Comparing the Ramsey case to other cases

eileenhawkeye

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 16, 2010
Messages
8,755
Reaction score
130
Do you notice any similarities between the Ramsey case and other cases? Or between how John and Patsy acted and how other parents have acted?
 
I am reading JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation by Steve Thomas, a leading detective on this case. (I'm on page 279 to be exact (-: )

I am seeing so many similarities between the ramsey and the Baby Lisa cases; especially where the parents in both cases lawyered up and resisted interviews to the detriment of the investigation procedure.

This situation is playing out in the Sky Melalwala case, as well. I am so frustrated with seeing a pattern of moral actions being trumped by legalities!

IMO
 
Yep,I always thought JR and Jeffrey MacDonald behave and talk like they were twins...

Omg what a thing to say! this just demonstrates the extreme bias there is against the Ramseys.

Jeff MacD was found guilty in a court of law the evidence was overwhelming against him that he slaughtered his whole family. He is a cold hearted psychopath.

John Ramsey is INNOCENT until proven guilty, the evidence is NOT overwhelming against him.
 
Omg what a thing to say! this just demonstrates the extreme bias there is against the Ramseys.

Jeff MacD was found guilty in a court of law the evidence was overwhelming against him that he slaughtered his whole family. He is a cold hearted psychopath.

John Ramsey is INNOCENT until proven guilty, the evidence is NOT overwhelming against him.

but this has nothing to do with evidence or a court of law or the extreme bias you are talking about,it's just that one reminds me of the other,their love for tv appearances,they're both charming and have lots of female fans,they both blame it on incompetent cops,they're both using the same lines when talking about their victims,they are both very self confident and calm and sometimes calculated and cold.they both SAY how much they want the killers found but behind the scenes they do nothing.


ETA:they both promote fascinating IDI theories but on the other hand they are so cool and detached when talking about it,I see no anger,rage whatsoever when they are talking about the brutal monsters who killed their family members,weird huh.
 
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSrlPlhUgr8&feature=related"]March 27, 2000 - YouTube[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mAHTB73f6t0"]'48 Hrs.' on Jeffrey MacDonald 1/5 - YouTube[/ame]
 
Omg what a thing to say! this just demonstrates the extreme bias there is against the Ramseys.

Jeff MacD was found guilty in a court of law the evidence was overwhelming against him that he slaughtered his whole family. He is a cold hearted psychopath.

John Ramsey is INNOCENT until proven guilty, the evidence is NOT overwhelming against him.

I agree with Madeleine's reasonings, but I'd throw in Dr. Sam Sheppard, too. All three of them are psychopaths, and dearly love to be in the spotlight.

Edit-- I would also add Charles Lindbergh. I just don't buy his story.
 
Off the top of my head:
Baby Lisa
Sky
Darlie Routier
and I agree with Alix about Charles Lindbergh
 
I haven't followed Sky's case at all. What are the similarities?

The biggest similarity to me is the fact that Sky's mother says her child was abducted, and she is not being forthcoming with LE.

ETA: I just thought of another case I think is comparable to JBR. That is Madeleine McCann.
 
Nah I don't think the McCann's seem content to just sit back and let Maddie's disappearance fade into obscurity in the same way that the Ramsey's were content to let Jonbenet's murder go unsolved.

I get the impression they were not the type of couple who would let somebody do this to them and get away with it.
 

Thanks for posting these. I don't see the similarities, JM clearly does love the camera and his smug looks are quite nauseating, I dont see that with john he is far more uncomfortable in front of the camera.

Omg , people still doubt Charles Linderburg??? and the McCanns , no way , people will see others as guilty and be quite happy to judge based on little or no evidence, I'm not like that.
 
All I said in my post was that the McCann case is "comparable" to the JBR case. The McCann case is still unsolved, is it not? Both cases involve little girls and both remain unsolved-that's why I compared them.
 
All I said in my post was that the McCann case is "comparable" to the JBR case. The McCann case is still unsolved, is it not? Both cases involve little girls and both remain unsolved-that's why I compared them.

No hardly comparable at all on that basis , apart from the fact they were both girls one 6 and the other 3 and its unsolved-so what? apart from that nothing else.!!
 
Thanks for posting these. I don't see the similarities, JM clearly does love the camera and his smug looks are quite nauseating, I dont see that with john he is far more uncomfortable in front of the camera.


guess it depends on who you ask.there were times when I was tempted to believe JMCD,he's THAT good.never felt like this about JR though,always had the feeling he's hiding SOMETHING.

Omg , people still doubt Charles Linderburg??? and the McCanns , no way , people will see others as guilty and be quite happy to judge based on little or no evidence, I'm not like that.

I don't think the McCanns killed their daughter.police work in that case was a DISGRACE,it makes me sick and so does officer Amaral,he's full of cr@p,he's a liar IMO. :puke: his documentary was a bad bad joke.
 
guess it depends on who you ask.there were times when I was tempted to believe JMCD,he's THAT good.never felt like this about JR though,always had the feeling he's hiding SOMETHING.



I don't think the McCanns killed their daughter.police work in that case was a DISGRACE,it makes me sick and so does officer Amaral,he's full of cr@p,he's a liar IMO. :puke: his documentary was a bad bad joke.

totally agree with you re Amaral !:furious:

JMCD gave me the creeps from the off, the guy is a slimeball , why do these people attract women and manage to get married in prison , its beyond me!
 
Jeff MacD was found guilty in a court of law the evidence was overwhelming against him that he slaughtered his whole family. He is a cold hearted psychopath.

Ah, but again, no "history." I believe our mutual friend rashomon addressed that.

That said, FairM, you stand out. I'm serious. I think you're the first IDI I've ever met (myself included) who thought that Jeffrey MacDonald was guilty. Every other one doesn't. It's easy to see why, too.

John Ramsey is INNOCENT until proven guilty, the evidence is NOT overwhelming against him.

Well, I COULD make a crack that you're right, and that it's overwhelming against Patsy, but I won't do that. :innocent:
 
Even serial killers have a FIRST victim. No prior history that first time, is there.
It is the same with abuse- physical, sexual or emotional. There is always a first time, and sometimes the first time is also the ONLY time.
 
The ages are different, the length of time of the physical is different, and in the other case, the murderer was clear, and the two cases were at opposite ends of the socioeconomic spectrum, but for some reason, the JonBenet Case and the Sylvia Likens cases have parallels to me.
 
The ages are different, the length of time of the physical is different, and in the other case, the murderer was clear, and the two cases were at opposite ends of the socioeconomic spectrum, but for some reason, the JonBenet Case and the Sylvia Likens cases have parallels to me.

I googled Sylvia because I wasn't familiar with her and I came across this from Wikipedia.


"A play called Hey, Rube written by Janet McReynolds, was produced but never published."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Likens#section_5

The same Janet McReynolds?!
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
90
Guests online
751
Total visitors
841

Forum statistics

Threads
589,927
Messages
17,927,743
Members
228,002
Latest member
zipperoni
Back
Top