If Patsy is the killer....

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by koldkase, Mar 1, 2007.

  1. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Thanks so much, Tril. That's it!

    I believe John knew exactly what was going on, was in it up to his jockey shorts. That's my opinion.

    I believe that John is Machiavellian to the core. I don't think he went from working out of his basement to CEO of a Lockheed Martin company in 10 years any other way.
  2. heymom

    heymom Member

    If the murder had happened anywhere else, that evidence would have been critical and probably would have convicted at least John. But the suspects would have had to have been charged with a crime, and the DA would have had to prosecute. And Hunter could not, would not do that, no matter what the evidence. I almost wonder if the Ramseys would have done time if they had been caught standing over JonBenet with a golf club and the rest of the duct tape in their hands. "Oh, we just found these lying here and picked them up!"
  3. heymom

    heymom Member

    From the Bonita Papers post..


    In August, the Boulder police department contacted Dr. John McCann, one of the nation’s leading experts on child sexual abuse. McCann had agreed to assist the police department in determining if JonBenet had been a victim of sexual abuse during or before her murder. McCann was sent the autopsy report and photos. According to McCann, examination findings that indicate chronic sexual abuse include the thickness of the rim of the hymen, irregularity of the edge of the hymen, the width or narrowness of the wall of the hymen, and exposure of structures of the vagina normally covered by the hymen. His report stated that there was evidence of prior hymeneal trauma as all of these criteria were seen in the post mortem examination of JonBenet.

    There was a three dimensional thickening from inside to outside on the inferior hymeneal rim with a bruise apparent on the external surface of the hymen and a narrowing of the hymeneal rim from the edge of the hymen to where it attaches to the muscular portion of the vaginal openings. At the narrowing area, there appeared to be very little if any hymen present. There was also exposure of the vaginal rugae, a structure of the vagina which is normally covered by an intact hymen. The hymeneal orifice measured one centimeter which is abnormal or unusual for this particular age group and is further evidence of prior sexual abuse with a more recent injury as shown by the bruised area on the inferior hymeneal rim. A generalized increase in redness of the tissues of the vestibule was apparent, and small red flecks of blood were visible around the perineum and the external surface of the genitalia. It was his opinion that the injury appeared to have been caused by a relatively small, very firm object which, due to the area of bruising, had made very forceful contact not only with the hymen, but also with the tissues surrounding the hymen. McCann believed that the object was forcefully jabbed in – not just shoved in. Although the bruised area would indicate something about the size of a finger nail, he did not believe it was a finger, because of the well demarcated edges of the bruise indicating an object much firmer than a finger. McCann was not able to see any fresh tears of the hymen which he thought might be due to the lack of detail in the photographs. It was unclear where the blood on the perineum originated, since there were no lacerations visible in these photos. McCann also noted that in children of this age group the labia, or vaginal lips, remain closed until literally manually separated. In order for there to be an injury to the hymen without injuring the labia, the labia would have to be manually separated before the object was inserted. The examination also indicated that the assault was done while the child was still alive because of the redness in the surrounding tissue and blood in the area.

    McCann stated that this injury would have been very painful
    because the area of the injury as indicated by the bruise was at the base of the hymen were most of the nerve endings are located. Such an injury would have caused a six year old child to scream or yell. The doctor also stated that he assumed the object did not have jagged edges because there were no evidence of tears in the bruised area.

    McCann also noted that there appeared to be a bruise on the inner right thigh which he though might represent a thumb imprint from forcing the legs apart.

    Dr. McCann explained the term "chronic abuse" meant only that it was "repeated", but that the number of incidents could not be determined. In the case of JonBenet, the doctor could only say that there was evidence of “prior abuse". The examination results were evidence that there was at least one prior penetration of the vagina through the hymeneal membrane. The change in the hymeneal structure is due to healing from a prior penetration. However, it was not possible to determine the number of incidents nor over what period of time. Because the prior injury had healed, any other incidents of abuse probably were more than 10 days prior.

    In discussing perpetrators of sexual abuse on children, McCann stated that the majority of children this age are molested by someone with whom they have close contact most commonly family members. He explained that if the molester is a stranger or someone else with whom the child is not close, the child will usually tell someone or psychological problems appear which create behavior changes observed by their parents. Common symptoms would be eating disorders, nightmares or a variety of behaviors indicating that something is bothering them. Commencement or increased bedwetting is also commonly seen in sexually abused children. When asked about JonBenet's sexualized behavior during her pageant performances, McCann said that this was not necessarily a sign of abuse, since this was taught behavior for the pageants. Also, with children's exposure to sexually explicit television programs, sexualized behavior is no longer considered to be an indication of possible sexual abuse.

    Dr. Andrew Sirotnack from Children’s Hospital in Denver was also asked to review the medical findings and autopsy photographs. He confirmed McCann's determination of acute vaginal trauma during the assault on JonBenet, but He had not yet concluded that there was chronic abuse. Sirotnack had examined over 2,500 abused children during his career at Children's Hospital and had testified in approximately 50 - 100 criminal trials regarding sexual abuse on children.

    In September 1997, the police department held a meeting with McCann and three other child sexual abuse experts to go over their opinions based on their review of the autopsy results. Dr. Virginia Rau of Dade County, Florida stated that she observed fresh hymeneal trauma on JonBenet and chronic inflammation that was not related to any urination issues. Dr. Rau said, “In my heart, this is chronic abuse,†but feared that a defense argument would be made that this was only evidence of masturbation.

    Also agreeing with the findings of both McCann and Rau was Dr. Jim Monteleone of St. Louis. Dr. Richard Krugman, Dean of the University of Colorado Medical School, an expert first contacted for assistance in the Ramsey case by the D.A.’s office, was the most adamant supporter of the finding of chronic sexual abuse. He felt that in considering the past and present injuries to the hymen that the bedwetting/soiling took on enormous significance. He believed that this homicide was an indecent of “toilet rage†and subsequent cover up. He told the group of experts and detectives about another Colorado case where both parents had been at home and both were charged. “The JonBenet case is a text book example of toileting abuse rage," Krugman stated.

    All of the experts agreed that there was no way any of the recent or chronic abuse damage to the genitalia of the child was the result of masturbation.

    I think this is one possible scenario. After the others are in bed, or elsewhere occupied in the house, John has taken JonBenet to the cellar to molest her. She fights him. He gets angry. He breaks the paintbrush and jabs her with it. She screams, and he hits her. She either strikes her head on a hard surface accidently, or he hits her with an object, and she is thus injured to the point of being unconscious. He then strangles her with the cord. At some point after she is dead, she is undressed, wiped down, and re-dressed with the Bloomies that are too large. Thus the black fibers inside the underwear. Only after all this has happened is Patsy brought in to write the ransom note. I am not sure how much Patsy really knew about what happened that night. I think she was an empty person who would be easily controlled and dominated by a narcissist like her husband. I think there is a LOT more to John Ramsey than meets the eye.
  4. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    One problem I see with that theory, heymom, is that the point of the impact on the cracked skull came from above and to JonBenet's right side, probably a little to the rear. She wouldn't have been facing the person who struck that blow, I don't believe.

    Another problem with the theory is that JonBenet had NO defensive wounds, bruises, or abrasions on her. Not on her hands, fingers, feet, legs, knees, elbows, wrists, arms, face, ankles...none. If she were fighting someone, she'd have been bruised, especially if she were on the floor or a hard surface, near hard surfaces that she might thrash accidentally during a fight, etc. She had nothing.

    And jabbing her vagina with a paintbrush would be certain to cause bleeding...as it in fact did. I don't think John would have wanted to explain to Patsy why JonBenet had bleeding from her vagina, so why would he jab her like that? Plus, pedophiles are, in general, gentle with their victims, which goes along with "grooming," taking often a long time, sometimes months before the pedophile actually begins true body intrusion. I know that pedophiles who kill are the exception, but if John is the molester/incester, one thing he would NOT want to do is leave CLEAR EVIDENCE and draw ATTENTION to his actions. I don't believe he'd have used a paintbrush. Unless she was already unconscious and he knew she was going to be examined for OTHER signs of molestation.

    Reading the Bonita excerpt, and thank you for posting this again, it seems to me that JonBenet had the paintbrush shoved up her while she was still alive, but probably after the headblow. She bled a small amount. That's obvious from the blood found on her undies, as well. This excerpt states she was still alive when this was done because of redness of tissues.

    But you notice the description of the hymen. That wasn't done solely that night. Someone had been molesting her before, and possibly many times, is how I read it:

    Now if you believe that Patsy and/or John were the stagers of the crime scene, that the paintbrush was shoved up JonBenet to hide the prior molestation, then one can conclude that they HAD to know about the prior molestation. So they knew who did that, as well.

    But you can see from this description in the Bonita Papers why Spade and others think Burke was the one who attacked JonBenet. It's a theory I can't discount entirely.

    Let me see if I can find the picture of Dr. Spitz's illustration.
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2007
  5. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    #10 Killers of people who were "in the way" or who killed, for example, witnesses (egocentric but not distinctly psychopathic)

    I guess this would be where I'd put John if he was involved in the head blow and/or garroting, molestation, or decided to cover-up for the person who was molesting her and/or who struck the headblow.

    Oh, Jayelles, you mentioned RST harping on the detectives and lawyers not hounding John for an answer on the shirt fibers, and not presenting the actual evidence to the PRIME SUSPECTS to PROVE it. You're exactly right about why they would NOT have done that: no reason to hand MORE evidence to the Ramseys before they were arrested. That's what buried this case from DAY ONE, thanks to Hunter's office. The Ramseys had all the evidence LE had when the Ramseys finally submitted to a SHORT and LIMITED interview in April of '97. The same as the interviews in mid-98. LE can't catch suspects in lies if the suspects KNOW everything LE knows and is able to PREPARE ANSWERS WITH THEIR LAWYERS BEFOREHAND. Duh. It's interrogation 101.

    You see, this is why I believe Hunter was actively helping the Ramseys avoid prosecution. He gave them everything LE had as soon as they had it. He refused to SUBPOENA EVEN PHONE RECORDS AND CLOTHING IMMEDIATELY! He shoud have demanded LE arrest the Ramseys if they had to, to get them in for questioning IMMEDIATELY, before they had their stories all lined up.

    Boulder LE couldn't have done worse if they'd PLANNED to help the prime suspects get away with it. IMO, that's EXACTLY what Hunter did. NOBODY in LE would have been so incompetent. Even if the DA was THAT STUPID, he had dozens of other lawyers throughout the state, plus various LE agencies, who no doubt would have been ASTONISHED to hear him say NO PHONE SUBPOENA. But he never got them. NEVER. NOT TO THIS DAY.

    Spade said this phone record black out went all the way to Washington. I'm not that big on conspiracy, but in this case, considering John worked for Lockheed Martin, I think SOMEONE might have used that as an excuse to quash any phone record subpoena, because of the LM connection to John. It's the only thing I can think of that makes sense, because that "we want them to like us" BS isn't believable on ANY level.

    This murder cover-up wasn't the result of a couple of rich parents being clever. It took some incredible influence for the Ramseys to get the privileges they got from the start. It took some powerful back door deals to keep the simplest, most basic investigative procedures from being followed. TO THIS DAY.

    I think Thomas made a lot of people very nervous when he blew their BS out of the water with his inside information in the form of a book. If you notice, the RST, Hunter, and the Ramseys hate NO ONE more than they hate THOMAS. NOT EVEN THE KILLER. Doesn't come close. John even feels sorry for a man who talked about having oral sex with John's murdered child. But mention Steve Thomas, and they ALL go MENTAL with hate.

    I believe Michael Kane was a team player who didn't know the truth about what was going on behind his back. I believe he was allowed to give an appearance of actual effort to solve the case, but I don't believe for one minute that Hunter was ever going to prosecute this case. Hunter brought in Smit and handed him the materials to go on a media blitz no one has EVER seen from an LE detective defending prime suspects in a publicity crusade before. It's really mindboggling when you think of it now.

    Poor JonBenet. They abused her and then dumped her like trash in a grave and never looked back. Then they went on a campaign to make themselves sainted celebrity victims. Now that's diabolical.
  6. Paradox

    Paradox Banned for Stupidity by RiverRat

    You have to look through a microscope to find something that incriminates John. And just because shirt fibers were found doesn't mean John was wearing the shirt at the time the fibers were transfrered. There's no "reciprocal" evidence reported of anything from JonBenet on the shirt. What was done to the genitals is minor compared with what was done to the rest of the body. And yet "sex" had to have a lot to do with it. And it had to be done by a male. There is no evidence of John abusing JonBenet in any way, but there is a lot of evidence of Patsy's abuse. None of the medical experts are asked for or offer their opinions on the ransom note, as if there could be no connection.

    The JDI theory is boring. IMO.
  7. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Paradox, it would take a MAN to make the argument that the sexual abuse to JonBenet's genitals was the LEAST of what was done to her. You have NO IDEA....

    You can rattle around in Patsy's head all you want, but the EVIDENCE is that JonBenet was being sexually abused for some time PRIOR to her murder. If you know of evidence that PATSY was the one sexually molesting JonBenet, outside of your psychology theories, please, I'd love to see it. Otherwise, if it was ALL Patsy, as you theorize, then John had a psychotic child killer on his hands...and what does he do? Trots her out in front of a TV camera, drugged to the gills?

    I don't think so. He had every reason in the world to put her in seclusion, maybe in a hospital, and nobody would have thought WORSE if he'd said the loss of JonBenet was too much for her. It could have been spun either way, BUT she wouldn't have been in a position to blurt out something incriminating caught on tape.

    No, the Ramseys were both very aware of every word they uttered on camera, and neither feared the other would give anything away. John may be bereft of common decency and morality, but he isn't stupid. If Patsy did this all alone, planned it all, floated around in a fugue state, as you describe, John would have spotted it and known she was not to be trusted. You don't live with a spouse for two decades and not NOTICE behavior change, not NOTICE that the night your daughter was murdered in your home, your wife was acting strange. If he didn't notice it BEFORE, he'd have realized it after.

    The only reason I can fathom that John went with the media blitz for years is because he knew what happened and he knew Patsy could function just FINE in public appearances, under intense scrutiny, because he and she were up to their necks in this TOGETHER, thinking clearly, thinking cleverly, and always 10 steps ahead of LE. If John even suspected that Patsy had some mental issues that deep that had caused her to murder JonBenet, he'd have NEVER put her out there under the pressure of keeping up the mask in the glare of public scrutiny ON CAMERA. That would have been the DUMBEST thing he could have done. And there was NO REASON for him to take that chance, if he had any suspicions AT ALL she had done this alone, without him.

    Well, that's my opinion, anyway.
  8. Elle

    Elle Member

    May well be, KK. I just know I saw a video, and the question was put forth about John Ramsey's black sweater, and he was hopping mad. One of these days, I may fall over it, KK, thanks.

    Just went over Tril's post. Thank you, Tril. I see they are talking about a black collared shirt in this transcript. Most of the time a black sweater has been mentioned (?). I would say this is what I was talking about, KK. Same as yours.
  9. Elle

    Elle Member

    I have to agree with you here, KK. On camera, it was very obvious John Ramsey jumped in fast when Patsy faltered while speaking. He took over. They were well rehearsed as Steve Thomas stated in his book. They had time to study what they had said in their last interview, to prepare for the next one, thanks to DA Alex Hunter. What a fiasco.
  10. Elle

    Elle Member

    It could have been repeated again on the LKL show tylin. Funny how some statements stay with you, when you're watching this case. So hard to remember everything. Thanks, tylin.
  11. Paradox

    Paradox Banned for Stupidity by RiverRat

    I am not dismissing the seriousness of sexual abuse of women and girls by men. Remember I think Patsy did the damage to JB's genitals.

    There is no evidence of John abusing JB in any way, but there is a lot of evidence that Patsy abused JB in several ways. So I extrapolate to the damage of genitals coming from Patsy.

    Murderers of all kinds go unnoticed in society for years as do people with all kinds of mental illness. If there is one thing that is common to sufferers of psychopathology it is that they often go undiagnosed and untreated.

    This is based on the theory that John was involved early on. John slept in his bed that night, Patsy didn't. John said he found the body aroung 11 am. He handed LE the note. He kept his distance from Patsy that morning. He disappeared for 1/2 hr. This contradicts his need to keep a leash on Patsy.

    Unless he was self deluding as a self defense mechanism. This is common in abusive families, most often reported in women who self delude when their husband is abusing a daughter.

    John had money and lawyers to back him up. I think he opted for the intruder theory easily as he was convinced Patsy was incapable of doing what was done to JB. Patsy had personality difficulties before, during and after the event. But having accomplished what she set out to do in killing JB she was able to live in a relatively stable persona that was buffered from destablizing forces by a self deluding John, his money, his lawyers, and an uncritically contributing sister.

    Please read the pm I sent you.
  12. heymom

    heymom Member

    I should have used the word "struggle" instead of fight. And JonBenet could have been facing away from John when he would have struck her. I am saying that this scenario came about through anger, and then the cover-up was done to hide previous abuse. The weak part of my theory is why Patsy helped John instead of turning him in. I know John could have controlled her easily, and that she was an empty, probably frightened person, but it makes me really sad if she was such a poor excuse for a mother that she couldn't stand up and defend her, admittedly already dead, child.

    Well, maybe I am giving too much credence to the scream, which was later retracted (why?), but something in my gut tells me that John is more than people think he is. He is not just a nice guy who got a little pudge on him and likes to play golf. One comment he made recently was that JonBenet, had she lived, "...would have been a handful." That tells me that he already thought of her as a blossoming "handful," maybe because she resisted his molestation.

    I'll continue to be boring but I'll hush up and go back in my corner, Paradox.
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2007
  13. Paradox

    Paradox Banned for Stupidity by RiverRat

    You aren't boring heymom, the JDI theory is.

    I enjoy stories of psychopathology, especially those that combine art and murder, such as Thomas Hariss' novels. And I like the history of violence and the sacred such as the Maya and the Egyptians. It is fascinating to think of a well developed society devoted to killing people and animals ritually, thinking that will influence supernatural beings.

    Pedophilia isn't very interesting to me.
  14. heymom

    heymom Member

    I see. Well, I don't think John is really a pedophile. I think he's a sociopathic narcissist. I think he would victimize just about anyone if he felt like it. I think there is a lot more to John than he ever lets on. Is that more interesting?
  15. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    First, I want to apologize to you, Paradox. I jumped too quickly, which I am want to do on the topic of sexual abuse and rape, and implied you were insensitive to victims. I have no excuse but a life of seeing sexual abuse treated by the public at large and lawmakers as something to ignore, minimize, and sweep under the rug. It's the one crime that is more pervasive than any other across this planet, but which is given short shrift because the victims are the most vulnerable in societies. There is little to no justice for most victims, as you know. So I can only hope you will forgive my temper. Mea culpa.

    Also, I'm not saying you can't be right about Patsy. You could be. I have no way of knowing what was going on in Patsy's head. Much of what you interpret is open to various interpretations, as you're talking about what a person's mental state was. If you have access to a professional diagnosis of Patsy, by someone who treated her or evaluated her, I'd love to see it.

    But trying to extrapolate what was happening in Patsy's mind during that period is like throwing dice to me: you have the dice, you have the known numbers on them, but you can come up with many combinations. We know some of what was going on in Patsy's LIFE, we know some of what was going on in JonBenet's life. We know what the autopsy revealed. We know some of what the investigation revealed. But we do not really know the precise combination of what the three people in that home were thinking and feeling and doing that night.

    I wrote a long post yesterday, laying out the timeline of the last 6 or so weeks of JonBenet's life, in regards to her medical history and the various activities and trips of the family known to us. I wrote about the evidence and behavior of the Ramseys. Then I inadvertantly hit the wrong button and lost it all. But it got me to thinking. Maybe I should start a new thread on that timeline, because I have to tell you, Burke began to loom large in the picture. He's a factor, no matter what your theory is.

    But some things about Burke are troubling: Why didn't he get up out of his bed and find out what was happening when he "heard" scurrying around that morning? Why didn't he speak to his parents, if he was awake, when they came into his room--IF they came into his room, and we don't actually know as the only stories we have of what happened are from the three people in the home, and they differ and changed? Burke's swiss knife was found in the basement near JonBenet's body. It has been published--in Wecht's book, I think but won't swear to--that residue from the duct tape was on the knife, but I've never seen that verified or denied, so I don't know. Burke was also said to have kept the large maglite in his room, again not confirmed or denied, though Patsy told LE it was kept in a drawer downstairs, and so there is no way to know the truth as she had every reason to lie, and often did.

    I guess what I was thinking, and this goes to what you said, heymom, is that if there WAS a scream, if there were "strange lights" seen moving about the house that night possibly from the maglite, maybe Burke was the one jabbing JonBenet with a paintbrush, "exploring" sexuality in his child's mind, knowing he'd been told not to do this again, who hit her with the maglite when she screamed. Then her parents heard this, discovered her unconscious and Burke with the maglite and paintbrush, made some phone calls, made some decisions, and the staging followed. "What did I do?" "We're not talking to you!" Go back to bed and never say a word about this night to anyone or you'll be taken away and locked up in a dark prison, no video games, no parents, nothing but bars.

    And now that John is close to Burke, now that Burke has been focused on, guided and nurtured past this horror of a murdered sister, when asked if he ever thinks of what JonBenet would be like today, with Burke right there in the studio with John and Larry King, John chose to "blame" JonBenet as a "handful."

    Is this more likely than other theories? Not necessarily. But that picture of the young adult Burke looking over his shoulder, put online by his friends, with that wicked smile...it haunts me. Sure, people make pictures like that all the time, in fun, so maybe it's nothing. But considering all...the look in his eyes still makes me uneasy.

    So you see, there can be so many scenarios that are plausible. I once made the observation that possibly the reason the Ramseys got away with this was because it involved ALL of them, and thus the crime became a conglomeration of various personalities that were then aided by expert attorneys. Add in Hunter and Lacy, and you have the perfect murder.
  16. heymom

    heymom Member

    Please do start a new thread, KK. I'd love to look at that timeline. Sorry you lost what you had already captured in thought!

    I think your last paragraph is very thought-provoking. With just 2 Ramseys involved, things got pretty muddled, but if all 3 of them had knowledge and were involved in some way, then it was 3 times the confusion and obfuscation.

    And as for what any of them were doing that night - we have no idea whether Burke was up, down, anywhere other than what his parents told LE. All we know is that 4 people went in alive, and 3 left the next day alive, and no one ever confessed or talked to LE except under extreme pressure.

    I am not ruling any of them out, honestly. The only reason I tend toward a JDI theory and not a BDI theory is that I cannot imagine Burke never saying anything else to ANYONE, or doing anything else. But who knows? I sure don't. And none of us may ever know.

    Did LE ever ask JOHN about Burke's possible involvement? And if so, how did he react? Did he get furious as Patsy did?
  17. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    OK, heymom, but I can't do it today. Plus, it's nothing new, just me putting stuff together which we've already discussed, but organizing it more, or trying to, anyway.

    Another thing I thought about Burke. One argument against him being involved is that the parents sent him away that morning. I've made that argument myself many times. But if Burke didn't know he'd hurt his sister mortally, if sent to his bedroom, or if he ran to his room and hid waiting for the parents to discover what he'd done, and stayed there while they tried to figure out what to do, maybe the Ramseys wanted him out of the house for two reasons: one, so LE wouldn't have a chance to question him and/or he wouldn't have a chance to say something to the guests or LE, blurt out something under pressure when...two, JonBenet's body was found and Burke thought he must have killed her. So Burke was sent away quickly once the Whites got there, to a house of friends. At some point that early morning perhaps Burke had been instructed not to say A WORD about what happened on pain of terrible things happening to him.

    Just some other thoughts....
  18. Tril

    Tril Member

    koldkase, I too hope you'll post your timeline.

    Btw, kk, fascinating posts. I remain pretty much a BDI person, but I don't rule out the possibility that PDI, or even that JDI...although I'm more of the opinion that John's role was aiding Patsy in the coverup.
  19. Elle

    Elle Member

    Burke Ramsey will have to talk about this night sometime soon, KK. It's not as if he was a baby on Christmas night, 1996. He was almost ten years old, and we know he was ushered out of the house toot sweet by John Ramsey, who seemed to take charge of the whole scene. Not going to a hotel offered by the cops, but to the Fernie house. He really does take over, doesn't he?

    You bet Burke was told to keep his mouth closed that night.
  20. heymom

    heymom Member

    I think the only hope we have for Burke talking is when his father is dead and buried. And he may not then, if anything implicates him in it.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice