830 users online (159 members and 671 guests)  



Websleuths News


Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 97
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    north carolina
    Posts
    1,203

    John Ramsey felt empathy for Karr !!!!

    While Karr was a suspect , John says he felt empathy for him. A man that was accused of bashing his daughters skull, he feels empathy for !!!!!!!!

    http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...166388,00.html

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    7,960
    Quote Originally Posted by cynpat2000
    While Karr was a suspect , John says he felt empathy for him. A man that was accused of bashing his daughters skull, he feels empathy for !!!!!!!!

    http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...166388,00.html
    cynpat2000,
    But he is still a person of interest via some 3rd party?

    John is just saying hey I know what its like to be accussed but be innocent, so he is keeping the intruder flag flying!


    .

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Central Valley, CA
    Posts
    275
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy
    cynpat2000,
    But he is still a person of interest via some 3rd party?

    John is just saying hey I know what its like to be accussed but be innocent, so he is keeping the intruder flag flying!.
    I agree, and according to the promo for JR's 48 hours interview there will be something regarding Karr not being "off the hook."


    "I bear the chain I forged in life...I made it of my own free will and of my own free will I wore it....your chain was fully as long as this seven Christmas Eve's ago - and you have labored on it since." Jacob Marley


    MURDERER'S! You know g**damn well what happened to your kid so stop playing the victim and just confess you lying murdering liars! - Mr. Chris Stotch - South Park


    All posts are my opinion only.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy
    cynpat2000,
    But he is still a person of interest via some 3rd party?

    John is just saying hey I know what its like to be accussed but be innocent, so he is keeping the intruder flag flying!


    .
    Didn't JR also say something to the effect that people shouldn't rush to judgment about Karr? I suspect JR knew very well that Karr would be released.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    Quote Originally Posted by sharkeyes
    I agree, and according to the promo for JR's 48 hours interview there will be something regarding Karr not being "off the hook."
    That's exactly what I thought would happen....JR is still going to try to keep Karr as a suspect, somehow.He's just toooo desperate for an intruder.
    Coming to bookstores soon: 101 Reasons Why Karr is Guilty ..by John Ramsey.
    Oh yes,and "Ransom Notes for Dummies".How about a promo for a class on the IDI theory:You're off the hook! Sign up for IDI 101: 100 Ways to Prove an Intruder Did It,with instructor John Ramsey,co-instructor Michael Tracey.
    something to ponder:

    When the corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal have put on immortality, then shall we be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?

    The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
    But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    1 Corinthians 15:54-57

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by JMO8778
    That's exactly what I thought would happen....JR is still going to try to keep Karr as a suspect, somehow.He's just toooo desperate for an intruder.
    Coming to bookstores soon: 101 Reasons Why Karr is Guilty ..by John Ramsey.
    Oh yes,and "Ransom Notes for Dummies".How about a promo for a class on the IDI theory:You're off the hook! Sign up for IDI 101: 100 Ways to Prove an Intruder Did It,with instructor John Ramsey,co-instructor Michael Tracey.

    lol. I thought IDIs only needed one reason -"A parent could't do this to their child"

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    2,970
    I use to post daily ... it's comments like the ones in the above posts that make me seldom want to post in the JBR forum anymore.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by capps
    I use to post daily ... it's comments like the ones in the above posts that make me seldom want to post in the JBR forum anymore.
    Then don't.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    I know what you mean, guys. My fave is "the Rs were such a good Christian family, so involved in their storybook perfect life - anyone who thinks they were guilty is jealous of that and wants to make them look bad." I'm sorry, but there is no conspiracy to frame or defame the Ramsey family, over jealousy or anything else. It's pretty difficult to be jealous of people who neglect their children's obvious issues to focus on what they want for themselves - money and status.

    As for no parent could do that - a lot of people who say that are of the belief that the strangling came first, and cannot envision a parent doing THAT to their child. I'm fighting an uphill battle daily to point out the evidence that indicates the head wound came first. People resist the idea that the head wound came first, because it's more likely the Rs may have done this if the head wound came first - they know a parent may go this far to cover up a wound incurred by abuse. But if they believe it was an EA situation...forget it, there's no way JR and certainly NOT PR would be involved in EA. I could slap Dr Wecht for pimping that theory without more solid proof.

    John Ramsey, Erin Moriarty, and John Karr...all three make me completely nauseous.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter
    I know what you mean, guys. My fave is "the Rs were such a good Christian family, so involved in their storybook perfect life - anyone who thinks they were guilty is jealous of that and wants to make them look bad." I'm sorry, but there is no conspiracy to frame or defame the Ramsey family, over jealousy or anything else. It's pretty difficult to be jealous of people who neglect their children's obvious issues to focus on what they want for themselves - money and status.

    As for no parent could do that - a lot of people who say that are of the belief that the strangling came first, and cannot envision a parent doing THAT to their child. I'm fighting an uphill battle daily to point out the evidence that indicates the head wound came first. People resist the idea that the head wound came first, because it's more likely the Rs may have done this if the head wound came first - they know a parent may go this far to cover up a wound incurred by abuse. But if they belieev it was an EA situation...forget it, there's no way JR and certainly NOT PR would be involved in EA. I could slap Dr Wecht for pimping that theory without more solid proof.

    John Ramsey, Erin Moriarty, and John Karr...all three make me completely nauseous.
    Wecht was also the one who stated in his book the bleeding in the skull was limited to a few CCs of blood. That's why so many people seem to think strangulation came first. But the bleeding was extensive, albeit internal. So she must have been alive when she was hit in the head.

    One theory I hear all the time from IDIs is that the blow to the head finished her off, or put her out of her misery. But if the strangulation was effective - e.g. it killed her, then why would she need to be finished off or put out of misery?

    One problem for both sides, but I think more so on the IDI side, is we get a rough theory of the case in our head and then anything that doesn't fit gets rejected or explained away.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrishope
    Wecht was also the one who stated in his book the bleeding in the skull was limited to a few CCs of blood. That's why so many people seem to think strangulation came first. But the bleeding was extensive, albeit internal. So she must have been alive when she was hit in the head.

    One theory I hear all the time from IDIs is that the blow to the head finished her off, or put her out of her misery. But if the strangulation was effective - e.g. it killed her, then why would she need to be finished off or put out of misery?

    One problem for both sides, but I think more so on the IDI side, is we get a rough theory of the case in our head and then anything that doesn't fit gets rejected or explained away.
    I know - and they don't want to believe Wecht could be correct in his theory, but they believe Wecht was correct in the details of his theory that they need for their theory. I constantly tell people how there was actually quite a bit of blood. They don't want to hear it.

    JonBenet's heart was beating when she was hit on the head, and it continued to beat afterwards for at least ten minutes, or the head wound would not have been able to develop as much as it did.

    I don't see how anyone can argue with that, but they do. They need this murder to have been the work of a sadistic intruder who got his jollies by strangling the children of people he was jealous of, never mind the evidence that indicates that was not the case at all.

    And exactly, if she was being strangled to death (somehow without struggling whatsoever - hmmm), why would anyone need to hit her on the head? If she was at the point of death when hit on the head, how did it end up being so developed? Why didn't she struggle against the restraints or the cord choking her at all, if she was strangled first and the head wound was last? It seems pretty clear to me that she was completely unconscious when strangled - and here's where clever IDIs point out that she had to have been unconscious from the stun gun - but why would a strangler with a stun gun need to bludgeon a child on the head?

    The hardest thing for the IDI in my pov is explaining how there's no evidence of an intruder (that's okay, they swear up and down that the undie DNA *had* to have come from the killer) and how the Rs made themselves look guilty with their denial of cooperation and consistently inconsistent versions of events. "Oh, they were so distraught and in such shock from the murder, they couldn't even function!" Yeah, that's why they're going on CNN to address their innocence to the planet.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter
    I know - and they don't want to believe Wecht could be correct in his theory, but they believe Wecht was correct in the details of his theory that they need for their theory. I constantly tell people how there was actually quite a bit of blood. They don't want to hear it.

    JonBenet's heart was beating when she was hit on the head, and it continued to beat afterwards for at least ten minutes, or the head wound would not have been able to develop as much as it did.

    I don't see how anyone can argue with that, but they do. They need this murder to have been the work of a sadistic intruder who got his jollies by strangling the children of people he was jealous of, never mind the evidence that indicates that was not the case at all.

    And exactly, if she was being strangled to death (somehow without struggling whatsoever - hmmm), why would anyone need to hit her on the head? If she was at the point of death when hit on the head, how did it end up being so developed? Why didn't she struggle against the restraints or the cord choking her at all, if she was strangled first and the head wound was last? It seems pretty clear to me that she was completely unconscious when strangled - and here's where clever IDIs point out that she had to have been unconscious from the stun gun - but why would a strangler with a stun gun need to bludgeon a child on the head?

    The hardest thing for the IDI in my pov is explaining how there's no evidence of an intruder (that's okay, they swear up and down that the undie DNA *had* to have come from the killer) and how the Rs made themselves look guilty with their denial of cooperation and consistently inconsistent versions of events. "Oh, they were so distraught and in such shock from the murder, they couldn't even function!" Yeah, that's why they're going on CNN to address their innocence to the planet.
    We know the head blow came first. We also know, from the coronor, that the COD was asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma.

    Let me run this by you - because I don't know much about the physical effects of strangulation. It's been said that the damage to the neck isn't sufficient for the garrotte to have been the actual strangulation device - at least not in the position we see it when the body is discovered. Many believe there was manual strangulation first, with the garrotte as staging.

    My question is, why wouldn't some other form of strangulation do damage to the neck muscles?

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrishope
    lol. I thought IDIs only needed one reason -"A parent could't do this to their child"
    yes, that
    something to ponder:

    When the corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal have put on immortality, then shall we be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?

    The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
    But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    1 Corinthians 15:54-57

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter
    John Ramsey, Erin Moriarty, and John Karr...all three make me completely nauseous.
    me too...and we all know about Moriarty,per (I think it was SD?) posting her lovely(not)reply.
    As far as I'm concerned,Moriarty wouldn't get the fame and notariety out of this if she openly said she thought the R's were guilty.It's certainly to her benefit to stay on his side and get the interviews,as she knows she wouldn't get them otherwise.
    something to ponder:

    When the corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal have put on immortality, then shall we be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?

    The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
    But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    1 Corinthians 15:54-57

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrishope

    My question is, why wouldn't some other form of strangulation do damage to the neck muscles?
    like what other kind ..I think it's possible she was strangled by twisting the collar of her shirt;I think this is in ST's book.
    something to ponder:

    When the corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and the mortal have put on immortality, then shall we be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.

    O death, where [is] thy sting? O grave, where [is] thy victory?

    The sting of death [is] sin; and the strength of sin [is] the law.
    But thanks [be] to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.
    1 Corinthians 15:54-57

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 147
    Last Post: 09-26-2016, 11:36 AM
  2. Ramsey investigator says Karr needs second look
    By spamelope in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01-04-2009, 09:59 AM
  3. WHAT Is The Ramsey/Karr Connection?
    By PagingDrDetect in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 104
    Last Post: 08-28-2006, 11:41 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-23-2004, 10:12 AM