Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by Tricia, Jan 18, 2012.
Yeah, that too DeeDee. He isn't fooling me.
Or perhaps a visit from these birds?
OH God, you're killing me!
Cynic, please allow me to join you in your disgust for this pandering garbage. uke:
John's attempts to make himself sound spiritual read like bad science fiction. It makes you roll your eyes and wonder in what universe could it ever happen!
If John Ramsey wants to BE spiritual and truly demonstrate the Christian attributes he professes to have, the first thing he needs to do is publicly tell the truth about what happened on the night of December 25, 1996! Next, John Ramsey needs to get down on his knees and beg the forgiveness of all the innocent people he has wronged and whose lives he has impacted for the worse. This includes Fleet White, Steve Thomas, Linda Hoffman Pugh, Chris Wolf, John Gygax, Cina Wong, and many, many others. After that, John Ramsey needs to start paying back the money it has cost the people of Colorado to continually investigate the Ramsey case for the past 15 years because it was an unnecessary waste of time, money and effort.
Only after John Ramsey has done all that can he possibly START on the path of a real spiritual journey. Until then, John is just continuing the lie his life has become.
Oh Chero, you have hit the nail on the head sort of. I think that confession is so very good for the soul that the first step JR should take is walking into the DA's office in Boulder and announce that he is now ready and willing to tell the whole truth about the night of his daughter's murder. Then he can do all of what you suggest. He could even say that he is willing to take any and all polygraphs, give any and all remaining evidence that was taken from the house by his sister-in-law Pam and then once and for all fire Woody as his Bull dog atty. Oh yes and most of all turn over his phone records from the month of December of that same year. He has them laminated and preserved so he can chuckle every time they are mentioned. (just dreaming here of course)
That's part of what I had in mind, Zoomama! When I said John needs to publicly tell what he knows, that includes going to the DA's office, as well as making the rounds of the fawning media. I want him to tell anyone who will listen THE TRUTH! John needs to undo 15 years of lying and obfuscation.
Of course, the whole thing is a fantasy because it will never happen.
And wouldn't that be a blessing to every person who ever cared about JonBenet and every person who has ever followed this case. And a blessing to him as well, because as we know- "The Truth Shall Set You Free". BUT...
I often think of the movie "A Christmas Story". In the scene where Ralphie and his friends talk Flick into sticking his tongue to the telephone pole in winter to see if it will stick. It sticks, and the kids leave him there, flailing his arms and still stuck to the pole. When they get back to class, the teacher asks what happened, and none of them admit what happened. Although the teacher knows they were involved, she can't get the truth out of them and tries to cajole them into feeling bad about it. Doesn't work- kids never feel bad about that stuff.
The voice-over says "Every kid knows it's always better not to get caught".
That's the way JR and his family feel. They got away with it and that is the end of it. The truth will stay buried...just like JonBenet. She stayed buried too. God forbid an exhumation could actually answer the stun gun question once and for all.
The book is loaded with "perfect world," idyllic stories as in the passage I mentioned over in the other thread http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showpost.php?p=189726&postcount=29
"Outside the wind blows tufts of snow...
I hum with the music. “Hark the herald angels sing…”
It makes you wonder if he’s been regurgitating spin for so long he’s lost his grip on reality and has begun to live full time in rose colored Ramseyland where he's a modern day Job and child murdering intruders are prancing to and fro, rather than in the real world where he has blood on his hands.
I just commented on the "tufts of snow" on that thread, cynic. What a sham.
You're absolutely right, Chero, but afraid I agree with DeeDee: JOB Ramsey will never, ever tell the truth, anymore than Patsy would. They are privileged. Going to prison with common child killers is out of the question. That's for poor schmucks. Boulder gave them a get-out-of-jail-free card, and they used it. Jezuz is ready to wave them into Heaven, as well, all sins forgiven because they're so special and righteous.
Send those FOOLS straight to Hell they ran over with that bus so many times. They and their loved ones don't count to the JOB Ramseys and their God.
Nope, never gonna happen. He's lasted this long....
John has decided to tell yet another version of the window story in TOSOS:
I remember last summer when I got locked out of the house; I broke a pane in a basement window, reached in and pulled open the latch, and was able to climb inside. Patsy had asked our cleaning lady’s husband to fix that window. Had it been fixed? I rush downstairs to check.
The pane is still broken.
The window stands wide open.
A big old Samsonite suitcase is set beneath the window. Who put that there? The suitcase is like a stool to climb up and crawl out the window.
Where are you, JonBenet? Be brave, Johnnie Bee – We’ll find you!
I rush up the stairs. I tell one of the policemen about the window. I can barely form the words. I’m sick to my stomach. I have to keep my wits about me. Patsy is in shock. She sits rocking and moaning, a mixing bowl between her knees as the urge to vomit is close. She’s praying and clinging to a wooden cross that she had fashioned as part of the Christmas decorations in the sunroom. There’s much turmoil. People milling about, talking, police coming and going. I tell myself, Keep focused, John. JonBenet is depending on you now more than ever. You’ve got to stay strong. You’ve got to get your baby back.
Where’s the FBI. Shouldn’t they be here by now? We need more help. Didn’t the lady detective tell me they’re on the way Where are they? And what about that strange car across the street?
The Other Side of Suffering, John Ramsey, page 12
Compare the wide open window (LOL) to this:
JOHN RAMSEY: I came down the stairs. I went in this room here. This door was kind of blocked. We had a bunch of junk down here and there was a chair that was in front of the door. Some old things. I moved the chair, went into this room, went back in here. This window was open, maybe that far.
LOU SMIT: Okay. You said -- or how far were you? An inch?
JOHN RAMSEY: An inch, maybe, or less. It was cracked open.
John Ramsey, 1998 Interview
I posted all of the prior versions of the window story here:
Sometimes the deception from the Ramsey camp is nothing short of stunning.
The following is the most openly dishonest assertion in the entire book:
A linguistics scholar, who studied the ransom note, offered his services. The police were still accusing Patsy of writing the note despite no credible handwriting expertâ€™s supporting opinion.
The linguistics scholar believed in Patsyâ€™s innocence, and wrote in a letter personally addressed to Patsy: â€œ I know that you are innocent, know it, absolutely and unequivocally, I would stake my professional reputation on it, indeed, my faith in humanity, I believe you were an ideal mother, wise, protective, caring and truly devoted.â€ He described the ransom note and said: â€œIt appears to have been written by a young adult with an adolescent imagination overheated by true crime literature and Hollywood thrillers.â€
The expert was eager and willing to help find the real killer but his offer of help was rejected by the police.
The Other Side of Suffering, John Ramsey, page 128
Although JR doesnâ€™t name the scholar, he is, of course, Don Foster.
Here is a review of the truth regarding Fosterâ€™s involvement in the case:
I finally heard the magic words while seated in the book-lined office of Don Foster, an Elizabethan scholar and professor at Vassar College in upstate New York, who just happened to be a h**l of a linguistic detective. â€œSteve,â€â€˜said Foster, â€œI believe I am going to conclude the ransom note was the work of a single individual: Patsy Ramsey.â€
These days Fosterâ€™s telephone was ringing off the hook as police and the corporate world sought his singular expertise in textual analysis. He was the best in the country at what he did.
District Attorney Alex Hunter enlisted his help in the Ramsey case, sending Foster a copy of the ransom note and the writing samples of various people, then following up with telephone calls. Foster told me that Hunter was particularly interested in Santa Bill and Janet McReynolds, and when the professor reported, â€œThey didnâ€™t write that ransom note,â€ Hunter seemed to lose interest.
The DAâ€™s office turned him over to the police, Beckner assigned him to me, and I ferried out to New York stacks of various peopleâ€™s writing samples. He explained that his work was based on much more than just one letter looking like another. Even the slightest things, such as the use of periods or the space before the start of a paragraph, could create a distinctive linguistic fingerprint. After all, it was the unconventional use of commas that had spurred his original theory about the Shakespeare fragment.
â€œWe canâ€™t falsify who we are,â€ Foster told me. â€œSentence structure, word usage, and identifying features can be a signature.â€
Throughout the month, I furnished Foster with a wide range of material from a number of suspects so we would not be accused of stacking the deck. One of the first things he picked up on was Patsyâ€™s habit of using acronyms and acrostics in her communications. She often signed off with her initials, PAPR, and used such phrases as â€œTo BVFMFA from PPRBSJ,â€ which meant, â€˜To Barbara V. Fernie, Master of Fine Arts, from Patricia Paugh Ramsey, Bachelor of Science in Journalism.â€ That, I thought, might somehow link to the mysterious SBTC acronym on the ransom note.
Foster was concerned that Alex Hunter still occasionally called to introduce his own theories and ideas and had told Foster there was â€œno way the parents did this.â€ To disclose such opinions to an independent examiner exposes them to attack in court, but Hunter didnâ€™t seem to care. The DA further risked tainting Foster by sending him copies of work done by other linguistic experts, but Foster refused to open those packets. In my opinion it was as if Hunter was trying to torpedo his own witness.
â€œSteer clear of him. You work for the Boulder Police Department, not the DAâ€™s office,â€ I told Foster.
Foster told me, â€œHeâ€™s just desperately trying to find an intruder. Iâ€™m not sure he has the resolve to pursue this in the direction that Iâ€™m seeing.â€
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, pages 291 - 292
Don Foster from Vassar, the top linguistics man in the country, made his conclusion firm in March. â€œIn my opinion, it is not possible that any individual except Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note,â€ he told a special briefing in Boulder, adding that she had been unassisted in writing it.
With his sterling academic reputation and a track record of 152-0 in deciphering anonymous writings, this should have been a thunderbolt of evidence, but the DAâ€™s office, without telling us, had already discredited and discarded the professor. His coming to Boulder was a big waste of time.
In our case, Foster examined hundreds of writing samples from people ranging from family members to Internet addicts, from neighbors to Chris Wolf to the McReynolds family, and a library of books, films, and videotapes.
Patsy Ramsey wrote it, he said. â€œThose are her words.â€
While Foster made that dramatic statement, Deputy DA Pete Hofstrom read a book and didnâ€™t look up. He occasionally rubbed his head and ignored the expert. I believed Hofstrom had already decided that Foster, with his definitive report, would never go before the grand jury, and he never did.
But that day in March, he built a wall of linguistic evidence before our eyes, brick by brick.
He explained that language is infinitely diverse and that no two people use it in quite the same way. They do not have the same vocabulary, use identical spelling and punctuation, construct sentences in the same manner, read the same books, or express the same beliefs and ideas. Ingrained and unconscious habits are virtually impossible to conceal, even if a writer tries to disguise his identity, he said. â€œIndividuals are prisoners of their own language.â€
Foster dissected the ransom note, explained that the wording contained intelligent and sometimes clever usage of language, and said the text suggested someone who was trying to deceive.
The documents he studied from Patsy Ramsey, in his opinion, formed â€œa precise and unequivocal matchâ€ with the ransom note. He read a list of â€œunique matchesâ€ with the note that included such things as her penchant for inventing private acronyms, spelling habits, indentation, alliterative phrasing, metaphors, grammar, vocabulary, frequent use of exclamation points, and even the format of her handwriting on the page.
In the decade prior to the homicide, Patsy freely inter-changed the manuscript â€œaâ€ and the cursive â€œa.â€ But in the months prior to December 1996, she exhibited a marked preference for the manuscript â€œa.â€ The ransom note contained such a manuscript â€œaâ€ 109 times and the cursive version only 5 times. But after the Ramseys were given a copy of the ransom note, Foster found only a single manuscript â€œaâ€ in her writing, while the cursive â€œaâ€ now appeared 1,404 times!
That lone exception was in the sample that her mother had unexpectedly handed to Detective Gosage in Atlanta.
Not only did certain letters change, but her entire writing style seemed to have been transformed after the homicide. There were new ways of indenting, spelling, and writing out long numbers that contrasted with her earlier examples, and she was the only suspect who altered her usual preferences when supplying writing samples to the police.
Foster used an overhead projector to describe Patsy Ramseyâ€™s habit of creating acronyms and acrostics, which she did with astonishing frequency.
On and on Foster probed, racing through numerous compelling points that left little doubt the ransom note came from Patsyâ€™s hand. The Vassar scholar explained that as people change over time, they incorporate some of what they read and experience into their language. â€œThe Ramsey library contains many books that were sources for Patsy Ramseyâ€™s nine-teen ninety-five and ninety-six writings, many of which also contain startling verbal or other detailed parallels with the Ramsey homicide and attendant staging, including language that appears in the ransom note,â€ he said.
When Foster was done, DA Alex Hunter said he â€œneeded time to digestâ€ the mass of information that had been presented. Pete Hofstrom closed his book and walked away, seemingly bored.
I was totally engrossed by the presentation and thought Foster had thoroughly tied Patsy to the ransom note. It was a bombshell of evidence. So why did the DAâ€™s office seem so dismissive?
The district attorney continued to call Foster privately over the coming weeks, and Foster told me he was puzzled by Hunterâ€™s reluctance to move forward. â€œHow can anyone still think this was the work of an intruder? This case appears solved. Now it needs to be prosecuted.â€
The answer came several weeks later when Pete Hofstrom sent over a package from an Internet junkie named Susan Bennett, who had been in contact with Lou Smit.
Her material indicated that back when Foster was just another Internet observer without access to official information, he had gotten involved in an Internet chat about JonBenÃ©t with Susan Bennett, who used the name of Jameson on the Net Foster once guessed incorrectly that die anonymous Jameson was really John Andrew Ramsey, the oldest son of John Ramsey.
Then Foster wrote a letter to Patsy Ramsey, suggesting that he thought she was innocent. Those statements were made before Foster was brought aboard to look at the case file, after which he changed his conclusion 180 degrees. To me, that only strengthened his position, not weakened it, for it showed he had no anti-Ramsey bias. Once the professor had access to the actual case documents, he changed his mind.
Bob Keatley, our in-house counsel, then pointed to the post-mark on the envelope, July 1997.
One detective yelled, â€œTheyâ€™ve had these f*****g documents for ten months!â€ It had lain in the DAâ€™s case file all year, while I was working with Foster, and Hunter himself was calling the professor with suggestions.
The DAâ€™s office knew all about the damaging information before the professor conducted his studies or came to Boulder and even while Hunter was pumping him about other possible suspects. In my opinion, Foster apparently had value until the moment he pointed his finger at Patsy Ramsey.
I believed that if Foster had said Santa Bill McReynolds or Chris Wolf or any of a dozen other suspects wrote the note, the DAâ€™s office would have been off and running after them. But now Pete Hofstrom dismissed Foster with a terse â€œThe defense would eat him alive.â€
They should have fought to use Fosterâ€™s expertise as the premier linguist in the nation, and explained to the jurors the totally different conditions under which he made his earlier statements. Thatâ€™s what courtroom argument is for. Take your best shot, and let the jury decide. The defense might have eaten him alive, but Foster might have taken a bite out of them instead.
With Fosterâ€™s conclusion and the panel of doctors who confirmed prior vaginal trauma, we felt we had met the criteria set by Pete Hofstrom for prosecution.
Instead Foster was consigned to the DAâ€™s junk pile. Losing him was a devastating blow.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, pages 313 - 317
As we left the auditorium, the detectives could feel the current of excitement. The state attorney generalâ€™s office and our Dream Team were lobbying for Don Foster to be used as a witness in court.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 344
I said that more than a dozen points led us to the Ramseys. Prior vaginal trauma came first. Then I went through die ransom note, the pen, pad, handwriting, and practice notes, as well as the textual analysis and Don Fosterâ€™s conclusion that Patsy was the author.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 345
Then at the end of July Don Foster, the Vassar linguist who had helped make our case, telephoned to tell me that the DAâ€™s office had just dismissed him. Not only did they fire Foster but they informed him that he was through doing this kind of work. Citing his Internet comments to Jameson when he knew nothing about the case, they declared that his later conclusions, when he knew everything, were unreliable.
Rather than fight to use his testimony, they declared that he would be open to impeachment on that one issue. Further-more, Foster was given the plain message that if he didnâ€™t contact the FBI and other law enforcement agencies heâ€™d worked for and admit that he was compromised and damaged goods, then the Boulder DAâ€™s office might make the call. â€œHeâ€™s cooked here,â€ said one detective.
It was a ridiculous attack on the manâ€™s sterling reputation. Without Don Foster the case against Patsy Ramsey was much more difficult, but the DAâ€™s office threw him overboard. Not only did they want him off the case but it appeared they wanted to ruin his life. It was so like them, I thought to go after the dissenters, those who didnâ€™t agree with them. The DAâ€™s office wouldnâ€™t stand up to Team Ramsey but had no hesitation about burning good people who stood in their way.
JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation, Steve Thomas, page 371
From Perfect Murder, Perfect Town:
Hunter thought that Foster might be helpful in the Ramsey case. Just before the July Fourth weekend, he called Foster, who told the DA that he had once written a letter to Patsy Ramsey and another to her son, John Andrew, while following the case on the Internet. He said he had wanted to lend them some support. Hunter saw no conflict of interest.
Foster agreed to analyze the ransom note for the DAâ€™s office. He would also be sent Janet McReynoldsâ€™s play Hey, Rube, Christmas letters and articles written by both Janet and Bill McReynolds, some of Patsy Ramseyâ€™s writings, and transcripts of the Ramseysâ€™ January 1 and May 1 press conferences. Not long after speaking to Foster, Hunter said that â€œthis case will come down to linguistics.â€
For months the Boulder police had been collecting Patsyâ€™s handwriting samples: beauty-pageant entry forms, school documents, applications, and business letters. They had recently visited the offices of Hayes Micro Computer in Norcross, Georgia, where Patsy had worked before marrying John. There they found more handwriting samples. This material was relevant for handwriting analysis but was of limited value to Donald Foster. He needed lengthy texts and examples of Patsyâ€™s prepared and extemporaneous speeches. These would take time to find and even longer to analyze.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 422 - 423
In mid-January, Beckner told Hunter that Donald Foster, the Vassar linguistics expert who had been working on the case with them, at Hunterâ€™s suggestion, was making some headway with his analysis. Beckner was eager to hear from Foster.
Steve Thomas had visited Foster earlier in the month, taking along hundreds of pages of writing from many different suspects, including Patsy and John Ramsey. Foster had followed the case on the Internet long before he was sought out to work on it. He had even entered some of the chat rooms and discussed the case with people like Jameson.
Foster was impressed with the detective. â€œI canâ€™t tell you what our theories or the evidence are,â€ Thomas had said. â€œAnd Iâ€™m not going to prejudice your thinking.â€ Foster found that kind of commitment to justice unusual. He had heard the same thing from Hunter when they first talked on the phone. To the professor, both men seemed dedicated to finding JonBenÃ©tâ€™s killer.
In his work, Foster always began with the assumption that no detail, however small, is irrelevant. Something as seemingly trivial as a period after the abbreviation Mr. can be a vitally important clue. In this example, it could suggest someoneâ€™s nationality: Americans use a period after the abbreviation but British writers do not. In one murder case, Foster identified the author of a document as someone educated in India. Among other clues was the misspelling of the name Rhonda as Rondha. In addition to such minutiae, Foster tracked down source material such as books, TV shows, movies, or music lyrics that might have influenced the writers whose documents he analyzed.
Beckner hoped Foster would name Patsy Ramsey as the author of the ransom note, and he asked Hunter if he would consider filing a motion to admit linguistic evidence when he filed charges against Patsy. It was the first time Hunter had heard Beckner name a suspect in connection with the death of JonBenÃ©t.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 603 - 604
At the end of March, Donald Foster, the Vassar linguistics expert, delivered his written report to the Boulder police. It was almost a hundred pages long and concluded that Patsy Ramsey had written the ransom note. It was key evidence, Beckner told DeMuth. He went on to explain how Foster had come to his conclusion. DeMuth pointed out that it would not be admissible in a Colorado court.
â€œMy guys think youâ€™re an a*****e,â€ Beckner said to him, â€œbut weâ€™re going to need an a*****e to fight for us.â€ He asked DeMuth to persuade Hofstrom and Hunter to use Fosterâ€™s report and conclusions as evidence before the grand jury. DeMuth remained neutral; he agreed only to discuss Fosterâ€™s findings with his colleagues. Later that afternoon, Hunter, Hofstrom, and DeMuth met. They decided to draft a letter to Beckner stating that the DAâ€™s office could not accept Fosterâ€™s conclusions as evidence of Patsy Ramseyâ€™s culpability.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 629 - 630
Alex Hunter had watched 20/20 fearing the worst. The attack on him wasnâ€™t as bad as he had expected. But listening to Fosterâ€™s conclusions regarding Patsy and the ransom note, he knew there was another side to that story, which the Ramseysâ€™ attorneys were sure to make public. Several months earlier, Bryan Morgan had given Hunter a copy of a letter that Foster had written to Patsy Ramsey in the spring of 1997, before he agreed to work for Hunter. The DA was aware that Foster had followed the case on the Internet from February 1997 and that he had also written to Patsy. But when Morgan told him about the second communiquÃ©, which Foster sent to Jameson, who ran an information Web site on the Internet, Hunter was dismayed. It seemed that at first Foster believed that Jameson was in fact John Andrew. Foster, after e-mailing Jameson/John Andrew a series of Internet communiquÃ©s, was told by Jameson that she was Sue Bennett and not John Andrew. Foster soon after asked Bennett to turn herself in to the police for her part as an accessory to the crime of murder. In the same communiquÃ© to Jameson/Bennett, Foster said John Andrew and Jameson were one person and indicated that he believed that John Andrew was involved in the death of JonBenÃ©t.
In Fosterâ€™s letter to Patsy, he had written, â€œI know you are innocentâ€”know it absolutely and unequivocally. I will stake my professional reputation on it, indeed my faith in my humanity.â€ He also said that his analysis of the note [at the time] â€œleads me to believe you did not write it and the police are wasting their time by trying to prove that you did.â€ Even though Fosterâ€™s spring 1997 conclusions were based only on the fragments of the ransom note that were available at the time, there was a powerful contradiction between his conclusion at the time and what he said in 1998.
â€œDid you think the Ramseys were going to forget about his letter?â€ Wise said to a reporter when word of it leaked. In his final report, Foster used strong language to state that Patsy Ramsey had written the ransom note. In the letter to Patsy claiming he was sure she didnâ€™t write it, Foster had used almost the same language.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 737 - 738
Just to be clear, there is no way that John is somehow unaware that Foster identified Patsy as the author of the ransom note after he received a good sampling of exemplars and other material from the BPD.
As a matter of fact, his own words from Death of Innocence serve to indict him. Below is the relevant passage
One of the most bizarre twists in the Internet spectacle came from an enthusiast who is a professor in the English Department at Vassar College. Donald Foster considered himself an â€œexpertâ€ in linguistic text analysis.
On May 22, 1997, Foster made his first contact with Jameson, applauding her for reminding the anonymous Internet â€œvoicesâ€ that the Ramseys were innocent until proven guilty. He placated her with the idea that he wanted to write a book on people who were â€œanonymous hats.â€
Foster had also written a full-page letter to Patsy proclaiming his belief in her innocence and stating that he would both stake his reputation and faith in humanity on the fact of her not being guilty. In addition to this magnanimous sweep of generosity, Foster had another motivation for writing. He wanted Patsy and me to use him to find the killer. When we didnâ€™t respond, he went to the Boulder police with a similar offer, only he must have left out the part about Patsy being innocent.
Foster then gave Jameson his home phone number and asked her to call him. When she called, he heard her soft, obviously female voice and was shocked. Foster quickly became quite uncomfortable with the information he was being given but believed his analysis of â€œJamesonâ€™sâ€ writings was correct. He was convinced that he had not spoken to the Internet poster â€œJamesonâ€ (whom he believed to be John Andrew) but to an accomplice named Susan Bennett, probably a cousin who had been hiding John Andrew in her North Carolina home. Foster refused to admit that his assessment of Jamesonâ€™s writings was off.
On June 29, 1997, Foster sent a long certified letter to Mrs. Susan Bennett, offering to go between her and the police if she would turn herself in to the authorities for her part in the Ramsey crime. Foster now was convinced that Susan had been allowing John Andrew to use her computer to send out information. He still hadnâ€™t gotten the point that Susan Bennett was Jameson.
Late that summer, Jameson learned that the Boulder police intended to introduce Foster as an expert witness for testimony in the grand jury setting in an attempt to get an indictment against Patsy. By that time Foster had decided he was wrong about Jameson. Instead Foster now believed that Paty clearly was the only one who had written the thirty-one-sentence ransom note, and he would testify for the police as an â€œexpert.â€
Jameson took the story of Fosterâ€™s claims against her to the district attorneyâ€™s office. Donald Foster, she said, was anything but a credible witness, but the DA never contacted her. With the help of Colorado University professor Michael Tracey, one of the producers of the JonBenÃ©tâ€™s America documentary, Jameson brought her story to CBS. In April 1999 she appeared on 48 Hoursâ€¦
Death of Innocence, John Ramsey, pages 307 - 310
Hi everyone! I just wanted to pop in here and apologize profusely for dropping the ball on this thread. I promised to read the book and come back a post the discrepancies and then all hell broke loose in my life. A health scare and a change of residence kept me away and then for awhile I didn't even have the internet! So anyway, I'm sorry I didn't follow through with what I had promised to do. I see others also read the book and filled in the blanks nicely. It's nice to be back. I missed you all!:beats: (And I missed discussing this case with you. I'm still not over it!)
What the hell is a "tuft of snow?" My GOD he makes the author of Fifty Shades of Gray look like Shakespeare.
Did anyone see the -kissing interview with John Ramsey on Good Morning America? No wonder nobody watches mainstream media anymore. If that is journalism, I'm Justin Bieber.
Just one time, ONE TIME, I want someone to ask that sneering creep why there were three differing motives at the crime scene:
1. Ransom kidnapping
2. Foreign terrorism
3. Sexual assault
Conflicting motives point to two things: staging and desperation.
Good to see you again. I was thinking about you the other day, wondering how you're doing.
Always love your common sense POV, BobC.
No such thing as journalism anymore, unfortunately for the world. It's all corporate back-scratching now.
Yeah, old JOB Ramsey gets a free pass every time he starts spinning his lies again. From the media anyway. Comments online written in response to the sycophantic, suck-up, pro-Ramsey blogs and articles prove that the majority of the public is still not fooled, however.
I refuse to even pick up a copy of John's book, even to look at the cover. I wouldn't be surprised to learn he had named Al Qaeda as the small foreign faction, and if he didn't, it is only because he didn't think of it.
Glad to see you back, Bob!
What an EFFING LIAR! Sparrows CANNOT HOVER! Only HUMMINGBIRDS can hover! Grrrrrrrrr....
Did John Ramsey charge the Charlevoix church for his book signing?
Taken from the monthly mail newsletter of the Christ Episcopal Church in Charlevoix, MI -
CHRIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, CHARLEVOIX , MI - JUNE 2012
"THE RED DOOR"
From Father John ~
We have good news, good news, and even more good news.
John Ramseyâ€™s presentation and book signing turned out to be a great success. For those thinking that Johnâ€™s talk would be a retelling of the tragic
death of JonBenet they were wrong. John told a story of faith and hope rising up from the suffering we endure in life. Those people fortunate enough to
be present were encouraged by one manâ€™s faith journey along with his insights on healing. Johnâ€™s answers to the questions from the audience were
honest and thoughtful and gave a sense of intimacy to the evening. This event was made possible through the investment income from the Taylor Fund at the Community Foundation. It was attended by over 150 people.
More good news. Our next event with national recognition, also open to the community, will be a teaching on the â€œParables of Jesusâ€ by the Westar Institute. This teaching by the organization that carries on what began as the â€œJesus Seminar,â€ will be insightful and provocative and will encourage a deeper understanding of Jesus and his teaching. Although this is not scheduled until October 5 and 6, best get it on your calendar now. The major expense of bringing two speakers to Charlevoix will also be covered by the Taylor Fund.
Thank You to John Ramsey ~
Many thanks to John Ramsey for presenting his book talk about his recent book, The Other Side of Suffering, on the evening of May 23rd. Over 150 people attended the talk and book signing. Round Lake Bookstore provided books for sale. If you didnâ€™t get a copy, check with Diane at the bookstore.
Weâ€™ll try to get John to do a summer signing for anyone who didnâ€™t get their copy signed. Thanks to all who helped, especially Jan Ramsey, Don Collier and Gary Stutzman and his students from Northwest Academy.
Of COURSE he did!
I don't think Job Ramsey does anything for free these days. It takes $$$ to keep a private plane ready for use.
SOB Ramsey, more like.
You don't remember? He and Patsy hired themselves out for some time to be "motivational speakers." That's what they were doing in Hawaii a few months before she died.
You can read the rest at the link.
As I remember, they got about $5K for a speaking engagement when Patsy was alive.
I'm not worried about JOB, though, as his new wife Jan has navigated the Las Vegas showgirl scene as a costumer, a couple of bankruptcies, and a couple of other marriages. While she may not be Patsy, I doubt she's a wallflower, either, or she'd never have gone after old JOB with his baggage.
She says she's from a missionary family, born in Africa or India or some such. She speaks with the traditional Christian references we heard from Patsy, as well, when she talks.
I tell you, they seem like a good match, actually: Patsy 2.0
I sure would like to see the pre-nup.
Separate names with a comma.