View Poll Results: Are the Ramseys involved or not?

Voters
1083. You may not vote on this poll
  • The Ramseys are somehow involved in the crime and/or cover-up

    811 74.88%
  • The Ramseys are not involved at all in the crime or cover-up

    272 25.12%
Page 48 of 145 FirstFirst ... 38 46 47 48 49 50 58 98 ... LastLast
Results 706 to 720 of 2161
  1. #706
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    There's a very interesting story there. Allow me. ST, pb, page 237:

    The Ramsey credit card purchases showed up again, this time through the mail anonymously from a tabloid newspaper to Sergeant Wickman. There were copies of purchase records from marine supply depots, hardware stores, and boating retailers in Charlevoix, Atlanta, and Boulder during 1996. Any of these places could have sold duct tape and cord. It was an investigator's dream come true--a paper trail.
    Wickman and I took it in to Bob Keatley for a legal opinion, and he almost had a heart attack. His exact words were most un-Keatley-like--s**t! s**t! s**t!--and he snatched the documents away. "Put it out of your mind," he ordered, imagining how a defense lawyer would do an OJ-style "Police Planted the Glove" on us.
    The tabloid 'indictment' of the R's was not met with enough lawsuits, thats for sure.

    Suppose your 6-8 year old daughter dresses up with lipstick, etc., for a Holloween party where photographs are taken, under the context of a simple holloween party.

    Suppose that sometime later, photos of your daughter with lipstick is published nationally, for distribution in supermarkets, alongside suggestive captions and photos of adult males who had nothing to do with your daughter in reality. A somewhat different context, no?

    What would YOU do, SuperDave?


  2. #707
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    Uh, no. I don't think so, SuperDave. I am actually surprised to be reading this.
    Given the way you usually interpret what I mean, that's no great shock.

    There are NO circumstances where someone gets pushed to the limits, that 'everyone has' then murders a child, and are then refered to as 'flawed people'.
    You'd have to understand where I'm coming from. (I'm not holding my breath.)

    Thats an understatement, to be sure.
    You're twisting what I meant.

    It goes with a consistent RDI pattern of sugar coating and understating the brutality that went along with the murder of JBR.
    You're blaming a phenomenon that does not exist for a viewpoint you are not interested in understanding. I don't know what this pattern of "sugarcoating" and "understating brutality" is that you're talking about. I don't sugarcoat anything, in case you haven't noticed. I can't count the number of times I've boiled this one down and come out feeling like there isn't enough soap in the world to get me clean again. I wish I COULD sugarcoat it!

    JBR was murdered by a deeply mentally disturbed person, who Tadpole probably correctly classified as disorganized.
    HOTYH, I've been saying for AGES that the killer was disorganized and mentally disturbed! Just what kind of Mickey-Mouse operation am I supposed to be running here?

    Thats why you can't make heads or tails out of kidnapping, sexual assault, turned murder.
    Why I can't make heads or tails out if it?
    Vae Victus! (May the conquered suffer!)
    Celerem vindictam manu! (Swift hand of vengeance!)


  3. #708
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    The tabloid 'indictment' of the R's was not met with enough lawsuits, thats for sure.
    You let on more than I wish to know. Moreover, you dodged the point.

    Suppose your 6-8 year old daughter dresses up with lipstick, etc., for a Halloween party where photographs are taken, under the context of a simple Halloween party.
    You can't seriously be comparing that to these shows so laughingly referred to as "beauty pageants?" I should hope you would have at least THAT much respect for my intelligence.

    Suppose that sometime later, photos of your daughter with lipstick is published nationally, for distribution in supermarkets, alongside suggestive captions and photos of adult males who had nothing to do with your daughter in reality. A somewhat different context, no?
    I'll say it's a different context! Much different than what we're discussing!

    What would YOU do, SuperDave?
    Just what is THAT supposed to mean?
    Vae Victus! (May the conquered suffer!)
    Celerem vindictam manu! (Swift hand of vengeance!)


  4. #709
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    .....
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    Ah, it's been interpreted that way, Tadpole. But not exactly. A mercy kill implies the person knew JB was still alive, knew she was going to die and wanted to ease her passing. I don't think that happened here. Although, it would explain a lot!

    It might be more apt to say that it was more merciful for the killer.
    ya. Just thinking under what circumstances the maternal instinct becomes capable of killing, or suffocating, strangling, desecrating. Life and death choices.


  5. #710
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole12 View Post
    ya. Just thinking under what circumstances the maternal instinct becomes capable of killing, or suffocating, strangling, desecrating. Life and death choices.
    I can answer that one. Socioeconomic.

    The majority of filicides are accompanied by socioeconomic factors. None of which are present in the case of JBR.


  6. #711
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole12 View Post
    ya. Just thinking under what circumstances the maternal instinct becomes capable of killing, or suffocating, strangling, desecrating. Life and death choices.
    I get you. And for all I know, that may be the case.
    Vae Victus! (May the conquered suffer!)
    Celerem vindictam manu! (Swift hand of vengeance!)


  7. #712
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post

    I'll say it's a different context! Much different than what we're discussing!


    Its the exact same circumstance, SD.

    JBR's lipstick photos were taken in the context of a child beauty pageant, an activity that YOU apparently believe is immoral, decadent, or whatever, and would thus get you kicked off the jury.

    These photos were taken in one context, and then broadcast nationally alongside adult males who never had contact with JBR, and suggestive captions. It is child exploitation because profit was made from child photos placed in a sexual context that otherwise did not exist.


  8. #713
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    .....
    Posts
    4,008
    .....


  9. #714
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    .....
    Posts
    4,008
    I'm reading ST's deposition http://www.acandyrose.com/09212001thomas-depo.htm and it sure does take you back to the bare bones of this case. .
    Wonder how much evidence was not developed or tested?


  10. #715
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    I think the DNA was developed and tested. It belongs to a male and was transferred onto JBR's clothing the night she was murdered. The male is not a family member, or a dinner guest. The R's were cleared as a result of this testing.


  11. #716
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    .....
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    I can answer that one. Socioeconomic.

    The majority of filicides are accompanied by socioeconomic factors. None of which are present in the case of JBR.
    Hi Hotyh. You must be kinda psychic, cuz I was just thinking about infant mortality rates, the expressed differential between pops and socioeconomic religious factors = smothering.


  12. #717
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    .....
    Posts
    4,008
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    I think the DNA was developed and tested. It belongs to a male and was transferred onto JBR's clothing the night she was murdered. The male is not a family member, or a dinner guest. The R's were cleared as a result of this testing.
    Oh. now Hotyh, you know what I mean? ... you've read all those CW vs Ramsey depos ..... I know ST's dodging legal q's but at least from what I gather from ST vagueness a lot of evidence can still be developed .....exculpatory? for the R's .... even?


  13. #718
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    Its the exact same circumstance, SD.
    The hell it is! A Halloween costume is something a child does once a year for their pleasure. A child in the beauty pageant circuit is paraded before adults BY other adults on a regular basis and is TRAINED by adults to preform for adults. Give me a break.

    JBR's lipstick photos were taken in the context of a child beauty pageant,
    Exactly!

    an activity that YOU apparently believe is immoral, decadent, or whatever,
    I believe it's all that and then some. Not ONLY me.

    and would thus get you kicked off the jury.
    Why would it get me kicked off the jury? I wouldn't be trying pageants, I'd be trying a killing.

    These photos were taken in one context, and then broadcast nationally alongside adult males who never had contact with JBR, and suggestive captions. It is child exploitation
    Damn skippy! Doesn't stop JR from selling copies of those pageant tapes, though!

    because profit was made from child photos placed in a sexual context that otherwise did not exist.
    My head hurts.
    Vae Victus! (May the conquered suffer!)
    Celerem vindictam manu! (Swift hand of vengeance!)


  14. #719
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,732
    Quote Originally Posted by Tadpole12 View Post
    Hi Hotyh. You must be kinda psychic, cuz I was just thinking about infant mortality rates, the expressed differential between pops and socioeconomic religious factors = smothering.
    Just remember, Tadpole: when a child is killed, the odds are 12 to 1 in favor of a parent.

    Another thing to remember is how the majority of filicides are solved.
    Vae Victus! (May the conquered suffer!)
    Celerem vindictam manu! (Swift hand of vengeance!)


  15. #720
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    2,526
    Quote Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat View Post
    Its a critical piece of evidence because it basically was the murder weapon. Its widely reported that this critical evidence can't be factually sourced to the house. Not only that, the tape ALSO cannot be factually sourced to the house. No other use was found. To suppose that the R's owned them simply because most people have random bits of cord and tape is a generalization. Its like saying the R's killed their daughter because sometimes parents kill kids.





    Nope because they just walked that evidence right on out of there, right past everyone.. Right under LE's noses..

    Patsy that is !

    Ane what about Patsy's frames to hang her paintings ? What do they hang with ?



Page 48 of 145 FirstFirst ... 38 46 47 48 49 50 58 98 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •