PDA

View Full Version : Basic Questions



Brefie
03-19-2004, 11:15 PM
Hi all.
Let me start by saying that I love reading here and I think you all are very intelligent and well informed about this case.
I, however, am not so up to speed, but hope to be soon.
I hope no one minds that I started a thread, but I didn't want to hi jack another one and get off topic.
I wanted to start this thread to ask more basic questions about the things that you all are discussing in great detail that I (and perhaps others) can't really follow.
I wondered if you all would be so kind as to fill me in on certain points???

I would like to start with the Stine family. What is their deal?
Why do you all think they are suspiscious?

Thank you all in advance!

BlueCrab
03-20-2004, 12:46 AM
Hi all.
Let me start by saying that I love reading here and I think you all are very intelligent and well informed about this case.
I, however, am not so up to speed, but hope to be soon.
I hope no one minds that I started a thread, but I didn't want to hi jack another one and get off topic.
I wanted to start this thread to ask more basic questions about the things that you all are discussing in great detail that I (and perhaps others) can't really follow.
I wondered if you all would be so kind as to fill me in on certain points???

I would like to start with the Stine family. What is their deal?
Why do you all think they are suspiscious?

Thank you al







l in advance!

THE STINE FAMILY:

Glen and Susan Stine became the chief supporters of the Ramseys after the murder of JonBenet, to the point where Susan was called 'Patsy's pit bull". They were good friends prior to that, but became glued together following the death of JonBenet. Also, Burke Ramsey and Doug Stine were best friends.

The Stines were the last people to the see the Ramseys when the Ramseys stopped by the Stine's to drop off a gift on their way home from the White's dinner party. Although the Ramseys called a group of close friends the next morning when it was believed JonBenet had been kidnapped, the Stines suspiciously were not called.

About one month after the murder the three Ramseys -- John, Patsy and Burke -- and Patsy's parents -- Don and Nedra Paugh -- moved in with the Stines in their one-family house. Already living there were the three Stines and Nathan Inouye, the Stines teenaged college student caregiver for Doug. The Ramseys lived with the Stines in those tight quarters for five months.

During that period neither the press nor anyone else got to the Ramseys or the two boys. Susan Stine soon became known as "the gatekeeper".

After John lost his job at Access Graphics in Boulder and moved to Atlanta, the Stines quit their high-level positions at Colorado University, sold their house, and followed the Ramseys to Atlanta.

JMO

Ivy
03-20-2004, 01:06 AM
(While Iwas typing this, BC beat me to the punch...but I'll go ahead and post this without deleting the portions BC already mentioned.)

Although the Stines' son Doug was about Burke Ramsey's age and the two were friends, Susan and Glen Stine were not close friends of John and Patsy's until after JonBenet died. Then suddenly they became very close, and the Ramseys lived with them until moving to Atlanta. During the Ramseys' stay at the Stines', Susan became very protective of Patsy, and was given the nickname "Patsy's pitbull" by reporters.

One thing in particular that makes me raise an eyebrow regarding the Stines is that when Burke returned to school after JonBenet's death, Susan drove Doug and Burke to school every day (and maybe home afterward) without any kind of protection or security device in her vehicle. She (and apparently Glen) didn't appear to be worried that the killer/s could come after Burke and attack them.

Susan Stine is a little odd (LOL...understatement of the day). Here's a Rocky Mountain News article (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/ramsey/article/0,1299,DRMN_1296_2009831,00.html) about Susan sending emails to various people connected to the case while pretending to be BPD Chief Mark Beckner.

For your additional reading pleasure, here's an article that includes a description of one of Susan Stine's "pranks" in which she swiped a reporter's wallet at her door and called the police on him, claiming he was an intruder...and of Glen Stine and John Ramsey chasing a reporter down the street and into a restaurant, where he hid from them in the kitchen. (John also once had an altercation with the author of the article, Boulderite Frank Coffman, a.k.a. "Masked Man," who used to post at WS regularly years ago.)
http://www.acandyrose.com/02291999feedingfrenzy-bw.htm

I don't know how familiar you are with the other case players, but here's a link to a page that will give you a basic idea of who's who.
http://www.acandyrose.com/02291999feedingfrenzy-bw.htm

TLynn
03-20-2004, 04:02 AM
Where are the Stines now? Did they follow the Ramseys to Michigan?

Toth
03-20-2004, 05:28 AM
During the time they were living in the Stines house and she earned the moniker "gatekeeper" or "pit bull", the Ramseys were under media seige and the house subjected to close and also telephoto surveillance.

The Stines felt motivated to perform what they felt was a duty to aid someone so beseiged by the media and subjected to such horrible and false accusations and innuendo by police and tabloids. The fact that a pre-existing friendship existed, seems unimportant to me. Susan Stine rose to the occasion when Patsy was so massively over-medicated and so emotionally overwrought that she literally could not get to the bathroom unassisted. She felt it was her duty to help the Ramseys and her husband agreed with her.

BrotherMoon
03-20-2004, 09:20 AM
The Stine's were the Ramsey's easy targets, having dumbed down enough to succeed in Boulder's culture. A high level position At CU is achieved by rolling over and rolling up. The Stines got trashed by white trash. Send your kids to CU. rah!

Brefie
03-20-2004, 02:14 PM
Thank you all so much!! Lots a reading for me to do.

I really appreciate this, thanks again.

Ivy
03-20-2004, 02:48 PM
Originally posted by TLynn
Where are the Stines now? Did they follow the Ramseys to Michigan?

I've been wondering the same thing, TLynn. I suppose it's possible that after Susan Stine impersonated Beckner and created a scandal, the Ramseys distanced themselves from the Stines to avoid a guilt-by-association perception by the public. On the other hand, if the Stines know things that could implicate the Ramseys in JonBenet's death, I would think the Ramseys would want to stay on good terms with them, and maybe keep them close by to make sure their friendship didn't fizzle out.

Thing is, if the Stines move to Michigan, or have already, how will we find out? I doubt the media will care enough to report it.

imo

BlueCrab
03-20-2004, 03:21 PM
I've been wondering the same thing, TLynn. I suppose it's possible that after Susan Stine impersonated Beckner and created a scandal, the Ramseys distanced themselves from the Stines to avoid a guilt-by-association perception by the public. On the other hand, if the Stines know things that could implicate the Ramseys in JonBenet's death, I would think the Ramseys would want to stay on good terms with them, and maybe keep them close by to make sure their friendship didn't fizzle out.

Thing is, if the Stines move to Michigan, or have already, how will we find out? I doubt the media will care enough to report it.

imo


If Doug or Nathan was the fifth person in the house on the night of the murder, then the Ramseys and the Stines are not going to be parting ways.

JMO.

Ivy
03-20-2004, 04:34 PM
Right on, BlueCrab--that is, regarding Doug. If only Nathan was there, and not Doug, why would the Stines help cover that up?

imo

Toltec
03-20-2004, 04:45 PM
What bothers me is that the Stines allowed the Ramseys to move in...being that there was a killer on the loose. Didn't the Stines worry about Doug at all? What if this "intruder" came back and tried to harm Burke or perhaps even Doug?

I do not know why the Ramseys did not return to the Fernies but instead decided to stay with the Stines. Do you suppose that the Fernies were afraid of their childrens safety...or were they becoming suspicious of the Ramseys?

Either way I would definately not allow the Ramseys in my home if I had young children who might get into harms way.

IMO

Shylock
03-20-2004, 05:16 PM
The Stines felt motivated to perform what they felt was a duty to aid someone so beseiged by the media and subjected to such horrible and false accusations and innuendo by police and tabloids. The fact that a pre-existing friendship existed, seems unimportant to me. Susan Stine rose to the occasion when Patsy was so massively over-medicated and so emotionally overwrought that she literally could not get to the bathroom unassisted. She felt it was her duty to help the Ramseys and her husband agreed with her.

There is something more going on with the Stines besides just friendship. Steve Thomas said in chat that they weren't close friends before the crime:
THOMAS: "In my opinion, the Stine's didnt really become close friends until after this tragedy. I found nothing indicating they were in the Ramsey's close circle before Christmas, although they were acquainted and on freindly terms. "

5-months is a long time to intrude on someone's home. Especially when the Ramseys had the means to rent any number of furnished places to live or move into an extended-stay hotel.
And the Stines quiting their jobs to follow the Ramseys to Atlanta is another very strange situation.

My guess is either Susan Stine is bi-sexual and is in love with Patsy, or as BlueCrab suggests, the Stines are somehow connected to the crime via Doug. Perhaps Susan Stine should have been refered to as Patsy's "bull dyke" instead of her "bull dog".

BlueCrab
03-20-2004, 07:17 PM
Right on, BlueCrab--that is, regarding Doug. If only Nathan was there, and not Doug, why would the Stines help cover that up?

imo

If either Nathan or Doug (or both) was the fifth person in the Ramsey's house that night (if there was a fifth person) it would loom as trouble for both the Ramseys and the Stines. Nathan spent time watching both boys and JonBenet, including while their parents were out of town.

For instance, on December 6 the Stines and the Ramseys were in New York while Nedra and Nathan watched the three children. JonBenet was riding in a car in a parade that night as the children watched. Both sets of parents were over 2,000 miles away.

The sexual aspects of JonBenet's murder would suck in the Stines and the Ramseys if either Nathan or Doug were involved. Doug and Burke were best friends and they lived just six blocks from one another. If Nathan was involved he would have likely been the architect of the EA device wrapped around JonBenet's neck. Those kind of masturbation devices are most popular in that age group (teens and early twenties).

Of course, Doug could also have been the builder of the EA contraption. Doug and Burke sailed together so they both would have been familiar with the knots used in the murder.

JMO

LovelyPigeon
03-20-2004, 07:28 PM
I don't think the Stines are suspicious at all. They were friends with the Ramseys before JonBenét's murder and became closer friends after her death.

Susan Stine has been a staunch defender of the Ramseys' innocence, and a close friend to Patsy.

Ivy
03-20-2004, 08:13 PM
From page 50 of John's October 20th 1998 deposition in the Miles v Ramsey and the National Enquirer defamation lawsuit.

13 Q. Do you have anyone running interference for you


14 with respect to social contacts or attempts? Anyone


15 taking calls or screening calls?


16 A. Not -- we did for a while, only because we lived


17 with some people.


18 Q. Who were those people?


19 A. Susan and Glenn Stine.


20 Q. Should I add them to your list of close friends?


21 A. They were not close friends, believe it or not.


22 They were friends, but we didn't socialize a lot with


23 them.

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2000/0206deposition.html

John wouldn't have mentioned the Stines at all had he not been asked if anyone was running interference for him and Patsy. Even when pressed earlier in the depostion to name people who weren't close friends but whom he considered to have been social acquaintances on a friendly basis, HE DIDN'T NAME THE STINES.

imo

BlueCrab
03-20-2004, 08:28 PM
From page 50 of John's October 20th 1998 deposition in the Miles v Ramsey and the National Enquirer defamation lawsuit.

13 Q. Do you have anyone running interference for you


14 with respect to social contacts or attempts? Anyone


15 taking calls or screening calls?


16 A. Not -- we did for a while, only because we lived


17 with some people.


18 Q. Who were those people?


19 A. Susan and Glenn Stine.


20 Q. Should I add them to your list of close friends?


21 A. They were not close friends, believe it or not.


22 They were friends, but we didn't socialize a lot with


23 them.

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2000/0206deposition.html

John wouldn't have mentioned the Stines at all had he not been asked if anyone was running interference for him and Patsy. Even when pressed earlier in the depostion to name people who weren't close friends but whom he considered to have been social acquaintances on a friendly basis, HE DIDN'T NAME THE STINES.

imo



Even though the four of them -- John, Patsy, Glen, and Susan -- were living it up together in New York while their children were back home in Boulder and at the same time while JonBenet was in a Christmas parade on December 6. And the Ramseys stopped by the Stines house to drop off a Christmas present on Christmas night, etc.

John was obviously lying under oath during that deposition about the Stines being friends. WHY?

JMO

Shylock
03-20-2004, 08:44 PM
John was obviously lying under oath during that deposition about the Stines being friends. WHY?
It's too bad LHP was never asked how often Burke and Doug played together.

Ivy
03-20-2004, 10:04 PM
Originally posted by Toltec

I do not know why the Ramseys did not return to the Fernies but instead decided to stay with the Stines. Do you suppose that the Fernies were afraid of their childrens safety...or were they becoming suspicious of the Ramseys?


John and Barbara Fernie were...

Friends of the Ramseys who were present in the home the morning of the 26th when police arrived. John Fernie was in the basement when John Ramsey found the body. (Hey, I thought John Fernie was upstairs when John found the body.) The Ramseys stayed with the Fernies for several days after the murder. Fellow parishioners of St. John's Episcopal Church, they can be seen in a video physically supporting the Ramseys as they exited the church in early January. Barbara, who believed in the Ramseys initially, reportedly began to doubt Patsy's innocence and was dropped by the Ramseys. John Fernie, a developer, at last report was still friendly with John Ramsey.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer/primer1_fam.html

If it's true that Barbara Fernie began to doubt Patsy's innocence, maybe that explains why the Ramseys stayed at the Fernies' for only a short time.

IMO

Brefie
03-20-2004, 11:04 PM
Hi all. Thanks again for all of your input. Now fora nother question....

I have read something about Fleet White being jailed for something to do with another case (Miller, perhaps?). What's all that about? The case and the reason for jailing.

BrotherMoon
03-20-2004, 11:40 PM
Please retitle your thread "Dull questions", thank you.

Ivy
03-20-2004, 11:41 PM
Brefie, in a nutshell:

JonBenet Ramsey's death ultimately led to family friend Fleet White spending 30 days in jail for contempt of court.

White, a retired oil executive, was among the first of family friends to arrive at the Ramsey home the morning JonBenet was reported missing, and he was with John Ramsey when her body was found in the basement.

White was called as a witness in the criminal trial of Boulder attorney Thomas Miller in the attempted sale of the Ramsey ransom note, but he refused to show.

He wrote the judge saying that he had nothing to offer at the Miller trial and believed his testimony could jeopardize the investigation of JonBenet's murder.

After a protracted series of hearings in Jefferson County District Court, White was ordered to spend 30 days in jail for contempt of court. He was released Nov. 22.

White became estranged from the Ramseys after he criticized them when they didn't cooperate with Boulder police.

Source (http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_908900,00.html)

IMO

LovelyPigeon
03-21-2004, 12:00 AM
Fleet White Jr was held in contempt of court for refusing to appear after subpoened to testify in Miller's case. He served a short term in jail as penalty.

Eagle1
03-21-2004, 12:06 AM
Sorry, I don't know about the Whites, but reading this thread made me think of something. Did McSanta teach at CU, and know the Stines from there?

This may be the first time I've heard that Nathan and Nedra kept the children while Patsy was in N.Y. and JonBenet was in that Dec. 6 parade.

So has Nathan definitely been cleared?

Don't forget the Fleet White question too. Sorry for jumping in right here but I'd forget if I waited.

LovelyPigeon
03-21-2004, 12:10 AM
Nathan is not even on the radar.

Well, he's on BC's radar, but that's it.

Brefie
03-21-2004, 12:18 AM
Please retitle your thread "Dull questions", thank you.

How rude.

Why would I do that?

You are obviously well informed on this subject, so if you don't want a 'basic' discussion, why bother to open a thread called 'Basic Questions'?

Brefie
03-21-2004, 12:22 AM
Don't forget the Fleet White question too. Sorry for jumping in right here but I'd forget if I waited.

Eagle1, don't be sorry....this is exactly why I started this thread, so we could ask some simpler questions.


To all who have been so very helpful...Thanks so much, I really appreciate the time you are taking to inform us of these things!

Eagle1
03-21-2004, 01:06 AM
Your ST book must be hard back, right? I think mine's paperback, and I don't remember ever reading or hearing what you posted. Never realized content might be slightly different in the paperback.

Hey, that's good. You said ST stopped a guy he'd observed taking pictures of the grave. He had Colorado plates, was in Atlanta, very interested in the case, stationed at Camp Lejeune, NC. (Well, if it's in the paperback I must have read it, don't know why I'd forget a thing like that.)

The roll of black tape would simply be photography equipment. So why would he have been so interested in this family and JonBenet? He'd seen JonBenet in the parade or heard gossip about her? Maybe knew John Andrew? Could he have been the person Barnhill saw that he thought was John Andrew?

Did ST investigate Camp Lejuene's records as to whether this suspect had been in Colorado on Christmas leave at the time of the murder, and did he ask about him at the h.s. he would have attended? Does Boulder have several high schools? Did ST ask the R's if they knew this photographer and if JonBenet knew him?

I really think the killer was someone who was at the party on the 23rd, where she was evidently molested and was crying, Susan Stine already a gatekeeper not let the police in, but if there were two, this could be one of them.

BlueCrab
03-21-2004, 09:57 AM
Fleet White Jr was held in contempt of court for refusing to appear after subpoened to testify in Miller's case. He served a short term in jail as penalty.


In fairness to Tom Miller, it should be noted that he was found not guilty in that case (it involved an alleged $30,000 attempted bribe to get a copy of the ransom note).

JMO

BlueCrab
03-21-2004, 10:32 AM
Sorry, I don't know about the Whites, but reading this thread made me think of something. Did McSanta teach at CU, and know the Stines from there?

This may be the first time I've heard that Nathan and Nedra kept the children while Patsy was in N.Y. and JonBenet was in that Dec. 6 parade.

So has Nathan definitely been cleared?

Don't forget the Fleet White question too. Sorry for jumping in right here but I'd forget if I waited.


I'm sure Bill McReynolds at least knew of Glen Stine and Susan Stine while at Boulder University. Glen was Vice President for Budget and Finance, and Susan was Director of Planning and Institutional Research at the university.

Both Nathan and Doug have kept a low profile since the murder, and especially after the grand jury disbanded in October of 1999. For instance, I believe their names were purged from PMPT, which came out following the GJ's disbandment and the court's protective order slapping secrecy on the case and its principals. Although Schiller's name index in the back of his book contains about 500 names, Nathan Inouye isn't mentioned at all, and Doug Stine's name appears only once in the text. I don't think Nathan was even investigated, although I hear some suspicion has been cast toward Doug.

JMO

Shylock
03-21-2004, 12:02 PM
Nathan is not even on the radar.
And how do we know this? What LE source has said anything about this guy? Where was he on the 25/26th, and how do we know for sure? Was his handwriting, prints, and DNA checked?

The RST likes to play silly games with people like "Bootman" Helgoth and Thomas Aqua-ass, but they ignore Nathan, who has is a good possibility of actually having met the victim. Why? Because if Nathan is involved then there is a strong possibility that Burke is too--and any hint of Ramsey guilt makes the RST immediately become stupid.

Ivy
03-21-2004, 12:15 PM
Was Nathan questioned by investigators? It seems to me I remember reading that he was, and that he told them he was out of town when JonBenet died.

IMO

Yeah, think Memento. We don't need no stinkin' linear plotline.

BlueCrab
03-21-2004, 01:07 PM
...but they ignore Nathan, who has is a good possibility of actually having met the victim.

Shylock,

Nathan and JonBenet knew each other very well, and he apparently even helped babysit her.

JMO

BlueCrab
03-21-2004, 01:19 PM
Was Nathan questioned by investigators? It seems to me I remember reading that he was, and that he told them he was out of town when JonBenet died.

Almost all of the information about Nathan has come from past WS posts about him. I was told by one source that he had been investigated, but nothing was ever put in print about it. One WS poster e-mailed Nathan about his possible involvement and Nathan e-mailed back to say he was in California during the Christmas of '96. There has been no confirmation about that claim. That's probably what you were referring to, because to the best of my knowledge neither LE nor the DA has ever mentioned his name publicly.

JMO

Nehemiah
03-21-2004, 03:40 PM
...because to the best of my knowledge neither LE nor the DA has ever mentioned his name publicly.JMO

I find that very odd. He was an adult at the time of the murder, not a minor. What would make Schiller remove his name from the book, when others were not? Was/is L. Wood his attorney? LOL Extremely odd...
IMO

BlueCrab
03-21-2004, 05:07 PM
I find that very odd. He was an adult at the time of the murder, not a minor. What would make Schiller remove his name from the book, when others were not? Was/is L. Wood his attorney? LOL Extremely odd...
IMO

Nehemiah,

It's only my theory, of course. I can't prove Nathan's name was purged from PMPT. But it seems strange that Nathan Inouye isn't mentioned anywhere in the book, even though he was an intricate part of the Stines' lives and, to a lesser extent, of the Ramseys' lives. IMO he was purged from the book and Doug Stine's name was purged except for just one place in the book as a result of the court's protection order.

IMO the GJ solved the murder, children were involved, and the court under Colorado law had to shield the names of the children. The problem is, if Nathan was involved, bringing charges against him would expose the names of the children. I think Hunter probably buried it all and the GJ and the court went along as the lesser of two evils.

It seems to me the names in PMPT were removed in a hurry after the court order, but in the time crunch the editors missed the name index. In PMPT's name index Doug Stine's name appears 9 times, but in the text it appears just once. By comparison, Burke's name in the name index appears 66 times, and in the text it appears 65 times (there was one typo).

JMO

Nehemiah
03-21-2004, 05:17 PM
BlueCrab, you've possibly read before where I have posted that I have a business friend who told me that her best friend served on the GJ. She told me that the only thing her friend would say about it was that it was "sickeningly political". Given the nature of your theory and opinion, do you think that phrase could be used by a G Juror to describe the outcome? Does "sickeningly political" fit your scenario?

IMO

BlueCrab
03-21-2004, 06:56 PM
BlueCrab, you've possibly read before where I have posted that I have a business friend who told me that her best friend served on the GJ. She told me that the only thing her friend would say about it was that it was "sickeningly political". Given the nature of your theory and opinion, do you think that phrase could be used by a G Juror to describe the outcome? Does "sickeningly political" fit your scenario?

IMO

Nehemiah,

Yes, "sickingly political" could fit the scenario. If my theory is anywhere close to being correct, then the truth should have come out and the literal destruction of all of those innocent peoples' personal lives could have been averted.

If the boys did it but fessed up, public empathy would have eventually forgiven them because of their ages. But it appears high profile parents may have considered it more important to protect their own vanities. They had the ideal politically connected law firm to seal the coverup -- from Hunter, the Democratic Boulder DA, to Romer, the Democratic Governor -- even though the Ramseys themselves were Republicans.

If an older teen was involved with the younger children, then he should have been charged (if he was known). That's what I fear the most about this coverup -- IS AN ADULT GETTING AWAY WITH MURDER BECAUSE HE HAS MANAGED TO SLIP BETWEEN THE CRACKS UNNOTICED?

JMO

TLynn
03-21-2004, 08:13 PM
If Doug & Burke had been involved - wouldn't you think the parents would want to keep the two boys separated?

Why would the Ramseys want to live with the Stines and the constant reminder that Doug & Burke were involved in the worst of all crimes/tragedies.

If it was just Burke - why move in with his best friend whom he may "confess" to someday.

Perhaps the Ramseys felt Doug would be a good friend for Burke and to help him get through this tragedy.

And, if it were Nathan I'd want as far away from him as possible.

BlueCrab
03-21-2004, 10:16 PM
If Doug & Burke had been involved - wouldn't you think the parents would want to keep the two boys separated?

Why would the Ramseys want to live with the Stines and the constant reminder that Doug & Burke were involved in the worst of all crimes/tragedies.

If it was just Burke - why move in with his best friend whom he may "confess" to someday.

Perhaps the Ramseys felt Doug would be a good friend for Burke and to help him get through this tragedy.

And, if it were Nathan I'd want as far away from him as possible.


TLynn,

The Ramseys were in a seige mode during those 5 months living with the Stines. The media had taken over the town and would do almost anything to get even a snippet of information from one of the boys. IMO that's the main reason they all gathered in one place, even Burke's grandparents, i.e., to guard the kids from the media and anyone else 24/7.

JMO

SieSie
03-22-2004, 01:10 AM
Please retitle your thread "Dull questions", thank you.
Now that was uncalled for. As a "newbie" to the JBR information, it can get overwhelming to those of us who haven’t followed the case as closely the past few years. If you don’t care for the topic, feel free to go to the next thread. No insults necessary.



Bluecrab, does your main theory still include 'autoerotic practices'..?

Even John Ramsey and Lou Smit recognize the contraption on JonBenet's neck as a sexual device.

Bluecrab,
Do you have any quotes or links or anything that says John Ramsey recognized the garrote as a sexual device? Who is Lou Smit? Does it appear to be that AutoErotic Practice is what caused JBR's death, or do you think that it's just part of the staging after-the-fact? Thanks for your input.

MIBRO
03-22-2004, 01:32 AM
Odd that there should be speculation that the Stines were not friends of the Ramseys BEFORE the murder since the Ramseys did stop off at their house the night of December 25th to deliver a Christmas gift for them. I would suggest that such a gesture might imply friendship.

BlueCrab
03-22-2004, 08:47 AM
Bluecrab,
Do you have any quotes or links or anything that says John Ramsey recognized the garrote as a sexual device? Who is Lou Smit? Does it appear to be that AutoErotic Practice is what caused JBR's death, or do you think that it's just part of the staging after-the-fact? Thanks for your input.


SieSie,

In an interview by the Denver Rocky Mountain News in 2000, John said while describing who he thinks the killer is:

"He is a pedophile with a preference for little girls. He is a sociopath experienced with autoerotic asphyxiation, the use of garrotes to enhance sex."

Lou Smit is a retired detective who has worked the case for years and believes an intruder killed JonBenet.

I believe JonBenet died accidentally while erotic asphyxiation was being practiced on her, and the grisly part of the staging was carried out by children trying to coverup the sexual aspects of her death, but who were joined later by the parents who added the finishing touches of the staging prior to calling 911.

JMO

Shylock
03-22-2004, 09:53 AM
Odd that there should be speculation that the Stines were not friends of the Ramseys BEFORE the murder since the Ramseys did stop off at their house the night of December 25th to deliver a Christmas gift for them. I would suggest that such a gesture might imply friendship.
Hardy "speculation" - Did you read the quote from John himself?
"They were not close friends, believe it or not. They were friends, but we didn't socialize a lot with them."

Skip back a page and read the quotes in posts 12 & 15 of this thread. Then keep in mind that the Stines for some reason were NOT called over with the Whites and Fernies the morning of the murder.

Britt
03-22-2004, 01:26 PM
Odd that there should be speculation that the Stines were not friends of the Ramseys BEFORE the murder since the Ramseys did stop off at their house the night of December 25th to deliver a Christmas gift for them. I would suggest that such a gesture might imply friendship.
True. If that's why they stopped by. Maybe they stopped by to pick up Doug.

Anyway, at the party on December 23rd, wasn't it Stine who threw herself between the cops and a Ramsey when the cops came to investigate the aborted 911 call? That right there makes me very suspicious of the Stines.

I think the question should be: Why, after the murder, would John try to distance himself from the Stines during the pre-murder period by claiming not to have been friends during that time?

IMO all the mysteries of this case can be cleared up by analyzing the Ramseys' lies, inconsistent statements and inventions.... just like the staged crime scene... look at what they're trying to hide, not at what they're trying to present. But I digress.

Maybe BlueCrab is right about something going on with those boys. Not necessarily that they killed JB, but maybe they were the ones "playing doctor" with her... maybe such an episode triggered the incident that did kill her... maybe Doug was simply an overnight guest on the 25th, he and Burke are totally uninvolved, but the Ramseys feared the boys might become unfavorable witnesses, so they latched on to the Stines to keep things under control.

Ivy
03-22-2004, 02:18 PM
If, when the Ramseys stopped by the Stines, Doug went home with them, maybe to see Burke's Christmas gifts, it could explain why the Ramseys decided not to stop at the Fernies. If the plan was to drop Doug off at home on the way to the airport early the next morning, it might have taken Doug some time to get his overnight things packed (or thrown into a sack.)

However, one of the problems I have with the 5th person theory is that I find it unlikely that Burke would have made himself a glass of tea to drink while JonBenet ate pineapple, without getting his friend something to drink as well. I can't picture Burke sitting at his place at the table drinking tea, and his friend sitting at the table with nothing or amusing himself by playing with Burke's gifts while Burke sat at the table with JonBenet.

IMO

Brefie
03-22-2004, 04:14 PM
In PMPT's name index Doug Stine's name appears 9 times, but in the text it appears just once.
JMO

I am so glad you posted this. I tried to cheat and use the index to find all references to the Stine family and noticed that I was only a page away from a 'mention', but roughly 10 pages later, I noticed that there was no mention.
I think I was at a juicy part, because I didn't double check anything, but it all falls into place now.

Thanks!

Barbara
03-23-2004, 11:10 AM
The Stine family is just about as evil as the Ramsey family

Susan Stine and the ever "Christian" Patsy once made some prank calls (during Patsy's grieving time no less) to a reporter's wife telling them that he had an extramarital affair going on. They did this to get even with the reporter and Patsy just thought that was the funniest thing ever. AND..was very proud of this to the point that she herself tells the story in DOI. That was one of the more despicable things that Patsy has done in the same breath as her preachings of Christianity. For anyone who has ever experienced the fear of a spouse cheating, or finding out they are cheating knows how painful that is and Patsy, the wife of an adulterer who should have known this, thought this was a great prank. It is vicious and downright mean, especially from someone who tries to portray her love of God as something sincere. But thank goodness there are those of us with functioning intellect who know better and see right through that charade.

Susan Stine was also a "friend" of Patsy who thought it would be a hoot to pretend to be Chief Beckner and sent out e mails to many important people impersonating him UNTIL she got caught by law enforcement.

What great gals!

Shylock
03-23-2004, 02:08 PM
For anyone who has ever experienced the fear of a spouse cheating, or finding out they are cheating knows how painful that is and Patsy, the wife of an adulterer who should have known this, thought this was a great prank.

Oh, well let's not forget that according to Thomas, Patsy denied knowing about John's cheating which caused his divorce. Patsy's family all knew about it, but it was another thing that Patsy managed to forget during her interviews with LE.

Patsy should write a book on, "Mastering Selective Memory Recall".

MIBRO
03-24-2004, 07:35 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by MIBRO
Odd that there should be speculation that the Stines were not friends of the Ramseys BEFORE the murder since the Ramseys did stop off at their house the night of December 25th to deliver a Christmas gift for them. I would suggest that such a gesture might imply friendship.
Hardy "speculation" - Did you read the quote from John himself?
"They were not close friends, believe it or not. They were friends, but we didn't socialize a lot with them."

Hardy speculation? Umm, Shylock, if you would be kind enough to read what I posted a little more carefully, as John (and I) said, "they were friends", however, some postings on this thread have implied they were not. Obviously, they were. The Stines accommodated the Ramseys with a place to stay beginning in February '97. Sounds like pretty good friends to me. Maybe their socializing was limited due to the Ramseys' time spent with the Whites, having their daughters and sons and other interests in common. It doesn't sound like the Stine family matched up as well (no daughter JonBenét's age) for more family socializing. The Ramseys didn't strike up a NEW friendship with the Stines following the murder. They just enhanced it.

Barbara
03-24-2004, 09:12 AM
Hardy speculation? Umm, Shylock, if you would be kind enough to read what I posted a little more carefully, as John (and I) said, "they were friends", however, some postings on this thread have implied they were not. Obviously, they were. The Stines accommodated the Ramseys with a place to stay beginning in February '97. Sounds like pretty good friends to me. Maybe their socializing was limited due to the Ramseys' time spent with the Whites, having their daughters and sons and other interests in common. It doesn't sound like the Stine family matched up as well (no daughter JonBenét's age) for more family socializing. The Ramseys didn't strike up a NEW friendship with the Stines following the murder. They just enhanced it.

MIBRO,

Perhaps it is you who should read a little more carefully. Nobody stated that the Stines and the Ramseys weren't friends, just that they weren't close friends. Having said that, it is also true that we all have friends such as the Stines insofar as not socializing all that much due to different interests and such.

The point is: How many of those type of "friends" would you expect to open their home to a whole family for a SIX MONTH PERIOD, protect you like the pitbull that Susan Stine has been called, risk their own family's lives having the Ramseys live there (after all, it was assumed by many that a murdering intruder was out there gunning for the Ramseys), and then to top it all off: Actually move away from HOME to another state to be near them and continue to protect, pull pranks, impersonate a police chief to gather information for the Ramseys etc.?

None of my friends, other than my dearest and closest would be expected to do all that, especially to risk the lives of their own family knowing that a murderer was out there.

So MIBRO, it is not just a matter of reading more carefully, but a matter of reading between the lines as well. Many of the posters here have mastered that.

Shylock
03-24-2004, 10:35 AM
The point is: How many of those type of "friends" would you expect to open their home to a whole family for a SIX MONTH PERIOD, protect you like the pitbull that Susan Stine has been called, risk their own family's lives having the Ramseys live there (after all, it was assumed by many that a murdering intruder was out there gunning for the Ramseys), and then to top it all off: Actually move away from HOME to another state to be near them and continue to protect, pull pranks, impersonate a police chief to gather information for the Ramseys etc.?

Exactly Barbara. The Stines actually gave up their professional careers to brown-nose the Ramseys all the way to Atlanta. Why? Either BlueCrab is right about some type of involvement in the crime by Doug Stine, or Susan Stine is bisexual and had the serious hots for Patsy.

Seeker
03-24-2004, 01:04 PM
I haven't read the entire 3 pages of this thread, so please excuse the post if it duplicates someone elses info...

Wasn't it Susan Stine who answered the door at the Ramsey home during their x-mas party 12/23? A 911 call was placed (if memory serves) at approximately 9pm that evening, no one answered the phone when 911 called back so they sent a unit over. Stine answered the door didn't she, and told the officers nothing was wrong?

That was before the murder, they were friends of the Ramsey's before the murder...good friends.

Barbara
03-24-2004, 01:23 PM
That was before the murder, they were friends of the Ramsey's before the murder...good friends.

These are John Ramsey's own words:


"They were not close friends, believe it or not. They were friends, but we didn't socialize a lot with them."

Ivy
03-24-2004, 01:32 PM
What's interesting is that in his deposition, John didn't mention the Stines until he was asked if anyone ran interference for him and Patsy. Earlier in the deposition, after he'd named his and Patsy's close friends, John was asked to name people who weren't their good friends, but just people they were on friendly terms with. He didn't name the Stines then either, even though he named a neighbor whose last name he couldn't even recall. I agree with posters who think that for some reason, John was deliberately trying to downplay his and Patsy's relationship with the Stines.

imo

BlueCrab
03-24-2004, 01:35 PM
I haven't read the entire 3 pages of this thread, so please excuse the post if it duplicates someone elses info...

Wasn't it Susan Stine who answered the door at the Ramsey home during their x-mas party 12/23? A 911 call was placed (if memory serves) at approximately 9pm that evening, no one answered the phone when 911 called back so they sent a unit over. Stine answered the door didn't she, and told the officers nothing was wrong?

That was before the murder, they were friends of the Ramsey's before the murder...good friends.


Yes Seeker. Word has it the conversation went something like this:

Knock. Knock.

"Who's there?"

"It's the police."

"What do you want?"

"I'm here because of a hang-up 911 call. Please open the door."

"We're busy right now. Come back later."

"But I'm from the BPD. I'm here to protect and serve."

"Go away or I'll call a ..., never mind. Just go away."

"Okay. If you need anything, always remember, we're here to protect and serve.

"Just go away! Now, where were we?"


JMO

Ivy
03-24-2004, 01:38 PM
ROFL, BC! Funneeee. :p

imo

Barbara
03-24-2004, 02:05 PM
Maybe she said that she was Chief Beckner and had everything under control. Who knows how long she has been Chief Beckner :)

Seeker
03-24-2004, 02:07 PM
These are John Ramsey's own words:

Well that would do it for me if I didn't know John was a pathological liar.

I can cite examples of his lies and distortions if need be, but so can anyone else who has followed this case.

Britt
03-24-2004, 02:09 PM
How many of those type of "friends" would you expect to open their home to a whole family for a SIX MONTH PERIOD, protect you like the pitbull that Susan Stine has been called...
IMO this is precisely why the Stines weren't summoned the morning of the 26th. The Ramseys needed and planned for the Stine hideout, complete with guard dog. The Ramseys chose the Stines for this role because they were easy pickins - no one else wanted to suck up and attach themselves to the Ramseys like the Stines did, at least Susan. JMO.

Two reasons for not summoning them:

1. To keep them separate from the crime scene. IMO one of the purposes of the Kidnapping Brunch was so the guests would deposit evidence. I even believe John planted foreign DNA evidence or tried to, courtesy of the guests - the multiple-donor DNA that can't ID anyone but can sure screw up a crime scene. The Ramseys had to keep the Stines clear of any scrutiny in order keep investigators away from the Ramseys' intended hideout.

2. To keep the Stines blind and stupid and easier to manipulate. Any Stine suspicion of the Ramseys would put a serious crimp in the Ramseys' hideout plans.

Britt
03-24-2004, 02:15 PM
Well that would do it for me if I didn't know John was a pathological liar.
I completely agree, Seeker. That's why I say we should always look at what he doesn't want us to look at, if we want to find the truth. If he says go East... go West.

jubie
03-24-2004, 08:27 PM
What did John and/or Patsy lie about?

This is a great thread and BIG thanks to those willing to enlighten us!!

Brefie
03-24-2004, 08:42 PM
What did John and/or Patsy lie about?

The fact that Burke was NOT asleep when Patsy called 911 at 5.52am, for one.

(YAY! I got one!!)

tipper
03-25-2004, 12:37 AM
I still haven't heard his voice on the 911 call.

Shylock
03-25-2004, 12:57 AM
I still haven't heard his voice on the 911 call.
And you won't Tipper. But you CAN hear Patsy's "help me Jesus" cries followed by a 4-second gap where Keenan redacted the voices of John and Burke.

SieSie
03-25-2004, 01:43 AM
SieSie,

In an interview by the Denver Rocky Mountain News in 2000, John said while describing who he thinks the killer is:

"He is a pedophile with a preference for little girls. He is a sociopath experienced with autoerotic asphyxiation, the use of garrotes to enhance sex."

Lou Smit is a retired detective who has worked the case for years and believes an intruder killed JonBenet.

I believe JonBenet died accidentally while erotic asphyxiation was being practiced on her, and the grisly part of the staging was carried out by children trying to coverup the sexual aspects of her death, but who were joined later by the parents who added the finishing touches of the staging prior to calling 911.

JMO

Wow, okay. So you think there's a possibility that Burke (who was under 10 at that time, right?) and/or another friend of his - practiced this erotic asphyxiation on JBR - I don't understand why you would use that device (or whatever) on someone who is too young to even know/understand/appreciate the heightening orgasms it's supposed to create. I know that even young children can commit sexual acts - but to know about erotic asphyxiation at such a young age seems hard to imagine. What a sad, sad world!

BlueCrab
03-25-2004, 10:44 AM
Wow, okay. So you think there's a possibility that Burke (who was under 10 at that time, right?) and/or another friend of his - practiced this erotic asphyxiation on JBR - I don't understand why you would use that device (or whatever) on someone who is too young to even know/understand/appreciate the heightening orgasms it's supposed to create. I know that even young children can commit sexual acts - but to know about erotic asphyxiation at such a young age seems hard to imagine. What a sad, sad world!

SieSie,

That's why, in one of my BDI theories, there's room for an older teen. Teens and males in their twenties are the main practitioners of EA and AEA. Also, if EA was being used on JonBenet, it would likely have been involuntary -- thus the cords binding her hands and the possible use of a stun gun to control A/O torture her.

It's true that Burke, at nine years old, was four weeks shy of being legally culpable, so why not just admit everything up front if BDI? But nevertheless a Ramsey coverup is in progress to hide something or somebody. I think the coverup is shielding Burke AND a fifth person who was in the house that night and who IS legally culpable.

JMO