Why Ramseys *and* Karr must be innocent

I do the same thing. I have several legal pads at work that I've done exactly that to.

That was exactly the idea that I got.
They have to have some way of identifying which torn out page goes with which small remaining tab of paper. The easiest way is just to number them.

 

Thank you, Sue. Daniel may never pass this way again. To me, this is the most natural thing to do. The pad folds back easier when split that way.

 

Sorry KK, I think I ran your fan-club-of-one off with a tough question.

I'm sooooooooorry! Man Fan's don't grow on trees, you know.

Maybe I can buy you one off Ebay with Zotto's permission of course.

 

I'm going to be right up front with you, Daniel. Whenever someone starts a thread that directly brings up a "close acquaintance who was at the party on the 23rd," my hinky antenna goes up. I asked you in my very first post whom you referring to, but you (wisely) gave the right answer - it wouldn't be right to accuse someone without proof. That, to me, means anyone who has not been previously named a suspect or under the umbrella of suspicion.

If there is one thing that the moderators and owner of FFJ, not to mention the members thereof, are hypersensitive about, it's trolls whose sole mission in life is to accuse an innocent man of being a child molester and a murderer, implicate him in pedophile sex rings, and disrupt the forum. While we have been vigilant in keeping the mameslugs out of here; it wouldn't surprise me that a couple have slipped through in the past week or so. They will eventually show their true colors and be kicked to the curb.

I saw a couple of cracks from you and another poster about not being welcomed here if you believe the Ramseys are innocent. We have posters with all different points of view here. At one time there were several forums where posters battled themselves bloody over who did it - the Ramseys or an intruder. There were side forums meant only for flaming everyone else.

Today, most of the other forums are gone as posters lost interest when the case was going nowhere and drifted off. What remains are posters of mostly like mind who stayed together on JB dedicated forums - pro Ramsey forum, the swamp, and FFJ, the forum of record and home to mostly posters who believe the Ramseys were involved. We do, however, have posters who are on the fence. We have been through wars you couldn't imagine, and we're sick of it. We wanted to exist in peace and good will, not constant turmoil, and thus was FFJ born.

We have history at FFJ, and part of that history includes a particularly nasty time on a previous forum when a small segment of determined posters were determined to ram their sick, twisted theory that one of the witnesses in the Ramsey case was involved in pedophile sex rings and murder. That's not ever going to happen on FFJ, so there's no sense in tiptoeing around the issue.

It might have been a better choice for you if you had eased your way in with a post that stated you were new to discussing the case (if you really are, and I'm not so sure about that) instead of coming in like gangbusters and telling us we don't know what we're talking about, but you do. That's a good way to rile the natives, and it's only due to the good will and good sense of our posters that you weren't severely flamed and burned to the ground.

Bottom line - show a little respect to the members of this forum who have been through the fires and are sages when it comes to the JBR case. We have earned our stripes the hard way, we know the case. There is nothing new under the sun you can tell us that we haven't already dissected a hundred times ourselves.

OTOH, if you are here to start up the bashing of a good man, again, all I can tell you is, don't do it. If you are here to challenge our knowledge, fine. You'll get all you can handle and more, and if you take the time to read all the threads, you'll learn a lot about the case and find out the answers to all these questions you've been asking.

 

WY is soooooo nice and civil.

And on the Other Hand - you have me............

For Clarification - here are my rules you new people can either like it or love it.

#1 Rule - No Bashing of the White Family.
#2 Rule - No preaching of Ramsey innocence.

Nuff said?

 

You haven't done your homework Daniel. The coroner was surprised when he performed the autopsy and found the skull fracture because there was no surface blood. Unfortunately, my books are packed but I feel quite certain someone here will locate the quote and lead you to the correct book and page number.

Those additional pages could have been used for other purposes long before the murder. You know, things like grocery lists and so on? A couple of people have explained their reasons for tearing out middle pages of a pad. Who's to say when the pages actually went missing.

As others have suggested, you might want to do your homework then ask questions. :read:


:::::::::::::::::assing :mears: the salt and pepper before she asks for it. :floor:

 

Sigh.....wishing I could be nice and hold this insane conversation again, but I have paid my dues and am standing my ground on this one. Just because some Wing-Nut Intruded into this case does not mean my doors are open for those with less than honest intentions.

 

Why I sometimes use the middle of a pad:

I often use pages at the front of the pad and then leave them attached to the pad so that I don't lose them.

Then, if I need a fresh page and I've already used a few, rather than flick through the used pages until I find a clean page, I just turn straight to the middle where I know all the pages are clean.

And of course, if I were writing something that I didn't want identified as having come from my writing pad, I'd not use the very front of the pad in case my handwriting had pressed through from previous things I had written.

 

Dear Watching You;

In regard to your long note, I don't have time to post anymore today; and I think tomorrow will be my last day judging by the tenor here.

In regard to your note, I have no idea what you are talking about. I have no specific suspect in mind. I also said in my initial post, that I disagree with Lou Smit (and now apparently Mr. Ramsey) as to motive, and that the crime had nothing whatsoever to do with pedophilia. Please do not set up "straw man" attacks; i.e., positioning an argument someone never made and then "refuting" it or castigating the person for it. If my theory is correct, then I would guess that the most likely motive was a social snub, real or imagined. In their world, this seems likely.

I don't know who this "good man" is you are referring to, but I can't be accusing him of unsavory activities in the direction mentioned above; and I accuse no specific person of murder; just a sort of person where the authorities might look again if Karr doesn't pan out, as few of us here, I think, beleve will be the case that he will. In the unlikely event he does, then we are all wrong here, including myself, and this entire discussion will be moot.

I don't know what a "troll" is. It sounds like someone who has posted on several forums. The only other forum I've posted on was one not really appropriate for this discussion as it is primarily a political forum where liberals and conservatives bash one another all day. They have little interest in crime issues.

As I said, although I know the personal grievance theory has been explored before, I personally have never read a discussion of the points I raised regarding the note pad and its possible implications. Perhaps someone has already. Whether the pages were actually numbered or not, if Det. Thomas could say which exact pages were missing and used, then the point would remain exactly as valid.

Thank you.

P.S. In an early one of my notes here, I had a word ommission. I am a terrible typist and virtually all my notes need to be edited. Originally, I had typed, "I have suspect." As the seemingly poor grammar would indicate, I omitted the word "no" before "suspect." I fixed it early on, but perhaps you read it before I did. If so, I apologize for that error which might have caused you to think I had a specific person in mind. As I also said earlier, I am open to the possibilty it might be a man or a woman.

 

Have you read the book Steve Thomas wrote? The answers you seek are there.

 

"If God Him/Herself appeared with the message that JR and PR were innocent the "some here" would wonder how PR convinced God to lie for her."

I'm afraid your idea of God is different from mine.

"The late Mrs. Ramsey must have been a virtuoso natural actress."

She prided herself on that, Daniel.

"Except when the killer has framing the residents of the home as a premeditated part of his or her motive."

That's fine, but this intruder staged it to look like an intruder.

"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?"

I often wonder that.

 

Darn... Daniel left without answering any of my questions. I can only assume he didn't have adequate answers, which leads me to conclude that he has the weaker argument. Victory!

 

I'm not holding my breathe either.....every time I ask that question of a Ramsey supporter THEY NEVER ANSWER BACK!

I'd didn't make it up....the Ramsey's told me in their book and the 911 tape.

 

Well, I swear, I pass out for one day and you've killed off my fan.

Thanks a lot. :steamed:


You can ask tough questions any time. But how many times am I going to be nice to an intruder theorist?

And don't go buying me nothing from ebay. With my luck, you'd slip up and I'd get a copy of jams' play in the mail! That would be some expensive toilet paper....

Besides, Zotto is no longer my agent. She dumped me for talking head Tricia, who is getting all the good gigs now. Just because Tricia is young, vivacious, rocks out on camera.... Big deal! This guttah would nevah have reached it's lowest point without me! :curses:

 

Never.

 

Very Predictable, No?

Haven't a clue who Daniel is - sounds like a biblical name. But here's a thought in response to Dan XVI's question about the pages of the pad, etc.

Sheepishly, I have to admit that, at time in my life when I did not want someone to know I was writing something personal, secretive, etc. I would go to a private area in the house/wherever AND JUST IN CASE, someone were to come snooping around, I would start writing in the middle of the pad.

WHY??? Because I could immediately flip the pages back to the beginning, so that it would look like I was just starting to write something. Sneaky? You Bet!

As well, for some reason, I always imagined Patsy writing the note in John's den because I think it was at the back of the house, where one could sit down at a desk with maybe a flashlight (or dim den light) ... because if John woke up & came down to his office, she could quickly flip the pad back to the first page & say she was just writing a note to Linda, the housecleaner or some other acquaintance.

A long time ago, it was mentioned that there was a plaque in the Ramsey home of John with other men taken in the '60's at Subic Bay in the Phillipines and it was suggested that the S.B.T.C. was a quick glance at the Plaque (that had typed text at the bottom of the photo, etc.)

That made some sort of sense to me and it still has a ring of truth to me to this day, because clearly the note is trying to indicate someone in John's world is out to get him & knows a lot about him.

Remember, the Ramseys also saying that someone in the Den had drawn an X through John's photo on some recent pamphlet at the time. Or was it a heart? Anyone???

As to Daniel's question about John being in the dark (for a while anyway) ... I think that is very plausible, especially considering he's the one on the floor dutifully reading every single page of the ransom note - sounds like it was news to him at that precise time. On the other hand, we have a Mom whose daughter has been "kidnapped" and she DOESN'T READ THE DAMN NOTE????

As a parent, I would have read EVERY SINGLE WORD ....

John, I think was in denial, until he found Jonbenet, then as a quick thinking CEO, he knew what he had to do, lest his whole world come crumbling down.

Today, I believe he has to maintain this denial, in order to keep his sanity & of course be able to balance his bulging bank account.

Regards,
Mandarin

 

John probably wants a new book deal.....guess John thinks the media cash cow hasn't dried up yet.

 

I had not thought of that, but it makes perfect sense to me (sheepishly admitting I have done the same thing)

That makes sense too. Even if she did not write it alone, I can't picture here standing in the kitchen writing it at the counter (it does have a certain dramatic flair though that sounds like her)

I remember that too, but not the exact things like where or what was drawn.

 

Did patsy wear gloves to write the note?

How did they manage to keep their fingerprints off the note? Why did they try to keep their fingerprints off the note in the first place? If a note showed up in my house I would pick it up and not worry about fingerprints at first. They were thinking like criminals from the very beginning, because that is what they were.

Even if they spread the note out on the floor to read it (uh-huh) then their fingerprints would still be there.

Heymom

 

here's an answer from another thread:

Link to the thread.
So, the investigation ignored things with Ramsey fingerprints on them because it was after all, their house and the things belonged to them. In the case of the note, Patsy was known to have handled it when she 'found' it, so finding her fingerprints was expected.
I see you already found that thread and responded to that point. I'm posting it here to complete the path for other readers.