In-Depth Discussion of Kolar's Book "Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet?"

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by koldkase, Jul 20, 2012.

  1. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Good to see you, heymom. You've been missed.

    I don't know what I'll think by the end of the book. But I've said it before and I'll say it again: if Burke is completely innocent in all this, his parents managed to make him a suspect for life with their behavior.
     
  2. Scarifier

    Scarifier McHag The Third

    I'm quite happy to be the official comparison guide :D

    It's very interesting to read the Steve Thomas book completely cold, as it were. I hadn't really read anything about the case in a couple of years - in fact, probably since that last visit I made here in October 2010 just before my daughter was born. When I originally got the book, I was visiting this forum regularly and reading a lot about the case. I knew so much about it and I knew what was coming, I suppose. Now that I'm reading it fresh I realise there is so much that I have forgotten.
     
  3. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    In the chapter "Lou Smit for the Defense" Kolar says this:

    Page 109:

    Kolar had mentioned this earlier in the book, as well.
     
  4. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    It just hit me what's been bothering me about this: Doug is the name of the Stine's son.

    Luke is the name of the Fernie's son.

    It's a simple mistake to make, as I looked up the passage you referred to and it only mentions Barbara Fernie's "son," but no name is used. Kolar doesn't use the names of children who aren't germane to the case, so far.

    Kolar doesn't mention the names of various people in this book when discussing peripheral elements, like people who were minor suspects at one time or another but cleared, only the circumstances.

    Edited to add: I found the Barb Fernie passage, page 87:

    We have heard in the past the Barb Fernie began to suspect Patsy after a time. I think this is based on Linda Arndt's testimony at her lawsuit trial, but I'd have to look that up to be sure. I just read it somewhere this morning...ACandyRose.com, probably.
     
  5. heymom

    heymom Member

    Why thank you KK! You are too kind. I will be here now for the forseeable future. I wonder what is going to happen next. We will see, we will see. I expect lawsuits to be filed, if they haven't already. I'm sure Team Ramsey tried to keep the book from being published.

    That NE interview was horrendous! Patsy really was insane, at least by that point, if she wasn't before (but I kind of think she always was).

    Someone was abusing JonBenet, that's for sure. Was it John or Burke? Someone killed her. Or tried to kill her but didn't succeed. And someone decided to protect that person by making up a kidnap scenario. Frankly, I am in doubt that Patsy really would protect John, but she would protect Burke. And her own image.

    Imagine what would have happened if the police had been called when JonBenet was struck...She would have died, the person who hit her would have gone to jail and possibly prison. Patsy's world would have been destroyed. Couldn't have had that. But would John Ramsey have protected Burke? Would he have gone along with Patsy's plan? Who actually tightened that ligature?

    Maybe he would have - after all, his life would have also crumbled if the killer had gone to jail. Although in retrospect, his life crumbled anyway.

    It's all so sad.
     
  6. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Good questions, all, heymom. Only John can answer them, though.
     
  7. heymom

    heymom Member

    And possibly Burke. I will be very interested to see how the book might affect the opinions of the people on this forum.
     
  8. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I know you've been posting some of the DNA information from the book at WS, cynic, but I haven't seen that here?

    Here is a section on the fingernail DNA that's rather astonishing, considering how long we've debated this, clearly without the full picture:

    Pages 127, 128:

    Kolar goes on to explain the database for DNA collection we know as CODIS. I learned some new things about that and how profiles qualify and the various categories there are.

    He also documents discovery of the DNA from the Bloomies and its history, and then puts it into perspective for us with these stats:

    If that last sentence leaves you scratching your head, remember he starts the book with a failed kidnapping by a theoretical foreign faction, with six members working in teams. If you listened to Tricia's podcast interview with Kolar, cynic and he discussed six different unidentified profiles taken from the crime scene. The upshot is that if one unidentified DNA profile equals one intruder, six must equal six intruders.

    So the infamous "touch" DNA is brought into perspective as far as being evidentiary proof of an "intruder."
     
  9. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Perspective is everything, isn't it? One thing about living long enough to see this repeated many times: as we live and learn, we can look back and see things much more clearly than when we first encountered them.
     
  10. Karen

    Karen Member

    Oh good Lord!

    Bedsheets reeking of urine!
    Feces covered box of candy!

    What in the world did Jonbenets room smell like????:eek::eek:
     
  11. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Don't forget the blood on the pillowcase and the "skid marks" in the underwear found in pants lying on the floor.

    Also the toilet wasn't flushed.

    Now we're back to oooky stuff.... :sick:
     
  12. heymom

    heymom Member

    During The ENQUIRER interview, Patsy admitted she considered and rejected the possibility that John was sexually abusing JonBenet. She openly admitted that during her struggle to defeat ovarian cancer between 1993 and 1994, John and Patsy's sex life suffered. She totally rejects the notion of John abusing JonBenet, but her reasoning is odd.

    She said her mother "came to take care of the kids (when I had cancer). She slept in the other bed in JonBenet's room. I mean, if John was coming in to molest JonBenet, you know that's not going to happen 'cause Grandma was right there every night."


    Not that John was not capable of molesting his own daughter, no. Just that he would not have had the opportunity at that time. My God, she may as well have said, "Yeah, he's a molester!"
     
    icedtea4me likes this.
  13. Cherokee

    Cherokee FFJ Senior Member

    No molestor would have to wait until night time to sexually abuse a victim. It happens day or night, any time there is an opportunity to be alone.
     
  14. heymom

    heymom Member

    But many times, the molester does wait until the victim may be asleep. The better to get away with something and not get caught. And some molesters get drunk before molesting, which happens in the evening. And that is what Patsy may know, that the molestation HAS happened at night...So thus her comment that Grandma was there guarding JonBenet.

    Dear Lord, I just know too much about this....

    :(
     
  15. Learnin

    Learnin Member

    " She ate that pineapple, Kolar writes, “not long before receiving the blow to her headâ€.


    Ole Learnin will testify to that Mr. Kolar.
     
  16. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I thought about you when I was reading that.

    Spot on.
     
  17. Elle

    Elle Member

    Getting back to John Ramsey maybe being the one molesting JonBenét (?), I have always had trouble with this thought, thinking of how he was an executive and there are many women out there attracted to these execs and are ready and willing. Why would he stoop so low to molest his young daughter?

    I am having some computer problems folks! Sorry if there are repeats![​IMG]
     
  18. heymom

    heymom Member

    It is not the same for a pedophile, Elle. If John Ramsey is a child molester, then he is attracted to children as sexual objects. It is not just a matter of having access to sex from a female of any age. He would be attracted to that specific age/type of little girl. Pedophiles almost always have strict limits on what ages of child they are attracted to. And they don't molest older or younger children. It's a very weird and sick mental problem.

    I don't know if John Ramsey is or is not a pedophile who could molest his own daughter. But that attraction is totally separate from any other sexual attraction he would also have for grown women.
     
  19. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    For Elle and others who are awaiting their books:

    After Kolar got the investigation as lead DA investigator in 2005, he learned about some problems involving evidence which took over a year to dribble in (as we know thanks to Hunter). One thing he writes about is that the clothing the Ramseys had been wearing that morning and the previous evening came in slowly, a couple of pieces at a time. He says that the red sweater Patsy appeared to be wearing under the jacket at the White's party that evening came in with the appearance of being previously unworn, right off the shelf, including folds still in the fabric.

    Here is something I hope we can keep in mind, with the new info about Burke drawing our focus away from the evidence still implicating Patsy's presence at the crime scene:

    From FF:WRKJBR, by Kolar, pages 228-229

     
  20. Elle

    Elle Member

    Truthfully, I don't know enough about pedophiles, heymom. Not a subject I can handle. Kudos to you for handling this. His first family had a high regard for him which made me feel he wasn't like this.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice