First Prev
of 10
Next Last
icedtea4me

Saint Louis, MO

#189 Dec 12, 2013
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi Cappy, how the heck are ya?
Looks like it is going to be a 'day', wish I could stick around for it, LMAO. With 'Redpill' back pedaling Mr. Cruel, AK deciding there was no foreign faction (duh!), and ITFM deciding 17 years later that the word 'faction' is incorrect you better remain seated and buckled in, and keep your arms inside until the ride comes to a complete stop. Ciao
17 years later? Wrong. I decided that the word "faction" could also be "factim" years ago when I read A Mother Gone Bad: The Hidden Confession of JonBenet's Killer by Dr. Andrew G. Hodges.

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#190 Dec 13, 2013
IMO, the comments Hodges made are pretty whacked, contrived, and really out there, but we each have our own rabbit hole through which to follow our theory, so who is to say if this is right or wrong? It sparsely garnered any following in a court of public opinion and I seriously doubt it would in a court of law. It is too subjective. I think you are giving PR far more credit than she deserves by believing what Hodges has to say.

You can look at some of the threads just on this board alone for more contrived thinking – the Smiley faced Killer thread for one. Here is an example:

“Just as with Michigan victim SACH and OCCK victim ROBINson, victim in VIRGIN ISLANDS is iSAAC ROBINs.
Michigan OCCK victims were missing CROSS & Saint CHRISTOPHER MEDAL. Missing Smiley Face victim missing in SACKVILLE. His name is CHRISTOPHER METALlic and went missing 11-25 on Sunday. Saint CHRISTOPHER MEDAL missing from OCCK victim and from Smiley Face victims. compare victims TINSley, victim CoOPER, HALL WILSON in IRONDOQUIST & Abel Bolanos in Wilson Hall, victim lieutenant RUST, Victim in IRON mountain Michigan had Smiley Face on neck and was dumped in DUNBAR because the false ZODIAC killer had called the Jim DUNBAR show.

Scientifically, it is like trying to force a square peg in a round hole. In more general or laymen terms, it is a jumbled mess, and not a scientific fact.
icedtea4me wrote:
<quoted text>
17 years later? Wrong. I decided that the word "faction" could also be "factim" years ago when I read A Mother Gone Bad: The Hidden Confession of JonBenet's Killer by Dr. Andrew G. Hodges.

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#192 Dec 16, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
IMO, the comments Hodges made are pretty whacked, contrived, and really out there, but we each have our own rabbit hole through which to follow our theory, so who is to say if this is right or wrong? It sparsely garnered any following in a court of public opinion and I seriously doubt it would in a court of law. It is too subjective. I think you are giving PR far more credit than she deserves by believing what Hodges has to say.
You can look at some of the threads just on this board alone for more contrived thinking – the Smiley faced Killer thread for one. Here is an example:
“Just as with Michigan victim SACH and OCCK victim ROBINson, victim in VIRGIN ISLANDS is iSAAC ROBINs.
Michigan OCCK victims were missing CROSS & Saint CHRISTOPHER MEDAL. Missing Smiley Face victim missing in SACKVILLE. His name is CHRISTOPHER METALlic and went missing 11-25 on Sunday. Saint CHRISTOPHER MEDAL missing from OCCK victim and from Smiley Face victims. compare victims TINSley, victim CoOPER, HALL WILSON in IRONDOQUIST & Abel Bolanos in Wilson Hall, victim lieutenant RUST, Victim in IRON mountain Michigan had Smiley Face on neck and was dumped in DUNBAR because the false ZODIAC killer had called the Jim DUNBAR show.
Scientifically, it is like trying to force a square peg in a round hole. In more general or laymen terms, it is a jumbled mess, and not a scientific fact.
<quoted text>
I lost faith and respect for Hodge when he wrote that the author of the note had cancer

I have known graphologists and know a little about it and that raised a big red flag for me. Graphologists can in fact detect illness in a handwriting and can even detect minor illnesses from major illnesses with handwriting and can even in some cases tell what part of the body is ailing based on the letters, BUT....I have never ever seen a professional actually attempt to pinpoint an exact illness such as cancer, etc.

They can say someone has a serious illness, is very sick and can use cancer as an example, but they do not diagnose actual disease. I have seen experts say that something is wrong with a person's leg/stomach area/head/etc., but have never known a graphologist to be able to tell what the illness is and to state a specific illness negates their credibility. They are handwriting analysts and not psychics and do not have x ray vision

Of course your above example magnifies the point in being able to make any scenario fit if you have the time to do the silly crap above

I say this as a person who will never believe that anyone other than Patsy wrote that note but to get to that conclusion did not include Hodges' analysis
icedtea4me

Saint Louis, MO

#193 Dec 16, 2013
Dr. Hodges is not a graphologist. He's a psychiatrist who analyzed not only the three page note, but Patsy's pre and post murder communications as well.

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#194 Dec 17, 2013
icedtea4me wrote:
Dr. Hodges is not a graphologist. He's a psychiatrist who analyzed not only the three page note, but Patsy's pre and post murder communications as well.
Yes I know but his analysis is still beyond lack of professional analysis no matter what his personal credentials were.

He went beyond the scope of what he should have done and certainly how he wrote it up

He was profiteering and that was obvious. Despite my agreement with who wrote the note, his analysis was inane at best from a professional standpoint IMO

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#195 Dec 18, 2013
I agree. People who are asked to perform certain functions from skills in their wheelhouse, should do that and nothing more - when they keep going further and further away from their expertise, they rapidly lose credibility.
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I know but his analysis is still beyond lack of professional analysis no matter what his personal credentials were.
He went beyond the scope of what he should have done and certainly how he wrote it up
He was profiteering and that was obvious. Despite my agreement with who wrote the note, his analysis was inane at best from a professional standpoint IMO
icedtea4me

Saint Louis, MO

#196 Dec 18, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
I agree. People who are asked to perform certain functions from skills in their wheelhouse, should do that and nothing more - when they keep going further and further away from their expertise, they rapidly lose credibility.
<quoted text>
Dr. Hodges's area of expertise is decoding messages from the subconscious embedded in messages from the conscious.

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#197 Dec 19, 2013
Then he should have stopped his assessment there!
icedtea4me wrote:
<quoted text>
Dr. Hodges's area of expertise is decoding messages from the subconscious embedded in messages from the conscious.
icedtea4me

Saint Louis, MO

#198 Dec 19, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
Then he should have stopped his assessment there!
<quoted text>
What else did he do besides that?
icedtea4me

Saint Louis, MO

#199 Dec 19, 2013
I had a feeling some gin-soaked, inbred cretin would use such icons to judge my question.

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#200 Dec 19, 2013
Personally, I wouldn’t bother with the icons, but by your response to them perhaps they had merit after all, LOL.

Hodges spewing theoretical assertions about the ransom letter that he cannot and does not actually back up, is a perfect example of passing a good stopping place long before he actually stopped. Yes, I think people can give up some things in their writings, but this tedious "analysis" finds hidden and supposedly “deeply incriminating meaning” in every single word of the letter, including in the misspellings and the crossed out words. He says that the misspelled word "bussiness" (all by itself) indicates that a woman did it because of several random words that he himself, OUT OF THE BLUE, associates with that word. That isn’t science. That isn’t methodology, which by the way, he chose not to give any back up for his methodology, and there was little else to make me believe it was anything much more than psychobabble. It is like a kid who accidentally comes up with the right answer to a math problem, but then can’t tell you how he arrived (by what process) at the correct answer.
icedtea4me wrote:
<quoted text>
What else did he do besides that?
icedtea4me

Saint Louis, MO

#201 Dec 19, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
Personally, I wouldn’t bother with the icons, but by your response to them perhaps they had merit after all, LOL.
Hodges spewing theoretical assertions about the ransom letter that he cannot and does not actually back up, is a perfect example of passing a good stopping place long before he actually stopped. Yes, I think people can give up some things in their writings, but this tedious "analysis" finds hidden and supposedly “deeply incriminating meaning” in every single word of the letter, including in the misspellings and the crossed out words. He says that the misspelled word "bussiness" (all by itself) indicates that a woman did it because of several random words that he himself, OUT OF THE BLUE, associates with that word. That isn’t science. That isn’t methodology, which by the way, he chose not to give any back up for his methodology, and there was little else to make me believe it was anything much more than psychobabble. It is like a kid who accidentally comes up with the right answer to a math problem, but then can’t tell you how he arrived (by what process) at the correct answer.
<quoted text>
What is your theory as to who killed JonBenet?

“WAX ON”

Since: Jul 10

WAX OFF

#202 Dec 20, 2013
accident / coverup
BDI / Parents
icedtea4me wrote:
<quoted text>
What is your theory as to who killed JonBenet?

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#204 Dec 27, 2013
DrSeussMd wrote:
.......... That isn’t methodology, which by the way, he chose not to give any back up for his methodology, and there was little else to make me believe it was anything much more than psychobabble. It is like a kid who accidentally comes up with the right answer to a math problem, but then can’t tell you how he arrived (by what process) at the correct answer.
<quoted text>
I agree. No methods given and your analogy with the kid doing a math problem is accurate

That is how I perceived it as well. It didn't have substance despite his conclusion
othello

Kolkata, India

#207 Dec 29, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Hi CC,
Lots of people refuse to consider Burke and your reasons are only some of those given
Being 9 at the time (BTW, just about 10) does not preclude him from having caused a serious if not fatal injury. Not being able to be charged doesn't mean it was not Burke. It just means he couldn't be charged with the crime. They COULD have mandated him to attend some sort of residential program and otherwise mandated him for outpatient treatment, etc. and Patsy would have NONE of that
IF he did it, in my theory, he was unaware that he was responsible AT THE TIME and I'm sure he was confused as all H**L when he realized what was going on the following morning. Even if my theory is wrong, as we know from the news and living in the world, depending on what you tell children they CAN keep secrets when the consequences are severe enough. That is why there are so many children in the world, being molested and abused by their loved ones and staying SILENT. It is not impossible for a child to keep a secret
I do believe personally that whatever Burke did was in fact an accident and it was not his intention to kill her. I think that "something" happened, her injuries were fatal or near fatal, and his parents covered up and staged the scene to protect him
I don't know if I am correct or not as I wasn't there but this is the only scenario that makes any sense to me. It is all just my opinion and theory based on everything we know
If this theory is ever going to be dismissed, Burke will have to come out of retirement and say something :)
He will need to because I am only one of many who believe he was involved with this crime no matter what the level of involvement is.
He knows what happened that night and if it wasn't him, he will need to open up or he will forever be under that cloud with his parents
I am actually starting to believe that this is true. I was so sure that an intruder killed her, partly because i am very new to this case,i came to know about it only last week for a project and got a bit too involved. Living halfway across the world and having been a child myself when it happened i have no info apart from what i found online (which many people told me are backdated). But the more i read about it, the more i think that what you said is what really happened. It makes much more sense than a father killing his daughter. Ofcourse i'm not sure but i think you are right.
Explain plz

Corpus Christi, TX

#208 Jan 16, 2014
H! I am new to this forum and have never posted before. Please be patient with me and my questions.

I have conducted tons of research into the killing of this child and do believe that there was a cover up in place before the police were ever called. However, I still have some questions about some topics that I have read......don't know if I misinterpreted them or if there was faulty info given out:

1. Many of the red marks on the neck on JBR were made by JB as she struggled to breathe as she was choked. In addition, the markings on her neck also show that she was strangled twice. Has anyone read this or can tell me if these are accepted facts?

2. The child was strangled and sexually molested while still alive due to the fact that there was bruising and bleeding - blood flow. I also read that the strangling had to be right after the head trauma.....can't remember exactly why but something about the lack of blood - maybe lack of swelling or bruising of the brain (sorry, I just don't remember.}

3. The suitcase in the basement by the window - had it been moved that morning by FW? Did it still have glass on it from when JR had to "break in " his own home?

I have more questions but will ask as the discussion permits.
Just Wondering

Sophia, WV

#211 Jan 16, 2014
To the best of my recollection--I have read so much on websites that it is difficult at times to remember what I have read as facts in the books written by the police and what I have read as theory proposed by posters including myself--this is what I believe are the factual answers to your quesitons.

1. Some experts believe Jonbenet may have clawed at her neck as she struggled against the hands of her attacker. Also, a bruise on her neck led experts to believe that perhaps the neck of her shirt was grabbed and twisted in an effort to choke her. Thus creating a need for the garrote to be used as a prop to cover up the original strangulation marks.

2, Experts do not necessarily agree on which came first--the head injury or the strangulation. There is apparently evidence to support each as the cause of death. Since her scalp was not split from the head injury, there was no bleeding on the outside of her head only the inside. Some think the head injury came first and that she could have lived as much as 45 minutes after receiving the blow.

3. I do believe FW said he moved the suitcase that morning looking for fragments of glass. There was a sliver of glass on top of the suitcase as well as on the window sill. The fragments, apparently, were not from a fresh breakage of the window pane.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 10
Next Last

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
News Trashy doc 'Casting JonBenet' feeds on viewers'... 18 min public scandal 11
A laugh 1 hr Jolamom 5
C O N S P I R A C Y theory 1 hr Jolamom 27
A Pattern Emerges 1 hr Steve Eller 151
It was fruit cocktail in Jonbenet's system 1 hr Jolamom 32
John Ramseys Mistress (Sep '10) 1 hr RTIC 36
Pants, bathroom-pants,bedroom (Jan '07) 1 hr RTIC 21
Did Patsy Lie 1 hr Steve Eller 23
The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie at websleuths (May '12) 2 hr Steve Eller 66
The unthinkable becomes thinkable 2 hr berrytea333 443
More from around the web