Websleuths is mentioned in The Globe

[madeleine]

Off topic

Why is HOTYH on time out?

 

[Jenny60123]

I did!:wave: Tricia is only mentioned in the last paragraph.

I did too, it's about 2 sentences worth. :twocents:

 

[BBB167893]

Off topic

Why is HOTYH on time out?

Not sure, but if I had to guess, it would be over his implication that those here at WS who were victims of molestation or knew victims of molestation were just making their stories up.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

The Globe did not solve the case. I'm pretty sure it would all over the news if the case was solved. See: JMK in 2006.

 

[ziggy]

OK first what's up with the picture of JonBenet on that Globe cover? It looks like they doctored it and made her forehead higher or something...odd...not right.

Second, I hate when they claim the case has finally been solved when it's total BS.

Third: it's NO SHOCK - these photos have been on the internet for years - so it's just a way they decided to hype their story and by doing so they are driving more hits to that video I guarantee it.

Last - it's fine with me. I think the more people see the brutality of the autopsy photos the whole theory that it was staging because after Patsy accidently punished JonBenet for wetting the bed a little too zealously and thought she might have killed her, and then instead of driving her to a hospital, she just took the time to break a paintbrush handle, intricately tie a knot around a paintbrush handle and savagely garotte JonBenet while also sexually assaulting her and construct a fake kidnapping note to cover her tracks. See...to me that theory is plain fruitcake and when you look at these photos you see how fruitcake it is. Someone deliberately and brutally murdered JonBenet; it was no accident w/staging. So if these photos are out there and can shed more light on the logic that in my opinion has been so lost for so long, then maybe some good will come of it.

I long for her murder to be solved. I just don't think any RDI theories hold water.

PS: Team Lou RIP warrior.

 

[Linda7NJ]

sniped See...to me that theory is plain fruitcake and when you look at these photos you see how fruitcake it is. Someone deliberately and brutally murdered JonBenet; it was no accident w/staging. So if these photos are out there and can shed more light on the logic that in my opinion has been so lost for so long, then maybe some good will come of it.

I long for her murder to be solved. I just don't think any RDI theories hold water.

PS: Team Lou RIP warrior.

Perhaps, if you were privvy to autospy photos of other children brutally murdered by their own parent you could understand.

 

[BBB167893]

Perhaps, if you were privvy to autospy photos of other children brutally murdered by their own parent you could understand.

I was just about to say that. Apparently, so of our best law enforcement agents didn't think it was too "fruitcake." Ask Ron Walker about it sometime.

 

[tragco]

I never knew Lou Smit was the one who made the autopsy pictures public. Why would he do that?

off topic but I don't want to bug the mods: Why does this forum only have 3 pages? Do they get saved somewhere or are they just gone forever?

 

[ziggy]

Perhaps, if you were privvy to autospy photos of other children brutally murdered by their own parent you could understand.

And none of them would be garotted like that and none of them would have parents with zero history of mental or abuse issues.

Parents who kill their children are typically in custody battles, single mothers who want out (Susan Smith et. al come to mind), kids are beaten to death or locked away and starved; they are drowned by the psychotic, they may be stabbed by the psychotic, but the issue here is that JonBenet was brutally murdered and strangled with a garotte AND was sexually assaulted. Round up the numbers of kids who fit that description as the deceased in addition to parents who are married, financially stable and have no history of abuse or mental problems for me.

Because the number would be zero to zero, now the probability actually becomes less.

 

[Linda7NJ]

And none of them would be garotted like that and none of them would have parents with zero history of mental or abuse issues.

Parents who kill their children are typically in custody battles, single mothers who want out (Susan Smith et. al come to mind), kids are beaten to death or locked away and starved; they are drowned by the psychotic, they may be stabbed by the psychotic, but the issue here is that JonBenet was brutally murdered and strangled with a garotte AND was sexually assaulted. Round up the numbers of kids who fit that description as the deceased in addition to parents who are married, financially stable and have no history of abuse or mental problems for me.

Because the number would be zero to zero, now the probability actually becomes less.

You wouldn't have to look far to find children murdered or sexually abused by their parents in heinous ways, many strangled and many suffering from blunt force trauma. I admit the garrote was a unique touch. Pretty darn dramatic and over the top, if ya ask me. But that seems to be a trait of at least one of the Ramseys.

You don't think parents that never drew any attention haven't sexually abused their children? Haven't murdered their children. That married & financially secure parents never sexually abuse their children? Never physically abused and have never murdered their own children? Do you believe incest doesn't happen in "upstanding" families? How far would a parent go to keep that secret?

There's always a first time when caught

 

[BBB167893]

It's one thing to argue that such a thing has never happened before. It's another thing altogether to argue that because something looks a certain way, it could only have happened one way.

 

[claudicici]

Ziggy,I love you but as usual I have a hard time understanding your point of view.Are you saying because the Ramsey's were married and rich they could not have had any deep issues? How do we know there was no abuse going on in that house,how do we know there was no abuse going on in PR's past or even JR's past?How do we know what they were dealing with inside of their mind? These things have no boundaries ,why would it matter that they were married or had a lot of money?

 

[LinasK]

Ziggy,I love you but as usual I have a hard time understanding your point of view.Are you saying because the Ramsey's were married and rich they could not have had any deep issues? How do we know there was no abuse going on in that house,how do we know there was no abuse going on in PR's past or even JR's past?How do we know what they were dealing with inside of their mind? These things have no boundaries ,why would it matter that they were married or had a lot of money?

From another thread

A few statistics:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...8/chapter4.htm

"More than 70 percent (71.0%) of child fatalities were caused by one or more parents. More than one-quarter (26.6%) of fatalities were perpetrated by the mother acting alone."

"More than 40 percent (45.3%) of all fatalities were children younger than 1 year, 15.7 percent were children age 1 year, 11.2 percent were children age 2 years, and 7.6 percent were children age 3 years. Therefore, 79.8 percent were younger than 4 years old."

I certainly don't mind reposting this info, but PLEASE bookmark this gateway page:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/

This page will lead you to hundreds of links and statistics concerning child abuse, neglect and fatalities. It's very easy to navigate.