The John Ramsey 2012 Roadshow

[cynic]

Here is the interview on Anderson:
Part One:

ACJR1 - YouTube

ACJR1 - YouTube

Part Two:

ACJR2 - YouTube

ACJR2 - YouTube

Part Three:

ACJR3 - YouTube

ACJR3 - YouTube

Part Four:

ACJR4 - YouTube

ACJR4 - YouTube

[dodie20]

Originally Posted by why_nutt

The pageant pictures and video had their copyright owned by the companies staging the pageants, since part of how they make their money is by not allowing the parents to take their own video or pictures, and then selling the official version of same back to proud Mama and Papa. Since, for example, the Sunburst Pageants knew they could make even more money selling the rights to their pictures and videos of JonBenet to a stock agency, they did.

Now, if John and Patsy *really* objected to the pageant images, they had every opportunity from December 26th, 1996 onwards to put out the private, informal pictures they had taken themselves and given to friends and family for which they themselves owned the copyright. They also could have publicized the pictures and videos their friends and family had taken on their own, but it is a measure of how much the Ramseys did and do lie that they make it seem as if this was not an option until John arrived at this week with a book to publicize and the knowledge that he could make absolutely no money off interviews with himself, but that he could make a chunk of change off selling the rights to "never before seen" JonBenet pictures.

Are you saying the companies that hosted the pageants, sold the pictures to the media? Did they ever answer 'why' they would capitalize on a little girl's death, in such a morbid way? Also, I remember seeing some of those pictures immediately after Jon Benet's death. The companies would have had to have been quick. I guess it's possible, but it definately makes the pageant system look bad.

[CitizenKane]

Hello everyone, first time poster here. It's been a curious week for me in regards to this case. It started last Saturday afternoon when by chance I got sucked into Perfect Murder, Perfect Town. Thought it was very well done for a smaller production and found myself fascinated again. So I began to refresh myself with the case, mostly through this forum which was very informative and appreciate all the opinons on both sides of the fence. Certainly learned some things I had never known before.

This morning I was flipping channels and caught an episode of Unusual Suspects about the Julie Rea Harper/Tommy Lynn Sells case. Was interesting to hear the DA say repeatedly that nobody kills a child like hers without any motive in that manner and therefore could not be a random act of unspeakable violence. Mental note taken. After the episode was over, I proceeded to surf and much to my ironic surprise, there is John Ramsey on Anderson and caught it right at the beginning.Had absolutely no idea he had just released a new book. While keeping my personal opinions aside for now, there were a few things that struck me. Will start by saying that for good or bad he continues to carry himself very well and seemed to have the audience's favor.

I forget what the woman's name was who stood up and shared how she had been accused for some time of her six year old sons death 25 years ago , but was ultimately cleared. I was on the edge of my seat when she mentioned that she was fine going through the police interviews and polygraphs within the first DAYS of the murder. Said she had nothing to hide and just wanted to clear her name to get on looking for the real killer and understood why she had to go through that process. As she was saying this, I was hoping for the camera to focus on John's reaction to her words of common sense. No go. Then I hoped that Anderson would have the courage to take advantage of that moment and ask the big question...." John, why did you and Patsy wait so long to finally agree to take a polygraph and with more conditions than typical?" I know he's been asked it before, but think maybe he would have been a bit more caught off guard considering the circumstances and wish I would have heard the answer.

The other main point was when asked the "whodunnit" question he really appeared to have sort of spread himself too thin and I say that with all do objectivity. On one hand he said in regards to the $118,000 amount that it was clearly someone with personal knowledge trying to hurt him. I've read plenty of opinions and of course I'm not shedding any new light here. But with all the catching up and reading different theories, then to actually hear him try to sort of "throw things to the wall and see which sticks" is where it seemed he became the most uncomfortable. I want to say that if he honestly doesn't have a clue who did it I can more than understand him coming across that way. But what I was left with wondering is how 15 years later he is no closer to bridging the gap (at least publicly) between the same person who would leave a ransome note like that, then theoretically the same person killing and leaving Jon Benet like that. Got the distinct impression though that he doesn't believe it either.

[DeeDee249]

Welcome to the forum!

Your question can be answered very simply. JR seems to be no closer after these 15 years because he is ALREADY there. And he was already there 15 years ago. Occam's Razor- things are usually what they seem. The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

FOUR people came home that night. Only THREE woke up alive that morning. NO evidence of an intruder. JR admitted to breaking the window. NO evidence of a break in. The perp had to be one of the three who survived the night.

JR can't find the perp because he already knows who it is. He was right about one thing...the perp is either dead or alive. in this case, one possible perp IS dead, and the other two are still alive. Alas, neither are in prison.

[Cappy]

Originally Posted by DeeDee249

Welcome to the forum!

Your question can be answered very simply. JR seems to be no closer after these 15 years because he is ALREADY there. And he was already there 15 years ago. Occam's Razor- things are usually what they seem. The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

FOUR people came home that night. Only THREE woke up alive that morning. NO evidence of an intruder. JR admitted to breaking the window. NO evidence of a break in. The perp had to be one of the three who survived the night.

JR can't find the perp because he already knows who it is. He was right about one thing...the perp is either dead or alive. in this case, one possible perp IS dead, and the other two are still alive. Alas, neither are in prison.

John Ramsey nor any member of his family killed this little girl.

There was no evidence found that an intruder entered nor any that the family did it either.

IMO, no one broke into their home. They simply entered through an unlocked door. With plenty of time to roam through the house, there was info in the office of how much Ramsey received as a bonus and plenty of time to construct a ransom note that he had no intention of ever collecting. If that someone knew John Ramsey..it answers a lot of questions. If it was a total pervert there is no answer to why he did it other than to satisfy some insane need.

The Ramseys had nothing to do with this. Give it up and leave the surviving members to live in peace.

[EllaMae]

Originally Posted by DeeDee249

Welcome to the forum!

Your question can be answered very simply. JR seems to be no closer after these 15 years because he is ALREADY there. And he was already there 15 years ago. Occam's Razor- things are usually what they seem. The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

FOUR people came home that night. Only THREE woke up alive that morning. NO evidence of an intruder. JR admitted to breaking the window. NO evidence of a break in. The perp had to be one of the three who survived the night.

JR can't find the perp because he already knows who it is. He was right about one thing...the perp is either dead or alive. in this case, one possible perp IS dead, and the other two are still alive. Alas, neither are in prison.

If you are including Burke as one of those....I think that's really far fetched and very unfair to him. He was a child, and how anyone thinks he killed his sister is beyond me.
He should not have people accusing him of murdering JB. There was never anything that pointed to him. That kind of talk should stop,IMHO,because it is probably very hurtful to him. Why add to all the suffering he's gone through already? He does not deserve to have his name dragged through the mud for no reason.

[vlpate]

Originally Posted by EllaMae

If you are including Burke as one of those....I think that's really far fetched and very unfair to him. He was a child, and how anyone thinks he killed his sister is beyond me.
He should not have people accusing him of murdering JB. There was never anything that pointed to him. That kind of talk should stop,IMHO,because it is probably very hurtful to him. Why add to all the suffering he's gone through already? He does not deserve to have his name dragged through the mud for no reason.

Wonder why Burke, to this day, refuses to talk to LE? Do you follow the case? Just curious.

[vlpate]

Originally Posted by Cappy

John Ramsey nor any member of his family killed this little girl.

There was no evidence found that an intruder entered nor any that the family did it either.

IMO, no one broke into their home. They simply entered through an unlocked door. With plenty of time to roam through the house, there was info in the office of how much Ramsey received as a bonus and plenty of time to construct a ransom note that he had no intention of ever collecting. If that someone knew John Ramsey..it answers a lot of questions. If it was a total pervert there is no answer to why he did it other than to satisfy some insane need.

The Ramseys had nothing to do with this. Give it up and leave the surviving members to live in peace.

Thank G-D.....after 15 years I can finally put this away.

[vlpate]

Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye

I don't want to defend the Ramseys, but I blame the media A LOT more for putting forth this image of JonBenet as a child beauty queen. First, the Ramseys have released A LOT of pictures of JonBenet being a normal child since 1996. The media just doesn't use them very often. There are plenty of JonBenet memorial websites where can you see them. Let's not act like if the Ramseys had said, "Hey guys, can you stop showing pageant videos of our daughter and only show normal pictures?", the media would have replied, "Of course! Sure, we won't make as much money off the case of a normal brunette 6-year-old as we would a child beauty queen, but your wish is our command!"

It's ironic to see the media embracing pictures of JonBenet as a normal child, because if those were the only pictures they ever had of her, they wouldn't be talking about her 15 years later.

Patsy put a Tiara on JonBenet in her casket. JonBenet's talent medal is John's most prized possession. Her trophies were some of the items taken out of the house by Pam Paugh. If they felt the pageant had anything to do with JonBenet's death, they wouldn't be able to look at anything connected to it - or at least normal people would distance themselves.

If Patsy thought the pageants had anything to do with JB's death, she would have felt tremendous guilt, or one would think. IMO

[DeeDee249]

Originally Posted by Cappy

John Ramsey nor any member of his family killed this little girl.

There was no evidence found that an intruder entered nor any that the family did it either.

IMO, no one broke into their home. They simply entered through an unlocked door. With plenty of time to roam through the house, there was info in the office of how much Ramsey received as a bonus and plenty of time to construct a ransom note that he had no intention of ever collecting. If that someone knew John Ramsey..it answers a lot of questions. If it was a total pervert there is no answer to why he did it other than to satisfy some insane need.

The Ramseys had nothing to do with this. Give it up and leave the surviving members to live in peace.

This forum is for opinions. It is mine that the family are involved. Until a perp is identified BY NAME, every person who was in that home at the time of the murder is suspect.
There are fibers belonging to the parents on items that are part of the crime- the mother's fibers in the knot of the cord and in the paint tote the broken brush came from, as well as on the INSIDE of the tape that was on her mouth. The tape, specifically, never came out of the basement until police removed it- no innocent way for Patsy's fibers to have gotten there. Her fibers are also on the blanket she was wrapped in, as well as a hair from the mother's forearm. There are fibers from the father on the INSIDE of the crotch of the panties she was wearing.
That pretty much wraps it up for me.

[DeeDee249]

Originally Posted by EllaMae

If you are including Burke as one of those....I think that's really far fetched and very unfair to him. He was a child, and how anyone thinks he killed his sister is beyond me.
He should not have people accusing him of murdering JB. There was never anything that pointed to him. That kind of talk should stop,IMHO,because it is probably very hurtful to him. Why add to all the suffering he's gone through already? He does not deserve to have his name dragged through the mud for no reason.

Once again- EVERY person who was in that house is a suspect, regardless of age, until a perp is identified by name. I am sure it was very hurtful to JB to have been bashed on the head and strangled, most likely by someone she knew and loved. She suffered too.

[vlpate]

Originally Posted by DeeDee249

This forum is for opinions. It is mine that the family are involved. Until a perp is identified BY NAME, every person who was in that home at the time of the murder is suspect.
There are fibers belonging to the parents on items that are part of the crime- the mother's fibers in the knot of the cord and in the paint tote the broken brush came from, as well as on the INSIDE of the tape that was on her mouth. The tape, specifically, never came out of the basement until police removed it- no innocent way for Patsy's fibers to have gotten there. Her fibers are also on the blanket she was wrapped in, as well as a hair from the mother's forearm. There are fibers from the father on the INSIDE of the crotch of the panties she was wearing.
That pretty much wraps it up for me.

Ransom note with PR's fingerprints, from the notepad and pen belonging to the Ramseys, likely written by PR. I'm satisfied that it was, IMO.

[Vhead]

I posted this on another Ramsey forum, but I might've posted under wrong topic.

I just came across a blog called eyes for lies - not sure if I can post the link This author of these blogs is like a human lie detector and can read micro-expressions and other subconscious clues people give up.

She studied the 911 tapes and a 48 hours spot the Ramsey's did and the blogger felt something was Amiss. Especially with John.

I'll post the link if I can or just google "eyes for lies blog"


Sent from my iPhone

[UKGuy]

Originally Posted by Cappy

John Ramsey nor any member of his family killed this little girl.

There was no evidence found that an intruder entered nor any that the family did it either.

IMO, no one broke into their home. They simply entered through an unlocked door. With plenty of time to roam through the house, there was info in the office of how much Ramsey received as a bonus and plenty of time to construct a ransom note that he had no intention of ever collecting. If that someone knew John Ramsey..it answers a lot of questions. If it was a total pervert there is no answer to why he did it other than to satisfy some insane need.

The Ramseys had nothing to do with this. Give it up and leave the surviving members to live in peace.

Cappy,

John Ramsey nor any member of his family killed this little girl.

The Ramsey's remain the prime suspects there are no others.

There is no forensic evidence linking to anyone outside of the Ramsey house. Yet there is forensic evidence linking both parents to the wine-cellar crime-scene. And Patsy Ramsey claims not to have visited the wine-cellar the night before!

The Ramseys had nothing to do with this. Give it up and leave the surviving members to live in peace.

The Ramsey's have everything to do with it, and until I see forensic evidence that identifies a non-ramsey, they remain prime suspects.


.

[Maikai]

The Ramseys were cleared by the DA's office---they are not prime suspects except in the minds of certain people that want to believe they did it.

Unknown DNA cannot be discounted.....they have the person...they just don't know his name. There is no evidence in the cellar linking the Ramseys to the crime, except for the few fibers Kane tried to link to them, which was bogus. There is no explanation for the wolf dog hairs found on JBR.

[CitizenKane]

Alex Hunter "clearing" them is not exactly a ringing endorsement that they were innocent.

[mtwentz]

Originally Posted by CitizenKane

Alex Hunter "clearing" them is not exactly a ringing endorsement that they were innocent.

Alex Hunter has never said the Rs were cleared- it was his predecessor, Mary Lacey.

[Thorkim]

Originally Posted by DeeDee249

Welcome to the forum!

Your question can be answered very simply. JR seems to be no closer after these 15 years because he is ALREADY there. And he was already there 15 years ago. Occam's Razor- things are usually what they seem. The simplest explanation is usually the right one.

FOUR people came home that night. Only THREE woke up alive that morning. NO evidence of an intruder. JR admitted to breaking the window. NO evidence of a break in. The perp had to be one of the three who survived the night.

JR can't find the perp because he already knows who it is. He was right about one thing...the perp is either dead or alive. in this case, one possible perp IS dead, and the other two are still alive. Alas, neither are in prison.

Bingo Dee Dee. Doesn't take a rocket scientist on this one.

Thanks to Cynic for posting the Anderson links. I watched the Nightline episode (thank God it was a short one) and I don't think I can handle watching Anderson. Was the tongue on active duty on Anderson?

[eileenhawkeye]

There's a 5-page spread about John's new life and book in People magazine. He says he's working for a company in Las Vegas, so it looks like he has homes in Vegas and Charlevoix. He also described Burke as "pretty quiet".

[DeeDee249]

Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye

He also described Burke as "pretty quiet".

I bet....

[UKGuy]

Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye

There's a 5-page spread about John's new life and book in People magazine. He says he's working for a company in Las Vegas, so it looks like he has homes in Vegas and Charlevoix. He also described Burke as "pretty quiet".

eileenhawkeye,

He also described Burke as "pretty quiet"

That must be a form of Ramsey irony.

[DeeDee249]

Originally Posted by Maikai

The Ramseys were cleared by the DA's office---they are not prime suspects except in the minds of certain people that want to believe they did it.

Unknown DNA cannot be discounted.....they have the person...they just don't know his name. There is no evidence in the cellar linking the Ramseys to the crime, except for the few fibers Kane tried to link to them, which was bogus. There is no explanation for the wolf dog hairs found on JBR.

They DON't have the person if they don't have the name.

Could have been anyone the Rs touched that day (handshake, etc) or come from anything they touched that day. (doorknob, etc). Therefore, SKIN CELL DNA could very well be innocent transfer and have nothing to do with the crime. As you very well know, NO DA or any other LE can "clear" anyone until they have a named suspect who was proven to be in Boulder that night.
Therefore, the Rs are prime suspects...period. They are only "cleared" in the minds of people who cannot accept that they could be involved.
The "wolf hairs" were never positively ID as wolf. They could have been beaver, and artist's brushed are often beaver. Patsy also owned fur-trimmed boots as well as fur coats.
The DNA appears ONLY on articles of clothing that BOTH parents admitted touching that day. Patsy admitted putting the longjohns on JB, and when you pull pants up on a child you touch the waitsband. JR was PROVEN to have touched them- he was SEEN by several people holding JB around her waist as he carried her stiffened corpse up from the basement. His fibers found inside those same panties makes me think his hands were the source of the skin cell transfer that placed those skin cells and DNA on the panties and longjohns.
That DNA is no slam-dunk for an intruder killer.

[vlpate]

Originally Posted by Maikai

The Ramseys were cleared by the DA's office---they are not prime suspects except in the minds of certain people that want to believe they did it.

Unknown DNA cannot be discounted.....they have the person...they just don't know his name. There is no evidence in the cellar linking the Ramseys to the crime, except for the few fibers Kane tried to link to them, which was bogus. There is no explanation for the wolf dog hairs found on JBR.

BEM: LOL, sorry, but they will never know "his name" until they look for him!

John Ramsey almost immediately hired four attorneys for himself, two for Patsy, one for Burke, one for his ex-wife, and dumb and dumber as investigators to find (or create), evidence that they were innocent. Their book with their uppity mugs on the front is named "The Death of Innocence". One would think they named it for their child's untimely death - ahahaha, nope, it meant their innocence was dead, not JonBenet's. The book published a wrong number for the tip line, and there have been no websites put up to help find her with the exception of a few months or so when they needed to LOOK like they were actually doing something.

They sued anyone who mentioned Burke's name in the media or on the Internet, but not ONCE did they EVER go after the million + pornography websites defaming JonBenet's memory and name in their advertisements.

Forget the mountain of evidence that points to them, and despite the misinformation published on websites like wikipedia and PNB that tries to point away, there's undeniable proof they've never looked for this illusive killer, and they, apparently, never will.

Stun gunning pigs and trying for 10 years to squeeze a complete strand of DNA out of a degraded sample doesn't count.

JMO

[sharkeyes]

Just finished watching JR on Huckabee. While I'm disappointed that Huckabee seemed to almost pander and throw a pity party for JR, I'm not surprised. All I can say is "liar, liar, pants on fire" Mr. Ramsey. YOU KNOW what happened that night, sleep well sir.

[Thorkim]

I had to leave during Huckabee and left the TV on for my dogs to watch and reply how the show went with Lizard Tongue. Since they couldn't tell me, I will say thanks to Sharkeyes for the review and will not watch it on a rerun. How quickly people forget (I don't).