Apology To The Ramseys?

[2luvmy]

I think it's horrendous that John Ramsay is criticized for not taking up the cause of murdered children, or that he just wants to be left alone by the media. When my father died of cancer, my mom took up the cause but I enrolled at university and buried myself in my work - taking 7 courses per semester to make sure that I was too busy to think. It's a well known fact that some people deal with stress by burying themselves in their work. It doesn't matter what John Ramsay does now or what he and his wife did 10 years ago, some people are going to criticize it all. If John is not an activist, leave him alone. I'm not an activist and if people were in my face complaining that I wasn't taking up the cause of all people that died of cancer, I would probably move away as well. Is Natalee Holloway's father an activist? Absolutely not. No one says a word about it because he has a job and other children to raise. John Ramsay is in the very same situation so why not afford him the same respect we extend to other men in the same situation. The double standard makes the criticism of John Ramsay very transparent.

I agree with you Otto. There are hundreds of parents out there whose children were murdered and/or missing and not all of them are children's rights activists.

My daughter had a liver transplant, while I personally advocate for organ donation, I tried to do it on a public scale and that just isn't me and I needed to be available for my family. As much as I wanted to, I just couldn't make it work.

As for the Ramseys how would they be able to advocate? They were being accused of murdering their daughter. Instead of focusing on the issues, people would be focusing on them and bemoaning the fact that murderers were arguing for children's rights. So their message would be lost in between the they did/didn't do it.

 

[Jayelles]

There was a special on A&E last night about the case and I watched parts of it. Every time I tuned in I could see that the debates here have been asnwered, but people don't want to believe what they hear. The Ramsays were not questioned the day of the murder because the police did not follow proper procedure. The Ramsays soon learned that they were the focus of the investigation and were advised to hire lawyers, but today that is used against them. On the advice of their lawyers, they agreed to meet with the police at their lawyers office with a PI and doctor (Patsy was sick, after all). This is not unusual given the circumstances, but in this case the police refused to cooperate. Again the Ramsays were criticized. I understand that eventually there were 3 teams investigating the murder and none of them were talking to each other, but the DA was talking to the Globe rag magazine. The Ramsays were not given updates on the investigation of their own child's murder. The police tried to withhold their child's burial as leverage in their investigation. There are so many irregularities in the investigation that would make any innocent person run to a lawyer, yet the family is constantly criticized.

I think it's horrendous that John Ramsay is criticized for not taking up the cause of murdered children, or that he just wants to be left alone by the media. When my father died of cancer, my mom took up the cause but I enrolled at university and buried myself in my work - taking 7 courses per semester to make sure that I was too busy to think. It's a well known fact that some people deal with stress by burying themselves in their work. It doesn't matter what John Ramsay does now or what he and his wife did 10 years ago, some people are going to criticize it all. If John is not an activist, leave him alone. I'm not an activist and if people were in my face complaining that I wasn't taking up the cause of all people that died of cancer, I would probably move away as well. Is Natalee Holloway's father an activist? Absolutely not. No one says a word about it because he has a job and other children to raise. John Ramsay is in the very same situation so why not afford him the same respect we extend to other men in the same situation. The double standard makes the criticism of John Ramsay very transparent.

The sad thing is, that if the Ramseys had fully co-operated in the very early days, then the police would almost certainly have cleared them (as per lack of solid, incriminateing evidence as we know it). The chances are that the American public might then have taken the Ramseys to their hearts - especially if they had used their status and charisma to back some worthy cause.

It's curious that a couple who have shown every tendency to be public spirited - with their good works for schools and cancer charities and John's run for office in Michigan, should not even maintain a website for their murdered daughter.

 

[tybee204]

Karr spent 6 months in jail and will likely owe the State of California 6 more months on the misdemeaner child *advertiser censored* charges. His certification to teach in the State of California was suspended.

Im not sure a life sentence is appropriate for misdemeaner child *advertiser censored* charges. At this point it is hard to determine what makes it a misdemeaner. His lawyer at the time did say that the 5 photos did not include any photos of children nude or dressed in provacative clothing. So I have been trying to figure out what would classify misdemeaner child *advertiser censored*.

I have seen mainstream movies that I would classify as containing child *advertiser censored* . Brook Shields role in pretty Baby and the Blue Lagoon. Kirsten Dunce in Interview with a Vampire.

The three movies listed contain footage of children in sexual situations with adults.

 

[Amraann]

If you think that he should not be permitted to have his freedom, then you should be working to change the laws. We can't just single one person out because we don't like his looks, and send them to prison for the rest of their lives while others who have done the same thing get sentenced to a few months, or probation.

I have read in several places that the Ramseys lawyered up the VERY NIGHT of the 26th, and refused to talk to LE.

You may call that "not indicative of guilt", but most people would call that plain old uncooperative, and indicative of not wanting to help in the investigation of their daughter's murder.

ANyone who posseses child *advertiser censored* should be locked away. I did not a say a word about his looks. I said he had child *advertiser censored* and therefore is a pervert not fit to live in society.
Hiring a lawyer is not a criminal act. Not to mention that people in the Ramsey's tax bracket tend to hire the appropriate person's needed when any situation arises.
What on earth is uncoopertive about not handing yourself over to people who aren't looking at the evidence but merely trying to fit the evidence to what they want to believe. A large reason for that was to cover their own initial screw ups in investigating the case.

 

[Nova]

Apology?

I haven't done anything to the Ramseys. I haven't denied them housing or employment. I haven't accosted them personally, I haven't sought them out in any way.

I have written that based on the available evidence, I conclude it is most likely that one of them caused JBR's death. (Personally, I can't tell which of them from the available facts.) And I have written this on a public website on the subject, clearly labeled so that anyone may avoid my opinion if he or she chooses.

(Would the evidence available to me have been different had the Rs behaved other than they did? Perhaps so.)

As additional evidence appears, I'll be happy to reevaluate my opinion. But I'm not going to apologize for conclusions I drew in the past based on what I knew at the time.

 

[otto]

The sad thing is, that if the Ramseys had fully co-operated in the very early days, then the police would almost certainly have cleared them (as per lack of solid, incriminateing evidence as we know it). The chances are that the American public might then have taken the Ramseys to their hearts - especially if they had used their status and charisma to back some worthy cause.

It's curious that a couple who have shown every tendency to be public spirited - with their good works for schools and cancer charities and John's run for office in Michigan, should not even maintain a website for their murdered daughter.

If the police had followed proper procedure and interviewed the family the day of the murder, then the Ramsays could have cooperated but last night I learned that the police didn't want to interview the Ramsays in the first few days because it was a sensitive time for the family. Even the Ramsays criticized the police for that blunder. By the time the police wanted to interview the family, they already had a theory - another police blunder.

Websites were in their infancy back in 1996 and were not the typical way to reach people. With Patsy's cancer and the grief they were experiencing, I think they had enough on their plates without becoming activists. Look at the site set up my Beth Twitty. It has some information about safe travel that is available on safe travel government websites and that's about it. No one of the family or friends attended the recent Run For Natalee fund raiser. I think there comes a time when the family is just worn out from it all so maybe the public needs to step back and leave them alone.

 

[Britt]

I have read in several places that the Ramseys lawyered up the VERY NIGHT of the 26th, and refused to talk to LE.

You may call that "not indicative of guilt", but most people would call that plain old uncooperative, and indicative of not wanting to help in the investigation of their daughter's murder.

Make that the afternoon of the 26th:

Fleet told us that Ramsey lawyer Mike Bynum had called them shortly after the body was discovered. Surely he was talking about December 27, the night John Ramsey talked with Bynum at the Fernie house. White found his notes and said, "No, it was the day before, on the afternoon of December 26." You sure of that date? I asked. White checked his notes again. Yes. ITRMI p. 287-88 pb

Fleet added that he was also interviewed by three people associated with Team Ramsey the following day, December 27, when he didn't know any better than to speak with them. The private investigators weren't out canvassing the neighborhood for an intruder but were pinpointing the Ramseys' best friends while the police were being stalled. ITRMI p. 288 pb

 

[Jayelles]

If the police had followed proper procedure and interviewed the family the day of the murder, then the Ramsays could have cooperated but last night I learned that the police didn't want to interview the Ramsays in the first few days because it was a sensitive time for the family. Even the Ramsays criticized the police for that blunder. By the time the police wanted to interview the family, they already had a theory - another police blunder.

Websites were in their infancy back in 1996 and were not the typical way to reach people. With Patsy's cancer and the grief they were experiencing, I think they had enough on their plates without becoming activists. Look at the site set up my Beth Twitty. It has some information about safe travel that is available on safe travel government websites and that's about it. No one of the family or friends attended the recent Run For Natalee fund raiser. I think there comes a time when the family is just worn out from it all so maybe the public needs to step back and leave them alone.

Not so. When the police wanted to ask the Ramsey's questions, John Ramsey asked for "a day" because they'd just lost their daughter. The police respected this.

Lou Smit says he would have been firmer and would have insisted that they go to the station and be separated and interviewed because that was such a crucial stage in the investigation. How would he have been portrayed if he'd been there to take that call?

There is no question that the police handled the investigation badly from the start - but the Ramseys must take responsibility for their failure to participate in police interviews. Their lawyers may have given them bad advice, but we know they weren't oblivious to public opinion and the fact that police really needed to speak to them.

 

[wenchie]

ANyone who posseses child *advertiser censored* should be locked away. I did not a say a word about his looks. I said he had child *advertiser censored* and therefore is a pervert not fit to live in society.
Hiring a lawyer is not a criminal act. Not to mention that people in the Ramsey's tax bracket tend to hire the appropriate person's needed when any situation arises.
What on earth is uncoopertive about not handing yourself over to people who aren't looking at the evidence but merely trying to fit the evidence to what they want to believe. A large reason for that was to cover their own initial screw ups in investigating the case.

What you or I "think" doesn't matter.

He may not be fit to live in a society, but that does NOT mean that he should be prosecuted any differently from all the other men who've been caught with the same items on their pc, just because his case has gotten so much publicity.

 

[bakerprune64]

What you or I "think" doesn't matter.

He may not be fit to live in a society, but that does NOT mean that he should be prosecuted any differently from all the other men who've been caught with the same items on their pc, just because his case has gotten so much publicity.

Well I don't think every "other" pervert has confessed to committing this crime. :twocents:

 

[otto]

Not so. When the police wanted to ask the Ramsey's questions, John Ramsey asked for "a day" because they'd just lost their daughter. The police respected this.

Lou Smit says he would have been firmer and would have insisted that they go to the station and be separated and interviewed because that was such a crucial stage in the investigation. How would he have been portrayed if he'd been there to take that call?

There is no question that the police handled the investigation badly from the start - but the Ramseys must take responsibility for their failure to participate in police interviews. Their lawyers may have given them bad advice, but we know they weren't oblivious to public opinion and the fact that police really needed to speak to them.

There is so much contradictory information available that the whole issue is completely saturated. As soon as the media and forums get hold of a topic the rumours fly, one person speculates, another takes it as fact, the information is posted on another forum as fact and before we know it people are speculating whether Patsy Ramsay put feces in her daughter's mouth as she lay dying. It's bizarre, to say the least.

 

[cheko1]

I don't feel anyone owes the Ramsey's any kind of an apology!

My gosh it was their daughter murdered.....why not do EVERYTHING you can to help solve it???? If I had nothing to hide I'd be beating the police chiefs door down to explain my innocence.

A lawyer would be the last thing on my mind. I don't care where they found her at.......I'd be at the BPD morning / noon & night to find out any detail I could.

With my personality I'd be asking my hubby if he did it? I'd be asking my son are you guilty??? I'd ask anyone & everyone I knew did you do it??? I'd make alot of enemies but nobody could or would every be able to say I never co- operated EVER! I'd be the first in line for a lie detector test & shun anyone who wouldn't take one. That was the Ramsey's mistake / they lawyered up & refused to co-operate & people drew there own conclusions.

 

[Jayelles]

There is so much contradictory information available that the whole issue is completely saturated. As soon as the media and forums get hold of a topic the rumours fly, one person speculates, another takes it as fact, the information is posted on another forum as fact and before we know it people are speculating whether Patsy Ramsay put feces in her daughter's mouth as she lay dying. It's bizarre, to say the least.

I think plenty of us do have the ability to separate fact from fiction and to evaluate sources with some degree of maturity.

 

[wenchie]

Well I don't think every "other" pervert has confessed to committing this crime. :twocents:

What??????

They are two separate issues and two separate crimes!

SOME people are stating that even if he's innocent of murder, she should be locked away forever.

Karr's wacky confession does NOT equate to guilt.


I don't believe that he killed Jonbenet, and so far there has been not ONE credible piece of information to make me think that anyone other than the Ramseys were in the house that night.

 

[otto]

I don't feel anyone owes the Ramsey's any kind of an apology!

My gosh it was their daughter murdered.....why not do EVERYTHING you can to help solve it???? If I had nothing to hide I'd be beating the police chiefs door down to explain my innocence.

A lawyer would be the last thing on my mind. I don't care where they found her at.......I'd be at the BPD morning / noon & night to find out any detail I could.

With my personality I'd be asking my hubby if he did it? I'd be asking my son are you guilty??? I'd ask anyone & everyone I knew did you do it??? I'd make alot of enemies but nobody could or would every be able to say I never co- operated EVER! I'd be the first in line for a lie detector test & shun anyone who wouldn't take one. That was the Ramsey's mistake / they lawyered up & refused to co-operate & people drew there own conclusions.

I respectfully disagree. If you have ever been falsely accused of commiting a serious crime, you would realize that beating the path to the police chiefs door would be carefully documented as an indication that you are not only guilty, but mentally unstable ... therefore more guilty. Every time you opened your mouth, people would be alternating between:
1. kindly and patiently talking with you, telling you that they already have enough evidence to prosecute so you may as well come clean (make it easy on yourself)
2. threatening you with the consequences of not cooperating.

Since the police considered withholding JonBenet's body from burial as leverage against the parents, it was obviously very early on that the police were trying to strongarm the family. No one in that situation is going to run to the police because it doesn't matter what they say, it will be used against them.

 

[bakerprune64]

What??????

They are two separate issues and two separate crimes!

SOME people are stating that even if he's innocent of murder, she should be locked away forever.

Karr's wacky confession does NOT equate to guilt.


I don't believe that he killed Jonbenet, and so far there has been not ONE credible piece of information to make me think that anyone other than the Ramseys were in the house that night.

And what credible information or evidence do you have to say that they did it? Anything other than the initial reluctance to talk with LE?

 

[cheko1]

I respectfully disagree. If you have ever been falsely accused of commiting a serious crime, you would realize that beating the path to the police chiefs door would be carefully documented as an indication that you are not only guilty, but mentally unstable ... therefore more guilty. Every time you opened your mouth, people would be alternating between:
1. kindly and patiently talking with you, telling you that they already have enough evidence to prosecute so you may as well come clean (make it easy on yourself)
2. threatening you with the consequences of not cooperating.

Since the police considered withholding JonBenet's body from burial as leverage against the parents, it was obviously very early on that the police were trying to strongarm the family. No one in that situation is going to run to the police because it doesn't matter what they say, it will be used against them.

That would be fine, I'd rather be called mentally unstable then a murderer of my own child.

They could threaten me all they wanted........the consequneces they've endured for not cooperating has never shown them in a positive light.

 

[otto]

That would be fine, I'd rather be called mentally unstable then a murderer of my own child.

They could threaten me all they wanted........the consequneces they've endured for not cooperating has never shown them in a positive light.

First you would be called mentally unstable and then you would still be considered guilty. Being falsely accused of a crime is no joke and anyone that has been in that situation loses all respect for law enforcement and the courts. Their world is upside down and they don't know who to trust. Unless you've been there, I don't think it is possible to know how it feels.

 

[cheko1]

Your correct I've never been there.........never want to be.

Trust me I'd fully cooperate as long as I could.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Good to see ya!

Another chilling thought - has he had more victims during the past ten years? If so - how will THOSE parents feel about the Ramseys and their lack of co-operation?

BINGO Jay, exactly.

Can't post anymore for today. See you all tomorrow!