762 users online (105 members and 657 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 27
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    14

    Questions from a Switcher

    I'm a "switcher" because, until recently, I believed the Intruder Theory. My reason was simply that I couldn't imagine how a parent could do to a child what had been done to JonBenet. In the wake of the John Mark Karr arrest, however, I decided to review the evidence in the case. I saw Tricia's challenge, somewhere here on websleuths, to study the documents at FFJ. I also read Steve Thomas' book and found it to be the most credible thing I've ever read on the case. I now believe that Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter, probably in the way hypothesized by Thomas.

    I still have a few nagging questions, though, and I was hoping some of you might be able to help make them nag me a bit less. Here goes.

    (1) Prior abuse. JBR went to the doctor far too much, had an abnormally high number of "accidents," incontinence issues, "chronic vaginal trauma." It paints the portrait of a little girl abused by someone in her family. Thomas seemed disinclined, though I wasn't clear why, to attribute any of this to the father. Why not John Ramsey? Just because he was proper with his other children does not mean he might not have done something untoward with his youngest daughter, particularly after Patsy's cancer problems. (I have a friend who was abused by her father after her mother died. The logic of the situation almost seemed to lead to it. Mother gone, daughter becomes surrogate.)

    (2) Suppose Patsy was a chronic abuser. Suppose she flipped out for whatever reasons and smashed JBR in the head. I still find it extremely difficult to believe that she could have strangled her daughter with a ligature. It's such an intimate way to kill someone. I just don't understand how a parent could do it -- particularly 45 minutes after the original outburst of rage. Wouldn't the passion have subsided? Wouldn't reason have prevailed? "My God, she's breathing... There's still hope... Call an ambulance!"

    (3) Thomas theorizes that John Ramsey discovered JBR's body during that late-morning interval that Arndt lost track of him. Thomas then thinks that John understood the situation and decided to cover for his wife.

    This I find to be the most perplexing point of the whole theory. Why in the world would he cover for his wife? Why would he choose to live with a psychopath? Why would he subject his son to living with someone capable of killing her own child? It makes no sense. It's difficult to believe that John was so obsessed with maintaining his lifestyle or whatever that he'd cut his losses with JonBenet and keep a pathological wife around. How could he know she wouldn't harm him or Burke? Even if he loved Patsy blindly, wouldn't it make more sense to hand her over to authorities, get her treatment? Maybe even wash his hands of her altogether? After all, no one would blame him if he divorced the killer of his daughter. John was an attractive, wealthy man. He could have found other women.

    The only way I can see John covering for Patsy is if she had something on him as well. What would that be? Proof that he did abuse JonBenet? Business secrets? Something weirder or worse?

    In the end, I now believe Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter. But I despair of ever understanding it, and perhaps that's just the thing -- it's ipso facto incomprehensible.

  2. #2
    Hi Keith,

    I think Patsy wrote the note and participated in the cover-up. I also tend to go along with Henry Lee and some others who think Patsy may have done it accidently or been carried awaly in a fit and something happened.

    But, like you, I do not understand why John would cover up for Patsy. UNLESS he had abused JonBenet. Which would explain the scene that was staged. There HAD to be a reason for the signs of sex abuse and the staged scene might and ACTUALLY DID become the explanation.

    Several pathologists said they thought JonBenet was abused prior to that Christmas night. So physical evidence supports this theory.

    But, trying to figure out who did what and why and coming up with reasons, I do not think can ever be done. Unless someone talks.

    However, in most states, you do not need to know the motive to convict. You are supposed to follow the evidence.

    The evidence overwhelmingly points to the Ramseys.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,889
    Keith X,

    This I find to be the most perplexing point of the whole theory. Why in the world would he cover for his wife?
    Because they were joint partners in JonBenet's death!

    Who can contradict the notion that both parents were abusive, that JonBenet was abused by each parent to suit each of their selfish motives, that is they colluded in abuse, and when it came to a cover up, both knew they either backed up each other or faced a murder case?



    .

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    14
    If both parents were abusive, do you think there were different forms of abuse? Perhaps John abused her sexually and Patsy abused her physically? Again, it's tough to imagine one parent tolerating the abuse of the other. If John were molesting JBR, why would Patsy beat on her or whatever? Or if John knew Patsy were abusing JBR, why would he not intervene -- simply because he was getting off too much on molesting her? It's hard to imagine that a father could be that low...

    When I look at this case, I see that the evidence points to the Ramseys but I just can't understand how (psychologically & morally) the Ramseys could have committed every action performed on that awful night.

    Maybe it's good not to understand? It must mean I'm "normal?" But then again, is it "normal" to be so deeply interested in this obviously abnormal event?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    749
    Quote Originally Posted by Jolynna
    Hi Keith,

    I think Patsy wrote the note and participated in the cover-up. I also tend to go along with Henry Lee and some others who think Patsy may have done it accidently or been carried awaly in a fit and something happened.

    But, like you, I do not understand why John would cover up for Patsy. UNLESS he had abused JonBenet. Which would explain the scene that was staged. There HAD to be a reason for the signs of sex abuse and the staged scene might and ACTUALLY DID become the explanation.

    Several pathologists said they thought JonBenet was abused prior to that Christmas night. So physical evidence supports this theory.

    But, trying to figure out who did what and why and coming up with reasons, I do not think can ever be done. Unless someone talks.

    However, in most states, you do not need to know the motive to convict. You are supposed to follow the evidence.

    The evidence overwhelmingly points to the Ramseys.
    i think john was codependent with patsy. he wouldn't have blown his whole family over this. i still get back to the book patsy bought for burke about why does johnny touch his sister or something like that. patsy was worried about burke and jbr.
    Patience is genius......author unknown

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Jolynna
    Hi Keith,

    I think Patsy wrote the note and participated in the cover-up. I also tend to go along with Henry Lee and some others who think Patsy may have done it accidently or been carried awaly in a fit and something happened.

    But, like you, I do not understand why John would cover up for Patsy. UNLESS he had abused JonBenet. Which would explain the scene that was staged. There HAD to be a reason for the signs of sex abuse and the staged scene might and ACTUALLY DID become the explanation.

    Several pathologists said they thought JonBenet was abused prior to that Christmas night. So physical evidence supports this theory.

    But, trying to figure out who did what and why and coming up with reasons, I do not think can ever be done. Unless someone talks.

    However, in most states, you do not need to know the motive to convict. You are supposed to follow the evidence.

    The evidence overwhelmingly points to the Ramseys.
    He did it to save face.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Keith X
    If both parents were abusive, do you think there were different forms of abuse? Perhaps John abused her sexually and Patsy abused her physically? Again, it's tough to imagine one parent tolerating the abuse of the other. If John were molesting JBR, why would Patsy beat on her or whatever? Or if John knew Patsy were abusing JBR, why would he not intervene -- simply because he was getting off too much on molesting her? It's hard to imagine that a father could be that low...

    When I look at this case, I see that the evidence points to the Ramseys but I just can't understand how (psychologically & morally) the Ramseys could have committed every action performed on that awful night.

    Maybe it's good not to understand? It must mean I'm "normal?" But then again, is it "normal" to be so deeply interested in this obviously abnormal event?
    What's normal anyway?

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Detroit 'Burb
    Posts
    2,832

    But There's the Rub

    Quote Originally Posted by Jolynna
    ..............................................

    The evidence overwhelmingly points to the Ramseys.
    That's just it! FBI said there was staging and staging-within-staging. Way overdone. They should know.

    In other words, obviously the R's wouldn't have staged the scene to point to themselves as the murderers! The staging was "overkill". The fact that there was too much of it is one thing that points to staging. That and the famous dictionary picture placed loosely in the evidence envelope as an afterthought by someone who had access to police files. (One of their own was involved?)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    4,986
    Quote Originally Posted by narlacat
    What's normal anyway?
    'Normal' is a term used by people in denial of their own abnormalities.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,641
    I don't think that JR found the body during that period when he disappeared that morning. I believe that JR was aware of what had happened very early that morning and that he was part of the staging and coverup from the beginning. Maybe Patsy had something on him (prior sexual abuse) or maybe in the panic of the moment he agreed to help her to cover up and once that ball started rolling he could never get out of it.

    It is possible that the body was originally hidden away elsewhere and that JR realized that it had to be found. He snuck off to the basement and moved it into the wine cellar and then "found" it later. However, I think it is possible that the body was always in the wine cellar and White just didn't see it in the dark. He wasn't looking for a body then. He was looking for evidence of a break in (no window in the wine cellar) or a live JBR. I think that JR used that time around 10am to get rid of evidence. Didn't the pilot come by at some point to pick up a package? What was that about?


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    9,061

    Hmmm

    Did FW have vision problems, wear glasses, hmmm.

    The interest in this case, most likely evolves from our legal system, and one of the ten commandments, Thou shall not kill.

    The person who killed this tiny girl with such potential, should be imprisoned and made to pay for the loss. This is our legal formality.

    The person who caused the death, and the people who engaged in the coverup, I do believe have lived in their own hell, for the approximate 10 years since this baby died.

    IF indeed we label it as an abnormal happening, with no further 'murders' planned by the perpetrator and the 'helpy' cover up people, do we merely go forth with a 'Live and let live' mind set?

    IF there ARE other non family members involved in the 'coverup' who are holding their silence, I have to wonder HOW they make it through day by day, what did they do with THEIR moral conscience for this innocent child? DID they receive "quieting money"?

    .
    Opinions expressed by me, are mine, based on life experience, and known facts of any given case.





    """I am just a pixel in the universal plan."""

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,223
    (1) Prior abuse. JBR went to the doctor far too much, had an abnormally high number of "accidents," incontinence issues, "chronic vaginal trauma." It paints the portrait of a little girl abused by someone in her family. Thomas seemed disinclined, though I wasn't clear why, to attribute any of this to the father. Why not John Ramsey? Just because he was proper with his other children does not mean he might not have done something untoward with his youngest daughter, particularly after Patsy's cancer problems. (I have a friend who was abused by her father after her mother died. The logic of the situation almost seemed to lead to it. Mother gone, daughter becomes surrogate.)
    That's what they call a "situational."

    (2) Suppose Patsy was a chronic abuser. Suppose she flipped out for whatever reasons and smashed JBR in the head. I still find it extremely difficult to believe that she could have strangled her daughter with a ligature. It's such an intimate way to kill someone. I just don't understand how a parent could do it -- particularly 45 minutes after the original outburst of rage. Wouldn't the passion have subsided? Wouldn't reason have prevailed? "My God, she's breathing... There's still hope... Call an ambulance!"
    I think you'll find that method was chosen because it WASN'T intimate (meaning that if you use a cord, you don't actually have to touch the person.)

    The passion would have likely subsided, but would have been replaced by panicked self-preservation. And it's highly unlikely that she would have known JB was breathing. She was most likely in shock: shallow breathing, pulse weak, most likely undetectable by someone who was searching frantically, if at all.

    (3) Thomas theorizes that John Ramsey discovered JBR's body during that late-morning interval that Arndt lost track of him. Thomas then thinks that John understood the situation and decided to cover for his wife.
    I don't buy that. I think he was in on it from the start.

    This I find to be the most perplexing point of the whole theory. Why in the world would he cover for his wife? Why would he choose to live with a psychopath?
    You just answered your own question. If he turned her in, he'd have to admit that he screwed up his first marriage only to marry a monster. And if he knew about her illness and did nothing, that just adds to the shame. I call this the "Kennedy complex."

    The only way I can see John covering for Patsy is if she had something on him as well. What would that be? Proof that he did abuse JonBenet? Business secrets? Something weirder or worse?
    I think you'll find a lot of people agree with that, Keith.

    Again, it's tough to imagine one parent tolerating the abuse of the other.
    It's a LOT more common than you think! In fact, it's standard for one parent to look the other way. Don't take my word for it. Marilyn Van Derbur is a former beauty queen who was molested by her father as a child. She'll tell you: her mother knew and looked the other way.

    If John were molesting JBR, why would Patsy beat on her or whatever?
    Because in those cases, it's common to blame the victim. Just spitballing: imagine this scenario:

    PATSY: You little b***h! I know what you do with your father! He's mine, not yours!

    Maybe it's good not to understand? It must mean I'm "normal?" But then again, is it "normal" to be so deeply interested in this obviously abnormal event?
    It might be better to say that you are trying to use logic to understand something that is inherently illogical. Keith, your confusion is only natural.


    "In other words, obviously the R's wouldn't have staged the scene to point to themselves as the murderers!"

    Ugh! Don't waste my time with that. They didn't stage it to point to themselves. That's just how it happened. That's the rule, not the exception.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Detroit 'Burb
    Posts
    2,832

    Staging Doesn't Just Happen That Way

    Yes, you have to wonder about those other peoples' conscience, and if they tell themselves, well we can't bring her back.

    I was just googling Sociopaths before checking in here. There's a lot more pages than the last time I tried it, and a lot more classifications. Couldn't possibly sort it all out. For one example, the "Aggressive Sociopath" want power and manage to get into positions to have it, such as bureaucrats, maybe cops, etc. I didn't say it. But I keep wondering about that dictionary picture ST leaked info about, and probably would have been fired for if he hadn't quit. I give him plenty of credit. http://faculty.newc.edu/toconnor/428/428lect16.htm

    One of the famous TV preachers, I haven't heard in a while, used to have a sermon title, "Nothing Just Happens". He's a motivational speaker, encouraging people how to deal with opposition or whatever in life. Doesn't use Peale's expression "Power of Positive Thinking", but it amounts to the same thing, that usually you'll reap what you sow. Right?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    In a van down by the river
    Posts
    1,216
    Quote Originally Posted by ellen13
    i think john was codependent with patsy. he wouldn't have blown his whole family over this. i still get back to the book patsy bought for burke about why does johnny touch his sister or something like that. patsy was worried about burke and jbr.
    Patsy received a book from her father called Why Johnny Can't Read. (This info is in the Thomas book.)


    -Tea

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    It was Why Johnny Can't Tell Right From Wrong.
    Where is Trenton Duckett?

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Questions Welcome Here!
    By imamaze in forum General Information & Discussion
    Replies: 240
    Last Post: 11-03-2017, 07:24 PM
  2. Questions for Levi Page. NO DISCUSSION QUESTIONS ONLY.
    By grandmaj in forum Kyron Horman
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-20-2010, 10:42 AM
  3. What questions do you have? I've got 64 so far- pls help!
    By CitizenKim in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 08-11-2008, 03:21 AM