Ramsey Case Returned to BPD!

I believe you. And I also believe that the tape played on Geraldo was NOT a re-enactment...the voices sounded too much like the Ramsey's. I believe that he was told to say that. ALSO...IF it had of been a re-enactment..he would have said..."THIS is only a re-enactment, folks."

 

ITA!!! I believe that he was told later to say that it was a re-enactment. Possibly even threatened with a lawsuit, if he didn't. I heard the tape on there the same time that you did...I believe. And it was long before I had ever came online too. I didn't even know what Websleuths...or FFJ was at that time...or any other forum, for that matter. It sounded way too much like the Ramsey's for it to have not have been the real enhanced thing.

 

Tricia, I was always one of those posters who never stopped visiting Burke. I have always held to the belief that Patsy wrote that note. I also had a difficult time believing that she would write it for John; possibly for herself, but without a doubt, for Burke.

I have never held a steadfast "theory" on WHO the murderer was, but always strongly believed that it was one of the three Ramseys who were still breathing the day after, with the other two covering it up and obstructing justice. Burke has never been off my list.

I have also wondered during these 12 years if Fleet White was so quiet, not only due to the retributions one receives when not Ramsey friendly, but if he somehow knows it was Burke or of Burke's involvement somehow, which has left him hesitant and more bluntly, AFRAID of coming forward with any information or even anecdotals regarding the family dynamics, Burke in particular

Yes indeed; time to re-visit Burke. :fingers:

 

I've never had one iota of doubt that Patsy Ramsey wrote that idiotic note.

I've also never suspected that Burke had anything to do with JB's death, especially after knowing he was on the tape asking questions about what they found. I think he was very confused that morning and was trying to find out what was going on, but his father silenced him and most likely told him to be quiet and not ask or answer any questions or his mother and father would go to jail. John terrorized his son into keeping quiet.

However, I've also never closed the door on the possibility that Burke might have been involved. It just doesn't make sense to me that if Burke accidentally killed his sister during a sibling spat or horseplay that John and Patsy would go to such extremes to cover it up. As a minor Burke couldn't be charged as an adult, and if it was an accident, why bother to cover it up and go through all the grief they went through? I just can't see Burke causing either injury to JB, unless he just picked something up and clobbered her over the head with it. It's a real stretch for me to believe John and Patsy would sacrifice their own freedom to cover for something caused by their minor son.

I've not been able to determine which parent killed JB, but I think one of them did. I also believe no one deliberately set out to kill her - that it was an accident that happened during the commission of a felony, meaning either that Patsy lashed out at JB and accidentally killed her, or John accidentally killed her during the commission of another crime - sexual abuse. The reason I believe that is that if JB was killed accidentally by falling and hitting her head, there would be no need for the cover up. If she was killed accidentally while Patsy was screaming and hitting her, that's felony child abuse. If she died accidenally during sexual abuse, that is also felony child and sex abuse. In both cases, it's accidental death during the commission of a felony. And hence, the reason it had to be covered up.

 

What if the original sexual abuse of JonBenet and the "horrific domestic accident" were actually two separate incidents that didn't happen on the same night?

What if in the days previous to Christmas night 1996, Patsy found out that JonBenet had been sexually molested? That would explain all the many attempts to call Dr. Beuf in the week or so before Christmas. Patsy may have been attempting to sort things out, and she may, or may not, have known who the molester was. It's possible, Patsy found out from JonBenet WHO the molester was, and that might have even been more terrible because if it was close family, Patsy knew she couldn't go to the police. It would have added to Patsy's stress level which was already high.

Then there is some kind of rage incident where Patsy and JonBenet get into a fight about a midnight bed-wetting clean-up in the bedroom and/or bathroom. JonBenet suffers a massive, and eventually, fatal head wound, and Patsy knows she cannot call 911 because the sexual molestation will come to light, and all hell will break loose. So Patsy, thinking JonBenet is already dead, stages a crime scene.

A ligature is tied around JonBenet's neck to make it look like an intruder strangled her. Unknown to the Ramseys, JonBenet was still barely alive, and the ligature contributed to her death. The unused broken portion of the paintbrush (that is tied to ligature) is briefly inserted into JonBenet's vagina in order to try to mask previous molestation, and hopefully, pin any damage on the fake intruder. To finish the staging of JonBenet's body, a small piece of masking tape is affixed to JonBenet's lips, and her wrists are loosely bound with a thin rope. Patsy then writes the "ransom note" in hopes of convincing the police there has been a kidnapping in order to deflect attention away from the family.

During questioning, both Patsy and John deny there could be any molestation of JonBenet because that would unravel the whole chain of events.

 

Whoever wrote the note is INVOLVED with with the killing, but isn't necessarily the killer. The case is not that difficult, I agree. Right up to where you have to choose just one perp. I cannot close the door on ANY family member in the house that night (including someone we do not know about). There are some things I am sure of. That PR wrote the note.(handwriting) That both parents participated in the clean-up and staging.(fiber evidence). That BR knows more about it than he has said. That Nedra did too. The Paughs were oddly silent after the funeral. No outrage as the years passed (before Nedra passed) about the lack of a perp. Not much public support of her daughter and her daughter's family.

 

excellent

Excellent post Chero, I can believe that is what happened but please add how JR's fibers got in the crotch area, did he take part in the staging perhaps?

 

Maybe John was in charge of the Wipe-Down details?!

 

This is very interesting and something I had never thought of before. What if JB had told Patsy and Patsy didn't believe her, or didn't WANT to believe her, and so she wanted Dr. Beuf to examine her to prove it? Since that never happened maybe Patsy chose to believe it wasn't true, hence all the denials about sexual abuse. I have recently come to the conclusion that Patsy knew JB was being sexually abused and she knew who was doing the abusing. So this leads me to belivieve it was someone who Patsy would cover for. The only people I can think of that fit that catagory are Burke, John and GPP.

And then again, maybe JB was killed for TALKING.

 

That is the $64,000 question, Texan. I probably should have written in my post ... "So Patsy, thinking JonBenet is already dead, BEGINS STAGING a crime scene."

John most certainly could have been involved in the staging, and by his actions on December 26th, he definitely didn't act like the father of a "missing" child. John didn't go near his wife, didn't comfort her, was gone for quite awhile to "check the mail," and immediately high-tailed it to the basement and "found" JonBenet when Arndt said to check the house again.

The fact that John's sweater fibers were found in the crotch of JonBenet's underwear, the fact that John went along with Patsy calling 911 when the ransom note said not to talk to anyone or JonBenet would be beheaded, the fact that John did not follow Lockheed Martin protocol and call them first in case it was a terrorist act, the fact that John lawyered up so quickly and then tried to get his pilot to fly them out of Boulder to Atlanta the minute he "found" JonBenet's body, all speaks volumes and underscores the idea that John was involved in the cover-up of what happened Christmas night.

The one thing I do know is Patsy wrote the ransom note. I don't believe she would write it for John, but she would write it for herself or Burke - whichever one inflicted the fatal head blow.

The rest was over-the-top staging and was meant to point away from the family. The chronic sexual abuse was separate from the head injury, but there had to be an attempt to cover up the abuse in order to protect someone. It could be that Patsy didn't really KNOW who was abusing JonBenet yet, but she had her suspicions. Patsy might also have felt she would have been held responsible if JonBenet's sexual abuse had come to light in a hospital ER, just like those mothers who don't do anything when an abuser molesters their daughters.

From what I have read, and understand, of JonBenet's chronic vaginal injuries, there was no penile penetration, but the damage was probably done by digital insertion. There was some erosion of the hymen, but it was still present. If JonBenet had been molested by an attempt at full intercourse, there would have been much more damage present. This is what many in the public do not understand. From the media and misinformation (like the man who wrote there was semen on JonBenet's underwear), many people think she was aggressively raped the night of her death.

If one understands that JonBenet's sexual molestation was probably, and primarily, that of digital penetration, then it helps the events leading up to her death make sense. There were several male family members who had contact with JonBenet in the weeks prior to Christmas night. The fact that Patsy and John tried to deny JonBenet's abuse instead of wanting to know who could have done such a thing is, in itself, very damning and suggests that a family member was the molester.

Patsy and John wouldn't have covered for anyone else.

 

http://denver.yourhub.com/Boulder/Stories/News/Crime/Story~579201.aspx

 

Just how does a little six year old girl go about telling her mother she was being interfered with, Karen?

I personally think any mother who bathes her younger children, boy or girl would very quickly notice this, and if so, she would also know who her young children had been with previous to any of this interference. With a baby sitter (?). With a mother's friends and their children(?). With her own parents(?). A mother of a six year old girl should know everyone her little six year old daughter came in contact with.

 

Response I didn't make...

Thanks, BobC, for that URL.
I wanted to make a comment, but didn't want to leave all that personal information in order to register. So, the following is the response I wanted to make.


The enormous, shameful influence, wielded by the Ramsey’s, has obstructed this investigation from the get-go. I cannot think of another criminal case that has brought forth such an array of unscrupulous characters; each peddling their own agendas, while secreting their own involvements (directly or indirectly) with the abuse and murder of this little girl. The Boulder Justice System now has a second chance to redirect its energies toward unveiling the truth, exonerating the innocents (thrown under the bus by the Ramsey-Spin-Team) and bringing the guilty to justice.

gl

 

Fabulous, Greenie, excellent points.

 

When the Powers that Be in Boulder seem sane...

The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse are saddling up!!!

 

Well, it's down now, probably crashed from comments on the Midyette trial, as today is the day of closing arguments, but a person who commented on the Daily Camera website blog for the Alex Midyette trial said that Boulder citizens believe in the Ramsey case that "the son did it." Interesting, don't you think?

 

I am on the DC site - on the Midyette section, not a problem, we haven't crashed the site!

 

hahaha From the article at the link BobC posted, this sounds SO...FAMILIAR...right?

Gosh...who oh who said that before? Let me think, let me think....

Oh, well, Mary Crazy and her DA shills did say it...over and over...right after THEY MADE COMMENTS ABOUT THE EVIDENCE AND ITS IMPLICATIONS THAT THE RAMSEYS ARE INNOCENT....

Sorry, Mr. Garnett. Been there...don't believe THAT.

 

Oh, good! I have been reading this morning but got a message when I tried to post and it gave me some melodramatic statement that the world was ending or some such.... :yes:

Okay, I AM making that up...but it did give me a strangely worded message that site was down. I don't think I've said anything inflamatory to get me banned...oddly enough.