Pet theories and vengeance

[Sophie]

I think I would like your mother. :dance:

Actually, Roy, I think she'd like you. She views my being an RDI as being a terrible indictment on her parenting ('How could you possibly think that a parent did that? Where did we go wrong that you could have such heinous thoughts?'). On that basis, she'd consider you the worthy offspring she deserves but didn't get

 

[BBB167893]

What an amazing post, Dave: it summarises beautifully the complexity of most people's feelings about this case and demonstrates (as if we needed extra evidence) your sensitivity and decency in particular. TY.

That means a lot, Sophie. It's not as simple as your Mum makes it out to be.

 

[Sophie]

Dave, that is a key reason for which I wanted my M to come on here: so that she could see the lovely, warm people who have lovely, warm relationships but who are also RDI and for whom it's more about understanding infanticide intellectually than about understanding it emotionally. I mean, the parents on here could write tomes on how much they ache with love for their children while those who aren't parents have been someone's child and know all about parental love. Knowing that parents - even good parents - do sometimes harm their children is not the same as thinking badly of the general parent-child relationship any more than knowing that a minority of men are rapists is the same as thinking all men are predators.

There was a thread on another forum - an IDI one, obviously - which basically invited analyses of the RDI psyche. It remains one of the most disturbing things I've seen on the Internet

 

[BBB167893]

Dave, that is a key reason for which I wanted my M to come on here: so that she could see the lovely, warm people who have lovely, warm relationships but who are also RDI and for whom it's more about understanding infanticide intellectually than about understanding it emotionally.

I agree. You should read the epilogue to my book. Heart-wrenching, it is.

I mean, the parents on here could write tomes on how much they ache with love for their children while those who aren't parents have been someone's child and know all about parental love. Knowing that parents - even good parents - do sometimes harm their children is not the same as thinking badly of the general parent-child relationship any more than knowing that a minority of men are rapists is the same as thinking all men are predators.

YES! You can want justice done without hatred.

There was a thread on another forum - an IDI one, obviously - which basically invited analyses of the RDI psyche. It remains one of the most disturbing things I've seen on the Internet

It's probably best that I don't know about that.

 

[TinaD]

I don't follow this case for some hope of vengeance. Just justice. If some new evidence came to light which totally and utterly exonerated the Ramseys (ie, not Mary Lacey's stunt) I would be so relieved. I would write to JR and apologise for my thoughts. I don't think it's going to happen.

And I certainly don't see ST as misogynist at all. Bitter? Yes, and I feel, quite rightly. But he put heart and soul into this case and destroyed his career in the process. You have to respect the man.

 

[Tadpole12]

I don't follow this case for some hope of vengeance. Just justice. If some new evidence came to light which totally and utterly exonerated the Ramseys (ie, not Mary Lacey's stunt) I would be so relieved. I would write to JR and apologise for my thoughts. I don't think it's going to happen.

And I certainly don't see ST as misogynist at all. Bitter? Yes, and I feel, quite rightly. But he put heart and soul into this case and destroyed his career in the process. You have to respect the man.

Hi TinaD.

I've been wondering, as I've just begun reading ST's book, taking note with respect to misogynistic overtones ....
ST seems like 'a maverick' , having often during his career taken issue with procedure, well before the JBR case.

quick ?, ST kinda disappeared off the map post resignation .....
how did he look at the time off the end of his stay at BPD.
Was he at the point of a breakdown?
Do you think he wrecklessly burnt those bridges?

 

[madeleine]

I don't follow this case for some hope of vengeance. Just justice. If some new evidence came to light which totally and utterly exonerated the Ramseys (ie, not Mary Lacey's stunt) I would be so relieved. I would write to JR and apologise for my thoughts. I don't think it's going to happen.

And I certainly don't see ST as misogynist at all. Bitter? Yes, and I feel, quite rightly. But he put heart and soul into this case and destroyed his career in the process. You have to respect the man.

:clap: @everything you've said

 

[Sophie]

I don't follow this case for some hope of vengeance. Just justice. If some new evidence came to light which totally and utterly exonerated the Ramseys (ie, not Mary Lacey's stunt) I would be so relieved. I would write to JR and apologise for my thoughts. I don't think it's going to happen.

And I certainly don't see ST as misogynist at all. Bitter? Yes, and I feel, quite rightly. But he put heart and soul into this case and destroyed his career in the process. You have to respect the man.

I agree with all that, Tina.

 

[Sophie]

Hi TinaD.

I've been wondering, as I've just begun reading ST's book, taking note with respect to misogynistic overtones ....
ST seems like 'a maverick' , having often during his career taken issue with procedure, well before the JBR case.

quick ?, ST kinda disappeared off the map post resignation .....
how did he look at the time off the end of his stay at BPD.
Was he at the point of a breakdown?
Do you think he wrecklessly burnt those bridges?

Hi Tad, not answering for TinaD but wanted to join in discussion

I think his issues were with Boulder rather than with LE generally. I mean, reading his book and PMPT, it reads like traditional law and order cops routinely resigned from the BPD after taking issue with the DA's office or Koby's approach to policing. In PMPT, Schiller describes him as a 'by-the-book' detective which I thought suggested someone who was the opposite of a maverick. Certainly he doesn't seem to have done much without first consulting the BPD's counsel about legality etc.


Wrt his mental health, I think the fact that he had asked for medical leave was subtly manipulated by the DA's office when he resigned so that people would believe there was a psychiatric problem going on. I believe Hunter went so far as to state on TV that ST did suffer from mental health issues and (again, if memory serves), the Shapiro tapes discussed Hunter's suggestion that psychiatric problems ran through the family. IMO, all of this was calculated to make ST look unstable and not credible since the DA was smarting that (in Bill Wise's words), '..they think Thomas is a f......g hero.'
I personally don't believe that ST was anything other than plain old knackered when he resigned.


This is just a musing, but I think heroism and doing something extraordinarily brave are nowadays easily mistaken for instability since they are so rare and run so contrary to our modern reverence for the sovereign self.


Looking forward to Tina D's views, too.

 

[Sophie]

I agree. You should read the epilogue to my book. Heart-wrenching, it is.



YES! You can want justice done without hatred.



It's probably best that I don't know about that.

Agreed. Real downside of the Internet stuff.

 

[anne11]

What would make me change my mind; fibres, hairs, fingerprints, footprints any tangible evidence that there was someone else present in that that night.
I'd love to be wrong, and the case be solved.

 

[TinaD]

Hi Tad, not answering for TinaD but wanted to join in discussion

I think his issues were with Boulder rather than with LE generally. I mean, reading his book and PMPT, it reads like traditional law and order cops routinely resigned from the BPD after taking issue with the DA's office or Koby's approach to policing. In PMPT, Schiller describes him as a 'by-the-book' detective which I thought suggested someone who was the opposite of a maverick. Certainly he doesn't seem to have done much without first consulting the BPD's counsel about legality etc.


Wrt his mental health, I think the fact that he had asked for medical leave was subtly manipulated by the DA's office when he resigned so that people would believe there was a psychiatric problem going on. I believe Hunter went so far as to state on TV that ST did suffer from mental health issues and (again, if memory serves), the Shapiro tapes discussed Hunter's suggestion that psychiatric problems ran through the family. IMO, all of this was calculated to make ST look unstable and not credible since the DA was smarting that (in Bill Wise's words), '..they think Thomas is a f......g hero.'
I personally don't believe that ST was anything other than plain old knackered when he resigned.


This is just a musing, but I think heroism and doing something extraordinarily brave are nowadays easily mistaken for instability since they are so rare and run so contrary to our modern reverence for the sovereign self.


Looking forward to Tina D's views, too.

Couldn't have said it better myself Sophie!! I've just finished reading PMPT for the first time (picked it up secondhand in a bookshop in a small country town over here). I'll have to reread Steve's book - haven't read it for a couple of years.

 

[BBB167893]

Hi Tad, not answering for TinaD but wanted to join in discussion

I think his issues were with Boulder rather than with LE generally. I mean, reading his book and PMPT, it reads like traditional law and order cops routinely resigned from the BPD after taking issue with the DA's office or Koby's approach to policing.

That's exactly it.

In PMPT, Schiller describes him as a 'by-the-book' detective which I thought suggested someone who was the opposite of a maverick.

"By-the-book" and "maverick" are a matter of perspective. Someone who's by-the-book in say, Miami, would be very much a maverick in Boulder.

Wrt his mental health, I think the fact that he had asked for medical leave was subtly manipulated by the DA's office when he resigned so that people would believe there was a psychiatric problem going on. I believe Hunter went so far as to state on TV that ST did suffer from mental health issues and (again, if memory serves), the Shapiro tapes discussed Hunter's suggestion that psychiatric problems ran through the family. IMO, all of this was calculated to make ST look unstable and not credible since the DA was smarting that (in Bill Wise's words), '..they think Thomas is a f......g hero.'
I personally don't believe that ST was anything other than plain old knackered when he resigned.

Why am I suddenly thinking of Watergate again?

This is just a musing, but I think heroism and doing something extraordinarily brave are nowadays easily mistaken for instability since they are so rare and run so contrary to our modern reverence for the sovereign self.

A sad commentary on modern society as we know it.

 

[Sophie]

Couldn't have said it better myself Sophie!! I've just finished reading PMPT for the first time (picked it up secondhand in a bookshop in a small country town over here). I'll have to reread Steve's book - haven't read it for a couple of years.

Tina, will be PM-ing you when my PM is working again to reminisce about my Pommy backpacking through OZ

Re books, this case gets you that way: there's never less than a foot high pile of material to read or re-read.

 

[Sophie]

That's exactly it.



"By-the-book" and "maverick" are a matter of perspective. Someone who's by-the-book in say, Miami, would be very much a maverick in Boulder.



Why am I suddenly thinking of Watergate again?



A sad commentary on modern society as we know it.

TY Dave. In all fairness, there are examples of heroism on a daily basis but they tend to be adrenalin-driven or else acted out in the knowledge that the heroism isn't controvertible. Examples like ST's are incredibly rare. I mean, the bloke will go to the Pearly Gates and St Peter will say, 'Oh, you're the one who thinks PDI.' His family will have to live with some people saying unspeakable things about him. The dead cat thing suggests that there may have been real sinister forces at work. Against this backdrop, the bravery of what ST did is astonishing. I honestly think some people would interpret this as being pure ego or mental instability and would be more than ready to accept AH's apparent defamation as truth.

 

[Sophie]

On the vengeance point, I imagine that people like the Whites, Hoffman-Pughs and McReynolds family struggle to think charitably about the person who not only killed JBR but watched as they were dragged through the mud of Internet libel. I mean, committing the offence is one thing but allowing others to either take the blame or suffer the worse fate of slander is another thing altogether. Whoever did this must be without a soul if they can sleep at night.

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Tad, not answering for TinaD but wanted to join in discussion

I think his issues were with Boulder rather than with LE generally. I mean, reading his book and PMPT, it reads like traditional law and order cops routinely resigned from the BPD after taking issue with the DA's office or Koby's approach to policing. In PMPT, Schiller describes him as a 'by-the-book' detective which I thought suggested someone who was the opposite of a maverick. Certainly he doesn't seem to have done much without first consulting the BPD's counsel about legality etc.


Wrt his mental health, I think the fact that he had asked for medical leave was subtly manipulated by the DA's office when he resigned so that people would believe there was a psychiatric problem going on. I believe Hunter went so far as to state on TV that ST did suffer from mental health issues and (again, if memory serves), the Shapiro tapes discussed Hunter's suggestion that psychiatric problems ran through the family. IMO, all of this was calculated to make ST look unstable and not credible since the DA was smarting that (in Bill Wise's words), '..they think Thomas is a f......g hero.'
I personally don't believe that ST was anything other than plain old knackered when he resigned.


This is just a musing, but I think heroism and doing something extraordinarily brave are nowadays easily mistaken for instability since they are so rare and run so contrary to our modern reverence for the sovereign self.


Looking forward to Tina D's views, too.

Hi Sophie.

Ty for your take on ST.

That gives me some insight as I make my way through his book.
Just that the begining of the book starts off with a personal history, and ST brief description of BC and his issues with the laissez faire attitude of LE is illuminating.

But as SD adds, "By-the-book" and "maverick" are a matter of perspective. Someone who's by-the-book in say, Miami, would be very much a maverick in Boulder", it is an issue of perspective,

For sure ..... ST didn't 'go with the flow'.

 

[Sophie]

Hi Sophie.

Ty for your take on ST.

That gives me some insight as I make my way through his book.
Just that the begining of the book starts off with a personal history, and ST brief description of BC and his issues with the laissez faire attitude of LE is illuminating.

But as SD adds, "By-the-book" and "maverick" are a matter of perspective. Someone who's by-the-book in say, Miami, would be very much a maverick in Boulder", it is an issue of perspective,

For sure ..... ST didn't 'go with the flow'.

TY Tad: very much looking forward to your review of ST's book when you have finished it.

I have to say that I struggle to see ST as being a maverick in any context, purely because he is demonstrably very bright and any fule know that cops cutting corners leads to acquittals on technicalities. I do see your point about perspective but presumably police have to obey laws of evidence whatever the jurisdiction - is it just that the laws are more stringent in Boulder than in, say, Miami?

From the perspective of a foreigner*, that sort of thing is something which makes US criminal law so fascinating. I mean, here, the legal system of England and Wales is different in its degree from that of Scotland and Northern Ireland but, essentially, something like the Police and Criminal Evidence Act will be applicable in most places. Really having an understanding of US law must be something quite special.

* Hmm, maybe HOTYH is right: I just called myself a foreigner despite previous assertions that no one considers themselves foreign.

 

[DeeDee249]

Sophie- different States do have different laws, even in murder cases. While Federal law governs Federal crimes, and are consistent in all States.
That is why the Colorado law concerning involvement of a minor took precedence in this case. In Colorado, the age at which someone can be accused of a crime is 10. Under that age, a child can not be arrested, indicted, accused. Nor can anyone who was an accomplice, even if they are over 10, if the under 10-year-old was involved.
BR was weeks shy of his 10th birthday.

 

[Becky319]

Sophie- different States do have different laws, even in murder cases. While Federal law governs Federal crimes, and are consistent in all States.
That is why the Colorado law concerning involvement of a minor took precedence in this case. In Colorado, the age at which someone can be accused of a crime is 10. Under that age, a child can not be arrested, indicted, accused. Nor can anyone who was an accomplice, even if they are over 10, if the under 10-year-old was involved.
BR was weeks shy of his 10th birthday.

IMO the Ramsey's were saving blaming BR as their ace in the hole in case they ever did get indicted, does anyone else think that?