Since: Feb 13

Location hidden

#390 Mar 18, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm sure Patsy kept her eyes open for everything, whether through splayed fingers or not. When Fleet White called for an ambulance, Patsy didn't even get up. When someone calls for an ambulance, first thoughts are that someone is alive and needs medical attention. I guess she knew that an ambulance is not really what they needed.
She made no attempt to get up or call for an ambulance. After Arndt declared her dead, then Patsy knew enough to get up and throw herself all over JBR, assuring that evidence would be tainted.
Yep, you'd think the mother would come running when she heard "call an ambulance," especially since, as you said, she knew enough to get up and throw herself on the body.

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#391 Mar 18, 2013
Anti-A wrote:
post #375, 376 & 377 were all posted within one minute of each other. so unless you can type 110 words a minute capricorn then you must be anti-k.
How about we just call you Miss Lin da for short. That is your name correct.
I write in Word and then copy/paste to topix. I often compose several posts at once and then post as a single block.

I don’t think Capricorn posts as anyone other than Capricorn. We disagree almost completely on everything, but I consider him/her to be a poster of some integrity.

You can call me anything you want, even Miss Lin da,‘though I don’t understand the reference.


AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#392 Mar 18, 2013
The Truth Hurts wrote:
<quoted text>
Please don't make anyone explain AGAIN why the Ramseys needed to write that note.
Please don't make anyone explain AGAIN why the body wasn't removed.
And there you go again with the "all the doors were locked" BS. Have we not established that JR later recanted that they were all locked? The alleged open window was staged. It doesn't matter what JR initially told the cops. Why did he change his story later?
Seriously, having discussion with you is on par with slamming my head repeatedly into a brick wall. Same results. ;)
No one has to explain AGAIN why the body was not removed. I agreed awhile back to simply accept this as fact. They wouldn’t or couldn’t remove the body. Agreed.

The fact (fact because we all agree) that they would or could not remove the body makes the ransom note nonsensical and NO ONE HAS EXPLAINED THAT, YET!

What do you believe; Ramsey’s original claim that all the doors were locked or his retraction?


AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#393 Mar 18, 2013
kat wrote:
lol hey ak--you know what they should have done to show an intruder did it...they should have left the front door open and then acted completely shocked that it was open when the first officer arrived. patsy could emphatically throw herself into the door, weeping and wailing...your quote 'all they had to do was say the doors were unlocked'...that would be all they had to do for what purpose--to ensure they wouldn't be suspects. you're genius..if they just left a door ajar, or just STATED that the doors were open and your right--there would never have been an inquiry into whether j or p did it. case closed. they said the doors were open--there must have been an intruder. case closed lol
They could have simply said that the doors were not locked. It doesn’t prove anything, but it gives an intruder a way in and out without breaking in. Pretty simple, eh?

Here’s another idea, not as simple as the last, but still pretty simple. They open the garage door a couple feet, just enough that someone could have slid beneath it and into the garage. They did say that the door from the house to the garage was usually left unlocked. they wouldn’t even have to point this out to the police, they could simple leave it for them to discover on their own.

Bottom line, if you want people to believe that someone came into your house then you have to provide a means for their entry.


AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#394 Mar 18, 2013
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>
I believe Anti K said she composes all her posts in Word and copies and pastes them to the board.
Have you never seen 2 posters post at the same time? Are you new to the forums?
Anti-K is a he.


AK

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#395 Mar 19, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn’t matter how you explain it, nonsense will always be nonsense. The problem isn’t with me, it’s with the (RDI) nonsense. If the body was removed from the house, then (assuming RDI) the ransom would make sense. Since, the body was not removed, the note becomes nonsense.
The truth is that there isn’t a single RDI who doesn’t see the ransom note as evidence against the Ramseys. So, the idea that the ransom note “worked” for them is also nonsense.

AK
The truth is that you would be factually incorrect in your last sentence.

The Ramseys, nor anyone else, is in prison for this crime. The ransom note and everything else they did to commit and subsequently cover up this crime did in fact, WORK for them

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#396 Mar 19, 2013
realTopaz wrote:
<quoted text>
never mind Cap, it's like talking to Jodi Arias..round and round and round until you wish she would kill you, too! lol
LOL RT, too funny

I'm done with that aspect of the conversation. There is a reason my tagline is what it is.

I can explain it, but I can't understand it for anyone. Those who choose not to see the logic in what has been explained have done so willingly and never had any intentions of taking the answers and seriously considering them.

There are none so blind..........

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#397 Mar 19, 2013
Seuss is amused you speak of yourself in the third person.
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
Anti-K is a he.

AK

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#398 Mar 19, 2013
They did say that. The problem is they took both sides of the fence at different times to cover all their bases. They tried to provide a means for entry, it just didn’t work out as a point-of-entry for them, and they totally forgot a point-of-exit.
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
They could have simply said that the doors were not locked. It doesn’t prove anything, but it gives an intruder a way in and out without breaking in. Pretty simple, eh?
Here’s another idea, not as simple as the last, but still pretty simple. They open the garage door a couple feet, just enough that someone could have slid beneath it and into the garage. They did say that the door from the house to the garage was usually left unlocked. they wouldn’t even have to point this out to the police, they could simple leave it for them to discover on their own.
Bottom line, if you want people to believe that someone came into your house then you have to provide a means for their entry.

AK

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#399 Mar 19, 2013
When the odds reach in the IDI's favor (majority thinking as you do) you can still rudely call it nonsense, but not before. The majority isn't comprised of IDI. Just a handful of people who spin and twist whatever the subject is to squeexe into their own agenda.

Do you believe the Ramseys thought they would be taken away from the house and questioned by the police, or that the police would set up camp there in their home?
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn’t matter how you explain it, nonsense will always be nonsense. The problem isn’t with me, it’s with the (RDI) nonsense. If the body was removed from the house, then (assuming RDI) the ransom would make sense. Since, the body was not removed, the note becomes nonsense.

AK

Since: May 11

AOL

#400 Mar 19, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
LOL RT, too funny
I'm done with that aspect of the conversation. There is a reason my tagline is what it is.
I can explain it, but I can't understand it for anyone. Those who choose not to see the logic in what has been explained have done so willingly and never had any intentions of taking the answers and seriously considering them.
There are none so blind..........
I love your tagline..perfect! I'm tired of this tedious person who couldn't care less what the truth is, or what anyone else thinks it might be. If it incriminates a Ramsey, then it's "nonsense"..so let this IDIot think whatever and let's move on already! Really tired of giving jerks this much attention.

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#401 Mar 19, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
The truth is that you would be factually incorrect in your last sentence.
The Ramseys, nor anyone else, is in prison for this crime. The ransom note and everything else they did to commit and subsequently cover up this crime did in fact, WORK for them
You could claim that it worked if the Ramseys were guilty and if the note was the reason that they were never charged. I don’t think either case is true, I think that if the Ramseys had been charged or if a trial had ever occurred than the note would be an integral piece of any prosecution.

I also suspect that the note played a central role in the grand jury’s decision to indict.

Since virtually all RI are convinced that one Ramsey or the other wrote the note, it becomes strange that they would argue that the note “worked” for them.
..

AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#402 Mar 19, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
Seuss is amused you speak of yourself in the third person.
<quoted text>
AK is amused that Seuss is amused.:)


AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#403 Mar 19, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
They did say that. The problem is they took both sides of the fence at different times to cover all their bases. They tried to provide a means for entry, it just didn’t work out as a point-of-entry for them, and they totally forgot a point-of-exit.
<quoted text>
Sorry, but there’s no evidence to show that a Ramsey or anyone tried to stage any break-in anywhere.


AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#404 Mar 19, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
When the odds reach in the IDI's favor (majority thinking as you do) you can still rudely call it nonsense, but not before. The majority isn't comprised of IDI. Just a handful of people who spin and twist whatever the subject is to squeexe into their own agenda.
Do you believe the Ramseys thought they would be taken away from the house and questioned by the police, or that the police would set up camp there in their home?
<quoted text>
I have no idea what the majority is composed of and this isn’t the sort of thing that gets decided like that.

Assuming RDI, yes, I think that the Ramseys should have believed that they would be taken away from the house and questioned by the police AFTER the body was discovered. Yes, I think they should have realized regardless of involvement that the police would set up camp in their home.


AK
The Truth Hurts

Redford, MI

#405 Mar 19, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
No one has to explain AGAIN why the body was not removed. I agreed awhile back to simply accept this as fact. They wouldn’t or couldn’t remove the body. Agreed.
The fact (fact because we all agree) that they would or could not remove the body makes the ransom note nonsensical and NO ONE HAS EXPLAINED THAT, YET!
What do you believe; Ramsey’s original claim that all the doors were locked or his retraction?

AK
I think he/they meant to throw out certain people as suspects from the start; therefore it is not important which claim was correct.
I don't think they knew or cared if doors were locked or unlocked since they already knew there was no intruder. Moot point.

JR claiming that it was an "inside job" was not something he thought up when JB was found in the wine cellar. He intended for it to look like an "inside job" from the start. IMO

When he realized that they were suspects, THEN he started throwing crap out there, such as the window being open in the train room and recanting that all of the doors were locked.
The Truth Hurts

Redford, MI

#406 Mar 19, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
They could have simply said that the doors were not locked. It doesn’t prove anything, but it gives an intruder a way in and out without breaking in. Pretty simple, eh?
Here’s another idea, not as simple as the last, but still pretty simple. They open the garage door a couple feet, just enough that someone could have slid beneath it and into the garage. They did say that the door from the house to the garage was usually left unlocked. they wouldn’t even have to point this out to the police, they could simple leave it for them to discover on their own.
Bottom line, if you want people to believe that someone came into your house then you have to provide a means for their entry.

AK
Really? What do you think that lie about the open window was all about? lol
The Truth Hurts

Redford, MI

#407 Mar 19, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, but there’s no evidence to show that a Ramsey or anyone tried to stage any break-in anywhere.

AK
Hole in basement window, lies about the window being open and a suitcase under the window that "wasn't supposed to be there" ring a bell?
PASSION

Marrakech, Morocco

#408 Mar 19, 2013
very true indeed john ramsey kept saying things that didnt report as time goes on and as the safer he felt. to further hide what happens from LE he knew exactly what to say and when to shut up , and sending burke to the white that morning and claiming that he slept through it all was later corrected because of the pineapple found in jonbenet digestive sytstem and, that he didnt know that burke was indeed awake , that's only because of the 911 call of course and also its like hitting 2 birds with one stone , firstly to show that burke didnt tell him until later , and to show the world that he is cooperating with the police that soon as he found out he reported it IMO JOHN RAMSEY IS THE PERP.

Since: May 11

AOL

#409 Mar 19, 2013
PASSION wrote:
very true indeed john ramsey kept saying things that didnt report as time goes on and as the safer he felt. to further hide what happens from LE he knew exactly what to say and when to shut up , and sending burke to the white that morning and claiming that he slept through it all was later corrected because of the pineapple found in jonbenet digestive sytstem and, that he didnt know that burke was indeed awake , that's only because of the 911 call of course and also its like hitting 2 birds with one stone , firstly to show that burke didnt tell him until later , and to show the world that he is cooperating with the police that soon as he found out he reported it IMO JOHN RAMSEY IS THE PERP.
ahh, here's the rub..John said Burke had "tears in his eyes". If Burke told him he was awake during 911, he wouldn't know if Burke was crying or what he looked like.
I completely agree with your post, especially the last sentence.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
ICU2 's Child Trafficking 9 hr ICU2 195
Home Invasion (Aug '09) Sat candy 21
Question about the red turtleneck (Jul '10) Fri candy 127
Patsy to Priscilla "Call the FBI" Fri candy 4
Did Hunter Know? May 22 candy 7
Ransom Note was random May 22 Just Wondering 26
Jeffrey MacDonald Is Guilty (Sep '08) May 20 JTF 7,525
More from around the web