John Ramsey reveals why the “intruder†hasn’t been caught.

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by cynic, May 17, 2012.

  1. cynic

    cynic Member

    A normal answer would be along the lines of, “technology hasn’t progressed enough, but I am anxiously awaiting the day that this “monster” is caught in order that my daughter might finally rest in peace,” or something along those lines.
    If you thought that John's answer would be similar, you couldn't be more wrong.
    No, instead his answer is OFF THE SCALE NARCISSISTIC.

    I had complained to a friend that God had not answered my constant prayer for the killer to be brought to light, and my friend wisely responded. “Perhaps God knows you not ready for that day yet.”
    I understood what he meant.
    God knew I needed to be emotionally and spiritually prepared to handle the painful details of our child’s death, and the inevitable grueling public trial. I had never read the autopsy report because I knew it would be too painful. I had never seen the photographs. Denial can be a powerful weapon to combat fear. Now with a trial, I would be forced to learn exactly what happened. This would be very, very difficult for me.

    The Other Side of Suffering, John Ramsey, page 174

    The answer is that God is preventing the capture of the “intruder.”
    Why? Because of ME, ME, ME.
    What about justice for JonBenet. Who cares?
    Am I ready, will this inconvenience ME?
    Last edited: May 18, 2012
  2. fr brown

    fr brown Member

    That's hilarious--and cynical since he knows very well who killed his daughter.
  3. Learnin

    Learnin Member

    I believe some Saint uttered the following wise admonition:

    Pray as if everything depended on God and work as if everything depended upon you.

    John, get up off your lazy arse and work to find the killer of your daughter if you truly don't know who it was. If you do, then, continue to lay it in God's hands.
  4. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Did John write that in his new book? Cause I've heard him tell that story several times on TV. For years.

    If he included that in his book, he clearly is simply recycling the same old BS the Ramseys have been selling from Day One.

    For example: if I hear that "talent medal" story one more time.... :puke:
  5. Why_Nut

    Why_Nut FFJ Senior Member

    I bet you never knew that God Himself made sure JonBenet won a medal for talent, and not a trophy, specifically so John could wear it discreetly under his shirt rather than hauling a giant trophy around his neck like some elderly grey-haired Flavor Flav.
  6. Thor

    Thor Active Member

    John always referred to the killa as "that creature". I remember because I have the Thomas/Ramsey showdown on Larry King Live recorded and watch it from time to time. The word creature is used quite a bit. Just wanted to through that out there. Can't figure out why the hell he is throwing this latest book at us. I'm not buying it.
    Last edited: May 18, 2012
  7. whitewitch1

    whitewitch1 Senior Member

  8. whitewitch1

    whitewitch1 Senior Member

    I recall the "creature" comments well and it's always bothered me for some reason.
    But then again, everything about John Ramsey bothers me.
  9. Elle

    Elle Member

    I won't be buying Ramsey's latest book either, Thor, although I did buy "Death of Innocence" without knowing one single thing about the Ramseys. You were my very first close friend all those years ago on the JonBenét case in the forum. You and other members there filled me in with all the information on the Ramseys. Seems so long ago. How many years ago? I know I was a lot younger! :) Now I'm ancient Chinese history! :) I have enjoyed your friendship.
  10. Elle

    Elle Member

    Not to worry whitewitch, he could have been your neighbour. :)
  11. Thor

    Thor Active Member

    Elle, I believe we started chatting back in 2001. I didn't have a computer until then and believe it or not didn't access the internet until 2000 when I got my current job! Boy I missed out on a lot in the early years of this case. I have enjoyed your friendship as well! I just hope we get some answers soon from Tricia.
  12. cynic

    cynic Member

    I've always thought that was unusual term of endearment for Patsy.
  13. Niner

    Niner Active Member

    :floor: :floor:
  14. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    John's use of the term "creature" always bothered me, as well.

    I don't remember Patsy ever calling the KILLER just that, or murderer--she must have, but I don't remember. I remember her statement on Jan. 1st, 1997: "...there's someone out there...."

    Because that is what the person was--A CHILD KILLER.

    So I always figured saying "creature" instead of killer or murderer was John's passive/aggressive way of denying the truth and not shoving it in the killer's face at every turn that Creature did some very, very bad things to JonBenet.
  15. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member


    Also, so his wallet could hold it without looking like he had Satan's tail tucked in his back pocket....

    God is good.

    Hopefully there's some justice in Him sometime soon, as well.... :pray:
  16. Elle

    Elle Member

    Eleven years ago, I was still a Senior! :) I remember thinking you were a guy because of the name Thor "God of Thunder" and then you told me it was your German Shepherd's name.

    Amazing we have been discussing this case for all these years. Let's hope Tricia's news will be encouraging!
  17. whitewitch1

    whitewitch1 Senior Member

    Nah. Charlevoix is nowhere near me and besides, I'm just 'po white trash. :shamed:
  18. Elle

    Elle Member

    :toast: Three cheers for the difference! ww! :)
  19. Why_Nut

    Why_Nut FFJ Senior Member

    Referring to JonBenet's killer as a "creature" might be a way for John to feel less responsible for doing anything to help find this supposed intruder. If a bear had broken in through the balcony entrance and ripped JonBenet to shreds, then wandered back off into the mountains, all John would be expected to do is mourn and go about his life, as he did indeed do. If John dares to refer to JonBenet's killer as a person or man, he is expected to help his fellow people in finding this person, who exists as a member of society and needs to be found, captured, and contained so as to not murder again. John, as we have seen, has absolutely no interest in helping to identify JonBenet's murderer, even when he has more of a stake in the subject than anyone else, so he also has no interest in affirming the murderer as a person who could be caught rather than as a "creature" which cannot.
  20. Thor

    Thor Active Member

    Sounds reasonable to me Why Nut. I remember him referring to "the/this creature" many times in interviews back in the day. Just a little thing I picked up on.
  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