Are the Ramseys involved or not?

[BBB167893]

To be honest, I never thought that it had been officially closed either, but every news article out there said that the case was to be RE-OPENED. A more accurate statement would be that there hadn't been any ONGOING investigation, since around 2002. It had grown stale...

I recall hearing somewhere that the BPD spent more investgating this case in a week than the DA's office did in six months.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Beheading a child is a very remote idea, distant from the more common middle-eastern or guillotine beheadings to which you referred. Thats the remote idea which never had occurred to me even once before JBR was murdered.

Sure some killers may have decapitated a child before, but putting a child beheading threat in writing hasn't. Because it is so unique, it is probably a good clue, providing insight into JBR's murderer.

 

[BBB167893]

Beheading a child is a very remote idea, distant from the more common middle-eastern or guillotine beheadings to which you referred.

HOTYH, that doesn't matter. The person who wrote it, I believe, was not thinking in those terms. They were thinking (again, IMO) what would sound impressive.

Do you remember what CASKU said about the RN? They said it was most likely written after the crime was committed by someone in a highly agitated state of mind. AFTER the crime. It was just icing on the cake at that point. THINK about it: if the killer knew she was already dead, as I believe they did, then there's no real malice. This person wasn't talking about beheading a child; they were just talking, period.

Thats the remote idea which never had occurred to me even once before JBR was murdered.

HOTYH, whether it occured to YOU or not is not the issue here.

Sure some killers may have decapitated a child before,

Damn skippy.

but putting a child beheading threat in writing hasn't.

HOTYH, if the deed was already done, then the threat is empty.

Because it is so unique, it is probably a good clue, providing insight into JBR's murderer.

It sure does: a person with an overdeveloped flair for the dramatic and a need to dazzle people whose only knowledge about crime and ransom notes comes from books and TV. That's not just my opinion, not by a long shot it isn't.

I don't know why this has to be so difficult.

 

[Ames]

Any version has to account for the facts. My version is admittedly a theory, and does not account for all the facts because I don't know them all. Whereas many RDI so-called facts aren't facts at all, nevertheless RDI presents them AS FACTS. Thats the difference in credibility.

A good theory accounts for the known facts in a plausible way. RDI is no longer capable of this, because the plausibility of male DNA showing up innocently on more than one article of clothing that JBR put on hours before her death, AND showing up in crime-related areas (mixed with blood in her underwear matching with the DNA on her longjohns) is very, very low.

Setting the DNA aside, the plausibility that an adult who lives in the house, educated here in the United States, knows capital crime laws, would associate 1500 or so characters of their own personal handwriting with a capital crime also is very, very low.

RDI is also forced to choose between PR deliberately or accidentally misspelling 'advise' in her exemplars. Which is it? I believe that the plausibility that someone would smoothly write 'advise' in the RN and then smoothly write 'advize' in repeated exemplars, whether accidental or on purpose, is very, very low.

RDI has low plausiblity these days.

Come on Holdon....Patsy was a JOURNALISM MAJOR, do you expect me to believe that she cannot spell a fourth grade (look it up, its a 4th grade word) spelling word? Give me a break.

One other thing...did you not notice that thumb print bruise on her right arm, in the picture of her that was in one of my above posts. And you tell me that there is no way that Patsy could have snapped??

 

[Ames]

I recall hearing somewhere that the BPD spent more investgating this case in a week than the DA's office did in six months.

I can believe that!

 

[Ames]

Beheading a child is a very remote idea, distant from the more common middle-eastern or guillotine beheadings to which you referred. Thats the remote idea which never had occurred to me even once before JBR was murdered.

Sure some killers may have decapitated a child before, but putting a child beheading threat in writing hasn't. Because it is so unique, it is probably a good clue, providing insight into JBR's murderer.

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.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

It sure does: a person with an overdeveloped flair for the dramatic and a need to dazzle people whose only knowledge about crime and ransom notes comes from books and TV. That's not just my opinion, not by a long shot it isn't.

The RN author threatened in writing to behead a small child. 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. Obviously thats impossible because the child is the 'subject' of the sentence in the ransom note.

This statement is unprecedented in the annals of crime, 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.

A person with an 'overdeveloped flair for the dramatic' is an understated characterization, more suited to describing an author or an actor. A better characterization would be a person with a bizarre outlook on violence. Executing or beheading small children is a bizarre, inappropriate concept even for a ransom kidnapper.

 

[Ames]

The RN author threatened in writing to behead a small child. 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. Obviously thats impossible because the child is the 'subject' of the sentence in the ransom note.

This statement is unprecedented in the annals of crime, 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.

A person with an 'overdeveloped flair for the dramatic' is an understated characterization, more suited to describing an author or an actor. A better characterization would be a person with a bizarre outlook on violence. Executing or beheading small children is a bizarre, inappropriate concept.

Holdon, she was already dead...it was an empty threat. It was easy for Patsy...imo...to write those words, because JB was already dead...it didn't matter how horrific it sounded. The more horrific...the better.

 

[Ames]

He can't dodge that one forever.

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

 

[BBB167893]

Come on Holdon....Patsy was a JOURNALISM MAJOR, do you expect me to believe that she cannot spell a fourth grade (look it up, its a 4th grade word) spelling word? Give me a break.

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

One other thing...did you not notice that thumb print bruise on her right arm, in the picture of her that was in one of my above posts. And you tell me that there is no way that Patsy could have snapped??

He can't dodge it forever.

 

[BBB167893]

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

A lot of luck to him.

 

[Ames]

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... :banghead: Or, that the SFF visited her the day of that photograph, and made the mark, trying to push her into their getaway car.

 

[BBB167893]

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]

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]

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.

 

[BBB167893]

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]

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.

 

[BBB167893]

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.

 

[BBB167893]

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