Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 13 to 24 of 142
  1. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    I have a crystal-clear idea in my mind as to why the note was written, and like Occam's Razor- it is the simplest one.
    There was a dead child in the house. There needed to be a reason for it. The truth was not an option. A kidnapping/ransom note provided the PERFECT way out. With the 911 call, (the other part of the equation) the Rs violated the first rule of ALL ransom notes- call police and the victim dies. There was the explanation for the dead child right there. You called the cops, so we killed her.
    What the Rs didn't think about was how odd it would be for the alleged kidnappers to leave body there. A body can still generate ransom money, and you don't really even have to tell the parents she is dead.
    I think they simply could not bring themselves to leave her body outside somewhere.
    It certainly is the simplest and most logical of explanations.

  2. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    For me the whole scenario was overdramatized because it was Patsy Ramsey creating a play in her head of the whole scenario which had taken place probably after returning home from the White's party. Taking hours covering up the accidental death of her daughter JonBenét. To arrive at the door with not a hair out of place when the first cop arrived after the 911 call says it all for me, plus John and Patsy's strange behaviour, and making sure Burke was ushered out of the house.

    I agree DeeDee, the Ramseys could not leave JonBenét out in the cold.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  3. #15

    Default

    This isn't about the purpose per se of the ransom note; it's about elements below the level of consciousness. I read about it on another website (which I can find again if anyone's interested). It may have been thoroughly covered here in the past, but I didn't find it when I looked.

    The author noted that the ransom note phrase "if you want her to see 1997" is an echo of two phrases in Patsy's 1996 Christmas letter: "we'll be seeing the orthodontist in 1997" and "look forward to seeing you in 1997."

    The author also noted that Patsy littered her letters with alliteration (sorry) viz. "flag football...basketball binge," "few fleeting." The ransom note, of course, contains "foreign faction," "adequate...attache" and "brown...bag."
    Last edited by fr brown; October 13, 2010, 12:37 pm at Wed Oct 13 12:37:08 UTC 2010.

  4. #16
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Isn't this just another form of analysis which has already been expertly done by Delmar England and Cherokee on this very forum fr brown? Yes, I understand perfectly what you're saying here, and I agree with this theory of "elements below the level of consciousness." Patsy's similarities of expression relate to the ransom note style.
    Last edited by Elle_1; October 13, 2010, 1:35 pm at Wed Oct 13 13:35:10 UTC 2010.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  5. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1 View Post
    Isn't this just another form of analysyis which has already been expertly done by Delmar England and Cherokee on this very forum fr brown? Yes, I understand perfectly what you're saying here, and I agree with this theory of "elements below the level of consciousness." Patsy's similarities of expression relate to the ransom note style.
    I don't remember Cherokee's or England's analyses mentioning either of the particular literary tics or devices I mentioned in my post, but I apologize if I overlooked them. I try to avoid being repetitive--or patronizing.

    I made an error when I said that the ransom note contained "few fleeting." That was in Patsy's 1996 Christmas letter. I'll try to fix that now.

  6. #18
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fr brown View Post
    I don't remember Cherokee's or England's analyses mentioning either of the particular literary tics or devices I mentioned in my post, but I apologize if I overlooked them. I try to avoid being repetitive--or patronizing.

    I made an error when I said that the ransom note contained "few fleeting." That was in Patsy's 1996 Christmas letter. I'll try to fix that now.
    Oh geesh FB I truthfully haven't read Cherokee's and Delmar's analysis/analyses for quite some time, but they were excellent relating to the style and content when I read them a few years ago. I'm a Senior Senior now and don't have the same patience you younger ones have here. I know from your posts you are a very intelligent young man and probably know what you're talking about. No need for apologies.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  7. #19
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fr brown View Post
    I don't remember Cherokee's or England's analyses mentioning either of the particular literary tics or devices I mentioned in my post, but I apologize if I overlooked them. I try to avoid being repetitive--or patronizing.

    I made an error when I said that the ransom note contained "few fleeting." That was in Patsy's 1996 Christmas letter. I'll try to fix that now.
    Oops! Made a mistake. I thought I had opened my post to correct an error.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  8. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zoomama View Post
    What I don't understand and I'll ask it again, WHY DID THE RAMSEY'S GET AWAY WITH THIS? Yes, some sloppy police work for sure but District Atty Hunter and gang of thieves with him just dropped the ball. WHY??? Who was John that he held such power or whatever it was? Just rambling here I guess. I still say that if it were you or I we would be rotting in jail from the get go.
    I believe the Ramseys got away with it because they had help, and lots of it.

    The missing cell phone, the blank record for the month of Dec. 96, with lots of activity before that month, but no subpoena ever issued for the Ramsey phone records, obstructed by Hunter himself, never obtained by Lacy--to this day, no one has ever subpoened those phone records that we know of. Yes, it would be too late probably, as someone had to have the power to erase that cell phone record for Dec. 1996 when it was finally "cooperatively turned over" a year later, but the full records might have been sitting in the BPD evidence room all these years, obtained illegally by a private company for a tabloid, with the owners prosecuted and the evidence gathered. Thomas spoke to this in his book, saying those phone records were walked past the Ramsey case detectives who were told, you will never see them. Thomas could see the fix was in from the beginning.

    That's tantamount to obstruction of justice any way you slice it. But not Hunter, not Lacy, not the Ramseys, no one has ever answered for that critical decision in this murder investigation.

    Think about that: if LE had but gotten the Ramseys' complete phone records, the case could have been solved inside of a week.

    This is a sticking point in this murder investigation for me because is it so blaringly ignored by both sides of the investigation. Only Steve Thomas ever spoke about it, in his book, when he described how Hunter crippled the BPD with his repeated interference in the most simple of investigative protocol. The Ramseys' clothes were never subpoenaed, either, right? At least, they were never even requested until nearly a year after the murder.

    The Ramsey lawyers were given police report after lab test result after control of the very investigation through Hunter and Lacy. What private citizen gets that treatment? Especially the prime suspects? Why?

    I believe the Ramseys had big help, through connections with Lockheed Martin. I believe they called for help that very morning, long before they called 911. I believe they were coached and helped to figure out how to mislead LE, while LE was already being reached out to in the form of Hunter, through Bynum, possibly.

    I think mistakes were made, because there wasn't a lot of time to work this out. The plane would be ready, the big kids would be in Minnesota awaiting the parents, along with a fiance. The help in Charlevoix would be wondering where was the family. Friends and relatives would be calling as per usual. So the longer the staging took, the less likely it would be successful.

    I don't think it was an accident that Dr. Meyers showed up so many hours after the body was found, either. How much he knew, who knows, but in a county of maybe 100K, with many gone at Christmas, he claimed he had other "calls" he had to finish first. I don't think so. Even if he did, how likely is it he wouldn't have dropped everything, ordered to do so by someone higher up the food chain, to attend the body in the murder of a child in a wealthy home, in the sole murder that year in Boulder? One excuse is that the BPD was getting search warrants before Meyers could show up. BS. They knew that morning this was going to be a crime scene any way it turned out. They should have been working on those search warrants by 7 am at the latest, just for the house. A coroner does not have to have a subpoena to attend to the body of a murder victim, either. Time is critical, and Dr. Meyer wasted it rather spectacularly, even though LE had been in the home all day already, as well. He didn't do the autopsy until the next morning. Why would Dr. Meyer do that?

    It's flat out jaw-dropping how the Ramseys were not even searched when they left the home, not taken to the BPD for questioning immediately. Unbelievable. How did Arndt, who we now know was a weak detective, get left alone in the house for hours with 8 or 9 civilians, her calls for back up ignored when she finally realized she needed help? The detective became unglued, which resulted in one of the worst crime scene blunders in crime history. Her boss knew that either there were child kidnappers on the loose, maybe terrorists, or the child had met an even worse fate at the hands of her own family, yet left Arndt there without one other office. Why would they do that?

    John Ramsey had a lawyer inside of a few hours after the body was "found." His wife had one within days, before their child was even buried. The Ramseys began refusing to talk to LE by that evening, excuses in place, lawyers in place. They should have been arrested then, LOU SMIT SAID HIMSELF, and taken to the BPD. But they weren't.

    One of the D.A.'s prosecutors who apparently wasn't in on the cover up, at least that day, said he had to tell the BPD to get some crime scene techs in the house when they were ready to leave that evening, all done. While the BPD might not have been experienced homicide detectives, how fast do you think a police chief could have figured out the crime scene where a murdered child was discovered in a rich family's home needed the best response possible at the end of the 20th century? The FBI was there, in the background; Agent Walker said he told the BPD that morning by the second time Walker read the ransom note that they would find a body. There were people on hand who knew exactly what was going on and what to do--but for some lame reasons given, all obvious, common protocol was abandoned post haste. Those in charge of following the book and doing the same jobs they did every day as professional police officers in a highly educated and wealthy population suddenly became bumbling cops who didn't know which end was up. Why was that?

    Hadden and his firm of lawyers were the most powerful defense attorneys in the state, connected all the way to the White House. Lockheed Martin is one of the most powerful defense contractors in the world, working for governments world wide, including the U.S. Defense Dept. They're at the cutting edge of technology, power, and influence. John Ramsey was a CEO for Lockheed Martin. He traveled for the company overseas. He should have been trained in protocol when kidnapping is a worldwide problem for rich corporations and has been for many decades now. A Denver lawyer who worked for Lockheed Martin in security at the time of the kidnapping has said in interviews on TV and in articles that he questioned why he never heard a peep from anyone when the child of a CEO was supposed to have been kidnapped, cops on the scene, child missing, with a ransom note left by a "foreign faction" who specifically named John's company as the impetus for the crime. Other executives and their families could have been in danger, but no one was called at LM security, no one alerted, no practiced and specific response to just such a situation was ever set in motion. Shadow also spoke about this: it's very fishy.

    I know what I think. Even if it sounds too much like a "conspiracy theory" and too far fetched, at the very least, Hunter knew exactly what he was doing when he obstructed LE in the investigation. He'd done it for 27 years, his record shows.

    Does this help explain how they got away with it?
    Last edited by koldkase; October 13, 2010, 9:56 pm at Wed Oct 13 21:56:08 UTC 2010.

    "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. #21
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    It wasn't even that outlandish a conspiracy, actually. All it took was a call from JR to MB, and that set the ball in motion for the other calls. The defense firm had strong ties to the governor's office, as well as personal and professional relationships with the DA- in any other jurisdiction, a DA in this position would have to recuse himself because of those relationships. Not AH, though.
    So it was more like a cascade of deceit from the get-go, and like a runaway train, once started, couldn't be stopped.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  10. #22

    Default

    Good thread, learnin, and I'm not trying to derail the topic...really!

    I have had a long day, so I'm going to come back tomorrow and keep reading. I'm about half way through now. Your thoughts about the ransom note are at least close, I believe. Whatever specifically the writer/author meant for LE to believe happened, it's clear it involved kidnapping gone wrong. John Ramsey said that himself many times.

    I'll say that I believe John Ramsey was in on it, myself. What specific part he played, whether in the abuse and/or murder or just in the cover up, I can't say. But the story of him on the floor on his hands and knees in his underwear doesn't fly with me. Nor do I believe for one minute that John would tell Patsy to call 911 when they clearly could have called the very powerful defense company John worked for, considering his child was supposed to be kidnapped by a foreign faction who named the company as the impetus.

    Also I don't believe for half a second that John and Pasty would have answered the door all groomed and smiling--cordial, I think was the word used. No way they'd have invited over friends, and if Patsy had done something that dumb and John heard it, he'd have called them back pronto and said do not come over--if that wasn't part of a "plan" as you point out.

    No way would it never occur to John Ramsey that the kidnappers might still be in the house, with his child, and a threat to himself, his wife and son, as well. Never once have I ever heard either Ramsey mention it ever crossed their minds. Sheer instinct should have given them that thought first and foremost. When someone breaks into your sanctuary and does harm, every nerve in your body starts screaming. They have your child? Its fight or flight.

    But John and Patsy had a kidnap party instead.

    So your breakdown of the ransom note is very interesting, learnin, and might be very close to the truth of what the writer was planning. But I believe John was right there with her.

    I'll go back over your analysis tomorrow. I had some thoughts as I was reading it, but wanted to finish the thread and see what everyone else said before I said much. Now I'm just pooped.

    Thanks for starting this discussion. You are such a good addition to the FFJ family. I am so glad you joined.

    "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.

  11. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    It wasn't even that outlandish a conspiracy, actually. All it took was a call from JR to MB, and that set the ball in motion for the other calls. The defense firm had strong ties to the governor's office, as well as personal and professional relationships with the DA- in any other jurisdiction, a DA in this position would have to recuse himself because of those relationships. Not AH, though.
    So it was more like a cascade of deceit from the get-go, and like a runaway train, once started, couldn't be stopped.
    I agree, DeeDee, but for one issue that was once such a laughed at concept by the RST, it was hard to discuss it: the blank phone record being tampered with by Team Ramsey.

    Now that we have seen exposed, time and again, the corruption of our government, it's not so hard to contemplate. It wasn't so obvious to everyone in 1996, when the Internet was just becoming financially feasible for many of us.

    A long list of conspiracies involving the very rich and powerful in the last decade has lifted that curtain, however, and all Team Ramsey can do is ignore the subject.

    The poster Spade, who brought us a lot of inside info, including "The Bonita Papers," has said the subpoena block went all the way to the White House. Of course, he never gave his source for that, but I can't think of a time when any info he provided turned out not to be what he said it was. With Access Graphics being owned by Lockheed, it's not that much of a stretch, if you know something about the level of power that company has. They can bury the bodies without so much as a sniff from LE. The world over. Their business is war, after all. REAL war. At the highest level.

    Why would they do that for John Ramsey, who was over such a small company they owned in Colorado? It's the club, of course. One CEO with a molested and dead daughter can be a PR problem, after all. Have you seen their commercials? They don't advertise collateral damage and death. It would have been a small problem for them to handle. Easier than seeing the headlines: LOCKHEED MARTIN CEO AND WIFE CONVICTED OF CHILD ABUSE AND MURDER.

    Lockheed Martin has been in the news in scandals involving corruption, as well, in the past. I posted the articles here, I think, but I am drawing a blank right now. It was along these lines, though: powerful company breaking the law and a cover up.

    The Ramseys had but to do what their powerful lawyers told them and hope for a little luck, because it was not foolproof, of course. I don't think on that night, or that morning, anyone involved dreamed it would become a national scandal, major unsolved crime, and live in infamy forever.

    But you never see anyone in the media ever mention Lockheed Martin as a player in this crime, do you? And you never will.

    P.S. If I die unexpectedly soon, or disappear, it was nice knowing all of ya'!

    "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.

  12. #24

    Default

    Fleet White told Steve Thomas that he'd talked to a Ramsey investigator--or investigators. (Don't remember that detail.) When Thomas asked when, White looked at his notes and said that it was the afternoon of the 26th, the same afternoon that JonBenet's body was discovered.

    That's quick work. Somebody got these guys on the job in a big hurry. I've always assumed it was Mike Bynum.
    Last edited by fr brown; October 14, 2010, 9:29 am at Thu Oct 14 9:29:01 UTC 2010.



Similar Threads

  1. Risk vs. Benefit and the Ransom Note
    By Learnin in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: October 6, 2009, 5:41 pm, Tue Oct 6 17:41:14 UTC 2009
  2. A Real Ransom Note & Kidnapping
    By RiverRat in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: March 14, 2007, 8:11 am, Wed Mar 14 8:11:13 UTC 2007
  3. Ransom note fingerprints
    By Barbara in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: June 6, 2004, 11:29 pm, Sun Jun 6 23:29:17 UTC 2004
  4. The trail of the ransom note
    By MJenn in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: May 16, 2002, 11:21 pm, Thu May 16 23:21:17 UTC 2002
  5. Ramsey Case Ransom Note
    By Dunvegan in forum Evidence Files: Ramsey murder case
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 14, 2001, 4:49 pm, Wed Nov 14 16:49:17 UTC 2001

Posting Permissions

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