Posted on Cybersleuths Forum

www.cybersleuths.com

MaskedMan

Member

Member # 44

Rate Member posted 09-11-1999 05:11 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is part of the "Complaint and Jury Demand" filed on May 19, 1998 by Linda Arndt's attorneys:

LINDA ARNDT,

Plaintiff,

THOMAS KOBY and the CITY OF BOULDER,

Defendants.

GENERAL ALLEGATIONS...

7. Detective Arndt has been employed by the City of Boulder's police department since March 1988...

9. From December 26, 1996 until May 1997, Detective Arndt was assigned to the investigation of the murder of JonBenet Ramsey...

11. Detective Arndt was the first police detective on the scene at the Ramsey house following the murder...

13. Among the statements about Detective Arndt that have appeared in one or more media publications are statements to the effect that:

(a) During her initial visit to the crime scene, Detective Arndt covered the victim's unclothed body with a sheet, disturbing physical evidence.

(b) During her initial visit to the crime scene, Detective Arndt noticed a flashlight but failed to collect it as evidence...

(e) ...Arndt permitted John Ramsey to leave the house...

(f) ...Arndt refused to allow the FBI to enter the house,

(g) ...Arndt gave a photocopy of the ransom note to the Ramseys...

(i) ...Arndt went on medical leave because of guilt over mishandling the Ramsey investigation

14. The purported facts above are not factual. Rather, each and every one of them is incorrect and false.

15. The publication and broadcast of such false statements has defamed Detective Arndt and sullied the reputation she has earned as a police officer and detective.

16. The publications and broadcasts have either stated or implied that Detective Arndt "bungled" the investigation in its early stages and is partly if not largely responsible for the problems that have plagued the investigation of the Ramsey murder.

17. The Boulder Police Department and Chief Koby in particular have been aware...that these statements about Detective Arndt were untrue and were creating an unfair and damaging public perception about Detective Arndt's role in the Ramsey investigation.

19. However, despite the knowledge that untrue and unfair commentary about Detective Arndt's role have been repeatedly published in the media, neither Chief Koby nor others under his charge have advised the media that these statements about Detective Arndt are untrue.

20. In June 1997, Detective Arndt met with the then second-in-command John Eller, and asked that he act to correct the public misconceptions about her role and to stand behind her publicly. He did not do so.

21. In October 1997, Detective Arndt, through legal counsel, sent a letter to Chief Koby requesting that he take action to correct the public record on Detective Arndt's behalf.

22. Chief Koby...indicated that he agreed that the statements being circulated about Detective Arndt were false and unjust. He agreed also that correcting the record publicly about these particular matters would not require disclosure of confidential information that would compromise the investigation.

23. However, Chief Koby indicated that he was not willing to go to the media and attempt to correct the record on these false statements about Detective Arndt's role...

26. Chief Koby made it clear that if Detective Arndt spoke to the media about the Ramsey investigation and thereby violated his policy, she would be subject to discipline...

34. Being held up in the public eye as someone who bungled the investigation and who committed the specific mistakes listed in this complaint has not only harmed Detective Arndt's well-earned reputation but has caused emotional distress.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

(U.S. Constitution -- First Amendment)

36. By forbidding Detective Arndt from speaking out... defendants have violated Detective Arndt's right of free speech under the First Amendment...

37. Defendants' conduct involves reckless or callous indifference to Detective Arndt's constitutional rights...

39. Detective Arndt should also receive reasonable compensatory damages...

WHEREFORE, Detective Arndt respectfully requests a judgment declaring that the conduct of the defendants was unlawful; and rewarding reasonable compensatory damages...

Detective Arndt requests a jury trial on all issues and claims so triable.

Respectfully submitted,

Brooke Jackson

[et. al.]

Attorneys for Plaintiff

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posts: 820 | From: Boulder, CO USA | Registered: Mar 99 | IP: Logged

MaskedMan

Member

Member # 44

Rate Member posted 09-11-1999 08:23 PM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here are all the alleged false claims against Linda Arndt, as listed in her lawsuit:

"(a) During her initial visit to the crime scene, Detective Arndt covered the victim's unclothed body with a sheet, disturbing physical evidence.

(b) During her initial visit to the crime scene, Detective Arndt noticed a flashlight but failed to collect it as evidence, thus permitting it to be lost.

(d) ...Arndt destroyed other, unspecified physical evidence;

(e) ...Arndt permitted John Ramsey to leave the house for an extended period of time;

(f) ...Arndt refused to allow the FBI to enter the house;

(g) ...Arndt gave a photocopy of the ransom note to the Ramseys;

(h) ...Arndt may have "hacked" into the Boulder Police Department's computer files; and

(i) ...Arndt went on medical leave because of guilt over mishandling the Ramsey investigation.

14. The purported facts above are not factual. Rather, each and every one of them is incorrect and false."

[MaskedMan's comment:

I've never heard some of these charges made against Linda Arndt. For instance, who ever claimed that she "hacked" the cops' computer? It's also significant that she doesn't deny the main criticism of her, namely, that she told John Ramsey and Fleet to look around the house and that she let them contaminate the crime scene.]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posts: 820 | From: Boulder, CO USA | Registered: Mar 99 | IP: Logged

MaskedMan

Member

Member # 44

Rate Member posted 09-12-1999 11:23 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Patsy was in a back room ("the study" in Schiller's blueprints) behind the kitchen, not in the sunroom, when the body was found. Patsy didn't see the body and wasn't told that JonBenet was dead until Patsy was led into the living room. She was strangely reluctant to enter the room where her daughter lay.

JonBenet's body wasn't "unclothed" when brought up from the basement. At the start of the autopsy report, the coroner describes the clothes that he saw on her body during his visit to the house on the night of Dec. 26, 1996.

As for Linda Arndt's lawsuit, her lawyers would have us believe that she was the victim of false media stories. But the lawsuit doesn't deny that Arndt told John Ramsey and Fleet White to search the house, thereby allowing them to disturb the crime scene. Even if Chief Koby had let Arndt "correct the record," she still couldn't have redeemed her image, considering the undeniable mistakes that she made.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posts: 820 | From: Boulder, CO USA | Registered: Mar 99 | IP: Logged