Interview w/ John Ramsey

candy · #1 03-14-2004, 06:54 PM

http://www.detnews.com/2004/editoria.../a18-90821.htm

Sunday, March 14, 2004

John Ramsey leans toward becoming high-profile candidate for Michigan House

By George Weeks / The Detroit News

Businessman John Ramsey of Charlevoix undoubtedly will be this year’s highest-profile candidate for the Michigan House of Representatives.

-Just an opinon-

SisterSocks · #2 03-14-2004, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candy

http://www.detnews.com/2004/editoria.../a18-90821.htm

Sunday, March 14, 2004

John Ramsey leans toward becoming high-profile candidate for Michigan House

By George Weeks / The Detroit News

Businessman John Ramsey of Charlevoix undoubtedly will be this year’s highest-profile candidate for the Michigan House of Representatives.

Candy ---this just blows my mind. I guess what surprised the most, is that the article named his Wife as the owning a business???

Socks

Thanks for the link =)

candy · #3 03-14-2004, 07:51 PM

In spite of the blurb Mr. Weeks quoted from Ramseys own book, here's the truth about John Ramsey's suspect status from Chief Beckner's deposition. (and it also puts lie to the BDI garbage)

17 Q So from start to today, you have not

18 classified any individual as a suspect?

19 A Publicly, correct.

20 Q Or otherwise?

21 A That's not accurate.

22 Q How is it inaccurate?

23 A Internally John and Patsy are considered

24 suspects.

25 Q Both of them?

64

1 A Yes.

2 Q Are considered to have probably been

3 involved in the death of their daughter?

4 A Probability, yes.

5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.

-Just an opinion

Shylock · #4 03-14-2004, 11:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candy

"Internally John and Patsy are considered suspects."

Somebody please forward this to whomever is running against John Ramsey!
Murder suspects running for public office....sheeesh, what next.

BrotherMoon · #5 03-15-2004, 02:19 AM

John Ramsey had nothing to do with the death of his daughter. Let him run, let him prove his worthiness, and may the increase in exposure create a tripwire for Patsy.

Blazeboy3 · #6 03-15-2004, 02:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candy

http://www.detnews.com/2004/editoria.../a18-90821.htm

Sunday, March 14, 2004

John Ramsey leans toward becoming high-profile candidate for Michigan House

By George Weeks / The Detroit News

Businessman John Ramsey of Charlevoix undoubtedly will be this year’s highest-profile candidate for the Michigan House of Representatives.

-Just an opinon-

Thanks for info/url...IMHO while reading the article, flashes of "being bought & sold" and "a puppet on a string" entertained my thoughts FWIW...LOL

Blazeboy3 · #7 03-15-2004, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BrotherMoon

John Ramsey had nothing to do with the death of his daughter. Let him run, let him prove his worthiness, and may the increase in exposure create a tripwire for Patsy.

Interesting thought...but when John married Patsy ... did the two not become ONE?

BlueCrab · #8 03-15-2004, 08:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candy

In spite of the blurb Mr. Weeks quoted from Ramseys own book, here's the truth about John Ramsey's suspect status from Chief Beckner's deposition. (and it also puts lie to the BDI garbage)

17 Q So from start to today, you have not

18 classified any individual as a suspect?

19 A Publicly, correct.

20 Q Or otherwise?

21 A That's not accurate.

22 Q How is it inaccurate?

23 A Internally John and Patsy are considered

24 suspects.

25 Q Both of them?

64

1 A Yes.

2 Q Are considered to have probably been

3 involved in the death of their daughter?

4 A Probability, yes.

5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.

-Just an opinion

Candy,

By Colorado law, Burke cannot be referred to as a suspect or probably involved by Beckner, or Keenan, nor anyone else of authority in Boulder, which might be implied that Burke killed JonBenet. Burke is protected by his age at the time of the crime, which was nine. Officially, in Colorado it's as if no crime had occurred if the perp is under 10 years old. Burke made it by four weeks.

IMO Burke was lucky he lived in Colorado at the time. Twenty seven states have no minimum age for a child to be tried criminally as an adult. The remainder of the states have minimum ages ranging from 15 in Louisiana down to 7 years old in New York.

JMO

candy · #9 03-15-2004, 09:28 AM

5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.

Toth · #10 03-15-2004, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueCrab

By Colorado law, Burke cannot be referred to as a suspect or probably involved by Beckner, or Keenan, nor anyone else of authority in Boulder, which might be implied that Burke killed JonBenet.

He can not be prosecuted or adjudged a juvenile delinquent in need of supervision, but the cops and DA could say in reference to anyone who was then nine years old 'he did it'. They just can't say 'he did it and he is under arrest for it'. If he had been ten, they could have said 'he did it' and when brought to court he will be referred to as 'The Juvenile alleged to be in need of supervision'' in all court papers.

but all this tiresome Burke Did It stuff is not only nonsense its off topic. What does it have to do with John Ramsey running for public office in Michigan?

BlueCrab · #11 03-15-2004, 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candy

5 Q Has anyone else ever attained that status

6 of probably involved?

7 A No.

Candy,

Beckner had to say "no". If he had said "yes" it would have made Burke an "internal" suspect who was PROBABLY involved in the death of JonBenet. That would violate the law and the court's protective order covering Burke.

Beckner and Keenan are forced to do a lot of broken field running to try to answer questions about Burke and in the same breath protect his anonymous identity as a child under 10 years old at the time of the crime.

In such instances it is perfectly legal to lie under oath in order to follow the law and a court order protecting a minor's identity. Beckner had no choice but to say "no".

JMO

Toth · #12 03-15-2004, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlueCrab

In such instances it is perfectly legal to lie under oath in order to follow the law and a court order protecting a minor's identity.

Your interpretation of the law regarding perjury is very interesting. I do so hope that if you are ever testifying under oath you gain a better understanding prior to giving your testimony. If you don't you are likely going to have seven years to study the matter.

candy · #13 03-15-2004, 11:30 AM

Right on Toth!

Kim Ii · #14 03-15-2004, 01:11 PM

I agree with Toth on this one, Blue...sorry. Under no circumstances, EVER...is it permissable to lie under oath...

BlueCrab · #15 03-15-2004, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kim Ii

I agree with Toth on this one, Blue...sorry. Under no circumstances, EVER...is it permissable to lie under oath...

I agree. But you are looking at the academic interpretation of perjury. In the real world, in such matters as laws protecting the identity of children, national security matters, etc., a lie can be the lesser of two evils and will be forgiven by the court.

IMO Beckner was caught between a rock and a hard place. If he had said "yes" the next question would have been "who". He would have violated a court protective order because the only other known person in the house that night was Burke, and at least one of those three Ramseys had to have been involved in the murder. So he said "no", John and Patsy were the only two "internal" suspects. Beckner would have violated the law if he answered 'yes" and would have violated the law if he answered "no".

JMO

Nehemiah · #16 03-15-2004, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SisterSocks

Candy ---this just blows my mind. I guess what surprised the most, is that the article named his Wife as the owning a business???

Socks

Thanks for the link =)

Socks, the article said "co-owned by his wife".

IMO

Kim Ii · #17 03-15-2004, 02:14 PM

Sorry, Blue, in the "real" world, perjury's perjury, period. I used to work as a Legal Assistant for years (litigation). My hubby, a lawyer, has also stated that perjury is against the law, no matter what the circumstances...

Seems to me you're trying to twist the law to suit your theory regarding this case. I've re-read all of the books on this case, all of the info. I could glean on the Internet, and I've turned myself around on the BDI theory. Burke was never, ever, considered a suspect, by Steve Thomas or anyone else, and that includes those that feel the family had something to do with JonBenet's death. He's never been considered a suspect...I think it's time to lay to rest the Burke did it theory. Sorry Blue...

candy · #18 03-15-2004, 02:57 PM

New Interview with John Ramsey

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michi...7654350750.xml

AP Interview: John Ramsey says he wants to give back to community

By JOHN FLESHER
The Associated Press
3/15/2004, 1:59 p.m. ET

CHARLEVOIX, Mich. (AP) — John Ramsey says he is seriously considering a campaign for the Michigan House and hopes voters will focus on his ideas and experience, rather than the unsolved murder of his daughter JonBenet.

Barbara · #19 03-15-2004, 03:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candy

New Interview with John Ramsey

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/michi...7654350750.xml

AP Interview: John Ramsey says he wants to give back to community

By JOHN FLESHER
The Associated Press
3/15/2004, 1:59 p.m. ET

CHARLEVOIX, Mich. (AP) — John Ramsey says he is seriously considering a campaign for the Michigan House and hopes voters will focus on his ideas and experience, rather than the unsolved murder of his daughter JonBenet.

Sure they will.............sure...... just like they focused on Gary Condit's ideas and experience, rather than the unsolved murder of Chandra Levy....and HE actually had ideas AND experience!

Ivy · #20 03-15-2004, 04:09 PM

John might look kinda funny sitting in one of these in the House chambers.

imo

BlueCrab · #21 03-15-2004, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kim Ii

Sorry, Blue, in the "real" world, perjury's perjury, period. I used to work as a Legal Assistant for years (litigation). My hubby, a lawyer, has also stated that perjury is against the law, no matter what the circumstances...

Seems to me you're trying to twist the law to suit your theory regarding this case. I've re-read all of the books on this case, all of the info. I could glean on the Internet, and I've turned myself around on the BDI theory. Burke was never, ever, considered a suspect, by Steve Thomas or anyone else, and that includes those that feel the family had something to do with JonBenet's death. He's never been considered a suspect...I think it's time to lay to rest the Burke did it theory. Sorry Blue...

Sorry Kim Ii, I guess you didn't read the right books. If I'm close to being right about my BDI theory, then Burke's juvenile records are sealed and NO ONE of authority can divulge that information, even under oath during a deposition, without approval by the court. IOW, they can legally lie under oath.

Colorado Children's Code (under age 18):

"Persons who have had their juvenile records sealed may lawfully and properly reply that no such record exists. However, the record is still available to the district attorney, law enforcement, the courts, and the department of human services. Government agencies cannot show the records to anyone without an order from the court."

Burke's juvenile records have been sealed since the grand jury disbanded in 1999.

JMO

Shylock · #22 03-16-2004, 03:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by candy

AP Interview: John Ramsey says he wants to give back to community

If Ramsey wants to give back to a community, he can start by paying back the city of Boulder for all the money they spent investigating his faux-crime.

BrotherMoon · #23 03-16-2004, 03:36 AM

BlueCrab, why do you claim knowledge of the real world?

Nehemiah, that wasn't very nice, pointing out a mistake by SSocks. Weve hu awone.

I hope he does run and win, the more Patsy gets exposure the better.

Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to election day. (We need a singing smiley.)

candy · #24 03-16-2004, 11:32 AM

http://www.record-eagle.com/2004/mar/16ramsey.htm

BrotherMoon · #25 03-16-2004, 11:58 AM

"I'm not afraid of dying like I used to be, because wherever JonBenet went, that's where I'm going."

Like I said, fear of death compensated by fantasy. Gee Patsy, have you also been SAVED, DELIVERED and will you share in John's VICTORY? Are you and John perhaps fulfilling the meaning of Psalms 118, self sacrifice, by giving back to "the community"?

The above quote is the motive, btw. Patsy will continue to "explain", just like she did in DOI.

I wonder, on inauguration day, will she wear purple?

"Wherever we go, whatever we do, we're gonna go through it together." (Again, we need a singing smiley.)