Since: May 11

Seattle, WA

#36 Apr 3, 2012
The Truth Hurts wrote:
<quoted text>
You do know that was the forum virus, right? And Topix has deleted that post but now you've enabled it to "live on."
Not trying to be a jerk but PLEASE do not quote the troll.
Like I said before, it defeats the purpose of reporting them.
sorry, I forgot.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#39 Apr 4, 2012
M Michigan wrote:
<quoted text>
Can you add to this?
thanks
Only that a picture is worth a thousand words.

Since: Sep 08

Location hidden

#40 Apr 4, 2012
Sorry for the double post.
Travis

Chicago, IL

#45 Apr 10, 2012
John lost just about everything he owned. He paid multiple millions for lawyers and investigators and the PR guys.
He was whipped in more painful ways than just finances, too.
He lost his baby girl, while he slept. He will never recover from that. He didn't protect her from this devil nor did he stop the avalanche of media from destroying his family's privacy and sense of security.
Many owe him their deepest regrets.

--Wow! Just wow!
Couldn't agree with you all more!
And like you, I admire a loving father who has done all these things and more, much more, I'm sure. What a shrewdy!
I wonder, though, if he doesn't regret not killing both children? He could have doubled his profits without increasing his initial investment; the total risk would have been about the same. Hmmm
Maybe it's not too late. He could get at least two more book deals and perhaps a Pulitzer.
I think this could be the start of something big. You guys were right, by golly.
Maybe a movie production business featuring sequels.
For instance,
Who Murdered My Kid?
Did You Murder My Kid?
Would You Like To Murder My Kid?
I'd Like To Murder My Kid.
May I Murder Your Kid?
Who Murdered My Kid? II
Who Murdered My Other Kid?
Who murdered My Other Kid? II
Should You Murder Your Kid?(Subtitled, What The Hell, Might As Well!)
Let's All Kill A Few Brats Today, What The Hey?
I see enormous production value here. Wow. How brilliant.
I am sure the two of them had it all worked out long ago. Awesome!
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#50 Feb 28, 2013
Should say Steve Thomas! Slip of the mind!!

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#51 Feb 28, 2013
Jonbenet wasn't murdered. She died from a brain injury that was an accident and her parents staged and invented the rest as a marketing ploy to direct attention away from the ugly dysfunctional family they created.

The Ramsey kids didn't poop on the potty , an exhibited symptom of sexual abuse. Jonbenet's autopsy showed chronic changes to her vagina from repeated sexual trauma. Burke was obvioulsy not autopsied but his medical records were hidden and given an 'island of privacy' status. One reason boy's his age leave there BM 'out' is beacuse they have been sodomized.

The question isn't how much had John Ramsey 'made' but how much should he have to pay to all that have suffered damages as a result of empty accusations.

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#52 Feb 28, 2013
The people that helped them pull it off should also be held accountable. The DAís office was not an honest transparent agency. Alex Hunterís work was corrupt and influenced by inappropriate factors.

The Grand Jury voted to indict John and Patsy Ramsey for involvement in what transpired. Too bad they didnít have an ability to indict Hunter. The DAís office was manipulative with specific dishonest intent.

This is my claim and I am free to say so.
OpenMind

Chagrin Falls, OH

#55 Feb 28, 2013
FreeCanadianGuy wrote:
I have spent literally hundreds of hours studying this case, have read nearly everything ever written about it, both published, and posted on the net, and have viewed every report, deposition, Interview, and photograph ever made public in relation to this case, and analyzed it all as objectively as humanly possible, and I believe there is not a chance that either of the parents, or Burke, had anything to do with JonBenet's murder. I believe everything they claimed from the start, to be the truth, and can find no inconsistency in their stories, not a hint of deception, or insincerity.
'...can find no inconsistency in their stories, not a hint of deception, or insincerity.'... And you spend hundreds of hours and find no LIES and no INCONSISTENCY?...You must be kidding or you need the reading glasses or you've been study the wrong case.....
OpenMind

Chagrin Falls, OH

#56 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
Patsy killed JonBenet deliberately, no one else was involved. The Grand Jury was incorrect. Hunter was correct to not indict both parents.
BB, I'm sure you know that 'killed deliberately'= premeditation = planning... So, I'm going to ask you: are you sure Patsy had PLAN to do it?
OpenMind

Chagrin Falls, OH

#58 Feb 28, 2013
BB, what you described as the outcome of an 'advanced psychotics' condition could be quesioning by the 'normal' people from this perspective:

- does this kind of behavior 'sickness' has ONE-TIME or LONG-TIME-REPEATING pattern?
- does this disorder has triggers and if yes then which triggers could be applicable on/during Dec 25, 1996?
- which attributes dereferencing the 'advanced' versa (let say)'beginnng' stage?

The reason I'm askng you these questions is not to doubt your knowledge but to UNDERSTAND:

- why 10 years after JB's murder no other dead bodies were found (means, why Patsy didn't kill anyone else since? does her sickness went away?) AND
- why John stays/supports her (not sending her to the psychiatric 'mad-house' for the sake of Burke's life)?

Because what you've dscribed is pretty dangerous condition to leave along without proper treatment. Kind of like playing russian roulette....

FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#62 Feb 28, 2013
moonjack wrote:
The people that helped them pull it off should also be held accountable. The DAís office was not an honest transparent agency. Alex Hunterís work was corrupt and influenced by inappropriate factors.
The Grand Jury voted to indict John and Patsy Ramsey for involvement in what transpired. Too bad they didnít have an ability to indict Hunter. The DAís office was manipulative with specific dishonest intent.
This is my claim and I am free to say so.
What I find amazing is how at one point, practically the only line of communication between the DA's office and the BPD was a junior reporter for the Globe! On many forums, people cite the Globe as being the source of many facts about the case, and immediately discredit anything it has published, given the paper's track record. Anybody who has knowledge of the dynamics between the various agencies involved in the investigation knows that uncharacteristicaly, the Globe was actually the voice of the investigation, for a time, and the mainstream media took on more of a circus atmosphere, their reporting boardering on the sensational incredulity normally reserved for the likes of " the Inquirer", and " the Globe"!
The Breakdown in relations between the various criminal justice enteties led to this anomaly, but I have to defend people who cite "the Globe" as being a credible source of journalistic integrity, for a time. This is freely admitted to by all parties, in books, interviews, TV appearances, et.
I am saying all that because things the globe claims, point directly to what you said, that the DA's office WAS manipulative and did have specific dishonest intent. The dynamics I just described are a direct result of the DA's agenda, and the office cut off direct communication with the BPD to avoid having to directly answer to his decisions, which were questionable at least, and at times bizarre! Hunter was the main reason, I think, this case was never solved.
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#65 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
The separation anxiety in Patsy was caused by the maturing of JonBenet going from infancy to childhood, gaining her own identity and making her own decisions. Remember Patsy had an identity fusion with JonBenet. As an object that carried the projection of Patsy's psyche the maturing of JonBenet was an image of Patsy's own mind getting away from her.
By stopping the object from growing and leaving Patsy attempted to prevent her mind from dissociating.
If this was true, does it necessarily exclude the possibility of an accidental injury? Maybe a bed wetting incident could have been the catalyst, but the anxiety you describe lead to an unintentional, reactionary assault? People who have Borderline personality can have momentary rage outbursts, that are immediately regretted. I'm not saying that in defence, or to put "lipstick on a pig" , but I still find it hard to believe that IF she is responsible, she acted with conscious malevolent intent. Her history, and subsequent life don't bear out evidence of her being inherently evil. Nobody interviewed could come up with one instance of an uncontrolled violent outburst, or expression of discontent with her children, but that doesn't exclude the possibility of a single unique event. People with BP are good at hiding things, but cracks do show inevitably.
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#66 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
The triggers were her cancer, her 40th birthday and JonBenet's coming 7th and the last Christmas before those events.
This was a one time event as JonBenet was the object that carried the projection of Patsy's psyche and was taken into her with the death.
The goal, Victory!, was reached.
And don't think of this as a murder, it was a creative act, a work of art to Patsy.
And John did not support her. To this day he deludes himself that she was not evil enough to do what was done to JonBenet.
What do you make of the idea that the phrase " maybe I Shall Be The Conqueror, and live in multiple peace" was in the common vernacular of young people ( high school aged ) in and around Atlanta at the time Jon Mark Karr ( and patsy) were in high school, and hence his use of the phrase in his yearbook, not as an indictment of Karr, who had NOTHING to do with the case, but as a bit of anecdotal evidence to point to that phrase as probably being the basis of the acronym S.B.T.C. Victory!
Patsy would have been in high school in Atlanta when that phrase was going around, so it could indeed point to her, OR, someone her age, a peer, or jealous classmate? Not likely, BUT someone from her past may have written that as a clue as to their identity that only Patsy would get? A rival, romantically, or in pageantry?
A stretch, but something I always thought about. It could explain Patsy feeling " guilt", and her " knowing" who did it? A threat from her past. " you might win now, but i'll get you some day, and you will know it was me". Now she is being forced to take responsibility for JB's death, not directly , but because of a battle earlier in life? Because of her ego?
I realize this is not that intuitive anexplaination, and I'm not saying it because I want patsy to be innocent, but because knowledge of this phrase and it's popularity in Atlanta, at a crucial time in Patsy's social development ( high school) raises the possibility, and I had to look at it. Again this is not an ironclad theory, but I always thought that if JB's death wasn't a result of a moment of rage, it had to be something from the past, and John Ramsey is a person not likely to have ever inflamed the passions of someone by unfair treatment, and he has NO link to Atlanta in his past, and is of the wrong age to know of the SBTC phrase! Just a couple of thoughts, but a possibility, no doubt!
The Truth Hurts

Detroit, MI

#68 Feb 28, 2013
Oh come on now, SIG (aka "The Count"). That isn't why you were banned and you know it. There are still plenty of IDIs posting on this forum whose posts have not been deleted.

Topix does not have a dog in this IDI vs. RDI "fight."
The fact is, you were banned as "Sig Turner" for being a rude obnoxious troll and then you tried to pass yourself off as a new user and was busted.

Why should you be allowed to post under a new hat when you were banned before?

Put on your big boy panties and deal with it. Maybe if you played nice you wouldn't be banned.
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#70 Feb 28, 2013
Why are some of my comments being removed? It seems like some of my more objective comments that don't support a particular view point, being removed, yet the ones that at least lend credibility to the other view point not? Why do people have to pay games like this? Is nobody interested in a productive and open discussion, or debate? I don't understand.
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#71 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
<quoted text>
Very weak effort, very thin whitewash.
Weak effort, whitewash, lol, well that's a scathing rebuke! I now see your point of view as being the only credible scenario! Whatever!
Whatever you call it, it's true, and the lack of blow by blow discreditation of my assertions is a fairly good testament to that. I am looking at the same case, and I stand by everything I've said.
I have to ask this. Do you know anyone with Boarderline personality disorder? Do you know people who are dissociative?

Ok stop... just a Point, I'm not asking this to start an argument or to be dismissed as a fence painter, I'm serious. Try and actually engage in a productive discussion, somebody, please! I have a wealth of knowledgeon this case, and would love to have an intellectual exchange of these ideas with others! There MUST bebsomeone capable of that? The following statements are genuine and I'm looking for some intelligent engagement! It seems to be so elusive! Discussion or debate is not someone expressing an opinion and having somebody come back with " weak effort" talk about a self defining statement. Maybe I'm asking too much?

I have to ask this. Do you know anyone with Boarderline personality disorder? Do you know people who are dissociative?
I know many people with these conditions, and they are,not able to function like Patsy Ramsey did. Their lives are either completely messed up, constant interaction with law enforcement for road rage type incidents, a lot of problems being in public, and certainly not capable of functioning the way Patsey did. Most of them would struggle to organize a three legged race at a Sunday School picnic. Even the high functioning ones.
The ones I know who SEEM successful are actually spending most of their time maintaining a facade of normalcy, but people who are close to them know they have created a circumstance so precarious it teeters on the edge of falling down at any moment. People NOT close to them may not see all that deception, but they are aware of problems, always being late, often failing to show up for important meetings or engagements, they blame everyone else for their shortcomings, and pace themselves, delusionally , on a pedestal, claiming everything would fall apart without them. In many cases that's true because they have created this flimsy reality, that can only exist if people are kept in the dark and away from their day to day movements.
Patsy was so involved with so many things, and proved to be an efficient mover and doer, never late, never having to make excuses, never blaming others for the failure of things, because she didn't fail. She was incredibly organized, incredibly focused, and seen to be quite dependable by everyone. These divergent behaviours don't mesh, period.
Does anybody have an experience with a Boarderline Personality individual? Do you know anybody so afflicted that CAN occasionally function normally?

I guess it's time to face the barrage of predictably boring insults and discrediting remarks insulting my cognitive abilities. I 'll probably be judged a moron by the litany of geniuses who have so much incredible insight into things their ideas are beyond reproach! Whatever. I don't have much time for people who can't make intelligent comments, or are not open to the fact that someone else might have something insightful to offer.
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#74 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
<quoted text>
You miss the point even after I take pains to make the point clear.
The death of JonBenet at the hands of Patsy was not a violent outburst but rather it was a creative act. And it had nothing to do with JonBenet herself.
I didn't miss the point, I merely re- posted my comment after someone removed it. I don't expect everyone to agree with my opinions, nor should anybody else necessarily think that their opinions should be agreed with. I wasn't rejecting, or agreeing to your statement, just re-posting! Why can't people have an opinion without needing to have it recognized? Not recognizing it, by pointing it out specifically, is not a rejection! Just relax everyone!
The problem I see with these forums is that people can't just accept, this is someone's opinion. If I don't agree, it doesn't mean I have to start a war! With the divergence of opinions in our society, nobody would ever be able to do anything productive, we would just be arguing all the time!
Have you ever read something and thought, " interesting, but I don't SE it" and after some reflection, think, ok, this may have some credibility? Free and open exchange of ideas, with tolerance and respect, is imperative to the functioning of a free and open societies.
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#75 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
<quoted text>
You are lying. You searched the topic in order to manipulate it to your needs.
If you actually did know anyone with the affliction you would know they in fact function quite well and even excel in certain situations.
In case you missed it Patsy did have a little run in with police.
You know what I'm trying to have an intelligent exchange of ideas. Calling me a liar is laughable. I did nothing of the sort that you accuse me of. I know plenty of people with Borderline Personality, and Schizophrenia , and Autism, and bipolar disorder, among many others.
Patsy having a little run in with the police is not the same as being on the police's radar for multiple incidents of rage driven public outbursts. But who cares? Why are you so threatened by what I have to say? I' not saying you are wrong, or right, just expressing an opinion. Why do you feel compelled to want to strip away someone's credibility because they don't agree with you? Can't you just accept that others have differing opinions and respect that? Jeesh!
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#77 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
You are a pathological liar.
You made a play off of my assertion that Patsy was a borderline by searching the subject and posting an article to counter the assertion. When you were busted by your own posted article that substantiated my assertion you resorted to fabricating yourself as an expert.
The tip off is saying you know many people with these conditions when in fact the odds are very small that anyone would know a borderline and less for a dissociative.
You aso make the naked mistake of claiming to know too much about Patsy.
The lie you tell is to yourself that you are more experienced and more accomplished than you really are as compensation for insecurity and and a lack of self worth.
Fool yourself fool.
The "opinion" that you want accepted is the ruse you want to pull on people and pull off. Didn't work.
Man you are just paranoid! As clever as you think you are, everything you ar saying is just dead wrong! I'm not busted on anything! " my opinion I wanted accepted" ? Do you only read the points I make that feed your belligerence? I actually know dozens of people with the afore mentioned afflictions, why would I claim to if I didn't ? Insecurity? Lack of self worth? Lol! What are you talking about? Just because you say those hings doesn't make them true! Why do you insist on shredding people? Naked mistake? Lol, I'm just flabbergasted that you are so broken up over a coupe of comments I made!
Why do you find my level of knowledge of certain subjects so hard to swallow? Can you think of a circumstance where someone knows a bunch of people with varying psychological pathologies? Hint, I'm not a milk man, or paper boy! I know so much about this case because it's my business to know these things! I posted the article, like I said to spawn a discussion based on a comparative analysis, I thought it would provide a good frame of reference to start such an exchange.
I thought that was about to hapen, but predictably, it turned into a soapbox for a coupe of folks to further their theories. I said I have been looking for an outlet in which to engage in productive intelligent discussion and debate. That almost happened, but there are too many people who seem to have a vested personal interest in furthering their perspective theories to have a respectful objective exchange of ideas. I guess I have to continue my quest. Insulting people and calling them names doesn't constitute proving a point, it's a sign of a weak argument!
Good luck with what ever it is you are trying to achieve!
FreeCanadianGuy

Calgary, Canada

#79 Feb 28, 2013
Blue Bottle wrote:
You are a pathological liar.
You made a play off of my assertion that Patsy was a borderline by searching the subject and posting an article to counter the assertion. When you were busted by your own posted article that substantiated my assertion you resorted to fabricating yourself as an expert.
The tip off is saying you know many people with these conditions when in fact the odds are very small that anyone would know a borderline and less for a dissociative.
You aso make the naked mistake of claiming to know too much about Patsy.
The lie you tell is to yourself that you are more experienced and more accomplished than you really are as compensation for insecurity and and a lack of self worth.
Fool yourself fool.
The "opinion" that you want accepted is the ruse you want to pull on people and pull off. Didn't work.
I like that I'm a pathological liar. You understand the word association, but have little understanding of what it actually means.

I would suggest that YOU have been diagnosed with, or suspected of having Bipolar disorder, Borderline personality, Schizoid personality, or even Asperger's syndrome, at various points in your life. You have problems relating to other's socially, and find yourself frequently embroiled in arguments but can never concede that you might be wrong. This makes you angry and you have frequent emotional outbursts, making It difficult for others to want to spend time with you, so you spend a lot of time by yourself, or away from public places with crowds. You were alienated as a teenager, and had trouble maintaining meaningful relationships, and steady employment You have an inflated sense of self importance and have almost no capacity for empathy. You are inherently distrustful of others, and think you are better than just about everybody, although you struggle with everyday activities and have problems completing what you started. When you get frustrated by your shortcomings you lash out, first verbally, and then physically. If you have your mind set on a particular idea, you wouldn't change your opinion if direct proof was laid out in front of you.

Nobody is out to get you dude, you need to take a deep breath and rationalize the situations you find yourself in. It's OK for someone to have a different opinion than you. That doesn't make you any less relevant, nor does it imply that other opinions are wrong. Everybody sees things from different perspectives. The sooner you can accept that, the sooner you will feel better about yourself!

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
Note-odd detail? 16 min Undrtheradar 708
Burke Ramsey REFUSED to be interviewed by inves... (Sep '10) 10 hr Rupert 658
Boulder's JonBenet Ramsey, Sid Wells murders on... 14 hr Note 4
Jeffrey MacDonald Is Guilty (Sep '08) Sep 27 Bunny 7,478
Jonbenet's grave gives a clue? Sep 27 Legal__Eagle 15
Phone Records (Apr '14) Sep 22 Just Wondering 12
Chief James Kolar on the JonBenet Ramsey case, ... (Aug '13) Sep 21 Just Wondering 283

JonBenet Ramsey People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE