Evil people - and things that don't fit

K777angel · Jun 19, 2004

The other night I watched some of the first crockumentary.
It is so interesting to compare Patsy's (especially) demeanor when Tracey brings up the question of whether or not Burke could have been involved to all the other scenarios that had been brought up throughout the crock.

While John goes on to defend how Burke could never have done this etc. - Patsy is just sitting there glaring. She then says, with a very determined and almost controlled anger, "Don't even THINK about it!"
Almost as if you can think about any other scenario and ask about it - but THAT one is off limits.

I just found it very interesting.

BlueCrab · Jun 19, 2004

Barbara,

In Colorado when a serious crime is committed by a juvenile who is too young to be legally culpable (under 10 years of age), the case goes to the district attorney to confidentially dispose of the matter in any way he sees fit. This is apparently what Alex Hunter did. The New York Post subpoena to Hunter included those papers associated with Hunter's disposition of the case.

IMO the Burke Ramsey v New York Post case was settled for the same reason all of the other cases were settled. The case could continue up to a point and then the court would have to demand it be settled before the Colordo Childrens Code protecting the identity of very young perpetrators is violated.

JMO

Barbara · Jun 19, 2004

BlueCrab said:
Barbara,

In Colorado when a serious crime is committed by a juvenile who is too young to be legally culpable (under 10 years of age), the case goes to the district attorney to confidentially dispose of the matter in any way he sees fit. This is apparently what Alex Hunter did. The New York Post subpoena to Hunter included those papers associated with Hunter's disposition of the case.

IMO the Burke Ramsey v New York Post case was settled for the same reason all of the other cases were settled. The case could continue up to a point and then the court would have to demand it be settled before the Colordo Childrens Code protecting the identity of very young perpetrators is violated.

JMO

If this is the case, is it legal? If Hunter had the power to dispose of this case as he saw fit, is it legal to continue an "investigation"? Is it legal to let the public know that there is an investigation going on?

Something doesn't seem right here. Can you explain?

K777angel · Jun 19, 2004

The only thing that has motivated ANYTHING in this case since the grand jury disbanded (and precisely at this point the Ramseys dismissed their criminal attorneys as they deemed them no longer necessary.... hmmm.... and subsequently hired a CIVIL attorney) - are LAWSUITS.
The only reason Keenan brushed any dust off the boxes of evidence in the case (and only then it was just superficial) - was simply to avoid Lin Woods' blackmail tactic of the threat of a lawsuit unless she complied. And the motivation behind Wood's threat had nothing at all to do with "finding the real killer". That was merely the front.
The REAL purpose in every action since the end of the grand jury has been simply to attempt to revamp the Ramseys reputation.
At any cost.

They in their delusion think that this has been accomplished. Evidenced by John Ramsey having the incredible nerve to think he can run for congress and everyone will just forget about that little murder incident and the fact that arrest warrants were readied for both he and his wife not long after the murder. Not to mention the fact that he and his wife are STILL under suspicion. Due to police fumbles and the Ramseys vast wealth affording them some of the most powerful attorneys in the state of Colorado and friends up in high places there - they have thus far escaped justice.

They live in their little self-made bubble and think the rest of the world resides there as well.

They are darned fortunate that they were not arrested for obstruction of justice - at the very least.
It still hangs over their heads .....

So the fact that there is a the notion of some "investigation" on-going is
simply window-dressing.
I think the real reason detectives went to Atlanta in 2000 was to see if they could yet pin charges on the Ramseys for the cover-up.
I think they knew who accidentally killed JonBenet. And it wasn't the parents.
It was the mess afterwards that they hoped to solve and bring justice for.

Barbara · Jun 19, 2004

They live in their little self-made bubble and think the rest of the world resides there as well.

Not only that, but they think the rest of the world is beneath them.

concernedperson · Jun 19, 2004

Barbara said:
Not only that, but they think the rest of the world is beneath them.

That quote made me think of the day I met Patsy Ramsey. In late 1999 I was working on a Post Property In Atlanta. The Ramsey's were living there while their home was being built. Apparently they were friends with the founder of Post and chose to live where they hobnobbed, the most expensive apartment community in the entire metro Atlanta area. Anyway we were always told if it was a friend of the owner we were to do anything they asked, from hand carrying packages to their units, meeting delivery people if they weren't home and many other services that aren't offered in most apt. complexes. One day Patsy came to the office livid, apparently she had received a notice from UPS that a package was being held in the office for her. Either we were too busy with other clients or something but the point I am trying to make is her rage at the underlings for not responding to her needs at the exact time she needed tending. Her face was impossibly stern and the veins in her neck were extended.She was freaking scary!! Fortunately I wasn't the target of her rage but it was palpable throughout the entire room. I transferred to another property very shortly thereafter.

BlueCrab · Jun 19, 2004

IMO the authorities in Boulder have the proverbial tiger by the tail and can't let it go. The case was solved by the grand jury in 1999 but they can't let it be publicly known because it would violate the Colorado Childrens Code that protects the identities of children.

That's why nothing happens despite a so-called "investigation" taking place. Keenan doesn't even have the money for an active investigation. The investigation is all bun and no beef. The case was solved 5 years ago but no one of authority is allowed to tell the truth about what really happened because very young children were involved.

However, there is some evidence of a fifth person having been in the house that night, so the grand jury may have missed something -- there MAY have been a fifth person who had been invited into the house by Burke that night. And that fifth person could have been an adult who Burke is not telling ANYONE about.

JMO

Britt · Jun 19, 2004

concernedperson said:
...the point I am trying to make is her rage at the underlings for not responding to her needs at the exact time she needed tending. Her face was impossibly stern and the veins in her neck were extended.She was freaking scary!! Fortunately I wasn't the target of her rage but it was palpable throughout the entire room.

Very interesting, Concernedperson, and revealing. If she gets freaking scary over a UPS package, I wonder how scary she'd get if something really stressful happened, like say a child's toileting problem or contrariness, or if she caught her husband doing something inappropriate with said child.

Cherokee · Jun 19, 2004

concernedperson said:
That quote made me think of the day I met Patsy Ramsey. In late 1999 I was working on a Post Property In Atlanta. The Ramsey's were living there while their home was being built. Apparently they were friends with the founder of Post and chose to live where they hobnobbed, the most expensive apartment community in the entire metro Atlanta area. Anyway we were always told if it was a friend of the owner we were to do anything they asked, from hand carrying packages to their units, meeting delivery people if they weren't home and many other services that aren't offered in most apt. complexes. One day Patsy came to the office livid, apparently she had received a notice from UPS that a package was being held in the office for her. Either we were too busy with other clients or something but the point I am trying to make is her rage at the underlings for not responding to her needs at the exact time she needed tending. Her face was impossibly stern and the veins in her neck were extended.She was freaking scary!! Fortunately I wasn't the target of her rage but it was palpable throughout the entire room. I transferred to another property very shortly thereafter.

Welcome to the forum, CP. Your anecdote shows another side of Patsy that is absent from the sanitized version constantly promoted by the Ramseys and their supporters.

Your story confirms what I have always said ... there is another Patsy the public does not see, and that Patsy has a temper.

As long as Patsy is in control of her situation, she can play the gracious Southern belle, but if she feels something, or someone, is out of her control ... she changes like quicksilver.

An example of this is during Patsy's June 1998 interview with investigators. She could be pleasant and almost coy until a topic was brought up which touched a nerve, and then Patsy's mood changed and she lashed out in anger, even cursing.

Detective Tom Haney talking to Patsy Ramsey "If I told you right now that we have trace evidence that appears to link you to the death of JonBenét, what would you tell me?"

Patsy Ramsey: "That is totally impossible. Go re-test."

Detective Tom Haney: "How is that impossible?"

Patsy Ramsey: "I did not kill my child. I didn't have a thing to do with it."

Detective Tom Haney: "And I'm not talking, you know, somebody's guess or some rumor or some story......"

Patsy Ramsey: "I don't care what you're talking about."

Detective Tom Haney: "I'm talking about scientific evidence."

Patsy Ramsey: "I don't give a flying flip how scientific it is. Go back to the damn drawing board. I didn't do it! John Ramsey didn't do it. And we didn't have a clue of anybody who did do it! So we all got to start working together from this day forward to try to find out who the hell did it!"

Another famous example -

On the third day of the interviews, Haney asked JonBenet's mother Patsy Ramsey what she would say if police had evidence that she was not being truthful. Ramsey asked to see it.

The excerpt states: "We're not in a position to show it to you now," Haney replied. "You have lied to me."

"Pal, you don't want to go there. Don't start that," she responded.

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0216jon1.shtml

When Patsy realizes investigators don't believe what she has said, and she has thus lost "control" over the situation and them, Patsy immediately changes her tone and her manner. As long as things are going "her" way, Patsy is cooperative, but when she feels threatened by loss of control, Patsy immediately drops her well-crafted facade and goes on the offensive.

The story related by CP shows this same Patsy. She wanted her UPS package, and she wanted it NOW! She re-asserted her control over the situation by upbraiding those responsible for the delay in delivering it to her.

Patsy Ramsey has many faces. Some of them are "perfect," some of them are not.

IMO

Jayelles · Jun 20, 2004

You will see Patsy being "assertive" in the new Tracey documentary. John was benign throughout the interview, but Patsy fairly spits peas at one point. When we watched it, my Mother, (who had previously maintained that she couldn't see either parent being involved but wondered if they would cover for the brother) said "I wouldn't like to cross that one - I think she could be capable".

(Note to Lin Wood - my mother is entitled to her opinion and if Michael Tracey selects interview footage of Patsy showing her teeth, then maybe she won't be alone in her opinion).

Eagle1 · Jun 20, 2004

Jayelles said:
So my best theory to date has been that the killer was someone who knew the family and who had an obsession for Patsy. It still seemed far-fetched, but stranger things have happened. I considered the killer to be intelligent and to have hated JonBenet - been jealous of JonBenet because of the obsession with Patsy

That's been part of my best theory to date also, that (1) Agent X was obsessed PATSY a hating obsession, because she'd been a beauty queen and he's been accused of pride, hates it in others, assumes women are too proud whether they're beauty queens or not, and (2) I agree that he was jealous of JonBenet according to the Patricia Letters, and (3) a big reason, besides a womens' intuition similar to Jayelles', that I'm so sure of this hunch is that I've heard there really is a covert person who blows his cover by ranting about his mother liking his youngest brother best, so he felt an insatiable need to be favorite, and youngest brother's wife being a beauty queen/concert pianist, that "stars" like that need humbling, but he's often self-contradicting and tries to explain away his sabotages of careers by victim blaming such as that they don't exude enough confidence. Having ranted and raved about their "big head", pride.

One big thing about the RN, this talebearer in religion circles gets religious mail addressed to husbands only, which most wives probably reason is just church sexism quirkiness. So I think that's why "and Mrs." on the RN was crossed out. To make sure his hatred of a wife would be more noticed!!!!!!!!!!

In the Patricia Letters, she quotes someone who sounds "not of this world". That figures. Most religions try to ignore Biblical predictions of just such a person as too depressing, though they're supposed to sound the alarm. His coming is the working of Satan, 2nd Thessalonians 2, and all who believe his heresies and slanders (he's a/k/a the Re 12 accuser of the brethren and of a woman in the time of flying) will be allowed to "perish", having "strong delusions" the translators think are from God. Probably a better translation would be God allows it, right?

Anyway, he's an expert forger, and I may know a couple of people who've lost investment money due to a forgery, even their lawyers seeming to have been bought out. Nobody can have any secrets from this creature, Ezekiel 3:28 if I remember correctly, so he must be a spy, would know oil people and other sources if he wants to bribe whole cities. Famous chapter 14 of Isaiah says his to-be-slain followers deal with cities and new buildings. (As bribes to illegally discriminate against those he hates?) I agree with your best theory whole-heartedly.

The way this whole thing was planned out plays people against each other, makes John unemployable and the whole family under public seige, "humbles" them, etc., some of his trademarks, all in one fell swoop.

That was the first post, now to read the rest of the thread.

Show Me · Jun 20, 2004

I thought Jamison wrote the Patricia letters.

Jayelles · Jun 20, 2004

Show Me said:
I thought Jamison wrote the Patricia letters.

She says she didn't, but I wonder if she knows who did? There again, she tells lies so who knows?

Shylock · Jun 20, 2004

Show Me said:
I thought Jamison wrote the Patricia letters.

She denies it, but if she did write them, she wouldn't even know it. Susan Bennett is a diagnosed pathological liar who actually believes all the crap she makes up. She's a nut-case just like Nancy Krebs who also thrives on the attention and notoriety.

Besides, who cares - Some butt-ugly psycho bimbo has nothing to do with this case.

Cherokee · Jun 20, 2004

Jayelles said:
You will see Patsy being "assertive" in the new Tracey documentary. John was benign throughout the interview, but Patsy fairly spits peas at one point. When we watched it, my Mother, (who had previously maintained that she couldn't see either parent being involved but wondered if they would cover for the brother) said "I wouldn't like to cross that one - I think she could be capable".

(Note to Lin Wood - my mother is entitled to her opinion and if Michael Tracey selects interview footage of Patsy showing her teeth, then maybe she won't be alone in her opinion).

"I wouldn't like to cross that one - I think she could be capable".

My point exactly.

Patsy Ramsey is capable of much more than her public persona reveals. Even in a non-confrontational interview for a documentary slanted in her favor, Patsy fairly seethes with anger.

And what we have seen is just the tip of the iceberg, or more appropriately, the volcano that is Patsy Ramsey.

IMO

Jayelles · Jun 20, 2004

jameson says:-

jameson - Jayelles is having a hard time staying comfortable in the BORG camp, I think .

Wrong, I am perfectly comfortable in all of the forums where I am a member.

If BORG means "daring to criticise jameson", then yes, I am BORG. If it means "Beleiver of Ramsey Guilt" then I have never been BORG (except in jameson's twisted mind).

jameson started calling me BORG after I exposed one of her many lies. Prior to that, she rightly described me as a fencesitter. She won't be able to produce a single post where I have said that I think a Ramsey killed JonBenet. She won't because there aren't any. She will find plenty where I say I think they didn't. Not even in conversation or in private e-mails have I ever taken a stance other than fencesitter who is 99% convinced of Ramsey innocence.

I haven't needed an asbestos coat for the past 4 years and I don't think I need to start wearingn one now. In fact, I have NEVER been flamed on any of the "BORG" forums for being a fencesitter - The only people who have ever flamed me have been jameson & co who consider that if you aren't a fully paid up member of the RST ... then you are a BORG.

jameson wear Ramsey tinted spectacles (aka blinkers) - that is evident in her latest attack on me where she apparently finds it impossible to separate believing the Ramseys are innocent with being able to criticise them for not co-operating with the police.

I find it both amusing and rather pathetic.

Britt · Jun 20, 2004

Cherokee said:
And what we have seen is just the tip of the iceberg, or more appropriately, the volcano that is Patsy Ramsey.

Yes, I think you're right, Cherokee.

Maybe John went along with her because he was terrified not to... lol.

But I still can't figure out what he was sorry for. John Ramsey doesn't strike me as an apologizer. No way. He's a blameshifter, through and through. So for him to say to Fernie, Beuf, Bynum, Hoverstock and whomever else was there at the Fernies on the evening of the 26th, that he was "so sorry," he must've done something pretty damn bad. A victim doesn't apologize.

TLynn · Jun 20, 2004

An accident involving Burke and cover-up by Ramseys is the most reasonable explanation - however, if that's the case, why didn't the BPD go with that theory?

They didn't. And they must have their reasons. Because they would NOT keep an investigation going or the case files open if it was determined otherwise. No, Burke could not have been arrested and tried for the "accident" - but they wouldn't keep the money flowing into a fake investigation.

IF that was the determination (Burke being the responsible party for JonBenet's death/accident/whatever) by the Grand Jury/BPD/DA's officer/whomever - the case files would be closed.

I believe Patsy is very capable of temper...(thanks for the insight concernedperson). Also, Burke is reported as saying Patsy followed JonBenet up those stairs Christmas night.

Shylock · Jun 20, 2004

Jayelles said:
jameson says:-
I find it both amusing and rather pathetic.

And what exactly does your little tit-for-tat with the *advertiser censored* have to do with this case?
Maybe I should start posting differences of opinions I have with my mother-in-law here too.

Jayelles · Jun 20, 2004

Shylock said:
And what exactly does your little tit-for-tat with the *advertiser censored* have to do with this case?
Maybe I should start posting differences of opinions I have with my mother-in-law here too.

jameson is not my mother-in-law.

Your quote is also wrong.

Evil people - and things that don't fit

Member

New Member

New Member

Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

New Member

Former Member

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Former Member

New Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics