I still have an open mind as to how this happened and who did it

[renah]

Are there any transcripts from interviews or depositions from Priscilla?


(And wasnt that Patsy herself basically saying that she didnt WANT to know?)

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

[snip]

PETER BOYLES: How long did you work for John and Patsy Ramsey?

LINDA WILCOX: Approximately 2 1/2 years. I left September 4, 1995.

PETER BOYLES: You contacted me after the Boulder Police contacted you. You've spoken with them, now it's been 20 months. Why did you call me and why did you want to have this meeting?

LINDA WILCOX: One, I keep hearing a lot of little things, misconceptions, that I wanted to clear up. The other, I personally have a very hard time with the Ramseys going on national television, blatantly lying and not having anyone speak up to contradict what they are saying.

PETER BOYLES: An example?

LINDA WILCOX: An example, when John Ramsey says to the camera, I didn't know she wet the bed, or not very much. I happen to know myself, he walked upstairs, she had wet her bed, I came in on a Monday morning and he said, "could you change her bed? She's wet it again." The thing that strikes me as odd, I knew her between 2 1/2 and 4. During that time, she did wet the bed but it wasn't chronic. It was every now and then. Early on, I mean 2 1/2 year olds always do, I mean it seems like they always have accidents. But, it got progressively worse. I would think that a 6 year old would wet the bed less than a 4 year old or a 2 year old. It actually got worse, it was moderate, she didn't have rubber sheets at that point, a pull-up would hold it. But her and Burke both wet the bed. Burke was 7 years old and he also wet the bed. I didn't think it was odd at the time, because it sometimes runs in families and it's more common in boys. And, their parents were lazy.

[snip]

PETER BOYLES: You told me in another conversation, I dont' want to put words in your mouth, that JonBenet took a bottle really late in life.

LINDA WILCOX: She was in Nursery School. She was about 3 1/2 or 4. Suzanne, the nanny, was trying to break her from the bottle. It was, she turned 4 that august and that summer she pretty much broken from it. But, she was 3 years old, she was going to nursery school and she... Suzanne used to threaten that she was going to tell her nursery school friends that she was still using a bottle to get her to stop because she was way too old to be using one. Um, she wasn't a good sleeper. She didn't sleep well and John, in particular, would get frustrated with her trying to get her to bed and he would put her to bed with a bottle and a video.

[snip]

Like, JonBenet, for example. She got no affection at all when she was little except maybe from their nanny. Until she started to perform or produce, she was basically ignored. At one point, John was complaining because he had to get her dressed one morning because Suzanne had been out of town. He couldn't find any clothes that matched. The reason was, she was wearing cast-offs from Burke because she didn't have any clothes of her own.

PETER BOYLES: We look at so many photos and videos of this child wearing adult, woman sexy costumes, you know something about some Halloween costumes.

LINDA WILCOX: This particular Halloween costume, it was the Halloween, it would have been 1994 probably. Yeah, the Halloween of '94. And she had this, it was actually kind of cute, it was this little witches costume but it wasn't your standard, you know, black dress, pointy hat, it had orange criss-cross striping and it had a little cape. You know most little kids would say, you know, she said I'm gonna be a witch for halloween but I'm not going to be a bad witch. I'm going to be a good, sexy witch. And this is from the voice of a 4-year-old.

PETER BOYLES: She said, a good, sexy witch at 4?

LINDA WILCOX: It was a witch costume. Most kids would have just said, you know, I'm not a bad witch, I'm a good witch. But her mom is there and then Patsy walked in the room and said, "Yeah, she's gonna be a sexy witch."

[snip]
http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/07211998lindawilcoxon-pb.htm

mothers also value their kids as child support checks and tax deductions. mothers also run for the local school board while abusing their kids and allowing others to abuse them as well

there are all kinds of mothers in this world. and in this case, the mother was a doozy and the father stood by clucking his tongue and permitting some very odd behavior. money doesn't guarantee insulation from laziness, poor hygiene, poorly defined boundaries, and legitimizing inappropriate behavior(s)

There is nothing at all in that conversation that says that Patsy was anything but a good mother. I have not seen any proof to the contrary.

I believe that most of what we know about them is myth and rumor. Trying to assemble facts in this case is harder than ever because of all the lies.

Wetting the bed is a common problem for kids. Some can wet the bed well into 10. It is a medical condition. It does not mean something evil was lurking beneath the surface.
I would not call my kids bed wetters either if someone asked me but they have wet the bed on occasion. Either too tired to get up, Too much to drink before bed, But it is not something I even worry about before they go to bed.

No child is perfect nor is any parent perfect. People make different parenting decisions all the time that the masses may not agree with but it does not make them bad parents.

Nothing from this conversation holds any relevance to me about the situation at home, Nor what happened to this baby.

 

[Tawny]

... nor is any parent perfect.

RSBM

EXACTLY. Which is why your blanket statement that all mothers "know" every single thing about their small children and what happens to them is, at best, misinformed.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

RSBM

EXACTLY. Which is why your blanket statement that all mothers "know" every single thing about their small children and what happens to them is, at best, misinformed.

I am talking about normal mothers. The ones that live in the house daily. Ones that are decent caring parents. I am not talking about the crazies or the neglectful ones. Ones with little kids.

I will make it more clear. I figured it was obvious it was a general statement and not one that needed to be clarified.

 

[Anyhoo]

There is nothing at all in that conversation that says that Patsy was anything but a good mother. I have not seen any proof to the contrary.

I believe that most of what we know about them is myth and rumor. Trying to assemble facts in this case is harder than ever because of all the lies.

Wetting the bed is a common problem for kids. Some can wet the bed well into 10. It is a medical condition. It does not mean somethingevil was lurking beneath the surface. K
I would not call my kids bed wetters either if someone asked me but they have wet the bed on occasion. Either too tired to get up, Too much to drink before bed, But it is not something I even worry about before they go to bed.

No child is perfect nor is any parent perfect. People make different parenting decisions all the time that the masses may not agree with but it does not make them bad parents.

Nothing from this conversation holds any relevance to me about the situation at home, Nor what happened to this baby.

There's no need for you to go into 'Ramsey Defense Mode' when anything negative is said about a Ramsey, Scarlett. See, that is what is so revealing about you. Not only is no Ramsey in any way involved with what happened to JB, but they are a perfectly normal family with no significant issues. You need to at some point take off those rose colored glasses and see reality. Myths, rumors and outright lies is how you classify anything said which impugns the Ramsey's in any way. Just because you don't want to see anything past cold hard evidence does not mean that inferences cannot be made that could be just as important. Anything which is unusual like this should be freely discussed and not just shut down with the blanket statement: we don't know anything more than the cold hard evidence and we should not speculate on things unless we are sure of them. You know, if JR were to ever post on this forum as a different person, he would probably sound remarkably like you.

 

[Venom]

There's no need for you to go into 'Ramsey Defense Mode' when anything negative is said about a Ramsey, Scarlett. See, that is what is so revealing about you. Not only is no Ramsey in any way involved with what happened to JB, but they are a perfectly normal family with no significant issues. You need to at some point take off those rose colored glasses and see reality. Myths, rumors and outright lies is how you classify anything said which impugns the Ramsey's in any way. Just because you don't want to see anything past cold hard evidence does not mean that inferences cannot be made that could be just as important. Anything which is unusual like this should be freely discussed and not just shut down with the blanket statement: we don't know anything more than the cold hard evidence and we should not speculate on things unless we are sure of them. You know, if JR were to ever post on this forum as a different person, he would probably sound remarkably like you.

:gthanks:

 

[Venom]

<snipped>
Wetting the bed is a common problem for kids. Some can wet the bed well into 10. It is a medical condition. It does not mean something evil was lurking beneath the surface.
I would not call my kids bed wetters either if someone asked me but they have wet the bed on occasion. Either too tired to get up, Too much to drink before bed, But it is not something I even worry about before they go to bed.

<snipped>

I think the point everyone is trying to make isn't about her having the occasional accident at night; it's that she was potty trained and then regressed with it. I think it's normal for a kid to have an occasional accident, but when the accidents start happening everyday, then something is probably going on to cause it. JMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I think the point everyone is trying to make isn't about her having the occasional accident at night; it's that she was potty trained and then regressed with it. I think it's normal for a kid to have an occasional accident, but when the accidents start happening everyday, then something is probably going on to cause it. JMO

. There are many kids that regress when potty training and there are many kids that can not keep the bed dry at certain ages.

Bed wetting is not uncommon. Some children have medical issues that lead to bed wetting.

There is so much urban legend about bed wetting and misinformation about it that it seems like a something is wrong with a child who bed wets. Who stops and restarts, Who does it until 8 or 10.

Many kids wet the bed. It is normal. If accidents are happening every day which I have not seen proof of that here, That would be a reason to visit a dr and seek treatment but again. It does not mean there is something sinister wrong. Just that medically they may have an issue.


http://www.abct.org/docs/Members/FactSheets/BED WETTING 0707.pdf

There are many causes.

"Millions of kids and teenagers from every part of the world wet the bed every single night. It's so common that there are probably other kids in your class who do it."

http://kidshealth.org/kid/health_problems/bladder/enuresis.html

 

[gramcracker]

There is nothing at all in that conversation that says that Patsy was anything but a good mother.
whaaaaaat?

I would not call my kids bed wetters either if someone asked me but they have wet the bed on occasion. Either too tired to get up, Too much to drink before bed, But it is not something I even worry about before they go to bed.
it wasn't occasionally, it was daily and nightly. you are minimizing it and deflecting from the seriousness of it

No child is perfect nor is any parent perfect. People make different parenting decisions all the time that the masses may not agree with but it does not make them bad parents.
ah, but the verdict from the masses is already in. it was delivered many years ago and still has validity

Nothing from this conversation holds any relevance to me about the situation at home, Nor what happened to this baby.
how did I know you would say that?

JB taking the bottle when she was nearly 4 years old = poor parenting

a 4-year-old using the word "sexy" in proper context = poor parenting

this does not describe a good mother:

She got no affection at all when she was little except maybe from their nanny. Until she started to perform or produce, she was basically ignored. At one point, John was complaining because he had to get her dressed one morning because Suzanne had been out of town. He couldn't find any clothes that matched. The reason was, she was wearing cast-offs from Burke because she didn't have any clothes of her own.

JB was not merely a bed wetter; bed wetting connotes nocturnal or nap-time wetting, when the child is asleep. it was difficult to treat her recurring infections because her panties/pull-ups were continually wet. during the day, while she was awake. that was poor parenting. and, she was much too old to be wearing pull-ups during the day. that was poor parenting. PR said she had just recently taken JB out of pull-ups (again) and substituted panties because the pull-ups were disguising the sensation of being wet during the day. that was poor parenting

not teaching your female child to wipe her own behind by age 6 was poor parenting. allowing that female child to call out to anyone within earshot to wipe her behind was poor parenting

a lot of the behaviors in that hell hole were creepy, and I would never consider defending them or minimizing them. I usually scroll on by, but today is not the day

 

[Venom]

I don't even know why I bother.

 

[Chelly]

The subject of this thread:

"I still have an open mind as to how this happened and who did it" reminds me of advise a mentor once offered.

He said "Being open-minded may appear admirable. However, beware that your mind is not so open that your brain falls out."

 

[momof4ws]

This is what I am getting at. I hear "stories" and opinions from books "but I am looking for real info from people who were in the house and knew them well."
I am trying to find factual evidence for reports and rumors.

I find most times the more I search the more facts turn out to be opinion.

ETA:
For me this is about finding the roots of the case. I have heard and read so much over time that proves just not to be true. I don't want to hear that something was reported in a book. I want to know who said, when they said, to whom they said it and what are their motives in this case before I place it in a category to weigh it for consideration. Many may think that this makes me difficult but honestly, I am just trying to be thorough.

I really don't understand why you post on here. Everything anybody says that is RDI, if it's fact or not, you dismiss…there is no winning with you because you don't want to know who did this to JBR. There is NO mystery person out there who hasn't been caught yet! It is a no brainer to most of us that JR, PR, and BR know what happened to her….PERIOD! As you a stated….you want real info from people who were in the house and knew them well! Well, try to get a hold of the housekeeper…she will probably tell you things you will disprove…how about the Fleets…oh no…wait…you will disprove their knowledge…who's left…outside family…of course they won't talk…oh yeah…John, Patsy, and Burke…get a hold of them and ask them what happened that night and get back to us!

 

[Chelly]

I really don't understand why you post on here. Everything anybody says that is RDI, if it's fact or not, you dismiss&#8230;there is no winning with you because you don't want to know who did this to JBR. There is NO mystery person out there who hasn't been caught yet! It is a no brainer to most of us that JR, PR, and BR know what happened to her&#8230;.PERIOD! As you a stated&#8230;.you want real info from people who were in the house and knew them well! Well, try to get a hold of the housekeeper&#8230;she will probably tell you things you will disprove&#8230;how about the Fleets&#8230;oh no&#8230;wait&#8230;you will disprove their knowledge&#8230;who's left&#8230;outside family&#8230;of course they won't talk&#8230;oh yeah&#8230;John, Patsy, and Burke&#8230;get a hold of them and ask them what happened that night and get back to us!

Thanks Momof4ws. Many of us learned months ago that logic, reason and facts are wasted here.

 

[Amateur Novelist]

The subject of this thread:

"I still have an open mind as to how this happened and who did it" reminds me of advise a mentor once offered.

He said "Being open-minded may appear admirable. However, beware that your mind is not so open that your brain falls out."

LOL - Thanks so much for the advice. I recently finished Kolar's book and it put a lot of things into perspective for me so my mind has closed up a bit.

For all of the threads that I have read, I do not recall anything being mentioned about the chair that JR said was blocking entrance to the train room. If I recall correctly, neither FW nor LE reported that they needed to move a chair to open the door to the train room (although LE did not actually open the door) but JR mentioned there was a chair which I think was interpreted to mean that the murderer must still have been in the house in the AM and moved the chair after FW performed his initial check. Is this a common theory believed by IDI? If not, perhaps I misread / misunderstood the issue with the chair.

In reviewing all of the information, to me it seems that the RDI theories are much more likely / believable but there is no smoking gun which removes all doubt - I guess that the definition of reasonable doubt could be debated which may be one of the reasons that the DA did not move forward with the GR indictment.

 

[gramcracker]

I really don't understand why you post on here. Everything anybody says that is RDI, if it's fact or not, you dismiss…there is no winning with you because you don't want to know who did this to JBR. There is NO mystery person out there who hasn't been caught yet! It is a no brainer to most of us that JR, PR, and BR know what happened to her….PERIOD! As you a stated….you want real info from people who were in the house and knew them well! Well, try to get a hold of the housekeeper…she will probably tell you things you will disprove…how about the Fleets…oh no…wait…you will disprove their knowledge…who's left…outside family…of course they won't talk…oh yeah…John, Patsy, and Burke…get a hold of them and ask them what happened that night and get back to us!

:waiting:

 

[BBB167893]

The subject of this thread:

"I still have an open mind as to how this happened and who did it" reminds me of advice a mentor once offered.

He said "Being open-minded may appear admirable. However, beware that your mind is not so open that your brain falls out."

You and I must have had the same mentor!

 

[Mysteeri]

I am talking about normal mothers. The ones that live in the house daily. Ones that are decent caring parents. I am not talking about the crazies or the neglectful ones. Ones with little kids.

I will make it more clear. I figured it was obvious it was a general statement and not one that needed to be clarified.

You are entitled to your opinion about Patsy as a mother, but certainly it is not based on facts that people should accept, nor do they have to accept your logic: Mothers know their children. Patsy is a mother. Therefore she must know her children. The problem with this logic is that the premise "mothers know their children" (even with the addition of "normal") is highly debatable. Since you demand facts, please don`t expect people to accept your opinions either, just focus on factual statements, not vague remarks such as "so much of RDI is a lie" or a "myth" without even giving examples. This logic fails also: Much of what is said about the Ramseys is a lie (I`m not sure what, though). Therefore we must not believe any negative opinions about the Ramseys. Also, you say that we don`t really know much about the Ramseys (I actually agree), so I find it difficult to understand why you are so sure that they were a loving family and no abuse took place, even when there are medical experts that describe in detail the injuries in her vagina/hymen that are consistent with digital penetration/prior abuse.

And concerning "general statements". Statistically it is fair to state that when a child is found murdered in their home, overwhelmingly often it`s a family member responsible for the crime. This does not of course mean that in this particular case, it was a family member. But it explains why the FBI encouraged the BDP to look at the family and why it is completely fair and reasonable that they did just that. And what they found did not exclude the family members present at the house, quite the contrary. I don`t believe there was any "hidden agenda" to go after the parents, but that evidence led to that direction.

 

[Chelly]

You are entitled to your opinion about Patsy as a mother, but certainly it is not based on facts that people should accept, nor do they have to accept your logic: Mothers know their children. Patsy is a mother. Therefore she must know her children. The problem with this logic is that the premise "mothers know their children" (even with the addition of "normal") is highly debatable. Since you demand facts, please don`t expect people to accept your opinions either, just focus on factual statements, not vague remarks such as "so much of RDI is a lie" or a "myth" without even giving examples. This logic fails also: Much of what is said about the Ramseys is a lie (I`m not sure what, though). Therefore we must not believe any negative opinions about the Ramseys. Also, you say that we don`t really know much about the Ramseys (I actually agree), so I find it difficult to understand why you are so sure that they were a loving family and no abuse took place, even when there are medical experts that describe in detail the injuries in her vagina/hymen that are consistent with digital penetration/prior abuse.

And concerning "general statements". Statistically it is fair to state that when a child is found murdered in their home, overwhelmingly often it`s a family member responsible for the crime. This does not of course mean that in this particular case, it was a family member. But it explains why the FBI encouraged the BDP to look at the family and why it is completely fair and reasonable that they did just that. And what they found did not exclude the family members present at the house, quite the contrary. I don`t believe there was any "hidden agenda" to go after the parents, but that evidence led to that direction.

Unfortunately some define evidence as "rumor".

 

[tezi]

I don't even know why I bother.

I understand totally, that is why I haven't responded to anything except this on the thread. I am still trying to figure out a response. :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

 

[borndem]

I think the point everyone is trying to make isn't about her having the occasional accident at night; it's that she was potty trained and then regressed with it. I think it's normal for a kid to have an occasional accident, but when the accidents start happening everyday, then something is probably going on to cause it. JMO

bbm
You're so right, Venom -- something is just wrong. 3-4 year-olds who undergo some type of abuse or neglect cannot, or are already afraid to, communicate to anyone about what's happening to them, etc. And in some cases, a 5-6 y/o may be afraid to express his/her fears or anxiety about a situation, or he/she may not have anyone with whom they feel is safe to discuss it.

Even adults manifest undergoing stress, anxiety or abuse in non-verbal ways: rashes/hives, headaches, fever-blisters, stomach ulcers, vomiting, nightmares, kleptomania, pill-popping, etc., etc., etc. And some children may have some of those I just listed.

Most of us have seen it (or possibly experienced it, sad to say), and we know it when we see it. JMHO.