Where is Steve Thomas today?

ellen13

New Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2005
Messages
749
Reaction score
3
Just wondering where Steve Thomas is today. Since he
felt so passionate about this case, just wondered how
long he followed it. Did he end up leaving Boulder. Has
he ever been interviewed?
 
I enjoyed his book and I wish Steve Thomas well, but I am not a fan of his. Steve vigorously but blindly pursued a Patsy-Did-It theory with no real evidence to support it, so he manufactured some evidence and presented it as fact to the DA and assembled VIP's on June 1 and 2, 1998 in an aborted effort to get an indictment on Patsy. The twisted bogus evidence seriously misdirected the investigation and, IMO, cost him his job just weeks later.

BlueCrab
 
There are posters who are very protective of Steve Thomas. If they know where he is and what he is doing, they won't say on a public forum.
 
BlueCrab said:
I enjoyed his book and I wish Steve Thomas well, but I am not a fan of his. Steve vigorously but blindly pursued a Patsy-Did-It theory with no real evidence to support it, so he manufactured some evidence
BlueCrab
I'm currently reading Steve's book, and I can't imagine a type like him manufacturing any evidence. So would you please name the kind of evidence he allegedly manufactured, and back it up with reliable sources. Thanks.
 
Well, wherever he is, I wish him well. I am a believer that he knew what he was talking about. He stood up for little JonBenet when no one else would...not even her mom and dad. He's a stand-up guy...it's too bad there aren't more people like him in this world.

This doesn't have anything to do with Steve Thomas, but last week while we were on vacation, I could have sworn I saw John and Patsy. I was sitting in a lounge chair in front of the ocean when a couple strolled past me. A half an hour later they walked by me again. It looked so much like Patsy, I was sure it was her. The man looked a lot like John, but I wasn't so sure.

Has anyone heard anything more on how Patsy is doing?
 
In the NE 1/23/06 issue it is reported that Patsy has announced she has beat cancer again.
 
Whereever he is, if he has children, I hope one of them is a bedwetter. He clearly needed to learn what a small deal that is.
 
tipper said:
Whereever he is, if he has children, I hope one of them is a bedwetter. He clearly needed to learn what a small deal that is.
The number one preceding cause of physical child abuse is bed wetting. It's the truth.
 
Linda7NJ said:
The number one preceding cause of physical child abuse is bed wetting. It's the truth.

And I believe it was the catalyst in the event that unfolded. I also believe there's much more that was going on in that house than we know about. I think things just got out of contol. It happens. For some reason people just don't want to think it's possible, but it does.

As for Patsy beating cancer yet again, good for her. She seems to be able to beat it over and over. I've known a lot of people who haven't been so lucky. She's got more lives than a cat. I do hope she really is in recovery.
 
luvbeaches said:
And I believe it was the catalyst in the event that unfolded. I also believe there's much more that was going on in that house than we know about. I think things just got out of contol. It happens. For some reason people just don't want to think it's possible, but it does.

As for Patsy beating cancer yet again, good for her. She seems to be able to beat it over and over. I've known a lot of people who haven't been so lucky. She's got more lives than a cat. I do hope she really is in recovery.
Interesting isn't it, in view of the fact that ovarian cancer is among the most fast-proceeding and deadly cancers existent.
Whether it was a compassion story the Ramseys planted or whether not, good for her that she is not ill because then there remains the theoretical chance that she will finally tell what happened on that fatal night, maybe to alleviate her conscience. Wonders do happen.
 
Linda7NJ said:
The number one preceding cause of physical child abuse is bed wetting. It's the truth.
That may be true. I couldn't find anything on Google to support it but it doesn't seem unreasonable that some types of parents would overreact to toilet training issues. I did however, find a risk factors associated with child abusers. None seem to apply to the Ramseys.


http://www.medicinenet.com/child_abuse/page2.htm

Is there an association between poverty and child abuse?

While children of families in all income levels suffer maltreatment, research suggests that family income is strongly related to incidence rates. Children from families with annual incomes below $15,000 per year are more than 25 times more likely than children from families with annual income above $30,000 to be harmed or endangered by abuse or neglect. Poverty clearly predisposes to child abuse.

http://www.medicinenet.com/child_abuse/page5.htm#35whatfactors

What factors predispose a person to child abuse?


Specialists evaluating an abused child's environment and family background have noted several risk factors for potential abuse:

1. The abuser's childhood: approximately 20% of offenders were themselves abused as children.
2. The abuser's substance abuse: children in alcohol-abusing families are nearly 4 times more likely to be mistreated, almost 5 times more likely to be physically neglected, and 10 times more likely to be emotionally neglected than children in non-alcohol- abusing families. Of all child abuse cases, 50-80% involve some degree of substance abuse by the child's parents.
3. Family stress: the disintegration of the nuclear family and its inherent support systems have been held to be associated with child abuse.
4. Social forces: experts debate whether a presumed reduction in religious/moral values coupled with an increase in the depiction of violence by the entertainment and informational media may increase child abuse.
5. The child: children at higher risk for abuse include infants who are felt to be "overly fussy", handicapped children, and children with chronic diseases.

Specific "trigger" events that occur just before many fatal parental assaults on infants and young children include: an infant's inconsolable crying, feeding difficulties, a toddler's failed toilet training, and exaggerated parental perceptions of acts of "disobedience" by the child.
 
tipper said:
That may be true. I couldn't find anything on Google to support it but it doesn't seem unreasonable that some types of parents would overreact to toilet training issues. I did however, find a risk factors associated with child abusers. None seem to apply to the Ramseys.


http://www.medicinenet.com/child_abuse/page2.htm

Is there an association between poverty and child abuse?

While children of families in all income levels suffer maltreatment, research suggests that family income is strongly related to incidence rates. Children from families with annual incomes below $15,000 per year are more than 25 times more likely than children from families with annual income above $30,000 to be harmed or endangered by abuse or neglect. Poverty clearly predisposes to child abuse.

http://www.medicinenet.com/child_abuse/page5.htm#35whatfactors

What factors predispose a person to child abuse?


Specialists evaluating an abused child's environment and family background have noted several risk factors for potential abuse:

1. The abuser's childhood: approximately 20% of offenders were themselves abused as children.
2. The abuser's substance abuse: children in alcohol-abusing families are nearly 4 times more likely to be mistreated, almost 5 times more likely to be physically neglected, and 10 times more likely to be emotionally neglected than children in non-alcohol- abusing families. Of all child abuse cases, 50-80% involve some degree of substance abuse by the child's parents.
3. Family stress: the disintegration of the nuclear family and its inherent support systems have been held to be associated with child abuse.
4. Social forces: experts debate whether a presumed reduction in religious/moral values coupled with an increase in the depiction of violence by the entertainment and informational media may increase child abuse.
5. The child: children at higher risk for abuse include infants who are felt to be "overly fussy", handicapped children, and children with chronic diseases.

Specific "trigger" events that occur just before many fatal parental assaults on infants and young children include: an infant's inconsolable crying, feeding difficulties, a toddler's failed toilet training, and exaggerated parental perceptions of acts of "disobedience" by the child.

People kill their children over spilled milk, and bedwetting...and a host of other things. It's a fact. What you've posted is interesting, but doesn't give Patsy a pass.
 
luvbeaches said:
People kill their children over spilled milk, and bedwetting...and a host of other things. It's a fact. What you've posted is interesting, but doesn't give Patsy a pass.
No but it does suggest the Ramseys don't fit the general profile of parents who abuse their children.
 
rashomon said:
Interesting isn't it, in view of the fact that ovarian cancer is among the most fast-proceeding and deadly cancers existent.
Whether it was a compassion story the Ramseys planted or whether not, good for her that she is not ill because then there remains the theoretical chance that she will finally tell what happened on that fatal night, maybe to alleviate her conscience. Wonders do happen.

Yeah, it's hard to say what Patsy's true state of health is these days...she's been "near death" so many times. I don't so much think Patsy will "confess" to anything, but I do think one of these days Burke is going to tell what he heard that night, and it will resolve this case. I've also wondered if Patsy does die, John will tell everyone that "Patsy" confessed on her death bed" to him. Then he and Burke could move on....

But then again, anything is possible. Patsy does seem like a religious person, and she may want to clear her conscience and tell what happened that night. And the killer may not be who I think it is...anything is possible.

They are where they are because they had money. They lawyered-up and that was that.

I remember the first thing that I heard that made me question the R's was the little coffee klatch they had that morning. Can you even imagine calling your friends to come to your house when you think your daughter has been kidnapped and the ransom note says "don't talk to a stray dog, or she'll be beheaded." Yeah, I'd call all my nearest and dearest to my house! Obviously, they weren't worried about that...I wonder why?
 
tipper said:
No but it does suggest the Ramseys don't fit the general profile of parents who abuse their children.

Every killer has a first. And not every person fits a "profile." There was a lot going on in that house. People snap. It happens. Profile or not, it just happens. And they don't get a pass from me. Too many inconsistant statements.

I remember Nedra saying...JonBenet had only been molested "a little bit." Now that's a strange statement. A little, a lot, what's the difference? You'd think they'd want the killer found and brought to justice. They certainly have done nothing to find the killer. Nothing at all. :(
 
emphasis mine

http://www.corpus-delicti.com/douglas_jbr.html
Ramseys update own probe

By Marilyn Robinson
Denver Post Staff Writer

July 24 - Frustrated at the pace of the police investigation, JonBenet Ramsey's father stepped up his efforts Wednesday to find her killer.

John Ramsey announced plans for a series of newspaper ads and released a profile developed by the family's team of experts. The profile outlines possible characteristics of an intruder whom Ramsey says killed his 6-year-old daughter on Christmas night.

"On December 25, my daughter, JonBenet, was brutally murdered by an intruder who came into our home while we slept," Ramsey said in a one-page statement.

"The person who did this crime is an evil person beyond the imagination. He must be brought to justice and prevented from stopping the life of another young child who offers so much to the future of the world." Ramsey attorney Hal Haddon said the newspaper ads will contain more details and profile information than what was released Wednesday.

"We are hopeful that somebody will either notice something they haven't noticed before or will have an attack of conscience," Haddon said.

Any leads generated by the ads will be turned over to police because Ramsey investigators don't have arrest powers, Haddon added.

Haddon wasn't sure how much the Ramseys have spent in their efforts to find their daughter's killer. But, he said, "it is by mammoth proportions more than any citizen should have to spend to solve the murder of their daughter."

The profile, which was drawn up by criminologists and other experts, suggests that the killer is someone who may have previously been in the Ramsey home and may have quickly constructed an alibi for his whereabouts.

The murder could have been triggered by a crisis in the killer's life and the killer could have been venting anger, perhaps at Ramsey himself, according to the profile.

Ramsey said the investigation by Boulder authorities has focused too much on the family.

"Over the past seven months, I have grown increasingly frustrated as the investigating authorities have limited their investigation into the murder of my daughter.
.
.to me and members of my family," Ramsey said.

In his statement, Ramsey said he believed authorities would eventually look beyond the family.

"I am not confident this has happened," he said.

Spokeswoman Rachelle Zimmer later clarified Ramsey's statement by saying his frustration is not with the district attorney's office but more with Boulder police.

District Attorney Alex Hunter has said JonBenet's parents, John and Patsy Ramsey, are a focus of the investigation. He has emphasized, however, that investigators also are looking outside the family.

Both police and DA officials declined to comment on Wednesday's development.

Detective Cmdr. John Eller, however, said police have worked closely with experts from the FBI's child abduction and serial killer unit in Quantico, Va.

"We've made a number of trips there, and they've been out here. We are in constant contact with FBI experts and have been since the beginning. We have found their assistance to be invaluable," Eller said.

He declined to disclose what profile they have developed.

The Ramseys have assembled a team of private investigators, former FBI profilers, handwriting experts and attorneys since their daughter was found murdered in the basement of their Boulder home on Dec. 26. She had been beaten and strangled.

Ramsey said the family's investigators are looking into "solid leads" based on tips received as a result of previous ads and on other field work.

On Sunday, Ramsey said, the family will begin running ads in the Boulder Daily Camera newspaper and distributing fliers detailing the profile.

The fliers will be distributed in "appropriate" neighborhoods, according to the statement.

"While we are limited in our work because we do not have access to the forensic information and do not have police powers to search and test, we do have the advantage of knowing that no one in our family is responsible for JonBenet's death and we can evaluate information without prejudice," Ramsey's statement said.

The family has offered a $100,000 reward in the case. Anyone with information can respond by calling the Ramsey hotline at 303-443-3535.

[...]
 
luvbeaches said:
I remember the first thing that I heard that made me question the R's was the little coffee klatch they had that morning. Can you even imagine calling your friends to come to your house when you think your daughter has been kidnapped and the ransom note says "don't talk to a stray dog, or she'll be beheaded." Yeah, I'd call all my nearest and dearest to my house! Obviously, they weren't worried about that...I wonder why?
Good point, luvbeaches.
Behavior is circumstantial evidence too, and the way the Ramseys behaved throughout that whole case just screams that they both must be involved into this up to their neck. There is no other explanation.
Yes, the Ramseys called their neighbors over because they knew they had nothing to fear from the kidnappers, for these kidnappers only existed in their concocted ransom note.
 
rashomon said:
Good point, luvbeaches.
Behavior is circumstantial evidence too, and the way the Ramseys behaved throughout that whole case just screams that they both must be involved into this up to their neck. There is no other explanation.
Yes, the Ramseys called their neighbors over because they knew they had nothing to fear from the kidnappers, for these kidnappers only existed in their concocted ransom note.

And didn't John tell his other two kids (can't remember their names), that he "found" JonBenet at 10:00? But it was around 1:00 when the officer send him and Fleet to search the house. Wasn't it around 10:00 when John disappeared for a bit? I think he did find the body at 10:00.

Yep, they didn't have a thing to fear concerning the ransom note. The concocted note was another big "red flag" for me. Most ransom notes get to the point. "I have your kid. I will call you." Period.

But it's the inconsistancies in their statements that I can't get past. The wet red turtleneck in the bathroom was something else. Patsy said one thing once about what JBR was wearing, then another later. And the list goes on and on.

When you tell the truth about an event, especially something like this, you can remember what you said. You made add more detail (color or something like that), but your basic story stays the same. Theirs didn't. And there's a reason for that....they aren't being truthful, for whatever reason.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
220
Guests online
3,406
Total visitors
3,626

Forum statistics

Threads
591,814
Messages
17,959,405
Members
228,613
Latest member
boymom0304
Back
Top