Page 5 of 9 FirstFirst 123456789 LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 104
  1. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Learnin View Post
    I think you're right, kk. John never climbed through that window.

    1. If I locked myself out of that house, I'd go get one of the many keys that had been given to friends, etc., or:

    2. I'd sure pick an easier window to break and enter.

    So I'm asking myself why John would fabricate that story. Evidently, the window was broken ealier in the year because Patsy said she and LHP cleaned the glass up. LHP would have caught her in a lie then and there so the window must have been broken. I'm wondering if Patsy ever told LHP how it got broken. If she didn't, I think this might be why John would fabricate the story of him being locked out and entering through that way.

    1. If P and J were staging this crime, they needed an entrance and exit. They remembered the broken window in the basement and remembered that LHP knew it was broken because she had helped clean the glass up.

    2. John could have fabricated the story that he broke the window when he found himself locked out. Why? Because, if John entered "the locked house" that way, then, the intruder sure could have entered "the locked house"
    the same way. Who was the first person thrown under the bus? LHP, the woman who helped clean the broken glass up.

    I'll always believe, until proven otherwise, that JR took FW to that train room so FW would notice the broken window before JR "discovered" the body. At that time, he was able to throw in the juicy little item that he, himself, had gotten into the locked house through that very window....hint, hint.

    Just thinking out loud as to why John would fabricate that story if, indeed, he did. At any rate, this theory would hinge on whether or not LHP was told, at the clean up time, as to how the window was broken.
    That all makes sense, Learnin.

    It has always been a question for me as to why John wouldn't just tell the truth about who broke the window, since it's obvious to me he is the one person who didn't.

    I have asked myself many times why would he feel the need to lie about who did break the window. The only answer I have is he was protecting someone.

    LHP probably could tell us and probably has told LE what the Ramseys' story about that broken window was when she cleaned it up. I have never seen anyone say if or what she said, though. Of course, John and Patsy would know what LHP had been told, so maybe they told her that it was John even back then. If the Ramseys were protecting someone immediately after it happened, maybe it was someone who was exhibiting behavior more questionable than just forgetting a key.

    At the swamp jams came up with a completely unbelievable BS story that John actually had someone WITH him the night he broke the window, and that person can verify John's story! She knows who the person was, but of course, she can't say.... And by the way, she has a really good deal on a bridge in Brooklyn, if anyone is in the market.

    So we not only have John fabricating his "break-in" story, but we have even more lies being told by the RST to back him up. They're pretty desperate to have John's and Patsy's lie about the window-breaking believed, aren't they?

    If you notice, when Patsy gives her version of the "broken window" story, she goes into such detail about cleaning it up, she also is clearly covering up something. Since I believe John lied, then I have to believe Patsy was aiding his lie.

    Now, the one thing we heard repeatedly from the Ramseys, and which is verified by the "train room," is that children played in that basement a lot. It stands to reason JonBenet would have been comfortable playing there, as well. Just thinking here....

    I wonder if the window was broken from the inside?

    Because of the grate, it's not likely someone accidently broke it playing ball or anything.

    Patsy even kept a key outside at one point, didn't she? The couple across the street had a key. The maid had a key. In fact, before the Ramseys were through spinning tales, half of Boulder had a key. Like you, Learnin, I wonder why anyone locked out just didn't call and get a key or break an easier window?

    One reason I can think of is that it was very late at night. I have pondered whether JAR might have been the one to break the window to get in, maybe when the family was out of town and he might have even been drinking, etc.? He was underage for drinking in 1996, 20 yrs. old. He had been arrested for that earlier that year, in the fall, I'm thinking. His frat house was about five blocks away from the Ramseys, I think I remember reading, so maybe he brought a girl there?

    One thought: if John had some mystery person with him and they broke in for some reason, like it was late and they were drunk, maybe it was JAR and he's the one who climbed through the window. Maybe the element of truth in John's story is that he didn't want to mess up his nice suit, so his partner in the window breaking did the dirty work? One thing about John's story that is simply theater of the absurd is that he took his suit off, but then put his shoes back on to back through the window. In his underwear. On his knees. If he had company, and the company was younger and wearing jeans or something, he'd be likely to climb through, not John. Maybe telling that story would lead to questions about where they'd been, etc., and maybe the pious Ramseys didn't want to admit that JR was drinking with his underage son?

    Just speculating, of course, but really, it can't be that complicated, can it? They had some reason that led them to lie about who broke that window, but the Ramseys weren't running liquor or selling drugs for a cartel; they were just average Americans with the same vices and virtues as the rest of the average population...up until JonBenet's murder, at least. Whoever broke that window orginally, the Ramseys must have lied to LHP for some personal reason, and once it became part of their "intruder" cover up, they continued the lie for more serious reasons. For one thing, JAR was awaiting judgment on his underage drinking charge when the murder occurred, so that could be part of it.

    Or maybe the Ramseys were out of town, or it was the weekend, so the issue with breaking the basement window instead of a glass in a door or upper floor window was simply that a broken basement window was not visible from the street, was protected by the grate, and tucked into the basement room. It was not a problem that might be created from an upper/other window being used for entry, like rain, wind, or snow being blown inside. Also, maybe other basement windows were not as easy to get to, or had other obstacles under them, with all the stuff stored around, etc.

    Just brainstorming, of course, but the reason I speculate is this: why would the Ramseys have a reason to lie about this prior breaking of the window, as the glass being cleaned up clearly would have come up, as you point out, Learnin. What you say about them using that to create the entrance/exit for the intruder is logical; what isn't logical is why they'd lie that it was John who broke the window when it wasn't.

    Who were they covering for? It had to be someone whom they did not want to drag into the investigation further. JAR's suitcase was under the window, with his semen on the contents and a child's book there as well. Whether that was related to the molestation or murder at all, I don't know, but Smit and his gang of Pink Panthers certainly like to point to fibers from the suitcase being on JonBenet, don't they? So maybe it was JAR, or even Burke playing around, and the Ramseys were protecting them from further questions and implications about activities that had taken place in that basement where JB was sexually assaulted and murdered on Dec. 26.

    We'll probably never know, because Team Ramsey sure isn't going to reveal the truth about it, IMO. Not when they'd have to explain why John and Patsy lied to LE about something so critical in the investigation of their child's murder.
    Last edited by koldkase; April 2, 2011, 11:18 am at Sat Apr 2 11:18:58 UTC 2011.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  2. #50

    Default

    And after that long post I just wrote, I have to say that the reason this murder was never tried was the Ramseys were absolutely gifted as liars. Trying to cut through their huge web of lies spun to conceal the truth, with Alex Hunter obstructing the investigation at every turn, was nearly possible. It's taken us 14 years to get this far.

    If the Ramseys' lips were moving, they were lying, IMO. Still are, IMO.

    From Whynut's website, if it's okay to put this here: tell me Lou Smit did this repeated "entry recreation" and never once questioned John's BS story. If Smit didn't know full well John lied to him about this, then Smit was either in full denial, completely incompetent, or just plain corrupt.

    [IMG][/IMG]

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  3. #51
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    Patsy said she kept a key in statue on the lawn somewhere. She had given the statue a french name (was it Francois?) because as we know, she was obsessed with things French.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  4. #52

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    That all makes sense, Learnin.

    It has always been a question for me as to why John wouldn't just tell the truth about who broke the window, since it's obvious to me he is the one person who didn't.

    I have asked myself many times why would he feel the need to lie about who did break the window. The only answer I have is he was protecting someone.

    LHP probably could tell us and probably has told LE what the Ramseys' story about that broken window was when she cleaned it up. I have never seen anyone say if or what she said, though. Of course, John and Patsy would know what LHP had been told, so maybe they told her that it was John even back then. If the Ramseys were protecting someone immediately after it happened, maybe it was someone who was exhibiting behavior more questionable than just forgetting a key.

    At the swamp jams came up with a completely unbelievable BS story that John actually had someone WITH him the night he broke the window, and that person can verify John's story! She knows who the person was, but of course, she can't say.... And by the way, she has a really good deal on a bridge in Brooklyn, if anyone is in the market.

    So we not only have John fabricating his "break-in" story, but we have even more lies being told by the RST to back him up. They're pretty desperate to have John's and Patsy's lie about the window-breaking believed, aren't they?

    If you notice, when Patsy gives her version of the "broken window" story, she goes into such detail about cleaning it up, she also is clearly covering up something. Since I believe John lied, then I have to believe Patsy was aiding his lie.

    Now, the one thing we heard repeatedly from the Ramseys, and which is verified by the "train room," is that children played in that basement a lot. It stands to reason JonBenet would have been comfortable playing there, as well. Just thinking here....

    I wonder if the window was broken from the inside?

    Because of the grate, it's not likely someone accidently broke it playing ball or anything.

    Patsy even kept a key outside at one point, didn't she? The couple across the street had a key. The maid had a key. In fact, before the Ramseys were through spinning tales, half of Boulder had a key. Like you, Learnin, I wonder why anyone locked out just didn't call and get a key or break an easier window?

    One reason I can think of is that it was very late at night. I have pondered whether JAR might have been the one to break the window to get in, maybe when the family was out of town and he might have even been drinking, etc.? He was underage for drinking in 1996, 20 yrs. old. He had been arrested for that earlier that year, in the fall, I'm thinking. His frat house was about five blocks away from the Ramseys, I think I remember reading, so maybe he brought a girl there?

    One thought: if John had some mystery person with him and they broke in for some reason, like it was late and they were drunk, maybe it was JAR and he's the one who climbed through the window. Maybe the element of truth in John's story is that he didn't want to mess up his nice suit, so his partner in the window breaking did the dirty work? One thing about John's story that is simply theater of the absurd is that he took his suit off, but then put his shoes back on to back through the window. In his underwear. On his knees. If he had company, and the company was younger and wearing jeans or something, he'd be likely to climb through, not John. Maybe telling that story would lead to questions about where they'd been, etc., and maybe the pious Ramseys didn't want to admit that JR was drinking with his underage son?

    Just speculating, of course, but really, it can't be that complicated, can it? They had some reason that led them to lie about who broke that window, but the Ramseys weren't running liquor or selling drugs for a cartel; they were just average Americans with the same vices and virtues as the rest of the average population...up until JonBenet's murder, at least. Whoever broke that window orginally, the Ramseys must have lied to LHP for some personal reason, and once it became part of their "intruder" cover up, they continued the lie for more serious reasons. For one thing, JAR was awaiting judgment on his underage drinking charge when the murder occurred, so that could be part of it.

    Or maybe the Ramseys were out of town, or it was the weekend, so the issue with breaking the basement window instead of a glass in a door or upper floor window was simply that a broken basement window was not visible from the street, was protected by the grate, and tucked into the basement room. It was not a problem that might be created from an upper/other window being used for entry, like rain, wind, or snow being blown inside. Also, maybe other basement windows were not as easy to get to, or had other obstacles under them, with all the stuff stored around, etc.

    Just brainstorming, of course, but the reason I speculate is this: why would the Ramseys have a reason to lie about this prior breaking of the window, as the glass being cleaned up clearly would have come up, as you point out, Learnin. What you say about them using that to create the entrance/exit for the intruder is logical; what isn't logical is why they'd lie that it was John who broke the window when it wasn't.

    Who were they covering for? It had to be someone whom they did not want to drag into the investigation further. JAR's suitcase was under the window, with his semen on the contents and a child's book there as well. Whether that was related to the molestation or murder at all, I don't know, but Smit and his gang of Pink Panthers certainly like to point to fibers from the suitcase being on JonBenet, don't they? So maybe it was JAR, or even Burke playing around, and the Ramseys were protecting them from further questions and implications about activities that had taken place in that basement where JB was sexually assaulted and murdered on Dec. 26.

    We'll probably never know, because Team Ramsey sure isn't going to reveal the truth about it, IMO. Not when they'd have to explain why John and Patsy lied to LE about something so critical in the investigation of their child's murder.
    Well, I'll say one thing. If John actually did go through that window, several months before, he was hiding something. And if he had a companion with him, it was someone, obviously, that, for him, is better left unknown.

  5. #53

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    And after that long post I just wrote, I have to say that the reason this murder was never tried was the Ramseys were absolutely gifted as liars. Trying to cut through their huge web of lies spun to conceal the truth, with Alex Hunter obstructing the investigation at every turn, was nearly possible. It's taken us 14 years to get this far.

    If the Ramseys' lips were moving, they were lying, IMO. Still are, IMO.

    From Whynut's website, if it's okay to put this here: tell me Lou Smit did this repeated "entry recreation" and never once questioned John's BS story. If Smit didn't know full well John lied to him about this, then Smit was either in full denial, completely incompetent, or just plain corrupt.

    [IMG][/IMG]

    There is only one way to get into that space and that is the way Smit went into it. You surely don't go down that opening feet first. Now, a child could negotiate it much easier. Do we know which pane of glass was broken?

  6. #54

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Learnin View Post
    There is only one way to get into that space and that is the way Smit went into it. You surely don't go down that opening feet first. Now, a child could negotiate it much easier. Do we know which pane of glass was broken?
    Here's the only photo that I remember seeing of that window in situ from the actual morning of Dec. 26:


    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  7. #55

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    Patsy said she kept a key in statue on the lawn somewhere. She had given the statue a french name (was it Francois?) because as we know, she was obsessed with things French.
    Thanks, DeeDee. Was it the "lawn jockey"?

    I can't remember without looking it up again, but if anyone does: did Patsy say when she took that key from the statue, or was she wishy washy about it to give yet another source for that intruder to enter? But then, why didn't John use it? Were the Ramseys trying to have it both ways again?

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  8. #56
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Courtesy of Little: Steve Thomas "Jonbenét"


    Page 37
    *snip*
    Downstairs in the basement, another technician examined the broken
    window. Three windows, each eighteen-by-thirty-inch rectangles,
    were in a row. The top left pane in the center window was broken, and
    the screen was off. The tech noticed pieces of glass outside the window
    and a scuff mark on the wall. The dust, film, and debris on the window-
    sill were undisturbed.
    Outside, a detective examined the steel grate that covered the window
    well and found undisturbed cobwebs still attached from the grate
    to the bricks. The foliage around the grate also appeared undisturbed.
    In the far corner of the basement, just outside the small room where
    the body had lain, Detective Mike Everett discovered a half-dozen oil
    paintings on canvas and an artist's plastic tote box belonging to Patsy.
    In the tote was a broken brush splotched by paint. Splinters were on
    the floor beside the tote. It was a major find because the broken brush
     
    38
    matched the fractured end of the multicolored stick used in the garrote.
    The detective had found the source of part of the murder weapon and
    where it had been broken.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  9. #57

    Default

    Going back to the Hi-TEC boots, Patsy was questioned about them in 2000. (The reference to there being no size difference at the end refers to the fact that the logos are the same size on the adult and children's shoe. Only the logo, according to the police, was discernible in the shoeprint.)

    21 Q. Okay. Is this the first time
    22 that you've heard that Burke says that he
    23 had Hi-Tec?
    24 A. Yes, it is.
    25 Q. This is the very first time?
    0132
    1 A. Yes.
    2 Q. When you said in your book and
    3 then you said at other times too that you
    4 didn't own either brand --
    5 MR. WOOD: Hold on. If you have
    6 got a reference of the book.
    7 MR. KANE: I'm sorry. Page 232.
    ....
    9 PATSY: I think we were
    10 referring that John or I didn't, did not
    11 ever have -- were not in possession of --
    12 Q. (By Mr. Kane) So when you said
    13 we, you were referring to John or you?
    14 A. Yes. It never occurred to me
    15 about Burke's shoes.
    ....
    23 Q. (By Mr. Kane) But I mean, but
    24 my question was, when you said we, you were
    25 talking about you or John?
    0134
    1 A. Well, what is the, what size
    2 print is the Hi-Tec? Is it a child's or is
    3 it an adult's?
    4 Q. I don't think there is any
    5 difference between the two. And I think
    6 that has been pretty well publicized too.

  10. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Research: Courtesy of Little : Steve Thomas " JonBenét"


    Page171
    *snip*

    Ramsey said he checked Burke's train room, where he and Fleet
    discussed the broken window. He then added, "I'd actually gone down
    there earlier that morning, and the window was broken, but I didn't
    see any glass around, so I assumed it was broken last summer. I used
    that window to get in the house one time when I didn't have a key,
    but the window was open, I don't know, maybe an inch, and I just
    kind of latched it."
    What? I had to work to keep my face neutral, for while he was de-
    scribing the broken window, he had also admitted going down to the
    basement alone and unseen before he went down with Fleet White and
    found the body.
    I pushed on that. "Fleet had talked about earlier being down there
    alone and discovering that window. When you say that you found it
    earlier that day and latched it, at what time?"
    "I don't know, probably before ten."
    172
    Just about when Detective Arndt lost track of him and thought he had left to
    get the mail. Now he admits being in the basement!
     
    He then described going to the little cellar room on the subsequent trip downstairs with Fleet White, unlatching and opening the white door. He snapped his fingers and said, "It was instant, I mean, as soon as I opened the door I saw the white blanket. . . and I knew what was up."She was on her back on the floor with the white blanket folded around her, her arms were tied, and there was a piece of black tape over her ips, he said, and her head was cocked to one side.

    The door opens outward, so he would have had to step back or aside before moving through. He did not say he saw the blanket after turning on the light but "instantly." Fleet White had stood in that same doorway that morning and could see nothing in the windowless darkness. I had always considered that Ramsey might have known something before he entered, and with this new
    admission of going to the basement earlier, I was sure of it. By the time he went back downstairs with Fleet White, I thought he knew exactly where the body was.
     
    Nevertheless, his theory was that "someone came in through the base-ment window, because there was a blue Samsonite suitcase sitting right under the window and he . . . could have gotten in the house without that, but you couldn't have gotten out that window without something to step on. Even to have known those windows were there wouldn't have been obvious to anybody just walking by." The grate, he added, could be pulled off, and the window was not painted shut.

    This was the DA's Intruder Theory, although it contradicted the events of December 26, when Fleet White said Ramsey shrugged off the open window. Now it had become very important, for the open window pointed toward their intruder. And we knew that Fleet White said he had' moved the suitcase, so the intruder had not done that. Ramsey added that during the morning of December 26, "I went around and I looked around the house that morning and. . . all the doors were locked and I had checked every door on the first floor. . .and they appeared to be locked." To me, if all the doors on the first floor were locked, that meant an intruder would have had to either have a key or enter and exit at some other point, which made the basement window even more important. And the undisturbed dirt and debris on the sill of the basement window, along with the unbroken
    173
    spider web between the metal grate and the wall, demonstrated to me
    that no one came through that window. In my opinion, there was no
    intruder. Both the Ramseys' answers when asked whether they had reviewed the police reports were astonishing. Patsy said, "We got them, but I didn't read them, I don't think." John Ramsey said he only "scanned them."

    I turned that over in my mind: Your child is murdered, you hire a top- dollar legal team and believe the police are trying to frame you, but you are not interested enough to do more than "scan" police reports? Most unlikely.

    But even with that cursory reading, John Ramsey said he found "errors or misunderstandings." He said that not only did he not check every door in the house the night before but he did not believe he checked any door. Also incorrect was the police notation that Ramsey said he read to the kids before going to bed. "That did not happen. I mean what happened was that the kids went to bed and then I read."

    I asked, "Do you attribute that simply to an officer's error in recol-
    lection, or might you have said that?" "No, I wouldn't have said that. I think that maybe the way I said it was misinterpreted. I clearly did not read to the kids that night. JonBenet was asleep, we wanted Burke to get to sleep. We were going to get up early the next morning."

    To believe him now, one would have to believe that three police
    officers-Officer French, Detective Arndt, and Sergeant Reichenbach
    were all mistaken about what Ramsey had told them
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  11. #59

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1 View Post
    Courtesy of Little: Steve Thomas "Jonbenét"
    Thanks for finding that tidbit, Elle. Interesting that there was still broken glass outside the window on the concrete. I think that was some of the broken glass that a stager put on the floor which FW picked up that morning.

    I, also, wonder why there was glass outside the window when JR supposedly broke the glass from outside in order to get in.

  12. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fr brown View Post
    Going back to the Hi-TEC boots, Patsy was questioned about them in 2000. (The reference to there being no size difference at the end refers to the fact that the logos are the same size on the adult and children's shoe. Only the logo, according to the police, was discernible in the shoeprint.)

    21 Q. Okay. Is this the first time
    22 that you've heard that Burke says that he
    23 had Hi-Tec?
    24 A. Yes, it is.
    25 Q. This is the very first time?
    0132
    1 A. Yes.
    2 Q. When you said in your book and
    3 then you said at other times too that you
    4 didn't own either brand --
    5 MR. WOOD: Hold on. If you have
    6 got a reference of the book.
    7 MR. KANE: I'm sorry. Page 232.
    ....
    9 PATSY: I think we were
    10 referring that John or I didn't, did not
    11 ever have -- were not in possession of --
    12 Q. (By Mr. Kane) So when you said
    13 we, you were referring to John or you?
    14 A. Yes. It never occurred to me
    15 about Burke's shoes.
    ....
    23 Q. (By Mr. Kane) But I mean, but
    24 my question was, when you said we, you were
    25 talking about you or John?
    0134
    1 A. Well, what is the, what size
    2 print is the Hi-Tec? Is it a child's or is
    3 it an adult's?
    4 Q. I don't think there is any
    5 difference between the two. And I think
    6 that has been pretty well publicized too.
    Good point...no difference in the logo size between child and adult. I, also, find it very interesting how Wood jumped in when Kane asked why the Rams stated, in the book, they didn't own any HiTec shoes....Guess they didn't think Burke said anything about his.



Similar Threads

  1. Who's Who in the Ramsey Case
    By Cherokee in forum Evidence Files: Ramsey murder case
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 16, 2008, 8:01 pm, Wed Apr 16 20:01:29 UTC 2008
  2. Ramsey-v-Fox Case Documents
    By Tricia in forum Transcripts: Ramsey murder case
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: September 29, 2004, 10:48 am, Wed Sep 29 10:48:34 UTC 2004
  3. Ramsey Case - Autopsy of JonBenet Patricia Ramsey
    By Dunvegan in forum Evidence Files: Ramsey murder case
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: May 25, 2002, 12:07 am, Sat May 25 0:07:54 UTC 2002

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •