1023 users online (175 members and 848 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 41
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    245

    Steve Thomas' book

    I just re-read the book, and i found several of his arguments quite good. For instance, would an intruder know where to find the sharpie pen with which he/she wrote the note, and why would he/she put the pen back? what about the pineapple which was never explained? he also said they couldn't move through the house without creeking. Also, Thomas claimed he COULD hear a scream from the basement upstairs. I also found it interesting that Thomas claimed with the light off, he could not see into the room where JB was found, although john claimed he saw her instantly. Finally, Thomas said navigating the house in darkness was impossible.

    Think what you will, but i think Thomas' book contains the answers and he provides logical proof to reinforce his argument.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,182
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay78
    I just re-read the book, and i found several of his arguments quite good. For instance, would an intruder know where to find the sharpie pen with which he/she wrote the note, and why would he/she put the pen back? what about the pineapple which was never explained? he also said they couldn't move through the house without creeking. Also, Thomas claimed he COULD hear a scream from the basement upstairs. I also found it interesting that Thomas claimed with the light off, he could not see into the room where JB was found, although john claimed he saw her instantly. Finally, Thomas said navigating the house in darkness was impossible.

    Think what you will, but i think Thomas' book contains the answers and he provides logical proof to reinforce his argument.
    LHP said the same thing.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,868
    Quote Originally Posted by Jay78
    I just re-read the book, and i found several of his arguments quite good. For instance, would an intruder know where to find the sharpie pen with which he/she wrote the note, and why would he/she put the pen back? what about the pineapple which was never explained? he also said they couldn't move through the house without creeking. Also, Thomas claimed he COULD hear a scream from the basement upstairs. I also found it interesting that Thomas claimed with the light off, he could not see into the room where JB was found, although john claimed he saw her instantly. Finally, Thomas said navigating the house in darkness was impossible.

    Think what you will, but i think Thomas' book contains the answers and he provides logical proof to reinforce his argument.
    Jay78,

    Yes its a good book, he makes many interesting points, also there is no forensic evidence, absolutely none, zero, to support the notion an intruder murdered JonBenet. Sadly his central claim regarding toilet rage is inconsistent wrt the current forensic evidence.

    I always had the impression he knew more than what was written in his book, also in the event of any prosecution, why telegraph your prosecution strategy in book form?

    So it could all have been a cat and mouse game or smoke and mirrors with Smit promoting an Intruder Theory and Thomas a Ramsey Theory. With nobody charged and the legal teams on board, the Ramsey's always had the inititive.

    I find it interesting that both theories are probably incorrect, yet both have served their intended purpose, e.g. internet sleuthers have something to chew over, and the investigators have a pitch to offer. All of which neatly sidesteps the central issue.


    .

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,807
    Quote Originally Posted by narlacat
    LHP said the same thing.
    Also, he went right to her when Det. Arndt told him to recheck the house. The parents always find the body and the Ramseys are no exception.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy
    Jay78,

    Yes its a good book, he makes many interesting points, also there is no forensic evidence, absolutely none, zero, to support the notion an intruder murdered JonBenet. Sadly his central claim regarding toilet rage is inconsistent wrt the current forensic evidence.

    I always had the impression he knew more than what was written in his book,
    Me too.In some parts, I can see obvious omissions of certain evidence.Like I think he knew for sure which shirt JB wore to the party.I also suspect he might have known that JR was involved somehow as well,but left that out as he felt PR was the killer and he didn't want to be sued by both.

    also in the event of any prosecution, why telegraph your prosecution strategy in book form?
    right.

    So it could all have been a cat and mouse game or smoke and mirrors with Smit promoting an Intruder Theory and Thomas a Ramsey Theory. With nobody charged and the legal teams on board, the Ramsey's always had the inititive.

    I find it interesting that both theories are probably incorrect, yet both have served their intended purpose, e.g. internet sleuthers have something to chew over, and the investigators have a pitch to offer. All of which neatly sidesteps the central issue.
    I wonder that, too.By concentrating so hard on PR and leaving JR out of it all....was he trying to get her to admit to him being involved somehow?
    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
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    183
    I recently reread his book as well. His frustration with the ridiculous kid glove treatment of the Ramsey's seeps through every page, and rightfully so.

    I for one hope there is evidence that hasnt been leaked to the press/public in some form or fashion that makes him so sure in his convictions.

    I dont know what to make of Smit. He seems to be grasping at straws. I really think highly of ST for showing LS such respect in his book, even though the two were polar opposite theory wise. That goes to character, and credibility, and ST has both.

    More than I can say for some characters in this case.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    183
    The sharpie and the notepad. I find it very hard to swallow that an "intruder" would take the time to waltz about the home in leisure, admiring the artwork, cooing over the decor, looking for a pen and paper to compose the ransom note....um, not likely. In the dark? Even more unlikely that this "intruder" will stumble across the pen and paper.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by goddess
    ... I dont know what to make of Smit. He seems to be grasping at straws. ...

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    I dont know what to make of Smit. He seems to be grasping at straws. I really think highly of ST for showing LS such respect in his book, even though the two were polar opposite theory wise. That goes to character, and credibility, and ST has both.
    Much nicer than I.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    Quote Originally Posted by goddess
    I recently reread his book as well. His frustration with the ridiculous kid glove treatment of the Ramsey's seeps through every page, and rightfully so.

    I for one hope there is evidence that hasnt been leaked to the press/public in some form or fashion that makes him so sure in his convictions.

    I dont know what to make of Smit. He seems to be grasping at straws. I really think highly of ST for showing LS such respect in his book, even though the two were polar opposite theory wise. That goes to character, and credibility, and ST has both.

    More than I can say for some characters in this case.
    And one more thing...CLASS.Something the R's certainly haven't acted like they have.It just goes to show you that the measure of true *class* has nothing to do with money
    I think he had a lot of patience with LS..I don't know how he did it...I really don't.If I'd have been up debating with LS all night,I think I'd have finally lost it and ended up superglueing a copy of the ransom note to his face until he got he fact that PR wrote the dang note !!!
    One more thing about class...the R's have shown they don't have an ounce of it by lying and doing nothing but dishonoring JB from the day she died.And so has *******.To resort to name-calling,websites that don't agree with *their opinion and defensive lying is the lowliest form of slime I can think of.So is putting that garbage in their book,DOI.
    Bottom line? Can you see John Walsh or Marc Klass for one second stooping so low as to even worry about name-calling someone else a BORG and even putting it in a book (or on a website?).NO,because no. 1-they aren't liars and no. 2-they aren't childish like the R's are.To even worry about something like that, instead of trying to find the killer speaks volumes !!!
    Last edited by JMO8778; 12-07-2006 at 04:42 AM.
    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


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,182
    I've always found the fact that JR was a Trekkie a quirky little coincidence.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave
    Much nicer than I.
    I keep getting the feeling you know ST.(Ignore that if you want,I won't probe further).
    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

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    1,670
    Steve Thomas' book is deeply moving and compelling. It gives a shocking insight into a murder investigation in which everything that could go wrong went wrong.
    Hunter, DeMuth and Co. should have been charged with obstruction of justice.


    But still Steve Thomas is a very polarizing figure.

    I think he was a dedicated cop and in many ways a good detective who
    wanted to do what had to be done, but who got monstrous obstacles thrown
    into his way by the coward A. Hunter and his minions, who did not
    really want this case to be thoroughly investigated.

    I'm also convinced that, had SteveThomas been at the crime scene on the
    morning of the 26th, he would have had the Ramseys arrested on the spot
    as soon as it turned out that this was no kidnapping, but a homicide.
    Like he sarcastically wrote in his book: "Locked home. Dead child. Two
    parents in the home. Hello?"

    BUT, his pointing the finger at Patsy
    WITHOUT presenting a theory based on factual evidence and a convincing
    time line is not enough.
    His failure to do so was what finally 'buried' Thomas.

    For ST never tried to fit the many loose ends in his theory together,
    and therefore was not able to present a complete and consistent picture.

    That's what has been bugging me about ST from the start. He doesn't even
    try to fit it together, but if he purports to have a theory, he HAS to
    fit the pieces of the puzzle together.
    For example, he wrote verbatim in his book that the garote was "a
    terrible killing tool", i. e. he
    failed to recognize this as a staged scene . But when I recently
    mentioned this on C&J, I was surprised that even well-informed posters
    did not believe this was so.
    One poster for example wrote on the 'Thomas vs. Smit thread'
    that ST thought that the garrote was a 'useless weapon'. But this is wrong.

    For ST actually thought it was a functioning weapon, otherwise he would
    not have called it a 'terrible killing tool'.
    But it did NOT kill JB 'terribly'. No damage to the larynx, no broken
    hyoid bone point in that direction. And this forensic evidence actually
    confirms Delmar England's assessment of the garrote as a mere contraption which was
    clumsily done and would have been totally ineffective if anyone ever
    tried to actually garrote someone with it.

    And aside from that, how does the terrible killing tool fit in with the
    head bash in ST's theory? No explanation from him there either.

    Suppose an enraged Patsy inflicted the head bash first - then why go to
    the trouble of then constructing a garrote to finish JB off? If Patsy's
    final decision was to kill JB, why not deliver one more head bash which
    would do the job?

    And if it was toilet rage which caused Patsy to inflict the paintbrush
    injury on JB, what is ST's sequence of events on that ? So Patsy struck
    the head blow, and then ran down into the basement, broke a paintbrush,
    ran up the stairs again and jabbed it into the child's vagina?
    Ridiculous.

    And it is just as ridiculous the other way round: Patsy ran into the
    basement, came back with the broken paintbrush to 'punish' JB, and then
    delivers the head blow? Not convincing at all.

    Why did ST give John a pass? Another question I'd like to ask him. Imo
    there is no reason at all to give JR a pass. What makes ST so sure that
    John wasn't involved at least in the staging of the scene? What about
    John's shirt fibers in the crotch area of JB's underwear?

    Maybe Steve Thomas did not know about the fiber evidence against John at the time he wrote his book? Is it possible that some evidence was tested so late afterward?
    For (if memory serves) SteveThomas doesn't mention Patsy's fibers in the garrote wrappings and in the pain tote either, only those on the sticky side of the duct tape.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    5,554
    I don't know, but he did put the report in the book about the manual strangulation coming first.
    I wonder that about JR as well..his behavior that morning was not that of a parent who's child is missing..(forget the no script excuse...that doesn't fly).Along with all the other evidence...I beleive he played a part in at least the coverup, and maybe more.
    I can only guess that ST didn't want to be sued by both JR and PR,seeing as they both had separate legal rep.
    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
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    I keep getting the feeling you know ST.(Ignore that if you want,I won't probe further).
    I don't. but I have been accused of being him!
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Steve Thomas comment
    By JMO8778 in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-13-2008, 04:25 PM
  2. Steve Thomas Speaks
    By RiverRat in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 85
    Last Post: 09-03-2006, 04:05 PM
  3. Steve Thomas
    By sandraladeda in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 79
    Last Post: 08-22-2006, 09:16 AM
  4. Steve Thomas Update
    By RiverRat in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-12-2006, 06:07 PM
  5. Update on Steve Thomas
    By Tricia in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 05-01-2004, 03:56 PM