Websleuths
Go Back   Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community > Featured Case Discussion > JonBenet Ramsey

Notices

JonBenet Ramsey What really happened to 6 year old JonBenet? Someone is getting away with murder. All information posted on this site is gained through published documentation on this case. It is strictly opinion only.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 02-14-2004, 03:00 PM
K777angel K777angel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oregon
Posts: 511
Note Clues

It is well understood that the most critical piece of evidence in the case is the "note" Patsy Ramsey claims she found on the stairs. Setting the "handwriting" aside - let's look at the abundance of other clues the writer gave us in writing that note.

One came to my attention today in browsing through the Ramsey's own book.

Patsy is talking about a "message of appreciation" she and John wrote and had printed on the back of the liturgy program for the Dec. 1997 rememberance service held for JonBenet in Boulder.

Patsy writes (pg. 234): "In composing this expression of appreciation, John and I had each written a version. With both copies in hand, John dictated and I typed at the computer as we merged the two into one."

Whoa. Here we have PROOF that John and Patsy practiced John dictating and Patsy writing!! Just as has been suspected in the writing of the "ransom" note.

Again - it is not just "one" thing that points to the Ramseys as the author's of that note, but a combination of things. To the point of rendering the suggestion of some stranger/intruder/kidnapper/pedophile as the author as
simply ridiculous.

We of course also have the now well-known clues such as: "and hence", the
ransom demand of $118,000 (same as John's bonus that year), the use of the word "gentlemen" which Patsy and her family use and she also uses in her
book (pg. 57), the familiar term "John" departing from the intial "Mr. Ramsey",
the frequent departure from the use of "we" to "I", the use of the term used in the family "use that good southern common sense", the use of the term
"fat cat" (Patsy's dad used the word "cats" when referring to others too),
the phrases used to "be well rested", "bring an adequate sized attache',
and the sheer extreme length of the note suggesting panic and desperation on the part of the note writer to DIVERT attention away from what would be so very obvious as to who caused the death of JonBenet.

And they wonder why they are not removed from under the umbrella of suspicion.
__________________
This post is my opinion.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to K777angel For This Useful Post:
  #2  
Old 02-14-2004, 04:11 PM
blueclouds blueclouds is offline
Former member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,547
The new prosecutor HAS removed them from the "umbrella of suspicion". No one wants to hear that though.

My 2 cents.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 02-14-2004, 04:14 PM
Barbara Barbara is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueclouds
The new prosecutor HAS removed them from the "umbrella of suspicion". No one wants to hear that though.

My 2 cents.
What prosecutor? Have I missed something? Please enlighten us as to where they have been removed from that "umbrella of suspicion" NOBODY in the Ramsey family has been removed from that umbrella officially.

If you can show us where they are removed, please share

Thanks
__________________
This is my opinion only
This post may not be copied to any other forum

God Bless America
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 02-14-2004, 04:16 PM
Britt Britt is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 1,913
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueclouds
The new prosecutor HAS removed them from the "umbrella of suspicion".
She has? What have I missed? Do you have a source/quote you could post? I'd like to read that.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 02-14-2004, 04:30 PM
blueclouds blueclouds is offline
Former member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,547
Well I'm not sure if she has said all the words but the "newer" DA Mary Keenan is convinced of intruder theory... Here's a couple of links

http://www.longmontfyi.com/ramsey/st...il02.asp?ID=36

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drm...914253,00.html

http://www.dailyiowan.com/news/2003/...e-413774.shtml

Mary's beliefs and point of views are enough to believe she is NOT looking at the Ramsey's at all.

I've always supported the Intruder theory, which I know is not popular here but I still feel there is enough evidence to support it. How can certain things be tossed aside? I don't understand how people want to convict these people period. There are SO MANY cases where children have been kidnapped from their bedroom, raped & murdered. I just think that this house was big enough that the perp didn't have to remove her. Easier to run away without a body.

Another 2 cents of mine
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 02-14-2004, 04:35 PM
Toltec Toltec is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 1,644
Interesting...John dictating and Patsy writing the note.

We are a group of individuals that represent...Johns use of the word "that" is all over his writings...his book DOI and his statements.

The word Victory...Johns word.

"Fat Cats"...John's reference to his friends "The Atlanta Fat Cats"

If you want your daughter to see 1997...Patsy's 1996 Christmas letter..."Burke will be seeing the orthodontist in 1997"...instead of "next year".

Don't underestimate us...Patsy in her book DOI is talking about JonBenets first pageant and her concern about how she would do. Patsy says, "I underestimated her."

Patsy is speaking about Judith Phillips' frequent talk show appearances and she has this to say: "We were in the midst of a serious murder investigation and did not feel compelled to share our investigative tactics or our excruciating pain with the press and public.

Patsy is speaking about JonBenet's Christmas ornament, a gift to Patsy for Christmas and is worried that it has become lost..."But Trip DeMuth assured me they had it in their possession."

All one has to do is read DOI and you will know who dictated/wrote the ransom letter.

IMO
__________________
...We have said to ourselves, look, there is never going to be a victory in this, there is no victory...John Ramsey: 6/24/98
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 02-14-2004, 05:30 PM
Barbara Barbara is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 741
"There are SO MANY cases where children have been kidnapped from their bedroom, raped & murdered. "

Yes you are right. But HOW MANY of them also had a ransom note written by their mother?
__________________
This is my opinion only
This post may not be copied to any other forum

God Bless America
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 02-14-2004, 05:46 PM
Shylock Shylock is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueclouds
Mary's beliefs and point of views are enough to believe she is NOT looking at the Ramsey's at all.
"Mary" is not the one doing the investigating. That person's name is "Tom".
Additionally, "Mary" is nothing but a stooge left over from the Hunter follies. "Mary" thought that "Santa" was the perp.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 02-14-2004, 05:50 PM
K777angel K777angel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oregon
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toltec
Interesting...John dictating and Patsy writing the note.

We are a group of individuals that represent...Johns use of the word "that" is all over his writings...his book DOI and his statements.

The word Victory...Johns word.

"Fat Cats"...John's reference to his friends "The Atlanta Fat Cats"

If you want your daughter to see 1997...Patsy's 1996 Christmas letter..."Burke will be seeing the orthodontist in 1997"...instead of "next year".

Don't underestimate us...Patsy in her book DOI is talking about JonBenets first pageant and her concern about how she would do. Patsy says, "I underestimated her."

Patsy is speaking about Judith Phillips' frequent talk show appearances and she has this to say: "We were in the midst of a serious murder investigation and did not feel compelled to share our investigative tactics or our excruciating pain with the press and public.

Patsy is speaking about JonBenet's Christmas ornament, a gift to Patsy for Christmas and is worried that it has become lost..."But Trip DeMuth assured me they had it in their possession."

All one has to do is read DOI and you will know who dictated/wrote the ransom letter.

IMO
I agree Toltec that the Ramseys gave us even more confirming clues about the note by writing a book in their own words. 391 pages of it.

The motivation behind writing that note was the same as the motivation behind writing that book. A COMPULSION to get others to believe what they wanted them to believe - and steer them away from the truth.

John Ramsey gives clues to how he likes to "stretch" the truth in his own words in his book. Example: (pg. 270) "Who had drawn that heart? The killer?
JonBenet? I doubted that my daughter had done so. Certainly as a younger child she might have drawn things on her hand, but at almost seven years old she was beyond that stage."
HUH???? "As a YOUNGER child?" Younger than 6? Who is he trying to kid here?
And for him to claim that JonBenet was "almost 7 years old" is nothing short of a bald face LIE. She wasn't even 6 1/2 yet! She would not even have her 7th birthday for 8 months!
Funny how his son Burke was only 3 WEEKS shy of 10 yrs old, yet he insisted on calling HIM "9" yrs old. Distancing Burke from that older "10" yrs old.
So depending on what John's goal was - he had no problem in stretching truth
when it was convenient.
Trouble is - he reveals himself as very inconsistent and therefore his word cannot be trusted.
Patsy does the same thing in her practice of minimizing those things that made them look bad. For instance the pageants were just a "few Sunday afternoons." We know that was total B.S.

A wise philosophy professor once said this: "There are two kinds of people; those who want (respect) the TRUTH - and those who want to be "consoled."

We know where the Ramseys fall.
__________________
This post is my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 02-14-2004, 08:11 PM
BlueCrab BlueCrab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,053
I agree the note is important because it shows it was written by a juvenile.

The note has young male written all over it. It's ridiculous length; its shock movie adages; its unnecessary threats; its bizarre amount for a ransom demand; its immature foreign terrorist theme; and its transparent reason (diversion) for being written in the first place, all point to a young male as the writer.

For instance, why would John or Patsy ask for $118,000 as a ransom demand, knowing that was John's bonus figure for the year? Would they add that as a deliberate clue and play games with a trip to death row? Of course not.

As for the language used in DOI, forget it. Unless it's a direct quote, the writing in the book is the work of Thomas Nelson Publishers.

IMO neither John nor Patsy had anything to do with the writing of the note. And the six handwriting examiners used by the CBI agree it is highly unlikely John or Patsy wrote it.

But both parents are up to their chins in doo doo with their coverup to protect Burke and perhaps one or two others who may have written the note.

JMO
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 02-15-2004, 06:46 AM
Shylock Shylock is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCrab
For instance, why would John or Patsy ask for $118,000 as a ransom demand, knowing that was John's bonus figure for the year?
You have to be kidding me! It was John or Patsy's idea to use his bonus amount as the ransom demand to point the crime at someone involved closely in John's business. Remember that the note also said they didn't like "your business". John had to be linked somehow to the "foreign faction" - it's not like a group of foreign terrorists would have been the least bit interested in a softball-playing pageant mom!....LOL

The evidence is clear that Patsy wrote the note. Nobody else could have written that note and matched so many of her exemplars as shown in the file listed in my sig. below.

Figure it out, BlueCrab. Patsy writing the note fits just fine in your Burke/Doug theory.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Shylock For This Useful Post:
  #12  
Old 02-15-2004, 09:07 AM
BlueCrab BlueCrab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shylock
You have to be kidding me! It was John or Patsy's idea to use his bonus amount as the ransom demand to point the crime at someone involved closely in John's business. Remember that the note also said they didn't like "your business". John had to be linked somehow to the "foreign faction" - it's not like a group of foreign terrorists would have been the least bit interested in a softball-playing pageant mom!....LOL

The evidence is clear that Patsy wrote the note. Nobody else could have written that note and matched so many of her exemplars as shown in the file listed in my sig. below.

Figure it out, BlueCrab. Patsy writing the note fits just fine in your Burke/Doug theory.

Shylock,

The ransom note said it was from a small foreign faction, and does not suggest it's also from an emplyee at Access Graphics. However, a $118,000 ransom demand makes no sense no matter how you slice it. Only the reasoning of children would produce such a small and bizarre number. Any adult would have known to ask for at least $1 million.

Incidentally Shylock, your URL at the bottom of your posts doesn't work.

JMO
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 02-15-2004, 11:18 AM
Ivy Ivy is offline
Inactive
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,199
I think John and Patsy chose the ransom note figure of $118,000 to implicate their friends and business associates, hoping LE would think the perp was a Ramsey acquaintence trying to pass himself or herself off as a member of a small foreign faction. If that didn't work and LE tried to track down the sff, fine. The idea behind so many different "clues" in the note was to send LE on a wild goose chase.

John told LE right away he thought it was an "inside job." This was even before JonBenet's body was found, but there was John, already pointing the finger at his friends and trying to plant the idea that the small foreign faction could be a ruse.

IMO
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Ivy For This Useful Post:
  #14  
Old 02-15-2004, 12:46 PM
BlueCrab BlueCrab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivy
I think John and Patsy chose the ransom note figure of $118,000 to implicate their friends and business associates, hoping LE would think the perp was a Ramsey acquaintence trying to pass himself or herself off as a member of a small foreign faction. If that didn't work and LE tried to track down the sff, fine. The idea behind so many different "clues" in the note was to send LE on a wild goose chase.

John told LE right away he thought it was an "inside job." This was even before JonBenet's body was found, but there was John, already pointing the finger at his friends and trying to plant the idea that the small foreign faction could be a ruse.

IMO

Ivy, it's true John said it looked like an inside job, but that could also have meant to make investigators look in the opposite direction of a small foreign faction because John KNEW the note was from a small foreign faction -- namely the Asian Pacific American Coalition (APAC). IMO the note was already written when the Ramseys discovered the body. Perhaps the clues in the note pointing to APAC were too obvious for John so he had to do something about it.

It's not my main theory re' Burke, but if John knew that Nathan or someone else from APAC had been snuck into the house that night by Burke, then he had to cover up that fact as well as cover up for Burke or the truth would pour out. John's main goal was likely to hide the embarrassment attached to a close family member's death due to erotic asphyxiation. It's a common behavior among family members when there's an EA or AEA death because of the perceived negative impact on the family's business and social reputations.

In this BDI theory, the teenage college student, even if identified, could not be prosecuted without violating Colorado law preventing the disclosure of an underage accomplice's name in a serious crime. It was determined to be an accident so IMO the GJ, the D.A. and the court resolved the matter in another way -- of which we aren't fully aware.

JMO
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 02-15-2004, 12:54 PM
Shylock Shylock is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCrab
The ransom note said it was from a small foreign faction, and does not suggest it's also from an emplyee at Access Graphics. However, a $118,000 ransom demand makes no sense no matter how you slice it. Only the reasoning of children would produce such a small and bizarre number. Any adult would have known to ask for at least $1 million.
The $118,000 figure is more than just a ridiculously low number, it's a number with a purpose. It was put in the ransom note to point the crime into John's business which had foreign affairs. As Ivy points out, right away JR told the police it had to be "an inside job". JR also pointed the finger at Jeff Merrick from Access Graphics as soon as he could.
More importantly, JR played "stupid" and didn't tell anyone the $118,000 was his bonus amount.

Tell me, BlueCrab, what kind of a man, a CEO of a billion dollar corporation, wouldn't know what he received in compensation?

JR, Patsy, (or both) knew that sooner or later the police would discover the amount was JR's bonus, and that would mean someone with inside knowledge of Access Graphics was the perp.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 02-15-2004, 05:54 PM
WhiteWolf WhiteWolf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,308
You can't separate the ransome note from the other clues left at the house. The note tries to point to a small foreign faction, but some of the clues point to the Linda Hoffman-Pugh family. The placement of the note on the stairs where Patsy left her purses to be cleaned out by Linda. Burke's knife left in the cabinet in the second floor hall which LHP put it, but then it turns up in the basement by the wine cellar door. The paint tote which Patsy had Linda move to the basement on the night of their Christmas Party (12/23). No concrete proof of a break in so maybe a key was used to gain entry to the house (LHP had a key). Last but not least, JonBenet's body was found in a romote location of the basement where LHP and family had moved Christmas trees from just a month prior to JB's murder. Why does the note point one way (small foreign faction) and the clues another (LHP's family)?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 02-15-2004, 06:04 PM
Barbara Barbara is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 741
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteWolf
You can't separate the ransome note from the other clues left at the house. The note tries to point to a small foreign faction, but some of the clues point to the Linda Hoffman-Pugh family. The placement of the note on the stairs where Patsy left her purses to be cleaned out by Linda. Burke's knife left in the cabinet in the second floor hall which LHP put it, but then it turns up in the basement by the wine cellar door. The paint tote which Patsy had Linda move to the basement on the night of their Christmas Party (12/23). No concrete proof of a break in so maybe a key was used to gain entry to the house (LHP had a key). Last but not least, JonBenet's body was found in a romote location of the basement where LHP and family had moved Christmas trees from just a month prior to JB's murder. Why does the note point one way (small foreign faction) and the clues another (LHP's family)?
All part of the staging. Remember, LHP was supposed to pick up a check from Patsy.

First of all, why would she do anything like this BEFORE getting money from Patsy?

Second of all, why would she do this at all?

Third of all, with all the talk of LHP being uneducated, how could she have possible written that note, with all of the vocabulary used that would be way above her educational level? attache? foreign faction? etc. All words LHP would not utilize in everyday vocabulary.

Do you think that LHP could have done all that without leaving a trace of herself? Actually, could an intruder have done all that without leaving a trace? BTW, LHP and family gave more samples and time to the investigation than the Ramseys did.

LHP? NO WAY!
__________________
This is my opinion only
This post may not be copied to any other forum

God Bless America
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-15-2004, 06:23 PM
WhiteWolf WhiteWolf is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,308
Barbara, exactly! I don't believe Linda's family is involved either. Patsy is the one other person besides Linda who knew all of the things I pointed out. The stageing was not consistent with either the foreign faction or LHP's family.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-15-2004, 10:27 PM
blueclouds blueclouds is offline
Former member
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,547
If JB was "accidently" killed by Pasty or John or whomever in the house (although I support the intruder theory), WHO HAS THE MINDSET to "stage" so many things. My head would be a complete mess. I cannot fathom that either parents would have the ability to attempt to accomplish this. That would not make any sense unless this was premeditated.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-16-2004, 11:32 AM
Shylock Shylock is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 1,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by blueclouds
WHO HAS THE MINDSET to "stage" so many things. My head would be a complete mess. I cannot fathom that either parents would have the ability to attempt to accomplish this.
Remember that they had ALL night to complete the staging. That can be as long as 8 hours by some estimates, if the accident happened near 10 P.M.
And nothing the Ramseys have ever done falls into the catagory of "normal".
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-16-2004, 01:34 PM
K777angel K777angel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oregon
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shylock
Remember that they had ALL night to complete the staging. That can be as long as 8 hours by some estimates, if the accident happened near 10 P.M.
And nothing the Ramseys have ever done falls into the catagory of "normal".
And facts lending to the probability that at least Patsy WAS up all night, is the fact that she was fully dressed, made up and coiffed when the officer arrived at 6:00am that morning. With the time-line Patsy gives - it is clear that she is not telling the truth.
Let's examine this in THEIR own words from their book:

Johnpg.9) - writing about the night of the 25th : "At about 9:30 I led Burke upstairs and got him ready for bed, then tucked him in and turned out the light. I went on up to our room on the third floor, which we had converted from an attic space to a master suite in 1993. Patsy was already in bed. I got ready, took a melatonin tablet to insure a good night's sleep,
set the alarm clock for 5:30am, and read in bed for a short while before turning out the light."

Patsy: (pg. 10) - "I hear John turning on the water in his bathroom and realize that it is still dark. ....I swing out of bed and abruptly remember that my shower is still broken."

Ok let's stop here. John's alarm is SET for 5:30am. Assuming he just jumps out of bed at that very moment and takes the time to go into the bathroom,
do his business and ready the shower - it is going to be at LEAST 5 minutes before Patsy "swings" out of bed! And that is being very generous. Not to mention how odd it is that it is John "turning on the water" in the shower that she claims awakens her - and not the annoying ALARM that goes off right next to her! Yeah right)

Ok, so going with HER time-line here - she doesn't even roll out of bed until
at the EARIEST 5:35am.
She calls 911 at exactly 5:52am. Just a mere 17 minutes later.
And in that time of 17 minutes, she wants us to believe that she did all the things she said she did.
Here she writes how she doesn't "need" a shower this morning (eewww!),
"Don't need one this morning, I think to myself. Just put my clothes on. And,
of course, my make-up. I remember my mother's words. "Never leave the house without your make-up." (what a bizarre thing to say in this particular recollection...) Plus we are going to be with Melinda's fiance', Stewart, so I want to make a good impression. (Oh! So she goes stinky-style and not only doesn't take a shower - she puts on the same clothes she wore the night before to a party!!) NOT believable.

She then, after taking time to dress and put make-up on (which takes a good ten minutes alone - not to mention doing her hair - which would be BED HAIR and needing some major attention!) she puts laundry into a plastic garbage bag, and goes down the spiral stairs, finds the note, comes back upstairs,
yells and waits for John, goes to Burke's room at the "far end" of the second floor, runs downstairs with John and he crouches and reads the note on the floor and THEN she calls the police.

There is NO way she can do all this in 17 minutes.

There is deciet in their story here.

And I have a question on my mind that I've pondered and never seen discussed.
Just what was Patsy's facial appearance when the officer arrived at 6:00am?
IF she had been dealing with JonBenet's death all night long as is suspected,
wouldn't her face be very puffy from crying?
Wouldn't her eyes show that look of having been crying for hours?
Her voice be nasly?
Her eyes red?
These features of lengthy crying take time to develop.
If she'd just discovered JonBenet MISSING only 10 minutes before the officer arrived, as she claims, her face should not show this appearance.
It is an important clue.
WHAT did Patsy's face really look like when the officer first laid eyes on her at that door at 6:00am?
And for that matter - what did JOHN'S face look like?

It is too frightening to consider that Patsy HAD been up all night staging the crime with her daughter lying dead - and be so stone faced that she didn't shed a tear.
I do not believe she would have behaved and reacted this way.
Her face SHOULD have shown signs of crying and puffiness at the officer's arrival if she'd been up all night - or for even an hour or two.

Perhaps this never discussed or released detail is being held close to the breast of the police and is what is in part meant by the officers' observations that day that it appeared that a DEATH had occured more than a kidnapping.
Hmmm.....
~Angel~
__________________
This post is my opinion.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to K777angel For This Useful Post:
  #22  
Old 02-16-2004, 02:13 PM
Barbara Barbara is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 741
Excellent points, Angel. And good questions too.

I am very quick in the morning, but 17 minutes would never do
__________________
This is my opinion only
This post may not be copied to any other forum

God Bless America
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-16-2004, 02:25 PM
BlueCrab BlueCrab is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 3,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Barbara
Excellent points, Angel. And good questions too.

I am very quick in the morning, but 17 minutes would never do

Correct. I also agree the timetable won't fit. IMO the Ramseys got up around 4:00 A.M. to casually get ready for the trip to the airport and the all-day flight to Michigan. Why would they PLAN to be in a bum's rush in the morning by waiting until 5:30 to get out of bed when they had to be at the airport by 6:30, a 20-minute drive by itself?

JMO
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-16-2004, 02:40 PM
K777angel K777angel is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Oregon
Posts: 511
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlueCrab
Correct. I also agree the timetable won't fit. IMO the Ramseys got up around 4:00 A.M. to casually get ready for the trip to the airport and the all-day flight to Michigan. Why would they PLAN to be in a bum's rush in the morning by waiting until 5:30 to get out of bed when they had to be at the airport by 6:30, a 20-minute drive by itself?

JMO
I've asked this question before: Did the police TAKE John Ramsey's alarm clock as evidence to check what time his alarm was REALLY set to?
If he says it was 5:30 and in fact it was really 4:00 or 4:30 - then they are caught in another lie.

I have suspected this lie ever since I watched John Ramsey make a huge boo-boo on the 1st crock. I've mentioned this before and it bears watching if you have a video of it.
John Ramsey starts talking about the night of the 25th and the need they had to get to bed early "because we were going to get up early, around f..."
And at that point when he is just about to finish the "f..." time - he realizes what he has done and how he has slipped (it is SO obvious) and he
gets a horror look on his face, stumbles, throws his arm up and oddly POINTS at the interviewer and - changes what he was about to say to a general time of "early" or something. He CLEARLY was concerned about the TIME they were planning to get up on the morning of the 26th. WHY??????
WHY if they had absolutely nothing to do with the crime and no knowledge of anything - would they care one way or another what time they got up>
What difference too would it make if Burke was awake or not if they were all innocent?
What difference would ANYTHING - except the TRUTH - make if they are innocent?

And they wonder why they are not believed. It's called "reason."
__________________
This post is my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-16-2004, 02:46 PM
SisterSocks SisterSocks is offline
What a wild and crazy trip its been
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Don't mess with Texas
Posts: 297
Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by K777angel
It is well understood that the most critical piece of evidence in the case is the "note" Patsy Ramsey claims she found on the stairs. Setting the "handwriting" aside - let's look at the abundance of other clues the writer gave us in writing that note.

One came to my attention today in browsing through the Ramsey's own book.

Patsy is talking about a "message of appreciation" she and John wrote and had printed on the back of the liturgy program for the Dec. 1997 rememberance service held for JonBenet in Boulder.

Patsy writes (pg. 234): "In composing this expression of appreciation, John and I had each written a version. With both copies in hand, John dictated and I typed at the computer as we merged the two into one."

Whoa. Here we have PROOF that John and Patsy practiced John dictating and Patsy writing!! Just as has been suspected in the writing of the "ransom" note.

Again - it is not just "one" thing that points to the Ramseys as the author's of that note, but a combination of things. To the point of rendering the suggestion of some stranger/intruder/kidnapper/pedophile as the author as
simply ridiculous.

We of course also have the now well-known clues such as: "and hence", the
ransom demand of $118,000 (same as John's bonus that year), the use of the word "gentlemen" which Patsy and her family use and she also uses in her
book (pg. 57), the familiar term "John" departing from the intial "Mr. Ramsey",
the frequent departure from the use of "we" to "I", the use of the term used in the family "use that good southern common sense", the use of the term
"fat cat" (Patsy's dad used the word "cats" when referring to others too),
the phrases used to "be well rested", "bring an adequate sized attache',
and the sheer extreme length of the note suggesting panic and desperation on the part of the note writer to DIVERT attention away from what would be so very obvious as to who caused the death of JonBenet.

And they wonder why they are not removed from under the umbrella of suspicion.

Well K, I believe that Patsy wrote but,I don't think John had anything to do with the Note.

Socks
__________________
Just my opinion
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


© Copyright Websleuths 1999-2012 New To Site? Need Help?
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:30 AM.

Advertisements

Pre-Order Imperfect Justice: Prosecuting Casey Anthony today!