Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 15
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Western OR
    Posts
    971

    Default "Even if we are guilty"

    What an odd thing for an innocent parent to say about the murder of their baby girl. Found this at crimemagazine.com:

    And Colorado Gov. Bill Owens wasn't buying much of the Ramseys' claim of innocence either. In March 2000 he told reporters "there is very good reason, based on the evidence, for the Ramseys to be under the umbrella of suspicion."

    In September when the Ramseys were invited to appear before some journalism students at the Newseum in Arlington, Va., Patsy Ramsey used the occasion to repeat Gov. Owens' remark before asking the students "Why wasn't the media all over Gov. Owens? Even if we are guilty, he shouldn't be the Justice Department."

    A short time later, when Owens was told of her remark, he had a spokesperson say for him, "The governor finds it hard to believe anyone would even care what the Ramseys would have to say anymore."
    (Emphasis mine.) Thoughts, anyone?

    Ayeka
    The universe is full of magical things, patiently waiting for our wits to grow sharper.
    -- Eden Phillpotts

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The "Beehive State" It's true. Look it up
    Posts
    5,176

    Default

    Ayeka I always thought this to be one of the strangest things the Ramseys' have said and there are so many to choose from.

    As parents of a murdered child they should be so enraged that Gov. Owens made such a statement IF they truly are innocent. Which they are not.

    Instead of screaming, "How dare you. We did not kill JonBenet you bastard. Now find the person who did this before they kill again", the Ramsey's come up with their lame asss, guilt ridden. "even if we were guilty" comment.

    Patsy made this feeble attempt to show outrage at the Gov. of Colorado in front of a journalism class.

    Holy Hell if the Gov. of my state said I had killed my child I would hold the biggest press conference on the planet to trash him. So would any innocent parent.

    But if the Ramsey's made too big of a deal out of what Gov. Owens said then they would have to answer the tough questions like:

    *Why did you wait four months before meeting with the police to answer questions about JonBenet's murder

    *Why did you let Burke go out of the house the morning of the murder when a "small foreign faction" had just killed your daughter.

    *Why didn't you exhume your daughters body to prove your stun gun theory when you had the chance....

    I could go on for about 40 more single spaced typed pages but I won't.

    I think you get the picture.

    Thanks Ayeka. Great thread.

    Tricia

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    800

    Default The operative word

    here is "are".... Wouldn't you say, "Even if we WERE guilty"......??

    "Even if we ARE guilty sounds like a confession!!
    Last edited by Nandee; September 15, 2002, 9:49 am at Sun Sep 15 9:49:13 UTC 2002.
    When you defend the indefensible, you make the Ramsey's look even more guilty.....

  4. #4

    Post Yep...

    Strange choice of words to come out of Patsy's mouth. I agree Tricia, I would have called a news conference and trashed the governor too, if I was innocent. Nandee, that does sound like a confession to me also. I wouldn't have used those words at all. But, hey, I am not Patsy. (Wouldn't want to be either!)

    The above is just my opinion, right or wrong, but please leave it at FFJ.

  5. #5
    BobC is offline Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript and Book Reviewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,435

    Default

    What's so strange about it? Sounds like the perfect choice of words to me...

  6. #6
    BobC is offline Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript and Book Reviewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,435

    Default

    I mean true, Patsy should have worded it "so what if we are guilty..." but who's to point the finger? We all have our little grammar slip-ups...

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    174

    Default Nandee

    You took the words right out of my mouth. The fact that Patsy used the 'present' tense is the most incriminating aspect of her statement.

    Like Thomas says, she's still good for it and probably always will be, but she'll never spend any time behind bars, of that I am certain, except of course, as a prisoner of her own guilty knowledge.

    Regards,
    Mandarin

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    In a World With Too Much Crime
    Posts
    7,835

    Default

    I have added the transcripts of this interview (previously transcribed by Dunvegan), and 17 years later, knowing what we all now know about this case...it might be fun to re-read these and see all that falls out of the Ramsey's mouths...

    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...m-Class-visit)
    It's probably too late to get justice for JonBenét. Maybe it always was. But knowing where things went wrong is the first step to not going there again. **-- Alan Prendergast-Dec 21, 2006--**

    ______________________
    Bring all our Missing Home www.usearchut.org
    Prayers for our military who are protecting our freedom.

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moab View Post
    I have added the transcripts of this interview (previously transcribed by Dunvegan), and 17 years later, knowing what we all now know about this case...it might be fun to re-read these and see all that falls out of the Ramsey's mouths...

    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...m-Class-visit)

    thanks for the transcript...
    oh geez,whenever I read one of their interviews I feel like I'll have a liver failure....

    JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah, our attorneys were very, very afraid of the justice system, 'cause they knew it was flawed. And, um…that was a wake-up call for us, I think. And…and…and one of the things we wanna make a difference in, uh…is that whole process.
    GMAFB
    not only is this manipulation but it's so stoopid,and I can't imagine how so many really buy this BS!
    M. Lacy: "You know, no-one is really cleared of a homicide until there’s a conviction, in court beyond a reasonable doubt. And I don’t think you will get any prosecutor… unless they were present with the person at the time of the crime… to clear someone."

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Moab View Post
    I have added the transcripts of this interview (previously transcribed by Dunvegan), and 17 years later, knowing what we all now know about this case...it might be fun to re-read these and see all that falls out of the Ramsey's mouths...

    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...m-Class-visit)
    Thanks, Moab.
    .
    All views expressed in my posts are my opinion and are protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as “freedom of speech”.

  11. #11

    Default

    I decided this morning to read through this while I had a little free time. I didn’t get too far before I nearly spewed coffee all over my keyboard when I came across this passage (emphasis by me):

    JOHN RAMSEY: The police as a gov-, …you know, the justice system is a government organization. And hence, should be looked at with some degree of skepticism, and, uh…and, uh…suspicion.

    I always thought that Patsy penned the RN, with input from John. But that phrase is just so uncommon (especially in speech as opposed to written)... Just more confirmation in my mind of the authorship of the RN.
    .
    All views expressed in my posts are my opinion and are protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as “freedom of speech”.

  12. #12

    Default

    Thanks, Moab. I have the tape of this, and it's M A D D E N I N G to hear the Ramseys talking points yet again--as ever, so full of themselves, so full of feces, so smug and snide and self-righteous.

    But NOT ONCE do they ever shed a tear for the suffering of JonBenet. NOT ONCE do they convey any fear of any intruder with any sincerity. NOT ONCE do they show a tiny fraction of anger or hatred of the person who killed their child as they do for Steve Thomas when again attacking him.

    More contradictions and lies uncovered. For example: the Ramseys mention Smit working FOR THEM, which Smit denied many times; they mention that the Grand Jury did NOT indict them--another lie about which we now have the truth.

    They really believe they have everyone fooled. But there they are, saying things like this:

    JOHN RAMSEY: - [snip] A detective told me that…an old, retired, very experienced detective [Smit]…he said the problem with this case was so much media attention, th-th-that the detectives weren't allowed to do their job. And they do their job kinda of in the background. They…uh-h-h…pick here…they look here…you know, it's a…it's a complex thing to solve this kind of crime. Very complex. Takes a lot of gray matter. It takes a lot of time.

    Well, when the media gets involved in demanding an answer for the 6 o'clock news, uh…the Chief gets involved. And he micro-manages. Well, the Chief hasn't been in a crime investigation, maybe ever, as it was in the case in Boulder…uh…certainly for a long time, because he's been an administrator…the Chief of Detectives gets involved. And, the poor detective, uh…can't do his job.

    So, that…in the very beginning, with that kind of attention and pressure…uh, the justice system, the investigative process, can't operate. Doesn't work. And, that's a problem.

    And, uh…it's a…I'm not sure how you fix it. But…you know, in terms…so, there's issues of just the privacy of the investigation that needs to be somehow protected, so that the process can work. And, that may take years.

    And, that's a flaw, and that's something that…that…to specifically address your question…uh, should not have been exposed…uh…the police used the media…they played the media like a fiddle in this case…they leaked innuendos….

    Their strategy basically was to put immense pressure on us so that we'd break. And…in fact, they wanted to throw one of us in…I guess both of us…in jail. And they figured, well…one of us would crack…and turn on the other…they weren't sure which one, but the two of us were in the house…it had to be one or the other.

    And, my fundamental criticism of the media, as I really analyze this from 30,000 feet, is that they…uh, they took these leaks, and innuendos, and basically gossip as fact, and ran with it. And they ran with it world-wide. Rather than being skeptical of the police.

    The police as a gov-, …you know, the justice system is a government organization. And hence, should be looked at with some degree of skepticism, and, uh…and, uh…suspicion.
    Now where oh where have we heard similar, even exact, language like this before? Let me think, let me think....

    John stutters and hems and haws trying to sound like he has something important to say, but he is only rambling around. That's all both Ramseys do: go from blaming the chief to the media to the detective to the gov't. All they have are their talking points and a lot of time to fill. But JR wants to make CLEAR that THIS KIND OF CRIME IS HARD TO SOLVE, TAKES A LONG TIME. In case anyone is wondering why they haven't FOUND that old intruder in FIVE YEARS and, oh my, NEVER DO.

    Good thing those journalism students, professors, and journalists present learned the important lesson that the Justice System is the GOV'T. Who knew? Naturally the lesson there, according to JR, is "And hence" BE SUSPICIOUS...of THEM, not US! (Parents who obstructed the investigation into their child's murder. And wrote the ransom note to cover it up.)

    Questions to the Ramseys were vetted beforehand, obviously. No one asked about the murder itself. Mostly they got a lecture about how important it is to be nice to public figures who should be able to put forth their own agenda but not have a free press analyse or question their :(:(:(:(-and-bull story. Because that's just not FAIR!

    And the Ramseys certainly had no interest in that old intruder, that's obvious as could be. The title of this thread says it all, quoting Patsy herself, a highly educated person with a journalism degree, who worked in professional advertising writing copy, whose strength and training was the ENGLISH LANGUAGE: "EVEN IF WE ARE GUILTY...."

    Not the SUBJUNCTIVE MOOD: "The subjunctive is the mood of a verb expressing wishes, stipulating demands, or making statements contrary to fact": as in "Even IF we WERE guilty...."

    Patsy in fact uses the present tense: "Even if we ARE guilty...." That Patsy; she could not stop confessing. [And this isn't even the first time the Ramseys said such a thing. Look up their interview with the Christian Broadcast Channel.]

    I could go on...but you can read it for yourself.

    Then go bang your head on a wall.
    Last edited by koldkase; July 4, 2014, 8:12 pm at Fri Jul 4 20:12:50 UTC 2014.

    "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.



Similar Threads

  1. Book Proposal for "Prostitution of Justice" by Thomas C. "Doc" Miller
    By Tricia in forum ***Sneek Preview*** - Tom Miller's Book
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 4, 2007, 9:15 pm, Sat Aug 4 21:15:02 UTC 2007
  2. John Ramsey's '98 Interview...Things That Were "Strange" or "Out Of Place"
    By AMES in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: June 19, 2007, 11:51 am, Tue Jun 19 11:51:40 UTC 2007
  3. "South Park," "SNL" & "Mad TV" Ramsey Episodes
    By RiverRat in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: September 2, 2006, 3:54 pm, Sat Sep 2 15:54:35 UTC 2006
  4. Debunking the Seven Pieces of "Evidence" That "Prove" the Intruder Theory.
    By Dunvegan in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: September 10, 2002, 7:34 pm, Tue Sep 10 19:34:10 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
  •