"Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey?"

[Cherokee]

Originally posted by Nehemiah
But they did go on CNN so soon after the murder. I can't see JR trusting that situation if Patsy were psychotic, or so recently psychotic that she had committed a crime. I would think a cool headed CEO would be afraid that she could get verbally out of control with a camera rolling.

We know that Patsy was drugged at the time of the CNN interview, and many people have surmised she was on some sort of benzodiazepine such as Valium, Xanax, Klonopin or the like.

These drugs are known as tranquilizers, and they inhibit spontaneous response as they are central nervous system depressors. These drugs have a calming effect because they keeps neurons from firing in certain areas of the brain, especially neurons carrying the anxiety hormone cortisol. This reduces any anxiety response in the individual, and so is used to combat panic attacks or other psychological disturbances.

If you watch the CNN interview closely, you notice Patsy rambles with her responses which is also indicative of someone under the influence of "tranquilizers." In addition, John controls the conversation, often interrupting Patsy, or taking over the topic at hand. He is careful to keep Patsy on a "short leash' as it were, and make sure she does not say something incriminating.



My opinion.

 

[Nehemiah]

Good point, Imon.

 

[BrotherMoon]

Thanks again Maxi. Any chance I can change my hat as per....?

Psychoses come and psychoses go,
What are you gonna do about it?
That's what I wanna know.--Paul Simon (Paraphrased)

I think the appearance on CNN was part of her psychotic behavior. She used a phrase right out of The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie when she broke in and said we feel there are at least two people that know, the killer and someone that person may have CONFIDED IN. John flinched noticeably.

DOI is also part of her psychosis. She just can't keep quiet.

My hope is the pressure cooker is still going and will pop when John lets the lid slip. Hot times in Charleviox?

 

[Imon128]

No doubt John' s reaction to Patsy's diatribe caused a 'flinch'. I guess it's u[ to our intrerpreation. Both parenst had a faux pas moment, no matter how we intrpret it, IMO.

 

[Ivy]

Not long after JonBenet's death, Patsy and Burke went to Michigan, alone. I don't believe John would have trusted Patsy to be alone with Burke if Patsy had psychotic tendencies, especially if she had killed JonBenet during a psychotic episode.

 

[sissi]

Good point IVY!
Patsy exhibited no sign of psychotic behaviors.
Maybe we should look at a few who did...Fleet in Atlanta....Randy
Simon ..running through the streets naked....Mervin Pugh..alchoholic or nut?.....Santa with his ramblings at the service....the guy who worked for Jay who said he saw the ghosts of children coming out of the sewers saying Jay killed her......MM who claims he was temporarily "gone" while robotripping over the holiday.....wow!! Boulder may have nuts,but why were there so many in Jonbenet's life.
After the murder a few more put in their two cents, Chris Wolf's girlfriend,the guy who attended the memorial service (forgot his name) do we call him St. Aquinas?....again santa...and on....
JMO that Patsy is innocent!!!!!

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by Ivy
As a BDIer, I find the Ramsey quotes in the following article excerpt interesting:

Theories about the Ramseys' guilt tend to cast one of them as the accomplice who is protecting the perpetrator.
"Anybody who's ever had a child, and thinks that, has to have rocks in their heads," Patsy said. "I mean, I love my husband. But I adore, passionately, my children. And if he ever laid a hand on them, I'd knock his block off. People just don't use their common sense."

"The police asked me that question," John said. "I had to think about it, because I'd never even thought about it. The police said, 'Just what if Patsy had done this? Would you turn her in? Would you turn on her?' Of course I would. I would have to."

Their son, Burke, who was 9 at the time of the killing, has been cleared by authorities. But both Ramseys agree it would be more tempting to cover up for your child than for your spouse.

"The love of a child is unconditional," John said. "So that presents a much bigger dilemma, if you love that child unconditionally, and yet they've done this horrible thing. But if you love that child, you've got to get help for that child. It's a tougher question to think through."

Source

Interesting read...
"We've not ever faulted anybody for looking at us," Patsy said. "Our child, our home, we're the parents. But don't stop there. That's the trouble."
...
"You can't protect against everything," John said. "Life is a risk. But you've got to implore people, when it comes to their children, to know that people look at your children and get sexually excited. Know that. We were ignorant of that. Be aware."
...
"I have thought a lot about what I want to happen to this killer," John said. "And what I want to have happen is, I want this person to suffer as much as my daughter suffered. If he values life more than anything, then put him to death. But in some cases, death can be a gift. And I am not going to give this person a gift.

:dontknow: what the R's saying (?s); trying to anyway?

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by Nehemiah
I know I am neurotic; perhaps I am a sociopath and psychotic, also, and don't know it? LOL I wonder upon what study Singular bases his statement? Very interesting but he'd have to prove that one to me!

I agree that certain held beliefs could mask the beginning of a psychotic episode. From what has been written/reported about Patsy, it has never appeared that she was suffering from a psychosis. With as much as was leaked about the case, I would think that something that serious would have been exposed in some form or the other to the public, but that's just my opinion.

Have you read dr.Hodges two books on this? Maybe Dr.Hodges' definition of Patsy's ways is their (psychosis?...yathink?it was in Dr.Hodges' two books (reatsy's character...?) that to-date, The R's have not sued him...wonder why?...

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by BrotherMoon
ajt400, Patsy is well protected by her husband and lawyers isn't she? With less pressure there is less need for disociation.

And remember, the object of the killing was to get a personal emissary to heaven. That has been accomplished. That would lessen symptoms right there. My guess is there has been a transfer of narcissistic needs to Burke and his role in their church. The psychosis continues.

I disagree with your anticipation of the progression and your use of the word disease. She isn't diseased, she is human.

And 2003-1996=7 not 8.

DITTO!...I agree ... do the math LOL!

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by BrotherMoon
Thanks again Maxi. Any chance I can change my hat as per....?

Psychoses come and psychoses go,
What are you gonna do about it?
That's what I wanna know.--Paul Simon (Paraphrased)

I think the appearance on CNN was part of her psychotic behavior. She used a phrase right out of The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie when she broke in and said we feel there are at least two people that know, the killer and someone that person may have CONFIDED IN. John flinched noticeably.

DOI is also part of her psychosis. She just can't keep quiet.

My hope is the pressure cooker is still going and will pop when John lets the lid slip. Hot times in Charleviox?

DrHodges books reveal this(Patsy's psychoses) IMHO!
http://enotalone.com/books/0961725524.html
THE INVESTIGATION CONTINUES VIA PSYCHO-LINGUISTICS
By necessity, Dr. Hodges repeats much of the rivetting research he first revealed in his first book on the Ramsey murder, A MOTHER GONE BAD, but here he and his learned colleagues go much further. Not only do they explore the hidden messages from the child killer(s) contained in the rambling "ransom note" found at the scene, they also expertly analyze subsequent statements by the Ramsey parents--all of which point to their sadly shared guilt. After making an amazingly strong case against the Ramseys, damning them with their own words no less, Dr. Hodges then takes aim at both the media and the would-be prosecutors, for their inability and/or unwillingness to accept this convincing psycholinguistic analysis as evidence suitable for a court of law. According to recent news reports (mid-July 2000) the parents--John and Patsy Ramsey--soon will schedule another of their rare meetings with Boulder Police in an effort to solve the Dec. 25, 1996 strangulation slaying of their six-year-old beauty queen daughter. Such a sitdown should be as good a time as any for the authorities to confont these prime suspects with the subliminal messages which Hodges and others have unearthed, including multiple references to Patsy's struggle with cancer and John's financial and professional guilt-trips. Dr. Hodges maintains that all human beings possess a "Deeper Intelligence" which comes to the fore regardless of efforts to suppress it. In this manner, he maintains that Patsy especially, as the author of the alleged ransom note, "brilliantly" tells the entire story of that awful Christmas night in Colorado four years ago. Anyone who still thinks the Ramseys are innocent owes it to themselves, to JonBenet, and to the very concepts of Truth and Justice, to hear Hodges out. As the good doctor himself advises the Ramseys in an "open letter" in this new book, "The Truth will set you free."

 

[ajt400]

I can't do math, I went to public school. They just taught us to use calculators if the digits are TOO big!

 

[BrotherMoon]

I'd like to belabor a dead horse concerning psychosis.

A psychosis occurs when a person's ego degrades to the point it becomes subject to the contents of the unconscious. The unconscious is the source of symbol, dream and myth. A psychotic may identify with a mythic figure or imagine themselves related to one and to be a part of a mythic storyline. Their behavior may have a high degree of structure and a low degree of rationality.

Patsy's psychosis has structure evidenced by the ransom note, the repeated references to The Psalms and literature in general. I include DOI here. Her psychosis has very much to do with numbers, dates, birthdays and the symbolism in letters, words and objects.

Her psychosis was timeline sensitive. It led up to a single date, the last Christmas before her 40th and JonBenet's 7th birthday. Her psychosis led to an act that was carried out. Her psychosis has structure much as a novel has the structure of; introduction, body, climax and denouement. Patsy is still in the psychotic denouement, her daughter is in heaven with a God awaiting her arrival.

As far as disease, I do not believe the psyche resides in the brain. It resides in the whole body and possibly beyond. Behavior pathology does not necessarily indicate physical pathology. There is major fault to be found with scientific materialism.

Patsy Ramsey is inhibited in her ability to function socially due to moral maladaptation and lack of maturation. It is these qualities that are compensated by an IMAGINED relationship to a supernatural being. This is something that humans in general have been grappling with throughout history.

Patsy's behavior and crime have little to do with disease and more to do with problems of the conscious moral nature that we all share.

 

[sissi]

BrotherMoon,I believe the person who killed Jonbenet was mentally ill,either induced by organic disease or by substance abuse. It is not uncommon for this type of person to be having some type of religious experience and incorporating it into their crime. Patsy,no,she's just fine,she didn't kill her baby!
imo

 

[BlueCrab]

Who killed JonBenet? Well, we know that it can reasonably be boiled down to the involvement of at least one of the three family members besides JonBenet who were known to be in the house that night.

John and Patsy have exculpatory evidence in their favor -- and Burke doesn't. And neither has Burke ever been cleared, since Hunter's affidavit, in my opinion, is an obvious fraud.

However, there is some evidence of a fifth person in the house that night --
and that person could have been the killer with a Ramsey family member as an unwilling accomplice.

The killing, in my opinion, involved EA (erotic asphyxiation) and was an accident followed by gruesome staging and a bizarre coverup. The physical evidence of the killing being the result of EA gone wrong is the EA device still wrapped around JonBenet's neck and the circumferential marks on the neck.

In my opinion JonBenet died accidentally during EA, and was then hit on the head and finally viciously strangled as part of the staging to make it appear that the "murder" was done by a terrorist foreign faction.

Just my opinion.

BlueCrab

 

[Ivy]

Welcome back, Blue Crab! We've missed you.

Would you please tell us what evidence there is of a possible fifth person in the house that night?

 

[eliza]

I also would like to welcome you back BlueCrab, I've been eagerly waiting for your return! That 5th person theory of yours seems very intriguing.

 

[Shylock]

Originally posted by BlueCrab
And neither has Burke ever been cleared, since Hunter's affidavit, in my opinion, is an obvious fraud.

Welcome back Blue Crab. You don't have to consider Burke's status as a suspect any more, it's a whole new investigation. The RST will be the first to tell you that Keenan has started from "ground-zero" with her own team and own investigation. That being the case, Burke is once again one of three prime suspects. And nobody from Keenan's office has said "boo" about him being cleared by this "new" investigation.

With that said, I have to add that I don't hold out any hope that this "new" team of investigators has any more common sense than the last bunch. Keenan has already shown herself to be quite the bimbo. I wouldn't hold my breath about anything in this case. The only sure-thing is that no intruder will EVER be caught. Ramsey supporters have a better chance of witnessing the second coming of Christ before the capture of their beloved intruder.

 

[Nehemiah]

Welcome back BlueCrab. Did you get a new computer?

 

[sissi]

Absolutely, there was a fifth person in that house......the killer!
IMO
Who was it?
Was it someone we "know"?
Was it
Fleet in the throws of a manic episode?
Was it a Pugh,who didn't like the way their child was treated as second hand rose?
Was it an "alley" dweller?
Was it Santa? How many of your spouses carve out the names of dead children?
Was it that oriental young man that lived with the "steins or fernies",I forget which?
Was it the twins who lived with melody stanton?
How about the "prophet",who liked to decapitate barbies and take their pictures?
Chris wolf,why would he?Political reasons?
The gardener,who noticed her leg muscles and her "deep" thoughts?
The Boulder burglar?
Could it be the photographer who ran naked throught the streets screaming to all that he was innocent?
A scorned business associate,Merrick?
The babysitter,who gave up dates because she loved Jonbenet so much she needed to watch her?(at 19 puleaze)
Maybe the eccentric who set the foyer on fire? His handwriting is darn close,but he just liked dressing up the already dead.
Or perhaps Jay's employee who saw the ghosts tell him Jay did it?
Has anyone ever read a novel..where there were sooooooooo many possibilities.
And.....without really knowing each individually ,how can we think Patsy ,Burke or any Ramsey is the best choice. Heck they seem the least psychotic of the "Boulder group".

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by BrotherMoon
Yes, strangulation first rules out accident.

Head blow second rules in ritual.

Blazeboy3, I mean JonBenet's death does not revolve around sexual abuse as so many of the lay detectives think.

Patsy did the deed but she was using JonBenet before the famous deed in ways that had nothing to do with sex and she continues to use her in ways that have nothing to do with sex.

The Psalms are refered to over and over by Patsy before the event, after in DOI and in the ransom note. Patsy repeatedly ties the angel theme to JonBenet, again before, after and during the event. Patsy's ruminations on God are projected on to JonBenet.

The blow to the head, the initial strangulation, the final position of the garrote, the raising of the arms, the implied posing of the body and the duct tape point to obsessional thinking about corporeal issues in the upper region. And the large panties refer to lower body issues.

The nature of this crime points to a wide spectrum of psychological and physical concerns in the perp, not just sex.

I totally agree...but Jesus...didn't ANYONE SEE THIS COMING??? ,,, ... reminds me of when Patsy stated that it was "premeditated"--and she's the only one that stated that word--thought!!!:dontknow:

Main Entry: pre·med·i·tat·ed
Function: adjective
Date: 1590
: characterized by fully conscious willful intent and a measure of forethought and planning <premeditated murder>
- pre·med·i·tat·ed·ly adverb
by Merriam-Webster, Incorporated