Are the Ramseys involved or not?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Are the Ramseys involved or not?

  • The Ramseys are somehow involved in the crime and/or cover-up

    Votes: 883 75.3%
  • The Ramseys are not involved at all in the crime or cover-up

    Votes: 291 24.8%

  • Total voters
    1,173
Status
Not open for further replies.
I truely beleive the trouble started crissy morning [not crissy nite]Ive read jonbenet was ill that morning ,she was well enough to go to the Whites party later.The kid hardly ate all day?What happened prior to christmas day.
 
i`m with you dingo i believe the party on the 23rd december was somehow important in the whole crime.

lawman
 
dingo said:
I truely beleive the trouble started crissy morning [not crissy nite]Ive read jonbenet was ill that morning ,she was well enough to go to the Whites party later.The kid hardly ate all day?What happened prior to christmas day.
I was trying to find where Id read that, about Jonbenet being sick christmas day...I thought I had imagined it....where did you read that dingo??
 
Hi Narlacat, I was reading about Jonbenet being sick on christmas morning at one of the forums yesterday,ive looked back thru but i cant find the post which gave the source of the information. I think it could have been in one of Patsys interviews or the doi book.
 
what i hate about reading those interviews with J and P is wading through all Lin Wood's BS!!! I can't stand it!

what a pit bull that guy is. Reminds me of a cliche'd vicious gun-for-hire lawyer who'll act like he believes anything, and defend anybody, if the $$ is right :)

seems like a damn good lawyer though.
 
GuruJosh said:
what i hate about reading those interviews with J and P is wading through all Lin Wood's BS!!! I can't stand it!

what a pit bull that guy is. Reminds me of a cliche'd vicious gun-for-hire lawyer who'll act like he believes anything, and defend anybody, if the $$ is right :)

seems like a damn good lawyer though.


GuruJosh,

You got that right! Lin Wood did his best to torpedo the Atlanta interviews in 2000 by disgracefully fillibustering almost every question. Half of the time used up was about Lin Wood's ridiculous technical objections designed to protect the Ramseys, and not about trying to find justice for a murdered little six-year-old girl.

Reports have a disgusted Mike Kane ready to physically slug it out with Lin Wood over Wood's use of shabby legal gymnastics to torpedo the talks.

BlueCrab
 
BlueCrab said:
GuruJosh,

You got that right! Lin Wood did his best to torpedo the Atlanta interviews in 2000 by disgracefully fillibustering almost every question. Half of the time used up was about Lin Wood's ridiculous technical objections designed to protect the Ramseys, and not about trying to find justice for a murdered little six-year-old girl.

Reports have a disgusted Mike Kane ready to physically slug it out with Lin Wood over Wood's use of shabby legal gymnastics to torpedo the talks.

BlueCrab
I couldn't agree with you more BC. Lin Wood manipulated those depositions and then released them to manipulate public perspective about the case.

There's a name for that but I can't remember what it is. It's a tactic used in political journalism.
 
Jayelles said:
I couldn't agree with you more BC. Lin Wood manipulated those depositions and then released them to manipulate public perspective about the case.

There's a name for that but I can't remember what it is. It's a tactic used in political journalism.
My first thought was he was grandstanding. When I looked up the word grandstand (verb) means "to show off" - with a sports example "they make impossible catches and when they get the ball they roll all over the field"
 
UKGuy said:
Jayelles:

Might that be polemic ?
Not polemic. It's a word which ends in "ing" or even in "eering". It will come back to me - probably during the night.
 
Jayelles said:
I couldn't agree with you more BC. Lin Wood manipulated those depositions and then released them to manipulate public perspective about the case.

There's a name for that but I can't remember what it is. It's a tactic used in political journalism.


Jayelles,

Yellow journalism.
 
I could be wrong but in a book written by Henry Lee I thought he said JBR had self inflicted scratches from trying to get the garrot off her throat.

If that is so I don't see how the garrot could have been staged. I think the garrot was used and the person also hit her in the head about the same time. Perhaps they didn't like her fighting back when they were choking her.
No opinion on who used it, be it family or an intruder. Just I don't think it was staged.
 
Becba said:
I could be wrong but in a book written by Henry Lee I thought he said JBR had self inflicted scratches from trying to get the garrot off her throat.
Hi Becba. Are you referring to Lee's Famous Crimes Revisited? I have that book and can find nothing in it about "self inflicted scratches" on JB. Did he write another book where he talks about this case?
 
The title is Cracking More Cases. Published in 2004. I will have to recheck the subject to make sure he remarked on the scratches because looking at different areas of what he wrote I think I may have attributed him to writing about the scratches where as I likely read it somewhere else.

He writes at the end that he doesn't know what to think but that a domestic accident happened. He mentions someone pushing her down the stairway and it being covered up. He is talking about the stairway that leads from her bedroom to the kitchen and her striking her head on an object like the banister. Or even horsep[lay which I take to mean an accident with Burke. This does not go with self inflicted scratches.
I apologise if I gave out mixed up info. Have y'all covered a possible fall caused by her brother? I can't see that due to the idea the parents would have to have tried to cover it up by a garrot and the paint brush. That would be going beyond they realm for parents that just found their daughter dead.
Of course if it was an intentional shove down the stairway that could lead to the person doing whatever to cover it up.
Thanks for making me recheck the facts. I still need to reread but I do think I got confused with where I read the info. And that means it may have been an opinion by someone that did not read the autopsy. So it would mean nothing.
Henry Lee also mentioned the fact LE did not catch the size of the underwear right away and seems to suggest the DNA in them could have come from the owner of the underwear and if they were with someone that had that DNA. Like the underwear was the sisters or Moms or someone that changed JBR and the male DNA was on them.
 
Becba said:
[...]Of course if it was an intentional shove down the stairway that could lead to the person doing whatever to cover it up.
[...]Henry Lee also mentioned the fact LE did not catch the size of the underwear right away and seems to suggest the DNA in them could have come from the owner of the underwear and if they were with someone that had that DNA. Like the underwear was the sisters or Moms or someone that changed JBR and the male DNA was on them.
I think a fall down a stairway would produce additional bruising. Also, if they did not catch the size of the underwear that would suggest it wasn't grossly too big and must have looked reasonable on her. Underwear is so stretchy that (leaving out the tiny and gigantic) most sizes fit most wearers. My daughter-in-law is about 50 lbs heavier than I am yet we can wear the same size underwear. Slightly snug on her - slightly roomy on me.
 
I agree Tipper.
I've read that the oversized underwear must have been hanging off/ falling down on JonBenet, but I've never thought that because my little boy is 6 going on 7 which means he wears size 6-8 underwear , but I have put 10-12's on him and they fit too. The 6-8's are tight and the 10-12's are loose. I'm sure if I put 12-14's they would be really quite baggy but I dont think they would fall off him.
 
My little girl is five and a half and she weighs 42lbs. She has the same set of Bloomies that Jonbenet had in size 4-6 and they are still a little large for her. Put it this way - there is plenty of growth room. Size 10-12 would be huge as they are several sizes bigger. Out of curiosity, I looked at that size when I was in Bloomingdales and IMO all sizes were "big made".

My daughter is sitting just on/above average height for her age but she has a slender build.
 
Jayelles said:
My little girl is five and a half and she weighs 42lbs. She has the same set of Bloomies that Jonbenet had in size 4-6 and they are still a little large for her. Put it this way - there is plenty of growth room. Size 10-12 would be huge as they are several sizes bigger. Out of curiosity, I looked at that size when I was in Bloomingdales and IMO all sizes were "big made".

My daughter is sitting just on/above average height for her age but she has a slender build.


Just a reminder: the panties found on JonBenet were size 12/14.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
246
Guests online
1,896
Total visitors
2,142

Forum statistics

Threads
599,552
Messages
18,096,518
Members
230,877
Latest member
agirlnamedbob
Back
Top