Criminality: The R's vs. the perp's.

[Brefie]

Your theory might make a good fiction book, but it's not even close to reality in the case of the Ramseys. There is no history of Patsy ever having been sexually abused herself. It's absurd to think even bad parents would allow their child to be routinely used by pedophiles. There were no pedophiles close to the Ramseys, and they didn't need friendships with these sorts---I don't know where you're getting this from. Patsy wasn't self-absorbed--in fact quite the opposite.

You state a lot of 'facts' about the Ramseys - do you know them personally?
You have no idea whether Patsy was abused or not. You also have no idea if pedophiles were close to the Ramseys.

How do you know Patsy wasn't self absorbed? Even in reading their own words in DOI it comes through plain as day they were unbelievably self absorbed.

 

[ragland]

if one of my children were found dead in my home, you can take it to the bank that LE would take me to jail for the crime! im not rich, therefore im guilty.


i cant say i know for sure who did this, i only know that my gut tells me it was someone in the family. i feel so horrible for JBR, i just wish they could find justice for her!

 

[Maikai]

You state a lot of 'facts' about the Ramseys - do you know them personally?
You have no idea whether Patsy was abused or not. You also have no idea if pedophiles were close to the Ramseys.

How do you know Patsy wasn't self absorbed? Even in reading their own words in DOI it comes through plain as day they were unbelievably self absorbed.

to know there was no history....multitudes of people that know them have said the Ramseys were nothing but loving parents who were generous to family and friends, and Patsy did a lot of volunteer work, including supporting other women with Ovarian cancer. Steve Thomas tried hard to bring a circumstantial case to the DA--if there was ANYTHING negative he would have found it---the worst he came up with is Patsy had makeup on early in the morning..and owned designer clothes....and the weird reference in his book when he interviewed her, she was so close he (or she--don't remember which way) could have kissed he.

 

[Brefie]

to know there was no history....multitudes of people that know them have said the Ramseys were nothing but loving parents who were generous to family and friends, and Patsy did a lot of volunteer work, including supporting other women with Ovarian cancer. Steve Thomas tried hard to bring a circumstantial case to the DA--if there was ANYTHING negative he would have found it---the worst he came up with is Patsy had makeup on early in the morning..and owned designer clothes....and the weird reference in his book when he interviewed her, she was so close he (or she--don't remember which way) could have kissed he.

Perhaps that's why folks had good things to say about the Ramsey's? They were generous towards them? Who knows?

I am one of a few RDI's that does not believe they were monsters their whole lives, and that everything they did was wrong, but I do believe them to be cold and calculated and believe them to put self preservation top of the list.

I wholeheartedly believe Patsy (and maybe even John) did lots of nice things for lots of people. It still doesn't mean she / he didn't snap OR do whatever it took to protect another Ramsey.

I have yet to read anything except one interview that mentioned abuse. So how, in reading, you have made up your mind that there was no abuse in her past is beyond me.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Perhaps that's why folks had good things to say about the Ramsey's? They were generous towards them? Who knows?

I am one of a few RDI's that does not believe they were monsters their whole lives, and that everything they did was wrong, but I do believe them to be cold and calculated and believe them to put self preservation top of the list.

I wholeheartedly believe Patsy (and maybe even John) did lots of nice things for lots of people. It still doesn't mean she / he didn't snap OR do whatever it took to protect another Ramsey.

I have yet to read anything except one interview that mentioned abuse. So how, in reading, you have made up your mind that there was no abuse in her past is beyond me.

I've never met the R's. They were never generous to me. I'll say some good things about them anyway:

1. The R's called 911 immediately, to get help for their daughter. Since their six year old daughter was no longer under their supervision, that was the right thing to do. Her age pretty much demands the police be notified.
2. JR found JBR while searching the house at the request of LE. He brought her immediately to the attention of everyone, in case there was some chance she could be saved.
3. The R's enlisted the public's help, both on the internet and in the paper, to enlist the public's help in the search for JBR's killer, publishing a profile that's not unlike other child murderers.
4. The R's provided samples of items and/or handwriting that would only be used in an argument against themselves, despite their innocence.
5. They hired private investigators to help develop a profile and find the killer.
6. They lawyered up under the threat of a media lynching. Without that, they may have been falsely accused. IOW if they were poor, maybe they would they'd be wrongfully convicted. Its a good thing they lawyered up, to avoid being wrongfully convicted in their own daughter's murder. You can call that self preservation if you want.

 

[Brefie]

I've never met the R's. They were never generous to me. I'll say some good things about them anyway:

1. The R's called 911 immediately, to get help for their daughter. Since their six year old daughter was no longer under their supervision, that was the right thing to do. Her age pretty much demands the police be notified.
2. JR found JBR while searching the house at the request of LE. He brought her immediately to the attention of everyone, in case there was some chance she could be saved.
3. The R's enlisted the public's help, both on the internet and in the paper, to enlist the public's help in the search for JBR's killer, publishing a profile that's not unlike other child murderers.
4. The R's provided samples of items and/or handwriting that would only be used in an argument against themselves, despite their innocence.
5. They hired private investigators to help develop a profile and find the killer.
6. They lawyered up under the threat of a media lynching. Without that, they may have been falsely accused. IOW if they were poor, maybe they would they'd be wrongfully convicted. Its a good thing they lawyered up, to avoid being wrongfully convicted in their own daughter's murder. You can call that self preservation if you want.

They lawyered up before the media was informed.......you might wanna re-think that list.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

They lawyered up before the media was informed.......you might wanna re-think that list.

You might wanna re-think your POV on this whole JBR thing, because you're pointing fingers at an innocent middle-aged company man and his beauty pageant enthusiast wife, for the brutal murder of their own daughter.

IOW the idea of JR, PR, or especially BR as suspects in a brutal child murder that involved garrote strangulation and headbash, is quite laughable.

Its time to look at real-world suspects like those who fit the profile for child murder.

 

[Zman]

When considering the possibility that an intruder killed JonBenet why does everyone assume there would have been only one?

Why not two or three or five?

One to have a reason to be present in the Ramsey house and to carry JonBenet down to the basement, one to operate the ligature, another the stun gun and yet another to hit her over the head with a baseball bat. And of course the one who adored her in his own sick way to wrap her body in her white blanket.

And the ransom note? - that wasn't an intruder, that was Patsy IMO.

Here we go again round and round the RN.

First of all writing a RN does not cover up anything.

How could anyone think that PR of JR would write a RN with the motivation of covering up a murder?

A RN does not cover up for a murdered child in the basement. There is no motivation to write such a note unless you are going to remove the body from the house.

All you have to do is read this RN and you can quickly tell its not written by JR or PR. In fact you really don't have to go past the first sentence.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Here we go again round and round the RN.

First of all writing a RN does not cover up anything.

How could anyone think that PR of JR would write a RN with the motivation of covering up a murder?

A RN does not cover up for a murdered child in the basement. There is no motivation to write such a note unless you are going to remove the body from the house.

All you have to do is read this RN and you can quickly tell its not written by JR or PR. In fact you really don't have to go past the first sentence.

The idea that JR, PR, or BR would get out a pen and start handwriting criminal stuff is also laughable.

 

[Brefie]

You might wanna re-think your POV on this whole JBR thing, because you're pointing fingers at an innocent middle-aged company man and his beauty pageant enthusiast wife, for the brutal murder of their own daughter.

IOW the idea of JR, PR, or especially BR as suspects in a brutal child murder that involved garrote strangulation and headbash, is quite laughable.

Its time to look at real-world suspects like those who fit the profile for child murder.

Like...........? Oh yeah - they are the only 2 who have not been cleared.....Ah well

I guess it's soooooo laughable that they felt the need to pay out all that money for lawyers......kind of a waste, really, considering how laughable it is.

 

[deanws]

You might wanna re-think your POV on this whole JBR thing, because you're pointing fingers at an innocent middle-aged company man and his beauty pageant enthusiast wife, for the brutal murder of their own daughter.

IOW the idea of JR, PR, or especially BR as suspects in a brutal child murder that involved garrote strangulation and headbash, is quite laughable.

Its time to look at real-world suspects like those who fit the profile for child murder.

What is quite laughable is that YOU ignore all the facts of the case, even though many here have tried to explain them to you. It is funny that when someone asks you a direct question, you just ignore them because you can't seem to back up your theories with facts. It is one thing to brain storm, we all do...that is why we are here. However, it is quite another to keep spouting the same old song without any reasonable facts to back it up.

 

[narlacat]

QUOTE>>A RN does not cover up for a murdered child in the basement. There is no motivation to write such a note unless you are going to remove the body from the house.<<

Well, you don't know they weren't planning on removing the body. Something may have happened that prevented them from doing that.

 

[simplesimon]

Here we go again round and round the RN.

First of all writing a RN does not cover up anything.

How could anyone think that PR of JR would write a RN with the motivation of covering up a murder?

A RN does not cover up for a murdered child in the basement. There is no motivation to write such a note unless you are going to remove the body from the house.

All you have to do is read this RN and you can quickly tell its not written by JR or PR. In fact you really don't have to go past the first sentence.

We go round and round the RN because it is evidence. It is a very strange piece of writing I think but thats just me.
So you think it was written by a foreign faction? McSanta? the White's ? are 'they" still committing crimes?murders?
Are the R's actively pursuing them ? as they have promised....
now that's laughable

 

[Zman]

We go round and round the RN because it is evidence. It is a very strange piece of writing I think but thats just me.
So you think it was written by a foreign faction? McSanta? the White's ? are 'they" still committing crimes?murders?
Are the R's actively pursuing them ? as they have promised....
now that's laughable

No I don't think the note was written by a foreign faction. Why?
Because it tells us so.

We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction."


a (1) : to take the place of in some respect</I> </I>(2) : to act in the place of or for usually by legal right.

Why would PR choose to write such a thing.
If she wanted us to think a foreign faction was involved then why would she use the word represent.
More than likely she would of just written

"we are a small foreign faction"

 

[narlacat]

Your theory might make a good fiction book, but it's not even close to reality in the case of the Ramseys. There is no history of Patsy ever having been sexually abused herself.
It's absurd to think even bad parents would allow their child to be routinely used by pedophiles. There were no pedophiles close to the Ramseys, and they didn't need friendships with these sorts---I don't know where you're getting this from.
Patsy wasn't self-absorbed--in fact quite the opposite.

Well, you do not know that Maikai, incest is not something people like to talk about...alot of times, it is swept under the rug.
Aussiesheila could well be right, just like any of us here could be in regards to what happened to JonBenet. You do not know there were no pedophiles close to the Ramsey's.
John was away alot of the time on business.....Patsy had left all her friends in Atlanta. She would have been lonely and out of place in Boulder......in the scenario that Aussie sets, I can see how easily these things can happen. And happen they do. We know pedophile rings exist, we know they cover their tracks very carefully as not to get caught and we know people in positions of power are often the ringleaders.
Is a pedophile ring responsible for the death of JonBenet??
We don't know, but it's not out of the realm of possibility.

Patsy Ramsey wasn't self absorbed??
You have GOT to be joking about that.
She was totally self obsessed!!!!!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

What is quite laughable is that YOU ignore all the facts of the case, even though many here have tried to explain them to you. It is funny that when someone asks you a direct question, you just ignore them because you can't seem to back up your theories with facts. It is one thing to brain storm, we all do...that is why we are here. However, it is quite another to keep spouting the same old song without any reasonable facts to back it up.

Please don't bother explaining your so-called 'facts' to me if they have anything to do with incest, chronic sexual abuse, EA, or any other crass fictional idea drawn literally out of thin air. Its disgusting, and those who create and spread these ideas about innocent people should be ashamed.

 

[Brefie]

Please don't bother explaining your so-called 'facts' to me if they have anything to do with incest, chronic sexual abuse, EA, or any other crass fictional idea drawn literally out of thin air. Its disgusting, and those who create and spread these ideas about innocent people should be ashamed.

Perhaps you should contact the experts and tell them that they pulled their findings out of thin air. And to finish, tell them they should be ashamed that they help solve thousands of crimes doing just that.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Perhaps you should contact the experts and tell them that they pulled their findings out of thin air. And to finish, tell them they should be ashamed that they help solve thousands of crimes doing just that.

You show me an expert on R incest, R chronic sexual abuse, or R EA, and I'll show you someone getting carried away with themselves.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Perhaps you should contact the experts and tell them that they pulled their findings out of thin air. And to finish, tell them they should be ashamed that they help solve thousands of crimes doing just that.

Expert findings? There have been no expert findings! On EA? On chronic sexual abuse? On incest? C'mon you're making that up!

 

[simplesimon]

No I don't think the note was written by a foreign faction. Why?
Because it tells us so.

We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction."


a (1) : to take the place of in some respect</I> </I>(2) : to act in the place of or for usually by legal right.

Why would PR choose to write such a thing.
If she wanted us to think a foreign faction was involved then why would she use the word represent.
More than likely she would of just written

"we are a small foreign faction"

who are the reresentatives? do you have any ideas/