"Death Of Innocence" Analysis - By Sylvia

Chapter 5 part 3

And yes, here we go again, P. Ramsey starts writing, and guess what she starts with? Of course with struggling to focus; with most of the time being too anesthetized to contribute much. Hey, what else is new?

Let us see, she knew who would do the church service. She suddenly remembered an inspiring song for the funeral that she heard during the Thanksgiving holidays, and even where she heard it. In addition, she remembered the name of the choir that sang the song. What else? Oh, she remembered that the Atlanta Constitution ran a story with the headline: “Georgia says goodbye to JonBenét.†Most likely another PR stunt of the Ramseys--oh no, of their public relations manager of course! Beside that, she also remembers a couple, who said during the visitation, that they had lost two daughters. That is quite a bit of remembering done by someone who is so anesthetized. I love the word 'anesthetized' that she uses all the time! Which, in this case, it just means she was under the influence of some tranquilizers.

Then follows the story about the burial gifts being placed in the coffin. And guess what? Thanks to “super detective Smit,†we now know where that scarf is, and whom it belonged to. In Steve Thomas' book on page 195, we read: “He [J. Ramsey] also put a dent in the part of the latest Intruder Theory, in which the DA’s investigator Lou Smit claimed the killer left a scarf behind. Ramsey identified the scarf as a gift from one of his kids. Patsy had said the same.†Does that also mean we know whom the murderer(s) is/are, Smit? Her “friend†Priscilla White, (soon to be on the Ramsey’s suspect list), had found a stuffed animal, a cat called Sister Socks, so P. Ramsey placed that in the coffin.

Now pay attention, because something does not sound right here with the story of the cat. P. Ramsey states in the book:“John is not particularly a cat person, but he and Sister Socks [the real cat] were bonded. I knew he would have taken her and her three kittens back to Boulder at the end of the summer, but I was afraid to ask him – and he wasn’t about to volunteer.†I am totally lost here, can anyone explain why she was afraid to ask? He was bonded to the cat and would have taken her plus kittens, yet didn’t volunteer? So how bonded was he with that cat? Again, it sounds so hypocritical to me. However, the cat and her kittens were dropped off at the neighbor’s house. Again, it is easier to lay the responsibility on another person than to take responsibility for them yourself! In addition, what a great way to disappoint your children again, who had become so attached to the cat.

 

Chapter 6

Chapter 6

J. Ramsey is starting this chapter and again he is not doing so fine. Oh, he is trying so desperate to look like a good Christian, only he is not so believable. He states, “We were both deeply moved and worshiped God for the gift that JonBenét has been to us.†Take notice now of what is written in Steve Thomas book at page 363, which reports about the videotaped interrogations of J. Ramsey by Mike Kane “Kane threw Ramsey a curve on the religious aspect and asked him to recite his favorite Bible passage. John Ramsey could not do so.†Point taken! Every Christian can at the least name one favorite passage from the Bible. Those who are so deeply moved by and worship God in such a manner, as the Ramsey’s claim they do, should at least be able to recite on Bible passage, if it were only a single sentence.

He states that their lives had been such a together experience during their time with JonBenét. Officer French and detective Arndt amongst other also that observed the opposite on the morning of December 26, 1996. A perfect example of the together experience is shown in Steve Thomas book on page 26: “Despite her obvious distress, her husband did not go to her. It was if the house was separated into two camps, His and Hers, with friends dividing their time between the two. Patsy stayed in the sunroom, and John paced in the dining room and den.†Isn’t it that when someone’s child is injured, or kidnapped the parents cling together? However, with all their togetherness Ramsey’s did the opposite! Strange behavior to say at the least.

“Suddenly Patsy got up and went down by JonBenét’s coffin and knelt to pray. I don’t know why she did that,†he then writes. Hold it just a second, doesn’t this sound familiar? Let’s get back just one chapter, and guess what P. Ramsey wrote? “For some reason (I don’t know why; maybe it was the medication), I began walking up to the aisle towards the altar.†Coincidence? One chapter later J. Ramsey is using the same description of this event. Oh yes, we know the excuse already to medicated, anesthetized, but aren’t they overdoing it, at the least, a little?

Yes, the vicious media was also around again. I mean what else is new, did Ramsey’s public relation manager also arrange it this time? Just wondering, as it seems most likely it happened that way. After all weren’t it the Ramsey’s themselves who sought the attention of the National media.

Now we get a real nice example of J. Ramsey’s hypocrisy. Yes, Mr. White heard talk show host Peter Boyles say nasty things about the Ramsey’s. Mr. White had called the Boulder Police Department and the news media station(s) to stop it. In addition, Mr. White had called Mr. Westmoreland to tell him to find J.A. Ramsey so he could tell his mother (J. Ramsey’s ex-wife) to get out of her house just in case the bad, vicious, and obnoxious media would turn up at their house too. Are we now talking about the same Mr. White who had been furiously scribbling notes, who wasn’t comforting on December 26, 1996? The same Mr. White who had both duct tape and cord? Just asking, wasn’t that your statement to the BPD Ramsey, you know the one that was video taped? This man is taking it up for you Ramsey and what do you do Ramsey, make accusations regarding him to the BPD. A real Judas you are, Ramsey!

When Mr. White arrived in Atlanta, he kept arguing that they [the Ramsey’s] did not need lawyers to defend them. A very wise statement, since innocent people who claim they have nothing to hide indeed do not need to hide behind lawyers. Innocent people with nothing to hide will do anything to help the police in finding the murderer(s) of their loved one.

 

Chapter 6 part 2

As far as what is written about Mr. White’s solution to the problem, which is described by J. Ramsey as follows: “After Fleet arrived in Atlanta, he kept arguing that we didn’t need lawyers to defend us. His solution was for Patsy and me to go on National television and tell our story, since he was convinced that the media were rapidly painting us in guilty colors.†In addition, “More-over, Fleet had convinced me that a public appearance was necessary.†However, several people stated that it was the opposite, in fact, Mr. White confronted them with their appearance on CNN, he was strongly against it. First, in PMPT on page 85 we can read: “What Patsy’s sister Polly noticed at her parents home was that Fleet White was quarreling angrily with her bother-in-law John. Patsy was standing at one side of them while Fleet hovered over John, telling him he had to go back to Boulder and help the police. It was wrong for him to hire his own investigators and criminal attorneys, said Fleet. His job was to cooperate with the police, not stonewall them. John’s face reddened. It was obvious that he was embarrassed to have this conversation in front of his wife and family. But Fleet kept at him. What was this he’d heard about John contacting CNN for an interview? His daughter had just been buried! How could Patsy and John even think about going on television? Even if they wanted to respond to rumors that were going around, a TV appearance was unthinkable.†So here, we do not only have a Mr. White advising against hiring lawyers, but a Mr. White telling them to stop stonewalling the BPD. Furthermore, here there is no doubt that he was totally against any media appearance of the Ramsey’s. In addition, we learn here that it was J. Ramsey who had already contacted CNN in the first place even before the conversation with Mr. White took place. Second, Brian Cabell states in the same book on page 88: “That same evening, New Year’s Eve, I was at home with my family when the phone rang. Tom Johnson, president of CNN, told me that the Ramseys had told CNN through a friend that they wanted to appear on national TV to explain why they weren’t talking to the media and to discuss the suspicions that were being raised about their possible involvement.†In addition, Mr. White could easily confront them with this lie as well if he wished to do so. So once again, Ramsey quit lying, stop hiding behind others, and for once take responsibility for your own actions!

P. Ramsey is taking over again with the usual statement that she was heavily sedated. How many times more are we going to hear this in this and the following chapters? If this goes on much longer I am going to need tranquilizers to stay calm while reading this ridiculous book. Moreover, what’s next of course “my concentration was gone.†Yes we know that by now after being reminded of it time after time. Nice other intermission, she decided to wear the same dress she had worn at the funeral. Get it? Wearing dresses two days in a row, sound familiar? Yeah, nice try, but alas it does not work!

All this is followed by a lot of irrelevant nonsense about the drive to the CNN studio, the arrival at the studio and not to forget how the show started, let us forget about that part and move on.

Now for some reason the interview does not give you the impression of someone, who is lost her concentration and who is heavily medicated, being interviewed. Have you ever seen a person who was heavily medicated and due to that not able to concentrate? I can assure you, you will not get a single sensible sentence out of them. This is in no way the situation with P. Ramsey during the CNN interview. She responds normally to questions, and in no way looks like someone who can not concentrate on the questions asked. Did you see the interview and did she look heavily medicated and without concentration to you?

To give some examples, “It was difficult. But, you know, they [LE] need to know – I mean our handprints are all over our house, so they [LE] need to know.†Sounds clear to me, LE should have been able to eliminate the Ramsey’s as suspects so they needed their finger- and palm prints. How about this one: “America has just been hurt so deeply wit the tragic things that happened. The young woman who drove her children into the water, and we don’t know what happened with O.J. Simpson. I mean, America is suffering because we lost faith in the American family. We are Christians, God-fearing family. We love our children....†Again, does this strike you as coming from a heavily sedated, anesthetized person? Don’t think so, such a person wouldn’t have been able to say two words without getting in trouble! Beside that, don’t you notice all the examples she gives are of people who are guilty of murder? Why refer at all to those two murderers, Susan Smith and O.J. Simpson, who both specifically murdered family members?

 

Chapter 6 part 3

“As the interview ended, I sighed in relief. The time at the station had proven emotionally difficult to endure,†says P. Ramsey in their book. However what does Brian Cabell, the interviewer state in the book Perfect Murder, Perfect Town on page 92: “Soon afterwards, I ended the interview. They had spoken for almost forty minutes, and it wasn’t as if they were eager to leave. †Rather inconsistent don’t you think?

Then J. Ramsey starts his rant with: “I was surprised when Brian Cabell abruptly ended the interview with the caveat that ‘Ramsey had been removed from his job at Access Graphics.’†The transcript of the interview doesn’t contain “this cheap shot Cabell made.†I have been going over it several times, but it just isn’t there. Can someone shed some light on this?

The following lie or inconsistency, whatever you want to call it, goes as follows. J. Ramsey writes: “During the CNN interview, Patsy and I stated that now that JonBenét was properly laid to rest, we wanted to return to Boulder and help with the investigation. The police had leaked false information that we were not cooperative and had refused to be interviewed. Our comments would have refute those leaks; but for what ever reason, Cabell eliminated that portion of the interview.†The transcript says the following: “Cabell: The Ramsey’s are staying here in the Atlanta area with family. They say they intend to go back to Boulder within a few days, precisely when they are not sure. They say when they go back they will sit down with the Boulder Police. They will talk. They will tell them anything they want to know.†That is lie one refuted Ramsey! Now lie number two, as far as the police leaks the transcript goes like this: “Police have not been particularly forthcoming about leads perhaps deliberately so, but they have said very little as to forced entry, anything like that we do not know. The police are keeping that to themselves at this point.†Now who do you believe, my bet is on the transcript of CNN. Even if said by the Boulder Police that the Ramsey’s had refused to be interviewed, the police would have been telling the truth. They did refuse to talk to the BPD and were already from day one hiding behind lawyers. Again note the similarity between the interview stated, “properly laid to rest†and the in the ransom note mentioned “proper burial.†A coincidence again?

As to the statement which P. Ramsey supposed to have made in the CNN interview, which again I can not find in the transcript, that JonBenét “loved her daddy, she was daddy’s girl,†strikes me as odd. Not for the reason given by J. Ramsey in their book, being jealousy of P. Ramsey. No, my question is what was the real reason for this statement? In what context did she [P. Ramsey] say this? No reason is given in the book, which makes me wonder why say such a thing. Wasn’t she said to be at one with her mother, pageants and so on? So why “Daddy’s girl?â€

Also the statement about people focusing in J. Ramsey’s words: â€for our grief to resolve itself, we have to find out why this happened†doesn’t make any sense. The first thing that needed to be found out was “who did it†and not the why. It can be possible that someone’s murderer is found, but that the why of the murder will be for always unresolved. Even, in the slightest possibility, if meant in a religious way it still is a ridiculous remark. God works in mysterious ways and He is not coming down to tell you the why of it!

He finishes with writing that they became more and more afraid of the press and of the ruthlessness of the press. Doesn’t that strike you as hypocritical? Who played the press all the time as if they played the violin? It wasn’t the Boulder Police Department! Who spent most of the time during the past 5 years talking to and via the press spinning their intruder stories, accusing innocent people? Right, the Ramsey’s did, they themselves or via their lawyers and PR managers. Shouldn’t they have talked to the BPD instead?

Reaching the last paragraph of this chapter P. Ramsey takes over the writing again. Now the attack on Mayor Leslie Durgin starts. Again, it shows exactly how stupid and ignorant the Ramsey’s really are. Why? Simple, as the statement made by this Mayor of Boulder were completely correct, only the Ramsey’s are too dumb to realize they could have made the statement work in their advantage. But no, stupid as they are, they go against them.

Let me explain! The statement made by Mayor Leslie Durgin went as follows: “People have no need to fear that there is someone on the streets of Boulder looking for someone to attack. Boulder is safe,†see page 93 Perfect Murder, Perfect Town. Patsy Ramsey’s version of the Mayor statement in DOI is: “People in Boulder have no need to fear that there is someone wandering the streets of Boulder, as has been portrayed by some people, looking for young children to attack. Boulder is safe, it’s always been a safe community. It continues to be a safe community.†Which of the two statements is the correct one, I do not know, I have not been able to find the official statement of Leslie Durgin. During the CNN interview the interviewer informed them about a statement made by the BPD, there was no murderer roaming the streets of Boulder. The Ramsey’s have stated over and over again, during at least the first year, that the murder was the result of a kidnap gone awry. Logic tells you that if that were true it would have been an act against the Ramsey’s personally. The bogus ransom note in principle confirms this. Only in the CNN interview, P. Ramsey has to play the drama queen again by stating: “I don't know who it is. I don't know if it's a he or a she. But if I were a resident of Boulder, I would tell my friends to keep -- keep your babies close to you, there's someone out there.†A very ridiculous statement if the so-called terrorist kidnappers were after the Ramsey’s. J. Ramsey already stated, “I don't know. I mean, there is a -- a note that said – your daughter has been kidnapped. We have your daughter. We want money. You give us the money; she'll be safely returned.†After that statement, the fool (P. Ramsey) even states: “It seemed like kidnapping to me.†Instead of sticking to the kidnap statement, these fools go against it, making them look even more suspicious in the eyes of the LE and the intelligent part of world. In later interviews, they repeat the kidnap gone awry theory, until it becomes the terrorist-kidnapper-intruder-pedophile, based on the statements of a dumb cop called Smit, the most unlikely scenario there ever could be. Therefore, they constantly contradicting themselves, so who would not get suspicious with all the different stories the Ramsey’s were telling. If they had stuck to the kidnap gone awry and the fact that it was a crime solely against them for extortion of money, it sure would have made them look better. Alas, the Ramsey’s were too stupid, to at least stick to one theory/story. They had staged a crime scene insinuating a kidnap took place and now they were contradicting the facts of that scene. It just proves that their theory is actually based on a lie! Now it works against them, what intelligent person is ever going to believe a word that comes out of their mouth after all these contradictions? No one!

 

Chapter 7

Chapter 7

Pageant, that is what this chapter is about, or to be more precise trying to find excuses for letting a six-year-old child parade as a seductive, sexual mature adult. Oh, they were so stunned that those videos showed up in the media. They had no idea that there would always be the possibility that those videos ever made it to the media. “Videos that were never meant to go beyond the family living room ended up on National television in an entirely wrong context.†Luckily, those videos did show up in the media, so that everyone could see what was going on during those child pageants. So tell me why, Mr. Ramsey, why were those videos never to go beyond living rooms? What is your problem with it, those pageants were harmless according to you? Isn’t that what you stated time after time? Or was it not so harmless after all? Why else would you have such a problem with the fact that these videos did go beyond living rooms? It was because at that moment everyone saw how obnoxious those pageants, your daughter attended, were. These child pageants were a pure form of child abuse! If you had nothing to be ashamed of, you would not have made such fuss over the fact that these videos were shown on national television. In reality by stating your problems with the fact they were shown, you deliver the proof that you knew it was wrong to let such a young child participate in those disgusting pageant. Moreover, in what context were they to be seen, there was only one context they could be looked at and that is that they were obnoxious. Do you want tell us another context is possible too, Ramsey? Do tell!

Did you ever hear of the psychiatrist Dr. Hodges, Ramsey? Here is what he wrote, about those pageants and your daughter performance: “Organizers of the larger state-wide pageants routinely make $. 100,000 or more per contest. One annual Florida pageant, Sunburst USA International, regularly gives $ 1 million in prizes. Include all the custom-designed clothes for the important contests, and you have an industry in itself --- tremendous economic motivation for all types of adults to enable these children, aside from the emotional gratification. People magazine saw a ‘flirtatious, even provocative’ JonBenét in her videos. The article quoted a Denver deputy sheriff who said: ‘It's impossible to look at all these photos and not see a terrible exploited little girl’. Many of these photographs and many of these pageants unavoidably amount to the sexual exploitation of children. It's natural for kids to want to grow up too fast before they have the time to build the appropriate internal controls. A main rule thumb for parents is that if you in the least suspect you're encouraging an undesirable trait or behavior in a child, you play it safe: You simply don't do it. The child-pageant industry should set off lots of warning bells in a parent's mind in that regard. In our sexually orientated culture, every parent has their hands full in helping kids stay within the appropriate bounds, and the last thing you want to do is give a premature push to your child's sexuality. But that is exactly what John and Patsy Ramsey did. Don't think that John didn't have a stake in these beauty pageants - he enabled Patsy to push JonBenét every step of the way. Through their actions John and Patsy told JonBenét: Because of our own needs, we want you to grow up much faster than you should. We want you to learn how to dress seductively, how to smile seductively, how to walk and move seductively. We will help you learn what turns on people, what they respond to, and how to play to their basest desires. Our need for this stimulation is greater than your need to progress slowly. They used JonBenét and in the process abused her emotionally, but they taught her to think that is was good for her. They told her that being premature sexual is good and she should enjoy it. Smile. They told her, we know you like it. See? Just keep smiling. Keep giving the people what they want. Remember, you're just an object. You're just a performer -- like both of us ar.â€

 

Chapter 7 part 2

As far as those photographs are concerned, look at the expression on the face of your six-year-old child and then tell us that these are normal expressions for a normal, spontaneous, and innocent child of that age. Your daughter’s innocence was lost the day you entered in those hideous pageants, the day you had those kinds of photos made of her. You and only you Ramsey’s are guilty of the fact that your child lost its innocence. However again you refuse to take the responsibility for it, like you refuse to take responsibility for all your actions. You were horrified, what do you think the rest of the people who saw those videos and photo were and still are?

Ramsey actually wants us to believe those videos and photographs were altered? According to J. Ramsey: “As pictures proliferated, we quickly saw that some of the tapes had been slowed down to portray a flirting expression or to accentuate JonBenét’s movements and make them look more seductive.†Well, Ramsey, if you slow tapes down to portray a flirting expression, the expression already had to be there. And accentuate? Look it up in the dictionary! The expressions and movements were already there, how else could they be accentuated (draw attention to, highlight, make more noticeable). Actually, I am not buying the slow downed video theory for one second. PROVE IT! Show the actual tapes you have in your possession! As far as the photo’s he states: “Many of the still photos had been doctored with eye shadow, heavy lipstick, and rouge.†Same message to you here, Ramsey, PROVE IT by showing the originals!

However, there is additional information concerning the makeup, and seductive looks in PMPT page 122 is first mentioned the following: “Pam Griffin told the police that when she first spotted JonBenét performing at the All Star Pageant, she saw that Patsy didn’t know how to apply pageant makeup or style her daughter’s hair. When JonBenét presented herself in from of the judges, she mouthed the oohs and aahs and rolled her eyes in a very amateurish way.†However, no despair, help was on the way. On page 124, it written how that problem was solved: “Kristine, a high school senior, loved to coach JonBenét. She taught her the walk, the wave, and the pageant poses on a small mock runway in her basement.†Here we have a high school senior coaching a 6-year-old child how to act seductive on a pageant stage! On top of that, we learn that P. Griffin taught P. Ramsey to do the makeup. The most interesting quote concerning the photos is found at page 124 of PMPT: “Most pageants include a ‘Most Photogenic’ or ‘Photo Portfolio’ category, where the entrants are judged solely on their photographs. Patsy decided it was time for JonBenét to have a portfolio, and Pam Griffin recommended a photographer, Randy Simons, who could make a six-year-old look twenty. When a pageant favored the seductive look, Pam told Patsy, Simons was the best.†Still there Ramsey?

Next rant is about CNN reporter Mary Tillotson on page 52 is stated: “One instance in particular stands out in my mind. JonBenét’s Grandma Nedra happened to be watching CNN when Mary Tillotson, the news anchor, made an off-the-cuff remark about JonBenét. Tillotson said she looked like a hooker. Nedra was so hurt. Can you imagine how this grief-stricken grandmother felt?†Felt about what, Ramsey, the remark, or that what Mary Tillotson said was the truth? Are we talking about the same grandmother who to Judith Phillips (PMPT page 248): “Then there was the time Nedra pulled out this little cowboy outfit out of the closet. ‘This is not JonBenét’s,’ I said. ‘What’s it for?’ ‘Well, Judith, we’re just getting JonBenét into a few pageants.’ ‘Why would you do something like that?’ ‘You know, she’s not too young to get started.’ ‘And what if JonBenét isn’t willing?’ I asked. ‘What if she says, I am not going to do it! How would you respond to that?’ ‘Oh, Judith, we would never consider her saying no. We would tell JonBenét, ‘You must do it. You will be a Miss Pageant.’’ It was sort of eerie.†Eerie? Scary is the right word! So this great grandmother had absolutely no problem with forcing the poor child into something, whether the child liked it or not. JonBenét was not living, she had her life for her, by her mother, father, and apparently grandmother as well. The only one I feel sorry for is the little girl, who had no life of her own. What kind of a person would do such a thing to an innocent child anyhow?

 

Chapter 7 part 3

Then J. Ramsey discovers something that was so startling and frightening, he learned that professional photographers own the copyright of the photo’s they make and can sell them if the wish to. Big surprise! Of course, the photographer owns the copyright, those photos are his creation, you know, as an artist owns the copyright of painting, a writer of books, and so on. However, you do have the possibility to buy the copyright from the photographer, ever thought of that Ramsey? Oh and he worries because it can happen to all of us too, well I’ve got nothing to hide and besides, although I am not CEO, I know to read the small print under contracts! In addition, he just cannot leave it, he has to refer to Princess Diana and the paparazzi, and it makes him looks even more stupid.

He, J. Ramsey, and P. Ramsey want to make it very clear that the pageants were just one of JonBenét’s many hobbies. One of her hobbies? “You must do it†You call that a hobby, I call it pressing someone into something, whether they like it or not. Furthermore, Ramsey, hobbies are harmless, aren’t they? So again, what is all the fuzz about concerning the release of those videos and photos? He continues with giving a list of other hobbies the JonBenét supposed to have had. On page 53 DOI is written: “She also loved in-line skating, arts and crafts, and gymnastics. She took violin and piano lessons,†and “Her next challenge was rock climbing lessons.†Now, I assume she went to school and that she did have to sleep as well. Let us not forget the coaching, dance lessons, and photo sessions that went on. I cannot believe this poor child had actually time to play, as every other normal child does. That list would be exhausting, even for an adult!

Little girls like to dress up and that is, well, about the same obsession as performing at pageants, at least according to J. Ramsey. On page 54, he writes: “Anyone who has a daughter knows that little girls like to play dress-up and enjoy putting on lipstick. That’s part of being a little girl. JonBenét just had an extra level of ham in her.†If J. Ramsey cannot even distinguish the difference between innocent child playing dress-up and hideous pageants he is even a bigger moron than I thought. Besides JonBenét did not have that ‘extra level if ham in her,’ she was pushed into it whether she licked it or not! It is sickening to do such a thing to your own child, any child.

Then P. Ramsey takes over again. Immediately you are struck by the arrogance and the wickedness of that woman. It just jumps of the pages! I cannot imagine anyone finding that woman charming. I guess I am not so easily impressed with Hollywood like characters, I am even worse in worshipping. Besides, to me the inner side is much more important than the outer side, as that is what really counts! Oh yeah, let us not forget, by all means she was Miss West Virginia! Now what was it what the judge said at the Miss America elections wasn’t it that she was “a little automaton?†Now that is an understatement!

On and on she goes, talking about stars, star struck, doesn’t she know that stars are those lights you see in the sky at night? She has countless excuses for pushing JonBenét into those pageants. Whether she is believes or is trying to convince herself she did the right thing for JonBenét or is trying to convince the reader is not particular clear. I only know that for me none of the excuses worked.
She even dares to state that the at that time three-and-a-half year old JonBenét begged her to let her participate in pageants, because she had seen her mother on some stage. Sure, everyone is going to believe that, the adult kid in action again. Only the answer already lies within the part she writes, DOI page 55: â€In his remarks Mr. Marks said he had met a little blonde angel in a pretty pink dress who looked to him like the future Miss America. He was talking about JonBenét.†Anyone still wonders how and why JonBenét ended up in those kiddy pageants? That evening the seed was planted in P. Ramsey’s arrogant head, JonBenét had to become Miss America at one time, so let the games begin! This was not a little girls dream!

 

Chapter 7 part 4

There seem to be some kind of mystery concerning JonBenét's first pageant. According to P. Ramsey, it was a pageant held at the East Jordan High school in Charlevoix. She writes on page 56 of DOI; “I noticed an add in the Charlevoix newspaper promoting an upcoming Miss Charlevoix contest for girls of all ages. The two-day event had to be held at the East Jordan High school over the Fourth of July weekend,†and “The event sounded tailor-made for JonBenét. The pageant had a patriotic theme since it was held over the Fourth. When we arrive, we learned there only two other little girls in JonBenét’s age group. †and “JonBenét win the title of Little Miss Charlevoix.†However, in PMPT there is quite a different story told on page 122; “During the winder of 1995 and the first months of 1996, JonBenét had competed in her first pageant, at the Twin Peak Mall, just twenty minutes from Boulder. The judges ignored her.†So why did P. Ramsey forgot to mention the pageant at the Twin Peak Mall? Good guess, P. Ramsey is a sour loser! Beside that, she has to drag her cancer. She decided if JonBenét liked to do it, them she would see that it were made possible, however, funny thing is she never asked the little girl whether she really liked it. Same page gives the following quote: “I always worried that my cancer would return someday, so I was glad to have found an activity that we could have fun with together. Mother-Daughter experiences were to be treasures for me, more now then before.†This makes it clear that the one whom it were treasures for was P. Ramsey, JonBenét came second. By the way, this chapter has as title Like Mother, Like Daughter; only from the first chapter, we already learned that the daughter did not want to be a copy of the mother.

Next pageant was suppose to be the Colorado All-Stars Kids Pageant, where according to P. Ramsey JonBenét wore the appalling Ziegfeld Follies costume. P. Ramsey writes starts writing about that on page 57 of DOI; “I called my mother in Atlanta because I didn’t have any idea where to look for a pageant dresses in Denver, and I didn’t have much time to find out.†According to P. Ramsey, she had entered JonBenet at the last possible moment, and the event took place in spring 1995. Then she goes on with; “My mother and my oldest sister, Pam, were visiting Biloxi, Mississippi, and found a Mardi Gras costume shop. They brought back a white sating cape and collar that could be made into a Ziegfeld Follies costume, reminiscent of the one I had worn in the Miss West Virginia Pageant some twenty years earlier. Like mother, like daughter.†However, it is written in PMPT that P. Griffin met P. Ramsey at the Colorado All Stars Pageant in Denver, on page 122 is written that P. Griffin introduced herself to P. Ramsey. In addition, they realized they lived only twenty minutes apart from each other and that P. Griffin suggested that she could make a few alterations to the party dress JonBenet was wearing. “Patsy accepted the offer: ‘Do whatever you need do to make it look better,’ she said.â€

Although P. Ramsey here gives the impression that the Ziegfeld Follies costume was, let us say, family made for this pageant. To me this is yet another lie of the Ramsey’s. Also mentioned in PMPT is mentioned that from that moment on after the Colorado All Star Pageant P. Griffin made JonBenét’s costumes. On page 123 is an extremely interesting piece to read; “One day Patsy’s mother, Nedra, who occasionally came to Pam’s house with Patsy, showed her a photograph of an outfit with marabou and glitter. Nedra said it was just right for ‘Patsy’s baby doll,’ as she liked to call JonBenét. She thought it would be perfect for the ‘Anyone from Hollywood’ category at the next pageant, where the children could dress as Shirley Temple or Charlie Chaplin or any other star—or, for example, a Las Vegas Ziegfeld Follies showgirl, which Nedra thought would be perfect for JonBenét.†Out of this little quote, we can learn a few things, JonBenét is seen as a kind of doll to play with, N. Paugh has an enormous influence on pressing JonBenét into the pageants and the Ziegfeld Follies costume is a lie. As for the last there is even more proof. In May 1996, M. Fix had photographed JonBenet on stage. Here follows part of his description written down in PMPT at page 259; “JonBenét came out in this shocking outfit, and a noticeable murmur went through the room. There were all these feathers, like an ostrich. Someone called it a Ziegfeld costume—so much more expensive and elaborate than anyone else’s. You could see it was custom-tailored for her.†He also states; “Patsy realized she’d overdone it. She was as shocked as everybody else.†Proof enough P. Ramsey lied again, oh and there is a difference between acting shocked and actually being shocked, no word about being shocked in DOI! All she finds interesting enough to mention is that JonBenét won the price of cover girl.

Also mentioned is the dance instructor K. Andre, introduced to P. Ramsey by P. Griffin. Now what was it that she said; “The pageants were Patsy’s gig. JonBenét was her alter ego. Patsy had the money, she had the costumes and she had the kid. She could relive her own pageant thing. You got the picture right there. Patsy didn’t have a sense of proportion about how this should fit into her child’s life. What I saw on the pageant video.....you don’t do that to a six-year-old.â€

How many people have said the same thing, year after year? You do not do that to a six-year-old child. Yet, P. Ramsey does not think that way, it shows you exactly what she is like, her vicious character, her selfishness, her coldness, and her ruthlessness. She did exactly that to her own daughter of what other people say, you would not do such a thing to a six-year-old child.

 

Thank you again, Sylvia for all the hard work and effort you have put into this project. I sincerely hope Tom Bennet has not finished his "JonBenét investigation report, and reads this. I would pin a gold medal on you if I could. So here's a

star:star:to replace the medal.

 

More, More, More!!!!!

 

Thanks Elle, that is very sweet. Only I don't think I deserve it. Am flattered though and well......kinda like that star. :blush:

 

Yes, boss! LOL! Your wish is my command :devil:

 

Chapter 8

Chapter 8

The first thing I noticed while reading chapter 8 of DOI is that P. Ramsey refers to the Ramsey’s themselves as little guys several times. It immediately reminds you of the ransom note and particularly it takes you to the sentence with the words “two gentlemen†in it.

Next thing you notice is almost everything is turned into something supernatural. A simple saying like “there is an aura hanging around someone†is viewed as a tip-off. On page 64 P. Ramsey makes the dumbest remark possible; “The first tip-off that something was amiss in the promised land should have been when our corporate host mentioned that he noticed an ‘aura’ around us as we lunched at the historic Hotel Boulderado. I wasn’t exactly sure what an aura was, but it sounded good.†Here she is saying that although it sounded good and she did not have the faintest idea of what an aura was it was a sign that something was amiss. Now that sure sounds logical to me, what an idiot! By the way, an aura is the same as an impression, an atmosphere, a feeling, a sensation, or an air and does not have to be something supernatural.

Another remarkable thing is the way P. Ramsey describes the city of Boulder. The perfect town that is not perfect at all, just two opposites. Going from God’s handiwork, the Flatirons, to Satan’s work, a big rock named the Devil’s Thumb. It is almost painted a Jekyll and Hyde town, or as a town with a multiple personality syndrome. Only question is, is it the town, or is it the Ramsey’s? The strange referral to “being lulled towards a false sense of comfort†and the “the not knowing what really is really in store,†again makes you wonder about a kind of multiple personality syndrome. Doesn’t the evil come up when the good is lulled asleep? It sure leaves you with a bad taste in you mouth. It looks as if already excuses are being presented for the future events that are going to take place. In addition, it leaves you wondering what kind of people they are, they seem to have no sense of responsibility for anything they do.

The way P. Ramsey describes the searching for a house in Boulder is also somewhat peculiar and makes you wonder how the city of Boulder looks like. It gives me the impression that the whole city, kind of looks like it is some ghetto. Almost all houses are on the verge of falling apart, the whole town seems like a junkyard. Boulder, the perfect town is a dumpster once P. Ramsey is done with the description of the search for a house. Arrogance or reality? I think the answer to that question is very simple it is arrogance. The people of Boulder are done of as hypocrites. They were all involved in some kind of welfare project, however they have absolutely no tolerance towards people with a different view.

The description of the house on Fifteenth Street is, to say at the least, peculiar. The house is too small, too close to the neighboring houses and they had to pay too much for it. However, they buy it anyhow since it gave them a safe feeling or are P. Ramsey puts it “in-town living and security.†As far as the price is concerned, her excuse is “that’s the price you pay for in-town quaint and charming.†The most important reason to buy the house after all is, yes, divine intervention. A sign was given that told them, or at least P. Ramsey, this was the right house for them. And what was the divine intervention, a BUCK DEER! Page 67 DOI quote, “Under an old fir tree in the backyard lay a huge buck deer with antlers I’m sure would excite the most experienced deer hunter. Wow! This must be a sign. The buck stops here! I thought. I guess this must be the place for us.†This is again seeking a way out. They are not responsible for buying that house, no the buck did it! They seem to need an excuse for whatever they do!

 

Chapter 8 part 2

As she goes on, she is setting the stage for the intruder-kidnapper. There were doors everywhere in that house, and old windows too, some of them were just held close by a simple latch. Once they had moved in they would find out those windows were a real problem. They would find them open on a regular base “after a typically strong Colorado wind.†Nonsense, she is just looking for a lame excuse to make the intruder theory more likely. After they moved in they had a complete remodeling project was going on in “virtually every room.†There were walls set up on the second floor, as it was one open space. An elevator was removed, as it was to slow. Yet, windows that were often found open, because of the wind were not a part of that remodeling project? If true, wouldn’t you put that that on top of the list? So one may assume that was taken care of, after all, it bugged them so much that P. Ramsey feels the need to comment on it in their book.

What is also remarkable is the fact that the moving to Boulder was only bearable, as it was seen as a temporarily situation. Upon leaving Atlanta, she claimed to feel uneasy. Then she writes; “Silly, isn’t it, I thought. It is just for a little while, I assured myself. We’ll be back in Atlanta soon enough.†Here she is already foreseeing a fast return to Atlanta, which makes it sound as an excuse for their flight back to Atlanta later on. It was already their plan to return to Atlanta, however because of JonBenét’s murder it may have sped the return up a little. The excuse is there, and again they take no responsibility for their own actions!

The story of J. Ramsey’s oldest daughter having fatal car accident being discussed in detail also makes me wonder, what is this book about? I thought the book was written to give details relating to the murder of JonBenét. This car accident of Ramsey’s oldest daughter, how sad it may be is totally irrelevant to the case. It leaves you with the impression that they will do anything to make themselves look like victims. They use the girl’s tragic death to obtain the status of ultimate victims.

J. Ramsey takes over and of course finishes what P. Ramsey started, the story of his oldest daughter. You immediately notice the strange father and daughter relationship. It looks as if the role of parent and child is switched. She is always there for him, she really cared about her dad. There seems to be a different behavior towards the other two children out of the previous marriage. It looks like one is favored about the others, in the same way JonBenét is favored above Burke. I also get the feeling JonBenét took over the role of the oldest daughter on certain points.

One might also question the importance of his statement concerning birthplaces. He apparently finds it important to mention whether his oldest daughter would have wanted her birthplace be kept as secret. Why? According to him, she could not brag about the place where she was born. He actually writes; “Beth had a birth certificate from Olongapo City, probably the roughest liberty port in the world. I often wondered if she’d want to keep her birthplace a secret when she grew up. After all, who would brag about being born in Olongapo City?†Who would even want to brag about ones birthplace? Would someone be a better person if born in a more, to him, important city? What is his standard for a more important city? This is pure arrogance! Moreover, what does it have to do with JonBenét’s murder? Again, it shows what the Ramsey’s are all about, outward show.

The story goes on and we come to December 1991. J. Ramsey is telling the reader, how he was introduced to his oldest daughter’s boyfriend. He describes it as follows; “Patsy and I liked him immediately; he clearly met our hopes and expectations for our oldest daughter.†Patsy and I? Our hopes, our oldest daughter? What is he talking about? Again a ridiculous statement. Just think of it, this is a 22-year-old adult woman, P. Ramsey was at that time 35-years old and he is talking about our oldest daughter. With the our he is implying P. Ramsey’s and J. Ramsey’s daughter, since he already mentions Patsy and I. First of all his oldest daughter had her own mother, second would a 22-year-old adult see someone who is 35-years-old as a parent? That combined with the fact that her own mother was alive! It makes you wonder what he is trying to achieve with that ridiculous statement.

 

The last pages are drenched with self-pity. On the other hand, maybe it was just written down to gain pity or sympathy. On page 75, he is trying to convince the reader (or himself) that he is such a good father. He actually dares to write; “One of the most comforting thoughts I had after losing two children is that each knew how much we loved her. At the time of their deaths, there was no question about that. Nothing was left undone or unsaid between us. Not a day went by that I didn’t tell my children, ‘I love you.’†A pretty strong statement I might say. Nothing was left undone or unsaid between us? Can anyone actually say that nothing was left undone or unsaid between two human beings when separated by death? If right now any of you would lose a loved one, sibling, parent, or child, can you tell me in all honesty that you can claim nothing was undone or unsaid? To me this is statement comes over as very disturbing.

He actually believes anyone will believe his fairytale of saying every day to his children that he loved them. Does anyone of you tell your children every day that you love them? Do you need to tell your child(ren) every day that you love them or do they know they are loved, because of how you treat them? So here, he is telling me that not only did he tell Burke and JonBenét every day that he loved them, but he also phones his two children, from a previous marriage, to tell them he loved them. And does he actually love them so much? He showed his love for them by leaving them. Instead of being home spending time with his children, he preferred to that spent time with his mistress! However, that mistress did not even mean that much to him, otherwise he would have married her after the divorce. Does he mention it for a moment, no! One can make errors, big mistakes, no one is perfect, but at least you take responsibility for it. Say you did the wrong thing! Don’t pretend to be perfect, no one is! It is so easy for someone to say, “I love you,†showing you are loved and make you feel loved, that is a different story! That it is more difficult! So did he show and if so in what way?

On the last page he states that he know that “death and tragedy often destroy marriages,†yet he claims they, the Ramsey’s became closer. Oh, we have seen that, so did the BPD! Even if that might be so the question still is was it purely out of what he calls love or was it something else. “I know exactly what Patsy’s gone through in the loss of these two children and how much she grieves.“ They are so close that they cannot keep their story straight and are constantly contradicting each other. Now that is really being close and knowing exactly what the other feels. Besides, who can know exactly what the other is going through!

Lastly he has to refer to the good and evil of Boulder, you know Devils Thump versus the beauty of the mountains. “Today when Patsy and I think of Boulder, we can still see the beautiful majesty of the purple mountains and feel the crispness of the fall air, but we also see that outcropping of Devil’s Thumb more clearly. The beauty of the Rockies remains, but we must forever remember this as the place where we learned the hardest lesson of live and the true meaning of evil. Just two final questions remain. Did you really lean something from it? Whose evil? As I far as I can see you learned nothing and are still not cooperating with the local police to solve your daughter murder, instead you keep on hiding behind lawyers! Cooperating with the BPD, that should be your duty, no matter what the outcome might be!

 

Chapter 9

Chapter 9

Like Chapter 8, Chapter 9 is also totally irrelevant to what happened to JonBenét and the events thereafter. However, irrelevant chapters can give a great amount of details concerning the person(s) involved. This chapter has some great information of the person(s) we are dealing with.

For multi-millionaires, they seem to do a lot of shopping at K-Mart. I wonder why it is so important to mention shopping at K-Mart? It was also used in the “burglary†that took place in January 2001--the stolen K-Mart jewelry. Does it have something to do with the Ramsey’s trying to say; “We are a normal, loving American family?†Like, that is something what ignorant people believe--try to relate to them, and you win their support. Get realistic, that doesn’t work with most people.

And of course, what words do we find all over the chapter? Divine, God, intervention, divine intervention from God, (what else), bible, and signs. What is new? Cancer--stage IV ovarian cancer. Why? Most people get a feeling of sympathy toward a person who has, or had cancer. Many people have had, or maybe still have the disease; and many people have lost dear ones to this horrible disease. They know what cancer is, and they would never, even for a second, think someone could use such a disease to gain sympathy. I am sorry to wake those people up, because there are indeed persons who would do such a thing. Hard? Yes, but also very realistic.

Let us go back to the religious side again, which is also meant as a way to stand above any suspicion. Like good Christians do not do things like committing murder. However, again realistic, if that were so, then there would be many innocent people in prison. So, let us not be hypocritical, as being a good Christian does not exclude one from committing a crime, not even a crime like murder. Murder is a human occupancy.

According to P. Ramsey, it was ‘divine intervention’ that brought her to Atlanta. “I know God puts you in the places you need to be at the right time, and I could see that he had done so now.†However, there is another side to that story, if what she says is true, then it was also God that put them in Boulder at the time of JonBenét’s murder. And to be honest I do not know what to make of this, is she blaming God or is she saying something else? “God knew I had a problem and that I needed to be in Atlanta to take care of it.†How come that divine intervention left P. Ramsey when her daughter was murdered? Was anything done against the rules? Alternatively, did the divine intervention only come when P. Ramsey was personally threatened?

More divine intervention: “Another intervention from God†made sure a certain Dr. G. Kloster was at home when they called him. They needed him, a plastic surgeon by the way, to make P. Ramsey understand what it meant that she might possibly have cancer. Strangely, this divine intervention doctor does not open his mouth at all when the news is brought. Let's be honest. Asking a plastic surgeon about cancer would be about the same as asking an orthopedist to perform brain surgery. His presence at that particular moment was rather useless in my opinion. Therefore, I see no divine intervention here, as divine intervention is not supposed to be useless. However, the “divined intervention†doctor makes sure she got to Bethesda.

 

Chapter 9 part 2

It is also remarkable that P. Ramsey has knowledge concerning medical expressions. She understood very well what was going on, as everyone would have. Therefore, what the plastic surgeon was doing there remains a question, but he was not there to explain medical expressions, or the situation. Further, wouldn’t you prefer that your partner be called in such a situation? Wouldn’t you need the moral support the most from your partner?

In addition, the following remarks made by P. Ramsey are questionable: “Most of all, I was horrified to confront John with this condition. He certainly didn’t need me being sick; he was still reeling from Beth’s death.†E. Ramsey died in a car crash on January 8, 1992, while the Atlanta hospital event took place on July 2, 1993. So after 1.5 years, P. Ramsey was horrifie to confront J. Ramsey with the possibility that she might have cancer. Pay extra attention to the word horrified--and couldn’t she count on his support? Her next statement is that she kept crying; “My poor husband. My poor husband doesn’t need this.†Up until now, there is not a word about her children. Doesn’t that sound, to say the least, odd? All this takes place on Saturday, after the surgery on Monday it registers that she has two small children to raise. Wouldn’t a loving mother, as she claims to be that, have thought of her children by now? That should at least give you some idea about who and what the “we are a loving family†Ramsey’s are. A little later in the book, P. Ramsey is suddenly telling about a loving J. Ramsey: “the one she was horrified to confrontâ€, who was trying to calm her down after she heard the she had stage IV, instead of stage III ovarian cancer. Now doesn’t that sound at least like a contradiction?

However, the description that is given by her concerning her cancer is as follows, “Obviously they had removed my ovaries and performed a radical hysterectomy.†“The cancer has spread to your lymph nodes, he said. This means that you are at Stage IV, rather than Stage III, as they told you in Atlanta.†“There is also a tumor about the size of a tennis golf ball behind you pelvic bone, he said. It may have developed since your surgery.â€

Let us have a look at some facts concerning ovarian cancer. The International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) has standardized the staging of gynecological cancers. The stages of ovarian cancer are described as follows:

Stage I
Stage I ovarian cancer means the cancer is only affecting the ovaries. It is divided into three groups:
Stage Ia = The cancer is contained inside one ovary
Stage Ib = The cancer is contained inside both ovaries
Stage I = 1a or Ib AND either there is some cancer on the surface of at least one ovary OR cancer cells are found in fluid taken from inside your abdomen during surgery OR the ovary ruptures (bursts) before or during surgery

Stage II
Stage II means the cancer has grown outside the ovary or ovaries, but it is inside the pelvis. Stage II cancer can be:
IIa = The cancer has spread into the fallopian tubes or the womb
IIb = The cancer has grown into other tissues in the pelvis, for example the bladder or rectum
IIc = IIa or IIb AND either there is some cancer on the surface of at least one ovary OR cancer cells are found in fluid taken from inside your abdomen during surgery OR the ovary ruptures (bursts) before or during surgery

 

Chapter 9 part 3

Stage III
Stage III cancer of the ovary means the cancer has spread outside the pelvis into the abdominal cavity. Your cancer is also stage III if there is cancer found in the lymph nodes in the upper abdomen, groin or behind the womb. So stage III cancer can be:
IIIa = Cancer can be seen under the microscope in tissue taken from the lining of the abdomen
IIIb = There are small tumor growths on the lining of the abdomen
IIIc = There are tumor growths larger than 2cm on the lining of the abdomen; the lymph nodes in the upper abdomen, groin or behind the womb contain cancer

Stage 4
The cancer has spread into other body organs such as the liver or lungs. (If there is cancer on the surface of the liver but not within the liver itself, then the cancer is regarded as Stage III.)

This leaves me with no other conclusion, that if her description of her disease is accurate it can only be stage III ovarian cancer. Which lead me to two possibilities, either the physician needs schooling or she is lying, since she nowhere indicates that the cancer, at that time, had spread into other body organs. My personal opinion, I think she is lying to gain sympathy and that is exactly what doesn’t work with me. This disease is already bad enough, there no need to lie about it or to make it sound worse then it already is. Moreover, if you already lie about this then I ask myself what else are prepared to lie about.

Also, do you know what? P. Ramsey is constantly slipping up when it comes to the ovarian stage IV cancer. In the 700 Club interview, that took place in July 2000, with S. Ross, P. Ramsey stated she was diagnosed with cancer in July 1992. However, on Larry King Live, aired in November 2000, she stated; “I will celebrate my sixth year since my diagnosis.†Now I believe we all can count year 2000 minus 6 years would bring us to the year 1994. The book was published on March 17, 2000, and stated the cancer was diagnosed in July 1993. Now, don’t we have a problem here? Something that might, at least, make you suspicious? I sure think so!

Next, ‘divine intervention’ takes place at a hotel in Annapolis, Maryland. While P. Ramsey is staring at the ceiling of the hotel room, she thinks Burke and JonBenét; “didn’t deserve to have a mother with cancer!†Odd choice of words, don’t you agree? Wouldn’t “what will happen to my children, should I die,†not be a more natural thought? She then takes the Gidion Bible off the nightstand, opens it randomly, and reads a verse. Psalm 57 and she reads; “In the shadow of Your wings I will make my refuge, Until these calamities have passed by.†Conveniently, she forgets the first part of the psalm: “Be gracious to me, O God, be gracious to me, for my soul takes refuge in You.†This psalm describes what King David said when he fled for Saul, into a cave. However, P. Ramsey explains it as, it was a direct message from God to her and it meant: “Now I realized that the words were telling me that the calamities would some day pass by†and “a sense of strength and presence of the ‘divine’ settled around me. I went to sleep, knowing that my problem was in the right hands after all, the hands of my Heavenly Father.†It may be a surprise to P. Ramsey, but your destiny is always in the hands of God, He gave you a free will. And one does get the strange feeling P. Ramsey does not understand much about religion, let alone the bible. She explains all that is written to her advantage--but it does not work that way.

Next, she is comparing herself with Job--unbelievably! Would you dare to do so? Yes, God is talking to her again! In addition, this time He is saying, according to her; “those ‘babies’ are your reason to live. Get up and get with it.†That is how God told her to get up and live--just as he had told Job. After that she thought; “You’re right. We’re going to beat this together. God and me and the chemo.†Something does not quite fit here. It sounds like--hey, let us throw in the chemo treatments as well--you never know. Again wouldn’t someone more likely think: God and I together are going to beat this?

 

Chapter 9 part 4

In addition, God is making sure that, although the flight back to Denver is fully booked, there is always something happening that makes the seat next to her empty so she can lie down. Somehow, all of this sounds rather strange! To be more precise, it sounds arrogant and presumptuous. Religion asks for being humble, not for arrogance. Never overestimate yourself!

As for the healing session, it is ridiculous! Nice for a novel, but in this case it is just used as an excuse--'look how good I am, even God heals me'.... Again, it does not work like that. Just look at what she says; “The warmth of the Holy Spirit’s presence settled over me. I felt the healing touch of Jesus Christ working in my body.†Looks nice, doesn’t it? Only it does not convince me of anything-divine taking place here. Why? Two days later, she was taking the CT scan in the Boulder hospital. She asked the doctor about the tumor that had remained in her pelvic area, and she wanted to know whether it had shrunk, as the doctors in Bethesda and she had hoped for. Now wouldn’t you say it has gone, I mean she ‘felt the healing touch of Jesus Christ working in her body,’-- so why even think it was still there? It just doesn’t make sense…doubts after all? Then miraculously the tumor (the size of a golf ball) is gone. However, the chemo treatments have to continue according to the doctors in Bethesda, at the NIH, so she had to go for the third treatment.

After the fourth treatment, and just before the fifth treatment, the cancer had spread. It was stated that it had metastasized, which means: “the transfer of disease from one organ or part to another not directly connected with it. It may be due to either to the transfer of pathogenic microorganisms (tubercle bacilli) or to transfer of cells, as in malignant tumors. The capacity to metastasize is a characteristic of all malignant tumors.†Therefore, this means that in order to be able to spread--the disease must already be there. This leaves me with a kind of puzzle. It would have been normal to have said the disease had returned. However, to have spread...no, that does not make sense, you do not say such a thing when you are convinced that God cured you from the disease. That is what she stated, she told the doctors at the NIH in Bethesda that she no longer needed the treatments, as God had healed her. Again, this gives you something to think about.

Then on the plane trip to Bethesda, she tells God this: “God, I don’t know how you are going to do this, but I know you are going to change what that film says. I have total faith that you can do it.†Here she is demanding from God, that He change the CT scan. She is actually telling Him what to do. Not asking 'please'--but telling Him what to do! This is unbelievable! In the meantime, she had already declared herself a missionary, and finds it necessary to state that two people had declared her an angel. Now how was that saying about modesty?

Then reading the last paragraph, at least for a moment it flashes to your head--the motive, talking about the motive. Indeed a scary thought. Being the center of attention, known by people all over the world, because of JonBenét’s murder--that is why she can act at as tool for Christ, she claims. She is a sort of living miracle, cured from cancer by God. Coupled with being known because of what happened to JonBenét, it makes her known to people all over the world. So, could that be a motive as well? Scary, isn’t it?