If your child were murdered…

Your reaction? Does it matter?

  • My reaction would be closer to the Goldmans.

    Votes: 86 73.5%
  • My reaction would be closer to the Ramseys.

    Votes: 6 5.1%
  • Behavior subsequent to a crime is relevant with respect to guilt or innocence.

    Votes: 43 36.8%
  • Behavior subsequent to a crime is irrelevant with respect to guilt or innocence.

    Votes: 10 8.5%

  • Total voters
    117
The other issue is that the Ramseys supposedly believe that this is the work of a paedophile who is a danger to children (although the recent statement seemed to have absorbed some of HOTYH's theory) and they warned friends to keep their babies 'close.' If they honestly believe this, they have a responsibility to other children to help locate the killer and keep the fires of justice burning. They can forgive the killer but that doesn't preclude a genuine attempt to find him - to protect others and get him the help they obviously think he needs.
 
"I never considered not cooperating and I never considered hiring a lawyer. We bring these children into this world and its our duty then to do whatever we can to protect them and that includes totally cooperating with law enforcement right down the line"
"It is only when you hire a lawyer that it becomes apparent, if not obvious that you are hiding something"
"I don't believe there was an intruder inside the Ramsey house that evening I believe the evidence as we know it is pretty clear-cut. The only logical explanation for that ransom note is if it came from within the household itself."
-Mark Klaas
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kuu_IfYOX7U



Cynic, I don't know whether you are following the Caylee Anthony case on the forum but there's a lawyer over there who expresses that very same opinion about lawyering up. Contrary to what some IDI would have you believe, it isn't just the legal laiety who see something odd about lawyering up so early.
 
I totally agree. I was on a chat board one time with Mark Klaas, and asked him about the JBR case. And he said the same thing to me, as your quote from him. He said, "No intruder, it was someone that lived in that house".
Mark Klaas is awesome and truly a class act (no pun intended). He is essentially the “anti-Ramsey."
 
Cynic, I don't know whether you are following the Caylee Anthony case on the forum but there's a lawyer over there who expresses that very same opinion about lawyering up. Contrary to what some IDI would have you believe, it isn't just the legal laiety who see something odd about lawyering up so early.
Yes I am following the Anthony case, and I did notice that lawyer’s remarks regarding “lawyering up.”
It was good to hear that from a lawyer.
 
The other issue is that the Ramseys supposedly believe that this is the work of a paedophile who is a danger to children (although the recent statement seemed to have absorbed some of HOTYH's theory) and they warned friends to keep their babies 'close.' If they honestly believe this, they have a responsibility to other children to help locate the killer and keep the fires of justice burning. They can forgive the killer but that doesn't preclude a genuine attempt to find him - to protect others and get him the help they obviously think he needs.

Sophie, you have just inspired me.
 
, who, after their child was abducted would try to plan a flight out? That is not right. I would not even be able to think straight.

John was the CEO of a large company. If, upon learning of JonBenet's death, he just wanted to get out of there, why wouldn't he delegate the duty to one of his friends who were there to support them? It seems like a very menial task to be performing in the circumstances.
 
Mark Klaas is awesome and truly a class act (no pun intended). He is essentially the “anti-Ramsey."

LOL..yep he is a class act! I love to watch him on Nancy Grace...he always says what I am thinking.
 
Talking about reactions...I am sorry but what she answers is pure BS

THOMAS HANEY: There were like

22 three days, and the first two days were pretty

23 basic questions, but on the third day, there

24 were questions where the discussion was around

25 JonBenet and the death. And I am no

0297

1 psychologist, psychiatrist, but immediately

2 noticed a change in Burke and his demeanor.

3 He's curled up on the chair something like this,

4 not sitting like this, but a chair like this,

5 and he's half in a fetal position and it seems

6 to be a real struggle, a real difficult time.

7 I am wondering if you had noticed

8 anything similar, any changes?

9 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I may have --

10 I have had him in therapy just for this reason.

11 So that, I mean, the therapist explained to me

12 that -- that Burke may be trying to hold it

13 together and be real strong for John and I
, you

14 know. And because I was saying it seemed to me

15 like he needs to let it out, you know.

16 He said, well, children handle

17 things differently, you know, than adults. And

18 he doesn't -- he thinks Burke is fine. So I

19 have to just take him at -- I respect his

20 opinion, Dr. Jaffe.

21 But no, I have not -- I have not

22 directly, you know, noticed anything.



Okay,so Haney describes a troubled Burke and she replies "I have had him in therapy just for this reason. But then "I have not directly, you know, noticed anything."

Duh.
 
Talking about reactions...I am sorry but what she answers is pure BS

THOMAS HANEY: There were like

22 three days, and the first two days were pretty

23 basic questions, but on the third day, there

24 were questions where the discussion was around

25 JonBenet and the death. And I am no

0297

1 psychologist, psychiatrist, but immediately

2 noticed a change in Burke and his demeanor.

3 He's curled up on the chair something like this,

4 not sitting like this, but a chair like this,

5 and he's half in a fetal position and it seems

6 to be a real struggle, a real difficult time.

7 I am wondering if you had noticed

8 anything similar, any changes?

9 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I may have --

10 I have had him in therapy just for this reason.

11 So that, I mean, the therapist explained to me

12 that -- that Burke may be trying to hold it

13 together and be real strong for John and I
, you

14 know. And because I was saying it seemed to me

15 like he needs to let it out, you know.

16 He said, well, children handle

17 things differently, you know, than adults. And

18 he doesn't -- he thinks Burke is fine. So I

19 have to just take him at -- I respect his

20 opinion, Dr. Jaffe.

21 But no, I have not -- I have not

22 directly, you know, noticed anything.



Okay,so Haney describes a troubled Burke and she replies "I have had him in therapy just for this reason. But then "I have not directly, you know, noticed anything."

Duh.


Blimey, you're sharp at the moment, Madeleine! You could publish a companion to the interviews!
 
Blimey, you're sharp at the moment, Madeleine! You could publish a companion to the interviews!

Yep,there's always something interesting about these interviews.
This is so ridiculous.Would a shrink know better than the MOTHER if a kid is FINE or NOT???:banghead:

And this :"Burke may be trying to hold it together and be real strong for John and I,"


Hello,the kid was 9 years old?!And not exactly the emotional ,brave type of kid.IMO
 
Yep,there's always something interesting about these interviews.
This is so ridiculous.Would a shrink know better than the MOTHER if a kid is FINE or NOT???:banghead:

And this :"Burke may be trying to hold it together and be real strong for John and I,"


Hello,the kid was 9 years old?!And not exactly the emotional ,brave type of kid.IMO



You're right - it makes no sense at all. Just wondering whether it would be worth starting a new thread on the interviews and we could go through them from start to finish to see what we spot. I know it's been done but who knows what might show up after this time?
 
Yep,there's always something interesting about these interviews.
This is so ridiculous.Would a shrink know better than the MOTHER if a kid is FINE or NOT???:banghead:

And this :"Burke may be trying to hold it together and be real strong for John and I,"


Hello,the kid was 9 years old?!And not exactly the emotional ,brave type of kid.IMO

Hi madeleine.

ty for posting the interview snippets!

hmmm.


"12 that -- that Burke may be trying to hold it

13 together and be real strong for John and I
, you ..."


Children do take on 'roles' post trauma, to cope, and within a dysfunctional family these coping skills are well established.
 
The other issue is that the Ramseys supposedly believe that this is the work of a paedophile who is a danger to children (although the recent statement seemed to have absorbed some of HOTYH's theory) and they warned friends to keep their babies 'close.' If they honestly believe this, they have a responsibility to other children to help locate the killer and keep the fires of justice burning. They can forgive the killer but that doesn't preclude a genuine attempt to find him - to protect others and get him the help they obviously think he needs.

Hi Sophie.

I wonder what the feel is ....the atmosphere in the neighbourhood come Christmas and the anniversary of JBR's death; are the neighbours well secured, armed, vigil?
Perhaps Jason's lurking in the .....



Wonder what exactly is the neighbouhood lore.
 
If an IDI and it was not a personal attack on a member of the family it is unlikely that it would be a one off, so unless the intruder died soon after is is surprising that no other case pulled up the same DNA IMO.
So yes i'm surprised that the ramsey's weren't shouting from the rooftops find this person before he does it again.
And i think that if i was living near there at the time i would be very worried about the safty of children in the neighbourhood.
 
I came across this - thought it was good:

OK, that's enough. For nearly five months, I've withheld judgment and comment on this sordid episode because I just couldn't figure out who the Creeps were. A little girl was dead, her family was acting very weird and nobody was making any progress towards finding the killer. But this has gone on long enough and everyone involved is smelling really foul, especially the multi-millionaire parents, John and Patricia Ramsey
…What kind of parents would dress up their daughter like that and put her on display?
Answer: The same kind of parents whose first move after their daughter's murder is to hire an army of lawyers, investigators and media consultants. The kind who refuse to speak to the police investigating the murder because they were "insulted" at being considered suspects. The kind who hold an invitation-only press conference where they deny any involvement in the crime while looking like two kids doing the "I didn't break the lamp, Daddy, it just fell over by itself" routine. And the kind who this week put an ad in the paper offering a $100,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of the killer and warning of an adult male who was approaching children in the Boulder area around the time of the murder. Any previous evidence of such a guy? If there was, I'll bet he looked a lot like John Ramsey.
…And what is this business of negotiating with suspects about conditions under which they will consent to speak to the police? Is this the special millionaire pampering treatment? If you or I were suspects in such a case, the cops would break down our door, screaming "Up against the wall, hands behind your head..." and then haul us downtown where we'd be interrogated …even OJ was handcuffed and brought down to the station for questioning.
http://www.johnmonty.com/cotw/cw970510.htm
 
You're right - it makes no sense at all. Just wondering whether it would be worth starting a new thread on the interviews and we could go through them from start to finish to see what we spot. I know it's been done but who knows what might show up after this time?

That would be great Sophie!
How do we do it,one thread for each interview?
 
You're right - it makes no sense at all. Just wondering whether it would be worth starting a new thread on the interviews and we could go through them from start to finish to see what we spot. I know it's been done but who knows what might show up after this time?

I started one on here and over at FFJ. I went over John and Patsy's interviews with a "fine tooth comb", but I am sure that I probably missed alot of stuff.

One of the most interesting things that I found was in both John and Patsy's interviews, they were asked about the food that PW served at her party. John at first says that he asked PW to save out a plate for JB, because she loved cracked crab. AND then, later on in the interview...he must have forgotten that he had said that, because he says that he has no idea WHY PW would have saved a plate for JB, and that he thought it was strange. Patsy said the exact same thing...almost word for word. I will try and find that portion of the interview.
 
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yaK2RstdQQw[/ame]

What if we were murderers???
Laugh it up, John. Were you laughing about highway accidents a few years after Beth died?
 
This isn't a murder case (although it's medical miracle that it isn't) and it's generally the most depressing, horrifying crime imaginable in many ways. I've been crying all morning about what the little ones suffered, the way the perps had been dragged up by their 'parents' and what this story tells us about welfare towns and people whose state-financed life consists of procreating for child benefits, neglecting and abusing those kids and basically watching vile movies while getting drunk and smoking cannabis. The other really awful part and the bit that is apposite to this thread is the judge talking about how guilty the parents of the victims feel about not protecting the boys better. WARNING: THIS IS VERY UPSETTING.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/8473978.stm
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
167
Guests online
1,053
Total visitors
1,220

Forum statistics

Threads
589,937
Messages
17,927,904
Members
228,006
Latest member
Suesleuth
Back
Top