Why Ramseys *and* Karr must be innocent

Dear Trill:

"Originally posted by Daneil XVI: The supposed ransom note said "she will die" and would be "beheaded" if John talked to anyone. I would assume I was being watched somehow. As a parent I would believe it and sit tight until the call came and then decide what to do. Instead, they called right away risking death to JBR. The only answer to that question is they knew she had not been kidnapped and there was no threat of death because she was already dead in the house."

--Your attribution to me of this quote in you post #283 is incorrect. I did not write it. Please fix your note ASAP. Thank you.

P.S. Trill, I just discovered that your mistake was caused by myself. I had been quoting Kang and forgot the quote marks. I have fixed my post now, and I am sorry for my error and the inconvenience. Still, please fix your post as the quote attributed to me is directly opposite what I have been arguing here all along. Thank you.

 

Daniel, shucks, I thought you'd up and seen the light. Pooh. :rs:

 

Daniel,

I am not Cina L. Wong. My analysis is not on the web, but is only posted here at FFJ. However, the owner of www.acandyrose.com and I were working to add my analysis to her web site before this Karr fiasco began, and hopefully, it will be added in the near future.

The title of my analysis is:

Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note

and it is posted at the top of this forum page as a "sticky." At present, it is the number seven sticky from the top. Right now, there are nine stickied threads that stay at the top of the page before the regular threads start.

If you click on the link below, it will take you directly to the analysis.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404


Cherokee

 

This is very good - with all the little details that people get focused on, sometimes the big picture can get lost, especially when it's a picture that no one really wants to face. The liars...er...lawyers of the Ramseys have done a wonderful job for the past 10 years of obfuscating and casting doubt, and obtaining evidence that they really shouldn't have had access to. The original cops blew it terribly, and the snowball just kept going. I mean, as Lawrence Schiller says in PMPT, separating the suspects and doing interviews is Lesson One in Police Academy! What they feared was the money and power of the Ramseys...I think the touchy-feely police force of Boulder was too focused on people as possible victims and not suspects. From then on, it was a 3-ring circus. As it now stands, no one will ever be prosecuted nor will we ever find out just what happened.

I'm new here too, but I just want to say Welcome! Common sense is always good.
:cool2:

Heymom

 

I just saw the picture several pages back of Burke at his mom's funeral. That really broke my heart. He has been through so much.

About the MagLite: Wasn't it eliminated as the weapon used to strike JonBenet? I could have sworn one of the pathologists on TV (Dr. Baden?) said that the MagLite would have cut her scalp and caused much external bleeding. He believed JonBenet's head struck a curved smooth object, such as the edge of a bathtub, sink, or toilet.

 

Daniel,
If you haven't heard about anything else that could have caused rage in Patsy you must be new to forums, lol. Patsy was most likely fed up to here with her little girl's bed wetting...changing a child's pjs and bed linens every night is exhausting. Add to that the planning, shopping, cooking and partying during the holidays which can cause stress. Oh and add on raging female hormones, cancer and it's awful treatment. Seems like a lot of things that could have caused Patsy to feel stressed and raged, imo.

 

Many make various conclusions and assertions on the basis of the mixed bag of evidence that we know of.. for the pundits of the IDI theories etc.. consider what is actually missing !!

As a juror we were constantly reminded we could and should only make a determination on the basis of what can be proved. This as an ideal we found cut two ways..

We were allowed in special circumstances to ask questions to the Judge who in his determinations would 9 or not ) ask the various councel to reply...

What we determined as a group to often be quite relevent...was when we got 'nothing' when logic dictated there ought to be something..

It is practically impossible ( unless on a mission impossible ) to enter and exit anywhere without some evidence you did. it was the middle of winter..I myself was there this last one ( Boulder ) and how anyone could get in and out of that house without leaving 'something' is beyond me....

So sometimes if there is no evidence....then its evidence of nothing !!

 

Dear Tril:

LOL! and thank you for fixing your note, especially as the error was due to my own error in my original note before I edited it.

By the way, I read your hypothethical revised note after your speculate the Ramseys abandoned the idea of moving the body outside. It was a riot! You ought to write comedy, if you don't already, and I grasp your point.

You all think I'm trying to be too clever by half by trying to explain away all the seemingly damning aspects against the family as having been planned by a diabolic and very clever mind in advance, and that I give the Ramseys too much credit that even under time limitations, severe stress, and lighting limitations (a neighbor reported seeing "odd lights" during the night in the Ramsey house--flashlights?) they couldn't have possibly made the seeming mistakes that they did. This is Kang's point.

I do have some hurdles in my mind to my own theory. Whether or not one accepts the validity of the enhanced 911 call proving that Burke had been awake at least at that time, it does seems almost impossible to believe that he could have slept through all the commotion of his mother's screaming and the arriving police and company. I originally speculated that because of the golf club incident, they might have felt circumstances might cast suspicion on their son. But what I had forgotten was that at that point the Ramseys were still supposed to have believed they were dealing with a kidnapping and not a head-bashing murder. It is difficult to believe that anyone would connect a nine-year-old boy with a kidnapping, and it is absurd to think he could have written that ransom note. So what was their fear?

Well, as I noted previously, people under stress often tell stupid and unnecessary lies.

I asked before if it was ever conclusively proven that the girl had had her head bashed before she was strangled and received no answer. If it is at all possible that she had been strangled first and the head bashing having been the attempted cover-up and not visa versa (in which case the girl would have been already dead and that would have been known, which explains why no 911 call for an ambulance), then has anyone ever considered "the choking game"? The girl's scream heard by the neighbor was her last ability to vocalize before the strangulation got too tight?

The mysterious flashlight is the one hard piece of evidence that might have cracked this case. If, as you believe, one of the Ramseys killed the child and then attempted the cover-up, why would Mr. Ramsey have claimed that the flashlight was not theirs? Wouldn't he have been afraid that one of his friends over that day might recognize it as his? Did the flashlight look brand new? Could Mr. Ramsey have just very recently purchased it and knew no one would recognize it? Was this his attempt to introduce some physical evidence that an intruder had been present that day beyond the ransom note? Why were even the batteries wiped clean of prints--no matter where the flashlight came from?

I read that during the day on the 26th that Mr. Ramsey remarked, "This must have been an inside job," and that Mrs. Ramsey reportedly said about the note, "They must not know John. They call him 'Southern' but he's from Michigan." [I noticed that too, but dismissed it in my mind as the perp having known that Mr. Ramsey had resided in Georgia for several years.] Mr. Ramsey's plan all along was to make it look like the perp was very familiar with the family, thus the seemingly incriminating reference to $118,000, while the "mistake" regarding JR's background was designed not to make it seem too obvious?

See, I can see your point of view as well. But I continue to believe in the family's innocence. The police should have secretly asked the Ramseys for names of anyone who might have cause for a personal grievance against then, and with good old fashion police leg work, checked records at every hardware and home store in the Boulder area to see which stores sold that particular brand of flashlight and, if cash was paid, show pictures to cashiers. If my theory is right, someone bought two of them at once.

By the way, "S.B.T.C" stands for "Subic Bay Training Center." In military parlance, that would have been "SBTC" and Mr. Ramsey would have known that--another point in his favor.

 

Daniel,

You still have lots of homework to do. The police DID ask the Ramseys for the names of anyone who might have a grievance against them. It's all in the investigative records.

In addition, police found receipts from McGuckin's Hardward in Boulder where Patsy had bought items that matched the price of materials used in the cover-up ... like the tape and cord.

You need to keep reading the evidence. All this ground has been covered before.

Which reminds me, have you read the handwriting analysis yet (for which I posted the links last night)? I didn't think so. Or you wouldn't still be posting how the Ramseys must be innocent.

 

I agree. Don't think Daniel has any desire to read your handwriting analysis. Not when he can't even find the top of the page! The direct link ruined that excuse. So, what will the next excuse be?

 

Evidence ignored

Shall I ask the 64K questions: How did the fibers from Patsy's sweater/jacket get entwined into the cord around JonBenet's neck? And how did those sweater/jacket fibers end up on the inside of the duct tape strip found on JonBenet's mouth? I'm dying to hear another spin on that bit of evidence.

Heymom

 

Head Blow, Stranglation

Daniel;
It is not known exactly which came first, the head blow or strangulation. Also
the flashligh was a gift to John form his son John Andrew, not sure of the year it was '95 or'96.

 

And, while the cash register tape did not tell the exact item that was purchased, it did have the department the item was from and the price paid for the item, which was able to be matched up with the price and department for some of the items.

 

What items? Has that ever been disclosed?

 

I think it was the duct tape and the cord around JonBenet's throat - Steve Thomas went and bought similar items from McGuckin's Hardware Store in Boulder. They never proved that Patsy had bought the duct tape and cord, only that she could have.

Heymom

 

Snip from a 1999 Denver Post article:

- Duct tape, taken from JonBenét's mouth by her father when he found the body. The tape was analyzed by FBI and detectives purchased identical tape from McGuckin Hardware in Boulder. An Atlanta-area hardware store clerk told investigators that she had helped Patsy Ramsey find duct tape in the store sometime in December 1996, according to a book on the case, "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town.'' But a search of the store's receipts turned up no record of a duct-tape purchase by Patsy Ramsey, the book's author, Lawrence Schiller wrote.

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/ram1014k.htm

 

I have bought duct tape for whatever....usually because my hubby or one of my sons asked me to. And I'm sure I've bought cord, twine, rope.....not unusual items to have around a house. I'm guessing no duct tape was found at the Ramseys. Or was there? If not, I think that's kind of odd. I think EVERYONE should have some!

 

I think that is right - they found neither the duct tape nor the cording anywhere in the Ramsey home. It's not the silver duct tape, I believe, but a black-colored kind, somewhat specialized. I haven't seen any reference to any other duct tape in the house or garage at all. If the roll had been in the house, it may have been removed in the stuff Pam took out.

The cording too, looks more like something you would use in a craft project and not regular household twine. It's too finely woven to use in dirty locations, and it doesn't look to be super-strong.

Heymom

 

I heard it could have come from the back of a picture Pam took with her.

 

I think I read in PMPT or somewhere that that tape which attached mats to frames on pictures in the house had been put on by the framing shop and was not a match for the duct tape over the mouth of JonBenet. Of course they could not test the pictures that Pam took out, but they could ask for a detailed list of what pictures they had framed, including the ones Pam took out, and find out if they used the same tape on all of them.

Heymom