Who Were the Ramseys More Angry With, the "Killer", or the Media?

New Posts

S

SleuthingSleuth

New Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2006
Messages
251
Reaction score
2
I'm interested in any quotes or information pertaining to who John and Patsy Ramsey were angry at the most...the "murderer" of their daughter, or the media?

I don't have them on hand...but I seem to remember Ramsey quotes that pertained to them not really being angry with the "killer" and just wanting to go on with their lives.
On the other hand, I seem to also remember the Ramseys were critical and resentful at all of the media coverage (and of course, any suggestions that cast suspicion on themselves). I myself have a feeling that back in '96 the Ramseys had no idea their daughter's murder would become such big news and get so much coverage on a national or even international scale. They probably figured it'd kick around in Boulder and surrounding areas for a while and then steadily die off.

Also interesting was the recent Karr fiasco...when Karr was first arrested John Ramsey's first response was that Karr should be presumed innocent, and as well, he seemed to express annoyance that media coverage of his daughter's murder had kicked up again.
Did John know beforehand that Karr was not the man, or was he simply disinterested in his daughter's murderer being found?
 
If you look at their Hawaii interviews, it's clear they're not angry with the killer.
 
They are not angry with the killer, but by gosh they are angry with LE who tried to find out who the killer was.
 
packerdog said:
They are not angry with the killer, but by gosh they are angry with LE who tried to find out who the killer was.
Click to expand...

Yep, they are not angry with the killer(s) i.e. THEM, but are very angry with LE for trying to find out who the killer(s) was/were i.e. THEM :waitasec:
 
By New Year's day, just 5-6 days following JonBenet's murder, it was clear on the CNN interview that they were NOT angry with the killer. Indeed, they wanted to get on with their lives. You really have to ask why they would want to go on national TV if they thought this would blow over quietly in Boulder. Years ago there was a word analysis of everything they said in that interview, and it all pointed to the R's as being guilty and covering something up. I have no idea is that analysis is still anywhere to be found, though.
 
SleuthingSleuth said:
I'm interested in any quotes or information pertaining to who John and Patsy Ramsey were angry at the most...the "murderer" of their daughter, or the media?

I don't have them on hand...but I seem to remember Ramsey quotes that pertained to them not really being angry with the "killer" and just wanting to go on with their lives.
On the other hand, I seem to also remember the Ramseys were critical and resentful at all of the media coverage (and of course, any suggestions that cast suspicion on themselves). I myself have a feeling that back in '96 the Ramseys had no idea their daughter's murder would become such big news and get so much coverage on a national or even international scale. They probably figured it'd kick around in Boulder and surrounding areas for a while and then steadily die off.

Also interesting was the recent Karr fiasco...when Karr was first arrested John Ramsey's first response was that Karr should be presumed innocent, and as well, he seemed to express annoyance that media coverage of his daughter's murder had kicked up again.
Did John know beforehand that Karr was not the man, or was he simply disinterested in his daughter's murderer being found?
Click to expand...
My opinion, they were not angry at the killer at all. I believe the killer to be their son Burke. They knew why/how it happened that he killed her. It was an accident. He didn't mean to choke her. He was mimicing what he had seen being performed by adults. And the Ramseys knew this. They not only forgave him, they did all they could to protect him. Writing the note (it was NOT a ransom note). It was a note to threw suspicion to an intruder. They covered up all evidence that would have led to Burke. They got him out of the house before police could question him or check him out for defensive wounds/scratches. They destroyed evidence; they lied, and they obstructed justice.

Why did they do this to protect Burke, when he was too young to be charged?

Simple answer, the way I see it. They were indirectly protecting themselves because they were guilty, by commission or omission, of exposing Burke to adults practicing the act of erotic asphyxiation.

THat is what Burke was doing with his sister. He was acting out the same thing he had seen others doing. The other people he saw doing this were not harmed by it. He didn't understand the goal of the sexual act; he only was doing the same thing he saw. It is natural that if children are exposed to sexual practices, they will try them out.

By protecting Burke, they were protecting themselves. They filed law suits against people/newspapers etc who suggested Burke did it.
 
I would think most normal Father's of little girls who have
been sexually abused and murdered would be seething with rage to kill the SOB with his bare hands!
 
There was no need to be mad as hell at some mystery killer......they knew there wasn't one.

What fascinated me was that we never heard from them unless it was because someone pointed the finger at them and they decided to sue someone.

What is more telling to me is that they weren't wailing and gnashing their teeth at the sheer idiocy of the Boulder DA and police...you know, if they really didn't do it.

What would be as bad as losing their daughter like they did? Losing your daughter and then having a police and DA's office that bungled the investigation and fought amongst itself. I would be calling for people's resignations, talking to the CBI and FBI and would never stop screaming.

They were happy as pigs in $h!! as long as no one was looking at THEM. Tells me all I need to know right there.

New
 
I think you're right, C3. Those who I have known to suffer both the loss of a child and the idiocy of a bumbling police force have been madder than a cross-eyed hornet in a hand-raising church.

As for the Hawaii interviews, it goes beyond self implicating. It is totally lame. It is a pity that the perpetrators of any crime (whether by commission or by accessory/obstruction) would play on the faith of those who have been taught to swallow pseudofactoids whole without challenging their validity if said tidbits of information come from the pulpit.

That's the same weakness in the "flock" that caused wolves to come in and perpetrate pyramid schemes and the "Amway mentality" on the Christian churches during the '80's and part of the '90's.

The Rams had a ready-made army of potential sympathizers in Hawaii, I just hope that some of those congregants read on these types of forums. The truth should set them free, and in the process I'd LOVE to see it incarcerate a guilty party or two...although one of those has become "eternally compromised" most recently.
 
This is a trick question right ;)

The answer of course, is the media!

JAR even used the word forgiveness when he was asked how he felt.
What the :eek:
 
...law enforcement, IMO.... They were not only rude to the police, but extremely uncooperative and evasive, and waited months to give the police basic information...

They seemed to have OTOH, a "love-hate" relationship with the media... When the media indulged their narcissistic needs, and their "spin" of the situation, they were all for it....When the media would get too close to the truth though, we got to see the Ramseys' truly ugly side...

As far as rage at the killer... I didn't really see that....not at all...very strange... If you do a "side-by-side" comparison with the parents of other murdered children, i.e. children NOT murdered by their parents, the Ramseys are absolutely unlike ANY parents I have ever seen in this category. However, when you compare Ramsey behavior characteristics with those of other parents who have, in fact, murdered their children, the comparison/similarities are amazing...
 
MysteryAddict said:
I would think most normal Father's of little girls who have
been sexually abused and murdered would be seething with rage to kill the SOB with his bare hands!
Click to expand...

No KIDDING! Guess you wouldn't be mad at yourself if you were the killer.......or someone in your family was.

There was no intruder, can't even believe anyone anymore could believe that who knows the whole case!

xxxxxxxxxxooooo
mama
 
packerdog said:
They are not angry with the killer, but by gosh they are angry with LE who tried to find out who the killer was.
Click to expand...
Exactly!!! I totally agree!

Not only were they not mad at the killer, but they sometimes seemed dismissive of the child's loss of life.<<<<as in: don't think harshly of the killer>>>>

A "jaw-dropper" for me was the 1/1/1997 CNN interview:

CABELL: Do you take some comfort in believing that JonBenet is in a better Place?

JR: Yes. That's the one thing we want people dealing w/us to know, to believe that, we know that in our heart.

PR: She'll never have to know the loss of a child. She will never have to know cancer or death of a child. <<<<poor little Patsy, lucky little JonBennet>>>>

JR: ...sooner or later everyone carries a very heavy burden in this life. And JonBenet didn't carry any burdens.<<<<??????? hmmm...lucky little JonBenet?>>>>
 
The Ramsay's were angry with the media because the media did not buy the lies they told. It was also impossible to influence them with wealth and status.

Maybe if the ramsay's had channelled their anger into helping LE instead of hindering them the media would have treated them better.The attitude they had brought it on themselves.Of course, they had no ineterst in helping Le because they knew who had killed Jb and 'forgiven' them.
 
"I would think most normal Father's of little girls who have been sexually abused and murdered would be seething with rage to kill the SOB with his bare hands!"

That's what I'd do! he'd HOPE the cops got him before me!
 
That's why neither Patsy before she died nor John had any interest in meeting with John Karr and hearing his false confession of how he was JB's "dashing prince lover". They already knew he couldn't have done it, since they were the killlers.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 276 more.
Total: 4,427 (members: 277, guests: 4,150)

Online statistics

Members online
277
Guests online
4,150
Total visitors
4,427
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,552
Messages
17,954,783
Members
228,532
Latest member
GravityHurts
Back
Top