Evil people - and things that don't fit

BlueCrab said:
GuruJosh,

First of all, the Ramseys didn't get up at 5:30 AM as they assert. They would have never made it to the airport by 6:30 AM. They had to have set the alarm for an earlier wake-up time -- more like 4:30.

But IMO the Ramseys found JonBenet's body even earlier, probably around 3:00 AM. In the police interviews John admitted he usually had to get up in the middle of the night to go to the bathroom. I think that John, during his usual stroll to the bathroom very early that morning, heard something going on downstairs and investigated. He caught the boys in the middle of trying to coverup what they had just done.

Patsy seems to have let the cat out of the bag during the 1998 interviews. Patsy was discussing with Detective Haney what she had been doing immediately after she discovered the note on the stairs and JonBenet was not in her bed and she had not yet made the 911 call at 5:52 AM. At his point Patsy had not yet notified John who, according to Patsy, was still upstairs getting dressed.

TOM HANEY: "So you're here at the base of the stairs?"

PATSY RAMSEY: "Yes."

TOM HANEY: "You scream for John?"

PATSY RAMSEY: "Yes."

TOM HANEY: "Do you remember exactly what words you used, was it more than just John or -- "

PATSY RAMSEY: "I remember my voice was just cracking. I mean it was like JOHN, like that. I mean like, I can't even, you know, I hear my scream and I hear his scream when he came up from the basement, I mean it was just a horrible thing. You know, it was just -- "

An emotional Patsy, IMO reliving the moment when she first saw the body, had just unconsciously blurted out the truth. Patsy described them both screaming as John came up from the basement carrying JonBenet. It was about 3:00 AM.

At this point Patsy had no interest in taking a shower. She hurriedly put on the same clothes she had worn the night before and she and John got busy with the crime scene staging.

BlueCrab

JR: So when I first found her I was like, "Thank God, I found her." I didn't want Patsy to see her that way, so I ran upstairs and got a blanket off one of the chairs.

LS: Upstairs?

JR: Probably up in the tv room.
 
dingo said:
With the telephone records missing its another thing we,ll never know for sure.If the phone company looses your records do you still get a bill?
Found this tidbit from a ST chat a while back. Thought it might shed some light on the missing phone records discussion. This quote makes it appear as though they existed but were not investigated. Are these two separate issues, or one issue that has been confused and muddied?

crimeADM: Are there any cell phone or long distance records for the Ramseys for December 1996? And if so, do they offer any useful clues?
Stevethomas: In the book I talk about my frustrations in the obstruction in our efforts to obtain such records. In the Touch Tone investigation (peripherally related case) we found many, many useful records that may/may not have helped the Ramsey investigation. But we were prohibited from exploring them.
Stevethomas: So as to Dec 1996 records - in hindsight, a heck of a lot more I wish we would have explored. When I left in 1998, people called in Dec 1996 long distance, had never been contacted . .
crimeADM: Prohibited using what excuse?
Stevethomas: The excuse was pathetic. Demtuh, for example, as well as hofstrom, suggested asking the Ramseys permission. It was like the way servants treat the Queen of England, and it bothered me terribly. The right way to have done it was through the legal process of search warrants. heaven knows why it took so long, as they had not been procured, part of my frustration, before I resigned.
Stevethomas: and when I wrote warrant(s) and took them to demuth for approval, they were rejected, despite our legal advisor in the bpd approving them. very frustrating!!!
 
Voice of Reason said:
Found this tidbit from a ST chat a while back. Thought it might shed some light on the missing phone records discussion. This quote makes it appear as though they existed but were not investigated. Are these two separate issues, or one issue that has been confused and muddied?

crimeADM: Are there any cell phone or long distance records for the Ramseys for December 1996? And if so, do they offer any useful clues?
Stevethomas: In the book I talk about my frustrations in the obstruction in our efforts to obtain such records. In the Touch Tone investigation (peripherally related case) we found many, many useful records that may/may not have helped the Ramsey investigation. But we were prohibited from exploring them.
Stevethomas: So as to Dec 1996 records - in hindsight, a heck of a lot more I wish we would have explored. When I left in 1998, people called in Dec 1996 long distance, had never been contacted . .
crimeADM: Prohibited using what excuse?
Stevethomas: The excuse was pathetic. Demtuh, for example, as well as hofstrom, suggested asking the Ramseys permission. It was like the way servants treat the Queen of England, and it bothered me terribly. The right way to have done it was through the legal process of search warrants. heaven knows why it took so long, as they had not been procured, part of my frustration, before I resigned.
Stevethomas: and when I wrote warrant(s) and took them to demuth for approval, they were rejected, despite our legal advisor in the bpd approving them. very frustrating!!!

Take this discussion a bit further, Voice of Reason. Find the excerpt in which Thomas talks (though it may have been another detective, not sure) to the people at the phone company and inquires if anyone could have deleted the information in the Ramsey account for the period in question.

The answer was an unequivocal "no."

Rainsong
 
The phone was used that morning to call...

911

Whites

Fernies

John's financial advisor Rod Westmoreland.
 
Toltec said:
The phone was used that morning to call...

911

Whites

Fernies

John's financial advisor Rod Westmoreland.

I believe those calls were made on the land line, not a cell phone.

Rainsong
 
Only a blooming idiot would believe there were no cell phone calls made by the Ramseys during the month of December. Of course there were calls made in December. But the coverup was solidly in place, and it involved some politically powerful people at that time, including D.A. Alex Hunter, his political ally Hal Haddon (Who had been Gary Hart's campaign manager when Hart was running for the presidency of the U.S.), and Governor Roy Romer. It's obvious Hunter's role was to keep the cell phone records away from the BPD because, IMO, the BPD would have solved the case if they had gotten their hands on the records.

The grand jury ended up with the cell phone records and, IMO, the case was solved by the jurors in 1999. Children were involved and that's why everyone, even the most powerful people in the state, cooperated in the coverup.

BlueCrab
 
BlueCrab said:
Only a blooming idiot would believe there were no cell phone calls made by the Ramseys during the month of December. Of course there were calls made in December. But the coverup was solidly in place, and it involved some politically powerful people at that time, including D.A. Alex Hunter, his political ally Hal Haddon (Who had been Gary Hart's campaign manager when Hart was running for the presidency of the U.S.), and Governor Roy Romer. It's obvious Hunter's role was to keep the cell phone records away from the BPD because, IMO, the BPD would have solved the case if they had gotten their hands on the records.

The grand jury ended up with the cell phone records and, IMO, the case was solved by the jurors in 1999. Children were involved and that's why everyone, even the most powerful people in the state, cooperated in the coverup.

BlueCrab

Did this conspiracy include the phone company?

Rainsong
 
BlueCrab said:
Only a blooming idiot would believe there were no cell phone calls made by the Ramseys during the month of December. Of course there were calls made in December. But the coverup was solidly in place, and it involved some politically powerful people at that time, including D.A. Alex Hunter, his political ally Hal Haddon (Who had been Gary Hart's campaign manager when Hart was running for the presidency of the U.S.), and Governor Roy Romer. It's obvious Hunter's role was to keep the cell phone records away from the BPD because, IMO, the BPD would have solved the case if they had gotten their hands on the records.

The grand jury ended up with the cell phone records and, IMO, the case was solved by the jurors in 1999. Children were involved and that's why everyone, even the most powerful people in the state, cooperated in the coverup.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

Thanks for the response. I only dragged this post back up, because I was reading the Steve Thomas chat transcript, and I got confused. Are there two different things going on here? (1) ST was not allowed to look into the numbers on the phone records. (2) The phone records were literally, physically missing.

The chat transcript suggests the former. Where do you get the info that the latter is the case?
 
This isn't about the phone bills but I've been looking for this quote for quite a while so I'll park it here.

(Found through the Sundance link/ST depo)

"10 . "uncorroborated stories"
Posted by MaskedMan on May-04-00 at 11:19 AM (EST)
Steve Thomas presents many unsourced and uncorroborated stories.



On page 5, he presents the improbable story that JonBenet was chilly at a restaurant,
but Patsy wouldn't let her put on a jacket because "You're still on show." Steve Thomas
didn't identify his source, but I know that this is one of Judith Phillips' urban legends.


When I aksed Judith about where and when this episode happened, she said that she
didn't know and that she didn't see it herself. She said someone else had seen it. I
asked her, "Who saw it?" She wouldn't tell me. So, this is just an unverified third-hand
rumor.


Judith has done this repeatedly. She's lied to me about what she supposedly knows. She
would claim to have first-hand knowledge about something, but then she'd change her
story when I tried to pin her down. For instance:


Judith told me that Priscilla White had told her that John Ramsey tried to discourage
Fleet White from entering the wine cellar room on Dec. 26, 1996. I believed that story
for a long time. She was the source for a story to that effect in the National Enquirer of
April 1997. When I found out later that that never happened, I asked Judith how Priscilla
could have been so wrong about that. Then, Judith admitted that, uh, well, she didn't
hear the story directly from Priscilla, but from someone else...


Steve Thomas used Judith for several dubious stories. She is the anonymous "family
friend" whom Steve Thomas mentions. It wouldn't occur to Steve to double-check his
information, since any story unfavorable to the Ramseys is automatically true to him.
Positive stories, of course, don't appear in his book. "
 
Rainsong said:
Did this conspiracy include the phone company?

Rainsong,

I don't know. But the cops should have been able to get the phone records without going through the D.A.'s office. Steve Thomas could have gone directly to the court and obtained a subpoena himself. Maybe he tried this and was turned down by the court, or was given the runaround by the phone company and gave up. I don't know.
 
BlueCrab said:
Rainsong,

I don't know. But the cops should have been able to get the phone records without going through the D.A.'s office. Steve Thomas could have gone directly to the court and obtained a subpoena himself. Maybe he tried this and was turned down by the court, or was given the runaround by the phone company and gave up. I don't know.
You are correct BC. I cut the chat transcript short...

crimeADM: Why didn't you bypass the DA's office and go to a judge to get a warrant for the phone records?

stevethomas: amen. politics at its worst. although LEGALLY we could have done just that, the bpd didn't want to buck the DA's office. Lots of fights about that one. Even discussion about taking an arrest warrant straight to a judge, bypassing Hunter and his office. But no way bpd was going to do it, particularly with Beckner at the helm. He was eyeing the chief's chair, and that would have put him out of the running.
 
Voice of Reason said:
BlueCrab,

Thanks for the response. I only dragged this post back up, because I was reading the Steve Thomas chat transcript, and I got confused. Are there two different things going on here? (1) ST was not allowed to look into the numbers on the phone records. (2) The phone records were literally, physically missing.

The chat transcript suggests the former. Where do you get the info that the latter is the case?


VoR,

I don't know the source, if there even is one. It's probably a rumor about the cell phone records physically missing, simply because if the cops didn't have the records then someone assumed they are physically "missing". But if a rumor, the rumor has been around for years.

Whether merely kept under wraps or physically missing, I know the cell phone records were finally rounded up and turned over to the grand jury.
 
BlueCrab said:
Rainsong,

I don't know. But the cops should have been able to get the phone records without going through the D.A.'s office. Steve Thomas could have gone directly to the court and obtained a subpoena himself. Maybe he tried this and was turned down by the court, or was given the runaround by the phone company and gave up. I don't know.

Regardless of how the records were obtained, this is what they found:

Thomas' book, pg. 259
Quote:
The AirTouch cell phone records were useless. Ramsey started the service in January 1994. AirTouch said that 91 minutes of use were logged during the August--September billing period of 1996, and 108 minutes were used in September--October. October--November was just as busy.

December, however, the only period we were allowed to see, was empty. No calls at all. I asked if someone could have removed the billing records from the computer? "No way," the AirTouch source told me.

"All these months preceding December are busy, and not one call was logged for that entire month?"

The representative was firm. "There ain't no way anybody altered those records." Unquote

My understanding is the cell phone was lost. If anyone finds that wierd, I spoke to a woman today who 'lost' her cell phone--and killed it (her words) when it fell into her coffee cup. She didn't realize what had happened until she drank half the cup. The woman told me she went approximately a month before replacing it because of her work schedule.

Rainsong
 
Rainsong said:
Regardless of how the records were obtained, this is what they found:

Thomas' book, pg. 259
Quote:
The AirTouch cell phone records were useless. Ramsey started the service in January 1994. AirTouch said that 91 minutes of use were logged during the August--September billing period of 1996, and 108 minutes were used in September--October. October--November was just as busy.

December, however, the only period we were allowed to see, was empty. No calls at all. I asked if someone could have removed the billing records from the computer? "No way," the AirTouch source told me.

"All these months preceding December are busy, and not one call was logged for that entire month?"

The representative was firm. "There ain't no way anybody altered those records." Unquote


Perhaps their 3 year contract expired and they switched carriers? I agree the phone records would answer alot of questions.
 
Well, if Steve Thomas is telling the truth, it's pretty clear that Air-Touch was likely lying. The cell phone records for December had been wiped clean, and the only way Air-Touch would do such a thing is if high-level pressure had been put on them -- such as from the Governor's Office and the Boulder D.A.'s Office.

John Ramsey's cell phone records for December would have likely blown the case wide open and revealed the high-level coverup put in place beginning on day one.

IMO John's cell phone records would have revealed calls to Mike Bynum around 3 or 4 AM; and calls to Glen and Susan Stine's house; and calls to the lawfirm of Haddon, Morgan and Foreman; and calls to the D.A.'s Office -- all of the calls prior to the 911 call at 5:52 AM. IMO the coverup was in place before the sun came up on December 26, 1996, and hours before the body was "found" at 1:14 PM that afternoon.

By 5 o'clock on the afternoon of the 26th Hal Haddon had Fleet White, the most important witness other than the three Ramseys in the house that night, in his office telling him in no uncertain terms to stay out of things. Doesn't that alone tell us the coverup was probably already in place and they didn't want any trouble from Fleet White?

BlueCrab

EDITED to say it was attorney Mike Bynum, not Hal Haddon, who called Fleet White to his office.
 
BlueCrab said:
Well, if Steve Thomas is telling the truth, it's pretty clear that Air-Touch was likely lying. The cell phone records for December had been wiped clean, and the only way Air-Touch would do such a thing is if high-level pressure had been put on them -- such as from the Governor's Office and the Boulder D.A.'s Office.BlueCrab
also possible -- such as from the BPD??

BlueCrab said:
John Ramsey's cell phone records for December would have likely blown the case wide open and revealed the high-level coverup put in place beginning on day one.BlueCrab
yes I think you might be right. But I suppose you would insist that it was John that made the calls. Would you be open to the idea that it might have been Patsy?

BlueCrab said:
IMO John's cell phone records would have revealed calls to Mike Bynum around 3 or 4 AM; and calls to Glen and Susan Stine's house; and calls to the lawfirm of Haddon, Morgan and Foreman; and calls to the D.A.'s Office -- all of the calls prior to the 911 call at 5:52 AM.BlueCrab
how about IMO John's cell phone records would have a revealed call to Fleet White around 3 or 4 AM?

BlueCrab said:
IMO the coverup was in place before the sun came up on December 26, 1996, and hours before the body was "found" at 1:14 PM that afternoon.BlueCrab
Yes I think so too
 
BlueCrab said:
By 5 o'clock on the afternoon of the 26th Hal Haddon had Fleet White, the most important witness other than the three Ramseys in the house that night, in his office telling him in no uncertain terms to stay out of things.

BlueCrab how much of this is fact and how much speculation? I'm not being rude I really would like to know if it is true that HH met with FW in his office.
 
Rainsong said:
My understanding is the cell phone was lost. If anyone finds that wierd, I spoke to a woman today who 'lost' her cell phone--and killed it (her words) when it fell into her coffee cup. She didn't realize what had happened until she drank half the cup. The woman told me she went approximately a month before replacing it because of her work schedule.

Rainsong
My...that was either one tiny cell phone or one BIG cup of coffee! I am not trying to disprove your friend's story, however, perhaps she didn't use the cell phone as much as a CEO of a company would, could that have been the case as to why she didn't replace it rapidly? I know when I lost mine (and my usage is probably somewhere in between your friends and JR's), I called the company the night I lost it, had the number turned off so there would not be any unauthorized calls on the bill, and had them overnight a new one to me. Had I not done that, the wireless provider would have been hard pressed to believe what day I had lost it if calls were made on it in the interim. And when I have misplaced it in the house, I simply use my land line and call the cell phone, and voila...I find it right away!
 
Moab said:
My...that was either one tiny cell phone or one BIG cup of coffee! I am not trying to disprove your friend's story, however, perhaps she didn't use the cell phone as much as a CEO of a company would, could that have been the case as to why she didn't replace it rapidly? I know when I lost mine (and my usage is probably somewhere in between your friends and JR's), I called the company the night I lost it, had the number turned off so there would not be any unauthorized calls on the bill, and had them overnight a new one to me. Had I not done that, the wireless provider would have been hard pressed to believe what day I had lost it if calls were made on it in the interim. And when I have misplaced it in the house, I simply use my land line and call the cell phone, and voila...I find it right away!

Yeah, I thought it was weird too. Couldn't see how anyone could lose their phone in a coffee cup.

Rainsong
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
99
Guests online
1,666
Total visitors
1,765

Forum statistics

Threads
590,013
Messages
17,928,994
Members
228,038
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top