10-18-2005, 07:44 PM #1
Books - What is to be gained from them?
I own several books about the JonBenet Ramsey case. The only one I have read cover to cover is DOI. Which is kind of suprising as I believe a Ramsey to have committed this crime. I assume that a lot of posters here own or have read several books on the Ramsey case.
My question is which books serve which purpose? For example, DOI for me was just an insight into the Ramsey way of life and their personalities. What do the other books do for you? Is PMPT the most accurate? Does it have the most factual evidence? Does ST's book show you how focused he was on solving the crime? Or does it show you how (IYO) focused he was on framing the family?
Thanks in advance!Above is my opinion only
10-18-2005, 09:20 PM #2Originally Posted by Brefie
10-18-2005, 10:55 PM #3Originally Posted by michelle
Last edited by Brefie; 10-19-2005 at 07:59 PM.Above is my opinion only
10-27-2005, 08:27 PM #4
I am only just now reading the books after looking in the crime section at the library. I think Jon Benet by Steve Thomas really shows how the case was botched and just what type of place Boulder is regarding solving murders. Perfect Murder Perfect Town seems to have more facts that weren't in the first book.
10-27-2005, 10:18 PM #5Registered User
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
Cyril Wecht was one ofOriginally Posted by txsvicki
Linda McClean, who knew Patsy since high school days wrote a book to set the record straight on what kind of person Patsy is. Not too many interested, because it wasn't a Ramsey bashing book. I think she wrote it because of the public lynching, and is truly a good friend.
Schiller---appears to be objective and highlighted the RIF between the police and DA's office. Raised some interesting suspects. Did it for money, and think he also had an interest in justice and getting the facts out.
Steve Thomas--money..ego..wanted to get his lamebrained theory out there, because he couldn't have his way, IMO. He shows his bias against Patsy and her female relatives, by snide remarks and innuendos.
DOI--Ramseys wanted a legacy for their children..grandchildren, etc. It was their story, and they wanted it memoralized.
There were a few others, and some that had references to the case in a few chapters , such as (clueless) Henry Lee; and John Douglas. One was written by a former beauty contestant that was sexually abused as a child---I think she had baggage and projected what happened to her on JBR.
Still waiting for Linda Hoffman Pugh's book.........Janet McReynold's at one time said she was going to write one about the real Bill McReynold's.
10-28-2005, 08:47 AM #6Former Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
The National Enquirer book, the transcripts of tapes of the Ramsey's interviews which Jameson sold to them for $40,000 is very interesting.
It is pretty damning to the Ramseys, it not only shows how particular interviewers treated them with kid gloves and not asked the "hard" questions, but what made my hinky meter ring are the amounts of "I don't remembers". Compare this to details upon details described in D.O.I. meant to portray them as the perfect "Ozzie and Harriet" type family-- which I have an extremely hard time believing.
One of my favorite examples is the elaborate "traditional" breakfast which is described in D.O.I. whereas in the interviews we were told they had "pancakes." That's it. If you believe D.O.I. there was a banquet.
The memory lapses these Ramseys have are incredible. I believe most trained interrogators will conclude that the Ramseys were less than forthcoming with the truth after seeing these transcripts in the NE book.
There is an excellent discussion at FFJ about the ghost writing of D.O.I. and the inconsistency of statements in relationship to how and who wrote it!
Those Ramseys even have a problem remembering how their own book was written!
10-28-2005, 09:24 AM #7
Yeah, it's pretty odd how Patsy can remember exact conversations from when JonBenet was three, but can't remember if she had a bath before she was killed. DOI is a load of self-serving crap, it's nothing but misdirection and fabrication. Why have they offered contradicting stories about key information? Why did they not go in to interview with police right away, and why on earth would there be a limit on questions? They're supposed to be searching for the killer, not covering up for themselves! Why did they call police and all of their friends and ask them to come over if they thought kidnappers holding JonBenet were going to *cut off her head* if they spoke to anyone about it? They knew there was no kidnapper. They knew she was dead in the basement.
10-28-2005, 10:27 AM #8
Originally Posted by NuisanceposterAbove is my opinion only
10-28-2005, 11:33 AM #9Registered User
- Join Date
- Mar 2005
I have read 4 different books about this murder. I read DOI last, the other books I read were PMPt and two other books who's titles escape me. The book that had the most impact on me was deffinitly DOI, because it was so far removed from the other 3 books.
Either the authors of the other books I read wrote books filled with innacuarices or the Ramseys put out a book that is essentialy a fluff piece designed to paint a "Leave it to Beaver" image out to the world of this family. Reading the books gave me lots of food for thought. Prior to reading the books I thought an intruder did it. However, after reading all the books I am not sitting on the fence. Ironicly it was the DOI book that led me to doubt the intruder theory,
10-28-2005, 09:07 PM #10Former Member
- Join Date
- Aug 2003
If you want that doubt of the intruder sealed in stone, read the National Enquirer transcript book!