Page 7 of 29 FirstFirst ... 3456789101117 ... LastLast
Results 73 to 84 of 338
  1. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel XVI
    To all:

    For those of you who think that Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter and wrote the note, do any of you think that there is any possibilty that her husband could have been in the dark and could be to this very day?

    Thank you.
    Maybe....

    But he lied to LE about climbing in the window after breaking it. I'm not sure why, but I don't believe a man who says he took his suit and pants off to climb in the window...and then put his shoes back on to climb through.

    Unless...well, see there, you did make me think of something. Maybe John put his shoes back on because of the glass on the floor. He didn't want to cut his feet.

    Well, that's why I can't make up my mind about John and what he knew.

    Do I think he could have been in the dark all these years if Patsy did it? People have kept dark secrets for far longer than that.

    But maybe he did figure it out. Maybe he didn't want Burke to lose his mom, as well as have her a convicted child killer. Who knows?

    What I do know is that the evidence against Patsy is convincing to me.

    "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. #74
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    827

    Default umm hmmm

    There are those who believe PR did it all by her lonesome. You will find that even though people on this forum have been accused of all being "Bent on Ramsey Guilt" there are many different ideas on what possibly happened and there are also a few fence-sitters.

    I think it possible John didn't know what happened when he woke up but that he began to suspect from the ransom note and behavior of Patsy and during the time he was "missing" that morning went to the basement and found JB's body.
    He certainly conveyed the thought that someone close did it when he told detective Arndt that it was an inside job.

  3. #75

    Default

    Oh, I just remembered. Sorry, I'm quite distracted from the many details of this case right now.

    I think John lied about climbing in the window for another reason. His description of how he climbed in. He not only sounds like he's trying to figure it out as he tells it, rather than he remembers it, but he described the way he climbed in and it's not possible.

    He said he turned and got on his knees in the window and then dropped down. Try it. Not possible with that far of a drop, without putting one foot down, shifting weight to it, etc. He couldn't put his foot down...watch Smit drop down after climbing in and dragging his behind over the sill. Long drop. John is a short man, as well.

    "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.

  4. #76
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    827

    Default numbered pages

    I too thought from reading the ST book that the pages were simply counted and the pages missing were counted by the small tab of paper left where the page is perforated to be torn from the pad.

  5. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Texan
    I think it possible John didn't know what happened when he woke up but that he began to suspect from the ransom note and behavior of Patsy and during the time he was "missing" that morning went to the basement and found JB's body.
    He certainly conveyed the thought that someone close did it when he told detective Arndt that it was an inside job.
    Oh, yeah, that's true. John did apparently "think" it was an inside job at first. Then he changed his mind for the rest of his life, apparently.

    "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. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel XVI
    However, I have never read all I've put forward here and I hoped to get people to thinking in a search for truth and justice.
    That's arrogant of you, Daniel. Like we WEREN'T searching for truth and justice already?!!

    The people on this forum have been die-hard case followers for almost 10 years. We have not spent time, money and effort on this case just because we have nothing better to do. How dare you come in here and lecture US about getting "people to thinking in a search for truth and justice." The reason this forum EXISTS is because we want truth and justice for JonBenet.

  7. #79

    Default

    Dear Kold:

    First off, thank you for being the apparent voice of reason and civility here! It is appreciated.

    The gist of my thinking is this. If, for the sake of argument, my theory is correct, then the perp had much more time to plan and reason every detail out than certainly the Ramseys would have had if one of them killed the girl. Many of you here seem to think that they were too clever by half, thinking "on their feet" with amazing rapidity along the "reverse psychology" lines I mentioned before. "Use the $118,000 so that no one will think we could be that stupid to specify that sum ourselves. "

    In regard to how and why they acted as they did, I shall attempt to address that the next day I can post, as it is getting late now. Is "Jams" "JAMESON.?"
    Sue Bennett? I've heard of her. Who is "RTS" please? Thank you.

    Thank you again for your civility.

  8. #80

    Default

    Well, I have always thought that the ransom note writer went to the middle because she hoped that no one would notice she'd written the note on that pad.

    But John handed it right to LE.

    Which is another reason that gives me pause about John being involved. Either he figured they'd find it anyway and thought they would look innocent if he gave it up freely...or he didn't know.

    Doubt we'll ever know.

    "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.

  9. #81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel XVI
    Dear Kold:

    First off, thank you for being the apparent voice of reason and civility here! It is appreciated.

    The gist of my thinking is this. If, for the sake of argument, my theory is correct, then the perp had much more time to plan and reason every detail out than certainly the Ramseys would have had if one of them killed the girl. Many of you here seem to think that they were too clever by half, thinking "on their feet, with amazing rapidity along the "reverse psychology" lines I mentioned before. "Use the $118,000 so that no one will think we could be that stupid to specify that sum ourselves. "

    In regard to how and why they acted as they did, I shall attempt to address that the next day I can post, as it is getting late now. Is "Jams" "JAMESON.?"
    Sue Bennett? I've heard of her. Who is "RTS" please? Thank you.

    Thank you again for your civility.

    Daniel why do you think John let Patsy call over the Whites, then the Fernies, Father Rol and who else....when the note told John he was being MONITORED by kidnappers who would behead his daughter if he so much as talked to a stray dog?


    Give you time to ponder this....or are you afraid you have no answer?????

    Koldkase the voice of reason........hahahahahahahaha
    Daniel has not experienced the wrath of Koldkase!!!!!!!!

  10. #82

    Default

    Dear Cherokee:

    No, I didn't mean that at all, though I'm sorry if I gave you that impression. I simply meant that I thought I had an insight I had not heard previosuly and that might get people--like yourselves--thinking some more, perhaps in different directions. That's all.

    Sorry again.

  11. #83
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    827

    Default I think

    I think you may mean RST which is Ramsey spin team. If we seem a little brusque it is because we occasionally get people who deliberately come here to cause trouble rather than truly seek for the truth.

    The awesome moderators keep up well with these trouble makers but the forum is a little crazy right now. You will find we are willing to discuss anything but have already discussed all of this for 10 long years so there isn't much you can propose that we haven't already thought about.

  12. #84

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Daniel XVI
    Dear Cherokee:

    No, I didn't mean that at all, though I'm sorry if I gave you that impression. I simply meant that I thought I had an insight I had not heard previosuly and that might get people--like yourselves--thinking some more. That's all.

    Sorry again.
    No answer....I thought so!

    Daniel must agree it doesn't make sense to himself either.



Similar Threads

  1. Karr--what to say? Karr's Lawyers: Porn Case Can't Go on - No Evidence
    By koldkase in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 122
    Last Post: October 7, 2006, 5:26 pm, Sat Oct 7 17:26:18 UTC 2006
  2. 'Scott Peterson Is Innocent'
    By "J_R" in forum Laci Denise Rocha Peterson
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: November 1, 2004, 2:54 pm, Mon Nov 1 14:54:42 UTC 2004
  3. 'Scott Peterson Is Innocent'
    By Moab in forum Laci Denise Rocha Peterson
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: April 26, 2003, 2:59 pm, Sat Apr 26 14:59:42 UTC 2003

Posting Permissions

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