Burke

[tipper]

I thought Bynum came over on his own after hearing about the murder from someone else. There's an interview with him on the (I think) A&E show.

 

[Rainsong]

One more note about John Ramsey's relationship with Mike Bynum.
He states in this CNN interview that Bynum is a "personal friend of mine."
Yet in his depostion from October 1998, this is what John Ramsey says regarding his relationship with Bynum:

First, regarding John Ramsey's characterization of the level of friendship with the Stines:

(John Ramsey) A: "....we lived with some people."

Q: "Who were these people?"

A: "Susan and Glen Stine"

Q: "Should I add them to your list of close friends?"

A: "They were not close friends, believe it or not."
They were friends, but we didn't socialize alot with them."


And then regarding Mike Bynum:

A: "Well, my friend Mike Bynum, basically asked me would you trust me to do some things that I feel need to be done for your family? And I said yes.

Q: "When did he ask that?"

A: "That was probably the 26th or 27th "

Q: "How long had you known Bynum?"

A: "I had known him for 2 or 3 years I guess."

Q: "Was he a professional associate or a social friend?"

A: "He was I guess more of a professional associate ."

Q: "Also something of a friend?"

A: "Sure."

Q: "What strata would he belong in? Would he be roughly in the same
category as the Stines?"

A: "Uh-huh."

Q: "Yes?"

A: "Yes."

So - we have, in John Ramseys OWN words from interviews, that Mike Bynum was basically a "professional associate." Now why in the world would you even THINK to pick up the phone and call a "professional associate" at a time like it was - in the middle of a supposed life or death situation for your daughter?? WHY A LAWYER?

Don't you have friends who are also doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers, possibly plumbers, electricians, contractors, engineers, etc?

Are people supposed to be compartmentalized? Oh, he's a doctor. She's a teacher. Can't they be both 'occupation' and friend?

Rainsong

 

[tipper]

Capps,

Found the Melinda source. It was in ST's book and longer than what I recalled in my earlier post. Now I need to remember where the brief confirmation reference came from

ppbk p 62

"Melinda Ramsey, twenty-two, wore a white pullover and jeans, and her eyes were puffy from weeping. She was attractive and polite when a detective and a sherriff's investigator began questioning her, but by the time the interview was done she she was left with her head buried in her arms, crying. They had pressed her hard about the possibility of inappropriate sexual behavior in the family. Melinda vehemently denied that and in fact revealed nothing of significance, since she was in Atlanta at the time of the murder. She had been caught in a web not of her own making, and the interview left her with a bad taste about dealing with police."

 

[tezi]

I'll bet they would have been in Boulder...

Obviously you have never lived in Boulder or Boulder County. Boulder is very soft on crime, but of course since it's the beloved Ramsey's all bets are off, according to you and the rest of the RST.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Don't you have friends who are also doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers, possibly plumbers, electricians, contractors, engineers, etc?

Are people supposed to be compartmentalized? Oh, he's a doctor. She's a teacher. Can't they be both 'occupation' and friend?

Rainsong

Sure do, but I wouldn't call them up if my daughter was kidnapped. The point is, they called a small, select group of people. Why did that small group contain a lawyer who JR himself stated was a professional associate he was friendly with?

 

[K777angel]

Sure do, but I wouldn't call them up if my daughter was kidnapped. The point is, they called a small, select group of people. Why did that small group contain a lawyer who JR himself stated was a professional associate he was friendly with?

Exactly. But more than that, why did the Ramseys call ANYONE that morning when the note specifically stated that if they did they'd KILL their daughter!
Calling the police is understandable - but that is IT! Why purposely provoke the kidnappers who are supposedly holding your daughter's life in their hands?

So to call anyone is absurd - but to call someone who is NOT even a close friend but a "professional associate" - means that Bynum was called not because of his personal closeness to John or Patsy Ramsey or their children - but because of his PROFESSION!! LAW.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist here folks to figure the strategy out....

 

[aussiesheila]

Exactly. But more than that, why did the Ramseys call ANYONE that morning when the note specifically stated that if they did they'd KILL their daughter!
Calling the police is understandable - but that is IT! Why purposely provoke the kidnappers who are supposedly holding your daughter's life in their hands?

So to call anyone is absurd - but to call someone who is NOT even a close friend but a "professional associate" - means that Bynum was called not because of his personal closeness to John or Patsy Ramsey or their children - but because of his PROFESSION!! LAW.

Doesn't take a rocket scientist here folks to figure the strategy out....

Do we know who called all their friends over that morning? Was it John or was it Patsy? My guess is that it was Patsy. Patsy's having called them is entirely consistent with my theory that the Ramseys didn't do it but that some people very close to them did and that Patsy knows who they are.

 

[capps]

Capps,

Found the Melinda source. It was in ST's book and longer than what I recalled in my earlier post. Now I need to remember where the brief confirmation reference came from

ppbk p 62

"Melinda Ramsey, twenty-two, wore a white pullover and jeans, and her eyes were puffy from weeping. She was attractive and polite when a detective and a sherriff's investigator began questioning her, but by the time the interview was done she she was left with her head buried in her arms, crying. They had pressed her hard about the possibility of inappropriate sexual behavior in the family. Melinda vehemently denied that and in fact revealed nothing of significance, since she was in Atlanta at the time of the murder. She had been caught in a web not of her own making, and the interview left her with a bad taste about dealing with police."

Tipper,

Thanks for taking the time to look up the info for me ... I appreciate it!

Being questioned about your father possibly molesting you and every thing else involving this case;I'm sure was not pleasant,I'd probably be crying too. But these questions had to be asked.

 

[BlueCrab]

Do we know who called all their friends over that morning? Was it John or was it Patsy? My guess is that it was Patsy. Patsy's having called them is entirely consistent with my theory that the Ramseys didn't do it but that some people very close to them did and that Patsy knows who they are.

aussiesheila,

Yes, Patsy made the calls to the friends a minute or two after making the "performance of a lifetime" 911 call.

 

[KatherineQ]

If Patsy "didn't do it but knows who they are", WHY would she protect them, BlueCrab?

Doesn't that seem extremely far fetched? That she would lie to protect someone who sexually tortured and murdered her darling daughter? What possible reason?

 

[capps]

If Patsy "didn't do it but knows who they are", WHY would she protect them, BlueCrab?

Doesn't that seem extremely far fetched? That she would lie to protect someone who sexually tortured and murdered her darling daughter? What possible reason?

Katherine,
If you look through the posts and see what BC's theory is as to who did it ... you would understand why Patsy may want to cover up.

 

[capps]

Sorry BlueCrab ... Katherine's question was directed to you ... didn't mean to answer for you. Am I forgiven?

 

[BlueCrab]

If Patsy "didn't do it but knows who they are", WHY would she protect them, BlueCrab?

Doesn't that seem extremely far fetched? That she would lie to protect someone who sexually tortured and murdered her darling daughter? What possible reason?

KatherineQ,

I think you're referring to Pam Griffin's comment to Larry Schiller or an associate while they were researching PMPT. Pam Griffin, knowing Patsy rather well, was going by instinct when, sitting with Patsy and talking, she felt as if "Patsy knew who killed JonBenet but was afraid to say".

Pam Griffin's feeling about the strange scenario and Patsy's suspicious comments dovetail into my theory that children were involved in the death of JonBenet and the parents are covering it up.

The killing itself was probably accidental, but the staging carried out by the children to try to coverup what they had just done was ruthless. The embarrassment of the erotic asphyxiation (a dangerous masturbation technique) which accidentally asphyxiated JonBenet, and the barbarous staging, when discovered by the parents, likely caused John and Patsy to go along with what the boys had already started and try to coverup the truth -- hoping the truth would never be uncovered and a hypothetical intruder would be blamed, with the crime going into the history books as unsolved.

BlueCrab

 

[tipper]

http://www.boulderdailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1999/26crams.html

…

Boulder County Commissioner Paul Danish and Pam Griffin, JonBenét's dressmaker, also have claimed Schiller inaccurately used a small portion of the information they provided the author.

…

It would be interesting to know the specifics of this.

 

[UKGuy]

KatherineQ,

I think you're referring to Pam Griffin's comment to Larry Schiller or an associate while they were researching PMPT. Pam Griffin, knowing Patsy rather well, was going by instinct when, sitting with Patsy and talking, she felt as if "Patsy knew who killed JonBenet but was afraid to say".

Pam Griffin's feeling about the strange scenario and Patsy's suspicious comments dovetail into my theory that children were involved in the death of JonBenet and the parents are covering it up.

The killing itself was probably accidental, but the staging carried out by the children to try to coverup what they had just done was ruthless. The embarrassment of the erotic asphyxiation (a dangerous masturbation technique) which accidentally asphyxiated JonBenet, and the barbarous staging, when discovered by the parents, likely caused John and Patsy to go along with what the boys had already started and try to coverup the truth -- hoping the truth would never be uncovered and a hypothetical intruder would be blamed, with the crime going into the history books as unsolved.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,
[font=&quot]Do you have any views on where two preteen boys would learn about erotic asphyxiation? Assuming both boys to be pre-pubertal where would the inclination to adopt what is, statistically, a solitary practice, arise from?


[/font]

 

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,
[font=&quot]Do you have any views on where two preteen boys would learn about erotic asphyxiation? Assuming both boys to be pre-pubertal where would the inclination to adopt what is, statistically, a solitary practice, arise from?

[/font]

UKGuy,

Several comments about what you posted:

Erotic asphyxiation (EA) is when two people participate in the dangerous breath control game; autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA) is when it is practiced solo.

EA and AEA are practiced by young people, usually those in their teens and twenties, and mostly by males. Therefore, I think the boys were tutored by an older person. But their inexperience in the use of the EA device caused the accidental asphyxiation of JonBenet.

The EA device was probably fashioned well before the day of the killing by the older male and stored in the blue suitcase containing the semen-stained blanket from JAR's bed and the Dr. Seuss book.

There is strong evidence JonBenet knew her attacker and voluntarily came downstairs with him and snacked on pineapple. But the evidence of stun gun burns on JonBenet suggests the participation by JonBenet in the EA game was involuntary.

BlueCrab

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

Several comments about what you posted:

Erotic asphyxiation (EA) is when two people participate in the dangerous breath control game; autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA) is when it is practiced solo.

EA and AEA are practiced by young people, usually those in their teens and twenties, and mostly by males. Therefore, I think the boys were tutored by an older person. But their inexperience in the use of the EA device caused the accidental asphyxiation of JonBenet.

The EA device was probably fashioned well before the day of the killing by the older male and stored in the blue suitcase containing the semen-stained blanket from JAR's bed and the Dr. Seuss book.

There is strong evidence JonBenet knew her attacker and voluntarily came downstairs with him and snacked on pineapple. But the evidence of stun gun burns on JonBenet suggests the participation by JonBenet in the EA game was involuntary.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

Thanks for your remarks and highlighting the distinction between AEA and AE.

If an older person tutored the boys, would this be grounds for the either the Grand Jury or the BPD considering some form of sexual abuse had occurred? If so this would make the subsequent sealing of records comprehensible! But would the authorities not be under some form of legal injunction to investigate precisely who the tutor was? Since this may prevent another tragedy from occurring!

As you remark Erotic Asphyxiation is normally a voluntary and consensual activity but in this instance it is not only involuntary but is accompanied by the sadistic use of a stun-gun! So it was obviously not a game or an experiment.

Why should two reasonably well educated and intelligent preteen boys aged about 9 or 10, want to introduce JonBenet to Erotic Asphyxiation when other more conventional games such as Playing Doctor etc may have been more relevant to their age and maturity?

It seems likely JonBenet knew her killer, but she may have snacked the pineapple upstairs, I have read no reports that JonBenet's fingerprints were on either the large serving spoon or the bowl?

.

 

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,

Thanks for your remarks and highlighting the distinction between AEA and AE.

If an older person tutored the boys, would this be grounds for the either the Grand Jury or the BPD considering some form of sexual abuse had occurred? If so this would make the subsequent sealing of records comprehensible! But would the authorities not be under some form of legal injunction to investigate precisely who the tutor was? Since this may prevent another tragedy from occurring!

As you remark Erotic Asphyxiation is normally a voluntary and consensual activity but in this instance it is not only involuntary but is accompanied by the sadistic use of a stun-gun! So it was obviously not a game or an experiment.

Why should two reasonably well educated and intelligent preteen boys aged about 9 or 10, want to introduce JonBenet to Erotic Asphyxiation when other more conventional games such as Playing Doctor etc may have been more relevant to their age and maturity?

UKGuy,

If an older person, in his teens or twenties, was involved as the tutor of EA, then that would certainly be a criminal act against a child. If this is the case, there's a possibility the authorities already know who that person is and are covering it up. We can likely identify who it is ourselves by simply looking in the opposite direction from where the authorities appear to be trying to make us look.

For instance, we know the authorities had Larry Schiller remove certain things from PMPT at the last minute (immediately following the adjournment of the grand jury in 1999) "to protect the investigation". Despite about 500 names in PMPT's name index, whose name is conspicuosly missing from PMPT -- despite the fact this person regularly babysat JonBenet and drove JonBenet to school?

And whose name was listed in the name index nine times but listed in the text only once -- obviously the result of a hurried up purging of the name at the last minute?

The obvious purging from PMPT of these two individuals, one 21 and one nine, raised red flags for me.

BlueCrab

 

[LazyCat08]

UKGuy,

Despite about 500 names in PMPT's name index, whose name is conspicuosly missing from PMPT -- despite the fact this person regularly babysat JonBenet and drove JonBenet to school?

And whose name was listed in the name index nine times but listed in the text only once -- obviously the result of a hurried up purging of the name at the last minute?

The obvious purging from PMPT of these two individuals, one 21 and one nine, raised red flags for me.

BlueCrab

Have you heard any information as to what has since happened to this 21 year old person since the murder?
I'm assuming you are referring to Burke's neighborhood friend and his tutor who lived near by? (I don't recall the names)... so Burke, in this theory would be involved?

This is actually what my mother said when the murder happened... that the mother was covering up because her brother was involved.

In my mind this is THE ONLY reason why the Ramseys would cover anything up - if either they, or another of their children were involved...

If the 21 year old were indirectly responsible for what happened or guilty of inappropriate behavior or molestation of the children - would LE not be able to charge him at the risk of revealing information about the children who were participants or victims?

 

[BlueCrab]

Have you heard any information as to what has since happened to this person since the murder?
I'm assuming you are referring to Burke's neighborhood friend and his tutor who lived near by? (I don't recall the names)... so Burke, in this theory would be involved?

This is actually what my mother said when the murder happened... that the mother was covering up because her brother was involved.

In my mind this is THE ONLY reason why the Ramseys would cover anything up - if either they, or another of their children were involved...

If the 21 year old were indirectly responsible - would LE not be able to charge him at the risk of revealing information about the children who were participants or victims?

Brie,

Yes, I know exactly what has happened to both individuals since the murder.

DS is graduating from a high school in Atlanta this year. NI is teaching at a high school in California.