Are the Ramseys involved or not?

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Ames

He sure as h*ll is going to try, though....obviously.

A lot of luck to him.

[Ames]

Originally Posted by SuperDave

The only thing I'll say is, she was the ONE person who changed their writing style after the killing.

Not only that, but she actually started TYPING notes and other written material that was sent to Burke's school, for example, notes to his teacher.

He can't dodge it forever.

He will say that he doesn't see it... Or, that the SFF visited her the day of that photograph, and made the mark, trying to push her into their getaway car.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

The RN author threatened in writing to behead a small child.

I KNOW what it says. I also know that JB was NOT beheaded. The RN says a LOT of things that didn't happen. Isn't that odd?

I think you want to separate the child from the equation, and approach the beheading issue as if it were referring to any adult in any movie.

Actually, I was saying that the writer wanted to do that.

Obviously thats impossible because the child is the 'subject' of the sentence in the ransom note.

"The child" as an abstract is the subject of the sentence, HOTYH, not necessarily the actual person, who did not exist at that point, IMO.

This statement is unprecedented in the annals of crime,

Like so much involving this case. But last I checked, our killer is still human.

and because it is so unique, a truly serious observer from any POV should take pause and consider where a statement like that would originate, and why it would be used.

Well, I am as serious as you can GET, and what do you THINK I've been doing?

A person with an 'overdeveloped flair for the dramatic' is an understated characterization, more suited to describing an author or an actor.

You've almost got it... You've almost got it...

A better characterization would be a person with a bizarre outlook on violence.

You came SO close. You almost HAD it!

Yes, a bizarre outlook on violence due to not knowing much about it.

Executing or beheading small children is a bizarre, inappropriate concept even for a ransom kidnapper.

THAT's WHAT I'M SAYING!

[Holdontoyourhat]

Originally Posted by Ames

As SD said, the RN was written AFTER the murder. So, the author could have said that they were going to behead the child, and chop off her arms and legs, and nail her torso to the wall (sorry for the visual)...and it wouldn't have mattered, because she was ALREADY dead. It was easier for the author to talk about beheading a child that was already dead. So, the beheading wasn't really a threat, now was it?? All that RN author was doing was writing a bunch of cr@p that they thought sounded good, and would be convincing enough to keep the Rams butt out of jail.

Again, this is made up stuff stated as fact. Nobody knows for sure if the RN was written before or after. It is most likely written before the R's came home.

If the RN author wanted to make stuff up that sounded good,then wouldn't they stick to routine kidnap for ransom jargon? Whats with this 'she will be immediately executed' or 'she will be beheaded' remarks. This is NOT 'sounding good' at all for a ransom kidnapper.

[Ames]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Again, this is made up stuff stated as fact. If the RN author wanted to make stuff up that sounded good,then wouldn't they stick to routine kidnap for ransom jargon? Whats with this 'she will be immediately executed' or 'she will be beheaded' remarks. This is NOT sounding 'good' at all for a ransom kidnapper.

Okay, lets go over this again...and pay attention this time, ok?

Because she was already dead, the author knew that JB's body would EVENTUALLY be found, and that they would know that it wasn't a true kidnapping. It was NOT a real ransom kidnapping, and that was soon discovered. The author also said not for the Rams to talk to so much as a dog, or she would be killed...but, what do they do? Do they remain silent? No, they call everybody they know over...to have a reason that she was killed. She was already dead when "she will be immediately executed" or "she will be beheaded" was written by the author.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Again, this is made up stuff stated as fact. Nobody knows for sure if the RN was written before or after.

Not for sure, but the circumstantial evidence is compelling.

It is most likely written before the R's came home.

Not according to the agents. it wasn't. You talk about making stuff up; that's as good an example as I can think of.

If the RN author wanted to make stuff up that sounded good,then wouldn't they stick to routine kidnap for ransom jargon?

Not if they didn't KNOW what "routine kidnap for ransom jargon" is! Which is what we've been saying.

Whats with this 'she will be immediately executed' or 'she will be beheaded' remarks. This is NOT 'sounding good' at all for a ransom kidnapper.

And our writer was supposed to know that? Like I keep saying, the writer wasn't thinking like a ransom kidnapper.

[Holdontoyourhat]

Originally Posted by Ames

Okay, lets go over this again...and pay attention this time, ok?

Because she was already dead, the author knew that JB's body would EVENTUALLY be found, and that they would know that it wasn't a true kidnapping. It was NOT a real ransom kidnapping, and that was soon discovered. The author also said not for the Rams to talk to so much as a dog, or she would be killed...but, what do they do? Do they remain silent? No, they call everybody they know over...to have a reason that she was killed. She was already dead when "she will be immediately executed" or "she will be beheaded" was written by the author.

The RN written before or after JBR was murdered isn't a known case fact.

Because your posts repeatedly refer and draw conclusions from the POV that the RN came last, when that isn't a known fact, makes your arguments seem invalid, OK?

[Patsy B]

I'm so glad this case is being investigated by different law enforcement. I want to see justice for JonBenet. I've always believed Patsy was guilty of the crime and I'm pretty sure John knew what happened. I've never looked at the evidence with blinders on. This is my opinion only.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Ames

Okay, lets go over this again...and pay attention this time, ok?

Ames, you just said what I've been thinking all week!

Because she was already dead, the author knew that JB's body would EVENTUALLY be found, and that they would know that it wasn't a true kidnapping. It was NOT a real ransom kidnapping, and that was soon discovered. The author also said not for the Rams to talk to so much as a dog, or she would be killed...but, what do they do? Do they remain silent? No, they call everybody they know over...to have a reason that she was killed. She was already dead when "she will be immediately executed" or "she will be beheaded" was written by the author.

Bold mine.

Yes, the whole point was to give a reason why JB would be found dead.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Patsy B

I'm so glad this case is being investigated by different law enforcement. I want to see justice for JonBenet. I've always believed Patsy was guilty of the crime and I'm pretty sure John knew what happened. I've never looked at the evidence with blinders on. This is my opinion only.

Welcome, Patsy! (God, I NEVER thought I'd say those words! This is going from the ridiculous to the sublime!)

With a few exceptions, we're ALL glad.

Though I have to admit, your opinion is kind of odd, given your screen name! LOL

[Holdontoyourhat]

Originally Posted by SuperDave

Not for sure, but the circumstantial evidence is compelling.



Not according to the agents. it wasn't. You talk about making stuff up; that's as good an example as I can think of.



Not if they didn't KNOW what "routine kidnap for ransom jargon" is! Which is what we've been saying.



And our writer was supposed to know that? Like I keep saying, the writer wasn't thinking like a ransom kidnapper.

Please feel free to correct me if I state something as fact that isn't fact. You'll note I said 'most likely', or 'IMO'. If you want, you can keep claiming the RN was written after JBR was killed, but I know you have no rational basis for doing so...

BTW, what 'type' of person do you think uses the expression 'behead' and 'execute' anyway? From what type of person would those expressions 'normally' originate?

[Ames]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

The RN written before or after JBR was murdered isn't a known case fact.

Because your posts repeatedly refer and draw conclusions from the POV that the RN came last, when that isn't a known fact, makes your arguments seem invalid, OK?

Yeah, whatever. If a REAL kidnapper had of entered the Ramsey home, and wrote a three page RN BEFORE the Rams got home, and THEN JB was killed...WHY the h*ll did they bother to spread the RANSOM note across the stairs? What was the point?

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Please feel free to correct me if I state something as fact that isn't fact.

You can count on that!

You'll note I said 'most likely', or 'IMO'.

I'm trying to do the same. (It's been a hectic week, HOTYH.)

If you want, you can keep claiming the RN was written after JBR was killed,

Darn tootin'!

but I know you have no rational basis for doing so...

Oh, haven't I? ST, pb, page 242:
based on their studies of the evidence, [CASKU] believed that the note was written in the home, after the murder, and indicated panic.

Because your posts repeatedly refer and draw conclusions from the POV that the RN came last, when that isn't a known fact, makes your arguments seem invalid, OK?

No, HOTYH, it ain't okay! By that logic, you, me and everyone else here might as well shut down the forum, pack up and go on home!

BTW, what 'type' of person do you think uses the expression 'behead' and 'execute' anyway?

You really don't want me to answer that one.

From what type of person would those expressions 'normally' originate?

Key word: "normally." I think we can all agree there was nothing normal going on that night.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Ames

Yeah, whatever. If a REAL kidnapper had of entered the Ramsey home, and wrote a three page RN BEFORE the Rams got home, and THEN JB was killed...WHY the h*ll did they bother to spread the RANSOM note across the stairs? What was the point?

That's exactly the question CASKU asked!

[Holdontoyourhat]

Originally Posted by SuperDave

Oh, haven't I? ST, pb, page 242:
based on their studies of the evidence, [CASKU] believed that the note was written in the home, after the murder, and indicated panic.

Thats a laugh, even if true. I could no sooner write my name then a 2 1/2 page ransom note AFTER a child murder. The RN is organized in thought, and the handwriting is completely legible throughout. A clearly written, paragraphed 2 1/2 page RN that indicated panic?!? Thats just a riot.

Originally Posted by SuperDave

No, HOTYH, it ain't okay! By that logic, you, me and everyone else here might as well shut down the forum, pack up and go on home! .

JBR wouldn't notice.

Originally Posted by SuperDave

You really don't want me to answer that one.

Yes I do.

Originally Posted by SuperDave

Key word: "normally." I think we can all agree there was nothing normal going on that night.

You're the one drawing on movies and books and claiming executing and beheading is a popular, modern vernacular. Who is it a popular, modern vernacular of? (I can't make this any clearer)

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Thats a laugh, even if true.

Let's see: I have a team of people whose job it is to know the minds of criminals on one side, and you on the other. Boy, that's a tough decision...

I could no sooner write my name then a 2 1/2 page ransom note AFTER a child murder.

Like I said before, HOTYH, we're not talking about what YOU would do. (Not that I know of.)
But more honestly, I've heard that before, and I don't buy it. Number one, the person very likely wasn't alone and had someone helping them, to my way of thinking. Two, there's the little matter of tranquilizers. They don't call them "mother's little helpers" for nothing. Plenty of time, too.

The RN is organized in thought,

You must be reading a different note than the rest of us! (Which would explain a lot.) It's ALL OVER THE PLACE, very likely dreamed up in the mind of someone throwing in anything they could think of.

and the handwriting is completely legible throughout.

What's your point?

A clearly written, paragraphed 2 1/2 page RN that indicated panic?!?

That's what they said. Take it up with them, if you don't like it. Don't shoot the messenger.
And they weren't just pulling it out of their nether regions. They were doing exactly what I keep telling YOU to do. (For all the good it does me.)

Thats just a riot.

You'll notice I'm not laughing.

JBR wouldn't notice.

That's low.

Yes I do.

Remember, you asked for it. Well, "execute" is a common word in computer jargon, is it not? And JR just happened to work with computers...

You're the one drawing on movies and books and claiming executing and beheading is a popular, modern vernacular.

I find that appropriate, since that's very likely what the writer was drawing on for "inspiration."

Who is it a popular, modern vernacular of? (I can't make this any clearer)

Then let ME be clear: artistic types. Screenwriters, comic-book artists like Frank Miller, that "type" of people. And who does THAT sound like?

Incidentally, just what difference does it make? It wasn't a real note anyway.

[Holdontoyourhat]

Originally Posted by SuperDave

Then let ME be clear: artistic types. Screenwriters, comic-book artists like Frank Miller, that "type" of people. And who does THAT sound like?

Incidentally, just what difference does it make? It wasn't a real note anyway.

Real words on real paper. What's not 'real' about the note, its content? You, SD, don't know what was real or not real because you don't know when or in what context it was written. Foreign faction, extortion, not respecting the US, killing other fat cats, could all be real as far as you know.

Meanwhile, as to the original question, that I will clarify even further: To what type of person do the expressions 'immediately execute' and 'will be beheaded' belong?

Is an 'artistic type' of person the first thing that comes to your mind? You're kidding, right? Because thats what I'm getting from your post.

[Ames]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Real words on real paper. What's not 'real' about the note, its content? You, SD, don't know what was real or not real because you don't know when or in what context it was written. Foreign faction, extortion, not respecting the US, killing other fat cats, could all be real as far as you know.

Meanwhile, as to the original question, that I will clarify even further: To what type of person do the expressions 'immediately execute' and 'will be beheaded' belong?

Is an 'artistic type' of person the first thing that comes to your mind? You're kidding, right? Because thats what I'm getting from your post.

IMO..it would be more of a creative type person...for example...Patsy R. She was the actress in the family.

[Sophie]

Originally Posted by Ames

IMO..it would be more of a creative type person...for example...Patsy R. She was the actress in the family.

Ames, I agree. When I first read the note, it reminded me of nothing so much as a spoof ransom note someone wrote when 'kidnapping' my dorm's goldfish at university. In fact, the similarity in tenor between a note relating to a joke and a note relating to a genuine, horrible, tragic, appalling murder sent a chill up my spine. One was written by an amateur 'comedian' who watched way too much telly, the other by an amateur criminal. Just the sort of note someone with some writing skills and a sense of drama would write.

[Sophie]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Real words on real paper. What's not 'real' about the note, its content? You, SD, don't know what was real or not real because you don't know when or in what context it was written. Foreign faction, extortion, not respecting the US, killing other fat cats, could all be real as far as you know.

Meanwhile, as to the original question, that I will clarify even further: To what type of person do the expressions 'immediately execute' and 'will be beheaded' belong?

Is an 'artistic type' of person the first thing that comes to your mind? You're kidding, right? Because thats what I'm getting from your post.

Of all this, HOTYH, anyone describing themselves as 'foreign' is where I think the note falls apart. I mean, you would regard me as a foreigner, but sitting in a living room in Northern England, I don't regard myself as a foreigner...In fact, I lived for two years in France and described myself as 'anglaise' but never 'etrangere.' A very dear friend of mine from Baltimore is visiting me at the moment and I don't think she has ever described herself as foreign. From the US, yes. A foreigner, no. People don't view themselves as being foreign. They view themselves as being in a foreign country. The foreign bit, to me at least, was one of the sillier mistakes made by the writer of the ransom note.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Holdontoyourhat

Real words on real paper. What's not 'real' about the note, its content?

You just nailed it.

You, SD, don't know what was real or not real because you don't know when or in what context it was written.

That very well may be. But I have reasons for believing what I believe.

Foreign faction, extortion, not respecting the US, killing other fat cats, could all be real as far as you know.

Could be. But in my opinion, it's not likely for a couple of reasons.

Meanwhile, as to the original question, that I will clarify even further: To what type of person do the expressions 'immediately execute' and 'will be beheaded' belong?

I told you already. I can't make it more clear than I have. I'm sorry if that's not good enough for you. Maybe it would be, if you'd take the time to walk in my boots for a while.

Is an 'artistic type' of person the first thing that comes to your mind?

You got it. (Not the ONLY thing, but the first thing.) The word beheading conjures up a lot of hideous images for most people, not to mention strong reactions. That's what I believe the writer was going for.

You're kidding, right? Because thats what I'm getting from your post.

I NEVER kid about this case, HOTYH. NEVER. I would have thought you knew that by now.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Sophie

Ames, I agree. When I first read the note, it reminded me of nothing so much as a spoof ransom note someone wrote when 'kidnapping' my dorm's goldfish at university. In fact, the similarity in tenor between a note relating to a joke and a note relating to a genuine, horrible, tragic, appalling murder sent a chill up my spine. One was written by an amateur 'comedian' who watched way too much telly, the other by an amateur criminal. Just the sort of note someone with some writing skills and a sense of drama would write.

Ames, Sophie: that's where I was going to end up.

Tell me, Sophie, would you like to know who else thinks that? The former chief prosecutor for the DA's office. He said, and I quote:

"the staging was overdone. It was a very theatrical production and Patsy is a very theatrical person. She loves being known as the mother of a dead beauty queen."

Not only him. CASKU deemed the entire crime unsophisticated.

Of all this, HOTYH, anyone describing themselves as 'foreign' is where I think the note falls apart. I mean, you would regard me as a foreigner, but sitting in a living room in Northern England, I don't regard myself as a foreigner...In fact, I lived for two years in France and described myself as 'anglaise' but never 'etrangere.' A very dear friend of mine from Baltimore is visiting me at the moment and I don't think she has ever described herself as foreign. From the US, yes. A foreigner, no. People don't view themselves as being foreign. They view themselves as being in a foreign country. The foreign bit, to me at least, was one of the sillier mistakes made by the writer of the ransom note.

Sophie, that's just what the profilers said! "Foreign to whom?" To them, WE are the foreigners.

[Tadpole12]

Hey Hotyh.

I have pondered about your many thoughts and points .... over the last day ....

The reason I had originally asked you about your thoughts on what a hybrid IDI would be doing today, 12 years post crime(He could be mowing the lawn), well I was just wondering if you had considered events that way? He's rather an accumulation of exceptions so I'm intruiged.

There's so many elements within the unknown IDI scenarios, one could pick and choose, profiles varry from a social outcast ...... to, at the time of the crime, a profile of a perp 25 to 35 years of age, associate of criminal elements .... so I was just wondering ......


chain of events ..... I guess they're not always linear or altleast not predictable, like the plot asscociations in a Guy Ritchie movie.

and so maybe, in your minds eye the staging can in fact be staging but rather not to divert but to shock, perhaps, like a greusome panorama?

gee .... add the discussed reference to comic books, and a dark imagination .... one could go to ..... the absurd.

re:Movies.
iirc Into The Night http://www.fast-rewind.com/intothenight.htm
mad cap mobster terrorists types, I'm unsure if there were threats of beheading. Funny movie.... but it wasn't very pc at the time.

[Tadpole12]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/ja...rensicscience1

There were a unique set of circumstances in Omagh, and the judge's comments were really about the collection and preservation of the evidence."

LCN allows forensic scientists to link DNA to a person even if the most minute amounts are present. Because such small amounts can be detected, though, it vastly increases the potential for contamination. "The main problem is that if you don't have a visible body stain, you really don't know how it got there or when it got there," says Jamieson. It is this that led Mr Justice Weir to dismiss the evidence......


........The judge was scathing about the careless way in which physical evidence was handled by the police and hence the numerous opportunities for contamination. "It is not my function to criticise the seemingly thoughtless and slapdash approach of police and [scene of crime] officers to the collection, storage and transmission of what must obviously have been potential exhibits in a possible future criminal trial, but it is difficult to avoid some expression of surprise that . . . such items were so widely and routinely handled with cavalier disregard for their integrity," he said. Worse, even if evidence is handled carefully, the extreme sensitivity of LCN increases the possibility of false forensic inferences. Previous studies have shown that by shaking hands with someone your DNA can be transferred by them on to other objects (such as a murder weapon) when they touch them, even if your contact with them was half an hour ago. Once your DNA has been transferred by them it can remain on the object for days, or in one case (a glove that was analysed as part of a case), for two years. "That's kind of scary when we are working back from the evidence," says Jamieson......

[Tadpole12]

I had read this interesting judicial article, a critique on how touch dna should never be used on its own to convict, that in effect, without other evidence, it is inconclusive.

So ..... I'm still wondering what additional evidence there would be to allow ML to draw the conclusion that JR and his family can be exhonerated.

The inside fabric of JBR's long john bottoms must have been tested to exclude the source of dna as being a previous wearer of the clothing.

Maybe just the location ( 3 location) of dna services that conclusion?

And how can PR be wholely eliminated as a participant?