What's eating you alive re this case?

[DeeDee249]

Well, I can’t speak for the “IDI group,” but I certainly recognize how and why the Ramseys came to be suspects (beyond the fact that they were in the house), and I think that some of the responsibility for this lies at their feet. Regardless, it is simply not true that IDI do not understand the evidence, or that they have not considered the possibility of RDI, or that we deny all reason for suspicion, etc.

What eats me alive re this case? The certainty, the conviction with which a Thomas, a Kolar (an RDI) speaks.
...

AK

Well Thomas and Kolar speak with conviction because they actually investigated the case. If anyone can be certain the family was involved, it is them.

 

[Anyhoo]

Well Thomas and Kolar speak with conviction because they actually investigated the case. If anyone can be certain the family was involved, it is them.

I don't need to have officially investigated the case to be certain that the family was involved. All the indications are there for those who have eyes to see them. I have nothing but contempt for the Ramsey family because they have lied to everyone so blatantly. If there is a God, there will be justice for the Ramsey family in the end.

 

[Venom]

Well, I can’t speak for the “IDI group,” but I certainly recognize how and why the Ramseys came to be suspects (beyond the fact that they were in the house), and I think that some of the responsibility for this lies at their feet. Regardless, it is simply not true that IDI do not understand the evidence, or that they have not considered the possibility of RDI, or that we deny all reason for suspicion, etc.

What eats me alive re this case? The certainty, the conviction with which a Thomas, a Kolar (an RDI) speaks.
...

AK

BBM- Thank you. Most idi's have rose colored glasses on and think that the R's did nothing wrong, questionable, hinky, and odd. All jmo.

ETA- Kolar and Thomas investigated the case, have seen the case file and evidence: I believe they can speak with conviction. Again jmo.

 

[Venom]

Now to answer the question of what is eating me alive about this case-

The simple fact that this 6 year old girl has been failed and denied justice. She was a kid, she should have had the chance to grow up, but that was taken from her. From what the GJ voted, it was he parents that aided in and/or took that chance from her. Or if you're in the opposite camp, a stranger, or acquaintance took that chance from her. Then again, you have the DA's bungling up of the case, the police making mistakes. Her parents put out a reward at first, then that disappeared. How could those closest to her fail her? Where was the fight to find her killer by her family and the DA's office? This girl has only us, ordinary people who come together on a message board trying to find some justice and answers for her; or the investigators who went out of the way to try to get her justice (ST, JK)
Please don't take this post and start an argument over it, it is not meant to bash IDI's. Just gets to me that she won't have justice, as I feel the case will never be solved. JMO

 

[chlban]

[DeeDee249;10208622

]Well Thomas and Kolar speak with conviction because they actually investigated the case. If anyone can be certain the family was involved, it is them.

Exactly.

I think if I had to sum up the thing that eats at me the most it would be the overall behavior of the Ramseys. From their refusal to co-operate, John actually belieiving he would be allowed to leave town that day, calling half the city of Boulder to the house that morning, in spite of the warnings about JB being beheaded if they spoke to so much as stray dog ( I mean come on folks you composed the letter, why include that only to then ignore it?) allowing Burke to stroll off that morning, when they should have been unable to let him out of their site. Just the overall entitled attitude. They knew they could get away with it. So OK that's what really eats at me. They did.

 

[Anyhoo]

[DeeDee249;10208622

Exactly.

I think if I had to sum up the thing that eats at me the most it would be the overall behavior of the Ramseys. From their refusal to co-operate, John actually belieiving he would be allowed to leave town that day, calling half the city of Boulder to the house that morning, in spite of the warnings about JB being beheaded if they spoke to so much as stray dog ( I mean come on folks you composed the letter, why include that only to then ignore it?) allowing Burke to stroll off that morning, when they should have been unable to let him out of their site. Just the overall entitled attitude. They knew they could get away with it. So OK that's what really eats at me. They did.

I know this is going outside of the scope of this thread, but you got me thinking about something. Regarding the Ramsey's calling all those people over to the house that morning, I had always thought that was done just to give the Ramsey's cover against LE being called over to the house that morning. By this I mean, it is a lot more comfortable for the Ramsey's if they have their friends and supporters there at the house while LE is there than if the Ramsey's were to face LE alone. If you haven't thought about that, think about how much more awkward it would be for them to face LE alone, which would paint them less as victims and more as perps. So I have thought this was a calculated defensive move to have those people there while LE was there, to protect the Ramsey's. While I still think that, you and others have mentioned a point which I had not considered much, which is that the RN is very specific (in fact it goes out of its way) to warn the Ramsey's about contacting or letting anyone know about the "kidnapping" or JB will die. It is curious to say the least that the Ramsey's would ignore and disregard this part of the RN that they themselves created. Supposedly they were being closely monitored and yet they called all these friends over and also called police over. Did they do this in spite of the RN warnings OR did they do it because of the RN warnings? Was this calculated to somehow support the intruder theory and to justify JB being killed? But JB had been killed well before the parents called these people over, so how could that justify her murder?

What do others here make of it? In any case, I find this whole thing to be extremely bizarre even now when I contemplate it.

 

[Venom]

I know this is going outside of the scope of this thread, but you got me thinking about something. Regarding the Ramsey's calling all those people over to the house that morning, I had always thought that was done just to give the Ramsey's cover against LE being called over to the house that morning. By this I mean, it is a lot more comfortable for the Ramsey's if they have their friends and supporters there at the house while LE is there than if the Ramsey's were to face LE alone. If you haven't thought about that, think about how much more awkward it would be for them to face LE alone, which would paint them less as victims and more as perps. So I have thought this was a calculated defensive move to have those people there while LE was there, to protect the Ramsey's. While I still think that, you and others have mentioned a point which I had not considered much, which is that the RN is very specific (in fact it goes out of its way) to warn the Ramsey's about contacting or letting anyone know about the "kidnapping" or JB will die. It is curious to say the least that the Ramsey's would ignore and disregard this part of the RN that they themselves created. Supposedly they were being closely monitored and yet they called all these friends over and also called police over. Did they do this in spite of the RN warnings OR did they do it because of the RN warnings? Was this calculated to somehow support the intruder theory and to justify JB being killed? But JB had been killed well before the parents called these people over, so how could that justify her murder?

What do others here make of it? In any case, I find this whole thing to be extremely bizarre even now when I contemplate it.

I think you're right about them calling people over to "shield" themselves from LE. They probably thought that the more people there the less likely to be observed. Police would have 7 people to watch instead of the 2.

 

[Anyhoo]

I think think you're right about them calling people over to "shield" themselves from LE. They probably thought that the more people there the less likely to be observed. Police would have 7 people to watch instead of the 2.

My original thought is that the Ramsey's would be much less likely to be critically questioned and possibly arrested on the spot after JB's body was found if the Ramsey's were surrounded by sympathetic friends and supporters. I think this is the real reason why these people were called over. Imagine if there had been no one else there after JR brought JB's body from the basement. In that case, it is going to be very uncomfortable for the Ramsey's. Having these other people there, along with the fake RN, protected the Ramsey parents from immediately being arrested. So they did this on purpose. Also, this makes it apparent why the RN was written in the first place, which was also to protect the Ramsey's. If you remove the RN, all suspicion for the murder falls 100% onto the Ramsey's. So the RN and the other people there were both shields for the Ramsey's. But this still fails to explain why the parents would add that part about 'if you contact a dog, she dies' and then completely ignore it.

 

[Junebug99]

The fact that the RDI's act as if grand jury indictment automatically equals guilt. Yet when they thought they didn't hand down an indictment it meant nothing regarding innocence. Such a double standard.

 

[Anyhoo]

The fact that the RDI's act as if grand jury indictment automatically equals guilt. Yet when they thought they didn't hand down an indictment it meant nothing regarding innocence. Such a double standard.

I am RDI and I don't think the GJ indictment automatically equals guilt. This is simple-minded stereotyping on your part.

 

[Mama2JML]

This: (RSBM)

The misinformation, The lies, the slanted stories.

...& this: (RSBM)

The certainty, the conviction with which a Thomas, a Kolar (an RDI) speaks.
...

AK

...&, primarily, THIS: (RS&BBM)

The simple fact that this 6 year old girl has been failed and denied justice. She was a kid, she should have had the chance to grow up, but that was taken from her.

This case was compromised from the start. The Ramseys, the DAs, the BPD, competing "experts", the media, greed, egos, etc. have contributed in impeding justice for a most deserved little girl. ...and it continues.

I'm not sure it's possible, but this case needs compromise and a "coming together of the minds". The BDA vs. the BPD & IDI vs. RDI will not move this case toward resolution, as evidenced by the last 17 years.

I SOOO wish we were all "big enough" to move beyond the "tit for tat", refocus our minds on the ultimate (shared) goal, refine our strategies & theories, and at least progress toward some sort of justice.

I know, wishful thinking, and I'm at fault just as much as the next guy...

:truce:

 

[Venom]

This: (RSBM)


...& this: (RSBM)


...&, primarily, THIS: (RS&BBM)


This case was compromised from the start. The Ramseys, the DAs, the BPD, competing "experts", the media, greed, egos, etc. have contributed in impeding justice for a most deserved little girl. ...and it continues.

I'm not sure it's possible, but this case needs compromise and a "coming together of the minds". The BDA vs. the BPD & IDI vs. RDI will not move this case toward resolution, as evidenced by the last 17 years.

I SOOO wish we were all "big enough" to move beyond the "tit for tat", refocus our minds on the ultimate (shared) goal, refine our strategies & theories, and at least progress toward some sort of justice.

I know, wishful thinking, and I'm at fault just as much as the next guy...

:truce:

BBM- Mama, that is one thing that we can agree on, and that JB deserves to have justice.

It's not about IDI's, RDI's, DA, BPD, experts, GJ's at the end it's about JonBenet Ramsey who didn't get a chance to grow up.

 

[Anyhoo]

I'm not sure it's possible, but this case needs compromise and a "coming together of the minds". The BDA vs. the BPD & IDI vs. RDI will not move this case toward resolution, as evidenced by the last 17 years.

I SOOO wish we were all "big enough" to move beyond the "tit for tat", refocus our minds on the ultimate (shared) goal, refine our strategies & theories, and at least progress toward some sort of justice.

I know, wishful thinking, and I'm at fault just as much as the next guy...

:truce:

I agree with you that if we are to hope to solve this case that there needs to be coming together of a unified theory that explains all of the evidence. It does the case no good for all these individual theories to exist which never come together or resolve themselves in any way. It is like we are all going around in circles trying to justify our own individual beliefs, but in the meantime the case never gets solved. Having said that, I believe there is too much of a gulf between IDI and RDI for those two groups to ever compromise. The various RDI groups could come together, but IDI and RDI will never agree.

EDIT to ADD: As an RDI, I can say that if there were ever to be a compromise with the IDI group it would be this: That the Ramsey's allowed a non-Ramsey to kill their daughter and then covered up for the person(s) afterwards. The only compromise I would ever be willing to make has the Ramsey's not murdering their daughter but knowing who did and why. That is a long way from IDI but also not RDI. This would indicate a conspiracy. I am not saying this happened but I would be willing to consider it.

 

[chlban]

My original thought is that the Ramsey's would be much less likely to be critically questioned and possibly arrested on the spot after JB's body was found if the Ramsey's were surrounded by sympathetic friends and supporters. I think this is the real reason why these people were called over. Imagine if there had been no one else there after JR brought JB's body from the basement. In that case, it is going to be very uncomfortable for the Ramsey's. Having these other people there, along with the fake RN, protected the Ramsey parents from immediately being arrested. So they did this on purpose. Also, this makes it apparent why the RN was written in the first place, which was also to protect the Ramsey's. If you remove the RN, all suspicion for the murder falls 100% onto the Ramsey's. So the RN and the other people there were both shields for the Ramsey's. But this still fails to explain why the parents would add that part about 'if you contact a dog, she dies' and then completely ignore it.

It could have been that they wanted them to use as shields in a sense. I have
just always kind of thought that Patsy could not resist the drama. She had her friends there to feel sorry for her, fawn over her, etc.

Also, don't forget there was by every account I have read a very strange vibe going on between John and Patsy that morning. The didn't speak, didn't comfort each other, basically acted like they didn't even know each other instead of two parents suffering over the kidnapping of their child.
That is always a dynamic that made me lean toward PDI. Of course if could work the other way too. If either parent did it, the other would be pretty understandably mad as heck.

So I always thought the friends were supposed to distract a bit from that dynamic a bit also. Although it seems pretty much everyone there that day noticed the odd beavior between them. At least everyone that has ever spoken about it.

 

[otg]

I agree with you that if we are to hope to solve this case that there needs to be coming together of a unified theory that explains all of the evidence. It does the case no good for all these individual theories to exist which never come together or resolve themselves in any way. It is like we are all going around in circles trying to justify our own individual beliefs, but in the meantime the case never gets solved. Having said that, I believe there is too much of a gulf between IDI and RDI for those two groups to ever compromise. The various RDI groups could come together, but IDI and RDI will never agree.

Good luck with trying to unite everyone.

​

 

[Scandigirl]

I agree with you that if we are to hope to solve this case that there needs to be coming together of a unified theory that explains all of the evidence. It does the case no good for all these individual theories to exist which never come together or resolve themselves in any way. It is like we are all going around in circles trying to justify our own individual beliefs, but in the meantime the case never gets solved. Having said that, I believe there is too much of a gulf between IDI and RDI for those two groups to ever compromise. The various RDI groups could come together, but IDI and RDI will never agree.

EDIT to ADD: As an RDI, I can say that if there were ever to be a compromise with the IDI group it would be this: That the Ramsey's allowed a non-Ramsey to kill their daughter and then covered up for the person(s) afterwards. The only compromise I would ever be willing to make has the Ramsey's not murdering their daughter but knowing who did and why. That is a long way from IDI but also not RDI. This would indicate a conspiracy. I am not saying this happened but I would be willing to consider it.

Just wanted to join in, and say that I agree- the holy grail would be to find one conclusive theory, that fits everything! But, maybe the problem is that everyone's scratching their heads, trying to find a logical explanation for all the bizarre aspects that seem to contradict each other, because we're all looking at it rationally, from a distance? And maybe sometimes in real life, things happen or people act/react in ways that aren't sensible/rational/logical at the time? I don't know, just my thoughts...?

Also, your mention about being willing to consider conspiracies, and why the Ramsey's would contradict the ransom note and incite their friends round... Does the ransom note statements "if you tell anyone about your situation" or "talk to a stray dog" etc sound like one Ramsey warning or threatening the other not to tell anyone the truth about what happened? Which might be a separate issue for the Ramsey's than inviting people over?

If the friends were invited for protection, could they also know something about the situation, or be part of some kind of group with the Ramsey's? I don't know what, only vague thoughts, and I know their friends were all cleared as suspects... I just thought it odd that apparently John was heard apologising to his friends, saying "I'm so sorry..." I would have thought it should be the other way round, and his friends should have been saying that to him, as in: "We're so sorry this awful this has happened to you"?

 

[Nom de plume]

There is nothing about this case that requires "coming together" or "compromising". Coming to a consensus does nothing to solve the case. There is no way both sides can be right. One camp is right and the other is wrong. Simple as that.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

There is nothing about this case that requires "coming together" or "compromising". Coming to a consensus does nothing to solve the case. There is no way both sides can be right. One camp is right and the other is wrong. Simple as that.

And on that we finally agree.



Forgive the autocorrect. Tapatalk has a mind of its own.

 

[M.James]

I think that even if we knew what happened there’d still be a thousand ‘whys’. There are too many things that don’t make sense in any scenario.

I’ve spent some years trying to convince myself that the Ramseys aren’t guilty – because I don’t want them to be. It’s easier to believe that an intruder/stranger abused JonBenet’s body before, during, after. As it is, I’ve never been able to convince myself of that.

Here are a few things that won’t allow me to think they didn’t do it:

The lies – this is not anything new to anyone here, so there has never been a reason to mention it for the millionth time. Lying is hiding – always.

But, now I’m going to mention a couple of things that are so small that they’ll likely sound silly to others, and I’m sorry, they’re some of the things I can’t move passed, and are things I was going to mention in Dave’s Insane Thread, eventually, but changed my mind.

Their book – The Death of Innocence. This book was so boring, so poorly written and poorly edited that I couldn’t finish it. I’ve tried to force myself to read on more than once, but the arrogance and pride outweigh any sorrow. I've read enough.
Much of the time I would think John was speaking it was Patsy, and vice-versa.
Too much ink was wasted with them trying to convince readers of how successful and smart they were and how it came to be. Most of it was irrelevant to the subject, to JonBenet. I would summarize what I read as John and Patsy patting their own successful, egotistical backs. Remember – I did not finish reading this book.
Anyway, so many opportunities were wasted by their arrogance. Arrogance should not outweigh sadness.
They took advantage of a horrific situation to congratulate themselves – of course, this doesn’t make them guilty.

Coat and shoes – Unless I’ve missed any comments about this I’ve never heard it mentioned, and I’ve looked around. This bugs me almost more than anything. Yes, it’s a little crazy, but it keeps me from believing in that intruder.
It was cold, it had been snowing.
If I were Patsy and thought my kid had been taken from the home I’d be nuts wondering if she had a coat and shoes on. Nuts wondering if she was cold. I’d tell the police if her coat and shoes were missing or not. And, if not, I wouldn’t be able to focus on much more than her not having her coat and shoes. Yet, I’ve never heard whether Patsy mentioned anything about these things. Her not wondering tells me she knew she didn’t need them.

Does this prove they’re guilty? No. But, I think about it every time I try to think of an intruder theory. And, besides the obvious, that’s what “eats me alive” (thread title) about this case.

 

[DeeDee249]

As far as the Rs calling over their friends, clergy and "victim's advocates"...Yes, they used their friends as "human shields" in a way- a buffer between police and them. It was one more way to keep the police distracted- all the extra people milling about an active crime scene. I believe it was Officer French, the first officer to arrive, that had the responsibility of clearing the home of anyone not a family member, and of course, he did not.
And lets not forget there is no better way to present yourself as a victim than to surround yourself with "victims advocates".