Page 1 of 14 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 160
  1. #1

    Default Sexual Behavior Problems (SBP) - from James Kolar's book about Ramsey case

    It seems important to have a thread specifically for this topic, as it is a major point of his investigation in Kolar's book.

    As you're reading Kolar's book, please feel free to add your thoughts, observations, theories, opinions, and quotes on this thread, if you have any you'd like to discuss on this issue.

    I'd like to begin with a couple of telling passages, because they reveal typical Team Ramsey items of complete disinformation we've been fed...since very early in the investigation. It's hard to believe modern law enforcement officers of the court behave this way; but it seems we humans have a very difficult time with our own distorted perceptions of how we can and can't behave--all evidence to the contrary, really.

    After Kolar presented his own Power Point presentation to Lacy and a few of her attorneys for six hours in January of 2006, he asked for follow-up on obtaining evidence for the direction his "fresh eyes" had determined the investigation should have taken at that point.

    Lacy's response was clear: Close yourself, fresh eyes.

    From Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet?, by A. James Kolar; p.281-82

    I pointed out that Ramsey attorneys had effectively withheld
    medical records from the prosecution during the investigation,
    and I specifically referred to John Ramsey’s interview of June
    1998.51 I felt, that given the above information, we should be revisiting and intensifying our investigation of the involvement of
    the family. Among other things, we should be seeking the psychiatric
    records of Burke to determine if he had had any knowledge
    of the death of his sister, either through a grand jury or by asking
    the Ramseys for the information.

    I believed wholeheartedly that this was a viable investigative
    lead that deserved pursuit. If nothing came of it, then at least we
    could say that we had covered all of our bases.

    Mary Lacy’s response is something that I will have difficulty
    ever forgetting.

    She told me that she was unwilling to pursue that lead because
    she ‘didn’t want to harm her relationship with the Ramsey family.’

    This response left me speechless, and it effectively ended the
    presentation. At that juncture, I felt that nothing more could be
    said, or done, that would sway Lacy from this position.

    As I was packing up my computer and projector, she told me
    about something that Tom Wickman had purportedly observed
    during the execution of the search warrants at the Ramsey home.
    He reportedly had observed the impression of someone’s buttocks
    in the carpet of the hallway outside JonBenét’s second floor
    bedroom. It appeared that someone had been sitting on the
    floor with their knees up around their chest, leaning against
    the wall / cabinets.

    Wickman purportedly told her that he thought it was where
    the intruder had been waiting while the family was at the White
    dinner party. I was aware that some intruder theorists believed it
    possible the perpetrator had entered the home while the family
    was away that evening, and that he had written the ransom note
    while awaiting their return. Apparently, Lacy thought that
    Wickman was suggesting the intruder had found some time to sit
    on the floor outside JonBenét’s bedroom after penning his note.

    I didn’t recall seeing anything like that in any of the police
    reports I had read and subsequently asked Wickman about it.

    He told me he had no idea what I was talking about.

    Now we can see why Lacy and Smit were so simpatico: they both investigated the case with their imagination firmly in place of the facts.

    Sadly, we have known since she buddied-up with Wood in 2002 this was the case, but now we have it confirmed.

    But the Sword of Damocles hanging over the Ramsey's Umbrella of Suspicion all these years finally drops here, with this simple admission by Boulder ADA Bill Nagel:

    Pages 284-85

    Bill Nagel stopped by my office the following week. He apparently
    had been giving my theory some additional thought. Bill
    advised me that no one had really taken a very close look at Burke
    and that Ramsey attorneys had campaigned Hunter’s office to publically
    clear him of any involvement in the case. All eyes were
    focused elsewhere, and Hunter eventually caved on the request.

    It made sense to me. I recalled having seen a handwritten note
    on attorney letterhead that had been faxed to the D.A.s office.
    It was my impression that Hunter’s subsequent announcement to
    the media, which cleared Burke Ramsey as a potential suspect
    in the case, read nearly verbatim to the content of the note sent to
    him by Ramsey attorneys.
    Kolar presents that note in the book, including the two sections Hunter crossed out before signing and sending it back to Wood.

    Kolar left the DA's Office not long after his presentation. He writes he knew he was committing political suicide before he showed it to Lacy, but as Fate would have it, he got offered his old position back in Telluride about this time, so he had a safety net should his recommendations result in him being shown the door.

    Lucky for us Lacy's now legendary Team Ramsey maneuvers, costing the citizens of Colorado more than money, inspired him to continue his own quest for justice for JonBenet.

    "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. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    I am ordering this book on payday, next week, can't wait to get it. Thanks to Cynic, KK and everyone else giving their thoughts on the book. I am in the minority, and have gone back and forth in this case as far as who could have done this. I will await reading the book to really admit my feelings in this case.

    I have felt from early on that for sure:

    Patsy wrote that note

    John knew about what happened early on. IMO, he was waiting for the police to find JonBenet and when it wasn't happening soon enough, Arndt gave him the OK to search the house after 1:00 p.m. that day and that was his chance. I don't know he had anything to do with the actual murder, but he had to have known what happened before the cops were called, with all I've read.

    I still believe (not John) that it was a male Ramsey molesting JonBenet. I will just say that my original thought was Burke. JAR is a stretch, I know, but due to KK's original (long ago) research on him, I still wonder about his presence in the house. He also could have been molesting her. Just too many things point in both directions. Remember the fibers of John's (shirt?) being in the crotch of her underwear or something like that? Yeah, maybe he changed her innocently. Between Patsy and John's fibers, no way were neither of them involved in the coverup.

    I know most people think Patsy killed JonBenet. I remember Delmar telling me to not think about me being a woman and killing my child. He made some good points, and his "garrotte" analysis was excellent and made sense. HOWEVER....after reading snippets of this book, I am back to my original thought on this case. Burke was an odd duck and I know he was off limits to talk about on some forums because he was cleared by Hunter and a minor at the time. But I do remember his odd police/pyschological interviews and I still stick by my guns. Now the train track thing. He did get p i s s e d at her before. So shoot me.
    Last edited by Cherokee; July 27, 2012, 7:50 pm at Fri Jul 27 19:50:11 UTC 2012.
    I despise the Ramseys and this is just my opinion

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    James A. Kolar
    Mary Lacy’s response is something that I will have difficulty
    ever forgetting.

    She told me that she was unwilling to pursue that lead because
    she ‘didn’t want to harm her relationship with the Ramsey family.’

    This response left me speechless, and it effectively ended the
    presentation. At that juncture, I felt that nothing more could be
    said, or done, that would sway Lacy from this position.


    Then Mary Lacy should be charged with obstruction of justice by refusing to check out evidence found in the Ramsey home. All she was concerned about was losing the Ramsey's friendship. KK?
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Lincoln, Nebraska
    Posts
    2,320

    Default

    I agree Elle. Had no idea this happened. What a mess.
    I despise the Ramseys and this is just my opinion

  5. #5

    Default

    I'm not sure how much of this I should post, but as Chief Kolar stated he wrote this to get information about the case into the public, I'm going to go for it. Mods, if you need to edit, go ahead, no problem.

    This is by no means the entirety of Kolar's chapter on SBP. It's a long chapter with astonishing statistics and sources on the violent and sometimes criminal behaviors of children and minors in this country, specifically in 1996. It's a must read for this case.

    This section is more specific to this murder, though, so brace yourselves for some evidence we have not known about, as well as putting some we have into context. It's not pretty.

    From FF:WRKJ?, Kolar; pages 367-70:


    The second important event to occur that winter involved
    additional discoveries that were related to the behavioral symptoms
    of a childhood disorder.

    While working on the written case outline that was completed
    in October 2006, I became aware of a childhood behavioral
    disorder that revolved around the issue of sexually aggressive
    children. I learned about clinical research that had been conducted
    on the topic of children with a behavioral disorder commonly
    referred to as “Sexual Behavior Problems”, or “SBP.”

    I had obtained a copy of the book, Sexually Aggressive Children,
    Coming to Understand Them,70 and other research materials on that
    topic late that fall and began to review them in my spare time.
    Araji’s book, in particular, provided a comprehensive overview of
    national research that had studied sexual abuse perpetrated by
    children 12 years of age and younger.

    Approximately two months had passed since the mailing of
    my letter to the D.A.’s office, and I had finished my study of the
    SBP text book. It was incredibly enlightening, and the case studies
    only served to strengthen my belief that developed from my
    analysis of the case that indicated some form of family cover-up.

    This information is not all-inclusive but provides an overview
    of the behavioral symptoms seen with this childhood disorder:

    • Research into sexually aggressive children was described as
    being in its “infancy” in the mid1990s. (It appears that the
    earliest studies on this topic only dated to 1980.)

    • The average onset of preadolescent sexual behavior problems
    (SBP) are between the ages of 6-9 years.

    • Although the term “sexual” is used, the children’s intentions
    and motivations for these behaviors may be unrelated to
    sexual gratification.

    • Children act out for many varied reasons. Some may have
    been the prior victims of sexual abuse. Some may act out
    due to other behavioral problems related to PTSD, anger,
    fear, or emotional detachment. Sexual acting out has been
    linked to anger, rage, loneliness, and fear.

    • FBI UCR reports in 1979 revealed 249 rape arrests for
    children less than 12 years of age. Sixty-six of those children
    were under the age of 10.

    • Early research conducted in the 1980s provided evidence
    that preadolescent children’s behaviors can be as aggressive
    and violent as those of adolescents and adults.

    • FBI UCR discontinued reporting the age of offenders in
    1980, but the National Center for Juvenile Justice reported
    a forcible rape rate of .02 per 1000 for 10 and 11 year olds
    in 1988.

    • 1990 FBI and media reports in this time period indicate that
    among adults convicted of sex crimes, approximately 30%
    said they began offending before they were 9 years old.

    • A 1991 study revealed that some children engaged in
    behaviors that involved fire-setting, bed-wetting, animal
    mutilation, and scatological behaviors- (disturbed bodily
    functions related to urination and elimination).

    • A 1993 nationwide survey of SBP therapists identified
    preadolescent behaviors in 222 children that ranged from
    voyeurism to coercion: The more serious offenses involved
    digital penetration, penile intercourse, anal intercourse,
    bestiality, and ritualistic or sadistic sexual abuse.

    • Another 1993 survey conducted in the Northwest revealed
    that some offenders used physical coercion that included
    tying up their victims.

    • Offenders lack compassion, empathy, and exhibit inadequate
    social skills.

    • A victim may be the object of revenge or anger and could be
    viewed as the parent’s “favored child” by the perpetrator.

    • Families frequently attempt to portray themselves to the
    world as the “perfect” family.

    • Co-morbidity: SBP patients have a higher incidence of
    psychiatric disorders that include, but are not limited to,
    attachment disorder and separation anxiety.

    Revelation of these clinical case studies and the emerging
    national recognition of this childhood behavioral disorder was in
    its infancy at the time of JonBenét’s death, but confirmed what
    I had occasionally witnessed in the District Attorneys’ weekly
    SART meetings: Children of Burke’s age had been proven capable
    of sexually abusing their siblings and others.

    Moreover, these studies confirmed that children of his age
    were capable of committing horrendous acts of physical violence
    typically thought to have been reserved to adults.

    It had been stated repeatedly that there had been no prior
    recorded history / incidents of abuse that would have suggested
    parental involvement in JonBenét’s death. As I pointed out in the
    case analysis report and Power Point outline completed in the
    fall of 2006, Burke had already exhibited one prior incident of
    violence against JonBenét.

    The incident that involved a blow to the head with a golf club
    that took place in Michigan was claimed to be an “accident” by the
    Ramsey family, but it is interesting to note that this incident took
    place within a day or two of JonBenét’s birthday in August 1994.

    One can only wonder whether sibling jealousy or envy may
    have played any part in that instance, and whether these feelings
    spilled over into the events of the Christmas holidays in 1996.

    I had also found it interesting that the Paugh’s had reportedly
    purchased several books on childhood behavior for the Ramsey
    family. The titles of the books were intriguing:

    • The Hurried Child – Growing Up Too Fast, by David Elkind;
    • Children at Risk, Dobson / Bruer;
    • Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From Wrong, Kilpatrick.

    When exploring the nature of the content of these three books,
    I wondered what might have been taking place in the home that
    prompted the grandparents to purchase these types of childhood
    behavioral books for the family.

    I had reviewed an investigator’s report that documented a 1997
    interview with former Ramsey nanny – housekeeper Geraldine
    Vodicka, who stated that Burke had smeared feces on the walls of
    a bathroom during his mother’s first bout with cancer. She told
    investigators that Nedra Paugh, who was visiting the Ramsey
    home at the time, had directed her to clean up the mess.

    There were other police reports in the files that documented
    what I thought could be viewed as related behavior. CSIs had
    written about finding a pair of pajama bottoms in JonBenét’s
    bedroom that contained fecal material. They were too big for her
    and were thought to belong to Burke.

    Additionally, a box of candy located in her bedroom had also
    been observed to be smeared with feces. Both of these discoveries
    had been made during the processing of the crime scene during
    the execution of search warrants following the discovery of
    JonBenét’s body.

    I wondered whether fecal material observed in pajamas
    thought to belong to Burke, and smeared on the box of candy in
    his sister’s bedroom, could have been related to the symptoms of
    scatological behavior associated with SBP.

    I also contemplated the reasons why a box of JonBenét’s candy
    would have been smeared with human excrement.

    As noted previously, Linda Hoffman-Pugh had also mentioned
    finding fecal material in JonBenét’s bed sheets. It raised the
    question as to who may have been responsible for the deposit of
    that material in her bed – had it been JonBenét or was it Burke?

    I readily admit that I am not a trained psychologist – psychiatrist,
    having taken only the most basic of courses during my
    college studies. But these observations pointed to indicia of some
    type of behavioral issue that had been taking place in the Ramsey
    household, and they appeared to have been taking place over
    some period of time. Incidents like these would not likely have
    become known to those outside the family, but could have been an
    underlying reason for the grandparent’s purchase of the childhood
    behavioral books discussed previously.

    "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.

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Thor View Post
    I am ordering this book on payday, next week, can't wait to get it. Thanks to Cynic, KK and everyone else giving their thoughts on the book. I am in the minority, and have gone back and forth in this case as far as who could have done this. I will await reading the book to really admit my feelings in this case.

    I have felt from early on that for sure:

    Patsy wrote that note

    John knew about what happened early on. IMO, he was waiting for the police to find JonBenet and when it wasn't happening soon enough, Arndt gave him the OK to search the house after 1:00 p.m. that day and that was his chance. I don't know he had anything to do with the actual murder, but he had to have known what happened before the cops were called, with all I've read.

    I still believe (not John) that it was a male Ramsey molesting JonBenet. I will just say that my original thought was Burke. JAR is a stretch, I know, but due to KK's original (long ago) research on him, I still wonder about his presence in the house. He also could have been molesting her. Just too many things point in both directions. Remember the fibers of John's (shirt?) being in the crotch of her underwear or something like that? Yeah, maybe he changed her innocently. Between Patsy and John's fibers, no way were neither of them involved in the coverup.

    I know most people think Patsy killed JonBenet. I remember Delmar telling me to not think about me being a woman and killing my child. He made some good points, and his "garrotte" analysis was excellent and made sense. HOWEVER....after reading snippets of this book, I am back to my original thought on this case. Burke was an odd duck and I know he was off limits to talk about on some forums because he was cleared by Hunter and a minor at the time. But I do remember his odd police/pyschological interviews and I still stick by my guns. Now the train track thing. He did get :(:(:(:(ed at her before. So shoot me.
    Did you see the quote on another thread where Pastor Holverstock said he heard JR say, upon bringing up JB's body, something really strange? Let's see if I can find it again.

    Here it is:

    Father Holverstock, the Ramseys' pastor who had been called to the home by Fernie to help calm the Ramseys early that morning, was interviewed by LE:

    Page 88


    Father Holverstock advised he had been heating a glass of water in the kitchen microwave when things began to happen. Fleet White had a look on his face that he'd "never seen before," and racing past him through the kitchen, exclaimed that JonBenet had been found.

    The next thing he knew, he was standing in the foyer area near the top of the basement stairs, and John Ramsey had his daughter in his hands. It was Holverstock's recollection that Ramsey blurted out, "I don't think he meant to kill her, because she was wrapped in a blanket," or that "she was warm, she was wrapped in a blanket."
    Kolar has already recounted by this point that White and Arndt both said the child was cold to the touch, with the smell of death, Arndt said.
    Last edited by Cherokee; July 27, 2012, 7:52 pm at Fri Jul 27 19:52:00 UTC 2012.

    "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. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1 View Post
    [/B]

    Then Mary Lacy should be charged with obstruction of justice by refusing to check out evidence found in the Ramsey home. All she was concerned about was losing the Ramsey's friendship. KK?
    No doubt Lacy AND Hunter should be investigated and, IMO, charged with obstruction, not to mention, dereliction of duty or something really legal sounding like that.

    But that will never happen. The foxes don't complain when one gets caught eating a hen from the henhouse they're guarding.

    "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. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default Oh my goodness.

    That new info. has my mouth hanging open.

    Feces all over JonBenet's room? In a box of CANDY?? OMG! Even if it was JonBenet who was soiling her bed in order to keep an abuser away, why would she defecate or put feces in a box of candy??

    How old was Burke when Patsy first got cancer? That is an odd response to a mother's illness - to smear feces on the wall like a baby...very odd indeed...

    This gets sicker and sicker as the days go by. There was a LOT more going on in that house than we ever heard about.

    The book title, "Why Johnny Can't Tell Right From Wrong?"
    Last edited by heymom; July 27, 2012, 6:17 pm at Fri Jul 27 18:17:15 UTC 2012. Reason: fixed book title
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default Now we hear about butt-prints in the carpet??

    As I was packing up my computer and projector, she told me
    about something that Tom Wickman had purportedly observed
    during the execution of the search warrants at the Ramsey home.
    He reportedly had observed the impression of someone’s buttocks
    in the carpet of the hallway outside JonBenét’s second floor
    bedroom. It appeared that someone had been sitting on the
    floor with their knees up around their chest, leaning against
    the wall / cabinets.

    Wickman purportedly told her that he thought it was where
    the intruder had been waiting while the family was at the White
    dinner party. I was aware that some intruder theorists believed it
    possible the perpetrator had entered the home while the family
    was away that evening, and that he had written the ransom note
    while awaiting their return. Apparently, Lacy thought that
    Wickman was suggesting the intruder had found some time to sit
    on the floor outside JonBenét’s bedroom after penning his note.

    I didn’t recall seeing anything like that in any of the police
    reports I had read and subsequently asked Wickman about it.

    He told me he had no idea what I was talking about.


    The Phantom Butt-Print??? Could LE tell what brand of pants the "intruder" had been wearing?? I mean, there was that random Hi-Tech bootprint in the wine cellar...

    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

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

    Default

    One thing still puzzles me folks, me when it comes to this business about JonBenét being changed by whomever (?. She was six years old and surely could change herself (?). Short of being lazy and we have all heard she shouted on anyone to come and clean her when she was on the toilet, but no age limit was given for those particular times. Short of soiling the sheets, she was old enough to change her own underwear at six years old.

    Good grief what did JonBenét do when she was at the pageants? Did her mother have to strip her down when she was paying a visit to the toilet?
    Did she go by herself? Something just doesn't seem right to me. Six years old and still being changed by her parents or whomever just doesn't seem right to me(?). I wonder if the housekeeper noticed this at all(?).
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1 View Post
    One thing still puzzles me folks, me when it comes to this business about JonBenét being changed by whomever (?. She was six years old and surely could change herself (?). Short of being lazy and we have all heard she shouted on anyone to come and clean her when she was on the toilet, but no age limit was given for those particular times. Short of soiling the sheets, she was old enough to change her own underwear at six years old.

    Good grief what did JonBenét do when she was at the pageants? Did her mother have to strip her down when she was paying a visit to the toilet?
    Did she go by herself? Something just doesn't seem right to me. Six years old and still being changed by her parents or whomever just doesn't seem right to me(?). I wonder if the housekeeper noticed this at all(?).
    Elle, I have wondered about this from the early days of following the case. But I believe that Patsy did treat JonBenet like a younger child, and you know what? You have just brought up a very good point that I'm not sure anyone has thought about.

    Okay, so JonBenet is all dolled up for a pageant, and suddenly, she says she has to go to the bathroom. It's time to go on stage, and there is NO WAY Patsy is missing her chance for JonBenet to win another trophy. So JonBenet has to hold it, perhaps causing herself a UTI in the process. Or, Patsy may have deprived JonBenet of water, so she wouldn't have to go potty during a pageant performance. I can see Patsy "prioritizing" and making sure JonBenet did not need to use the toilet, including forcing her to go when she didn't need to go, or didn't think she needed to go.

    Of course at 6 years old, JonBenet should have been taking care of her own toileting, changing, and most of her dressing. Most kids of 4 or 5 already have pretty good boundaries in place and want to "do it myself!" But JonBenet was used to being taken care of, taken places she didn't want to go, doing things she didn't want to do. It was all out of her control, anyway. So why would she bother being independent on the toilet?
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  12. #12

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    i'm not sure how much of this i should post, but as chief kolar stated he wrote this to get information about the case into the public, i'm going to go for it. Mods, if you need to edit, go ahead, no problem.

    This is by no means the entirety of kolar's chapter on sbp. It's a long chapter with astonishing statistics and sources on the violent and sometimes criminal behaviors of children and minors in this country, specifically in 1996. It's a must read for this case.

    This section is more specific to this murder, though, so brace yourselves for some evidence we have not known about, as well as putting some we have into context. It's not pretty.

    From ff:wrkj?, kolar; pages 367-70:
    o m g !!!!!!! I'm going to revisit all the evidence we've known about forever and look at it with one particular individual in mind. From everything I can think of off the top of my head it's all finally starting to fall into place and make sense. I never thought I would say it is all starting to make sense when I considered this case, but it's true now. It's really really true. WOW. I'm shocked.

    Thank you koldkase for posting this info. Amazon emailed me and they're sending my book a week earlier than what was scheduled so I will have it by the 31st at the latest.

    I'm still sitting here stunned..................!


    ETA: So this is why the BPD wanted to interview Burke again in 2010, under a new DA.?

    Did he say anything about the book "Campfire Tales"?
    Patsy said in one of her interviews the book "Why Johnny can't tell right from wrong" was about the public school system, given to her by her father. !!!!!!!!



Similar Threads

  1. DNA revisited in light of James Kolar’s book
    By cynic in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: April 15, 2017, 11:03 am, Sat Apr 15 11:03:06 UTC 2017
  2. Jim Kolar – 45 minute video discussing the JonBenet Ramsey Case
    By cynic in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 87
    Last Post: February 21, 2013, 3:25 pm, Thu Feb 21 15:25:23 UTC 2013
  3. Where to buy James Kolar's book: "Foreign Faction - Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet"
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: August 18, 2012, 12:35 pm, Sat Aug 18 12:35:36 UTC 2012
  4. James Kolar's new book! It's what we have been waiting for! Daily Beast article!
    By Moab in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 308
    Last Post: August 14, 2012, 10:11 pm, Tue Aug 14 22:11:18 UTC 2012
  5. Listen to James Kolar talk about new book on Tricia's show tonight! (July 18, 2012)
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: July 19, 2012, 8:43 pm, Thu Jul 19 20:43:59 UTC 2012

Posting Permissions

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