Are the Ramseys involved or not?

Are the Ramseys involved or not?

  • The Ramseys are somehow involved in the crime and/or cover-up

    Votes: 883 75.3%

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

    Votes: 291 24.8%
  • Total voters
    1,173

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
SuperDave said:
I'll go first. I'll be brutally honest with you, HOTYH, that's a tough question. Very tough, in fact. But again, speaking purely for myself, I'd have to name Michael Kane.

Strictly out of curiosity, why do you ask?
Click to expand...


In reality, the top expert on what happened to JBR is the RN author. That person not only knows of what happened to JBR, but also emoted on paper other stuff not related to kidnap for ransom.

We've used the ad hominem argument to disqualify the RN author as a liar because one aspect, the kidnap for ransom, seemed to us to be a lie after the fact, even though we don't even know what happened. Another aspect was how or why to believe anything written by a child murderer?

By your post, the flip of the switch that turned off the SFF component that was turned on by the top expert on this case was Quantico. Do you have some source for that?

OK I'll read some Michael Kane stuff.
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
I think we went over that years ago. If new bills, then it would be 8-9 inches? Hardly needing 'an adequate size attache'.
Click to expand...

Hi Hotyh.
TY for the reply. Ya, for sure the 'oldschool' JBR posters , like yourself, have covered this case from every angle, and covered a lot of ground, as well.
Cool. I was wondering about that paper bag angle, manageable size.

Holdontoyourhat said:
Why I think it wasn't an inside job? Not enough money was requested. That amount would probably be within just one credit line.

Agreeing with the 'intimate' motivation. Obviously nobody sexually assaults and murders a small child unless they're deeply mentally disturbed.

Unlike RDI, there's a lot I don't know.

I don't know that the original motive wasn't to kidnap JBR for money. I don't know if SBTC stands for something. I don't know if the SFF does not exist. I don't know if the SFF or the RN author are people we would not recognize. I don't know what happened to JBR, besides what is evident by her injuries. I don't know the circumstances for the pineapple, if any.

RDI has answers to all these questions, practically solving the whole crime, yet there are no arrests. Its considered a 'cold case'.
Click to expand...

Ya, I understand your perspective .... the IDI perspective ....from it all the unknowns have remained. Not many answers in 12 years, until the recent confirmation of that possibility.
 
Sophie said:
What do you make of the fact that the amount of the "ransom" was the exact amount of John's bonus for that year? How did the SFF know about THAT?

I know you guys have discussed this before so I hope I'm not being tedious but what sort of idiot would use the device of kidnapping - which depends for its efficacy on people's love for the victim - then not even test that love by asking for a significant sum of money from a known 'fat cat.' SFF would have to mean Stupid Foreign Faction, too. As you say, though, their intuition about John's bonus is extraordinary so we are looking for a (p)Sychic Foreign Faction too.
Click to expand...

Hi Sophie.

I had read somewhere, out there in cyberspace ... one of the IDI theories (IDI was in the house for hours before Ramseys returned from party scenario) .... it was 'explained' that the Ramsey's home was usually cluttered and messy ... and that JR's pay stubs may have been within sight ... his bonus of 118k being clearly marked on that pay info.

no link - just speculation.
 
Tadpole12 said:
Hi Sophie.

I had read somewhere, out there in cyberspace ... one of the IDI theories (IDI was in the house for hours before Ramseys returned from party scenario) .... it was 'explained' that the Ramsey's home was usually cluttered and messy ... and that JR's pay stubs may have been within sight ... his bonus of 118k being clearly marked on that pay info.

no link - just speculation.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be handy? Along with JBR's fave snack right there on the dining room table with (ONLY) her mother's prints on the bowl. His bonus wouldn't be on a pay stub. Someone looking at the pay stubs woukd have asked for quite a bit more money. I doubt they were thinking, well, let's just ask for the bonus, he can spare that. The bonus was mentioed for the express purpose of focusing suspicion on a business associate or employee of JR. Of course, they also mentioned an SFF, so they didn't know WHERE they wanted to deflect the blame, except to try to point away from themselves.
 
DeeDee249 said:
Wouldn't that be handy? Along with JBR's fave snack right there on the dining room table with (ONLY) her mother's prints on the bowl. His bonus wouldn't be on a pay stub. Someone looking at the pay stubs woukd have asked for quite a bit more money. I doubt they were thinking, well, let's just ask for the bonus, he can spare that. The bonus was mentioed for the express purpose of focusing suspicion on a business associate or employee of JR. Of course, they also mentioned an SFF, so they didn't know WHERE they wanted to deflect the blame, except to try to point away from themselves.
Click to expand...

Hi DeeDee.

Ya. I know.
Handy explanations.

The pay stub near the flashlight, on the kitchen counter.
The bowl the Ramsey's did not own, although one similar appeared in photo.
The bat in the yard.....
 
Re:Michael Kane, link last updated 2001

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer/primer3_pro.html

Hey. SD.

Who's aboard that slow train now?

Mary Keenan Lacy : Former DA

Stan Garnett: DA
Mark Beckner: Boulder Police Chief

The [multiagency] task force will include representatives from the FBI, Colorado Bureau of Investigation and Colorado Attorney General's Office.



"Beckner also said that a multiagency task force"..... http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/02/jonbenet.ramsey.case/index.html







Lin Wood: attorney for JR
 
Tadpole12 said:
Hi DeeDee.

Ya. I know.
Handy explanations.

The pay stub near the flashlight, on the kitchen counter.
The bowl the Ramsey's did not own, although one similar appeared in photo.
The bat in the yard.....
Click to expand...

Actually, the bowl did belong to the Ramsey's. At first they denied it..and then..if you read the interviews..you will see that Patsy admits that it belongs to her. The bat in the yard belonged to Burke.
 
Ames said:
Actually, the bowl did belong to the Ramsey's. At first they denied it..and then..if you read the interviews..you will see that Patsy admits that it belongs to her. The bat in the yard belonged to Burke.
Click to expand...

Lol. This whole case gets dumber and dumber with each demystified detail.
 
nobull said:
Lol. This whole case gets dumber and dumber with each demystified detail.
Click to expand...

Ain't that the truth! What is ridiculous, is the amount of IDI's that spew out things that they think are a fact...when they haven't even read any of the Ramsey's interviews. If they would just take the time to do that...it would cut down on most of the rumors. For example..the owner of the pineapple bowl, etc.
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
In reality, the top expert on what happened to JBR is the RN author.
Click to expand...

That would have been my next question. And while it's tempting for me to say that it's not quite what I meant, I can't really argue with you. The ransom letter writer IS (Was?) the only person who knows 100% sure what happened.

That person not only knows of what happened to JBR, but also emoted on paper other stuff not related to kidnap for ransom.
Click to expand...

Agreed, fully.

We've used the ad hominem argument to disqualify the RN author as a liar because one aspect, the kidnap for ransom, seemed to us to be a lie after the fact, even though we don't even know what happened.
Click to expand...

I see, I think.

Another aspect was how or why to believe anything written by a child murderer?
Click to expand...

Just remember, it wasn't us who said that.

By your post, the flip of the switch that turned off the SFF component that was turned on by the top expert on this case was Quantico. Do you have some source for that?
Click to expand...

Do I have a source for it?! I've only told you a hundred times! Damn skippy I have a source for it! PMPT, pgs 496-497:

In Quantico, the detectives, their lawyers and Hunter's team were driven to FBI headquarters. The experts thought that the ransom note was written by someone intelligent, but not criminally sophisticated. Someone who had planned a kidnapping in advance would have tried to impress the parents with how great a threat he or she posed. Words like "we" and "us," "my group," "we're large," and "we're big" were absent. In the note, the kidnappers called themselves a "small foreign faction." That raised the question, foreign to whom? From whose point of view were they writing? Real foreigners would not refer to themselves as foreign. Here the author had made a mistake. One agent told the group: Is this an offender who came to the scene totally unprepared to do anything?

I'm just getting warmed up.

OK I'll read some Michael Kane stuff.
Click to expand...

I eagerly await the results. If you need any help, just shout.
 
Tadpole12 said:
Re:Michael Kane, link last updated 2001

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer/primer3_pro.html

Hey. SD.

Who's aboard that slow train now?

Mary Keenan Lacy : Former DA

Stan Garnett: DA
Mark Beckner: Boulder Police Chief
Click to expand...

Things SURE have changed, haven't they, Tadpole? A few things to mention, though.

1) Bill Ritter is no longer Denver Attorney General. As of January, he's Governor of Colorado. Which could mean bad news if the new DA gets out of line.

2) That site really doesn't tell much about the person I mentioned.

3) I actually do a version of this website in the book; it's the entirety of chapter 7, in fact. Except it's not "Slow Train Coming," it's "Conspiracy of Cowards, Creeps and Crooks." Here's a small (and I DO mean SMALL) excerpt:

According to Kane, the entire DA's office was already welded to the intruder theory. He was just window-dressing

The [multiagency] task force will include representatives from the FBI, Colorado Bureau of Investigation and Colorado Attorney General's Office.

"Beckner also said that a multiagency task force"..... http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/02/02/jonbenet.ramsey.case/index.html
Click to expand...

Yep. And already, some IDIs (actually, RST would be more appropriate) are pushing the panic button.

Lin Wood: attorney for JR
Click to expand...

You should read what I wrote about HIM!
 
SuperDave said:
Yep. And already, some IDIs (actually, RST would be more appropriate) are pushing the panic button.
Click to expand...

Let me get this. The last official action was by the DA's office, and that was to write an apologetic letter to Mr. Ramsey and family. That letter was based on new information that wasn't available to anyone who made any of these archaic suggestions that RDI still clings to even to this day, like 'look at the family'.

I'm sorry, not really seeing the IDI panic you're referring to, anywhere.

There has been no other official action. Some RDI claimed they've now 'reopened' the case, but that is false. The case has always been open. The new DA even denied that RDI claim directly!
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
Let me get this. The last official action was by the DA's office, and that was to write an apologetic letter to Mr. Ramsey and family. That letter was based on new information that wasn't available to anyone who made any of these archaic suggestions that RDI still clings to even to this day, like 'look at the family'.

I'm sorry, not really seeing the IDI panic you're referring to, anywhere.

There has been no other official action. Some RDI claimed they've now 'reopened' the case, but that is false. The case has always been open. The new DA even denied that RDI claim directly!
Click to expand...

I know what you mean, HOTYH, but surely the case was only open enough to keep checking Codis for a match: that really isn't an investigation. Equally, as I understood it, the new DA was careful not to clear anyone. TBPH, it looks like a feat of semantic gymnastics to say that - by omission - he was doing anything other than putting the Ramseys back under the umbrella or back into the bucket (*shamelessly curries favour with the ST aficionados with that reference :) )
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
Let me get this. The last official action was by the DA's office, and that was to write an apologetic letter to Mr. Ramsey and family. That letter was based on new information that wasn't available to anyone who made any of these archaic suggestions that RDI still clings to even to this day, like 'look at the family'.
Click to expand...

"Let me get this." Good luck. BTW, the last time you and I spoke, you said you were going to read some "Michael Kane stuff." How did that go?

[/QUOTE]I'm sorry, not really seeing the IDI panic you're referring to, anywhere.[/QUOTE]

All I can tell you is what some people on other forums have said about this, HOTYH. They talk about the "subtext" in Chief Beckner's statements to the press. And I would agree with that, though that may be just wishful thinking. But I saw what I saw.

There has been no other official action. Some RDI claimed they've now 'reopened' the case, but that is false. The case has always been open. The new DA even denied that RDI claim directly!
Click to expand...

In the letter, perhaps. But not the spirit.
 
Sophie said:
I know what you mean, HOTYH, but surely the case was only open enough to keep checking Codis for a match: that really isn't an investigation. Equally, as I understood it, the new DA was careful not to clear anyone. TBPH, it looks like a feat of semantic gymnastics to say that - by omission - he was doing anything other than putting the Ramseys back under the umbrella or back into the bucket (*shamelessly curries favour with the ST aficionados with that reference :) )
Click to expand...

I agree, because IMO checking CODIS for a match will never work.

If the indisputable parts of the RN are true, then CODIS will not show a match, because a "small foreign faction" that is "respectful of a business but not a country" does not fall within the scope of CODIS DNA collection activities. Not even close.

Indisputable meaning that there has been no discovery that can rule the RN authors' claims as invalid.
 
Sophie said:
I know what you mean, HOTYH, but surely the case was only open enough to keep checking Codis for a match: that really isn't an investigation. Equally, as I understood it, the new DA was careful not to clear anyone. TBPH, it looks like a feat of semantic gymnastics to say that - by omission - he was doing anything other than putting the Ramseys back under the umbrella or back into the bucket (*shamelessly curries favour with the ST aficionados with that reference :) )
Click to expand...

Hi Sophie.

Ya, it did have that effect ..... Beckner's phrasing. But he also comments about being on the same page.....
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28981916/

Beckner told the Camera newspaper of Boulder the task force will "explore all possible theories about what happened the night JonBenet was killed" and added, "We are open to all possibilities."

Garnett's predecessor, Mary Lacy, last year cleared Jonbenet's family in the slaying, saying male DNA found on the girl's clothing almost certainly came from her killer, and that it didn't match anyone in the family.

DNA evidence


Beckner informed John Ramsey of the change in the investigation in a letter, but gave no hint that police would back away from that finding.




http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/2009/feb/02/boulder-police-take-back-jonbenet-ramsey-case/

Beckner said he began thinking about taking over the investigation last summer when Lacy sent her apology letter, and he met with Garnett about that prospect.
“We were on the same page right away,” Beckner said
 
Hi Hotyh.

I've got this one covered!
I'm not good with those riddle me this type questions ...

but this query .... is answerable?



A:Trip DeMuth's page, headed 'Baggage List on Slow Train'.


http://www.coloradodaily.com/news/2009/feb/02/boulder-police-take-back-jonbenet-ramsey-case/
"Trip DeMuth, a former Boulder prosecutor who worked on the Ramsey case, said he doesn’t believe Beckner can handle the case without prejudice, and it is “less likely to be solved” unless the department approaches it without baggage"
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 227 more.
Total: 3,549 (members: 228, guests: 3,321)

Online statistics

Members online
228
Guests online
3,322
Total visitors
3,550
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,337
Messages
17,967,766
Members
228,752
Latest member
Cindy88
Back
Top