Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by Eagle1, Jul 7, 2004.
Seems to me that's one of our biggest clues. From Schiller's book, I think, a Patsy quote.
Yes, this is a major clue. It means Burke and that neighbor kid and possibly one other juvenile did it and the grand Jury figured it out and there's a conspiracy in Boulder to protect Burke.
Just read between the lines and all will become clear.
And I'll be happy to see those nice young men in their clean white suits and their coming to take me away.... Ha, Ha, Hee, Hee, to the funny farm where life is beautiful all the time.....
Without the whole conversation, its kinda hard to see where the statement fits.
From PMPT, re the afternoon of December 27 at the Fernies:
Kristine went to the bathroom to get a cool washcloth for Patsy's forehead. While she was gone, Patsy reached up and touched Pam's face. "Couldn't you fix this for me?" she asked. Pam thought she was delirious. It was as if Patsy were asking her to fix a ripped seam. "Patsy said something like, 'We didn't mean for that to happen,'" Pam would say later. p. 53 pb.
I think this is interesting, too:
While Patsy slept, Pam found John in the living room holding Burke. To Pam, Ramsey seemed to be in a trance. His face was blank. His eyes were red. "I don't get it," he said over and over. Then he got up, walked outside, shook his head, and asked aloud, "Why?" p. 53-54 pb.
And the day before, the 26th, at the Fernies:
Around 7:00 p.m. John Ramsey went for a walk with John Fernie and Dr. Francesco Beuf, JonBenet's physician, who had brought over some medication for Patsy. When they returned a half hour later, Ramsey asked Bynum to represent him. "I'm sorry, I'm so sorry," Ramsey told his friends over and over. Then, just after 8:00, he left alone to take a walk in the nearby foothills. p. 27 pb.
IMO the above described apologies and introspection make no sense in an intruder scenario. More like some kind of domestic tragedy.
Also, maybe it's just me, but if Burke did it, I find it hard to imagine John - the guy who barked angrily at Burke on the 911 tape - sitting there the next day holding him. Seems to me if John were seeking comfort, he wouldn't be cuddling with the perp.
I still don't see it. If she said "can you fix this for me?" doesn't mean anything. We need to know more of the context here. She could be asking her to fix something as minute as a seam. "We didn't mean for that to happen"- Well, what is the rest of the conversation. This tells me nothing.
And I would love to know how everyone thinks Burke really did this. The bashing in the skull makes no sense and then them trying to cover it up by tying the garotte and making it look like a strangulation. There is no way that is what happened. You cannot go on all these statements from books. We have no way of knowing what is true and what is not. I think if all of the things people are posting here about the guilt of the Ramsey's and their cover up were true, the Grand Jury would have seen things that way. I do not. I think that their behavior from the time they found the note up until now has been exactly what I would expect from some people in that situation. Some people, naturally would react differently. I deal with the dead and survivors and there is nothing at all unusual about anything I have read thus far regarding their behavior. I think the killer may still be out there (unless deceased since then) and it is just a matter of time before this happens again. JMO.
I purposely didn't write much in the opening post, wanted to see if this strikes others the same way it does me.
First, during one of the other cases, Chandra or Danielle, probably, did we all alike read about sociopaths and how charming and convincing they can be?
Sounds to me like a small group of them asked to borrow JonBenet for a little while for something pleasant-sounding, which was flattering and made them trust whoever it was. And naturally the parents are now major beating up on themselves for having trusted them.
They were left with not only the body of their child, but a coverup to concoct, to hide the fact they trusted criminals with their child, what parent would do that, just handed her over.
The next step is much harder, reconstructing exactly what it was, knowing the R's are not going to just tell us. They know they'd be inundated and never live it down and some would say "they have only themselves to blame".
Maybe it did. We, the public, have no way of knowing what the GJ thought. Alex Hunter chose not to pursue the case at that time:
HUNTER QUOTE: Yet I must report to you that I and my prosecution task force believe we do not have sufficient evidence to warrant the filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time.
Again, maybe it's just me, but if an intruder murdered my child, I'd be out for blood, turning the world upside down looking for him. I'd be shrieking with rage at the intruder and begging the police to help me find him. I'd not be sitting around wondering "why" and apologizing of all things.
Yes, they were grieving and people can grieve differently, of course. BUT they weren't just grieving. Allegedly a monster had just invaded their lives and murdered their child. In that situation there'd be a whole lot of rage along with the grief, and an intense drive to find the perp and find him quickly before he had a chance to get far... NOT a drive to get out of the house, get away from their beloved dead child, get away from the people whose job it is to find the murderer, and get out of town.
I think when you are the victim of a major crime you feel like you've been poleaxed. This sort of thing isn't supposed to happen to people who pay their taxes, aren't involved with alcohol or drugs, live in a nice neighborhood, are involved in their community, etc. etc. The whole thing seems very unreal for some time - days - maybe even weeks. It just doesn't compute with your image of how your life is supposed to unfold. It's not supposed to happen. I'd expect when death is involved and you know there is no chance life will ever get back to the way it was it is even more unreal.
IMO the Ramseys covered only for a Ramsey, and in the above type scenario they wouldn't have covered the way they did unless a Ramsey were personally involved. They would have extricated themselves from guilt and turned on the perp in a heartbeat. IMO no way would John and Patsy Ramsey have endured the stink of suspicion all these years unless they were deep in it themselves. Having an actual perp they could hand over to police would've solved the problem and "solved" the case.
Re "We didn't mean for this to happen", biggest clue in the case?
They trusted some psychopaths with their child? And/or maybe the Pagans having ceremonies out in the hills, reason John and his friends went for a walk in that direction? Who among us wouldn't be ashamed to admit it if we did something so stupid? Plus, how could they hope to prove they did it? They might even claim to be or really be gov't connected, may have promised some kind of gov't favor.
What you do when dealing with a true psychopath/sociopath is wait until they're caught for something else because your word against theirs will never get you anywhere.
In some other sleuthing cases we've discussed the how convincing and charming they can be, to cover up some failure/inadequacy in their own life and There's also a lot more about this at http://www.bullyonline.org/action/action.htm
re coping with workplace bullying, (which 14 pgs could be useful to nearly all of us, even if we weren't working on true crime cases, info we can't afford not to know, and you just might want to bookmark it).
may still have an article titled "Daddy's Little Princess", about a CIA connection with Lockheed, etc. CIA has "factions". I wouldn't be able to pin it on them, nor would even the DA.
Thanks to all of you who looked up the quote.
Are we still all on the same page and agreed that if Burke had done it, John wouldn't have been hugging him, dazed, saying "I just don't get it?" There's no telling what the perps may have told that made JonBenet's parents trust them with her.
Any ideas? We normal people wouldn't know what to tell, but this kind would. And they're probably not exactly intruders, but may have brought her back to the house to kill her? I sure don't think they were family, and if we were the parents we'd be as embarrassed as the R's are, would never tell. Probably nobody would believe them if they did. It'd be like Scott Peterson's brown van of devil worshippers taking Laci, and like Saddam's or Bin Laden's family being airlifted out of the U.S. just before 9-11. The cops are going to arrest them? In a NY Minute? JMHO
Looking at it from another perspective though.... "We didn't mean for that to happen" could also have meant they never meant for anything bad to happen to their family or drag their other other family members into it...
Haven't any of you ever had something happen that you didn't mean to happen just because you didn't lock a lock, turn down a certain road instead, etc? Never questioned yourself, or told yourself, "if only I had done this instead it wouldn't have happened".
Maybe this meant that he didn't get how someone (possibly Burke as he was holding him in disbelief) could kill her ("I don't get it" as in I don't understand this). If it was Burke and it was over something like his nintendo game, that may be what John didn't get. He didn't understand and asked "Why?". Parents often say "I don't get it" and always ask "Why?" (as in what did I do to deserve this happening. I know this is part of the grief of losing a child, firsthand.)
Unless he was telling them he was sorry for involving them in this whole thing.
As for him barking (supposedly) angrily at Burke (something totally unconfirmed yet believed), it could have been his initial reaction, then later he could have calmed down and been so depressed over what he found out that he wondered how his young son could actually kill his little sister.
Burke was completely disassociated from JonBenet. His demeanor at the funeral, his interview with the psychologist and his explination of what he thought while thinking of her (nintendo game beeps and bleeps when thinking of her) bear this out.
No wonder he'll have "problems when he's older. When he's 40."
I have to say. I still don't buy all of this. The "why, why, why" and "we didnt mean for this to happen", etc.....this is all part of grieving.
When my sister was murdered we went through the same things. At first we were completely numbed and shocked. My mother would NOT move from her chair, she kept wailing "why, why, why" and at the funeral was at the casket saying "she was so sorry, so, so sorry"......NOT because she killed her but because she wished she had been able to protect her more and see things, see the signs to stop this from happening in the first place. Her killer was found and it was someone the family trusted and we never would have believed it had they not admitted it (even though his story changed 5 times even after being caught). The police work was absolutely absurd in this case as well, this monster (as we now refer to him) served a year for manslaughter even though there was plenty of evidence to suggest otherwise. Sloppy police work and the court system being bogged down already with other stupid things contribute to this misjustice, but that is the past...... So I guess when I was numb and not crying and just sitting there staring off into space wondering why this happend to our family, I was probably appearing to others as not caring or hiding some guilt if one was so inclined to think that way but I was not. I was feeling guilty for not doing more and not paying enough attention to the signs that were so obviously there before.
As I have said on another post- There ABSOLUTELY is no merit to the claim that BR/PR bashed in her skull, THEN decided to make it look like a intruder came in and attempted to kidnap her, etc. I know that the head trauma is consistent with her being bashed in the head postmortem, otherwise, there would have been an abundance of blood coming out her mouth, nose, ears, etc. There would have been a tremendous subdural hematoma and there probably would not be the petechial hemorrhages on her neck and eyes. The evidence is not there to support that theory. Anyway, I posted all of that on the "why Burke did not kill" posts.
Seeker, it just seems to me that reflection and introspection would more naturally come much later, and that in the hours and days immediately following a home invasion/murder of one's child - such a horrific violation - one would be consumed with rage at the intruder and obsessed with getting him. Where was their outrage?
And what odd questions to be asking: "I don't get it" ? "Why?" What about: "Who are you, you bastard? Where are you? I'm coming after you!" Instead of "I'm so sorry" to Fernie and Beuf, why not "Help me, guys, let's go find him! I'm gonna f***in' tear him apart!" and so on... especially since they supposedly had leads. If the Ramseys honestly suspected the people whose names they were offering up (in a real kidnapping/murder scenario), why weren't they confronting those people, asking questions? Both before and after the body was "found," why weren't they confronting, questioning, searching, demanding answers, insisting that their entourage and the police help them find their child and/or her kidnapper/killer?
I agree that their grief was clearly there. But their rage and their demand to know who did it so they could get their hands on him were conspicuously not. If there were really an intruder, IMO there's not enough valium and booze in the world to keep the Ramseys sitting around on the couch, doing nothing but crying and wondering "why." Quite the contrary: they would've been galvanized with fury.
Britt- with all due respect that is the way YOU would handle it, not everyone has that in them. I am sorry but I have to disagree. Even when I knew who killed my sister I didn't want to strangle him or choke him. I was angry and still think he is a monster but I would NOT stoop to his level by showing the rage he obviously showed my sister. I said nothing to him and to this day have said nothing to him. I believe someday he WILL pay for his deeds. He didn't pay here on earth but he will pay one day. No one in my family had that rage you speak of. We were all just sickened that we were not able to protect her and THAT broke our hearts. Getting enraged would serve no purpose other than to let off some steam for a minute. Now, had I seen this man killing my sister, I may have went into a rage then and tried to save her but when it is already done, sometimes you have a different reaction. At least we did. JMO
Some families are just crushed with grief.
Okay about the Sociopath and CIA links and stuff, there was hate propaganda being circulated about John at Charlevoix, two or three guys circulating around the town, or maybe just one guy, someone sleeping in JonBenet's bed.
What could it all mean?
And Charles Manson had been told by someone evidently that he could be Apollyon, which I'm sure he didn't find by reading the Bible for himself. "Devils believe, and tremble," it says. One had evidently been reading it and used Manson and his gang or faction or family. Didn't one of them even attack Gerald Ford, years later?
I think when Patsy asked her sister couldn't she fix the situation. where they'd obviously been deceived, believed lies and made an error in judgement, she did not really have any hope, just was trying to express the pain. Question is, who exactly were the people that fooled them into letting them borrow JonBenet, maybe for some Pagan ceremony they said would be entertaining or educational for her?
Then there was also the (foreign?) tweed jacket hate guy at the parade. Sounds almost like an international thing, result of gossip-propaganda internationally. Did they think the R's had "pride"? I think maybe there's some new kind of ideology about that these days. (There's "The Thought Police" and "The Pride Police"? terrorism?)
When your world is turned upside down, as the Ramsey's was, everyone is potentially the guilty. You lose your trust for anyone outside the immediate family. You gradually get some back, but it takes a while. I have no problem with their telling the police about the behavior of various people they knew. Wouldn't you if someone committed a crime against your family?
The last thing in the world the police want is a family member going off the deep end and attacking a suspect.
I agree with twizzler - it's all part of normal grieving and there is nothing suspicious about their statements and behavior that night.
IMO it is ridiculous to believe that John and/or Patsy Ramsey, if they were true parent-victims of such a horrific invasion, would be cerebral and philosophical so soon after the crime. I realize this was Boulder, but still....
We've seen many displays of Ramsey righteous indignation over the years. Where is/was that righteous indignation over the mother of all violations? For years they've been p*ssed off at the police, the media, the "borg"... everyone BUT the "intruder."
Another reason they could have had for not tearing everyone apart and going into a rage is that they placed trust in the Boulder Police and thought that they would do a thorough job and follow the leads and take care of the business. They had to bury their precious little girl, they were in shock, and the police had a job to do. Let's face it, the police blew it. Had they done everything they should have done, and everything an experienced team would have done, we would not be here on this forum right now talking about this. I believe they would have caught the person. Everything was handled completely wrong. Instead of looking at the case with an open mind they were more concerned as to why the Ramsey's would want to take the body of their baby home (Atlanta) for a proper burial. They had to do this and they DO need to "move on with their life"...that doesn't mean they have to forget finding out what happened and why it happened and who did it. It just means they have to go on with life as they now know it for the surviving children(s) sake. Trust me, unless you have been in their shoes (or those like them), you really cannot judge them or condemn them for their actions. You always think you will react one way to certain situations but when the shoe is on YOUR foot, it is quite a different story. JMO
It's not being cerebral and philosophical, it's being numb. Poleaxed is the best word I can think of. Most people don't understand that reaction until something bad happens to them. Most people, given a hypothetical situation, say they would behave the way you say you would behave. That the Ramseys seemed to be stunned and out-of-it is one of the things that lends credence to the belief they are innocent. Its a very natural reaction but not what someone who was pretending would come up with.
Exactly! Until you've been there, you cannot say. I truly believe they have no idea who did this to their precious angel. I do believe it is someone they know though and don't really suspect or have publicly stated they suspect. I have my own thoughts as to who fits "my profile" but I will not say here. I do know they will be revealed some day. It will come out one day and justice will prevail for JonBenet and the Ramsey's.