Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 39
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    In a World With Too Much Crime
    Posts
    7,831

    Default "Death Of Innocence" Analysis - By Sylvia

    This thread is being set up so Sylvia can post her analogies of the book Death of Innocence.

    I will stick this thread and it is for Sylvia's posting ONLY.

    I have set up another thread for discussion of all that is posted here!

    Discussion link:
    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...=newthread&f=6
    Last edited by Moab; May 13, 2005, 6:41 pm at Fri May 13 18:41:16 UTC 2005.
    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.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Foreword DOI

    Foreword.


    First thing I noticed when I received the book, there is still the big photo of both Ramsey’s on the front cover. The picture that was on the hardback back cover was a small photo of JonBenét face. Oh well that is gone, all what is left now is a photo of a girl sitting with her back towards the photographer. Guess it could be JonBenét, but one cannot even be sure of that anymore. To me that means her importance has already diminished.

    They still start with the same nonsense of suspicions that were cast upon them by the ‘inexperienced’ police force and the world media “that almost crushed our ability to live.” Again I say their own actions made the police and the media suspicious, they caused that to happen, no one else. It was their lack of cooperation they gave the BPD that left LE and the rest of the world no other choice then to become suspicious.

    What happened to them overcomes everyone who loses a child to murder, everyone experiencing the loss of a child in such a way has to be cleared first in order to get the investigation going. Up to now, I cannot come up with one person who didn’t go through the whole system of being cleared and who ever complained about it. Those parents saw and knew the necessity of it and did it without thinking or complaining which lead to the fact that they could indeed be cleared. The Ramsey’s seems to think they stand above these other parents and refused, still do, to let LE clear them. Bad luck Ramsey’s, you are no better or more believable then all those other parents that went through the same ordeal of being cleared. As a matter effect your own non-cooperation, lies, and inconsistencies made you prime suspects in the eyes of LE and most of the people in the world who do have common sense.

    As you say “Our criminal justice system now operates on the presumption of guild, and then challenges the defendant to prove his or her innocence” lacks any common sense and knowledge of how the system works. Let me explain it to you for once and for all, the presumption of innocence applies only during a court of law and is reserved for the presiding judge and jury. Outside a court of law there is no such thing as the presumption of innocence. If that were the case no one could ever be accused, arrested or ordered to stand trial, as truly innocent people can’t, by law, be accused, arrested or stand trial. So try to educate yourselves on this technicality of the law.

    One thing I have to say, because of the foreword it becomes clearer that this book has nothing to do with what happened to JonBenét, but what happened to poor P. Ramsey and poor J. Ramsey. What happened to poor innocent JonBenét is clearly of far less importance to the Ramsey’s, but then again we already knew that.

    Of course, again they are trying to confuse everyone by stating: “At this date, more then three years after that Christmas, our memories are not completely trustworthy on some details, we simply do not have a total recall.” Let me tell you something Ramsey’s! Most, if not every, parent knows exactly what happened when their child was injured or murdered even after more than three years. Why? Because of the impression it left on them! Their willingness to get every detail straightened out in order for LE to be able catch whoever did this to their child and to them, shows how it affected them. Even after the perpetrator is caught, those horrible memories will always be their in their mind. Again your lack of, better even no cooperation at all, should be a clear signal to everyone in the world. I hope people have learned a few things from it, if you are innocent always cooperate with LE if you want the death of our loved one revenged, second if there is no cooperation LE is left with any other choice then to look upon you as their prime suspect! That is completely justifiably!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 1

    Chapter 1

    The chapter begins with J. Ramsey trying to give you the look what a great family we are, with a story that starts on Christmas morning. The usual kid of stuff, kids excited, gifts under the Christmas tree, turning the lights on and more of that kind of things. The first interesting thing J. Ramsey writes on page 3: “JonBenét asked for Burke’s assistance with the name tags, since he could read and she couldn’t.” Amazing a six-year-old child that could not recognize simple names on the gift tags, but that is able to act during pageants as a 20-year-old seductive woman. To me it says time spent at those pageants could have been used better with teaching the child to read a little. There even seem to be some form of competition going on, since there is written it was fun to see whose pill of gifts would become the biggest, a good way to teach a child greed.

    Now it is time for the biggest event of the morning, not for JonBenét as it turns out, but for P. Ramsey. P. Ramsey had bought a look-alike doll for JonBenét, this was the ultimate and most special gift for JonBenét that Christmas, the My Twin Doll. Only it did not turn out the way P. Ramsey thought it would. At page 4 J. Ramsey writes the following: “JonBenét opened the box and examined the doll with a look of curiosity. ‘Well, now, doesn’t she look like you?’ Patsy asked. JonBenét held the doll at arm’s length and tilted her head slightly. ‘I really don’t think she looks that much like me’ she concluded and laid the doll to one side.” It is obvious that the little girl was not that interested in having a twin, but reading a few pages further that P. Ramsey wanted to dress up JonBenét in manner as she did. DOI page 7 “She wanted JonBenét to wear a red turtleneck with her black velvet pants so that mother and daughter would be dressed alike.” To me, this says P. Ramsey was living her life through the little girl. The little girl, however, didn’t wish to be a copy nor did she wish for look-alike dolls to live her life through.

    It is obvious the P. Ramsey was the one who was into pageants, not the little innocent girl. Sure JonBenét liked to dress up, so does every other girl at the age of six, but that doesn’t mean they like parading on a stage on a regular basis, being turned in to a twenty-year old vamp. It is Christmas day, the children are enjoying their gifts, but what it already on P. Ramsey’s mind, of course a pageant in the first week of January. Getting the outfits ready, spreading them out on the bed. This is no little girl’s dream, a mother who doesn’t know what is important, and is pushing this child in to something she doesn’t want. It is all beauty above education, it is about using your body to get somewhere instead of using your brain to get the same result.

    First they will go to Charlevoix, celebrating Christmas on the 26th, lasting until when? After that they plan go on the Disney’s Big Red Boat, that will take place on the 29th of December and through New Year’s. J. Ramsey calls it a “cruise,” here we call such a thing a tour or a mini-cruise. Bluff, that is their game! It is so obvious in everything. Get real, a cruise is going on a cruise ship, sailing the ocean, going to ports in different countries, being at sea for at least three to four weeks.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 1 part 2

    A nice family, so close, yet J. Ramsey obviously spends hour at the airport, checking plane, loading some gifts. Sure, that would take hours. Al this, while there is a pilot to fly the plane. I assume that pilot was more than capable of checking plane, weather conditions, and what else is needed. Wouldn’t a close family be closer at Christmas day, here it is usual to spend that time with your family, not at airports? So obviously he doesn’t pay much attention to his wife and children. That is the reason there is no time for him to help JonBenét riding her new bike around the block a couple of times. No airports are the place he “always loved hanging about, and Christmas day was no difference.” Well it should have made a difference, but sure blame it on “T-I-M-E.” Nonsense, it selfishness and lack of responsibility, it is all about making choices and at that Christmas day the airport was more important then the family, simple as that. Looking for excuses afterwards is so easy!

    After that we get a description of the dinner party at the Whites house. “We had eaten together last Christmas, so it was the beginning to feel like a new tradition for us to join their family.” We are talking of the same Whites I hope, the ones who never paid for anything and let the Ramsey’s pick up the bill? The same P. White who was jealous of P. Ramsey? (Could not imagine why though!) The same Whites with the duct tape and rope, not to forget Whites supposedly owning a stun gun? The Whites that would soon end up on the RST suspect list. Sure a nice way to join their family, hypocrites!

    At 8:30 P.M. they decided to leave the Whites party, and head for their home. They made two side trips to ‘friends,’ the Walkers and (by all means) let us not forget the Stines. Each visit seems to take up a couple of minutes. Then suddenly there is no time left for the third and last package to be delivered at the Fernies. Strange, as the Fernie was called the morning they found the ‘ransom note’ being a special friend and it seems it did not take him long to get there either. P. Ramsey called them, as last, after she made the call to 911, which came in at 5:52 a.m. During that call, an officer was dispatched. Yet, being called as last person Fernie manages to get there at 6:03 a.m. So here we have a few possibilities:
    • Fernie does not live far from the Ramsey’s and the couple of extra minutes would not have been such big problem to overcome.
      Fernie really lives far away, but in that case, he could not have made it to be there the following morning so soon after the call came in.
      Fernie is not really such a good friend after all, or they would have taken the trouble of some extra time to bring them the gift as well. Only, then why call the Fernies the next morning?
      Was something was not going so well on the trip back home?


    Taking less then an hour drive from the White, via the Walker’s, and the Stines and not delivering a package to your dearest of friends, that you called the following morning when you were “in need” tells me a lot. That, to my opinion, is a one-way direction friendship, take, and not give. Besides isn’t Christmas evening a little too late to bring gifts anyhow to friends? You couldn’t have done that the day before, or even earlier? However, here again they are not that truthful. In their book, Ramsey claims he got Burke to bed at 9:30 that evening. By that time he according to himself had parked the car in the garage, took a ‘sleeping’ JonBenét out of the car. Brought her upstairs, took off her coat and shoes, and went downstairs again. Then is written the following: “Meanwhile I went downstairs to try to get Burke to come up to bed, but he was deeply involved in assembling the miniature parking garage he had received that morning. I could tell he wasn’t going to go to bed until the project was finished, so I settled down on the floor beside him. Helping him to complete what his mind was focused on was the best way to get us both in bed quickly.” All these activities must have taken up quite some time, at the least half an hour. Yet when asked by the BPD the next morning he said something quite different, Steve Thomas book page 25 says: “Officers reconstructed some of the timeline of the previous night from the parents’ recollection. John Ramsey said the family had returned home from the party about 10 o’clock.” I can understand not knowing the exact time, but a one-hour difference is a little too much for me. The following morning you remember it was round 10:00 p.m.; four to five years later, you suddenly remember it was round about 9:00 p.m.? Now that sounds a bit weird to me.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 1 part 3

    So after delivering the gifts, except the one for the Fernies, they returned home. According to J. Ramsey JonBenét was fast asleep in the backseat of the car. She had supposedly fallen asleep during the ride home. On page 9 of their book, J. Ramsey states: “I got her out of the car and carried her upstairs to her room, laid her on the bed, and took off her coat and shoes. I was amazed at how sound asleep she was. On the other hand, he declared to two different officers, present at the crime scene the next morning that he read both children as story before they went to sleep that night. In Steve Thomas’s book page 25 is stated: “John Ramsey said the family returned home from the party about ten o’clock and he read to both children before they went to sleep. He confirmed to Arndt that he had read to JonBenét after tucking her in.” Later he retracted the bedtime readings story. Only can two officers misunderstand the same thing? I do not think so, especially since there is more proof that JonBenét was awake upon arrival at home. Burke’s June 1998 statement goes as follows: “He said his sister fell asleep in the car on the way home, but awakened to help carry presents into the house of a friend. When they got home, JonBenét walked in slowly and went up the spiral stairs to bed, just ahead of Patsy Ramsey.” Not only was she awake, but P. Ramsey followed her up the stairs. So again, no sleeping JonBenét!

    Funny, although Burke declares his sister carrying presents into the house of a friend, in their book J. Ramsey claims it was Burke who carried a present, guess where? Right the first time, of course at the Stines house. The same Stines they moved in with in Boulder after the murder, and the same Stines that moved with them to Atlanta later on. The same Stine who committed a felony by impersonating a police officer (Beckner) via e-mail.

    Finally, we reach the end of the chapter, P. Ramsey was already in bed, and J. Ramsey joined, taking a melatonin to sleep good and of course to set things straight in his twisted way he now states he read a bit before turning out the light. After all you need some excuse for the reading the bedtime story to both children, in order to give the impression that both officers totally misunderstood the poor guy.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Arrow Chapter 2

    Chapter 2

    Chapter II starts reasonably, yet after only a few lines, yes we already have a quite remarkable fact that somehow doesn’t seem to fit. Here we find the following: “Take a shower, get dressed, get going. I swing out of bed and abruptly remember that my shower is still broken. Don’t need one this morning.” Again, a totally insignificant remark. A detail that most likely any parent whose child was murdered would forget, or at least, not think of first.

    However, there is more. You see in Chapter 1, on the first page, J. Ramsey states: “Patsy got up and moved towards her bathroom at the other end of the master suite.” Doesn’t make you wonder why she went into her bathroom? If we may believe them, the shower was broken. Now don’t tell, me P. Ramsey never leave the house without makeup, however, P. Ramsey does not shower for two days? A little bit unhygienic. Now don’t tell me P. Ramsey went to put on makeup, because one normally washes before putting on makeup! Therefore, that cannot be it. Or, was the shower, on the 25th of December, still in perfect working condition? Just a question?

    Then it goes on as follows: “Just put my clothes on. And of course, my makeup” a little further it continues with, “I reach for my clothes and start dressing. Minutes later I hurry down the back stairs.” No mentioning of putting on makeup anymore. Only the sentence: “Minutes later I hurry down the back stairs.” Now ask yourself, getting dressed and putting on makeup in just a few minutes, which woman can do that? Can you? I certainly cannot. Doesn’t this all sound at least a little suspicious? In addition, there is no indication, or even the slightest remark, on washing up. Washing? No, that isn’t so important, as long as you have your makeup on. Doesn’t that make you think of the foreign DNA? Now, here we have a good reason for foreign DNA to show up--hygiene did not exactly run in the family.

    The next stupid mistake starts at the bottom of the same page. “I hurried down the spiral staircase to the bottom floor and stop. What is this? I wonder. I turn around to look at the three pieces of paper on a step near the bottom. I bent over.” Now doesn’t this give you the impression that she descended that staircase completely? It is in the words, “to the bottom floor and stop.” Anyhow, you should try it sometime, to stop on the steps of a spiral staircase, turn around, and bend over to read something that is on the steps below you. Bet you, you can’t!

    Next, she says, “Must be a note from the cleaning lady, Linda” Sure of course, Mrs. L. Hoffman-Pugh drove over to the house in the middle of the night to put a three-page note on the bottom of the staircase. As we know, it wasn’t there the evening before, when she went up that staircase. Further, would Mrs. Hoffman-Pugh have needed at three-piece note to remind her employer about a loan of $2.500? Isn’t it more likely that Mrs. Hoffman-Pugh would have left that note at a more appropriate place--like on the kitchen counter or table? Again, I only have one word for this statement: RIDICULOUS.

    In their book P. Ramsey writes "I race back up the stair and stumble towards JonBenét's bedroom, pushing the door wide open. The bed is empty! John Help! I scream JonBenét is gone. He meets me wearing only his underwear. There is a note downstairs." However, there are some problems with this statement, as there seem several version of discovering JonBenét gone, and the finding and handling of the ransom note.
    Last edited by Sylvia; May 24, 2005, 3:38 am at Tue May 24 3:38:06 UTC 2005.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 2 part 2

    In Steve Thomas’ book is written on page 24: “She originally told officer French that she checked the bedroom before finding the note on the stairs, but she later told Arndt that she had gone downstairs and found the note first and only then hurried to the bedroom and found JonBenét missing.” These are clearly contradicting statements. Guess she decided to use the second statement, the one made to Arndt, for the book. However, she never states that she took the note upstairs.

    Later J. Ramsey declared on video tape made by the Boulder authorities that on the morning of December 26, 1996, that he, J. Ramsey, had been in the upstairs in his bathroom, when he heard P. Ramsey scream. He hurried downstairs, while she was coming up and she handed him the ransom note on the second floor landing. At about on the same time (and on video tape made by the Boulder authorities) P. Ramsey claimed she did not pick up the note. Oops, I think we definitely have a contradiction here. Can one or rather both of you, please tell me who is telling the truth here?

    On page 11, P. Ramsey writes the following "J-o-n-nn! John-n-n-n!" I scream, "JonBenét's gone" He meets me etc... John tears down the stairs; he seems to be shouting, but nothing makes sense. "Burke!" John yells. "What about Burke?" Remember, this happened on the floor where Burke is sleeping, J. Ramsey is one floor higher, yet he reacts to the screaming of P. Ramsey and Burke, who is on the same floor, sleeps though all the screaming and yelling. Pay attention to the following sentence “Both of us race to Burke's room at the far end of the second floor and find him apparently still asleep.”

    The word apparently tells it all. Burke stated during an interview that he pretended to be asleep. The following is part of his videotaped statement, he made in June 1998, at the age of eleven. He heard the "house creaking" during the night, he said, and when he awoke, his mother was turning on the lights and in a rush, saying "Oh my gosh, oh my gosh" then his father turned the lights off again. Burke stayed in bed "wondering if something bad had happened." He heard his father trying to calm his mother, then telling her to call the police. Burke told the detective he did not get out of bed that morning and that a police officer looked into his room. When analyzing this, Burke’s statement does not make sense. First, about hearing the "house creaking" during the night. Either he was awakened by something during the night or he was well instructed. Then, he goes on to state, that, when he awoke, his mother was turning on the lights, while saying "oh my gosh, oh my gosh." That doesn't sound very convincing to me. After discovering her daughter has been kidnapped, the mother can only think to say, "Oh my gosh"?

    Think about this. The father is trying to calm the mother and he tells her to call the police? Why didn't he call the police himself, if the mother was obvious in distress and needed to be calmed down? Also, the fact that a child would think something bad has happened by hearing his mother say "Oh my gosh" doesn't sound convincing to me. That a nine years old would stay in bed, when he thought something bad had happened, is, to say at least, strange. Wouldn't such a young child, at such a moment of stress, seek the safety of his parent’s arms? It just does not add up.

    On the following page, under the text of the ransom note, is an even more ridiculous statement, used as an excuse for calling the White family and the Fernies’. “Standing next to the wall phone, I instantly dial 911, and try to make the voice on the other end of the line understand. It is as if she doesn’t believe what I am saying.” After that follows, a lot of nonsense about getting help, therefore, calling the White family and the Fernies.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 2 part 3

    Now, let us have a look at the transcript of the 911 call, made on the morning of the 26th:

    P. Ramsey: “(inaudible) police.”
    Police dispatcher: “(inaudible)”
    R. Pamsey: 755 Fifteenth Street.”
    Police dispatcher: “What is going on there ma’am?”
    P. Ramsey: “We have a kidnapping…Hurry, please.”
    Police dispatcher: “Explain to me what is going on, ok?”
    P. Ramsey: “We have a…There’s a note left and our daughter is gone.”
    Police dispatcher: “A note was left and your daughter is gone?”
    P. Ramsey: “Yes”
    Police dispatcher: “How old is your daughter?”
    P. Ramsey: “She is six years old…she is blond…six years old.”
    Police dispatcher: “How long ago was this?”
    P. Ramsey: “I don’t know. Just found the note and my daughter’s (inaudible).”
    Police dispatcher: “Does it say who took her?”
    P. Ramsey: “What?”
    Police dispatcher: “Does it say who took her?”
    P. Ramsey: “No….I don’t know it’s there…there’s a ransom note here”
    Police dispatcher: “It’s a ransom note.”
    P. Ramsey: “It says STBC Victory….Please.”
    Police dispatcher: “OK, what is your name? Are you...”
    P. Ramsey: “Patsy Ramsey. I’m the mother. Oh my God, please…”
    Police dispatcher: “I’m…OK, I’m sending an officer over, OK?”
    P. Ramsey: “Please.”
    Police dispatcher: “Do you know how long she’s been gone?”
    P. Ramsey: “No, I don’t. Please, we just got up and she’s not there. Oh my God, Please.”
    Police dispatcher: “OK.”
    P. Ramsey: “Please send somebody.”
    Police dispatcher: “I am, honey.”
    P. Ramsey: “Please.”
    Police dispatcher: “Take a deep breath (inaudible).”
    P. Ramsey: “Hurry, hurry, hurry (inaudible).”
    Police dispatcher: “Patsy? Patsy? Patsy? Patsy? Patsy?”

    Now, does it sound to you like the voice on the other end of the line, the police dispatcher, doesn’t understand her? She is saying twice, that she is sending someone over, an officer. Now to me, that sounds like she [police dispatcher] understood exactly what was going on. There's no doubt in my mind. Is there in yours? Oh, I can already hear it coming! They are going to say: 'Yes, but P. Ramsey was in a panic and didn’t understand that the police dispatcher understood her.' Well, for someone who was in a panic and did not understand the police dispatcher, she [P. Ramsey] gave some answers, which indicated that she understood the dispatcher very well. When asked for age, she didn’t only give JonBenét’s age, but also her hair color. In addition, she clearly stated when asked, who signed the ransom note. Also, most of the other questions are answered correctly. So, no doubt about it--she understood all too well what the police dispatcher was saying. Don’t you think so too?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 2 part 4

    What is even odder is the fact that the ransom note was clear on the point of contacting anyone! They were even forbidden to talk to a stray dog, although I don’t think a stray dog would have been able to inform the police or FBI. Still the fact remains that P. Ramsey not only calls the police, however she also invites over a couple of friends (4 persons) at the same time. Calling the 911 sounds normal to me, but taking risks of having your daughter beheaded just to have some kind of gathering of friends? Doesn’t seem she takes the ransom note serious. Or, were they invited for some other and more obscure reason? Witnesses, others who have to find, but fail to find, the body, and not to forget contamination of the crime scene?
    After finally arriving already at page 13, it is apparent that J. Ramsey takes over the writing from here. Well, I can already tell you he isn’t doing such a great job either. After two sentences, he's already slipping-up, and it's even a double slip-up. After declaring he had been running around in underwear and going upstairs to dress, he's on his way back down! Yes, a big double slip-up. He writes, “I stop in JonBenét’s bedroom and look under the bed to make sure she isn’t there.” The first part of the slip up is obvious--do you expect to find your kidnapped child hiding under her bed? You have a ransom note, so you are not taking that seriously? Even if by any remote chance the child would have been able to hide from the kidnapper, wouldn’t she have sought the immediate safety of the parents upon hearing them? According to J. Ramsey, this happening took place upon the arrival of Officer R. French at their house.

    Let us go to Steve Thomas’s book, where we find the following quote on page 19: “Reichenbach and John Ramsey went to the second floor to look into the missing child’s bedroom.” Moreover, halfway down the same page he writes: “The father lifted the dust ruffle to peer beneath his daughter's bed and was told not to touch anything else.” We all know that Sergeant Reichenbach arrived at the house after officer R. French had been shown the ransom note, and had already talked to the parents. So, what is going on here now? Are we to believe here, that J. Ramsey, after already having verified himself that JonBenét wasn’t under her bed, looked under the bed for a second time? If he already knew she wasn’t there, then what is the reason for repeating this ceremony in front of Sergeant Reichenbach? What reason? Something like--contaminating the crime scene even more?

    Back to DOI, at the bottom of the same page is the second blunder. Here he states the following: “I meet Patsy and Officer Rick French in the hallway near the front door. I tell him my daughter has been kidnapped. The uniformed officer walks us in and asks us to repeat our problem. He keeps asking questions, and seems to grasp the situation quickly. He insists we move into the corner sunroom.”

    However, in Steve Thomas’s book at page 16, Officer R. French has given a total different police report statement, as follows here: “He noted that although it was still before dawn her hair was already done and her makeup was in place. They were joined at the door by a man in a long-sleeved blue-and-white-stripped shirt and khaki slacks. Patsy and John Ramsey told the officer that their daughter, JonBenét, was missing and their nine-year-old son was asleep upstairs. They escorted Officer French though a foyer and kitchen area to a back hallway, where pieces of legal white paper covered with blocky handwriting were spread out on the wooden floor.”

    We can be absolutely sure that the events that took place, as described in Steve Thomas’s book, are the correct ones, since there will be a police report statement from Officer R. French that will confirm it. And, if we were to believe J. Ramsey, Officer French knew his way around the house very well. So well, that he insisted they should move to the corner sunroom.

    However, there are even two more lies in that statement by J. Ramsey. The first is that in the book he states that the uniformed officer seems to gasp the situation quickly. That brings us back to the Larry King Live show aired on March 27, 2000. Take notice that this interview is after the book was already written. J. Ramsey states the following about Officer French: “They - a uniformed officer arrived relatively quickly, and I said - I handed him the note. I said; ‘my daughter‘s been taken.’ He said: ‘Gee, don’t you think she just ran away.’ Now, it is no longer Officer French who seems to grasp the situation quickly. Now, he is suddenly handed over the ransom note--can you still follow it? Talk about lying to get attention and saying 'look how pitiful we are'. Thereby showing us once again how deceitful they are, and cannot be trusted in any way.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 2 part 5

    The following mistake is one page further, which was also handled and proven a lie in the statement of Officer French [in Steve Thomas’s book as already quoted above]. Here J. Ramsey writes: “Another officer, Officer Veight, I believe, comes in after he moves the squad car to the next block. He is shown the ransom note.” Did you notice there is no mentioning of Officer French being shown the ransom note? Yet, it is stated that another officer that came in was shown the ransom note, thereby implying it was not shown to Officer French. This while Officer French stated he was led immediately to the back hallway and shown the note that was there on the floor. Moreover, on the Larry King Live show, J. Ramsey even dares to state that he handed over the ransom note to Officer French.

    Then we get the perfect 'good parent' remark that all friends had arrived, including Father Hoverstock, “I remember Burke, asleep in his room.” Although Ramsey is declaring that Father Hoverstock had arrived before the victim advocates, it is known through police reports that it was the other way around. Also, these police reports and most likely also the reports made by the victim advocates, state that they [the victim advocates] had already arrived by 6:45 A.M., and Father Hovenstock had arrived after 6:45 A.M. Implying therefore that he, 'the perfect father', J. Ramsey, just happened to have forgotten his son, while his daughter was “kidnapped”, for at least 45 minutes. Can you imagine forgetting the safety of your other child? Wouldn’t that be your first concern, getting the other child to safety? But no, perfect J. Ramsey forgets for 45 minutes that he also has a son, as the last person to whom his son was mentioned, was Officer French when he came in the morning before 6:00 A.M.

    And what does this perfect Ramsey decide, after the fact that he finally realized he also had a son still upstairs? He makes sure that this child is being transported, away from his parents. And more importantly, away from the safety of the police's presence, to an unsafe place. Does that make any sense to you?

    Following that decision, J. Ramsey writes on page 14: “I wake Burke up and as gentle as possible tell him that JonBenét is missing and he is going to his friend Fleet’s house for a while. Burke looks distressed and begins to cry, so I know he understands the gravity of our predicament. I help him get dressed, and momentarily he and Fleet are leaving the house, Burke carrying his new Nintendo 64 game under his arm.” First of all, he didn’t have to wake up Burke, as Burke stated later to the police that he had already been awake earlier that morning. The enhanced 911-call tape confirms his [Burke's] statement. Although gently told that his sister is missing, [which could also mean she ran off or was hiding somewhere, as I do not think a 9 year old child immediately thinks of a kidnapping], he [Burke] looks distressed and starts crying? Did Burke know more--to understand the gravity of the situation? Did Burke hear or see anything? If so, what? Officer French didn’t report a distressed and crying Burke, when he tried to ask the child some questions, before he left the house. Apparently Burke is not so distressed and crying that it prevents him from taking his new Nintendo 64 game with him. Strange situation--to say at least!

    J. Ramsey goes on, with another stupid remark on the top of the following page: “I suddenly remember our large walk-in refrigerator, could JonBenét have been put inside, trapped there?” Now, is he honestly trying to make us believe a kidnapper would be so stupid to leave the “kidnapped” child in the house, risking that the child would be found either dead or alive--meaning he wouldn’t get the money he is after? Please, give us a break! Just thinking however it could be a very useful tip for the police (determination of time of death for instance)!

    Near the end of the chapter is, to some extent, a comical statement made by J. Ramsey, concerning his concern that the BPD arrived at the house with normal squad cars. The statement goes as follows: “More squad cars are move away from the front of the house to locations down the block. We don’t want the kidnapper to think we have called the police, since he said he was watching the house. Yet the police officers do not seem to be using much discretion: the cars are marked, the police are wearing uniforms.” To some extend he is right, police should have come to the house in unmarked cars and should not have been in uniform. However, this statement comes from a guy who for whom it was too tough to call 911, and instead let his ‘distressed’ wife make the call. If he himself had called, he would have been able to state that note mentioned that the “kidnappers” were watching the house. Moreover, this is coming from a guy that lets his wife invite over five persons, while the note said no contact with anyone. Remember the stray dog? Guess the Ramsey’s were not using much discretion either.

    On to the next and last error we will address in this chapter. He, J. Ramsey now writes about how he concludes that if the kidnappers are watching the house, he might catch them watching the house. Therefore, he goes upstairs to the second floor, takes his binoculars, and spots a ‘strange vehicle’ in the alley behind the house of the Barnhill family, who live across the street. According to him: “After several minutes of watching the vehicle, nothing happens, so I finally go back downstairs.” It makes you wonder what should have happened, or better, what did he [J. Ramsey] expect would happen? It apparently took him several minutes to find out. Exactly what does he think should have happened? And what is making him so sure that it is safe after watching the ‘strange vehicle’ for several minutes, so that it doesn’t seem to worry him anymore? In addition, he does not even feel it is important enough to inform the police about the ‘strange vehicle.’ According to him, this took place after Detective Arndt arrived at the house, and she never mentioned that she lost sight of him twice. Please explain, then, how on earth he could have gone upstairs at that time? It just doesn’t fit.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 3

    Chapter 3

    While I started to read Chapter 3, my mouth fell open after just reading three complete sentences, plus some loose words. I just could not believe what I just had read! I even wondered whether I had read it correctly. In fact, I read the sentence again to make sure that I understood what was actually written there. However, there was no doubt possible--I had been reading it perfectly correct. Yes, the sentence read, “Patsy spends most of the morning in the sunroom, praying and clutching a cross that was part of our Christmas decorations.” A cross used as part of Christmas decorations? Excuse me! Are they sure they are Christians? To me, a born and raised Catholic, a cross is not a Christmas decoration, a manger is. A crib represents the birth of Christ, a cross his death. Since Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ, a cross most certainly not a part of Christmas decorations. It wouldn’t even enter my mind to use a cross as a specific Christmas decoration. I think most, if not all, Christians would agree with me on this. So why did these "good Christian" Ramseys feel the need to use it as such a specific decoration? Makes me wonder, are they such "good Christians,” or was there another, more sinister reason, for using the cross as a Christmas decoration?

    On the first page and the second page, J. Ramsey is trying to convince everyone he is not consciously registering everything. Remarks as, “Things come into my awareness and disappear randomly. In and out. Confusion. Noise” DOI page 17 and on page 18 “Everything seems scrambled and chaotic.” However the description given by detective Arndt is, well let us say, a somewhat different J. Ramsey. “Ramsey seemed distracted, but his manner remained cordial, and she felt he understood her. While Ramsey’s language was clear and articulate, and he even smiled and joked,........ Okay, here is the situation, your daughter has been kidnapped, and you are smiling and joking? Get real, joke right!

    On page 18, J. Ramsey writes, “I see some new mail lying on the floor of the foyer floor, beneath the mail slot by our front door. I think if the kidnapper is going to communicate with me, maybe there is a note from him in this pile. I sort carefully through the letters. Nothing.” This shows he is not taking the ransom note extremely serious--if he is taking it serious at all. The ransom note clearly stated that it concerned more than one kidnapper, and it also stated how communications would take place, which was via the phone between 8 and 10 a.m. However, detective Arndt sees the event in quite a different light, as we can read in Steve Thomas' book on page 26, “Detective Arndt couldn’t account for John Ramsey until noon. She found him reading some correspondence.” and “Ramsey had been out of contact for over an hour.” This is why Arndt's statements are so important. Reading correspondence is not the same as sorting carefully through the letters. Besides, it must have been one hell of a pile of letters to take more than an hour to sort through them. The fact remains that Arndt caught him reading, not sorting, and that just shows exactly how cold, cool he was. Would you go and read your correspondence if your child was kidnapped?

    One of the first victims they tried to pin the “kidnap” [murder] on, are Jeff Merrick, and L. Hoffmann-Pugh. Ridiculous of course, as far as Mr. Merrick is concerned in Steve Thomas’s book you can read how he was fired by Access Graphic in kind of a shady way, of course his ‘old pal’ Ramsey did nothing to stop it. Mr. Merrick appealed to Lockheed-Martin, the corporate owner of Access Graphic, which offered a settlement. That did not fall too well with Ramsey! Guess now Ramsey saw his chance to strike back at Mr. Merrick, it sure gives you an inside on what kind of person J. Ramsey really is. Mr. Merrick was cleared after months, however on page 77 of Steve Thomas’s book is an interesting passage concerning Mr. Merrick: “For months to come we crawled all over Merrick, who finally walked into the police department one Saturday morning to answer still more questions, against the advice of his attorney but wanting to settle things once and for all. ‘I am here, on a murder case, without a lawyer, talking to two detectives, having been pointed out by John Ramsey as a suspect,’ Merrick said to me. ‘Now where is John Ramsey?’ Yes where were you, J. Ramsey, nowhere near any police department I bet, but hiding behind his lawyers somewhere! The one who should have done what Mr. Merrick did is, even after all this time still doing the same thing, hiding behind lawyers.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    430

    Default Chapter 3 part 2

    The way L. Hoffmann-Pugh is accused is described in the DOI in a bizarre way. Actually, it is so contradicting that you will not need other books to see how ridiculous this accusation is. This is accusation is done by P. Ramsey, however J. Ramsey tries to throw in some weight too and thereby makes it almost laughable. On page 19 in DOI, he writes: “Patsy remembers that her mother, Nedra Paugh, had said that Linda had remarked to her at one time, ‘JonBenét is so pretty, aren’t you afraid someone might kidnap her.” Is that how they came up with the terrorist kidnap idea? Ramsey continues by writing: “Now those comments seem strangely menacing.” Oh, do they Ramsey? So, if I understand it all well, the kidnapper(s) in advance warns you of the act itself. Courteous kidnapper(s) I might say, only I do not think kidnapper like that do exist. Besides, she did not need your Christmas bonus of $ 118,000, just the loan of $ 2.500, which was already promised to her. On page 20, it goes further, J. Ramsey writes: “Patsy later tells me she was thinking, If it’s Linda, it’s okay, because she is a good, sweet person. She is just upset. She may need the money, but she won’t hurt JonBenét.” So here we have a good, sweet person committing a hideous crime, kidnap to me is a hideous crime, murder even worse. Why would she be upset anyhow, she was promised the money already as a loan. In addition, yes, she did need money, $ 2,500 only, not exactly J. Ramsey’s Christmas bonus! The mentioning of the possibility that JonBenét might be kidnapped was menacing [meaning, scary, ominous, alarming, threatening], but the thought that she if she had done it was okay? Right that makes complete sense!

    After this follows the pathetic statement about checking out the basement. Yes, he checked out the basement, as he suddenly remembered the broken window in the basement. He goes to the basement as he suddenly thinks that is the way the kidnapper(s) got in and out of the house. Except, he conveniently forgets to report this information to the police that are present in the house. Guess he wasn’t so worried after all about that broken window, or he would have at the least informed Law Enforcement Officers about this “possible” point of entry. Every normal concerned father of a kidnapped child would run to the police officers to inform them about such a “disturbing” discovery, but not J. Ramsey--hell no!

    The story continues with a lot of other nonsense, until we finally get to the point were he and Fleet White got to the basement together, near 1:00 p.m. In between, he feels the need to say that, “Fleet doesn’t mention to me that he had been down to the basement earlier that morning.” It makes it sound like some kind of strange accusation. After all, did J. Ramsey tell Fleet White (or anyone else), that he had been down there as well? No, he did not!

    Following the strange remark about Fleet White not having told J. Ramsey that he had been in the basement that morning, there is even a stranger remark, which concerns the broken window pain. It goes as follows: “We head downstairs, and I take Fleet over to the broken window pain and explain my breaking in there last summer. I tell him that I had found this window open earlier.” Now a few questions immediately pop up, like why was it so important to lead Fleet White instantaneously to the room with this broken window? After all as said before, he never mentioned it to anyone before. And, why explain his breaking in to the house via that particular window last summer? Again, this was also not mentioned to any Law Enforcement Officer, and now he suddenly feels the need to tell Fleet White about it. To me, this just proves that the whole open window statement was a complete farce. If it had been important--he would have reported it that morning to the authorities present.



Similar Threads

  1. "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
  2. DA: "Death won't affect JonBenet Case."
    By Greenleaf in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: August 28, 2006, 7:07 pm, Mon Aug 28 19:07:13 UTC 2006
  3. The "Death of Innocence"
    By momof2 in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 72
    Last Post: April 16, 2005, 9:46 pm, Sat Apr 16 21:46:12 UTC 2005

Posting Permissions

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