View Poll Results: Are the Ramseys involved or not?

Voters
1005. You may not vote on this poll
  • The Ramseys are somehow involved in the crime and/or cover-up

    742 73.83%
  • The Ramseys are not involved at all in the crime or cover-up

    263 26.17%
Page 9 of 76 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617181959 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 225 of 1895

Thread: Are the Ramseys involved or not?

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by tipper
    If what you're saying is true (the GJ solved the case. It was Burke. etc. etc.), why would Smit have gone back on the case when the DA's office took over? Why would Keenan have had that long meeting with the Ramseys? Why would Bennett's replacement have contacted the Ramseys to introduce himself when he took over? Why would CODIS have taken the sample?

    tipper,

    IMO it's all part of the hocus-pocus needed to pacify Colorado law requiring the identities of children to be kept confidential.

    However, the unidentified foreign male DNA in the panties may be evidence of a fifth person in the house that night who is an accomplice. That accomplice COULD be the actual killer. It has to be checked out. But a Ramsey is DEFINITELY also involved or there wouldn't be any need for all of the Ramsey lies and the Ramsey coverup.

    BlueCrab

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to BlueCrab For This Useful Post:


  3. #202
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Pa, USA
    Posts
    448
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCrab
    Zman,

    IMO it can't be publicly disclosed that the case was solved by the grand jury in 1999 because it would violate Colorado law protecting the identities of children. If the court disclosed the truth (that it was solved), the next question from the press would be: "Well, who did it?"

    Boulder authorities ( primarily the DA's office and the courts) are using smoke and mirrors to get through this catch 22 situation. Incidentally, under the Colorado Children's Code, the authorities are allowed to lawfully lie to protect the identities of the children.

    BlueCrab
    Well the answer would be "We can't tell you." Case closed.

    Well I'm sure not plowing through the Colorado Childrens Code so maybe you would be nice enough to show that to us.

  4. #203
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCrab
    tipper,

    IMO it's all part of the hocus-pocus needed to pacify Colorado law requiring the identities of children to be kept confidential.

    However, the unidentified foreign male DNA in the panties may be evidence of a fifth person in the house that night who is an accomplice. That accomplice COULD be the actual killer. It has to be checked out. But a Ramsey is DEFINITELY also involved or there wouldn't be any need for all of the Ramsey lies and the Ramsey coverup.

    BlueCrab
    Your theory has abosloutely no facts backing it up one of your suspects was in califorina and the other would never have been there at that time.

  5. #204
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by asdasd
    Your theory has abosloutely no facts backing it up one of your suspects was in califorina and the other would never have been there at that time.

    Hello asdasd,

    Thanks for responding and welcome to the forum. This is your first post, and it seems as though the possibility of NI a/o DS being involved has brought you out.

    Sometimes the lack of something or someone's presence is as powerful as hard evidence. For instance, Larry Schiller, the author of PMPT, admits he published just a small amount of the information he really knows about this crime in order to appease local authorities who put pressure on him. Even though NI was a day to day part of the Ramsey's life right up to the murder (he babysat and drove the children to school, etc.), in Schiller's book there was not a single mention of NI's existence. His name was not even in the book's name index. The silence is deafening.

    And DS's name was obviously hurriedly purged from PMPT at the last minute, and just days after the grand jury made its final report in October of 1999. DS's name appears 9 times in the book's name index, but only once in the text.

    There has to be a reason for the apparent removal of NI's name and DS's name from PMPT, immediately following the grand jury's verbal report of no indictments after 13 months of investigation. The court's strict and immediate gag order on everything about the crime following the grand jury's adjournment is also revealing, as was the curious timing of the final few witnesses who testified (Melinda Ramsey and John Andrew Ramsey and Susan Stine) after about 100 had already testified. It's also interesting that the testimonies of the two most important witnesses in the murder were not needed -- John and Patsy Ramsey.

    So far as the hard evidence, the long list of Ramsey lies, obfuscations, and coverups is a part of the record forever.

    I think the grand jury solved this crime, children too young to prosecute were involved, and the Colorado Children's Code protecting the identities of children automatically kicked in. It has created the catch 22 situation of having solved a major crime but unable to publicly say so.

    BlueCrab

  6. #205
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    19
    my point was not that your theroy held no merit I just know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the people you constantly mention could not have been involved.

  7. #206
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by asdasd
    my point was not that your theroy held no merit I just know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the people you constantly mention could not have been involved.
    Welcome asdasd!

    Do you have a theory about what happened that night?
    This is only my opinion

    Let the focus be on Madeleine




    Together we can make a difference





    Alert Viewer in Scotland

    Member of Websleuths since April 2000

  8. #207
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    19
    no theory just enough knowledge to know what isn't true

  9. #208
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,056
    Quote Originally Posted by asdasd
    no theory just enough knowledge to know what isn't true
    Welcome ....

    Well,let's hear it asdasd.
    What knowledge do you have, that makes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt,that the people BlueCrab mentions could not have been involved.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to capps For This Useful Post:


  11. #209
    BlueCrab

    Saw this quote and thought you and jayelles might be interested. It's Judith Phillips being interviewed by Mame and appears to confirm what John said in his interview. That prior to the murder they were friends with the Stines but not close.

    Mame: anyway, Mr. Stine.
    JP: Mr. Stine
    Mame: he had quite a big position with the university, didn't he?
    JP: yeah, I think he was in admissions or something like that.
    Mame: what would possess him to, first of all, you talked privately before they were never that that close? Prior to the murder, right?
    JP: right.

  12. #210
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,056
    Quote Originally Posted by tipper
    BlueCrab

    Saw this quote and thought you and jayelles might be interested. It's Judith Phillips being interviewed by Mame and appears to confirm what John said in his interview. That prior to the murder they were friends with the Stines but not close.

    Mame: anyway, Mr. Stine.
    JP: Mr. Stine
    Mame: he had quite a big position with the university, didn't he?
    JP: yeah, I think he was in admissions or something like that.
    Mame: what would possess him to, first of all, you talked privately before they were never that that close? Prior to the murder, right?
    JP: right.
    Tipper,

    I have to agree with BlueCrab and Jayelles on this one. I have re-read that interview with John several times ... and I got the distinct feeling that John was side stepping every which way he could,to not mention the Stines.Even when the LE left out "close"friends,and said who would you invite over for dinner ... John wouldn't budge.Not even a:Well,there's the Stine's,but we weren't close then.Maybe they weren't close then,but they were friends,John mentioned everyone else and their brother.

    Only when the LE specifically mentioned the Stine's,did John offer a:..."actually we weren't that close."

    Somethings up with that ... I wonder what it is.

  13. #211
    I think when John says they were friends but not close and then Judith Phillips, who was no fan of the Ramseys then, confirms it by saying they were never that close, the only conclusion one can draw is that they were friends but not that close. Phillips isn't hiding anything for the Ramseys.

    I think we're all in agreement that after the murder Susan Stine was thrilled to have the coveted Ramseys land on her doorstep and assign herself the job of running interference for Patsy.

  14. #212
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by capps
    Welcome ....

    Well,let's hear it asdasd.
    What knowledge do you have, that makes you know beyond a shadow of a doubt,that the people BlueCrab mentions could not have been involved.
    Specifily I know the exact location of the people BC contantly mentions on that night beyond a shadow of a doubt. Sadly, for you at least I cannot reveal how I know where they were.

  15. #213
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,284
    Well if you can't say, how are we supposed to believe you?

  16. #214
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    18,874

    Arrow

    Quote Originally Posted by Rupert
    Yes indeed, how did the killer know where to find the "Wednesday" panties? But then why would the R's use those panties? They were meant for a friend and it looks more like a set-up.
    Supposedly Patsy bought those panties for her niece and kept them in the drawer. JonBenet was with her when she bought them and had taken a fancy to them... So if John or Patsy killed her, Patsy knew exactly where the spare panties that JB loved were.
    Please help locate Mark Dribin http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...ht=Mark+Dribin and Ilene Misheloff http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...lene+Misheloff and bring them home.



  17. #215
    Quote Originally Posted by tipper
    BlueCrab

    Saw this quote and thought you and jayelles might be interested. It's Judith Phillips being interviewed by Mame and appears to confirm what John said in his interview. That prior to the murder they were friends with the Stines but not close.

    Mame: anyway, Mr. Stine.
    JP: Mr. Stine
    Mame: he had quite a big position with the university, didn't he?
    JP: yeah, I think he was in admissions or something like that.
    Mame: what would possess him to, first of all, you talked privately before they were never that that close? Prior to the murder, right?
    JP: right.
    And Capps,

    I have to agree with Tipper on this one

    I don’t see anything at all suspicious in the fact that a couple who were considered by John to be ‘not close’ prior to the murder of his daughter would become close afterwards.

    Momentous, horrific events in people’s lives throws every aspect of their lives into turmoil. This includes the dynamics of all their interpersonal relationships both within and beyond the family. The people directly involved change and those around them change also. Nothing is ever the same as it was before.

  18. #216
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by narlacat
    Well if you can't say, how are we supposed to believe you?
    Really it does not matter to me if you believe me or not I'm just lettting you know that I know that bc's "suspects" are innocent.

  19. #217
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,056
    Quote Originally Posted by aussiesheila
    And Capps,

    I have to agree with Tipper on this one

    I don’t see anything at all suspicious in the fact that a couple who were considered by John to be ‘not close’ prior to the murder of his daughter would become close afterwards.

    Momentous, horrific events in people’s lives throws every aspect of their lives into turmoil. This includes the dynamics of all their interpersonal relationships both within and beyond the family. The people directly involved change and those around them change also. Nothing is ever the same as it was before.
    Aussiesheila,

    Maybe I wasn't clear enough in my previous post. It wasn't that John wasn't agreeing they were "close" friends ... it was the fact that he wasn't mentioning the Stine's as friends at all that bothered me.

    Maybe not John's definition of "close",but they were friends. They were neighbors,they were invited to parties,they traveled together,their sons were friends.John wouldn't even acknowedge them,until the interviewer mentioned the Stine's.

    That's what has me wondering why.
    An excerpt of John's Oct 1998 transcript shows this. It ws too big to put in this post ... I am putting it in another post.

  20. #218
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,056

    Lightbulb Excerpt of Oct 98 transcript

    5 Q. As you lived in Boulder and your family sent or
    6 picked up the kids to and from school, did you develop a
    7 social network in Boulder?
    8 A. Yes.
    9 Q. Who became your friends?
    10 MR. CRAVER: At what time? 1991?
    11 MR. HILL: 1991 through today.
    12 A. Well --
    13 MR. CRAVER: I've got to object. It's
    14 over-broad. But you can answer it, John, to the extent
    15 you're able.
    16 Q. I'm looking for, you know, as best you can, a
    17 comprehensive list of your friend and associates.
    18 A. Friends -- they typically revolved around
    19 children. John and Barbara Fernie, Fleet and Priscilla
    20 White, Larry and Pinky Barber. I think those are probably
    21 our three --
    22 Q. The top of the list?
    23 A. Yeah.
    24 Q. How about any others that you would consider to
    25 have been social acquaintances on a friendly basis?
    Page 39
    1 A. There were lots of people that would fall in
    2 that category by the end of five years.
    3 Q. I know it's daunting, but as best you can, if we
    4 can get a list of as many of those as you recall today, it
    5 would be very helpful, please.
    6 MR. CRAVER: Social acquaintances on a friendly
    7 basis?
    8 MR. HILL: Right.
    9 MR. CRAVER: People that you knew through the
    10 church, activities through the church, things of that
    11 nature, through work?
    12 Q. Who would be invited to your house for dinner,
    13 for example?
    14 A. Well, our neighbors across the street, Betty and
    15 Joe Barnhill. We had Betsy -- I can't think of their last
    16 names. Roxy and Stewart Walker. We knew lots of people,
    17 but then that's kind of the people we socialized with.
    18 Q. Is that pretty much the complete list of people
    19 that you would want to spend time with?
    20 A. I don't know if it's a complete list. It's all
    21 that comes to mind. Penny and Dr. Buff.
    22 Q. If more names do come to mind between now and
    23 when you review the transcript, if you don't mind just
    24 inking that in so we have the best, most complete list we
    25 can get, I would appreciate that.
    Page 40
    1 And the court reporter might leave a couple
    2 blank lines to accommodate or remind you that we'd like to
    3 do that, if you don't --
    4 A. Yeah.
    5 ( )
    6 MR. GRAY: Is this the list of people that have
    7 been to dinner at his house, a list of close friends, or a
    8 list of -- I just want to make sure we understand what
    9 you're asking him to make a list of, please?
    10 MR. HILL: People Mr. Ramsey considers to be
    11 social friends, including especially close friends and
    12 people that the Ramseys invited to dine in their home.
    13 THE WITNESS: We had, for example, a church
    14 dinner at our house. There were 80 people there and I
    15 didn't know --
    16 Q. I'm not too worried about that. If there were
    17 members of that group that came again, for example,
    18 individually, I would be interested in having those
    19 indicated. Does that help?
    20 A. Yes.
    21 Q. I understand a lot of people came to your house.
    22 For example, from what I've read, you maintained open
    23 houses from time to time?
    24 A. We did an open house to benefit the historical
    25 society one year.
    Page 41
    1 Q. Did you maintain a guest book at the house?
    2 A. We didn't. I don't know --
    3 Q. If the historical society did?
    4 A. Yeah, if they did. And they sold tickets to go
    5 through several houses at Christmas time.
    6 Q. Actually, you occasionally also entertained at
    7 your home, if I remember correctly?
    8 A. Yes.
    9 Q. Prior to the unfortunate tragedy, you
    10 entertained at your home; is that correct?
    11 A. Uh-huh.
    12 MR. CRAVER: What do you mean by "prior"? You
    13 mean during the years prior?
    14 MR. HILL: During the month prior.
    15 MR. CRAVER: Okay.
    16 A. Yes.
    17 Q. I have information that you hosed a party on
    18 December 23; is that correct?
    19 A. That's correct.
    20 Q. Who did you invite to that party?
    21 A. They were a group of friends and their children.
    22 Certainly some of the people I've mentioned were there.
    23 Priscilla White's parents were there. Some guests they
    24 had, who we didn't know, were there. There might have
    25 been others. That's all I can remember.
    Page 42
    1 Q. Did you send out invitations?
    2 A. No.
    3 Q. Or --
    4 A. I don't think so. They were probably -- I don't
    5 know for a fact, but I believe Patsy called and invited
    6 people.
    7 Q. So she would know who was invited?
    8 A. Perhaps.
    9 Q. I don't know, for example, if there was
    10 designated seating?
    11 A. It wasn't a dinner. It was just a
    12 family/children's get-together.
    13 Q. Were gifts exchanged?
    14 A. Patsy had little gifts for each of the children
    15 and at least some of the adults, just token gifts.
    16 Q. So somewhere we could expect that there is a
    17 record of, for example, how many people attended the party
    18 and who was there?
    19 A. There wouldn't be a record.
    20 Q. Someone would remember? Who is the best person
    21 that would remember?
    22 A. I think we've gone through that, hadn't we -- I
    23 don't know -- for the police, but --
    24 Q. I don't know anything -- I haven't been a part
    25 of that or privy to it, so that's why I'm asking you.
    Page 43
    1 A. I mean, the best way we would have to remember
    2 is to just sit down and try to remember. I think we've
    3 done that, but I don't remember what we came up with.
    4 Q. There may be --
    5 A. The Barnhills were there, I remember that.
    6 Q. As best you can insert then a complete list of
    7 people who were at the party in the deposition transcript
    8 as you review it, I would ask you to do that.
    9 A. All right.
    10 Q. Did your circle of friends include any public
    11 officials in Boulder, County or Boulder City government?
    12 A. No.
    13 Q. Did your circle of friends include any
    14 journalists?
    15 A. I don't believe so, no.
    16 Q. The time period that I'm inquiring about are,
    17 let's say, from '94 to 1996, just to narrow it down a
    18 little bit. Did your circle of friends include any law
    19 enforcement officers?
    20 A. No.
    21 Q. Any lawyers?
    22 A. Not our close circle of friends, no, that I can
    23 recall. I don't think any lawyers.
    24 Q. What's the first tier where a lawyer turns up?
    25 A. Well, we knew people -- Noel Phillips was a
    Page 44
    1 lawyer, became a lawyer. That's the only one I can think
    2 of that I knew.
    3 Q. Were your friends the same as your wife's
    4 friends?
    5 A. Yeah, basically.
    6 Q. Completely?
    7 A. Well, within the people that we socialized with,
    8 yeah. Pretty much, it was couples and family activity.
    9 Q. Did either of you enjoy any degree of separate
    10 social environment or milieu?
    11 A. I mean, I had business entertaining that we
    12 would do from time to time, which Patsy -- I never drug
    13 her along, not particularly, that I can remember.
    14 Q. Some couples, you know, share every friend in
    15 common and others will have, you know, separate friends
    16 interested in different things. I wouldn't expect you to
    17 be a member of a sewing circle, for example. I don't know
    18 if your wife was either.
    19 What I'm asking is if -- I realize you don't
    20 know who she would consider -- well, I'm asking you, do
    21 you know whom she would consider to be in her close circle
    22 of friends?
    23 A. I think it would be the people we socialized
    24 with as couples, Pinky Barber, Barbara Fernie, Priscilla
    25 White, Roxy Walker.
    Page 45
    1 Q. Judith Phillips, would you consider her to be a
    2 close friend?
    3 A. No.
    4 Q. I'm not asking currently, but previously.
    5 A. No.

















    16 A. Not -- we did for a while, only because we lived
    17 with some people.
    18 Q. Who were those people?
    19 A. Susan and Glenn Stine.
    20 Q. Should I add them to your list of close friends?
    21 A. They were not close friends, believe it or not.
    22 They were friends, but we didn't socialize a lot with
    23 them.
    24 Q. Can you help me complete a list of people who
    25 would be on the same level of relationship as the Stines
    Page 51
    1 were to your family?
    2 MR. CRAVER: At what time, Lee?
    3 MR. LEE: Beginning in 1994 to date.
    4 A. I can't think of the names.

    10 Q. Thank you. When did you live with the Stines?
    11 A. Early 1997, probably until June, July I think.
    12 Q. Where do they live?
    13 A. They lived at the time on 10th I think, 10th
    14 Street.
    15 Q. Where do they live now?
    16 A. They live in Atlanta.
    17 Q. Do you continue a relationship with them?
    18 A. Yes.
    19 Q. What do they do?
    20 A. What do they do?
    21 Q. Yes, sir.
    22 MR. CRAVER: Mr. or Mrs.?
    23 MR. HILL: Both.
    24 A. Glenn Stine now works with me. He joined our
    25 company in August of this year, and Susan takes care of
    Page 52
    1 her son.
    2 Q. How old is their son?
    3 A. He's Burke's age. He's 11.
    4 Q. When did you first meet the Stines?
    5 A. Gosh, I don't know. It would have been when we
    6 lived in Boulder. I don't remember when we first met
    7 them.
    8 Q. Were they also at your Christmas party in 1996?
    9 A. Gosh, I don't remember. Possibly, but I don't
    1

  21. #219
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,389
    Quote Originally Posted by asdasd
    no theory just enough knowledge to know what isn't true
    Do you believe that an intruder killed JonBenet?

    (BTW, we are not allowed to name BC's suspects on this forum).
    This is only my opinion

    Let the focus be on Madeleine




    Together we can make a difference





    Alert Viewer in Scotland

    Member of Websleuths since April 2000

  22. #220
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    252
    Quote Originally Posted by Jayelles
    Do you believe that an intruder killed JonBenet?

    (BTW, we are not allowed to name BC's suspects on this forum).
    Would you please care to elaborate on the last sentence for a newbie in this forum? What are we not allowed to do? What does BC mean?

    Thank you. I have followed this case in the media from Day One despite livinig in Europe where coverage was not all that good, and I am appalled that so many years later, we are still wrecking our brains on who did it.

    Wuschel

    Don't try to teach a pig to sing. You are wasting your time and annoying the pig.

  23. The Following User Says Thank You to Wuschel For This Useful Post:


  24. #221
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by asdasd
    my point was not that your theroy held no merit I just know beyond a shadow of a doubt that the people you constantly mention could not have been involved.

    asdasd,

    Thanks for responding. Needless to say, your responses, if true, are extremely important. It sounds like the two people who you say are innocent were together that night. Is this so?

    Also, as you know, theoretically:

    o the only way a person could say beyond a shadow of a doubt that two other people are innocent of a murder is if the person making this claim is himself the killer; or

    o at the time of the murder you were with the two people who you say are innocent; or

    o you know who killed JonBenet.


    I want to believe you, but would very much appreciate any elaboration from you in support of what you say. Thanks.

    BlueCrab

  25. #222
    OT but, When did Kane come out and clear Burke?

  26. #223
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCrab
    asdasd,

    Thanks for responding. Needless to say, your responses, if true, are extremely important. It sounds like the two people who you say are innocent were together that night. Is this so?

    Also, as you know, theoretically:

    o the only way a person could say beyond a shadow of a doubt that two other people are innocent of a murder is if the person making this claim is himself the killer; or

    o at the time of the murder you were with the two people who you say are innocent; or

    o you know who killed JonBenet.


    I want to believe you, but would very much appreciate any elaboration from you in support of what you say. Thanks.

    BlueCrab
    Im making no claim that I know who killed JonBenet. Im simply able to confirm that your suspects were in the locations that you would call their alibi locations, California and the Stine residence. Also the grand jury did not solve the case. This is not opinion this is fact.

  27. #224
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,056
    Quote Originally Posted by asdasd
    Im making no claim that I know who killed JonBenet. Im simply able to confirm that your suspects were in the locations that you would call their alibi locations, California and the Stine residence. Also the grand jury did not solve the case. This is not opinion this is fact.
    asdasd,

    You're obviously very confident in what you are posting.

    BlueCrab has posted his theory many,many times on this forum. Out of curiosity,why haven't you posted your information before,and what compelled you to post it now?

  28. #225
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    3,056
    Quote Originally Posted by Wuschel
    Would you please care to elaborate on the last sentence for a newbie in this forum? What are we not allowed to do? What does BC mean?

    Thank you. I have followed this case in the media from Day One despite livinig in Europe where coverage was not all that good, and I am appalled that so many years later, we are still wrecking our brains on who did it.

    Wuschel
    Hi Wuschel,

    Posters are not allowed to use full names of any private citizen which posters may theorize is a suspect.

    BC is a shortcut for BlueCrab,who is a poster on this forum.

    Hope this helped!

Page 9 of 76 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314151617181959 ... 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
  •