yes. Yes. In so much that I utilized an instrument perfected by the United States government and I had done the first Hollis polygraph which kind of started the whole thing that, "Yes, I would be more than happy to examine John and Patsy." And I quoted my fee. At which time I stated that because of the high profile of the case that it would require that a urine examination be done with a medical doctor and a registered nurse, for obvious reasons, presence. Uhhhm, the attorney said, who stated that he was an attorney, I had reason to believe that he was, stated, "Fine, they would get back to me." Some three hours later I received a telephone call from that same telephone number on my Caller-ID that I originally had got stating that they had declined my offer, they had found someone that would not require a urine examination, thank you very much.

(Ed -- proof beyond a reasonable doubt that Team Ramsey had contacted other polygraphers and turned down Gene Parker BECAUSE OF THE UA. More lies out of the Ram spin team, in this case Lin Wood. No wonder Ellis Armistead et al quit. Hope the tabs are reading here and shout this to the hills!)

PB: But that, that other person would be the legendary now Mr. T, the guy in NJ, who finds, after testing Patsy a number of times, he can't get an accurate read which I am told, and I certainly don't have any expertise, that when you keep getting inconclusive results, you've got a liar.

GP: Yes and no. Uhhh, there are---the human mind is a very strange thing, a very complex thing in so much as that a lot of things can cause an inconclusive.

PB: But how many inconclusives can you keep getting?

GP: With this instrument I rarely get one.

PB: Hang on, Gene. Let me bring you back and get a wrap-up.


PB: ...He had an opportunity to do a lie, ahh, polygraph, I say lie detectors and I've been told time again and again and again Don't say that, but polygraph examination on a woman who also plays out in this as well, her name is Hollis, and ahh, Miss Hollis, Diane Hollis was the former executive secretary to John Ramsey. And he did a polygraph on her. You were, I believe it was, if I know anything about this, this took place in Arvada? Or would you rather not say?

GP: In that area.

PB: Fair enough. And what she told you is that she was told, and again this is a former executive secretary, she was told by someone in the organization, or someone, I shouldn't even set it up that way but

GP: I think maybe I can help you. She had a conversation several times with a personal secretary of John Ramsey.

PB: And she also was the executive secretary.

GP: Right, the executive had discussion with the personal secretary of John Ramsey which stated incidents of remorse and of some discussion as to what really took place.

PB: And what she was told, the fact that you say that 88% probability that this woman is telling the truth.

GP: That's correct. I'm looking at my notes here to the second relevant question, uhhhm, "Did you give, did you have the discussion with the personal secretary which lasted over an hour and a half period of time regarding what took place with JonBenet Ramsey?" and there was a 97% probability she was truthful, that she gained the information from the personal secretary.

PB: Wow! And then they, when initially they came to you to do some polygraphing and then you wanted them to take a UA and they would not do it. Why would that be important or significant, Gene, to the uninitiated?

GP: This was again the follow-up, where the media and, uhhh, events of the time had brought it to the head that it has now that I received a phone call to take in, OK, a polygraph examines John and Patsy. And because of the high profile of the case, because of their great monetary abilities and ability of certain drugs that are available that could affect the human body system that is examined by polygraph why I insisted that there be a registered nurse and a MD there to take a urine examination prior to the examination. So there would be no doubt in anyone's mind that anything might have caused reaction to change to whatever from what it really is. At which time, some three hours later, the law office called back and stated "Thanks but no thanks."

PB: So if you wanted to do a UA on whether or not they were doing...

GP: Whether they had used a drug. Which could, which very well could cause for an inconclusive, let alone could even take and show a truthful being deceptive.

PB: What's interesting about this is, even if, because clearly if they were, if they could pass a UA, they'd have come to you. And I'm guessing that.

GP: Sure.

PB: But they couldn't pass the UA so they go to another guy who doesn't require a UA and they still, Patsy still comes out on two occasions inconclusive, apparently--Carol McKinley from Fox News in an interview with the Ramseys, they did tell her they're both taking Prozac and if you watch Patsy Ramsey on TV you know there's more than just Prozac going on there. I don't know if you know that but you can certainly believe it.

GP: Yes, my Masters being in Psychology I have studied the effects of drugs probably as reasons that I polygraph for the Department of Defense. And I have found that there are certain drugs, let alone in that financial-ability category of the Ramseys to take certain drugs that could very easily cause it, which was the reason why I required a medical doctor and an RN which is I think only about the fifth or sixth time in my 20 some odd years of polygraphing that I've needed it.

PB: Gene, if they'd 've given you a hot UA

GP: Umhmm.

PB: That, that kills the whole thing?

GP: That's correct.

PB: Would you like to, I mean, I don't know what further comments...By the way, do you mind if I give your web site a plug or?

GP: Yeah, go ahead. At 64 years of age, anything.

PB: Yeah (chuckling) what are they gonna do to you, right? Actually, I've got a couple of web sites and phone numbers. What would you like to give out to the public?

GP: Oh, I don't know, the one that's www.PolygraphPlace.com/ColoradoPolygraph is one.

PB: Do it again and do it slow.

GP: http://www.PolygraphPlace.com/ColoradoPolygraph

PB: Fair enough.

GP: And then there is the expert pages for the world in different categories. www.ExpertPages.com And when you get to that click into experts in polygraphs and you'll see a map, click into experts of the world, in this case, click on Colorado.

PB: We will say goodbye off air and I know we'll be in touch and I know we'll speak again, Gene. Thank you for being on KHOW this morning. hang on. OK?

Later in the show Peter quoted a couple of the actual questions that were administered to Diane Hollis. One of them I caught was "Were you told John Ramsey was molesting JonBenet AND PATSY SAW IT?"
IP: Logged

Member posted 06-08-2000 10:14 PM
My small part in the search for justice for JonBenet, Candy! Unless I sleep thru the 5am wake-up call, I'll be taping Boyles with Darnay tomorrow. Sounds like it is on LH Pugh. Oh, by the way, Channel 2 9pm news had a short clip on Henry Lee while he was in town. He wouldn't offer anything about the R's recent polygraph but did say the following: he's seen people who later pled guilty and the evidence pointed at them, who had PASSED polygraphs. And he had seen others who were innocent who had failed them. Guess we know what the SCIENTIST thinks of polys!

Good night!
IP: Logged


[Steve Thomas Deposition 09-21-2001 Wolf vs Ramsey]2001-09-21: Steve Thomas Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia)
Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Action File No. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)

(Screen Capture on left is from "Today Show, October 28, 2002)

For Plaintiff: Darnay Hoffman, ESQ.
For Defendants: James C. Rawles, ESQ., L. Lin Wood, ESQ.
For Deponent: Charles P. Diamond, ESQ., Sean R. Smith, ESQ.
Also present: O.M. "Ollie" Gray
Also present: Jay R. Ren, CLVS, Todd Tompkins, Videographer Intern

Steve Thomas Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia)
Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Action File No. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)


11 A. Certainly in some departments but
12 it had been my experience that the Boulder
13 Police Department had never embraced and had
14 no policy, that I'm aware of, in place
15 regarding polygraphy.
16 Q. So there was no standard practice
17 in the Boulder Police Department about when
18 to seek a polygraph examination from a
19 suspect?
20 A. For example, in other departments
21 who have in-house polygraphers.
22 Q. Well, I'm asking you about the
23 Boulder Police Department?
24 A. I'm trying to get to that.
25 Q. Let's get to that for me, if you

1 would, please.
2 MR. DIAMOND: Let him finish.
3 A. Regarding the Boulder Police
4 Department, there was no in-house polygrapher
5 and it didn't appear to me that there was
6 any sort of a policy in place, although I
7 personally favored the use of polygraphs in
8 some cases. In which to -- and how it was
9 necessarily applied, we certainly were able to
10 polygraph some other potential suspects in
11 this case but I don't know that Mr. Wolf
12 ever was.

93 25 Q. So you would eliminate based

1 solely on a polygraph?
2 A. No.
3 Q. All right. You would take it
4 into consideration?
5 MR. DIAMOND: You have to answer
6 audibly.
7 A. We would take our polygraph
8 examinations into consideration, yes, sir.
9 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) All of your
10 polygraph examinations were done by the FBI,
11 weren't they?
12 A. I believe so.
13 Q. You didn't have anybody on the
14 Boulder Police Department that was trained in
15 polygraph examinations, did you?
16 A. I don't know if anybody received
17 polygraph training but we did not have an
18 in-house polygrapher.
19 Q. Okay. So we've got alibi,
20 handwriting, polygraph, what else?
21 MR. DIAMOND: Polygraph coupled
22 with other things he said.
23 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Well, yeah,
24 polygraph alone would not be sufficient to
25 clear someone, would it?

1 A. Not necessarily, no.

17 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did you ever send
18 a letter formally requesting a polygraph
19 examination of Patsy Ramsey after the April
20 30, 1997 interview?
21 A. I don't believe so.
22 Q. Did you ever make any formal
23 request for a polygraph examination of Patsy
24 Ramsey after the April 30, 1997 interview?
25 A. Certainly we hounded Pete Hofstrom

1 about it.
2 Q. I didn't ask you about Pete
3 Hofstrom. I want to know whether you asked
4 Patsy Ramsey or her lawyers formally will you
5 submit to a polygraph examination after April
6 30, 1997?
7 A. There was a chain of command. I
8 didn't deal directly with Patsy Ramsey or her
9 attorneys but I did not personally draft such
10 a letter.
11 Q. Are you aware of any formal demand
12 made by the Boulder authorities on Patsy
13 Ramsey after April 30, 1997, before you left
14 in August 1998, to submit to a polygraph
15 examination after April 30?
16 A. It was very clear that the police
17 department leaned on the DA's office to do
18 exactly that. And the fact that the DA's
19 office chose not to was to the chagrin of
20 the Boulder Police Department.
21 Q. So the answer is you're not aware
22 of any request being made?
23 A. The answer is just what I
24 answered, Mr. Wood.
25 Q. Even after Patsy Ramsey said she

Continued On Right Side ----------------->

Steve Thomas Deposition - 09-21-2001
Chris Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Case


1 would take ten of them when you asked her
2 the question hypothetically on April the 30th,
3 1997, right?
4 A. Right what? Was a formal request
5 made?
6 Q. Yeah, when she said -- you asked
7 her hypothetically, if I ask you to take one
8 and she said, I'll take ten of them, do
9 whatever you want, and you're telling me for
10 whatever reasons, politically I guess is your
11 explanation, but whatever the explanation is
12 there was never a demand made on Patsy Ramsey
13 to take a polygraph examination after April
14 30th, 1997, prior to when you left in August
15 of 1998, true?
16 A. I don't know that she was ever
17 sent an engraved invitation to take a
18 polygraph but I think it was pretty clear,
19 Mr. Wood, of the police department's position
20 and through the district attorney's office
21 that the Boulder Police Department wanted John
22 and Patsy Ramsey to submit to law enforcement
23 sponsored polygraph examinations.
24 Q. And do you all usually do those
25 on engraved invitations?

1 A. No.
2 Q. Why did you misrepresent the truth
3 then in your book when you said that the
4 book was going to be the inside story
5 answering a wide range of important questions,
6 including why were the Ramseys handled with
7 kid gloves and never asked by law enforcement
8 to take lie detector tests?
9 MR. DIAMOND: I'm going to
10 object --
11 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Were they asked or
12 not asked by law enforcement to take a lie
13 detector test? I'm trying to find out the
14 truth of the investigation.
15 MR. DIAMOND: Do you want to
16 withdraw the first question and have him
17 answer the second question?
18 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Do you understand
19 the question? Here is your book jacket.
20 You saw it before it hit the stands, didn't
21 you?
22 MR. DIAMOND: Which are we
23 answering?
24 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) This one right
25 here. Did you see this --

1 A. Book jacket, yeah.
2 Q. -- book jacket before it hit the
3 stands?
4 A. Yes, sir, that would be my book
5 jacket --
6 Q. There it is.
7 A. -- before the book went into
8 the --
9 Q. Right.
10 A. Retail store.
11 Q. Let's just try to make this clear.
12 I just want to know what the truth is. Were
13 the Ramseys asked by law enforcement to take
14 lie detector tests or not?
15 A. Yes, and I believe you know that
16 because read the transcript of my interview
17 with your clients from April 30, 1997, and I
18 think even Alex Hunter has said a monkey
19 could understand that polygraph examinations
20 were being requested.

18 Q. I mean when I was out there
19 saying, you know, I didn't think the FBI is
20 objective because they've been involved in
21 this case to a significant amount, whether
22 you agree or not with my objectivity
23 conclusion, I was right about the fact that
24 the FBI had been significantly involved in
25 the case, wasn't I?

1 A. For the record I don't agree with
2 the objectivity conclusion but, yeah, they
3 were significantly involved in the case.
4 Q. It seems like from what you're
5 telling me that they were of the mind that
6 you were, that Patsy Ramsey they thought was
7 involved in the death of her daughter?
8 A. That certainly seemed to be my
9 impression.
10 Q. So whether that was an objective
11 decision by then I certainly was right to
12 have some concerns about whether or not they
13 had formed such a conclusion before I
14 submitted John or Patsy to the FBI
15 examination, wasn't I?
16 A. Well, twofold. One, I don't think
17 they would have -- I don't think there was
18 anything inappropriate with their polygraph
19 unit or that they would have conspired in any
20 way with their polygraphers.

[Ed Gelb]2001-11-19: Cutter's Webpage: "The Ramsey Polygraph Farce"
An Investigation Into What Really Went On, And What The Public Wasn't Told.

"Doctor, Heal Thyself
Now is where this story takes a bizarre turn. As noted before, the Ramseys turned to Dr. Edward Gelb after they were unable to pass the tests conducted by Jerry Toriello.

Ed Gelb has served as president, executive director and chairman of the board of the American Polygraph Association and is an honorary fellow of the Academy of Certified Polygraphists. Gelb was trained in polygraph technique at the Backster School of Lie Detection, founded by Cleve Backster of San Diego. Gelb claims to have performed over 30,000 polygraph examinations. While Gelb may or may not be considered the foremost polygraph examiner in the country, he certainly is the most recognized, having appeared over the years on several television shows.

Gelb's involvement in the Ramsey case has brought out some very interesting information about the man. Internet sleuths, fixated on the Ramsey case, started checking into Gelb's background and he became closely scrutinized in crime sleuthing forums. Supposedly Gelb's resume states that he received his doctorate degree from LaSalle University in Louisiana. That would be a real problem, because LaSalle was found to be nothing but a mail-order diploma mill. LaSalle's office was investigated and raided by the FBI, and Thomas Kirk, LaSalle's owner and founder, was found guilty of fraud and sentenced to five years in federal prison. Kirk earned millions of dollars from people looking to obtain fraudulent college degrees at a discount rate with little or no actual course work required.

Calls to Gelb's office by people trying to verify his education were not returned, and one internet sleuth even went as far as to check the master registry of Ph.D. dissertations and could find no information on a doctorate thesis authored by Edward Gelb.

Should "Doctor" Gelb really be addressed as "Dr. Bogus"? Is the man who claims to be the master at detecting the deception of others really a master of public and profession deception himself? Perhaps when Ed Gelb hears about this web page he will contact us and provide proof of his educational background so we can publish the truth here."

[ACandyRose Internet Subculture Forum]2001-11-19: ACandyRose Internet Subculture Forum Thread,
"Polygraph Research on Gelb and Backster"

JonBenet Ramsey Folder - Polygraph Research on Gelb and Backster
From: ACandyRose 11/19/2001 8:54 pm
To: ALL (1 of 6) 1227.1

Ed Gelb and his space aliens?
Cleve Backster and his crying house plants?

Check out this polygraph research on Gelb and Backster

From: SABREENAKATZ 11/19/2001 9:17 pm
To: ACandyRose (2 of 6)
1227.2 in reply to 1227.1

I just read on Jammys site that Gene Parker was asked in 1997 to polygraph the Ramseys (chances are their attorneys arranged for secret polygraphs in 1997 which they most likely flunked!)

From: SABREENAKATZ 11/20/2001 9:52 am
To: ACandyRose (5 of 6)
1227.5 in reply to 1227.4


Here is a photo of Backster's funky office taken by yours truly. It looks like a scene straight out of Dragnet....

[Mark Beckner Deposition 11-26-2001 Wolf vs Ramsey]2001-11-26: Mark Beckner Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia)
Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Action File No. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)

(Screen Capture on left is from CBS 48 Hours Investigates
"Searching for a Killer" 10/04/2002)

For Plaintiff: NO APPEARANCE
For Defendants: S. Derek Bauer, ESQ., L. Lin Wood, ESQ.
For Deponent: Robert N. Miller, Bob Keatley, Walter Fricke, (All ESQ)
Also present: O.M. "Ollie" Gray, Monika Cary, CLVS

Mark Beckner Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia)
Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Action File No. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)


2 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Okay. From your -- from
3 the time period that you have been involved in the
4 Ramsey case, October of 1997 to date, you have never
5 publicly referred to any individual as a suspect; am
6 I right?
7 A That's correct
8 Q You have always carefully indicated that
9 individuals, whoever may come up, were either not or
10 were under the umbrella of suspicion?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Or used the phrase under suspicion?
13 A Yes.
14 Q Which you have told me means the same
15 thing as being under the umbrella of suspicion?
16 A Yes.
17 Q So from start to today, you have not
18 classified any individual as a suspect?
19 A Publicly, correct.
20 Q Or otherwise?
21 A That's not accurate.
22 Q How is it inaccurate?
23 A Internally John and Patsy are considered
24 suspects.
25 Q Both of them?

1 A Yes.
2 Q Are considered to have probably been
3 involved in the death of their daughter?
4 A Probability, yes.
5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status
6 of probably involved?
7 A No.

9 Q As I understand it, the Boulder Police
10 Department does not have a polygraph polygrapher on
11 its staff?
12 A That's correct.
13 Q And were all of the polygraph examinations
14 performed in the Ramsey investigation done by FBI
15 examiners?
16 A I believe so.
17 Q Was there any input given to the Boulder
18 Police Department by the FBI as to who should or
19 should not be polygraphed?
20 A Not to me. I'm not aware of that during
21 my time on the investigation. I don't know if that
22 occurred prior to that.
23 Q You said the FBI had been involved since
24 early in the case?
25 A Yes.

Mark Beckner Deposition (Atlanta, Georgia)
Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Action File No. 00-CIV-1187(JEC)


1 Q How would you describe the FBI's level of
2 involvement? Minimal, moderate, significant, heavy?
3 A I think they were moderately involved.
4 Q Would that be consistent throughout?
5 A Yeah, that was pretty consistent.
6 Q What was the basis of their jurisdiction
7 to be involved in what was a state homicide case?
8 A I think just as a consultant to us in the
9 case. It's pretty typical that the FBI will help
10 local jurisdictions on major cases.
11 Q Would you believe that three FBI agents
12 prior to April the 30th of 1997 would have stated
13 that the intruder theory in this case was baloney?
14 A Would that surprise me?
15 Q Yeah.
16 A No.
17 Q Why would that not surprise you?
18 A I think there is a lot of evidence that
19 would point to it not being an intruder.
20 Q Right. But this is in the first few
21 months of 1997 --
22 A Um-hum.
23 Q -- prior to John and Patsy even being
24 formally interviewed on April the 30th --
25 A Um-hum.

1 Q -- it doesn't surprise you that a
2 professional investigator before critical evidence
3 has been examined and tested would reach that kind of
4 conclusion; that doesn't surprise you?
5 A Well, if they said it -- if you're telling
6 me they said it in a manner of this is fact and there
7 is no other possibility, then that would surprise me
8 that they would say it as an absolute conclusionary
9 statement; yes, that would surprise me.


[jameson's Webbsleuths]2003-01-21: Jameson's Webbsleuths (www.webbsleuths.com)
Thread, "letters concerning the polygraph"

unregistered user
Jan-21-03, 09:17 PM (EST)

"letters concerning the polygraph"

John and Patsy Ramsey
c/o Lin Wood
Wood and Grant, Attorneys at law
Suite 2140, Equitable Building
100 Peachtree Street
Atlanta, GA 30303

Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey,

The Boulder police Department is aware of your public pronouncements that you each are willing and ready to take a polygraph examination in reference to the death of JonBenét. On Thursday, March 23rd, 2000, during an interview with Denver's Channel 9, Mr. Ramsey identified the conditions under which you both would be willing to take an examination. Those conditions are the following:

. The exam is to be conducted by an examiner independent from the Boulder Police Department.
. The exam is to be conducted in Atlanta.
. The results of the exams are to be made public.

We are pleased with your decision to submit to polygraphs and after discussing the conditions above, we have agreed to proceed with offering you the examinations. We have arranged to have independent FBI examiners conduct the examinations.

Specific examiners will be assigned by the FBI. The exams will be conducted in Atlanta, per your wishes, and we (the Bouldere Police Department) agree to make the results of the polygraph public information.

The polygraph examination will be conducted according to standard FBI protocols. In addition, you may be asked to take a urinalysis after the exam to confirm the presence or lack of presence of any drugs or medication. We would like to have the exam completed no later than Wednesday, April 26th, 2000. We will make the arrangements around your schedule and at any time that is most convenient for you. All we ask for is at least 72 hours notice prior to the date you would like to take the exam. Please contact me as soon as possible at 303-441-3310, and let me know what date you are available.


Mark Beckner
Chief of Police

cc: Pat Burke
Bryan Morgan



Mr. Mark R. Beckner
Chief of Police
City of Boulder
1805 - 33rd Street
Boulder, Colorado 80301

Dear Chief Beckner:

I have received your letter of April 11, 2000 addressed to John and Patsy Ramsey. Prior to my actual receipt of the letter I learned of its contents by virtue of a press release issued by your office to the media. I will certainly forward the letter to Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey for their response. Since I envision that Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey may have some questions for their counsel concerning your proposal, I would greatly appreciate your responses to the following questions:

(1) I am under the distinct impression that members of the FBI have been involved in the Boulder Police Department’s investigation of Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey. Just today, a former Boulder Police Department officer, Steve Thomas, published a book for profit containing police file information, some of which is certainly consistent with my understanding of the FBI’s role in the investigation of Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey. Is my impression correct? And are Mr. Thomas’ statements in his book accurate? With all due respect, if the answer is yes to one or both of these questions, the FBI hardly qualifies as “an examiner independent from the Boulder Police Department.”

(2) Assuming the FBI has not been involved in the investigation, will you promptly provide me with all applicable FBI protocols, including protocols applicable to the review process?

(3) In recent days, and subsequent to Mr. Ramsey’s comments on Channel 9, Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter has repeatedly stated in his national media tour that polygraph exams are extremely unreliable and that a polygraph exam of the Ramseys could seriously harm a future prosecution in this case. In view of Mr. Hunter’s well-publicized statements, I must know if it is the Boulder Police Department’s position that polygraph examinations are reliable indicators of truthfulness? If so, any public statements by the department confirming that position would be helpful if forwarded to me. Also, what is the Boulder Police Department’s position regarding Mr. Hunter’s comments about the exam possibly jeopardizing a future prosecution of the killer of JonBenét?

(4) If the Boulder Police Department does vouch for polygraph examinations as reliable indicators of truthfulness, can Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey receive a public assurance from your department and the District Attorney’s office that they will be officially and publicly cleared from the umbrella of suspicion, that they will no longer be considered to be suspects or possible suspects and that the investigation as to them will be closed when they pass any agreed upon polygraph examination?

I am confident you will concur that my questions are reasonable and I thank you in advance for your cooperation in promptly responding to them.

With best regards,


L. Lin Wood

cc: Mr. and Mrs. John Ramsey
Mr. Bryan Morgan
Mr. Pat Burke

[jameson's Webbsleuths]2003-02-03: Jameson's Webbsleuths (www.webbsleuths.com)
Thread, "Polygraph information"

Charter Member
8687 posts Feb-03-03, 05:35 PM (EST)

20. "The questions and scores"
In response to message #18

I had posted scanned pages from the Press Packet givem Media om May 24th, 2000. Those pages dealt with the questions asked, how the Ramseys scored, and what the scores meant. The entire press packet included the statement made by Lin Wood, the CV of Backster and Gelb and other papers.

The print out wasn't terribly clear and I also typed things out for the forums - the questions and scores. I will share them again.

Did you inflict any of the injuries that caused the death of JonBenét?
Regarding JonBenet, did you inflict any of the injuries that caused her death?
Were those injuries that resulted in JonBenét's death inflicted by you?

Do you know for sure who killed JonBenét?
Regarding JonBenét, do you know for sure who killed her?
Are you concealing the identity of the person who killed JonBenét?

John and Patsy answered "NO" to each of the questions.

+ 6 is the numerical cut off for a truthful determination required by the military and government agencies
including the FBI

John scored a +10 on the first set of questions and a +17 on the second.

Patsy scored a +10 on the first set of questions, +12 on the second.

Since Patsy was not eliminated as the writer of the ransom note, she was asked three more questions, she answered "NO" to each.

Did you write the ransom note that was found in your home?
Regarding that ransom note, did you write it?
Is that your handwriting on the ransom note found in your home?

On those, she scored +16.

Clearly, the Ramseys passed the tests.

[Purgatory II Forum]2003-07-05: Puragory II Forum Thread titled,
"JonBenet Ramsey Case - Gelb has a fake PHD?"

From: SABREENAKATZ Jul-6 9:22 am
To: ALL (1 of 21)

Look what I just found...

Polygraph Operator "Dr." Edward I. Gelb Exposed as a Phony Ph.D.
Past President of the American Polygraph Association Obtained Degree from an Unaccredited Diploma Mill
by George W. Maschke
16 June 2003

Why would one of the most prominent polygraph operators in America falsely pass himself off as a Ph.D.?
Edward I. Gelb of Los Angeles isn't saying.

Since 1969, after completing training at the Backster School of Lie Detection in San Diego, Gelb claims to have conducted in excess of 30,000 polygraph examinations. Along with attorney F. Lee Bailey, Gelb appeared on a nationally syndicated television program called "Lie Detector." Gelb has been interviewed about polygraph matters on such national television programs as "Entertainment Tonight," "Geraldo Rivera Live," "CNN Newstand," and CNN's "Larry King Live" show. His high profile clients include O.J. Simpson and John and Patsy Ramsey (parents of JonBenet Ramsey, whose murder remains unsolved). Gelb is a past president, executive director, and chairman of the board of the American Polygraph Association and in 1998 earned the association's Leonarde Keeler Award "for long and distinguished service to the polygraph profession."

Gelb has publicly claimed to hold a Ph.D. degree in psychology since at least 1996. In 1997, he represented himself as a Ph.D. to the highest court in the land -- the United States Supreme Court -- as a co-signer of the Committee of Concerned Social Scientists' amicus brief in U.S. v. Scheffer, where he is listed as "Ed Gelb, Ph.D."

But compelling evidence pieced together by discussants on the AntiPolygraph.org message board indicates that Gelb never earned a doctoral degree from any accredited university. The comprehensive Dissertation Abstracts database (the definitive worldwide collection of doctoral dissertations including over 1.6 million records dating back to 1861) includes no doctoral dissertation by an Edward Gelb.

Gelb did not return phone phone calls and e-mail seeking clarification regarding his educational background. However, AntiPolygraph.org has obtained a copy of Gelb's resume (80 kb PDF) that was included in court documents filed in a civil suit in 2002. Writing about himself in the third person, here is what Gelb says about his educational background: "Dr. Gelb was educated at the University of Southern California, LaSalle University and U.C.L.A.. He has been awarded a bachelor's degree in political science, a master's degree in psychology and a doctorate in psychology."

Gelb doesn't state where or when he earned which degree. Perhaps Gelb would like us to infer that he listed the universities in the same order that he listed his degrees and that he earned a bachelor's degree at USC, a master's degree at LaSalle, and a doctorate at UCLA. But this is certainly not the case. If Gelb had earned his Ph.D. at UCLA (or USC), his dissertation would surely be included in the Dissertation Abstracts database. That leaves LaSalle University. There is a legitimate institution of higher learning called LaSalle University in Philadelphia, but it awarded its first Ph.D. degree of any kind in 2002, years after Gelb began putting the letters "Ph.D." after his name. Ed Gelb didn't earn a doctoral degree there.

No, the "LaSalle University" that awarded Gelb his "doctorate" turns out to be a defunct, unaccredited diploma mill in Mandeville, Louisiana that was owned and operated by one Thomas James Kirk, A.K.A. Thomas McPherson. In 1996, LaSalle was raided by the FBI, and in 1997 Kirk pled guilty to federal fraud charges. (For more on the bogus LaSalle University, see "The swim 'doctor': Credentials of nutrition adviser to U.S. women's team questioned," by Danny Robbins and Margaret Jamison, Houston Chronicle, 7 September 2000 and "Chiropractors with False credentials and diplomas" on ChiroWatch.com.)

Mr. Edward I. Gelb is no Ph.D., and he should stop masquerading as such.
Edited 7/6/2003 9:25:09 AM ET by SABREENAKATZ

From: SABREENAKATZ Jul-6 8:02 pm
To: AMORE29 unread (8 of 21)
1153.8 in reply to 1153.7

Actually, I guess this info has been out awhile even though this page says June 21,2003. Someone just emailed me a link to this page by Cutter, I had never seen it before:


It would make a nice little article in the Enquirer, though.

From: KOLDKASE2 Jul-7 11:46 am
To: SABREENAKATZ (16 of 21)
1153.16 in reply to 1153.15

Hey, anybody besides me remember the "resume" Jams posted on her forum in response to Cutter's website about Gelb being a LIAR...how ironic for a polygraph "expert," huh? hehehehe Well, that resume was apparently one that Gelb sent to Jams...and it was so distorted it was illegible, even though it was typeface. How that worked I have no idea, unless it was a jpeg. All he could send was a "picture" of his resume? When his credibility is called into question, he sends something that no one can read as proof? Oh, how RAMSEY of him. So Jams, of course, posted what was on it which she "transcribed," if I remember correctly. What a hoot!

I have a copy somewhere but can't find any on disc yet. Mine may even be just on hard copy. Anyone else got it who can post it? Jayelles?

From: JAYELLES Jul-10 8:11 am
To: KOLDKASE2 (33 of 69)
1153.33 in reply to 1153.16

Is this what you are looking for? It's very poor quality. IMO, it has been stored as a bitmap file at some point. I can't read it, but it's what was saved on that webpage:-)
Edited 7/10/2003 8:12:33 AM ET by JAYELLES
- Attachments follow -

NOTE FROM Webmaster: See text transcript further down this page of the graphic titled, "gelbresu.gif"

From: SABREENAKATZ Jul-11 10:53 pm
To: RTE66 (55 of 69)
1153.55 in reply to 1153.53

Thanks for posting the transcripts.

Meanwhile I find what Lin Wood said on Larry King tonight very interesting in view of the fact that he staged this dog and pony show polygraph press conference. He said in regards to a polygraph "IT IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC INSTRUMENT THAT DETERMINES THE TRUTH AND LIES"

(Larry King Live July 11, 2003)

KING: Should they have taken a state-sponsored polygraph?

WOOD: No. I wouldn't let any client of mine do it. I didn't let Richard Jewell do it, wouldn't let the Ramseys do it...

KING: Why not? Why not?

WOOD: Because it's not a scientific instrument that determines the truth and lies.

KING: You don't like it?

WOOD: "I know it for what it is. I mean, the truth is, it is an interrogation tool. It is an investigative tool that law enforcement uses as a method of interrogation and intimidation. And there's no upside for you.

If they think you were involved and you pass, if they are willing to pass you, they're not going to stop investigating you. But more likely, they're going to say it's inconclusive, or they're going to say you didn't pass. But they're going to use that as a way to interrogate you after you take the test. And that's what it's really designed to do. And that's the way law enforcement looks at it, and I wouldn't let any client do it, because particularly where you have a police department as prejudiced as this department was against this family."
Edited 7/12/2003 1:12:29 AM ET by SABREENAKATZ

2002-00-00: EDWARD I. GELB Resume as transcribed from graphic posted at www.webbsleuths.com

Intercept, Inc
4201 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 312
Los Angeles, California 90010
(323) 932-0200 FAX (323) 932-0706


Forensic Psychophysiologist


Dr. Gelb was formally trained in the polygraph techique at the Backster School of Lie Detection. He has conducted in excess of 30,000 polygraph examinations since 1969 and has testified as an expert in front of courts and legislative bodies throught the country. Dr. Gelb has conducted spcific criminal incident examinations for Fortune 500 companies, criminal defense attorneys, proseutors and governmental agencies. He was appointed by the Los Angeles Superior Court to administor 400 polygraph examinations to effect settlement of two class action suits. Dr. Gelb is one of the few experts whose testimony is accepted byt he Los Angeles Police Commission. He has polygraphed for the Federal Public Defender's office and the Los Angeles County District Attorney's office. He presently conducts examinations for hundreds of attorneys as well as five police agencies. He is called upon to present expert testimony in polygraphy and conduct quality control reviews of both law enforcement and private sector polygraphy examinations. Dr. Gelb has been in the investigative field since 1956. He was a detective and lieutenant with the Los Angeles Police Department where he was the recipient of the Medal of Valor.

Mr. Gelb was educated at the University of Southern California, LaSalle University and U.C.L.A. He has been awarded a bachelor's degree in political science, a master's degree in psychology. His teaching credentials include programs at U.S.C., Delta College, and the Polytechnic Institute in Madrid, Spain. Dr. Gelb was appointed an adjunct faculty member of the Departmentof Defense Polygraph Institute. He has conducted research in lie detection under the auspices of the United States Government.

Dr. Gelb lectures on an on-going basis at continuing education seminars throughout the United States, Europe and South America. He taught polygraphy at a school fully accredited byt he American Polygraphy Association and taught "Detection of Deception" under the auspices of the American Society For Industrial Security. Dr. Gelb was a guest instructor at the Federal Bureau of Investigation's advance polygraph course.

Dr. Gelb serves as President Executive Director and Chairmen of the Board of the American Polygraph Association. He is an Honorary fellow of the Academy of Certified Polygraphists. He has held General Polygraph Licenses from the states of California, Oregon, Utah and Arizona. He is a member of the California Association of Polygraph Examiners, Northwest Polygraphy Examiner's Association, Ohio Association of Polygraphy Examiners, and the American Society For Industrial Security. He held life membership on the American Polygraph Association and was the first person honored as the Polygraph of the (???) Academy of Certified Polygraphists. Dr. Gelb is a Fellow of the American College of Forensic Examiners.

Dr. Gelb was selected by Columbia P (???) Polygraph profession in nationally syndicated television program during which 46 cases were examined by polygraph without a single detection error. Dr. Gelb conducted polygraph examinations (???) for Madrid, Spains Channel ? Television station Telecinco for two years. He is a recipient of the prestigious Leonarde Keeler award presented by the Amerian Polygraph Association. Dr. Gelb has been certified (???) clinical polygraph examinations of sex offenders.

A COMPLETE SECURITY SERVICE - UNDERCOVER iNVESTIGAITONS - Pre-Employment Screening - Polygraph - Shopping Service - Theater Investigations


[John Mark Karr Arrested]2006-08-16: Anderson Cooper 360 Degree Show - Guest: Ed Gelb on Arrest of John Mark Karr (Photo from Yahoo News)


FOREMAN: Mr. Gelb, what was your reaction to this news today?

ED GELB, ADMINISTERED RAMSEY POLYGRAPH TEST: I was absolutely ecstatic. Without being involved in a rush to judgment, it's been 10 long years since JonBenet was killed. And when I became involved in the case and polygraphed both Patsy and John, I was convinced and my polygraph was convinced that they were completely innocent. There was no deception indicated.

FOREMAN: You polygraphed them five times, I'm told. And what were the five separate tests for?

GELB: For Patsy, there were three separate examinations. One dealt with whether she inflicted the blows that caused the death of JonBenet. One examination asked her whether she knew who killed JonBenet. And the third examination dealt with the ransom note. John Ramsey was tested on whether he killed JonBenet and whether he knew who killed JonBenet.

FOREMAN: And all of the results on everything came back negative?

GELB: Conclusively truthful. Those polygraph charts were then quality controlled, blind scored by the pioneer of the industry, Cleev Baxter (ph), who independently corroborated my findings.

FOREMAN: Why did the Ramseys -- I know from covering this one of the issues was that the Ramseys hired you. And many people were saying, why didn't they just walk into the police or the state police or the FBI and say, you're independent. Check us out. Not somebody who they paid.

GELB: Well, a couple of reasons. One, I don't think their attorney, Lin Wood, completely trusted the government. He had had an experience with the Atlanta bombing, and I think he was a little gun shy. But you can ask Lin Wood about that.

FOREMAN: You're talking about Lin Wood, the attorney for the Ramseys, or for John Ramsey?

GELB: That's correct.

Secondly, my expertise is probably greater than that of the people that you're speaking about who might have conducted the examination. I've been in the polygraph field since 1968. I'm the past president of the American Polygraph Association. And I stopped counting at 20,000 polygraph examinations. Why not hire an expert like me to resolve this issue?

FOREMAN: Why did they take the lie detector test at all? Do you think this was to advance the case, or was it mainly to quiet the public? Do you have any sense with that?

GELB: Well, certainly there was a media frenzy every time John or Patsy came into the public. And I think there were hopes that the police, knowing the results of the examination, would double their efforts and find out who killed JonBenet.

FOREMAN: All right. Thank you so much, Mr. Gelb, joining us from southern California with your expertise in all of this.

[Boulder DA Mary Lacy Press Conference - Photo By Ed Andrieski]2006-08-29: Boulder District Attorney, Mary Lacy Press Conference
"No-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction"

Man: "Speaking of the ongoing nature of your investigation, then would it be fair to say that is any involvement by John or Patsy Ramsey completely ruled out by your office? Are you committed to an intruder theory of the crime?"

Mary Lacy: "What we are committed to is solving the crime if we possibly can.. You know, there’s these terms out there “Umbrella of suspicion”, we don’t use that.
You know, no-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction, in court beyond a reasonable doubt. And I don’t think you will get any prosecutor… unless they were present with the person at the time of the crime… to clear someone. Where, like in this case the facts are so strange … you know… obviously the family was in the house at the time… the DNA does not match … now … so what we can say is … I think an expert said it’s… you have to look at stranger, male DNA in the underwear of the dead victim."

CLICK HERE: Flight 755 15th Street Main Directory

Home 1998 to 2007 ACandyRose©