PDA

View Full Version : Interview w/ John Ramsey


candy
03-14-2004, 06:54 PM
http://www.detnews.com/2004/editorial/0403/14/a18-90821.htm

Sunday, March 14, 2004

John Ramsey leans toward becoming high-profile candidate for Michigan House

By George Weeks / The Detroit News

Businessman John Ramsey of Charlevoix undoubtedly will be this year’s highest-profile candidate for the Michigan House of Representatives.

-Just an opinon-

SisterSocks
03-14-2004, 07:28 PM
http://www.detnews.com/2004/editorial/0403/14/a18-90821.htm

Sunday, March 14, 2004

John Ramsey leans toward becoming high-profile candidate for Michigan House

By George Weeks / The Detroit News

Businessman John Ramsey of Charlevoix undoubtedly will be this year’s highest-profile candidate for the Michigan House of Representatives.


Candy ---this just blows my mind. I guess what surprised the most, is that the article named his Wife as the owning a business???

Socks

Thanks for the link =)

candy
03-14-2004, 07:51 PM
In spite of the blurb Mr. Weeks quoted from Ramseys own book, here's the truth about John Ramsey's suspect status from Chief Beckner's deposition. (and it also puts lie to the BDI garbage)

17 Q So from start to today, you have not

18 classified any individual as a suspect?

19 A Publicly, correct.

20 Q Or otherwise?

21 A That's not accurate.

22 Q How is it inaccurate?

23 A Internally John and Patsy are considered

24 suspects.

25 Q Both of them?

64

1 A Yes.

2 Q Are considered to have probably been

3 involved in the death of their daughter?

4 A Probability, yes.

5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.

-Just an opinion

Shylock
03-14-2004, 11:37 PM
"Internally John and Patsy are considered suspects."

Somebody please forward this to whomever is running against John Ramsey!
Murder suspects running for public office....sheeesh, what next.

BrotherMoon
03-15-2004, 02:19 AM
John Ramsey had nothing to do with the death of his daughter. Let him run, let him prove his worthiness, and may the increase in exposure create a tripwire for Patsy.

Blazeboy3
03-15-2004, 02:58 AM
http://www.detnews.com/2004/editorial/0403/14/a18-90821.htm

Sunday, March 14, 2004

John Ramsey leans toward becoming high-profile candidate for Michigan House

By George Weeks / The Detroit News

Businessman John Ramsey of Charlevoix undoubtedly will be this year’s highest-profile candidate for the Michigan House of Representatives.

-Just an opinon-

Thanks for info/url...IMHO while reading the article, flashes of "being bought & sold" and "a puppet on a string" entertained my thoughts FWIW...LOL

Blazeboy3
03-15-2004, 03:00 AM
John Ramsey had nothing to do with the death of his daughter. Let him run, let him prove his worthiness, and may the increase in exposure create a tripwire for Patsy.
Interesting thought...but when John married Patsy ... did the two not become ONE? ;)

BlueCrab
03-15-2004, 08:48 AM
In spite of the blurb Mr. Weeks quoted from Ramseys own book, here's the truth about John Ramsey's suspect status from Chief Beckner's deposition. (and it also puts lie to the BDI garbage)

17 Q So from start to today, you have not

18 classified any individual as a suspect?

19 A Publicly, correct.

20 Q Or otherwise?

21 A That's not accurate.

22 Q How is it inaccurate?

23 A Internally John and Patsy are considered

24 suspects.

25 Q Both of them?

64

1 A Yes.

2 Q Are considered to have probably been

3 involved in the death of their daughter?

4 A Probability, yes.

5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.

-Just an opinion

Candy,

By Colorado law, Burke cannot be referred to as a suspect or probably involved by Beckner, or Keenan, nor anyone else of authority in Boulder, which might be implied that Burke killed JonBenet. Burke is protected by his age at the time of the crime, which was nine. Officially, in Colorado it's as if no crime had occurred if the perp is under 10 years old. Burke made it by four weeks.

IMO Burke was lucky he lived in Colorado at the time. Twenty seven states have no minimum age for a child to be tried criminally as an adult. The remainder of the states have minimum ages ranging from 15 in Louisiana down to 7 years old in New York.

JMO

candy
03-15-2004, 09:28 AM
5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.

Toth
03-15-2004, 10:02 AM
By Colorado law, Burke cannot be referred to as a suspect or probably involved by Beckner, or Keenan, nor anyone else of authority in Boulder, which might be implied that Burke killed JonBenet. He can not be prosecuted or adjudged a juvenile delinquent in need of supervision, but the cops and DA could say in reference to anyone who was then nine years old 'he did it'. They just can't say 'he did it and he is under arrest for it'. If he had been ten, they could have said 'he did it' and when brought to court he will be referred to as 'The Juvenile alleged to be in need of supervision'' in all court papers.

but all this tiresome Burke Did It stuff is not only nonsense its off topic. What does it have to do with John Ramsey running for public office in Michigan?

BlueCrab
03-15-2004, 10:43 AM
5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.


Candy,

Beckner had to say "no". If he had said "yes" it would have made Burke an "internal" suspect who was PROBABLY involved in the death of JonBenet. That would violate the law and the court's protective order covering Burke.

Beckner and Keenan are forced to do a lot of broken field running to try to answer questions about Burke and in the same breath protect his anonymous identity as a child under 10 years old at the time of the crime.

In such instances it is perfectly legal to lie under oath in order to follow the law and a court order protecting a minor's identity. Beckner had no choice but to say "no".

JMO

Toth
03-15-2004, 11:16 AM
In such instances it is perfectly legal to lie under oath in order to follow the law and a court order protecting a minor's identity. Your interpretation of the law regarding perjury is very interesting. I do so hope that if you are ever testifying under oath you gain a better understanding prior to giving your testimony. If you don't you are likely going to have seven years to study the matter.

candy
03-15-2004, 11:30 AM
Right on Toth!

Kim Ii
03-15-2004, 01:11 PM
I agree with Toth on this one, Blue...sorry. Under no circumstances, EVER...is it permissable to lie under oath...

BlueCrab
03-15-2004, 01:44 PM
I agree with Toth on this one, Blue...sorry. Under no circumstances, EVER...is it permissable to lie under oath...

I agree. But you are looking at the academic interpretation of perjury. In the real world, in such matters as laws protecting the identity of children, national security matters, etc., a lie can be the lesser of two evils and will be forgiven by the court.

IMO Beckner was caught between a rock and a hard place. If he had said "yes" the next question would have been "who". He would have violated a court protective order because the only other known person in the house that night was Burke, and at least one of those three Ramseys had to have been involved in the murder. So he said "no", John and Patsy were the only two "internal" suspects. Beckner would have violated the law if he answered 'yes" and would have violated the law if he answered "no".

JMO

Nehemiah
03-15-2004, 01:47 PM
Candy ---this just blows my mind. I guess what surprised the most, is that the article named his Wife as the owning a business???

Socks

Thanks for the link =)

Socks, the article said "co-owned by his wife".

IMO

Kim Ii
03-15-2004, 02:14 PM
Sorry, Blue, in the "real" world, perjury's perjury, period. I used to work as a Legal Assistant for years (litigation). My hubby, a lawyer, has also stated that perjury is against the law, no matter what the circumstances...

Seems to me you're trying to twist the law to suit your theory regarding this case. I've re-read all of the books on this case, all of the info. I could glean on the Internet, and I've turned myself around on the BDI theory. Burke was never, ever, considered a suspect, by Steve Thomas or anyone else, and that includes those that feel the family had something to do with JonBenet's death. He's never been considered a suspect...I think it's time to lay to rest the Burke did it theory. Sorry Blue...

candy
03-15-2004, 02:57 PM
New Interview with John Ramsey

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/news-12/107937654350750.xml

AP Interview: John Ramsey says he wants to give back to community

By JOHN FLESHER
The Associated Press
3/15/2004, 1:59 p.m. ET

CHARLEVOIX, Mich. (AP) — John Ramsey says he is seriously considering a campaign for the Michigan House and hopes voters will focus on his ideas and experience, rather than the unsolved murder of his daughter JonBenet.

Barbara
03-15-2004, 03:27 PM
New Interview with John Ramsey

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michigan/index.ssf?/base/news-12/107937654350750.xml

AP Interview: John Ramsey says he wants to give back to community

By JOHN FLESHER
The Associated Press
3/15/2004, 1:59 p.m. ET

CHARLEVOIX, Mich. (AP) — John Ramsey says he is seriously considering a campaign for the Michigan House and hopes voters will focus on his ideas and experience, rather than the unsolved murder of his daughter JonBenet.

Sure they will.............sure...... just like they focused on Gary Condit's ideas and experience, rather than the unsolved murder of Chandra Levy....and HE actually had ideas AND experience!

Ivy
03-15-2004, 04:09 PM
John might look kinda funny sitting in one of these (http://www.inventionconnection.com/BOOTHS/GRAPHICS/345a.jpg) in the House chambers.

imo

BlueCrab
03-15-2004, 04:26 PM
Sorry, Blue, in the "real" world, perjury's perjury, period. I used to work as a Legal Assistant for years (litigation). My hubby, a lawyer, has also stated that perjury is against the law, no matter what the circumstances...

Seems to me you're trying to twist the law to suit your theory regarding this case. I've re-read all of the books on this case, all of the info. I could glean on the Internet, and I've turned myself around on the BDI theory. Burke was never, ever, considered a suspect, by Steve Thomas or anyone else, and that includes those that feel the family had something to do with JonBenet's death. He's never been considered a suspect...I think it's time to lay to rest the Burke did it theory. Sorry Blue...

Sorry Kim Ii, I guess you didn't read the right books. If I'm close to being right about my BDI theory, then Burke's juvenile records are sealed and NO ONE of authority can divulge that information, even under oath during a deposition, without approval by the court. IOW, they can legally lie under oath.

Colorado Children's Code (under age 18):

"Persons who have had their juvenile records sealed may lawfully and properly reply that no such record exists. However, the record is still available to the district attorney, law enforcement, the courts, and the department of human services. Government agencies cannot show the records to anyone without an order from the court."

Burke's juvenile records have been sealed since the grand jury disbanded in 1999.

JMO

Shylock
03-16-2004, 03:20 AM
AP Interview: John Ramsey says he wants to give back to community

If Ramsey wants to give back to a community, he can start by paying back the city of Boulder for all the money they spent investigating his faux-crime.

BrotherMoon
03-16-2004, 03:36 AM
BlueCrab, why do you claim knowledge of the real world? :waitasec:

Nehemiah, that wasn't very nice, pointing out a mistake by SSocks. Weve hu awone. :slap:

I hope he does run and win, the more Patsy gets exposure the better. :laugh: :innocent:

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to election day. (We need a singing smiley.)

candy
03-16-2004, 11:32 AM
http://www.record-eagle.com/2004/mar/16ramsey.jpg

http://www.record-eagle.com/2004/mar/16ramsey.htm

BrotherMoon
03-16-2004, 11:58 AM
"I'm not afraid of dying like I used to be, because wherever JonBenet went, that's where I'm going."

Like I said, fear of death compensated by fantasy. Gee Patsy, have you also been SAVED, DELIVERED and will you share in John's VICTORY? Are you and John perhaps fulfilling the meaning of Psalms 118, self sacrifice, by giving back to "the community"?

The above quote is the motive, btw. Patsy will continue to "explain", just like she did in DOI.

I wonder, on inauguration day, will she wear purple?

"Wherever we go, whatever we do, we're gonna go through it together." (Again, we need a singing smiley.)

candy
03-16-2004, 12:04 PM
I'm told the directory business Patsy Ramsey is working for is WebBookUSA.

http://www.yourwebsource.net/

BrotherMoon
03-16-2004, 12:10 PM
Maybe she lurks then.

Shylock
03-16-2004, 12:17 PM
"His wife has started a Web site development and promotion company. John Ramsey is assisting the project but not working full-time as he explores a legislative campaign."

Patsy designing web sites?--WTF!!
I thought they stayed off the internet!
And what happened to their "Name Your Favorite Intruder" web site?
Don't you think that a mother of a murdered child would put up a site where you could turn in tips, as her very first project?!


"I'm not afraid of dying like I used to be, because wherever JonBenet went, that's where I'm going."

When I die I hope I'll be going to a place where I can slap the chit out of you, Patsy!

Shylock
03-16-2004, 12:27 PM
I'm told the directory business Patsy Ramsey is working for is WebBookUSA.
http://www.yourwebsource.net/
Domain Name: YOURWEBSOURCE.NET
Created on: 10-Jun-03
Contact:
Hodgson, Laurie Lesser - laurie@llhgraphics.com
LLH Graphics
209 Elm Street
Charlevoix, Michigan 49720
United States
(231) 547-2835 Fax -- (231) 547-4725
http://www.llhgraphics.com/

BrotherMoon
03-16-2004, 12:41 PM
"I'm not afraid of dying like I used to be, because wherever JonBenet went, that's where I'm going."

Like I said, fear of death compensated by fantasy. Gee Patsy, have you also been SAVED, DELIVERED and will you share in John's VICTORY? Are you and John perhaps fulfilling the meaning of Psalms 118, self sacrifice, by giving back to "the community"?

The above quote is the motive, btw. Patsy will continue to "explain", just like she did in DOI.

I wonder, on inauguration day, will she wear purple?

"Wherever we go, whatever we do, we're gonna go through it together." (Again, we need a singing smiley.)bump!!!!!!

candy
03-16-2004, 01:52 PM
No matter what the owner name says, I'm told that that is the one she is with. She may not own it.

why_nutt
03-16-2004, 04:02 PM
No matter what the owner name says, I'm told that that is the one she is with. She may not own it.

It makes sense. Laurie Hodgson designed Linda Mason's web site. Linda Mason is the interior decorator who visited Patsy in October of 1996 at the Boulder house, posted many pictures of the Charlevoix house on her own web site as publicity for her services, and was the woman Patsy called at the last minute to have the house decorated for the famous Charlevoix Christmas visit. Laurie also, in 2003, took on as a partner in her business Shelly Witthoeft. The Witthoefts lived down the street from the Ramseys in Charlevoix. They were mentioned in DOI, and they contributed writing to the Linda McLean book JONBENET'S MOTHER. So I think it is likely in the extreme that Laurie, Linda, Shelly and Patsy were very tight in their friendships, and with Laurie's business. LLH Graphics, having expanded its offerings in the past year to web hosting and directory services (it previously only offered web design), it would be advantageous for Laurie to have access to whatever money the Ramseys might have to throw around so she could purchase web hosting servers, and Patsy has nothing to do.

TLynn
03-16-2004, 04:12 PM
When the law speaks of a juvenile record being sealed - it means a criminal record. Burke has no criminal record. His GJ testimony is already "sealed" as is everyone elses' who testified.

candy
03-16-2004, 04:15 PM
Thanks so much for that information why_nutt!

nellicat
03-16-2004, 05:09 PM
BC, I respect your BDI theory. However, one cannot lie under oath. One can say that he cannot answer a question or that he is not permitted to answer the question. The fact that that response would lead others to read between the lines doesn't matter. He is still required to answer truthfully, or to explain that he cannot answer truthfully. Most likely, a sidebar or in chambers discussion would ensue, wherein the witness would explain why he truthfully answered that he is not permitted to answer the question. If the judge agreed, the questioner would be required to move on. Under no circumstances is it permissible to lie under oath.

vicktor
03-16-2004, 10:41 PM
Don't you think that a mother of a murdered child would put up a site where you could turn in tips, as her very first project?!


"I'm not afraid of dying like I used to be, because wherever JonBenet went, that's where I'm going."

When I die I hope I'll be going to a place where I can slap the chit out of you, Patsy!

After 7+ years, a BPD investigation, Smit investigating, the Ramseys private detectives investigating, the DA's office, and probably 1000's of tips called in, I doubt there are many new tips out there. But if so, surely the tipster could figure out where to send it.

If you believe in near death experiences(which I do) of people who have come back from death, the afterlife is a place of radiant beauty and consuming love. There was one instance however (as described on unsolved mysteries) where a vain, selfish, maniplative man "died" and found himself in a dark unfriendly place where he was assailed by evil men and women. Taking your statement, Patsy will go to that dark place because of complicity in JB's death, but you will find yourself there also, to administer a rebuke.

Sundance
03-16-2004, 11:25 PM
There was one instance however (as described on unsolved mysteries) where a vain, selfish, maniplative man "died" and found himself in a dark unfriendly place where he was assailed by evil men and women.


Before his near-death experience, Rev. Howard Storm, a Professor of Art at Northern Kentucky University, was not a very pleasant man. He was an avowed atheist and was hostile to every form of religion and those who practiced it. He often would use rage to control everyone around him and he didn’t find joy in anything. Anything that wasn’t seen, touched or felt, he had no faith in. He knew with certainty that the material world was the full extent of everything that was. He considered all belief systems associated with religion to be fantasies for people to deceive themselves with. Beyond what science said, there was nothing else.

On June 1, 1985, at the age of 38, Howard Storm had a near-death experience due to a perforation of the stomach and his life was forever changed. His near-death experience is one of the most profound, if not the most profound, afterlife experience I have ever documented. His life was so immensely changed after his near-death experience that he resigned as a professor and devoted his time to attending the United Theological Seminary to become a United Church of Christ minister.

http://www.near-death.com/storm.html

But here's one ya gotta read:
On December, 1943, George Ritchie died of pneumonia. Nine minutes later, miraculously and unaccountably, he returned to life to tell of his amazing near-death experience in the afterlife.

His near-death experience was the one that profoundly moved Raymond Moody to begin seriously investigating the near-death experience. Since Dr. Moody is considered to be the "father of the near-death experience," Dr. Ritchie's near-death experience is in a class of its own.

You will find his experience to be one of the most profound near-death experiences ever documented. The following is Dr. George Ritchie's awesome near-death experience excerpted from his ground-breaking books, Return From Tomorrow and his follow-up book, My Life After Dying.

http://www.near-death.com/ritch.html

WolfmarsGirl
03-17-2004, 04:20 AM
John Ramsey had nothing to do with the death of his daughter. Let him run, let him prove his worthiness, and may the increase in exposure create a tripwire for Patsy.


Amen, BrotherMoon!

I think John is completely innocent of this crime. I have a hunch he is a decent man. And I know that is an unpopular opinion...

If only I understood the reasons why he still stands by Patsy after all of this...

I see his run for office as a positive thing. Could he be trying to break from Patsy with this move? To come clean? I don't know. I guess we will see.

BlueCrab
03-17-2004, 09:26 AM
BC, I respect your BDI theory. However, one cannot lie under oath. One can say that he cannot answer a question or that he is not permitted to answer the question. The fact that that response would lead others to read between the lines doesn't matter. He is still required to answer truthfully, or to explain that he cannot answer truthfully. Most likely, a sidebar or in chambers discussion would ensue, wherein the witness would explain why he truthfully answered that he is not permitted to answer the question. If the judge agreed, the questioner would be required to move on. Under no circumstances is it permissible to lie under oath.


nellicat,

During a deposition there is no judge to approach for a sidebar or discussion in chambers. I agree one cannot lie under oath, but neither can one violate the law. If my theory about the GJ solving the crime and children too young to prosecute were involved is close to being right, then Beckner had to choose which law to violate when he answered, and, IMO, he correctly chose not to violate the Children's Code.

The Colorado Children's Code is clear:

"Persons who have had their juvenile records sealed may lawfully and properly reply that no such record exists."

And:

"Government agencies cannot show the records to anyone without an order from the court."

Beckner did not have an order from the court.

JMO

BlueCrab
03-17-2004, 09:47 AM
I think John is completely innocent of this crime.


I think both John AND Patsy are innocent in the killing of JonBenet. They are, however, deeply involved in a coverup that protects Burke.

But I wonder how you, me, and the rest of the posters on this forum would respond much differently under similar circumstances.

JMO

Toth
03-17-2004, 09:50 AM
Strange coverup wherein the parents constantly campaign for more and better investigators to be assigned to the case.

candy
03-17-2004, 10:02 AM
BlueCrab,

During the Wolf depositions, Darnay had Judge Carnes available by phone should there be any need for a ruling by her during those depos.

BlueCrab
03-17-2004, 11:20 AM
Strange coverup wherein the parents constantly campaign for more and better investigators to be assigned to the case.

That's part of the dog and pony show. What else would you expect them to say? The parents know the truth, so they also know more and better investigators won't be assigned to the case except for show.

JMO

BlueCrab
03-17-2004, 11:35 AM
BlueCrab,

During the Wolf depositions, Darnay had Judge Carnes available by phone should there be any need for a ruling by her during those depos.


No ruling was necessary. Chief Beckner chose not to violate Colorado law.

Besides, lying under oath occurs in almost every deposition taken, but seldom is anyone charged with perjury. Even Bill Clinton lied under oath, but nothing happened. With the adversarial system in the U.S. there's two sides to every story, so in court one of the two parties is usually lying, but rarely are they charged with perjury.

JMO

nellicat
03-17-2004, 02:56 PM
No ruling was necessary. Chief Beckner chose not to violate Colorado law.

Besides, lying under oath occurs in almost every deposition taken, but seldom is anyone charged with perjury. Even Bill Clinton lied under oath, but nothing happened. With the adversarial system in the U.S. there's two sides to every story, so in court one of the two parties is usually lying, but rarely are they charged with perjury.

JMO

Actually, he DID choose to violate Colorado law: lying under oath is against the law. There was absolutely NOTHING preventing him from answering, truthfully, that he could not answer the question. The followup question "Why not?" could likewise have been answered truthfully: "Because to do so would violate Colorado law." If necessary, he could have CITED the juvenile protection law.

By saying "I can't answer because it is against the law to name a juvenile as a suspect" he would have complied with this law. He would not have perjured himself, and he would not have named a juvenile as a suspect.

The fact that folks could have then INFERRED that a certain juvenile was a suspect would not be the fault of the chief.

BlueCrab
03-17-2004, 03:57 PM
Actually, he DID choose to violate Colorado law: lying under oath is against the law. There was absolutely NOTHING preventing him from answering, truthfully, that he could not answer the question. The followup question "Why not?" could likewise have been answered truthfully: "Because to do so would violate Colorado law." If necessary, he could have CITED the juvenile protection law.

By saying "I can't answer because it is against the law to name a juvenile as a suspect" he would have complied with this law. He would not have perjured himself, and he would not have named a juvenile as a suspect.

The fact that folks could have then INFERRED that a certain juvenile was a suspect would not be the fault of the chief.


I respectfully disagree nellicat. Deposition transcripts are available to the public. That kind of response by Chief Beckner would have blown the case wide open by publicly exposing Burke as the likely killer -- just by the process of elimination. In my opinion it would have violated Colorado's Children's Code.

BDI posters and others using the process of elimination to narrow it down to Burke as the likely killer is one thing, but the Boulder Chief of Police doing it would be dynamite and, in effect, solve the murder.

JMO

Toltec
03-17-2004, 04:28 PM
More than a few beers???

Seems like lil ole Patsy does not want to leave the limelight. It was probably she who talked John into running.

Or else they ran out of people to sue and they need to get real jobs.

BTW...Is that a shotgun behind J&P?

Shylock
03-17-2004, 10:04 PM
Seems like lil ole Patsy does not want to leave the limelight. It was probably she who talked John into running.
Patsy is from the old school that says even BAD publicity is better then NO publicity. I'm sure she's upset that she doesn't get to see herself on the cover of the tabloids anymore when she goes through the grocery checkout.

cookie
03-18-2004, 09:00 AM
Toltec,
I think what you are seeing behind them is a chair back.

candy
03-19-2004, 08:24 AM
Other candidates running against John Ramsey, and there are more coming:

http://www.cheboygannews.com/articles/2004/03/19/news/news5.txt

Attorney eyes House seat

By ERICA KOLASKI

Tribune Staff Writer

GRANT TOWNSHIP - County attorney Kevin Elsenheimer is traveling to Cheboygan County next week in hopes of garnering support for his future run for a seat in the state House of Representatives.

Elsenheimer is expected to be a candidate in the Republican primary for the 105th House District Seat, currently held by Rep. Ken Bradstreet, R-Gaylord. The 105th District covers all of Otsego, Antrim, and Charlevoix counties and most of Cheboygan County.