mybelief's post

What Texan said. :highfive:

 

What Texan and WY said

 

Really, Pats- I mean, Mybelief, "well worth", "am aware", and "available again". I thought you were trying...

I hear a voice I've heard in the past when I read your writing. Maybe I've read thank-you notes you've written?

 

Yes but Texan that would disrupt Tracey's feelings of moral superiority towards the rest of us commoners. Where do universities get these freaks? Man I could tear that guy to shreds in a debate--which is, of course, why he never debates anybody. He just brays from the top of his little ivory tower in academia, where nobody can challenge him. He's a joke.

Even the waitresses at his favorite pub, The Hungry Toad (I think that was the name) make fun of him. They thought he was a pompous, annoying .

 

A quote

From the videotaped deposition of Patricia P. Ramsey, Dec. 11, 2001 (I added the italics):


THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are on the video record at 9:49.

MR. HOFFMAN: Mrs. Ramsey, Lin, I want to proceed when you are ready.

MR. WOOD: Absolutely. Go right ahead.

Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) Okay. Mrs. Ramsey, I would like you to look at page 40 of the paperback edition of your book, "the Death of Innocence." I have highlighted a section I would like you to read, which begins number and then, "The ransom note." Could you read that, please, for the record.

A. "4. The ransom note. Considered earlier and throughout the book, the note was written by the killer and remains an extremely important clue. An adequate amount of handwriting samples from the killer should conclusively tie him to the long and rambling note."

Q. Mrs. Ramsey, do you still agree with that statement?

A. I am not sure which statement.

Q. The statement you just read in your book, do you still agree with it?

A. Well, it is my belief that whoever wrote the ransom note probably had something to do with her murder. Is that what you are asking me?

Q. Yes, I am. I just want to know -- I know this book was written a couple of years ago, and I just want to determine whether it is still your belief, that this statement is still your belief, that you believe this statement to be true today?

A. Yes, I believe that. Yes, I believe that.

Boulder Daily Camera

************

'Nuff said, Wombat thinks.

 

Good for you, Wombat! You're sharp! Yes! Yes! You could be right. Patsy!

 

Wombat, I read Patsy's post again. I agree with you. She uses the same words here and there, and it does have the same ring to it.

 

IMO the part about the keys and the 'help' was a giveaway and that ending with a kind of a 'Victory' feel to it. We need analysis/comparison on this one Cherokee please

 

How many handwriting samples are in an "adequate" and I wonder what you would put them in?

Little

 

ROFL!!!!!!

Mybelief's first post also sounds like the 1997 Christmas letter, which I cannot find right now. I've been travelling. Will look when I get home.

Not humorous is the use of the word "tie" in the book excerpt.

Also, did anyone else notice she writes "Jon Benet", like "daug hter"? Well, maybe that's going too far, but it does look like a feeble attempt at disguise.

 

Oh my. Someone call the BDA! I think we have the ransom note writer here! :wind:

You guys are really good....

 

http://forums.delphiforums.com/acandyrose/messages/?start=Start+Reading+>>

From: Closer2 5/25/2000 8:18 pm
To: ALL (1 of 22)
1368.1
re Croc II - The concept is to focus on Lou Smit. Ramseys probably won't even be in it. It will be more of an investigation into the crime and the media coverage of the investigation as opposed to media coverage of the Ramseys themselves.

re Tracey's book - The concept is the psychology of hate, and the cultural and psychological dynamics of the hatred that surrounds this case, including hatred of the Ramseys and hatred between posters. It will also examine poster's theories of the crime within that context. Posts will be used but not names. Tracey says anyone who tries to assert that he is violating copyright laws by using forum posts can, and I quote, "f*ck off" because he will assert the Fair Use Doctrine.


From: Closer2 5/26/2000 8:22 pm
To: Cyberclops (Wotje) (16 of 22)
1368.16 in reply to 1368.15
Cy, I emailed your very wise idea to Tracey. He emailed me back that the whole point of the fair use doctrine was that you don't have to pay royalties. I emailed him again and said since I KNOW in my heart of hearts that he is NOT doing this for the money because he has told me that himself so many times and he would NEVER be insincere, that I also KNOW he will donate all the royalties to the JBR foundation. After all, his mission is to make America the best it can be, not to make any money for himself. Gee, he is soooo noble. It really moves me. In fact, it moves me so much, I think I have to go to the toilet right now.

:idea:

 

From: Closer2 6/22/2000 8:55 am
To: ALL (1 of 9)
1450.1
I had what will probably be my last conversation with Tracey yesterday as it ended with a threat from him to me. Now, about the croc:

I have often argued with Tracey about why the croc was shown prior to the GJ completing it's work, despite the Ramsey's stipulation that it not be shown until afterward. Tracey had always blamed this on A&E. I kep asking why he and Mills didn't require a clause in their sale contract with A&E that prohibited showing of the croc until after the GJ was done. Yesterday, I got an answer - they didn't have to.

It turns out that the Ramseys, through Brian Morgan, RETRACTED their stipulation that the croc not be shown prior to the GJ completing its work. Tracey claims he has a letter from Morgan (I have not seen it) authorizing him and Mills to go ahead with the sale to A&E and giving the Ramsey's approval, despite the fact that they knew A&E wanted to show the croc right away.

Of course, we didn't read Tracey in the Daily Camera saying the stipulation had been UNDONE by the very people who made it. Why would the Ramseys and Tracey make a big show of publicly stating that the Ramseys insisted that the croc not be shown until the GJ was finished if they never had any intention of following through with that stipulation? And what ever possessed Tracey to even ASK them to retract it? Or did he already know that the stipulation was just more spin and was never meant to be enforced?

This doesn't prove the Ramseys killed JonBenet. It does prove that they were insincere in their public declarations that they did not want the croc to be shown prior to the GJ finishing it's work so as not to appear to be attemtping to influence the GJ.

I'm not suggesting we jump to any conclusions here. Let's just use our "good southern common sense" to analyze and evaluate this piece of information.

Meanwhile, I am dizzy from the spin.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/acandyrose/messages/?start=Start+Reading+>>

 

Da Old Broom Closet (S) - Paraphrsing Tracey - He hangs up (S) notify me whenever anyone posts in this discussionSubscribe

From: Closer2 3/22/2000 5:01 pm
To: ALL (1 of 23)
1122.1
rofl...

G2: Hi, it's Gail

MT: Oh, I was just going to call you. I got your email. Why did Jams post this? (He is referring to hir "Documenting Gsquared" thread where she calls me a wanton slut and says I am *supposedly* remarried.) What prompted it?

G2: There was a post by someone else about Dr. Laura about her issues with gays and how she was about sex and I posted that she was ashamed of her past, and that jams had issues too. I forgot exaclty what I posted.

MT: It's really sanctimonious. What is the big deal if you've been divorced? So have half the people who are married. Why does she care.

G2: I know. I mean, John Ramsey was divorced but she loves him! Double standard I guess for men and for women. She is pretty backwards in her thinking. She said once she would disown her daughter if her daughter ever had an abortion. never mind I could have had an abortion but I chose the high road and had kidlet. Now I'm a wanton slut. Wanton slut or disowned - I'll take wanton slut where Jams is concerned. I was more surprised about the 'supposedly remarried' thing. Why does she still think I'm not really married when you told her I was?

MT: Yes, that's very bizarre, but the whole thing points to what I've been saying all along about you people. There is this need to project one's own failings onto others and they are very vitriolic and self righteous, and that includes Jameson. I am going to write about this. I will put this in my book.

G2: LOL - That I'm a wanton slut?

MT: I wish you were.

G2: Oh my god!! HAHAHAHAHA Seriously, don't you think this is weird for Jams to keep thining my husband is not real?

MT: Yes, it's very weird. it's just bizarre. I don't understand you people.

G2: So why do the Ramseys hang out with her? She went to the big book bash in Atlanta.

MT: I think that was all the publisher's deal and she helped them out with the research and things like that. The Ramseys know she has issues, big issues.

G2: Did Jameson get paid for her work? Did Thomas Nelson actually pay her?

MT: I don't know if she got paid but she did do some work.

G2: Oh my god, well that explains a lot. Now I know why she seems like she is all over that book; she was.

MT: How are people reacting to the book?

G2: Not much. I haven't read it yet. Chuck Green points about the inconsistencies and everyone is more focused on the Couric interviews. Get this - John said something about there being a 99.9% chance of Burke on the 911 call not happening.

MT: (interrupts) No, that's not what he said. He said something else about they hadn;t heard the tape.

G2: No No even Jams doesn't dispute that he used the phrase 99.9%. Someone on her forum, probably just her in another hat, is saying that someone who knew him used that phrase to taunt him in the note.

MT: John has been ruled out as the writer of the note so if that is all you have to go on.. come one , Gail

G2: He has been ruled out as the writer but not necessarily as the dictator of the note.

MT: LOls - That is absurd. How can you say that? You're really grasping.

G2: You can't say for sure he couldn't have dictated the note. Nobody really knows who wrote it or what happened.

Mt: That's just crazy. He did not dictate the note.

G2: How do you know? How do you know for sure?

MT: Puh-leaze

G2: You know you can't say that for sure. And there are inconsistencies in the book and it turns out that Thomas Nelson publishing is a hoax. They are big liars.

MT: What do you mean?

G2: There is a big article in Salon magazine about how they lied about the Columbine girl martyr story. They knew she never said that she believe in God and that's why she was shot, but they went ahead and published the book anyway. Now they are getting flack for it. The entire story has been debunked and now they come out with this ramsey chit, written by Jamsey!

MT: She didn't write the book. She helped out on it. Why are you going after Nelson? See, this is what I mean. If it turns out the ramseys are inncoent, some people are going to have nervous breakdowns. They can't handle anyone else having done it.

G2: I'm not going to have a nervous breakdown. I acept that they won't be charged. No one will.

MT: You would not be interested in Thomas Nelson publishing if they hadn't published the Ramsey book.

G2: Not entirely true. I always get a good laugh when religious hypocricy is exposed. I love it. And not just because of the Ramsey book.

MT: You would not even notice if they didn't publish the Ramsey book.

G2: The point is they lied. They basically lied about that murdered girl at Columbine - Cassie Burnwell or something like that - to make a buck and now they are doing it with the Ramsey book. Some Christian bookstores won't sell it.

MT: For God's sake. This is why I'm writing my book. You people are obsessed.

G2: So are you.

MT: I am not obsessed with the case. I don't care about the case. I am interested in the people who are obsessed with the case.

G2: But you were going to do a croc on the case itself, the investigation, as long as you could get Smit on board.

MT: He may do it at some point. He won't do it now with the Ramseys doing their book and everything, but I don't think we could get a budget now.

G2: By a budget you mean money, the cash. Mills won't foot the bill this time?

MT: Of course not.

G2: But if you so righteously believe in what you are saying, then why won't he front the money?

MT: Don't be ridiculous. That's not even an argument. You know we need the money to do this. He is a program producer.

G2: Why don't you just admit that your interest is not in JonBenet but in making money?

MT: How can you say that? That is not true. We have a message we believe in and you people fail to see what you have become.

G2: I think you fail to admit to yourself what the bottom line is. You would never have made the croc if you didn't think you would make some money off it. Why don't you just admit that you were in it for the money?

MT: How can you say that? (Then MT hung up on me. Oh well. Wonder how much jammy got paid by Nelson Publishing.)

Edited 3/22/00 4:59:43 PM ET by CLOSER2
Edited 3/22/00 5:01:53 PM ET by CLOSER2
op:

 

I empathize with Bob in his ever widening circles around the drain of despair. Oh, to think that anyone could believe lil' ol' Pastey would do such a thing to her own chile, why it's enough to wilt the petals on the daisy pinwheels in Bob's front yard.

By the way, Bob, the weather in Houston is conducive to the raising of tropical plants in your yard, and the planting of pink flamingoes (plastic) along the garden path. Would you like your yard to get flamingo'ed? Perhaps you'd best not tell Jammie Pie what city you live in, lest the Flamingoes of Death arrive at your abode at the hands of the "Gauche Brigade" (the Gomer Pyle North Carolinian Fourth Self-Righteous Brigade for the Preservation of Good Taste and the Retention of All Truth).

Jump-her-son will be amused (a- without; muse- mind **now, there's a novel concept!) to find that she-it and the crowd are not the only ones who have attended a major university, or are capable of authoring a book or play. Some, however, in an effort to tastefully avoid shooting a dead horse, will decline the offer (or temptation) to do so.

Bob, see ya at Funfest, and bring your Super Soakers!

 

An "attaché" case Little.

 

Well, RR, I'm just speechless. That stuff was before my time on the net. I had no idea....

So Tracey isn't obsessed with the Ramseys or the case, he's obsessed with us?

That's droll.

Well, I can't imagine that the general public would fall all over themselves to buy a book full of internet posts. But if Tracey thinks he can pare down nine years of the forum mess on this case, good luck to him. I don't think I could do it in a series for an encyclopedia. Of course, I'd be trying to tell something like the truth, whereas Tracey seems simply to want to document "hate." It suits him.

But he might do well to remember that knife cuts both ways. Someone might show up on his book tour documenting his terrible journalism scams....

 

Before my time too!

Somebody really needs to write a book about all of these people that are going to write a book! LOL - I promise that if Prof Tracey puts out a book regarding the subculture, I WILL buy it........IF.......he reveals which wacky hats and scenerio's he has SideShowed us with.

AND if he can explain how people like Lee Hill and Jeff Shapiro suddenly turned into Ramsey supporters after having drinks with The Prof down at the pub. Too bad for Patsy that us Old Hags on a Petition Mission didn't have that kind of opportunity while we were in Boulder.

AND why his original Crock was not supposed to be aired until after the Grand Jury concluded it's work.

AND why his original Crock was aired before the Grand Jury concluded it's work.

AND why John and Patsy Ramsey agreed and supported both timings.

RR

 

Hi, Cranberry. Unfortunately, I don’t have time right now to do a complete analysis/comparison of MyBelief’s posts but just briefly, I am convinced MyBelief is a woman and fairly well educated, although there were some spelling problems and numerous punctuation errors. Basically, MyBelief tries to use big words and sound authoritative and intelligent, but she is not as smart as she would like others to think she is. MyBelief is also somewhat of a snob who looks down her nose at those she considers inferior. Assuming that everyone who is not a Ramsey fan is also a lynch-mob-tabloid-reading-moron shows MyBelief’s lack of critical thinking skills. She is only able to see things in black and white, or with an “us vs. them†mentality.

In MyBelief’s posts, there were two passages that really stood out to me (besides those already mentioned by other posters) that mimic Patsy’s previous words. In one of those passages, a single word practically leaped off the page at me since it is rarely used and seemed as though it was pulled from a thesaurus.

That word was “disabused.†What a strange word to use in that context … especially in discussing a case about the sexual abuse of a child. Who among us uses the word “disabused†in regular conversation? I found MyBelief’s use of the word fascinating.

The second part of that passage that interested me was that MyBelief used the phrase, “parents in this country suffer†and it brought to mind Patsy’s words from her January 1, 1997 CNN interview where she said, “America is suffering because we have lost faith in the American family.â€

Both MyBelief and Patsy express the notion of “parents in this countryâ€/â€the American family†suffering using the same words to talk about JonBenet’s death. MyBelief says that parents suffer from innocence and ignorance; Patsy says the American family suffers because we have lost faith. Neither one has much to do with JonBenet’s actual death but is an opinion tacked on to the idea of JonBenet’s death.


MYBELIEF: “What the Ramseys are guilty of - and this I believe whole-heartedly - is the same innocence and ignorance from which the vast number of parents in this country suffer. The Polly Klass case, let alone all those before and since (e.g. Jessica Lundsford et al) should long since have disabused us all of the notion that children are necessarily safe in our homes at night.â€

PATSY RAMSEY (CNN Transcript - January 1, 1997): “You know, America has just been hurt so deeply with the -- this -- the tragic things that have happened. The young woman who drove her children into the water, and we don't know what happened with the O.J. Simpson -- and I mean, America is suffering because have lost faith in the American family.â€


Another passage in MyBelief’s post mimics Patsy’s sermonizing regarding Americans, but more importantly, MyBelief uses the word “scrutiny†in reference to police actions and behaviors. MyBelief says, "This is to hold their own police departments to the highest of standards and scrutiny ..." This mimics the Ramsey Ransom Note which says, “You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities.†In this instance, “the authorities†refers to law enforcement or the police.


MYBELIEF: “Attendant with this case is an additional and, I believe, most pressing issue for most Americans. This is to hold their own police departments to the highest of standards and scrutiny re their own actions and behaviors, which, sadly and in far too many instances, fall far short of what we often trust and believe is the minimal expected.â€

RAMSEY RANSOM NOTE: “You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities.â€


As I said earlier, I have not had time to do an in-depth analysis of MyBelief’s posts, so I cannot say definitely that MyBelief is Patsy, but there are some interesting parallels in their communications styles. If MyBelief is not Patsy, then I think it is someone close to her age and education who is also a long-time friend. This friend has listened to Patsy’s side of the story and reasoning for the last ten years, and so her arguments regarding the case have taken on some of Patsy’s linguistics and vocabulary.

I think MyBelief could be Patsy’s friend and defender, Roxie Walker. Susan Stine and/or Patsy may have asked Roxie to post at FFJ on the Ramsey’s behalf, or Roxie could have read the recent Boulder news article about Michael Tracey that mentioned FFJ, and decided to “educat the masses.â€

The reason I don’t think MyBelief is Susan Stine is because there's not enough in-your-face meanness to her posts.

 

Excellent Analysis, Cherokee

Patsy's pompous writings and speeches always sound as if they are being written for a Miss America competition, laying out the special project that the winner hopes to pursue during her reign. Such a cause might be to relieve the American family of its suffering.

Although this sounds a lot like Patsy, I think she is too ill to be fooling around on the internet, trying to win friends and influence people.

More likely, it is one of the paid Ramsey shills, like the personal coach she had in Atlanta (whose name escapes me), or those you mentioned above.

At any rate, it's pretty boring prose, and "my belief" is not about to convince anyone here that Patsy Ramsey had nothing to do with her daughter's murder (manslaughter) and/or the subsequent coverup.