Let's throw down, jams

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by koldkase, Mar 29, 2006.

  1. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    The facts are the facts, and more than one REAL JOURNALIST, as well as Kane and Thomas, have written and stated as FACT that the original 911 call tape was taken to Aerospace to be analysed. The result, as reported by ACTUAL JOURNALISTS and PROFESSIONAL LE, was an enhanced tape with voices on it in the background at the end of Patsy's 911 call.

    But as usual, you deny the truth and state your misinformation as fact:

    We'll see who's peddling ABSOLUTE BULL here.

    You, jams, say you spoke to Schiller and he won't "...verify Thomas' version of events...." So you're implying rather clearly Schiller denied the voices are on the enhanced 911 tape, because that's what Thomas wrote in his book. Or are you once again playing with semantics, meaning to give ONE impression, but leaving room to argue you didn't say that? That's the swamp spin we have so come to expect.

    I believe you are the one hearing voices if you really think that's what Schiller told you, because he wrote about this repeatedly in his book:


    [Thanks for the thousandth time, ACR.]


    Neither Schiller nor Kane EVER verified there are voices on the tape, you say? Here is the transcript of the Abrams show (thank you, Moab, for the thousandth time) where Schiller clearly states the exact same information about the enhanced 911 tape from Aerospace, repeating that VOICES ARE CLEARLY ON THE ENHANCED TAPE, just as he said in his book. (I saw the show and this transcript is true, but if you want to get another transcript from MSNBC, I'm sure you can; it will be essentially the same transcript.):

    And furthermore, on the same show, Kane backs up what Schiller says, stating HE HAS HEARD THE TAPE AND THERE ARE VOICES ON IT. Schiller is clearly arguing WHAT HE WROTE IN HIS BOOK IS CORRECT:


    You're right about one thing: Geraldo didn't air THE 911 call. He aired THE ENHANCED TAPE OF THE END OF THE 911 CALL. But that confusion I can understand, as for years, I didn't even get the difference, not until Wood aired the original on TV every five minutes. When I heard the original 911 call, I was stunned, because I did NOT remember hearing Patsy's voice, not the heavy breathing, the operator...none of it. I was ABOUT to post a mea culpa, that I must be wrong about hearing the tape on Geraldo, sure I'd have remembered Patsy's voice...when the Bonita Papers, which I also didn't know about, were posted online. Ironically enough, it was gutter candy bickering with someone--Spade?--about that topic, posting the section about the saga of the enhanced tape to prove some point she was busting a gut over, that focused me on the fact that THESE WERE TWO DIFFERENT TAPES, and the one I'd heard on Geraldo WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL WITH PATSY. That not only enlightened me about what I'd heard, but it was consistent with my memory of only hearing the "voices" aired on the tape from the Geraldo show.

    Jams, I know you well enough to know that you don't want to know, admit, or share the truth on this topic. Seems none of the RST has the courage to admit the plain truth about this, and I'm not even sure why, as there are good arguments to be made about how much any of this issue matters to the case anyway. But you only discredit yourself and your forum when you deny and bury the truth there. Anyone who has followed the case and kept up knows the truth about this from so many credible sources, it's undeniable to all but those who close their eyes to it willfully.

    As for me hearing the enhanced tape, it's a moot issue. Nobody has to believe me to actually KNOW there is an enhanced tape and that voices are on it, as the above sources prove. As for me, I know the truth by sheer serendipity. If Geraldo has stated publicly he did not play the ENHANCED TAPE, I believe you should put up your source of Geraldo saying that, as well, because I've never heard him say that and it would be news to me. And he would be bald-faced lying.


    For those who claim my not having a tape of the show proves it never happened, then I guess what is coming off my TV everyday is from Planet SuRztuN, because I don't tape all that, either. No, I didn't tape that show, which I've said many times. I doubt that most of the American public have ever considered taping nightly talk shows for future proof, to convince people they don't know even exist, of what is said on those shows. It's absurd to think they would. Who could possibly have known back then this would be such an issue? How many 911 calls have we heard on TV? I didn't even realize for years Geraldo played a different tape made from the original call. I just thought that he played the part with the voices which were claimed to be Burke's and John's. It never crossed my mind what had been done to the tape, nor that it mattered, other than here was the much talked about tape with voices that allegedly incriminated the Ramseys. When I heard it, it did not seem like a big deal at all. Nobody on the show jumped up and down, nobody argued vociferously, as I remember. I couldn't make out what was said, and neither could anyone on the show. Just voices. The whole segment took maybe 15 minutes. At the time, I don't think I'd ever discussed the case with another human being; it was just something I was interested in, like the O.J. case. Nobody I knew in real life cared one way or another--and doesn't to this day. So why on EARTH would I tape it?

    This was before I ever even imagined there was an internet full of boards and discussions about the case, or any case, or anything like forums, before I was online. I had never once taped one thing to do with any case in those days, unless it as a show I wanted to see and couldn't be there, and then taped over the next time for the same reason. I just watched talk shows for my own interest, which did not require taping. I always watched Geraldo at night for the news about the various high profiile cases. That's the only reason I even saw that show, because as I remember it, only a few commercials were run that day or so about him having "the tape" on his show that night. I can't even say what year it was now. I just know it was before May of 2000, because that's when I came online after reading Thomas' book and learning he was going to be on a website answering questions about his book.

    So if people want to believe that I'm therefore a liar because I can't prove what I saw on TV one night, years ago, even though others also say they saw it as well, then I guess they'll just have to believe what they need to believe. I'm not a liar, and I saw it.

    All I have ever heard said about why CNBC buried the show is what Maeven said, because she saw it, too. (No, I didn't know her then, don't know her now, she just saw me posting about it at Purgatory long ago and posted her information.) She said she saw it, not knowing ahead of time what was coming on. So she was going to tape it on the repeat of the show late that night, but when it came back on, there was some kind of message that due to some problem, the repeat was canceled, which disappointed her. That's all I know, as I didn't bother to stay up and see it again. Why would I? Since I know SOMETHING happened that night to the show, I can only surmise the network got a call from Hunter or Beckner or God, for all I know, and the result was they cut that part out of the transcript and the tapes they sell of the shows or just ditched that segment altogether under threat of legal action, maybe because Burke was a minor, maybe because it was evidence in a murder case.

    But I think it is just another example of how this murder case has been full of strange events all along.

    At any rate, moot point. The real issue is that there is plenty of credible corroboration from sources as high up as the attorney who led the Grand Jury which PROVES that there is an enhanced tape of the end of the 911 call, and there are voices on it.

    AND THAT'S NO ********.
  2. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay: :yay:

  3. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland

    Is she saying geraldo confided his thoughts to her? I would doubt that - there are too many clear cut examples of her using semantics to mislead the reading public.
  4. Moab

    Moab Admin Staff Member

    G'Day Mate...CONGRATS on a wonderful accounting KK...you da bomb!

    Jameson is ALL about semantics, and has been since the first time she had to wiggle out of a forum lie!
  5. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland

    I used to work with a bloke who used semantics to get himself out of tricky situations. For an example, supposing he left the stationery cupboard door open and three month's supply of printer ink was stolen. If the boss was to ask him "Did you leave the stationery cupboard door unlocked?" he would shake his head and say "I cannot tell a lie". The boss would accept his "denial" and look elsewhere to pin the blame.

    Everytime I heard him say "I cannot tell a lie" - I knew that's exactly what he was doing!
  6. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    No matter how hard she tries, jameson cannot undo her past practice of lying and admitting she lied and would lie if it suited her purpose. She can't undo pretending to be a man who lost his wife on the Audobon.

    I don't know about anyone else, but lie to me once, and I'll never believe what you say, again. I do not believe anything jameson says. Her diatribes are filled with innuendo, half truths, semantics, and flat-out lies. She has no credibility - she did it to herself.
  7. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    If you post complete lies and disinformation year in and year out, regardless of how obvious it is that's what you are doing, I guess it doesn't matter to you that honest people see what you're doing. If the swampsters want to back up that kind of duplicity, then they are not looking for the truth and have no interest in finding it.

    All I am interested in here is the truth. A child was murdered. This is no game. Nobody wins. JonBenet was robbed of many things that night, but the biggest crime was her life was taken from her. If there was some intruder, with some kind of real evidence which pointed in that direction, I'd be all over it. But we all know what is going on here: not one piece of evidence has led to an even WARM LEAD on an intruder in over nine years. All the evidence identifed has come right back to the family and the home. The parents have gone to extraordinary lengths to obstruct LE in the investigation, and all the excuses in the world won't cover up or alter the FACT that NO INTRUDER HAS BEEN FOUND.

    If the Ramseys wanted the truth exposed in the murder of JonBenet, they'd have been front and center pushing for it, helping LE instead of manipulating the case, lying to and evading LE, and spinning their lawyers' public relations bull in every media outlet possible.

    If the Ramseys really had an intruder that night, maybe they should have been as hot to help LE find him as they are to sue everyone who speaks the truth about this murder. Then a child killer might have been put away by now. As it is, it looks very much like that's what they were afraid of all along.
  8. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Well, what did I expect? Jams the liar responded to all the sources I posted, from Schiller's own mouth, saying he said that BEFORE the tape was released.

    Guess she can't be bothered to read the date on a transcript, nor read the transcript to SEE THE TRUTH. The transcript is from Abrams' show which resulted from WOOD RELEASING HIS COPY OF THE 911 TAPE. THE SHOW WAS ABOUT THE RELEASE OF THE 911 TAPE. Duh.

    But why bother to get INFORMED of the truth when lies and disinformation work so well for the RST to keep their myths and frauds intact?

    Also, dear old gutter candy somehow got confused AGAIN and didn't jump right on jams for MURDERING THE TRUTH! Nope, gutter candy simply attacked BORG and our GUTTAH FORUMS. She's just so above it all, happily inhaling the fumes of complete insanity at the swamp, doncha know....

    Well, at least gutter candy told the truth about Geraldo NOT publicly disclaiming playing the enhanced tape. Jams is REPEATING her lies about that, not to mention, not ABOUT to post an actual source. Jams doesn't need sources. She just makes it up as she goes. Yeah...that's the ticket!
  9. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland

    You are right about her making up things as she goes along. I think that comes with her preferred style of not providing sources. When one has high personal standards about using sources, one is more inclined to maintain a higher level of accuracy because the mere act of searching for the source and then selecting the appropriate quote acts as a fact refresher. jameson doesn't provide sources and openly forbids the use of any source which might lead the reader to another forum. This kind of reporting is sloppy and third rate. She wouldn't get an E grade here - it would be a "N/A" (No Award) LOL.

    Apparently Candy didn't see the bone jameson tossed for her on the other thread - so believe it or not, jameson has started another thread to toss another thread to Candy. This time Candy took the bone!

    It's so transparent and pathetic. Candy, the most unstable of all posters - who hates everyone (except Darnay Hoffman) and who happens to be BORG to the bone - attacks "the Borg" at the RST forum. Note how the RST ignore her when she attacks them. It seems an absolute certainty that jameson's members have been warned not to respond to Candy's slavering attacks on them.

    Perhaps jameson hoped Candy would share legal documents with her? Is jameson oblivious to the comtempt Candy has for her? Candy is laughing at them all. She gets to post there for free (she is banned from almost everywhere else) and she has no intention of delivering anything in return.

    To hang with them all! Spring has arrived here at last (although we are still getting snow). My garden is ablaze with colourful spring bulbs. Every year I biuy some more and ask the gardener to surprise me - and he does! It warms my heart :)
  10. JC

    JC Superior Cool Member

    She would get an F grade here (failed).
  11. RiverRat

    RiverRat FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Lef


    Darnay is as BORG as the Trojan Whores he rode in on.

  12. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    FIRST, I started this thread for two reasons: the swamp has long been spreading LIES AND MISINFORMATION about the enhanced 911 tape, saying either it doesn't exist or that there are no voices on it--ALL UNTRUE; and jams said I was posting bull because I said otherwise. Wrong again!

    So as you can see, I responded with facts and sources, proving the enhanced tape exists, that more than one source close to the case has stated it has voices on it. Jams pretty much couldn't respond with anything but hot air, as per...and here is more:

    Jams NOW says:


    But I did not SAY Kane, nor Schiller, nor Aerospace said it was Burke on the tape, did I? Nope. Not at all. To imply I did is nothing more than MISLEADING, and to misrepresent what I said and then claim it was bull...well, that's so Ramsey of jams.

    Let's review:

    Here is the part of my original post that jams responded to at the swamp, saying what I said is bull:


    In this quote, I have NOW highlighted the two claims I made in the original post, though they were not highlighted in that post originally: that Kane and Schiller corroborated that THERE ARE VOICES on the tape, as Thomas said there are. Since the swampsters have been spinning for years now that no voices are on the enhanced tape, I proved that they are lying by denying the facts of evidence on the enhanced tape. I did NOT say Burke's voice is on it. For THIS post, I have also HIGHLIGHTED IN RED what I did say in the orginal, though maybe I should have put it in red with 5 point letters, so it wouldn't be missed by those who aren't careful readers: I don't know who the voices belong to. But they are there. Period.

    So jams then posted this on a thread started for the purpose of spreading more disinformation about this evidence:

    And jams went futher:

    Jams clearly was wrong. Period. I posted the transcript from the show where they in fact DID CORROBORATE Thomas' report that there was an enhanced 911 tape with voices on it in the background. I personally don't have any strong opinion on who they belong to, because I don't know that they are clear enough to prove anything one way or another. Since I have heard them, that's my opinion. But to say they're NOT THERE is false and misleading. To say Kane and Schiller did not state perfectly clearly that THERE ARE VOICES FOUND ON THE ENHANCED 911 TAPE is a lie, as anyone who can READ or saw the Abrams show can see with their own eyes.


    As for the tiring and useless debate about Geraldo playing the ENHANCED 911 TAPE, jams finally managed to come up with a VERY DUBIOUS SOURCE to back her INCORRECTstatement that Geraldo has publicly denied playing the enhanced 911 tape. Obviously, he hasn't, and this is the best she can do:

    I have NEVER changed my story of hearing the tape on Geraldo. I'm not changing anything. And someone anonymous who posted that he/she emailed someone from "Geraldo's show" is proof of nothing but that someone said that someone said--YEARS AFTER THE EVENTS IN QUESTION AND LONG AFTER THE SHOW IN QUESTION WAS HISTORY. If the event was deliberately erased from the show's transcripts and records because of legal repercussions, that would explain why it's nowhere to be found, wouldn't it?

    And in case you can't figure it out for yourself, jams...AGAIN you have MADE A MISTAKE, and probably a delibarate one: an "ARCHIVE LICENSING REP" is NOT A PRODUCER. And therefore, again, GERALDO HAS NOT PUBLICLY DENIED ANYTHING.

    I heard lawyers talking on Greta Van Susteran's show the other night about having documents obtained illegally from FBI files or case documents of testimony from an uncharged or untried case, and they stated flat out they'd be in jail if they had those in their possession. If that's too much for some people to understand...not my fault.

    At least we can see what you call sources to support what you want to believe. I have repeatedly said nobody has to believe me about hearing the enhanced tape to know there is an enhanced tape and it has VOICES ON IT, because the actual facts have been stated and published in a number of media outlets. To state OTHERWISE is to LIELIELIE.

    Well, thanks for supplying your source for the "Geraldo denial." Now we have the evidence of how you come to such erroneous conclusions about so much in this case.
    Last edited: Apr 3, 2006
  13. The Punisher

    The Punisher Member

    I'll never figure Candy out. It's like a split personality.

    As for Jams, that one's all too easy.

    (As the Godfather): What have I done to make you treat me so disrespectfully?
  14. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland

    How about Evening2? Never mind "Janet McReynold's HISTORICAL writing" - what about "Evening2's HYSTERICAL writing?"

    She is supposed to be a judge's wife, yet she's over there accusing the McSanta's of murder (not even with an IMO). When it was pointed out to her that what she was saying was libellous and that she could get into a lot of trouble, she responded by chucking all her toys out of the pram!

    But (deary me) it doesn't just stop there. She thinks that Mrs McSanta - Janet McReynolds and feminist writer Louise Armstrong ..... are one and the same person!

    Just look here for the amazing likeness:-

    She's a dark horse that Janet...

    Attached Files:

  15. Moab

    Moab Admin Staff Member

  16. Jayelles

    Jayelles Alert Viewer in Scotland

    Well... I suppose they ARE both smiling and wearing glasses...
  17. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Good god! If that Armstrong has another brow lift, they're going to disappear under her hairlline! I bet she can't close her mouth and eyes at the same time.

    But I can see it! Janet has lost about a hundred pounds, had a face/brow lift, a makeover, and wears large sunglasses. Sure.

    Let's just say for argument's sake, Janet is Armstrong. Does this in some way prove she/they murdered a child?

    Or is Evening2 now accusing ARMSTRONG of being a child murderer?

    Oh, now THAT might get her a lawsuit....
  18. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    Oh, I see the hypocrisy is still more than skin deep at the swamp. Here is margoo, demanding a poster provide sources for a statement about Patsy's state of mind that morning. Guess margoo doesn't care when jams lies and lies, saying Geraldo publicly denied every playing the 911 tape--when the issue is the ENHANCED 911 tape, to boot, and then, when pushed to the wall to support her lies, posts something totally off the wall, from an anonymous source from an unnamed forum, that, even so, clearly DOES NOT CONTAIN THE INFO jams has lied and lied about.

    How deluded are these swampsters? They have no problem pushing their double standards, do they? They will ignore or brush off as many lies and disinformation as anyone wants to post, so long as it supports the Rams. But let someone post about a topic they don't like, and suddenly, they have STANDARDS...?

    How Ramsey of them.
  19. JC

    JC Superior Cool Member

    I'm surprised a supposed judge's wife supports a skank business woman who doesn't report business income to the IRS and falsifies legal papers.
  20. JustChillun

    JustChillun Member

    Maybe she's a judge's wife but by wife she means follower, and by judge she means God and we ALL know what a relative term the word "god" can be.

    She may be a follower of the Druid spirit or some other entity, and maybe when her husband speaks to her it's really "god" talking, and by talking I mean that voice that's in her head because you all are OBVOIUSLY not good enough to hear him for yourselves. :magnet: :nuts: :nuts: :nuts:
  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