nancy krebs

i think this lady is mostly discredited at this forum. i'm wondering why there is not more discussion about her or at least some more info about why she should not be taken seriously. there are aspects of her "story" which make sense at least to me: she describes abuse such as use of a garotee and electrocution which coincide with aspects of the ramsey case, she describes christmas parties as the pretext for such abuse and points toward the whites (there were two christmas parties - one at the ramseys and one at the whites. also i believe forensics pointed toward sexual abuse of jonbent two days before christmas day which i believe coincides with the ramsey's party), her allegations of powerful people involved would help explain in part why this case is growing cold and the DA's office appears at odds with the police, reports showed that krebs had recently been physically and sexually abused as she had said, krebs goes in hiding out of fear for her life, the ladies therapists gets threatening calls, etc.


this type of abuse in families and even in more extended groups has been documented in other cases, why does no one seem to take it too seriously here?


remember also that JB had problems with bedwetting ( a sign of sexual abuse), appeared down a lot to third parties (low esteem or depression in a 6 year old -- why whould that be), and had been treated numerous times by her physicians for a variety of ailments (some "falls" or other "accidents")...

can anyone shed some light? thanks

Iron, what hat have you posted under before?

It is almost impossible for someone to ask about Krebs without having posted in the forum world elsewhere about her.

Thanks.
Tricia

Tricia said:

Iron, what hat have you posted under before?

It is almost impossible for someone to ask about Krebs without having posted in the forum world elsewhere about her.

Thanks.
Tricia

Click to expand...

this is the first forum regarding jonbent in which i have posted, honestly. i've read about krebs (really the mystery woman in artilces that came out in 2000. i saw the lady's name in this and other fourms) in researching the saga (and read a lot at ffj forum -- where i just joined under cberg but can't post yet). just recently got interested in the case. i just see little discussion about the MW here other than people simply saying she's a crackpot etc and see that she's dismissed by most at FFJ.

It just seems to me that the woman and her story shouldn't be so easily dismissed. As noted in my original post there are some parallels and she did have some older guy convicted of rape when she was a teen. From what I can gather most think she's nuts because of what i see are minor inconsistencies and that the story seems to strange or scary to believe. i just would like to know from people who have been following the events for sometime why there is no (or little) credence given to her allegations.

Sheesh! I've followed the Krebs story from the beginning and you know a heck of a lot for a newbie to Krebs.

Let me put it this way Iron... a freak named M**e supported a delusional person named Nancy, mislead posters about Nancy and took money from them. Then M**e claimed another person was responsible for the missing funds/stuff.

Nancy has an interview with the BPD and ANYONE reading it can see she is confused or lying. Her own theories don't hold up.

Soooooo beware of the lying 3 M's and Ms H. each has an agenda against Fleet White cause he wouldn't give M**e the time of day and she's been pissed at him ever since.

Oh don't get us started on Nancy! lololol...

Show me and Tricia:
thanks for the responses. like i said in the past month or so i did a lot of reading about the case cuz i had some extra time, so i'm not a newbie so to speak to the krebs woman- just never posted in these forums before. i just didn't get why so she was so easily dismissed. maybe you could point me to the intervie with the bpd. seriously though not to open a can of worms but maybe a quick couple of sentences to say why krebs and her therapist (bientkowski i think) are confused and/or lying? what would be their motivations?

Please read what Snapple from CS has to say regarding Nancy Krebs. Snapple is an expert in Soviet studies. She claimed the radical leftist groups in Boulder was responsible for the Nancy Krebs Story. I believe her 100%.

http://www.cybersleuths.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004609

Shawna said:

Please read what Snapple from CS has to say regarding Nancy Krebs. Snapple is an expert in Soviet studies. She claimed the radical leftist groups in Boulder was responsible for the Nancy Krebs Story. I believe her 100%.

http://www.cybersleuths.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004609

Click to expand...

1. from what i can gather from snapple's post is that there is a group (AIM) that sets as their goal to discredit law enforcement and the courts (for what exact reasons i couldn't precisely gather other than there affiliation to the Indians is related to the murder of american indians around the 1900's and possible failure to properly punish the guilty parties by the fbi) and his idea is that this same group (i did read that Hill took Krebs to an Indian reservation for protection) puts krebs out there to discredit the fbi or cops? i suppose it's possible but according to the therapists story, she and krebs contacted Hill not the other way around.

2. how does kreb's story really discredit the courts and cops when the authorities hadn't any evidence of some sort of sex ring until she came forward (at least i don't know of any)? i just don't see what a leftist group would gain from the story.

3. also, there are documented paedophile ring cases (a big scandal of recent in Belgium where senior officials are implicated in a cover up, and there have been cases in the us-- do a search for "Finders" scandal (daycare I think) for example )

Show Me said:

Sheesh! I've followed the Krebs story from the beginning and you know a heck of a lot for a newbie to Krebs.

Let me put it this way Iron... a freak named M**e supported a delusional person named Nancy, mislead posters about Nancy and took money from them. Then M**e claimed another person was responsible for the missing funds/stuff.

Nancy has an interview with the BPD and ANYONE reading it can see she is confused or lying. Her own theories don't hold up.

Soooooo beware of the lying 3 M's and Ms H. each has an agenda against Fleet White cause he wouldn't give M**e the time of day and she's been pissed at him ever since.

Oh don't get us started on Nancy! lololol...

Click to expand...

I read the BPD interview on FFJ. Call me crazy, I just don't see obvious lies or delusions (some dates are a bit confused, i.e., she first says Fleet sr stopped abusing her in 1980, then it's 1990 but nothing that couldn't be expalined by nerves). The story is out there in that no one wants to think of such stuff going on but not unbelievable. She showed the officers notes and pictures from the Whites, she detailed a note from Uncle Johnny to her mother in 1974, she talked about being strangled to produce an effect for her abusers gratification (and maybe *advertiser censored*) which has obvious ties to jonbent and the garotee (what intruder or non child abuser would think of such a thing??). She obviously knows the White family and has obviously been abused (i know i read that a BPD examination of her showed she had been abused recently as she said). There are some sick people out there, many who pass themselves off as respectable people....
How and why would somone make up such elaborate stories with such ugly details (just so she can go into hiding)?
Why haven't FW or JR sued her if untrue??

Iron, I love it when new people post at WS. It is how we keep things fresh. Everyone is welcome.

Please don't take this wrong but I don't believe for one second you are a "newbie."

I will not respond to your Krebs thread. I know where this is going. I can spot it a mile away.

Working on www.supportramseytruth.com and nothing is going to distract me.

Nice try.

Tricia

Welcome to the forum!

Regarding the Krebs story - to quote Patsy Ramsey "Don't go their pal"

The Ramsey forums have a complex group structure. Membership of these groups depends on a variety of factors but principally, on how the posters articulate the case AND the quality of the case information the posters have been exposed to.

Websleuths is a friendly forum and we welcome newbies. However, there are certain discussion topics which are extremely sensitive and this is one of them. Nancy Krebs is a sideshow which never fails to cause ructions. It is also one which is started deliberately - "to disrupt".

Because of this, you will find your questions are either treated with suspicion or simply ignored.

For my part, I know nothing about the Nancy Krebs sideshow and nor do I wish to. The issues appear to be confused and conflicting. Besides, I believe it has little bearing on the Ramsey case.

I suggest you try Cybersleuths Iron....there is one or two posters on it, just crazy about the AIM and Nancy! No way you are a newbie. In fact the only place I've read about AIM and Nancy was on Cybersleuths......

iron said:

... there are documented paedophile ring cases ...

Click to expand...

Hmm. British spelling. Isn't the poster "Horace Mills" (ardent Fleet White hater) a Brit?

Not that there's anything wrong with Brits. Some of my best friends are Brits. ;-)

IMO

Again, people love a good yarn, a good boogeyman story, a good paranoia driven conspiracy. It's a lot easier than dealing with the truth, which requires discipline and a moral sense.

Btw, it would be nice if posters would include their area of residence.

Never heard of her.

RR

RiverRat said:

Never heard of her.

RR

Click to expand...

Funny RR, I have never heard of her either. She doesn't seem to be the type of person I'd trust though! Just sayin'.

Jayelles said:

Welcome to the forum!

Regarding the Krebs story - to quote Patsy Ramsey "Don't go their pal"

The Ramsey forums have a complex group structure. Membership of these groups depends on a variety of factors but principally, on how the posters articulate the case AND the quality of the case information the posters have been exposed to.

Websleuths is a friendly forum and we welcome newbies. However, there are certain discussion topics which are extremely sensitive and this is one of them. Nancy Krebs is a sideshow which never fails to cause ructions. It is also one which is started deliberately - "to disrupt".

Because of this, you will find your questions are either treated with suspicion or simply ignored.

For my part, I know nothing about the Nancy Krebs sideshow and nor do I wish to. The issues appear to be confused and conflicting. Besides, I believe it has little bearing on the Ramsey case.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the welcome. First, I don't know why it's so important but I swear on my unborn children that I've never posted in any JBR forum prior to this one where I have about 10 posts. (I've registered at FFJ under cberg, but can't post yet). I'm not a newbie because due in part to too much time on my hands in the past few weeks I've delved into this case via the internet I guess for my own satisfaction to try and figure out why this case is cold. I've learned a lot in that time thanks in part to some of you posters. I'm not trying to rancle any established code or decorum to these forums. I guess I'm just trying to get some new info and see why everyone so quickly dismisses what I think could be very relevant. (I guess b/c I've not been posting in these forums when the woman's story broke and probably discussed ad nauseum I'm not desensitized to it. I was hoping someone with greater knowledge would explain why very few take it seriously. All i"m getting is that she's crazy, its paranoia (sp?), a conspiracy etc without really discussing what this lady told the police and showed the police ).

I don't even know if I want to be a particular member of this complex group stucture, I was just looking to discuss the case but I will respect the more senior poster or at least try to. I can also articulate further and more intelligently why I think Krebs is relevant (quickly: 1. JBR showed signs of prior sex abuse; 2. the garottee and ligature --how would an insider know about these if they weren't doing such things; 3. the paint brush--why would a parent do this unless to cover up abuse; 4. FW being at the home early in the morning; 5. Krebs again showed evidence that the 85 year old FW had sent her personalized notes and photos; 6. FW will peition the court to clear his name but won't sue Krebs or anyone putting out her version for slander....) and my evolving and incomplete theory which is based upon pretty credible information (again I've read a lot of late) if anyone wants but for now I guess I'll leave it alone (at least here).


Again all I was looking for was some concrete info/data of which I wasn't aware of why this lady is perceived as a total crock. From the ladys BPD interview, I just don't see obvious lies or mental illness. Feel free to point out how I am wrong or bring up some major inconsistencies. Krebs could've make all of this up, but why and how would she have such a detailed story to tell?

does anyone have a link on the Krebs interview with Le for Iron?

This Krebs woman is a very, very minor character in the JonBenet saga. Not worthy of any more bandwidth than she has already been granted.

By the way, we are extremely sensitive about how people spell JonBenet's name. Would you please observe the courtesy of spelling this dear murdered child's name correctly?

Thank you very much.

BrotherMoon said:

Again, people love a good yarn, a good boogeyman story, a good paranoia driven conspiracy. It's a lot easier than dealing with the truth, which requires discipline and a moral sense.

Btw, it would be nice if posters would include their area of residence.

Click to expand...

Sorry all but I feel a need to respond to this one.
1. I'm outside of Philly, Pa.
2. Are you stating I have no moral sense and/or discipline? You can tell that from a few posts? Help me out there then brother.
3. Why don't you tell me (and everyone) what the truth is so we can't get this all behind us and lock up the culprits.
4. The only truth I know and was attempting to discuss was related to the facts that this woman with documented ties to the Whites comes to the BPD tells her story with obvious parallels to the death of JBR, is initially taken seriously by some of the authorities and the newspapers, than she goes into hiding and little more is heard from or about her other than she was a nutcase. Also, you're delusional if you don't think that sadly there are similar type things (gropus of child pronographers and paedophiles -- where do you think all the kiddie *advertiser censored* in the lucrative industry comes from anyway?) that go on in this world -- I can point you to some main stream news articles related to the matter if you press it.
5. Feel free to state why it's all a yarn or paranoia (maybe you're right) but please through in some facts.

A." Ok, do you know where those video’s are at currently"

D. "No, but I can tell you that when I lived in Trona with my mom and step father, that they had a movie screen out in the…a big like open patio and they would take umm me and my sister and my brother whoever else happened to be there and some men and teenage boys and they would all go out unto this patio they would pull down this screen and they would show these movies"

A. "Ok, and these…these movies of John Ramsey and you"

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3971

Who wants to microwave some popcorn and watch family *advertiser censored* movies tonight? Flippin ridiculous.