Why You Should Consider John Ramsey G...
Capricorn

Brooklyn, NY

#303 Feb 8, 2009
FoolsGold wrote:
<quoted text>He did comment to Bynum about the multiple lawyers but it was Bynum who explained to him that Colorado law required separate lawyers for the three of them.
Care to source that?

So, who advised him to get separate lawyers for the ex and the other children, et al?

Poor babies...perhaps he should have sought the advice of Klaas or Walsh or Lundsford to explain how it should be done; sure would have cost a lot less than Bynum's advice and might have saved their reputation. Oops, those three had nothing to hide...

Never mind
Right On the Money

New York, NY

#304 Feb 8, 2009
Lets see if we get this source.
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#305 Feb 10, 2009
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Care to source that?
Sure. John Ramsey said that.
Capricorn

New York, NY

#306 Feb 10, 2009
FoolsGold wrote:
<quoted text>Sure. John Ramsey said that.
Well, say no more. Nothing like the "truth" from the prime suspects lol
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#307 Feb 11, 2009
Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, say no more. Nothing like the "truth" from the prime suspects lol
The Ramseys should not be considered Prime Suspects or even Non-Prime Suspects.
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#308 Feb 11, 2009
Consider the Susan Smith case: psychological instability, emotional problems, alcohol abuse, inescapable poverty ... and an indication from an eligible bachelor with big bucks that he wanted her but not her baggage.

Now consider the Ramseys: Wealth, stable household, loving concern for the children, no spousal abuse, drug abuse, no pre-existing inch-thick file at CPS, no alcohol-fueled rage episodes. Yet suddenly the whole world seems willing to blame them for the death of their daughter and willing to dismiss dna findings because the dna does not come with a bar-coded time and date stamp.
RavenSquawk

United States

#309 Nov 4, 2010
sunshine wrote:
So do most of you agree with my point that John Ramsey had an intimate, emotional relationship with the killer beyond what you would have with an average acquaintance?
Or that John Ramsey killed Jonbenet himself?
Is this not what this case boils down to?
The killer was not a stranger, the killer was from the "inside", those facts alone dictate the situation for you, it makes the crime much easier to solve. You're able to narrow down your pool of suspects greatly, to only the people who were on the "inside", and had an intimate and emotional relationship with John Ramsey!
John should have a pretty good idea as to who the killer is right?
YES! YES! YES! All of the above and Thank You!
RavenSquawk

United States

#310 Nov 5, 2010
FoolsGold wrote:
Consider the Susan Smith case: psychological instability, emotional problems, alcohol abuse, inescapable poverty ... and an indication from an eligible bachelor with big bucks that he wanted her but not her baggage.
Now consider the Ramseys: Wealth, stable household, loving concern for the children, no spousal abuse, drug abuse, no pre-existing inch-thick file at CPS, no alcohol-fueled rage episodes. Yet suddenly the whole world seems willing to blame them for the death of their daughter and willing to dismiss dna findings because the dna does not come with a bar-coded time and date stamp.
Holy sweeping generalizations, Batman! So, let me see, you're saying that the wealthy are always stable and never have Borderline Personality Disorder, which I personally think Patsy had. And you believe the white-washed, sunshine dripping facade these people presented to the world! Golly gee!
And that's "touch DNA" - a partial profile (three markers, as I recall) that could never provide a conclusive, admissable in court profile and could have come from anywhere. And after brutally murdering JonBenet and staging the scene, including washing her and wrapping her in a blanket, and Patsy writing the damning ransom note, and hendering the investigation and lawyer up with separate lawyers, John and Patsy Ramsey are beyond suspicion! Yeah, OK, you can believe anything that makes you feel better, but I'm not buying their BS! Google "Belgian Syndrome" and then tell me upper mucky-mucks don't do evil things.
Lynette

Germiston, South Africa

#311 Nov 5, 2010
Freed coined the phrase "Belgium Syndrome" after the recent refusal of Belgian officials and the justice system to respond to a series of child murders, "not because they were involved in the murders, but because they were involved in their own way in pornography, child sexuality and related elements, some of which are not even illegal but all of which would be death sentences for their careers.

Sure, "upper mucky-mucks do evil things" and that is exactly what I suspect has happened in this case. JonBenet's killer is being protected by these "mucky-mucks" to cover their own butts and to find the real killer, we have to dig deeper and learn to look beyond the Ramseys.

Anyone can suffer from a personality disorder, but on what do you base your opinion that Patsy did?
Inquiring Minds

Minford, OH

#315 Oct 24, 2014
Henri McPhee wrote:
I think sunshine and lucyd are talking sense about the JonBenet murder. They both could be on the correct murder trail in the Ramsey case. If sunshine could substitute Fleet White for Rod Westmoreland as his suspect I might start agreeing with him.
They certainly post more sense than koldkase with her absurd ‘Ramseys did it’ theories and Ramsey case phone records conspiracy theory.
I also think it’s a bit of a strange conspiracy theory for internet posters to suggest that John Ramsey KNOWS who the killer of JonBenet is. I’m fully convinced that John Ramsey has always been mystified about that matter. He knows for certain that both he and Patsy and Burke are completely innocent.
It looks to me as though John Ramsey has been in correspondence with Topix poster Rodney about this Larry Petrie character, in the past. In the Ramsey police interviews all sorts of wild and wonderful names were suggested by the Ramseys.
I don’t believe John Ramsey has ever completely ruled out Fleet White as the killer. It’s just that John Ramsey has said publicly on TV that he doesn’t know anybody that evil. He has also categorically answered “no” when he was asked by Larry King on TV once if he thought Fleet White did it. None of that is evidence or real proof of anything.
The history of the JonBenet murder investigation is that Fleet White was one of the top three suspects at the Boulder DA’s office in 1998. The Boulder police have always only been fixated on the Ramseys and on nobody else. I strongly suspect that former Boulder DA Alex Hunter had his doubts about Fleet White.
Mary Keenan/Lacy became the Boulder DA in 2000. She’s the genius fat cat lawyer who was responsible for the wrongful arrest of John Mark Karr, and for the wrongful prosecution of the Midyettes, after pressure from the liberal media.. She has always been a ‘Santa Bill did it person anyway and she isn’t interested in Fleet White as a suspect
It’s a bit like the fat cat Herbert Britisher pygmy politician David Cameron now blaming people for being unemployed, or having handicapped children, or being bugged, or for the troubles the Rhodesian and South African white farmers are now facing. I sometimes wonder if David Cameron is in the pay of the Chinese. It looks like Mark Thatcher has been a corrupt middle man under the Thatcherite government.
The way the JonBenet investigation is going now is that the Boulder cops and FBI are no longer involved. The Boulder DA’s office has no money for the investigation. The detective there, Tom Bennett, has done no investigating.
The Ramsey detectives, like Ollie Gray, have been on a wild goose chase with regard to Gigax and Helgoth and John Mark Karr. All that seems to be happening now is waiting for some kind of DNA hit from the blood spots in JonBenet’s panties, which probably will never happen.
I agree with what Nancy Krebs was told on the phone by her mom. Fleet White did it, but of course, he’ll never be caught.
Note, did you write this? Are you Henry McPhee?
berrytea333

Saint Louis, MO

#316 Oct 24, 2014
Inquiring Minds wrote:
<quoted text>
Note, did you write this? Are you Henry McPhee?
No, Note did not write that. This is how the first paragraph would have looked if Note had written it: Out lab think sunshin and lucyd is talk sence about JonBent murder. They both on koorreck murder traill of Ramsey case. If sunshin stubstuit Flete White for Rodd Westmoroland as his spuspeck out lab agreeing with him.

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#317 Oct 24, 2014
berrytea333 wrote:
<quoted text>
No, Note did not write that. This is how the first paragraph would have looked if Note had written it: Out lab think sunshin and lucyd is talk sence about JonBent murder. They both on koorreck murder traill of Ramsey case. If sunshin stubstuit Flete White for Rodd Westmoroland as his spuspeck out lab agreeing with him.
HA HA - you beat me to it. I was going to say if the words are spelled correctly, then Note didn't write it!

HUKED ON FONICS DIDENT WEERK FER HYM
Undrtheradar

Tulsa, OK

#318 Oct 24, 2014
Inquiring Minds wrote:
<quoted text>
Note, did you write this? Are you Henry McPhee?
Ok I give up...I will be the one who asks..why do you believe Note wrote this and why do you believe Note to be Mcphee?

By the way thanks for bumping up this discussion it was written by a poster with a brilliant mind...that Sunshine is something special!
Rupert

Waterloo, Canada

#319 Oct 24, 2014
sunshine wrote:
So do most of you agree with my point that John Ramsey had an intimate, emotional relationship with the killer beyond what you would have with an average acquaintance?
Or that John Ramsey killed Jonbenet himself?
Is this not what this case boils down to?
The killer was not a stranger, the killer was from the "inside", those facts alone dictate the situation for you, it makes the crime much easier to solve. You're able to narrow down your pool of suspects greatly, to only the people who were on the "inside", and had an intimate and emotional relationship with John Ramsey!
John should have a pretty good idea as to who the killer is right?
Sunshine, I share your suspicion. The heart drawn Esprit award photo also suggests it was personal. That might be a hint to John why this was done and by whom and perhaps explains why the ransom note is long.

The Ramseys and their friends were all happy that year and I think their intentions were to simply enjoy the good life. The Billion Dollar sales party might have been a trigger to one much less fortunate in comparison. If your insight is correct, then I would follow the money trail.

If JR was party to some RDI cover up, then why would he be party to the RN which really makes it look close, upfront, and personal. So no, I don't think there was a cover up and this was personal.

However, I don't know how the S.B.T.C foreign faction fits into it and some other things don't quite line up. For instance, why was the dictionary dog eared to the word incest? How could the perp point an accusation of incest and then kill an innocent little girl to get revenge. What was done to JonBenet was done by a monster and not a defender of little girls.

Maybe the incest, upfront and personal thing is only in the mind of the obsessed killer and has nothing to do with John's past. A lot of things seem to have been thrown into the mix which is perhaps why and rightly so, many thought it was gutsy deflection. Maybe it was all just in the mind of a deranged killer and thus John doesn't know who that is.

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#320 Oct 25, 2014
Undrtheradar wrote:
<quoted text>

By the way thanks for bumping up this discussion it was written by a poster with a brilliant mind...that Sunshine is something special!
Think a lot of yourself don't you?

More false information under another hat is all it is.
Undrtheradar

Tulsa, OK

#321 Oct 25, 2014
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>
Think a lot of yourself don't you?
More false information under another hat is all it is.
It was actually suppose to be a joke...you know the kind of joke that everyone makes about them self from time to time to make them seem more than they really are...I believe Im smart...I know Im not brilliant....You should really lighten up sometimes...its actually fun when you smile sometimes:)
Undrtheradar

Portage, MI

#322 Oct 25, 2014
Rupert wrote:
<quoted text>
Sunshine, I share your suspicion. The heart drawn Esprit award photo also suggests it was personal. That might be a hint to John why this was done and by whom and perhaps explains why the ransom note is long.
The Ramseys and their friends were all happy that year and I think their intentions were to simply enjoy the good life. The Billion Dollar sales party might have been a trigger to one much less fortunate in comparison. If your insight is correct, then I would follow the money trail.
If JR was party to some RDI cover up, then why would he be party to the RN which really makes it look close, upfront, and personal. So no, I don't think there was a cover up and this was personal.
However, I don't know how the S.B.T.C foreign faction fits into it and some other things don't quite line up. For instance, why was the dictionary dog eared to the word incest? How could the perp point an accusation of incest and then kill an innocent little girl to get revenge. What was done to JonBenet was done by a monster and not a defender of little girls.
Maybe the incest, upfront and personal thing is only in the mind of the obsessed killer and has nothing to do with John's past. A lot of things seem to have been thrown into the mix which is perhaps why and rightly so, many thought it was gutsy deflection. Maybe it was all just in the mind of a deranged killer and thus John doesn't know who that is.
By the way Rupert in case you didnt know I am Sunshine...as stated before I created the hat Undrtheradar to show Rod Westmorelands guilt...I created Sunshine to show John Ramseys guilt by cover up.....and Im glad you agree with my suspicions... I must say though you are wasting a lot of time and energy focusing on what SBTC means because unless the killer tells you, you will never truly know.

John Ramsey also said the killer left all kinds of little clues around the home to taunt John...this was very personal....

Interesting you should say we should "follow the money trail" because this is what I have been saying for many years....

So lets follow the money trail..

The kidnappers want John to give them money in exchange for his daughter....

John calls Rod Westmoreland because John cant get the money without Rod Westmorelands help because he is Johns Financial manager...

So Rod Westmoreland sets up the ransom money for John Ramsey to get...

Doesnt this make Rod Westmoreland one of the 3 known people in the plot? John, Rod and the kidnappers right?

If this were a movie what role do you believe Rod Westmoreland would have in it a small cameo or major role?

Did you know that John Ramsey and Rod Westmoreland appeared to not be communicating on or around xmas that year? How do I know?
Because when John called Rod to get the ransom money, John was "surprised" to learn that Rod was out of town for xmas this year..Why was John surprised had they not been talking, did they not wish each other merry xmas???

Ask yourself if someone you were close to did all these things to you while killing your daughter, would you know who it was after all these years??? Do you believe your relationship with this person would have changed after this murder???

I say "follow the money trail".
Undrtheradar

Portage, MI

#323 Oct 25, 2014
Rupert wrote:
<quoted text>
Sunshine, I share your suspicion. The heart drawn Esprit award photo also suggests it was personal. That might be a hint to John why this was done and by whom and perhaps explains why the ransom note is long.
The Ramseys and their friends were all happy that year and I think their intentions were to simply enjoy the good life. The Billion Dollar sales party might have been a trigger to one much less fortunate in comparison. If your insight is correct, then I would follow the money trail.
If JR was party to some RDI cover up, then why would he be party to the RN which really makes it look close, upfront, and personal. So no, I don't think there was a cover up and this was personal.
However, I don't know how the S.B.T.C foreign faction fits into it and some other things don't quite line up. For instance, why was the dictionary dog eared to the word incest? How could the perp point an accusation of incest and then kill an innocent little girl to get revenge. What was done to JonBenet was done by a monster and not a defender of little girls.
Maybe the incest, upfront and personal thing is only in the mind of the obsessed killer and has nothing to do with John's past. A lot of things seem to have been thrown into the mix which is perhaps why and rightly so, many thought it was gutsy deflection. Maybe it was all just in the mind of a deranged killer and thus John doesn't know who that is.
Rupert Im not sure if your a man or not, but Im asking this question to all straight men, this killer is drawing hearts, this killer is sneaking around in another mans home hiding and stalking another man, this man would rather be close to this other man on xmas...this man writes a dear John ransom note to another man....

Do you see where Im going Rupe?

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#324 Oct 25, 2014
Undrtheradar wrote:
<quoted text>
Rupert Im not sure if your a man or not, but Im asking this question to all straight men, this killer is drawing hearts, this killer is sneaking around in another mans home hiding and stalking another man, this man would rather be close to this other man on xmas...this man writes a dear John ransom note to another man....
Do you see where Im going Rupe?
Yeah! Down a rabbit hole, LOL.
Undrtheradar

Portage, MI

#325 Oct 25, 2014
Legal__Eagle wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah! Down a rabbit hole, LOL.
Yes thats exactly what I was getting at...lol

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
Friends Smuggled Burke Back in the House 2 hr Blue Bottle 3
Kolar Writes About Feces and Burke (Nov '16) 4 hr Anonymous 115
Question about the head bash , DNA and Patsy's ... (Dec '08) 4 hr Anonymous 623
Order opening UNREDACTED JonBenet autopsy (Mar '11) 4 hr Anonymous 11
Three Wives, One Husband, One Murder 4 hr Anonymous 5
Patsy's Answers About the Pineapple (Oct '09) 4 hr Anonymous 84
Pineapple was Bought the Morning After the Murder 4 hr Anonymous 11
News Burke Ramsey, JonBenet's brother, sues CBS in $... (Feb '17) 8 hr KCinNYC 123
More from around the web