Stephen Singular

New Posts

S

shiloh

New Member
Joined
Jul 3, 2006
Messages
116
Reaction score
3
I read his book right after it first came out, but I never took it very seriously. But it may be time for a second read through and give it more serious consideration. Here's a link to an interesting interview with him from two years ago. http://www.crime-research.org/interviews/484

It's interesting that he says, "According to John Douglas, the ex-FBI profiler who examined the Ramseys briefly after the murder and concluded they were not child killers, only one parent knew that John Ramsey had recently received a $118,000 bonus and that parent was the father." If this is true, then Patsy could not possibly have been the writer of the note. But that still leaves John... with or without an 'intruder' accomplice.

That poor child. What she went through that night.

I don't believe in a head bashing by an enraged Patsy over bedwetting, and I never have. But she put her child (who at 4 years of age described herself as sexy) in a great deal of danger. Of that she is guilty, and she paid the ultimate price.

"They killed my baby." -- Patsy Ramsey, December 26, 1996.
 
shiloh said:
I read his book right after it first came out, but I never took it very seriously. But it may be time for a second read through and give it more serious consideration. Here's a link to an interesting interview with him from two years ago. http://www.crime-research.org/interviews/484

It's interesting that he says, "According to John Douglas, the ex-FBI profiler who examined the Ramseys briefly after the murder and concluded they were not child killers, only one parent knew that John Ramsey had recently received a $118,000 bonus and that parent was the father." If this is true, then Patsy could not possibly have been the writer of the note. But that still leaves John... with or without an 'intruder' accomplice.

That poor child. What she went through that night.

I don't believe in a head bashing by an enraged Patsy over bedwetting, and I never have. But she put her child (who at 4 years of age described herself as sexy) in a great deal of danger. Of that she is guilty, and she paid the ultimate price.

"They killed my baby." -- Patsy Ramsey, December 26, 1996.
Click to expand...
The problem with John Douglas is that it seems possible that he says more than his prayers. He really puzzles me. There's no doubt that he has talent but his ego is so HUGE that it seems to get somewhat in the way of him being excellent at what he does.

The question I would ask is "How does Douglas know that Patsy didn't know about the bonus" and I'm afraid the answer would probably be "Because Patsy said she never saw it".

Too many "facts" have been claimed on the basis of Ramsey say so in this case.

I read Singular's book and consider it to be one of the worst books about the case. All the way through, I felt that it was building up to some big revelation and then it just petered out at the end. I'm not alone in thinking that. It was like he had to finish it suddenly and didn't have time to put the ending in.
 
I think I have Singular's book but don't immediately remember much about it.
I'll flip through it to see if there's any margin notes that may seem important.

Just came from the "99% chance" thread, where it was noticed that FW's guest Bill Cox called the child a 6-yr old in the movie some of them had been watching, and her age wasn't specifically stated in the movie. I'm hoping he'll come back with the source, because I seem to remember only the guests from CA were watching a movie, not positive of that.
 
shiloh said:
only one parent knew that John Ramsey had recently received a $118,000 bonus and that parent was the father." If this is true, then Patsy could not possibly have been the writer of the note.

"They killed my baby." -- Patsy Ramsey, December 26, 1996.
Click to expand...
118 may have nothing to do with the bonus. It might have something to do with The Psalms. The Psalms show up all over this case.

"They" is plural, it points to a conspiracy. I think the "they" were inside Patsy and they were beyond her control: thus conspiratorial in nature.
 
Paradox said:
118 may have nothing to do with the bonus. It might have something to do with The Psalms. The Psalms show up all over this case.
QUOTE]
That psalms theory is RIDICULOUS, IMO.
Click to expand...
 
I do not for a moment believe that the parents were innocent (I know this case too well for such delusions), but I'm not sure what their exact involvement was. Patsy, IMO, was nothing more than an accessory after the fact.

If Singulair's theory is correct, it would explain the mob-style tactics used against some of the investigating detectives on this case, which does not make sense when considering any other theory. I'm referring to the machine gun fire through one of their homes, and the dead and mutilated cat found on ST's lawn, and the blood that was splashed across Linda Arndt's front door. This goes well beyond the involvement of solely the parents or solely an intruder. This case is BIG. Real big.
 
[shiloh] "If Singulair's theory is correct, it would explain the mob-style tactics used against some of the investigating detectives on this case, which does not make sense when considering any other theory. I'm referring to the machine gun fire through one of their homes, and the dead and mutilated cat found on ST's lawn, and the blood that was splashed across Linda Arndt's front door. This goes well beyond the involvement of solely the parents or solely an intruder. This case is BIG. Real big."

Except that there was an unsuccessful attempt by the Ramsey lawyers to torpedo certain experts in the case so they couldn't testify at trial. But was it on their orders or not?

"The problem with John Douglas is that it seems possible that he says more than his prayers. He really puzzles me. There's no doubt that he has talent but his ego is so HUGE that it seems to get somewhat in the way of him being excellent at what he does."

Especially since everything he writes condemns them. He's worthless.
 
SuperDave said:
"The problem with John Douglas is that it seems possible that he says more than his prayers. He really puzzles me. There's no doubt that he has talent but his ego is so HUGE that it seems to get somewhat in the way of him being excellent at what he does."

Especially since everything he writes condemns them. He's worthless.
Click to expand...
Isn't that an interesting fact about Douglas, as that certainly is true. It's as if he's forgotten everything that he's ever written. JBR being wrapped in a white blanket, and her pink nightgown placed next to her. That was done by someone who cared about her.
 
SuperDave said:
[shiloh] "Except that there was an unsuccessful attempt by the Ramsey lawyers to torpedo certain experts in the case so they couldn't testify at trial. But was it on their orders or not?
Click to expand...
I don't buy it. I don't believe that any of the Ramseys, their lawyers, their investigators, or any of Jameson's bunch were in any way connected to machine gun fire at a police residence.
 
shiloh said:
I don't believe in a head bashing by an enraged Patsy over bedwetting, and I never have.
Click to expand...
IMO it's not like she discovered the wet bed, reached for the maglite and bashed JB over the head. I agree that's probably not how it happened.

But the head blow could very well have resulted from an escalating attack/struggle triggered by a toileting incident that may not have even occurred in bed... especially considering the huge frustration of having to still deal with potty training problems at age six...

Not only is it a fact that more child abuse occurs during toilet training than during any other developmental step... (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/103/6/S1/1364)... but also, Head trauma is the leading cause of death in child abuse, one of the major triggers of which is failed potty training (http://www.capcsac.org/childabuse/patterns.html).

As for Singular's theory... (from your link): I believe that the child was removed from the house that night, for the seemingly innocent purpose of photographing her or exploiting her in some way, and she was killed at another location. At least one parent knew this removal had taken place. I think that JonBenet was then returned home and the crime was covered up by someone inside the family. Both parents, in my opinion, do not have the same information about what occurred that night.

This makes no sense. Bringing JB back to the house is a pointless move that only undermines the entire cover-up scheme. Obviously, the phony kidnapping cover-up would've worked a lot better if JB were not found in the house.
 
Paradox said:
118 may have nothing to do with the bonus. It might have something to do with The Psalms. The Psalms show up all over this case.

"They" is plural, it points to a conspiracy. I think the "they" were inside Patsy and they were beyond her control: thus conspiratorial in nature.
Click to expand...
I agree.
 
Someone who cared for her is right.

"I don't buy it. I don't believe that any of the Ramseys, their lawyers, their investigators, or any of Jameson's bunch were in any way connected to machine gun fire at a police residence."

No, I was referring to something else, shiloh.
 
Britt said:
As for Singular's theory... (from your link): I believe that the child was removed from the house that night, for the seemingly innocent purpose of photographing her or exploiting her in some way, and she was killed at another location. At least one parent knew this removal had taken place. I think that JonBenet was then returned home and the crime was covered up by someone inside the family. Both parents, in my opinion, do not have the same information about what occurred that night.
Click to expand...
LOL - LMBO! If there were a contest regarding the most idiotic theory about the killing of JonBenet, Singular's theory would get my vote. Priceless!
 
rashomon said:
LOL - LMBO! If there were a contest regarding the most idiotic theory about the killing of JonBenet, Singular's theory would get my vote. Priceless!
Click to expand...
Aussiesheila's done that theory one better. Hers gets my vote for most creative.
 
Does anyone know what happened to Singular's buddy Lee Hill? He was helping Singular promote the child *advertiser censored* ring. Last I heard he had a warrant out for his arrest for domestic violence, but I haven't heard if they found him yet.
 
It certainly is an interesting theory. If one ped party was going on complete with a santa, it would explain the "feel" so many have that santa was involved. It would explain the behavior of a few suspects,as well. Just because we can't put them together into any kind of association doesn't mean there wasn't one. Sexual sadists perhaps don't send flyers for their parties. I would imagine it would be a VERY secret society.
 
Britt said:
As for Singular's theory... (from your link): I believe that the child was removed from the house that night, for the seemingly innocent purpose of photographing her or exploiting her in some way, and she was killed at another location. At least one parent knew this removal had taken place. I think that JonBenet was then returned home and the crime was covered up by someone inside the family. Both parents, in my opinion, do not have the same information about what occurred that night.

This makes no sense. Bringing JB back to the house is a pointless move that only undermines the entire cover-up scheme. Obviously, the phony kidnapping cover-up would've worked a lot better if JB were not found in the house.
Click to expand...
You're right. But it is possible that his theory is still correct with the exception that she was at the house the whole time. The neighbor, after all, heard her scream.
 
shiloh said:
Paradox said:
118 may have nothing to do with the bonus. It might have something to do with The Psalms. The Psalms show up all over this case.
QUOTE]
That psalms theory is RIDICULOUS, IMO.
Click to expand...
So you're saying The Bible in the R's home wasn't open to The Psalms and The Psalms aren't quoted in DOI and Patsy didn't remark to friends and family About Psalms 118 as reported and The Psalms aren't mentioned in Thomas' book?
Click to expand...
 
Paradox said:
So you're saying The Bible in the R's home wasn't open to The Psalms and The Psalms aren't quoted in DOI and Patsy didn't remark to friends and family About Psalms 118 as reported and The Psalms aren't mentioned in Thomas' book?
Click to expand...
What I am saying is that Seraph's analysis of the ransom note is the most ridiculous I have ever read. It is absurd in it's conclusions, that because it talks about bringing a sacrifice to the altar and binding it with cords, that Patsy, in her delusional state, had therefore misinterpreted the Scripture and was bringing JonBenet to an altar to sacrifice her and bound her with cords.

For anyone interested in reading this garbage, it is here: http://www.seraph.net/jonbenet.html

For anyone interested in reading an intelligent analysis of the ransom note, this is where you'll find it: http://www.acandyrose.com/04212000delmaranalysis1.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 213 more.
Total: 3,581 (members: 214, guests: 3,367)

Online statistics

Members online
214
Guests online
3,367
Total visitors
3,581
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,815
Messages
17,959,434
Members
228,615
Latest member
JR Rainwater
Back
Top