An Evening with JonBenet...by Walter A. Davis

Jayelles · Nov 4, 2003

I have some vague memory of a previous discussion about this which concluded that John was an Episcopalian but that Patsy wasn't really.

I could be wrong. Religion is not something I have a great interest in (justifiably having grown up in a sectarian environment) so I wouldn't have been paying full attention!

Show Me · Nov 4, 2003

Wish Blazeboy had posted part of an essay.

Is the rest of the book along the same lines? If it is...I don't know if I can read it all.

Maxi · Nov 4, 2003

In Atlanta, the Rams were Presbyterian. In Boulder, they were Episcopalian.

If you want to read the play, please go to the url Blazeboy provided in the first post. I deleted the other, longer posts because of copyright violatons.

Shylock · Nov 4, 2003

Originally posted by tipper
No, it's not "deep." It's simply *advertiser censored* using a dead child as a hook to get sales. If this man has something to say about child beauty pageants he should say it and spare us this tripe.

It's FICTION -- Why people want to discuss it like it has some value is beyond me... I guess you all must be really bored.

ajt400 · Nov 4, 2003

Thank You Shylock for seeing what I guess very few here do. This is simply a wrok of fiction, the author himself said it is loosely based on JonBenet, so why the big deal?

Misty · Nov 4, 2003

It seems to me that you know who is doing enough to try and discredit this FICTIONAL ACCOUNT by posting only the most graphic portions of this particular section.

Abuse is not nice -- there are no flowers attached to it. Victims spend a life time recovering from its affects.

why_nutt · Nov 4, 2003

Originally posted by Jayelles
It's simply wrong to speculate about real, living people in such a horrid way. It's just wrong. It's a terrible insult to JonBenet above all else.

I don't know anything about Walter Davis. I have no idea if he is heterosexual or homosexual or anything else - but I could speculate (i.e. guess). I could write a book in graphic details about my speculations and be totally and utterly wrong. My graphic details might be titillating for some and disgusting to most and be extremely repulsive and hurtful to Mr Davis - but will it be OK for me to do that if I do so and donate the proceeds of my book to charity?

What do others think? (truthfully) Is it OK to go around publishing your wild and imagined dirty thoughts about real people in the name of Freedom of Speech?

In America, yes you can, so long as the work is presented as fiction and not biography. Look up "roman a clef." You would not have enough time to read all the examples I could present wherein real people are turned into fictional characters so that the creator of the artwork can make a larger point about Society. I am currently reading a Caleb Carr book, "The Alienist," in which Theodore Roosevelt is a character. Did he do or say any of the things which Carr makes him do and say? No. Recently I attended a showing of the movie "Bubba Ho-Tep," which takes as its entertaining premise the concept that Elvis Presley is still alive but in hiding, broke his hip, became confined to a nursing home, and has needed to fend off a zombie feeding on the residents of the home, all while in the company of his new companion, John Fitzgerald Kennedy, who is also alive and in the nursing home. I assure you, Lisa Marie Presley is not losing sleep at night because a movie was written showing her father is alive and fights a zombie.

Works of art always have and always will incorporate the use of real individuals, especially dead individuals, and there is not a court in the land which will uphold an assault on that process. Such assaults have been tried, such assaults always fail.

Jayelles · Nov 4, 2003

Abuse is not nice -- there are no flowers attached to it. Victims spend a life time recovering from its affects.

What about men and women wrongly accused of abuse? Only last month a headmaster killed himself after he was maliciously and wrongly accused of abusing a pupil. Even although he was exonerated without question he stated that 'mud sticks' before committing suicide. He couldn't live with that and his family are devastated.

We do not know for an absolute certainty that JonBenet WAS abused before the night of her death. Even if she was, it is not a certainty that her father was the abuser. The Ramseys arrogant butt-covering after her death does not make them murderers or sex abusers and they have the consitituional right to be considered innocenct until proven guilty in a court of law.

I have no criticism of Waleter Davis highlighting the plight of abuse victims in his play - but to use real people who have NOT been convicted of any such crime is appalling - regardless of who they are.

No matter what our personal feelings about the ramseys are, they should not be considered 'fair game' for an exercise such as this.

tipper · Nov 4, 2003

Originally posted by why_nutt

.. I assure you, Lisa Marie Presley is not losing sleep at night because a movie was written showing her father is alive and fights a zombie.

No, but I am quite confident you would have an army of Presley lawyers descend if you try and produce a movie portraying her father as a child molester.

Jayelles · Nov 4, 2003

Tipper/WN

No, but I am quite confident you would have an army of Presley lawyers descend if you try and produce a movie portraying her father as a child molester.

You took the words out of my mouth! I think if the fiction is far-fetched then there is a comfort factor, because people aren't going to take it too seriously.

why_nutt · Nov 4, 2003

Originally posted by Jayelles
Tipper/WN

You took the words out of my mouth! I think if the fiction is far-fetched then there is a comfort factor, because people aren't going to take it too seriously.

Nancy Reagan has not sent a horde of lawyers to descend on the Showtime Network despite her revulsion for the new Reagan biopic which is so controversial at the moment. She is smart enough to know that she has no case in the courts to keep the program from airing. The same things are at issue. Artists have put together an entertainment and since the work uses actors to depict real people, enough distance has been achieved to place the work into the realm of art. Art has protections which non-fiction does not, and it does not matter whether the art is far-fetched or true to life. So long as Davis's play is art, it is immune from anything but theater critics and audience reaction at the box office.

Jayelles · Nov 4, 2003

Well I think that's just awful.

ajt400 · Nov 4, 2003

Originally posted by why_nutt
Nancy Reagan has not sent a horde of lawyers to descend on the Showtime Network despite her revulsion for the new Reagan biopic which is so controversial at the moment. She is smart enough to know that she has no case in the courts to keep the program from airing. The same things are at issue. Artists have put together an entertainment and since the work uses actors to depict real people, enough distance has been achieved to place the work into the realm of art. Art has protections which non-fiction does not, and it does not matter whether the art is far-fetched or true to life. So long as Davis's play is art, it is immune from anything but theater critics and audience reaction at the box office.

Nancy Reagan also isn't under an "Umbrella of Suspicion" for her child's death, either, is she?

How do you know she hasn't tried to fight it? I am sure these things go on behind closed doors....

tipper · Nov 4, 2003

She sent a horde of conservatives instead.

Do a Google News search there's all kinds of coverage of CBS "yanking, dropping, axing, pulling the plug" on this show.

Reagan Miniseries to Air on Showtime
By DAVID BAUDER
AP Television Writer
NEW YORK

James Brolin as President Ronald Reagan poses on the set of CBS' "The Reagans." Under pressure from Republicans and conservative groups, CBS may not air its unflattering portrait of the former president and his wife, Nancy, according to published reports. (AP Photo/CBS, Cliff Lipson)
Capping an extraordinary conservative furor over a movie virtually no one has seen, CBS scrapped plans Tuesday to televise "The Reagans" and decided to shunt it off to the Showtime cable network instead.

Based on snippets of the script that had leaked out in recent weeks, conservatives, including the son of the former president, accused CBS of distorting the legacy of Ronald Reagan.

While CBS said it was not bowing to political pressure, critics said that was exactly the case, and worried about the effects of such pre-emptive strikes on future work.

CBS believed it had ordered a love story about Ronald and Nancy Reagan with politics as a backdrop, but instead got a film that crossed the line into advocacy, said a network executive who spoke on the condition of anonymity.
...

ajt400 · Nov 4, 2003

What say you now, Why_Nutt?

Blazeboy3 · Nov 5, 2003

Originally posted by Maxi
Blazeboy! You can't copy huge portions of a published work without the author's permission! Please pare those posts down to a paragraph or two right away.

\\\

DONE!!!Maxi...forgive me please...just got here/ SH>T...I didn't know I was in the wrong/not doing what was permitted ... forgive me please! ... I'm so SORRY ... my excuse:I'm brain-farting because OF KIDS(4)? ... but no harm intended!!! Hopefully all is well,,,...!!!???

Blazeboy3 · Nov 5, 2003

Originally posted by tipper
"PATSYS VOICE
Speak up. What have you got to say for yourself. Nothing. Good. Heres what nothing gets you. (Loud noise of slap.)"

A slap? Where did you get the idea that Patsy slapped her children? If anything, she's been criticized for being too easy going.

I asked the same question and the answer came in the latest book by W.A. Davis...it's in the play he wrote FWIW ... read it if you can ...???!!!

Blazeboy3 · Nov 5, 2003

Originally posted by SisterSocks
Maxi isn't there more you can do with Blaze and the waste of band width? Just asking her nicley doesn't help she like the damn ever ready bunny she goes on and on and on and on and on and on >: (

HELLO...and your point is...You are too ??? "MORE" what's that mean in regards to Band width?

Blazeboy3 · Nov 5, 2003

Originally posted by Show Me
Wow! Glad I got to read it all before Blazeboy edits it down.

It's very deep....don't care much for all the vulgar language...though I understand the reason for the bad language.

HeeHeeLOL...do I laugh or cry (for JonBenet?!) ... hope you all see it for what it is ... in regards to I'm a homemom(retired) raising 4 young kids against ALL ODDS!!!...HELLO?

Blazeboy3 · Nov 5, 2003

Originally posted by tipper
That's the point. There has been no evidence that she was physically abused in connection with the pageants (or anything else, for that matter) yet he is using this false premise as a jumping off point for the subsequent opinion.

I don't know whether malice can be proven. But I think there should be some kind of consequence for the willful creation of negative "facts" when presenting a piece using real people's names and situation. I would feel the same way whether we are talking about the Ramseys or the estate of Ted Bundy.

... for peace of mind "read the book and especially the last few pages that pertain to legalities...!!!"

An Evening with JonBenet...by Walter A. Davis

New Member

New Member

Maxi

Guest

Former Member

ajt400

Guest

Inactive

New Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

ajt400

Guest

Former Member

ajt400

Guest

Inactive

Inactive

Inactive

Inactive

Inactive

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics