Eagle1
Former Member
Seems to me that's one of our biggest clues. From Schiller's book, I think, a Patsy quote.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Eagle1 said:Seems to me that's one of our biggest clues. From Schiller's book, I think, a Patsy quote.
From PMPT, re the afternoon of December 27 at the Fernies:Eagle1 said:Seems to me that's one of our biggest clues. From Schiller's book, I think, a Patsy quote.
I still don't see it. If she said "can you fix this for me?" doesn't mean anything. We need to know more of the context here. She could be asking her to fix something as minute as a seam. "We didn't mean for that to happen"- Well, what is the rest of the conversation. This tells me nothing.Britt said:From PMPT, re the afternoon of December 27 at the Fernies:
Kristine went to the bathroom to get a cool washcloth for Patsy's forehead. While she was gone, Patsy reached up and touched Pam's face. "Couldn't you fix this for me?" she asked. Pam thought she was delirious. It was as if Patsy were asking her to fix a ripped seam. "Patsy said something like, 'We didn't mean for that to happen,'" Pam would say later. p. 53 pb.
I think this is interesting, too:
While Patsy slept, Pam found John in the living room holding Burke. To Pam, Ramsey seemed to be in a trance. His face was blank. His eyes were red. "I don't get it," he said over and over. Then he got up, walked outside, shook his head, and asked aloud, "Why?" p. 53-54 pb.
And the day before, the 26th, at the Fernies:
Around 7:00 p.m. John Ramsey went for a walk with John Fernie and Dr. Francesco Beuf, JonBenet's physician, who had brought over some medication for Patsy. When they returned a half hour later, Ramsey asked Bynum to represent him. "I'm sorry, I'm so sorry," Ramsey told his friends over and over. Then, just after 8:00, he left alone to take a walk in the nearby foothills. p. 27 pb.
IMO the above described apologies and introspection make no sense in an intruder scenario. More like some kind of domestic tragedy.
Also, maybe it's just me, but if Burke did it, I find it hard to imagine John - the guy who barked angrily at Burke on the 911 tape - sitting there the next day holding him. Seems to me if John were seeking comfort, he wouldn't be cuddling with the perp.
Maybe it did. We, the public, have no way of knowing what the GJ thought. Alex Hunter chose not to pursue the case at that time:twizzler333 said:I think if all of the things people are posting here about the guilt of the Ramsey's and their cover up were true, the Grand Jury would have seen things that way.
Again, maybe it's just me, but if an intruder murdered my child, I'd be out for blood, turning the world upside down looking for him. I'd be shrieking with rage at the intruder and begging the police to help me find him. I'd not be sitting around wondering "why" and apologizing of all things.I think that their behavior from the time they found the note up until now has been exactly what I would expect from some people in that situation. Some people, naturally would react differently. I deal with the dead and survivors and there is nothing at all unusual about anything I have read thus far regarding their behavior.
IMO the Ramseys covered only for a Ramsey, and in the above type scenario they wouldn't have covered the way they did unless a Ramsey were personally involved. They would have extricated themselves from guilt and turned on the perp in a heartbeat. IMO no way would John and Patsy Ramsey have endured the stink of suspicion all these years unless they were deep in it themselves. Having an actual perp they could hand over to police would've solved the problem and "solved" the case.Eagle1 said:Sounds to me like a small group of them asked to borrow JonBenet for a little while for something pleasant-sounding, and the parents are beating up on themselves for having trusted them.
They were left with not only the body of their child, but a coverup to concoct to hide the fact they trusted criminals with their child, just handed her over.
Britt said:From PMPT, re the afternoon of December 27 at the Fernies:
Kristine went to the bathroom to get a cool washcloth for Patsy's forehead. While she was gone, Patsy reached up and touched Pam's face. "Couldn't you fix this for me?" she asked. Pam thought she was delirious. It was as if Patsy were asking her to fix a ripped seam. "Patsy said something like, 'We didn't mean for that to happen,'" Pam would say later. p. 53 pb.
I think this is interesting, too:
While Patsy slept, Pam found John in the living room holding Burke. To Pam, Ramsey seemed to be in a trance. His face was blank. His eyes were red. "I don't get it," he said over and over. Then he got up, walked outside, shook his head, and asked aloud, "Why?" p. 53-54 pb.
And the day before, the 26th, at the Fernies:
Around 7:00 p.m. John Ramsey went for a walk with John Fernie and Dr. Francesco Beuf, JonBenet's physician, who had brought over some medication for Patsy. When they returned a half hour later, Ramsey asked Bynum to represent him. "I'm sorry, I'm so sorry," Ramsey told his friends over and over. Then, just after 8:00, he left alone to take a walk in the nearby foothills. p. 27 pb.
IMO the above described apologies and introspection make no sense in an intruder scenario. More like some kind of domestic tragedy.
Also, maybe it's just me, but if Burke did it, I find it hard to imagine John - the guy who barked angrily at Burke on the 911 tape - sitting there the next day holding him. Seems to me if John were seeking comfort, he wouldn't be cuddling with the perp.
When your world is turned upside down, as the Ramsey's was, everyone is potentially the guilty. You lose your trust for anyone outside the immediate family. You gradually get some back, but it takes a while. I have no problem with their telling the police about the behavior of various people they knew. Wouldn't you if someone committed a crime against your family?Britt said:Seeker, it just seems to me that reflection and introspection would more naturally come much later, and that in the hours and days immediately following a home invasion/murder of one's child - such a horrific violation - one would be consumed with rage at the intruder and obsessed with getting him. Where was their outrage?
And what odd questions to be asking: "I don't get it" ? "Why?" What about: "Who are you, you *advertiser censored*? Where are you? I'm coming after you!" Instead of "I'm so sorry" to Fernie and Beuf, why not "Help me, guys, let's go find him! I'm gonna *advertiser censored**in' tear him apart!" and so on... especially since they supposedly had leads. If the Ramseys honestly suspected the people whose names they were offering up (in a real kidnapping/murder scenario), why weren't they confronting those people, asking questions? Both before and after the body was "found," why weren't they confronting, questioning, searching, demanding answers, insisting that their entourage and the police help them find their child and/or her kidnapper/killer?
I agree that their grief was clearly there. But their rage and their demand to know who did it so they could get their hands on him were conspicuously not. If there were really an intruder, IMO there's not enough valium and booze in the world to keep the Ramseys sitting around on the couch, doing nothing but crying and wondering "why." Quite the contrary: they would've been galvanized with fury.
Another reason they could have had for not tearing everyone apart and going into a rage is that they placed trust in the Boulder Police and thought that they would do a thorough job and follow the leads and take care of the business. They had to bury their precious little girl, they were in shock, and the police had a job to do. Let's face it, the police blew it. Had they done everything they should have done, and everything an experienced team would have done, we would not be here on this forum right now talking about this. I believe they would have caught the person. Everything was handled completely wrong. Instead of looking at the case with an open mind they were more concerned as to why the Ramsey's would want to take the body of their baby home (Atlanta) for a proper burial. They had to do this and they DO need to "move on with their life"...that doesn't mean they have to forget finding out what happened and why it happened and who did it. It just means they have to go on with life as they now know it for the surviving children(s) sake. Trust me, unless you have been in their shoes (or those like them), you really cannot judge them or condemn them for their actions. You always think you will react one way to certain situations but when the shoe is on YOUR foot, it is quite a different story. JMOBritt said:Seeker, it just seems to me that reflection and introspection would more naturally come much later, and that in the hours and days immediately following a home invasion/murder of one's child - such a horrific violation - one would be consumed with rage at the intruder and obsessed with getting him. Where was their outrage?
And what odd questions to be asking: "I don't get it" ? "Why?" What about: "Who are you, you *advertiser censored*? Where are you? I'm coming after you!" Instead of "I'm so sorry" to Fernie and Beuf, why not "Help me, guys, let's go find him! I'm gonna *advertiser censored**in' tear him apart!" and so on... especially since they supposedly had leads. If the Ramseys honestly suspected the people whose names they were offering up (in a real kidnapping/murder scenario), why weren't they confronting those people, asking questions? Both before and after the body was "found," why weren't they confronting, questioning, searching, demanding answers, insisting that their entourage and the police help them find their child and/or her kidnapper/killer?
I agree that their grief was clearly there. But their rage and their demand to know who did it so they could get their hands on him were conspicuously not. If there were really an intruder, IMO there's not enough valium and booze in the world to keep the Ramseys sitting around on the couch, doing nothing but crying and wondering "why." Quite the contrary: they would've been galvanized with fury.
Exactly! Until you've been there, you cannot say. I truly believe they have no idea who did this to their precious angel. I do believe it is someone they know though and don't really suspect or have publicly stated they suspect. I have my own thoughts as to who fits "my profile" but I will not say here. I do know they will be revealed some day. It will come out one day and justice will prevail for JonBenet and the Ramsey's.tipper said:It's not being cerebral and philosophical, it's being numb. Poleaxed is the best word I can think of. Most people don't understand that reaction until something bad happens to them. Most people, given a hypothetical situation, say they would behave the way you say you would behave. That the Ramseys seemed to be stunned and out-of-it is one of the things that lends credence to the belief they are innocent. Its a very natural reaction but not what someone who was pretending would come up with.