BBMOk thanks and all the best in your quest. I'm aware the website was created around this story about 15 years ago or so so I'll not comment on this subject anymore, as I don't know enough about it. I will say one thing though, I am not American, and what I have noticed is abbreviations and observations of things are taken very literally. What we would say as a passing comment is taken here as a definite. We all communicate differently.
Outside, is the outside world.
The cleaning of the kitchen is not important, I believe she was up and lost her cool. Two golf bags were they both his? A torch on the head, not for me. Inverted golf club. Just a guess. A lot of women do not want to believe this and this is OK. In the back of my mind I have always believed the husband knew nothing so it made me think of an outsider. But the facts as they are for me the kid didn't do it for me. He does know his Mum did it. In a sick twisted way maybe he was even happy, but became sad as he missed his Sister. Maybe he thought in the morning everything would be ok. Maybe she told him to go to bed and she'd be fine.
Unless some one here knows him personally I am not going to listen to their opinion of him smiling ect, everyone deals with things in their own way. Some cry at funerals some cry before funerals. No one is less sad. We used to have wakes, if you saw a wake in America now you'd say the family was possessed and make a movie out of it. Everyone is different.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
*snip*The indictments were clear to me, as well. There were no murder charges against the parents but they were both responsible for JB's demise because they didn't protect her. BR was the only person still alive in the residence who could not ever have legal action brought against him.*snip*
BBM
Thank you for clarifying the "outside" question.
The two golf bags were both JR's. As to whether the device used for the head injury was the Maglite, a golf club, or the baseball bat - each individual here has his/her own theory and it isn't gender related, but we all know that no intruder did it. Pick an R, any R. Most think BR, some think PR, I don't think there are any who still think JR struck JBR.
My experience with death, dying, and bereavement tells me it's true that everyone deals with it in their own way. I just find BR's way of dealing with it - then and now - off the scale. From the video of him at 13 days after losing his sister to a brutal murder in his home to the Phil interview, it's all very telling, imo. One thing we have not witnessed is sadness.
It isn't a "fact" that "the kid didn't do it". That's an opinion. We are all entitled to our opinions and speculation, which is why we are here discussing this case. We are free to disagree, but we do so in a respectful manner.
Ok thanks and all the best in your quest. I'm aware the website was created around this story about 15 years ago or so so I'll not comment on this subject anymore, as I don't know enough about it. I will say one thing though, I am not American, and what I have noticed is abbreviations and observations of things are taken very literally. What we would say as a passing comment is taken here as a definite. We all communicate differently.
Outside, is the outside world.
The cleaning of the kitchen is not important, I believe she was up and lost her cool. Two golf bags were they both his? A torch on the head, not for me. Inverted golf club. Just a guess. A lot of women do not want to believe this and this is OK. In the back of my mind I have always believed the husband knew nothing so it made me think of an outsider. But the facts as they are for me the kid didn't do it for me. He does know his Mum did it. In a sick twisted way maybe he was even happy, but became sad as he missed his Sister. Maybe he thought in the morning everything would be ok. Maybe she told him to go to bed and she'd be fine.
Unless some one here knows him personally I am not going to listen to their opinion of him smiling ect, everyone deals with things in their own way. Some cry at funerals some cry before funerals. No one is less sad. We used to have wakes, if you saw a wake in America now you'd say the family was possessed and make a movie out of it. Everyone is different.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Ugh I hate it when I type out a response and then something goes wrong and I lose it all! So frustrating.
RBBM (Stands for "respectfully bolded by me," which means I emboldened the type of something stated in the post I'm quoting)
What women are you referring to here? What don't they want to believe? I'm not sure I'm understanding.
There is a difference between being a devil's advocate and being a troll. Usually, people who don't know a lot about a case ask a lot of questions, which we welcome. However, coming in and stating a bunch of stuff as fact (of course there was blood), isn't asking a question, it's stating an opinion as though it were a fact, and that's where we take issue. Additionally, Websleuths is a "no intruder did it" site, meaning the websleuths owner has determined that there is so little evidence, if any, of an intruder being the perpetrator of this crime, that the intruder theory is a waste of our time and is best left to trolls on other sites. There are plenty of sites where intruder theories are welcome, this just isn't one of them.
We do have LHP saying she took JB to the bathroom and shut the door and made her scream. But I would believe it if there were MORE accounts of PR losing her cool. To me that excerpt sounds like something from Darnay.
Amen!
Nothing could be more clear.
I'm so sorry about one of your cats. :cry:
Patsy probably thought that being decorative was all that was required of a female. She never really cooked either. The family went out for meals most evenings.
As for cleaning........that was the job of the housekeeper (who also thought it wasn't her job!)
According to the court order, the documents submitted to the court by Garnett consisted of 18 pages, nine relating to each of JonBenet's parents. Lowenbach ruled that only pages signed by the foreman of the grand jury would be considered "official actions" of the grand jury and would thus be releasable. In the end, a total of four pages -- two pages for each parent -- were released.
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_24381455/jonbenet-ramsey-indictment-released-john-patsy
http://extras.mnginteractive.com/li...025_092257_John & Patsy Ramsey indictment.pdf
We only know about count IV (a) and count VII for John and count IV (a) and count VII for Patsy. Each was charged with nine counts. Counts I, II, III, IV, IV (b), V, and VI for each are not known; however, I believe common sense would dictate that count I is going to be far more serious than what's in counts IV (a) and VII.
We've been told that the reason Counts IV and VII were released pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act request is because they were signed. However, there are two signature options - one for No True Bill and one for True Bill. I agree with you that the lower numbered counts were the more serious ones, including the murder charge. If it's true that the foreman did not sign these one way or the other, what possible reason would there be for this? Either the GJ voted to indict on those unreleased counts or they did not. Either way, they should have been signed by the foreman, and therefore releasable under the FOIA. There isn't a third option. Unless there is a third option, and those counts weren't signed off on either because the person or persons named could not legally be indicted for a crime. Or they were signed, but they involved a minor and were therefore invalid. And any such information involving alleged criminal activities of an un-indicated minor generally cannot be released under Freedom of Information.According to the court order, the documents submitted to the court by Garnett consisted of 18 pages, nine relating to each of JonBenet's parents. Lowenbach ruled that only pages signed by the foreman of the grand jury would be considered "official actions" of the grand jury and would thus be releasable. In the end, a total of four pages -- two pages for each parent -- were released.
http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_24381455/jonbenet-ramsey-indictment-released-john-patsy
http://extras.mnginteractive.com/li...025_092257_John & Patsy Ramsey indictment.pdf
We only know about count IV (a) and count VII for John and count IV (a) and count VII for Patsy. Each was charged with nine counts. Counts I, II, III, IV, IV (b), V, and VI for each are not known; however, I believe common sense would dictate that count I is going to be far more serious than what's in counts IV (a) and VII.
Do you happen to know why LHP made JB scream? Or even any speculation as to why someone would do that?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Tadpole already addressed this but just in case you missed it, the poster meant that LHP said Patsy took JB into the bathroom and made her scream. I believe the source for that is the "first chapter" of her unwritten book, which was likely ghostwritten by her lawyer Darnay Hoffman.
As to why Patsy would be making her scream, LHP and Darnay were both PDI and followed Thomas's toilet rage theory. If she truly witnessed this kind of bathroom behavior between PR and JB, I can see why LHP would agree with Thomas.
We've been told that the reason Counts IV and VII were released pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act request is because they were signed. However, there are two signature options - one for No True Bill and one for True Bill. I agree with you that the lower numbered counts were the more serious ones, including the murder charge. If it's true that the foreman did not sign these one way or the other, what possible reason would there be for this? Either the GJ voted to indict on those unreleased counts or they did not. Either way, they should have been signed by the foreman, and therefore releasable under the FOIA. There isn't a third option. Unless there is a third option, and those counts weren't signed off on either because the person or persons named could not legally be indicted for a crime. Or they were signed, but they involved a minor and were therefore invalid. And any such information involving alleged criminal activities of an un-indicated minor generally cannot be released under Freedom of Information.
We need a Colorado criminal attorney to opine here, but this "no signature" thing isn't adding up.
I do know that if those counts involve someone who was a minor at the time, signed or unsigned, they will never be releasedHmmm, that's a good point. Maybe someone with the appropriate knowledge of Colorado state law could help us with this. Because there's a possibility a case could be made for petitioning for the rest to be released if something hinky is going on.
We do have LHP saying she took JB to the bathroom and shut the door and made her scream. But I would believe it if there were MORE accounts of PR losing her cool. To me that excerpt sounds like something from Darnay.
'She' refers to PR?
- LHPJonBenet wet the bed again that night, didn't she? She woke up and told you about it before you were even undressed and you simply "lost it." You took her into the bathroom. It was the same destination you always took JonBenet when it was time to punish her for bedwetting. You forget that I saw you take here there so many times before, shutting the door tightly behind you, so her screams could not be heard. Except this time there was "an accident," wasn't there? You picked up the long, black flashlight you had brought with you, and you swung it. You swung it first at her crotch and then next at her head. Maybe you meant to scare her and maybe you didn't mean to kill her, but you did.
'We take issue'. Sounds like trolling or if I was easily hurt, bullying, to me. No surprise.
Websleuths is not a no intruder website, this thread is. And this is not a family related blame game anymore, it's a son related one. I have yet to read one post outside my own which blames the mother for any physical part in this murder. The Father at last seems blameless for the killing, but for a long time from my reading, was a silent monster on a lot of websites.
Regarding this case. I have already apologised for waisting people's time. I was playing Devil's advocate. I am finished with the thread bar a reply to a response today.
Which leads to this. I believe the mother did it. Whacked her over the head and strangled her. Wrote the note and pleaded with the Husband to back her up which he did. The son begged, as was caught in the background of the 911 call, to tell him what to say. Then was sent to his room.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I don't know. I screamed every single time my mother brushed my hair when I was little. She was very gentle. I just had a very sensitive scalp. After the neighbor girl told her she could hear me outside, she made my cosmetologist sister cut a foot of it off. So it could be something like that or something more nefarious. We don't really know.So PR made JB scream? I still don't understand what that's about.
But if LHP is saying she thinks PR did it, she would definitely have insight to their lives behind closed doors that I don't have.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
You didn't answer my question about your post.
Websleuths is a no intruder for this case, not other cases. Thought it was clear what case we're talking about.
"Taking issue" has a different definition than "trolling," so I'm not understanding the comparison there.
If a person walks into a dentist and says, "I've got a cavity on tooth 17 and need a root canal on tooth 20," the dentist is likely to ask questions like, "are you a dentist?" "did a dentist diagnose those issues and if so can I please see the records?" if the answer is, "no it's just my opinion," do you think the dentist will perform a filling and a root canal?
You entered a discussion and made statements as fact without offering evidence to back it up. People are going to question statements made as fact without evidence. Well, here they will... There are plenty of sites where they won't, but websleuths prides itself on expecting posters to provide something to back up statements.
I'd suggest reviewing the terms of service here, and brushing up on the case facts. The posters here are, by and large, more than happy to entertain new ideas and perspective.