Christmas photos

[Ravyn]

Thank you Sophie, now I know I don't want to read their book, cause I believe if the LE went in that morning knowing it was murder things would had been done different..

 

[Sophie]

Thank you Sophie, now I know I don't want to read their book, cause I believe if the LE went in that morning knowing it was murder things would had been done different..

I think you are totally correct, Ravyn.

I should add that my mother and sisters made quite a big deal about the fact that I wasn't a parent when I read DoI. I guess it could have made a difference but a) I haven't changed my mind about DoI since having my girls and b) I did have parents so the parent-child relationship wasn't an entire mystery!

 

[Ravyn]

Right, when you have good relationships with parents and then children, now my kids wet the bed but I didn't get mad cause thats happens.

 

[Ravyn]

Cause I remember when my step-son was young and he wet the bed and was scared to tell me and I told him just tell me so I can change the sheets but his sister told me that their Mom woukd spank him and that what I should do and I told her 1) that it happens sometimes 2) I'm not your Mom so believe it or not his sister got mad at me..

 

[DeeDee249]

Now in the begining I never believed the IDI theory, I feel in my heart JB knew and trusted the person(s) now if BR did tell the truth about hearing something about midnight,now I read this in one the links that was giving me,since he was a the second floor, and if JAR was there maybe what BR heard was someone making it look like JAR wasn't there, best way I can think of putting suitcases on the bed where it look like they been there getting ready for a trip.Now on JAR theory still looking into the timeframe of his whereabouts.As everyone knows here this wasn't done by someone strange to the house, the one that done this I believe in my opinion knew the house.

I think JAR is a very likely candidate to have been in the home that night- for a few reasons- First- he was off from the University of Boulder (just blocks away) for Christmas break. Colleges have a LONG break, a month or so, so there was plenty of time for him to to visit his mother after the trip to Charlevoix.
Second- he was included among those going to Charlevlox- JAR, his parents and half-siblings, and sister Melinda and her fiance.
Third- it fits in with the suspicious absence of photos and videos from Christmas morning.
Fourth- it fits in with JR hiring an attorney (right away) for his ex-wife. I assume he figured she'd be questioned about whether JAR was with her as he said he was. Her lawyer would make sure she wouldn't answer.
Fifth- JR's private pilot (and friend) could have flown him any where he needed to be whenever he needed to go. No boarding passes or tickets
needed- so it's untraceable.
Last- we have neighbor (the late) Joe Barnhill who claimed to have seen him going into the house that morning. While he later recanted this statement, I believe he recanted because he was intimidated by the R lawyers, just as the neighbor who heard the scream was (Melanie Stanton). She flip-flopped a few times on her claim, finally admitting that she did hear a scream.
The whole JAR thing has bothered be from the beginning, right from his suitcase with the semen-stained comforter and CHILDREN's book.

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Tadpole,

Must say, I bought the book in the hope that it would support the notion of Ramsey innocence but it actually persuaded me of their guilt. To me, the whole tenor of the book was one of reinvention - reinvention of their co-operation with the police, reinvention of their lives pre- and post-murder, reinvention of the investigation etc. It also seems to have been predicated on the idea of attack being the best form of defence and it was therefore a ruthless attack on the BPD generally and ST specifically. For example, they object to some questions ST asked a witness about their (the Ramseys') physical relationship and refer to him as 'sick,' knowing that the average reader will find the question distasteful and therefore condemn ST rather than the Ramseys. In fact, murder investigations with sexual competents are always going to raise unsavoury questions and it would have been delinquent of ST not to ask them but, in DoI, they push buttons that will work for many readers and suggest that he was some sort of sick freak for asking them. Likewise, they twabble on about how young ST and Trujillo looked, obviously trying to make them sound like clueless young puppies. They may well have looked youthful (lucky buggers) but the fact is, they were mid-thirties and experienced policemen. I'm articulating this appallingly, but it seemed to me that the Ramseys tried to establish their own innocence purely by attacking the BPD's competence.

Actually, I could have summarised that waffle in one word : manipulative.

Hi Sophie.

Thanks for your reply.
Wow.
Your post has great insight.
I've read the compiled index, at CandyRose and .... it reads like a book.
From your comments I gather it's quite reflective of the sense of the Ramsey's book in it's entirity.
And to me, the index reads like a point sheet.
And it kinda points diectly to a few of the' inside job' suspects, neighbours whose name have many pages and points of reference.

I've read critique that the book was lacking an emotional quality.

But then it did bring your Mom and sisters to tears;
it's such a heartwrenching story to start. It's a very sensitive topic, the death of a child., under any circumstances.

 

[Tadpole12]

I think JAR is a very likely candidate to have been in the home that night- for a few reasons- First- he was off from the University of Boulder (just blocks away) for Christmas break. Colleges have a LONG break, a month or so, so there was plenty of time for him to to visit his mother after the trip to Charlevoix.
Second- he was included among those going to Charlevlox- JAR, his parents and half-siblings, and sister Melinda and her fiance.
Third- it fits in with the suspicious absence of photos and videos from Christmas morning.
Fourth- it fits in with JR hiring an attorney (right away) for his ex-wife. I assume he figured she'd be questioned about whether JAR was with her as he said he was. Her lawyer would make sure she wouldn't answer.
Fifth- JR's private pilot (and friend) could have flown him any where he needed to be whenever he needed to go. No boarding passes or tickets
needed- so it's untraceable.
Last- we have neighbor (the late) Joe Barnhill who claimed to have seen him going into the house that morning. While he later recanted this statement, I believe he recanted because he was intimidated by the R lawyers, just as the neighbor who heard the scream was (Melanie Stanton). She flip-flopped a few times on her claim, finally admitting that she did hear a scream.
The whole JAR thing has bothered be from the beginning, right from his suitcase with the semen-stained comforter and CHILDREN's book.

Hi DeeDee.

You always set me straight.
Ty.

 

[Ravyn]

Yes, I was wondering in the family chirstmas photo of 96, the party on the 23 th, JB hair was fixed like in the Christmas photos so maybe when not performing that is how JB hair was fixed...

 

[anne11]

I also think its got something to do with the hairstyle, more of a day style than a going to bed style, ponytails (pigtails) can be really uncomfortable when trying to sleep.

 

[Sophie]

I think JAR is a very likely candidate to have been in the home that night- for a few reasons- First- he was off from the University of Boulder (just blocks away) for Christmas break. Colleges have a LONG break, a month or so, so there was plenty of time for him to to visit his mother after the trip to Charlevoix.
Second- he was included among those going to Charlevlox- JAR, his parents and half-siblings, and sister Melinda and her fiance.
Third- it fits in with the suspicious absence of photos and videos from Christmas morning.
Fourth- it fits in with JR hiring an attorney (right away) for his ex-wife. I assume he figured she'd be questioned about whether JAR was with her as he said he was. Her lawyer would make sure she wouldn't answer.
Fifth- JR's private pilot (and friend) could have flown him any where he needed to be whenever he needed to go. No boarding passes or tickets
needed- so it's untraceable.
Last- we have neighbor (the late) Joe Barnhill who claimed to have seen him going into the house that morning. While he later recanted this statement, I believe he recanted because he was intimidated by the R lawyers, just as the neighbor who heard the scream was (Melanie Stanton). She flip-flopped a few times on her claim, finally admitting that she did hear a scream.
The whole JAR thing has bothered be from the beginning, right from his suitcase with the semen-stained comforter and CHILDREN's book.

That is quite a compelling summary, DeeDee - gives a lot of food for thought.

 

[Sophie]

Hi Sophie.

Thanks for your reply.
Wow.
Your post has great insight.
I've read the compiled index, at CandyRose and .... it reads like a book.
From your comments I gather it's quite reflective of the sense of the Ramsey's book in it's entirity.
And to me, the index reads like a point sheet.
And it kinda points diectly to a few of the' inside job' suspects, neighbours whose name have many pages and points of reference.

I've read critique that the book was lacking an emotional quality.

But then it did bring your Mom and sisters to tears;
it's such a heartwrenching story to start. It's a very sensitive topic, the death of a child., under any circumstances.

I think that's right, Tadpole. Another issue is that my mother and sisters sort of read DoI in a vacuum and hadn't really followed the case on that interwebby thing so they took the book at face value. For people who have read a lot of the public documentation, followed the various sideshows and generally held an interest in the case for over a decade, it's much easier to spot the little inconsistencies and understand the Ramsey agenda....

 

[armywife210]

I keep looking at the pictures that you're referring to ... the Christmas photos. I don't see a differnce in the way her hair was styled, it's just taken from a different angle. As far as the pajamas, they look the same to me. It just looks like the collar is different because of the way she is sitting. I have enlarged it and everything, and I just don't see it...
the way Patsy is gripping Jonbenet's arm though has always bothered me. That's not a natural way to hold your child, atleast in my opinion. It looks like a "yanking" grasp... but JB doesn't even looked phased by it.

 

[DeeDee249]

I keep looking at the pictures that you're referring to ... the Christmas photos. I don't see a differnce in the way her hair was styled, it's just taken from a different angle. As far as the pajamas, they look the same to me. It just looks like the collar is different because of the way she is sitting. I have enlarged it and everything, and I just don't see it...
the way Patsy is gripping Jonbenet's arm though has always bothered me. That's not a natural way to hold your child, atleast in my opinion. It looks like a "yanking" grasp... but JB doesn't even looked phased by it.

Like she is trying to HOLD her there. Maybe JBR just didn't want to take a picture with Mommy. But she was held there.

 

[Ravyn]

Thank you for your comments about the photos, but my opinion still stand that there is a difference, but that is what make this forum great the different opinions from everyone, not everyone will agree.

 

[Zak]

It was Susan Stine who spoke to LE via the intercom on the 23rd.weird indeed.Also odd the R's didn't call the Stine's over,when according to them, they were the last outside the family to see her alive.
SS was wayyyy too involved to not have known more..she was scanning the net daily at the time,trying to see what was out there. (IMO,to see what,if anything,was being said about her and her family),and trying to get ppl to take the R's side,turning on those who refused to do it.And the fake emails she sent can be found on acandyrose.com.

I may be wrong, but I thought that the Stines were not at the party on the 23rd. I swear I remember reading one of JR's depositions where he states that the Stines weren't invited and something about them not being close at that time. Anyone remember????

 

[Zak]

You're right, it isn't cool. And I pray I'll never have to do it again! But that's the kind of man I am: I go the extra mile.



Um, well put it this way: I'm the closest thing we've got!

Hi SD! I haven't been on for awhile, so trying to catch up. I have a question for you about tazing yourself. What type of mark did it leave? How long were you incapacitated? It didn't knock you out, right? Did you just fall to the floor? What did the mark look like the next day? My son has a tazer and I have heard it turned on and he has shown me what it sounds like touching an object....it is LOUD! I tried to get him to let me taze him so I could see the marks....it was a *ell no! Congrats to you for going the extra mile for JBR!:woohoo:

Not to be off subject, but how is book coming along? Will it be published soon?

 

[Ravyn]

Hi Zak, there was an interview with JR where he said the Stine's wasn't invited that they just showed up.. But there are photos on the party on the 23th that shows SS there...

 

[BBB167893]

Hi Tadpole,

Must say, I bought the book in the hope that it would support the notion of Ramsey innocence but it actually persuaded me of their guilt.

I had pretty much the same reaction. There's a reason why lawyers tell you to keep your mouth shut.

To me, the whole tenor of the book was one of reinvention - reinvention of their co-operation with the police, reinvention of their lives pre- and post-murder, reinvention of the investigation etc.

Rewriting history to suit one's own needs.

It also seems to have been predicated on the idea of attack being the best form of defence and it was therefore a ruthless attack on the BPD generally and ST specifically. For example, they object to some questions ST asked a witness about their (the Ramseys') physical relationship and refer to him as 'sick,' knowing that the average reader will find the question distasteful and therefore condemn ST rather than the Ramseys.

Where to fight counts for a lot.

In fact, murder investigations with sexual competents are always going to raise unsavoury questions and it would have been delinquent of ST not to ask them but, in DoI, they push buttons that will work for many readers and suggest that he was some sort of sick freak for asking them.

Counting on ignorance. Pretty much sums up their whole plan.

Likewise, they twabble on about how young ST and Trujillo looked, obviously trying to make them sound like clueless young puppies. They may well have looked youthful (lucky buggers) but the fact is, they were mid-thirties and experienced policemen. I'm articulating this appallingly, but it seemed to me that the Ramseys tried to establish their own innocence purely by attacking the BPD's competence.

Sort of like OJ Simpson did.

Actually, I could have summarised that waffle in one word : manipulative.

:clap:

 

[BBB167893]

Hi SD! I haven't been on for awhile, so trying to catch up. I have a question for you about tazing yourself. What type of mark did it leave?

Like being stung by yellowjackets.

How long were you incapacitated?

Something like 15 seconds. And I'm pretty sure the whole neighborhood heard it!

It didn't knock you out, right?

No, it didn't. I sure wished it had!

Did you just fall to the floor?

Pretty much. I sort of hung in the air for a split second.

What did the mark look like the next day?

Like what you'd expect: swollen red burns.

My son has a tazer and I have heard it turned on and he has shown me what it sounds like touching an object....it is LOUD!

Exactly! The noise is designed to scare people away.

I tried to get him to let me taze him so I could see the marks....it was a *ell no! Congrats to you for going the extra mile for JBR!:woohoo:

Yeah, real pride of the team, I am.

Not to be off subject, but how is book coming along? Will it be published soon?

Hard to say.

 

[Sophie]

I had pretty much the same reaction. There's a reason why lawyers tell you to keep your mouth shut.



Rewriting history to suit one's own needs.



Where to fight counts for a lot.



Counting on ignorance. Pretty much sums up their whole plan.



Sort of like OJ Simpson did.



:clap:

For one reason or another, I haven't really studied OJ. I must read a book on it soon since it comes up so often in true crime discussions.

Another manipulative book was the John Douglas anthology - the bit about the only thing worse than losing a child was being accusing of causing that loss was a direct hit on the parent-child bond and how we feel about it.