Key events leading to JonBenet Ramsey...

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#26 Jul 5, 2013
candy wrote:
It angers me when people say there is a class of people incapable of murder, including the most atrocious of murders. It's always the same exempt class - white people, rich people, Christians. This is a great lie - there are no exempt classes for committing murder.........
If there are people who really believe that certain "classes" or groups of people are incapable of murder, no amount of explaining otherwise will be helpful.

That is pretty basic stuff and anyone who believes that "certain" people don't commit murder, no amount of explaining will help
Anonymous

Oak Hill, WV

#27 Jul 5, 2013
BrotherMoon wrote:
As a Christian you lack objectivity.
She did show prior symptoms.
It did manifest in other ares of her life.
She was psychotic.
It is what happened.
I have read four books on the topic, and I cannot find any given situation in which Patsy showed signs of psychosis. Proud, spoiled, vain, unattached from the plight of average living because of wealth? Perhaps. But not psychotic. Burke we know little about, other than he "accidentally" struck his sister in the head with a golf club when she was three or four. I am assuming it was a plastic toy or she would have been really hurt. I am not disagreeing with you, I just have not noticed any behavior noted that points to Patsy being psychotic.
Anonymous

Oak Hill, WV

#28 Jul 5, 2013
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
If there are people who really believe that certain "classes" or groups of people are incapable of murder, no amount of explaining otherwise will be helpful.
That is pretty basic stuff and anyone who believes that "certain" people don't commit murder, no amount of explaining will help
Apparently I left the wrong impression here. I am aware that anyone can murder. But murder with torture is a whole different situation. Of course, I was not aware that BTK had tortured and murdered a woman right in his church. How do these people operate on a daily basis and interact with others without showing that side of themselves?
Anonymous

Oak Hill, WV

#29 Jul 5, 2013
candy wrote:
It angers me when people say there is a class of people incapable of murder, including the most atrocious of murders. It's always the same exempt class - white people, rich people, Christians. This is a great lie - there are no exempt classes for committing murder.
In Boulder, a man far wealthier than John Ramsey - J. Nold Midyette, his son Alex and his wife were indicted by the grand jury. with EXACTLY THE SAME CHARGE THE GOOD CHRISTIAN RAMSEYS WERE - child abuse leading to death. The baby had THIRTY SEVEN BROKEN BONES.
Very wealthy Cullen Davis BOUGHT his way out of murder charges TWICE. Christians like BTK commit murder. Once you read Kolar's book, and see the virtual impossiblity of ENTRANCE FROM THE BASEMENT as the Scams said, including that window, and the crime scene video of the true state of the basement that night, you see it was virtually impossible for ONE intruder let alone A SMALL FOREIGN FACTION (needed to match ALL the unsourced DNA to) to enter that house, THEREFORE, as Sherlock Holmes said, when you eliminate the impossible, whatever is left, HOWEVER IMPROBABLE, must be the truth, and is what happened.
I know anyone can murder--it is just quite "unthinkable", for me as a Christian/mother/person in general, that Patsy could commit the horrible torturous acts that were eluded to by one person on this blog. Obviously, I need to read more about the horrendous acts that have been perpetrated on victims.

I can assure you, though, that I feel that no one should be judged guilty or innocent on the basis of religion, gender, race or social standing. However, it seems to me, that most women murder to attain/obtain something. Freedom from responsibility, love of a man, insurance money. I do not see a motive for Patsy here. She would have had more to lose than to gain by murdering her daughter. Unless she was a sexual predator/killer. And I tend to think of men as torturers and sexual predators than women. I am sure you can point me to many cases to dispel that fallacy of thinking as well.

I do, however, see why she might try to stage a cover-up and protect her only other child from a life of imprisonment or from being ostracized, although completely warranted, by society. That is my reasoning on why I feel Burke was the culprit not Patsy or John.

Also, after reading Kolar's and Thomas' books, I found John Douglas to be a self-important, pompous "I wrote the book on profiling", recalcitrant snob. Anyone else feel that way about him?

“May you all come home”

Since: Mar 07

safely Bless you all

#30 Jul 5, 2013
I agree regarding Douglas as do many many people. He was well respected until he showed himself to be nothing more than a pompous mercenary like so many others, but it's better to know that than to continue to think he is anything else

As far as motive, I am also a BDI, but even if PDI, motives may or may not be obvious but even if there is an accident, that is the motive: to cover it up

Anyone, male, female, etc. can commit horrible crimes

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#31 Jul 5, 2013
Anonymous wrote:
I do, however, see why she might try to stage a cover-up and protect her only other child from a life of imprisonment or from being ostracized, although completely warranted, by society. That is my reasoning on why I feel Burke was the culprit not Patsy or John.
It doesn't appear candy understood your post was in direct response to the BM 'theory' Patsy killed Jonbenet intentionally as a psychotic religious action. IMO as silly as if John killed her for insurance money.
Anonymous

Oak Hill, WV

#32 Jul 5, 2013
moonjack wrote:
<quoted text>
It doesn't appear candy understood your post was in direct response to the BM 'theory' Patsy killed Jonbenet intentionally as a psychotic religious action. IMO as silly as if John killed her for insurance money.
Exactly. Thank you.
Heloise

Wigan, UK

#33 Jul 5, 2013
I think Patsy did it in a terrible, stressed moment, and I think she was more than capable of orchestrating the cover up. That said, I have given lots of thought to the BDI theory and Kolar's book gave me pause. WRT Douglas, I think he may have started believing his own publicity and thinking himself papal in his infallibility. He also saw very little of the evidence by his own admission. I will admit I used to think he was remarkable but I saw a documentary on his involvement in another high profile case and I think he may have been involved in a miscarriage of justice. Likewise, I remember reading The Cases that Haunt Us and thinking it was generally interesting. Then my Dad, who is a bit of a Jack the Ripper and Yorkshire Ripper expert pointed out some shocking errors that undermined his theses.
robert

Yellowknife, Canada

#34 Jul 5, 2013
Anonymous wrote:
<quoted text>

Also, after reading Kolar's and Thomas' books, I found John Douglas to be a self-important, pompous "I wrote the book on profiling", recalcitrant snob. Anyone else feel that way about him?
--Yes-- I had a negative post about him some time ago--As far as I know he is not brave enough to make an official compete profile of a prep. in this case. I'm not saying he is wrong about statements he's made-- Just that there is something there that turns me off on him.
John Douglas

Arvada, CO

#35 Jul 5, 2013
Patsy killed JonBenet deliberately. No one else was involved. There was no staging for police. Everything that was done was done by Patsy for Patsy as part of a psychotic fantasy revolving around an imagined relationship with a supernatural being, the fear of judgment by that God and the fear of death. What people mistakingly take as staging for police had symbolic meaning known only to Patsy. This includes the ransom note. There were two aspects to what was done to the body: the ligatures were suspension devices, the body was posed and viewed and then taken down, placed in the small room, wrapped and the duct tape applied to set the kidnapping scene up in Patsy's mind. The ransom note is full of the ideas that swirled in Patsy's mind that night and plagued her for many years.
The goal was not to kill JonBenet but to make an Angel out of her.
Patsy herself said after the funeral "JonBenet is in Heaven with God awaiting her mother's arrival and it won't be long." Patsy put JonBenet in that heaven to complete the fantasy and in her mind assure her life after death.
As the dedication in DOI says:
Wherever we go ...
Whatever we do ...
[We're gonna go through it together ...]
candy

East Lansing, MI

#36 Jul 6, 2013
Back to the subject of the grand jury, as we all know, Alex Hunter liked to stall, delay, do nothing, never try any cases, and it was no thanks to him that we ever got a grand jury at any point in this case. Remember his infamous comment about Johnnie Cochran "rushing" the prosecution in the OJ case? It was September, 1998, almost two years after the crime was committed, that a grand jury was impaneled in this case. The prosecutor who ran the grand jury, Mike Kane, said one of the things he would do differently would be to impanel
a grand jury sooner:

"I think the major problem with this case was the hard-core evidence gathering," Kane said.

He believes a grand jury should have been impaneled promptly - not necessarily to secure a rapid indictment, but in order to use a grand jury's broad powers to subpoena witnesses and, equally important, personal records.

"I had this argument with them until the day (former Boulder prosecutors) Pete Hofstrom and Trip DeMuth were off the case" in August 1998, Kane said.

"That's what a grand jury is for, because a grand jury can order someone to produce documents. It's up to the DA's office to say,'There's an awful lot of things we need to know about, and the only way we're going to know about it is by getting these records.'

"Instead, it was almost two years later when we started issuing subpoenas for information, and the trail sometimes grows cold. A lot of businesses don't keep records that long," Kane said."

http://therocky.com/news/2001/dec/18/case-hau...

This makes me wonder what records they could not get because of the two year delay - like the phone records everyone wonders if they ever received. Lacy convened a grand jury in the similar Midyette case a lot earlier - after 7 months, and I assume the long, unnecessary delay in convening a grand jury in the Ramsey case had everything to do with that.
SRita

Oak Hill, WV

#37 Jul 6, 2013
Would the grand jury have made it possible for the police to subpoena the medical records of JonBenet and Burke? Or are medical records only available if someone is officially charged with the crime?

Did detectives ever get to interview the "other" woman John was involved with during his first marriage? Were they confident that the marriage was broken up over an extramarital affair? No child abuse of some kind?(I hate myself for being so suspicious.)
candy

East Lansing, MI

#38 Jul 6, 2013
Yes the grand jury had subpoena power for the medical records of JonBenet, Burke, etc. If you recall Kolar said the Scams were asking for an "island of privacy" regarding Burke's medical records, and it's believed no one ever saw them.

John Ramsey paid for Lucinda Ramsey's attorney, so I don't have much faith that she said anything damaging about him to cops or anyone else.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#39 Jul 6, 2013
The Boulder Police asked for and received the autopsy of Beth Ramsey, who died in a car crash in Chicago, and said there was no information in that report relevant to the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.

Burke did visit a psychiatrist, and even though no one has seen those records, I don't believe anything is in them, for the same reason the Menendez brothers did not confide in a psychiatrist they were seeing (one of them did), they had no control over the psychiatrist, who was being paid for by their parents. I believe Burke speaking to a psychiatrist was all about his litigation against the tabloids, to establish damages, that's why they were doing that.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#40 Jul 6, 2013
ST hardback, p. 133 "Two months would pass before we finally got to interview Lucinda Ramsey Johnson. In the meantime, we learned that John Ramsye was paying BOTH for his first wife's lawyer AND for the morgage on her home. THERE WAS NO DOBUT ABOUT HER LOYALTY."
candy

East Lansing, MI

#41 Jul 6, 2013
Also on p. 133 "Gosage and I had been in Georgia less than twenty four hours before the telephone started ringing on the desk of our boss in Boulder, Commander Eller. The Ramsey attorneys were seething that we were asking about INFIDELITIES and personal details. To hell with them I replied. If they don't want us searching all over God's green earth for former lovers and mysterious enemies, all they have to do is give us the information firsthand."
candy

East Lansing, MI

#42 Jul 6, 2013
On the subject of the "other woman", I assume they spoke to her, since John gave the police her name.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#43 Oct 8, 2013
This is some great work about the Ramsey grand jury, day by day, who is known to have testified, etc., so people can get a good idea of what the grand jury knew, etc.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6...
candy

East Lansing, MI

#44 Oct 23, 2013
To those who don't remember the grand jury in this case, these are some of the events that led to it's creation and ultimately indicting both John and Patsy Ramsey of child abuse leading to death.
Maqa

United States

#45 Oct 23, 2013
As for the indictment, a jury member said that the grand jury merely felt that more investigation of the parents'
role was needed, not that the jury itself was convinced they were the murderers.

Suppose that Boulder has an active child pornography/ritual child abuse community, or community center.
Suppose a parent or parents of Jon Benet involved her, or both children, in this.
Suppose that wealthy business and political leaders in high places participated in these activities.
Evan Ravitz wrote about this at length.(Look for Evan Ravitz on the Ramsey case.)
Would any of this explain any of the conduct of this case? The behavior of the parents in resisting investigation?
The behavior of Law Enforcement in perpetuating the coverup?
Suppose it is neither the parents, or a stranger, who committed the murder? Suppose it was a person allowed to enter the house and engage the child in a ritual act, planned ahead of time, which went awry?
Would any of this explain any of the puzzles in this case?

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
It always leads back to Burke (Oct '11) 9 min Amber Rose 213
Dr Phils credibility 44 min Heloise 19
Burke Ramsey- INNOCENT victim of BORG 1 hr robert 52
Anyone believe the ramseys didn't do the crime?? 1 hr soontobecut 200
JonBenet case on "True crime w/ Aphrodite Jones" (Mar '11) 2 hr Stoned luck aka l... 194
20th anniversary: JonBenet Ramsey case 3 hr Heloise 40
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 15 hr Stoned luck aka l... 536
More from around the web