Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by WHITEFANG, Jun 14, 2010.
no, I dont think it was.
No. No way.
they got exactly what they asked for. they paraded pictures & video of a sexualized JonBenet, out for the world to see, & then wondered why people judged them.
She was six years old. How did they sexualize her? They got what they deserved?
my point exactly. she was 6 years old. bleached blond hair with black roots, adult hairstyles, red lipstick, tons of make-up, showgirl clothes...not appropriate for a 6 year old, & if people can't see that for what it is, oh well... & yes, they got what they asked for, from the media. THEY, the Ramseys, put that image of JonBenet out there, & most people called them on its inappropriateness. In the beginning, because of the pageants, clothes, make-up, etc...there was a pretty wide-spread belief, that a pervert had targeted JonBenet, because of those very things, & the Ramseys were left to defend & explain their child rearing decisions. & they didn't do a very convincing job of it.
Some people allow their children to go naked at the beach. I personally don't agree with that either.
No,of course it wasn't.
But this is how the media makes money,it's about the sensational headline.
And in this case they got a lot of help,there were leaks,there were interests.
BUT don't tell me the R's and their lawyers didn't know THAT when they went on CNN 5 days after the murder for example.They fought back using the same channels.It was a mistake IMO.Eventually the press would have calmed down,the public isn't interested in one side of a story.They wanna hear both.So if you decide to give it to them,claiming it's self defence (KNOWING that this is how the war starts) then I guess you have to accept the outcome.IMO
Re JB's pageant videos and photo's.
It wasn't the R's who published those but others making (dirty) money out of her death.
But this is exactly what parents should have in mind when putting their children into pageants.LOTS of other people could take advantage of it in one way or another.
This has nothing to do with this case but it's another example.So maybe my little girl enjoys being a beauty queen now that she's six,maybe it's fun for her.How do I know that she won't blame me later for exposing her like that.What if she becomes famous one day and all her baby pageant pics will be all over the news and she'll hate THAT and maybe it will also ruin her image/reputation.This is just an example,I don't have a six year old,just sayin'.
MR. WOOD: Well, he told me about what a
6 forensic psychologist would bring to the table and he
7 gave me a number of areas and I asked him would he
8 also have been involved in a police strategy to bring
9 public pressure on a given individual who was under
10 suspicion. 11 MR. MILLER: Given individual, it seems to
12 me it's everybody, including Chris Wolf.
13 MR. WOOD: I think that's why it's related
14 to Chris Wolf.
15 MR. MILLER: But not specifically to Chris
17 MR. WOOD: Well, the question of whether
18 it should have been, if it existed, if the strategy
19 existed and there is evidence that I have that it
20 did --
21 MR. MILLER: What strategy are we talking
23 MR. WOOD: Why would it not -- a specific
24 plan that involved Steven Pitt and others, including
25 Bill Hagamaier of the FBI, that was developed around
1 a strategy to bring public pressure on individuals to
2 either force them to cooperate or for other reasons
3 I'll discuss later. Let me establish the first.
4 Q (BY MR. WOOD) I'm right about the
5 strategy, am I not, it existed, Steven Pitt was part
6 of it and so was Bill Hagamaier of the FBI?
7 MR. MILLER: I don't think you ought to
8 answer that question. I don't think it's got
9 anything specifically to do with Chris Wolf.
10 MR. WOOD: I'm entitled to know whether or
11 not there was such a strategy because we now have the
12 chief acknowledging that in January of 1997 within a
13 month of this child's murder, Chris Wolf, who was
14 brought to the attention of the authorities by his
15 then live-in girlfriend who was at least credible
16 enough to bring this man in for questioning, who was
17 totally or at least to the chief's recollection at
18 least uncooperative on the question of giving an
19 interview and submitting handwriting exemplars, I
20 want to know whether he was part of the strategy that
21 I have evidence existed about bringing public
22 pressure on suspects or individuals under suspicion
23 to try to get them to cooperate. I think it's
24 absolutely related to Chris Wolf and I'm entitled to
25 an answer, Bob. (no.it's not absolutley related to CW and Miller knows it,he's not falling into the trap, but thanks for indirectly making them admit this is the strategy they used with the R's )
1 MR. MILLER: I don't see how it's related
2 to Chris Wolf. If you ask it in a specific reference
3 to Chris Wolf, I think he can answer it.
4 MR. WOOD: Why would it not be applicable
5 to Chris Wolf and others?
6 MR. MILLER: I don't know.
7 MR. WOOD: That is what I'm trying to find
9 MR. MILLER: Well, but I don't think that
10 is purpose of this deposition. The purpose of this
11 deposition is, as our agreement says, to talk about
12 specifics as to Chris Wolf, not the rest of the
13 world, not the other suspects, not your other
15 MR. WOOD: Don't imply that my other
16 client, that Chris Wolf is a client.
17 MR. MILLER: I think that's got to be a
19 MR. WOOD: Here is the point. One of the
20 issues in this case is whether or not Chris Wolf to
21 this day was properly and thoroughly investigated by
22 the Boulder Police Department.
23 And one of the issues in this case is
24 whether you understand that this lawsuit involves
25 more than just the allegations of libel. The heart
1 of the allegations are based on the contention of
2 Chris Wolf that Patsy Ramsey killed JonBent. That's
3 part of the case as it relates to Chris Wolf.
4 We believe there is a serious issue that
5 still exists to this day about whether or not Chris
6 Wolf based on a thorough investigation should have
7 been excluded as being involved in the crime.
8 Now, one of the areas that I'm trying to
9 go into is whether or not when he was uncooperative
10 in January of 1997, whether or not there was any
11 efforts made to put pressure on him publicly in an
12 effort to get him to cooperate.
13 MR. MILLER: Well, ask that question.
14 Q (BY MR. WOOD) Do you understand that
16 A Repeat it --
17 Q Sure. I want to know whether or not any
18 efforts were made in 1997 through the media, use of
19 the media, to bring pressure on Chris Wolf publicly
20 in an effort to get him to cooperate with the
22 A I can't answer prior to October of '97.
23 Q You weren't --
24 A After October '97, no.
25 Q Was there a plan in effect for that to be
1 done for a particular individual or possibly any
2 individuals who were under suspicion?
3 MR. MILLER: I think that that's outside
4 the purview of this deposition.
5 MR. WOOD: Well, I think I'm entitled to
6 know whether or not Steven Pitt and Bill Hagamaier
7 and Mark Beckner and others, not you, you weren't
8 there at the time, Eller, whether or not they had a
9 strategy and a plan to use the media to bring
10 pressure on individuals under suspicion in an effort
11 to get them to cooperate. And I also have evidence
12 that it was undertaken in an effort to get
13 individuals to potentially confess. 14 MR. MILLER: Well, he's answered --
15 MR. WOOD: And I think the issue -- I
16 think the issue of whether or not that existed and
17 then the secondary question being, if it did, was it
18 utilized with respect to a known uncooperative person
19 under suspicion, Chris Wolf, is absolutely relevant
20 and I'm entitled to an answer to it.
21 MR. MILLER: He's answered that as to
22 Chris Wolf.
23 MR. WOOD: I'm asking him whether he was
24 aware of the fact that that type of plan existed in
1 MR. MILLER: Let me talk to him a minute.
2 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: We're off the record at
3 approximately 10:55 a.m.
4 (Recess taken from 10:55 a.m. to 11:02
6 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: We're on the record at
7 approximately 11:02 a.m.
8 MR. WOOD: Let me say, Bob, to you, so
9 that you understand. I mean, I'm trying to walk a
10 line that is difficult because we're defending John
11 and Patsy Ramsey in a civil charge of murder. I
12 understand there is an ongoing investigation, at
13 least one described as an ongoing investigation, I
14 guess I would say an open investigation.
15 That's why I tried to explain to you why I
16 think this clearly relates to Chris Wolf and it's not
17 just pulled out of the air to talk about other
18 people, even though it might in fact relate to other
19 individuals, including John and Patsy. So I want you
20 to understand, I'm not trying to push the Chief or
21 you here beyond the limits and that's why I tried to
22 explain it. But I think you, and I hope you would,
23 appreciate the difficult task that we have.
24 And we -- I agreed to that request by you
25 because I wanted to try to get the relevant questions
1 as we perceived them that would relate to the
2 difficult case of defending the Wolf matter out to
3 perhaps in a way that avoids having to fight with you
4 all now about going further, which ultimately is
5 still an issue in the case if we don't survive
6 getting out of the case on summary judgment.
7 MR. MILLER: Let me just say I appreciate
8 what you say. It's difficult for you, it's also
9 difficult for us. Because as you point out, there is
10 an ongoing investigation, not just an open case.
11 There is an active, ongoing criminal investigation.
12 And I think where we are on this line of
13 questioning is that you're impinging on that ongoing
14 investigation. He has answered the question with
15 specific reference to Chris Wolf and that's, I think,
16 the line that we seek to draw here. And so I have
17 advised the Chief that I do think that as it relates
18 to everybody else in the world, including the
19 Ramseys, does impinge on an ongoing investigation
20 and, therefore, I have advised him that it should be
21 privileged and he should not answer it.
22 MR. WOOD: Okay. I don't want to be
23 disrespectful to that instruction. I assume you are
24 taking a law enforcement statement privilege?
25 MR. MILLER: Yes.
Did she wear those outfits to school? Did you see "Annie" on Broadway? Or any Broadway production featuring kids? Joni was performing. If she was trying out for a part in a play, would you have more tolerance for the costumes and the bleached hair? They were not parading her. My daughter was a big green M & M for Halloween. It was a costume appropriate for that occasion. No chance the R's had an innocent, harmless take on beauty pageants?
Each parent with a child enrolled in these kinds of pageants deserves what the R's got? Should there be laws banning such displays of child pornography? Should parents be arrested? I mean, if that's how you interpret this stuff?
What about their child rearing decisions did they have to justify to anyone? Because there was a pretty widely held understanding of the pornographic nature of what they had subjected her to, they needed to satisfy everyone else that they were in fact good parents? Guilty until proven innocent?
How about taking one's children, eight years old and younger, to the beach/pool/shore wearing bikini bathing suits? Perfectly acceptable?
I think the question of the media coverage they got is irrelevant, myself. It's not the media who decides whether or not to pursue a case.
No, I don't think so. And it all centers around Nedra.
Come on, Fang. That's light-years apart from child beauty pageants. Everyone knows that.
Nedra's to blame for Joni's pornographic escapades?
Did Joni wear any beauty pageant clothing as revealing as a bikini?
What does everyone know? Light years apart? What are you talking about?
Did the R's willingly, knowingly submit their daughter to engage in porn through the influence of Nedra?
Why shouldn't people, adults, be locked up for this?
In a sense. She gave Patsy no choice in the matter of JB going into pageants. "JonBenet will do those pageants," she said.
That doesn't matter, Fang. It's the goal.
I'm talking that everyone knows there's a big difference between a kid wearing a bathing suit for a day of fun and being put in the kind of outfits generally associated with Las Vegas showgirls specifically for the purpose of performing for ADULT judges using ADULT moves, usually to fulfill another adult's dusty dreams.
Don't go putting words in my mouth, Fang. Technically, it's not pornography. Far as I go, it's just this side of it, but no, I doubt that's how they thought of it. My point was that the impetus to put her into the pageants may not have been psychologically healthy.
I have often found myself asking that question.
Let's be fair. JB's pageant outfits were not pornographic. They were too sexy for a child, but I wouldn't call them porn by any means. Her dance moves were not pornographic either, but they also were too sexy for a child. The combination of adult outfits, full makeup, including eye shadow, mascara, lipstick, etc. with the costumes, and sexualized moves project a coquettish, sexualized "Lolita" image.
Pageant parents like Patsy are not deliberately pushing the sex, IMO. But they equate these adult moves and outfits with precociousness which in turn is felt to be an advantage in these pageants. The polished, made-up beauty of the child suggests the formidable beauty of the woman she will become. They don't see at as "gilding the lily". It's the gilding that makes the lily, to them.
Are there perverts who come to these pageants to imagine their sick trysts with these innocent little girls? Yes, without a doubt. But I do not feel their parents are offering them up for this. Rather, these parents have one dream- stardom and fame for their kids. Wealthy parents like the Rs are not in it for the money (the prize money doesn't even come close to the expenses parents incur) but for a chance at the brass ring. For Patsy, it was the Miss America crown she went out for, and missed. For Nedra, she missed twice with her own daughters, JB was her last chance, and you know the third time's the charm, right? JR just went along for the ride. If it kept Patsy busy and content, he was fine with it.
Media coverage was not fair to Ramseys IMO>
That's an order! or, won't that be wonderful?
She enjoyed the pageants.
You mean like Joni participating in a pageant for a day? Weren't she and her family allowed some room to chose what they liked to do?
She was a baby!
Bikinis are associated with Puritan modesty?
You mean like grown-ups who supervise their kids' behavior at the beach?
Kids in bikinis swim like adults.
You mean provocatively? Like what?
Who says? The men and women who judge these shows are dirty old so and sos?
She was six years old! fully clothed! What are you talking about? How do show girls' dance?
Six years old, judged before adults, you mean like kindergartners? How can a six year old baby act pornographically?
SD, I am not, have not and will not put words in your mouth. If I rearrange your words to express what I think you're saying, that doesn't mean I am putting words in your mouth. Don't put words in my mouth, either!
Your point being that their impetus may not have been healthy? What the hell does that mean? Who are you to judge?
It may have been perfectly healthy.
This is a fine example. These folks cannot win. Doesn't matter what they did, or did not do. They are cooked, finished, over with, kaput. Everything about them is converted into something that works against them. As much as some proclaim their sympathy, concern, pity, even love for them, they can't buy a kind word or a favorable interpretation. And when someone says, you know I really don't think they were the most evil monsters of all time, you get this. Don't put words in my mouth, or I never said they were lousy people or parents, I never said they weren't full of love and devotion for their children, I never said Patsy wasn't a generous, caring person, I never said J didn't spend time with his kids, I never said P was a pure *****.
The media does to. The media sets the agenda like a dinner table. Oh sure, not literally. But, they bring so much pressure to bear on authority figures, they might as well. A major ongoing battle for every president is the challenge to set the national agenda versus letting the media do it.
Did you see Dr. Zhivago? Are you opposed to divorce, generally speaking? As this superb movie portrays the leading characters, Lara and Zhivago, and the hardships they endure, it is easy to begin to hope they will unite, despite their marriage vows. For me, anyway. The point? Images, sounds, words influence our thinking and our emotions. To a significant degree, our media produces and directs the stories we watch every day. The media exerts enormous influence over our culture. Enormous.
I gave you the exact quote, Fang. Based on what I know of Nedra, she didn't seem like a very understanding woman.
I'm sure that's partly true.
My point exactly! A baby should not be taught by a 19-year-old how to strut and grind!
I never said that.
There's a big difference between supervising their safety and judging how well they imitate adult pros.
YES, I mean provocatively!
Without knowing any of them personally, it wouldn't surprise me.
Like they want you to see what they've "got."
By imitating adults. I'm not blaming the kids. The adult trainers ought to know better.
When I say that the impetus may not have been healthy, I mean that Patsy may (MAY, mind you--I think it's worth discussing) have been using JB to make up for her "failures" in her mother's eyes. And as for who am I to judge, I'm nobody to judge. I just think it may provide insight.
That's because it's the truth. I realize that doesn't go for much these days.
Point taken, but when I talk about the Rs getting kid gloves and preferential treatment, I'm not talking about their media treatment.
Separate names with a comma.