Did JR tell us the Plan, #2 - RDI Only thread
- Thread starter Salem
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Nom de plume
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 24
I think we have to take into account who was questioning JR. Seems to account for his "that explains that then" BS. But from PR's interview:
1998:
17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right, from Priscilla.
18 That's another one of those legal pads.
19 TOM HANEY: Right.
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that a (inaudible)
21 picture?
22 TOM HANEY: No.
23 PATSY RAMSEY: No.
24 TOM HANEY: But this photo was not taken
25 after, this was on, it's a --
0527
1 PATSY RAMSEY: Right, right.
2 TRIP DeMUTH: -- similar photo to this one
3 here, but we're minus that.
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
5 TOM HANEY: And probably minus the cleaning
6 fluid and we have some bags here.
7 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
8 TOM HANEY: And that's photo 52 that we're
9 comparing it to.
10 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that cleaning stuff over
11 there?
12 TOM HANEY: Hard to see. It could be the
13 same, but I'm not sure. Okay.
14 That photo 52 was taken by the police.
15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
16 TOM HANEY: Well, this photo 12OTET8 was on
17 your roll of file in your camera. And on the
18 same roll is the next photo, a Christmas morning
19 photo of the kids.
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes). Oh, God.
21 TOM HANEY: Before we, before we talk too
22 much about the next photo, if you can --
23 TRIP DeMUTH: You want to just take that
24 out for a minute?
25 TOM HANEY: Let's talk still about the
0528
1 120TET.
Like I say, this was on your role of
2 film and it's not exactly the same photograph
3 that was taken by the police.
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
5 TOM HANEY: But it's, it's, it shows --
6 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
7 TOM HANEY: -- pretty much, I guess, or can
8 you tell me when that would have been taken?
9 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't have a clue why
10 anybody would take a picture like that. I don't
11 know (inaudible). Who took the picture?
12 TOM HANEY: Well, it's on your roll --
13 PATSY RAMSEY: It's on my --
14 TOM HANEY: -- of film on your camera.
15 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know.
16 TOM HANEY: And this legal pad that you --
17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
18 TOM HANEY: -- identified --
19 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
20 TOM HANEY: -- do you know when that would
21 have been in that position?
22 PATSY RAMSEY: No. So this, this was taken
23 before photo one was?
24 TOM HANEY: Before the police photos.
25 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, okay. I don't know
0529
1 when this was taken, or why it was taken. I
2 mean, it's nothing.
3 TRIP DeMUTH: Do you recognize that pad, I
4 know it's (inaudible) photo?
5 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but we had a lot of
6 those around. There was a picture in another
7 one. I think.
8 TRIP DeMUTH: Uh-huh (yes)
9 PATSY RAMSEY: I bought like those Office
10 Depot's or Office Max or whatever they are and I
11 usually kept a bunch of them, you know, kept
12 them over here, right around here in the
13 kitchen.
14 TRIP DeMUTH: By the telephone?
15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but, you know, they
16 float all over.
17 TRIP DeMUTH: So it wouldn't have been
18 unusual to be where it is?
19 PATSY RAMSEY: No. No. Gosh.
TH clearly says that the picture in question is on the roll before the Christmas morning pictures, and later asks why the pad would be in that position. Whether pages were laid out like KK said or not, obviously the pad of paper was located somewhere that made LE suspicious.
PR's reaction, "Oh God!" shows she knows it's incriminating in some way. She later states that they "float all over" in hopes of offering some reasonable explanation.
Both PR & JR are vague, unsure, blah blah blah. There was some reason they were uncomfortable with what this picture showed.
1998:
17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right, from Priscilla.
18 That's another one of those legal pads.
19 TOM HANEY: Right.
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that a (inaudible)
21 picture?
22 TOM HANEY: No.
23 PATSY RAMSEY: No.
24 TOM HANEY: But this photo was not taken
25 after, this was on, it's a --
0527
1 PATSY RAMSEY: Right, right.
2 TRIP DeMUTH: -- similar photo to this one
3 here, but we're minus that.
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
5 TOM HANEY: And probably minus the cleaning
6 fluid and we have some bags here.
7 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
8 TOM HANEY: And that's photo 52 that we're
9 comparing it to.
10 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that cleaning stuff over
11 there?
12 TOM HANEY: Hard to see. It could be the
13 same, but I'm not sure. Okay.
14 That photo 52 was taken by the police.
15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
16 TOM HANEY: Well, this photo 12OTET8 was on
17 your roll of file in your camera. And on the
18 same roll is the next photo, a Christmas morning
19 photo of the kids.
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes). Oh, God.
21 TOM HANEY: Before we, before we talk too
22 much about the next photo, if you can --
23 TRIP DeMUTH: You want to just take that
24 out for a minute?
25 TOM HANEY: Let's talk still about the
0528
1 120TET.
Like I say, this was on your role of
2 film and it's not exactly the same photograph
3 that was taken by the police.
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
5 TOM HANEY: But it's, it's, it shows --
6 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
7 TOM HANEY: -- pretty much, I guess, or can
8 you tell me when that would have been taken?
9 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't have a clue why
10 anybody would take a picture like that. I don't
11 know (inaudible). Who took the picture?
12 TOM HANEY: Well, it's on your roll --
13 PATSY RAMSEY: It's on my --
14 TOM HANEY: -- of film on your camera.
15 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know.
16 TOM HANEY: And this legal pad that you --
17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
18 TOM HANEY: -- identified --
19 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
20 TOM HANEY: -- do you know when that would
21 have been in that position?
22 PATSY RAMSEY: No. So this, this was taken
23 before photo one was?
24 TOM HANEY: Before the police photos.
25 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, okay. I don't know
0529
1 when this was taken, or why it was taken. I
2 mean, it's nothing.
3 TRIP DeMUTH: Do you recognize that pad, I
4 know it's (inaudible) photo?
5 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but we had a lot of
6 those around. There was a picture in another
7 one. I think.
8 TRIP DeMUTH: Uh-huh (yes)
9 PATSY RAMSEY: I bought like those Office
10 Depot's or Office Max or whatever they are and I
11 usually kept a bunch of them, you know, kept
12 them over here, right around here in the
13 kitchen.
14 TRIP DeMUTH: By the telephone?
15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but, you know, they
16 float all over.
17 TRIP DeMUTH: So it wouldn't have been
18 unusual to be where it is?
19 PATSY RAMSEY: No. No. Gosh.
TH clearly says that the picture in question is on the roll before the Christmas morning pictures, and later asks why the pad would be in that position. Whether pages were laid out like KK said or not, obviously the pad of paper was located somewhere that made LE suspicious.
PR's reaction, "Oh God!" shows she knows it's incriminating in some way. She later states that they "float all over" in hopes of offering some reasonable explanation.
Both PR & JR are vague, unsure, blah blah blah. There was some reason they were uncomfortable with what this picture showed.
Nom de plume
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 24
I could picture it happening like this:
JR tells PR to write the note. Say it's a SFF, you know, make it sound like some politically motivated thing. Make sure to say that they want the $ and not to call LE. So PR sets off to write her "masterpiece" and in true Patsy fashion, it's all drama, drama, drama.
She calls 911 before JR has a chance to actually sit down and read the note. He sees it after the call but before LE arrives. No time to rewrite it, but he's furious with PR for being such a drama queen.
redheadedgal
Former Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 4,659
- Reaction score
- 104
great thread friend!!
Marla Singer
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 0
I thought it was something that was on their photo (120tet), allegedly taken by JR that same morning (finishing off the roll of film), but when the police photographed that same area later on (photo 52) that object(s)(scarf? bag? windex??)was missing all of a sudden?
I read PR;s "Oh, God" response was from seeing the photo of JB and BR on Christmas morning.
dazeerae
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 85
- Reaction score
- 2
It is very difficult to follow the transcripts since we can't see what was being discussed. Also, comments like "Oh God" are hard to read even if we had visual clues since we don't know exactly what was she was thinking. I could see this exchange having several different possible meanings. It would be nice if we could hear from the officer to see if he recalls the specifics being discussed.
It would be very helpful if we could see that picture. Has it not been posted anywhere publicly? This may be nothing (as PR said) or it may indicate something. Until I see the picture I just don't know what we are talking about.
Nom de plume
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 24
I guess it depends on which interview you're talking about.
JR's interview with LS makes it look like that, thanks to JR, and LS letting him direct the interview in that direction.
However, it's plainly clear in PR's interview that Tom Haney says, point blank, This picture was on your roll of film BEFORE the Christmas morning photos of the kids. I don't see why there's confusion about what he's saying. It seems perfectly clear to me. Like "Hey Patsy, explain this photo and WHY it was on the roll BEFORE the crime."
16 TOM HANEY: Well, this photo 12OTET8 was on
17 your roll of file in your camera. And on the
18 same roll is the next photo, a Christmas morning
19 photo of the kids.
I'm not claiming to know what was depicted in the photo in question, but simply pointing out that whatever it was, it was taken before the Christmas morning photos, and that LE thought it was suspicious enough to question them about it.
Fair enough. I get that. What caused a lot of confusion for me was reading that Komrik document, which seemed to imply that the picture was of the RN pad and two blank pages laid side by side on the spiral staircase, as if someone was practicing in advance for the murder. Other people said that was just a supposition. If it was, I found it very unhelpful to do that as it caused a lot of confusion for me and others who misinterpreted it. I don't think we need to be making suppositions of this nature. It's a HUGE leap to interpret the transcripts as he did and the only reason he made is because it supports his theory. So I dismiss all of this as having any real relevance to the case unless someone can show otherwise.
dazeerae
New Member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2013
- Messages
- 85
- Reaction score
- 2
Anyhoo, I think any evidence of preplanning would change a lot of RDI theories.
I'm wondering what most members here believe, that the murder was planned or not? I don't think it was planned. If it was planned, it seems poorly executed. On the other hand, it was the perfect murder in that no one has been punished for this crime.
I'm wondering what most members here believe, that the murder was planned or not? I don't think it was planned. If it was planned, it seems poorly executed. On the other hand, it was the perfect murder in that no one has been punished for this crime.
Marla Singer
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 21
- Reaction score
- 0
Ah, I see what you're saying. Thank you for clarifying. Now I'm twice as curious as to what was in the photo.
I remain on the fence on this question. Certain aspects of the crime suggest preplanning and other aspects don't. If we assume the Ramsey's are a normal family then preplanning seems inconceivable, but we realize that the Ramsey's are not the normal happy family they appear to be. There are dark secrets in this family. We don't know what the hell is going on with them behind the scenes but this strikes me as very true: with a family like this, anything is possible.
DeDee
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2013
- Messages
- 7,344
- Reaction score
- 42,111
The Ramsey's snapped a picture that included the pad before the snapshot of the children on Christmas morning. Since we have not seen this photo, KK used conjecture, or a supposition, to assume two blank pages were also there laid out side by side.
Synonyms for supposition include the words theory, conjecture, hypothesis, belief. A supposition is made to account for known facts; a theory based on known facts.
That is what we do here. We form opinions based on known facts.
On another thread, in the post linked above, you stated:
"A lot of my posts are based on intuition, this one included."
Intuition -
- direct perception of truth, fact, etc., independent of any reasoning process; immediate apprehension.
- knowledge or belief obtained neither by reason nor by perception
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/intuition
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intuition_(psychology)
If your beliefs in this case are based on intuition, wouldn't KK's theory based on known facts be at least as important as your gut instincts?
LE is suspicious of the positioning of the RN pad.
16 TOM HANEY: And this legal pad that you --
17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
18 TOM HANEY: -- identified --
19 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
20 TOM HANEY: -- do you know when that would
21 have been in that position?
Nom de plume
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 24
I know exactly what you're saying! It was confusing to me too. I had to go back and read it several times to determine exactly what KK was saying. True, it is just his assumption, supposition, etc. Not much different than what any of us do in reality. IMO, it's his wording that's so confusing.
I think it could be very relevant to the case. Is it? Who knows? But it was suspicious enough for LE to question both Rs about it. Had the pic just shown a general scene that happened to include the pad, I can't see LE thinking twice about it. They'd already admitted they had many of those pads around the house. It seems there was something suspicious about the placement, or location of the pad. TH specifically asks about the placement/ location, and if it was typical for it to be located where it is in the photo.
Scandigirl
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2014
- Messages
- 130
- Reaction score
- 1
Sorry in advance, if this comes out in a jumbled way, and is more confusing than ever! I agree it's very confusing when we can't see the interviews or the photos in question- we may not be able to be sure...
I might be wrong, but I understood it to mean that the police were very suspicious about 2 aspects concerning the photos: firstly, the location of the pads and pages in the Ramsey photo, and secondly, that the Ramsey photo was almost identical to the police photo, but different in a crucial way?
Namely, that the positioning of the blank pad and pages in the Ramsey photo was virtually identical to the positioning of the real Ransom note, which was photographed by the police... But, crucially, the Ramsey photo showed a blank pad and pages, whereas the police photo showed the actual written ransom note? So, basically, that indicated that someone had been possibly practicing how the real ransom note was going to be positioned (in the future, obviously indicating pre planning) and also that the Ramsey's photo therefore could not have been taken at the same or similar time as the police photo (once the police had arrived), as John Ramsey was trying to say, when he described finishing off the roll of film for the police (obviously once they were there!)
Hopefully this stil makes sense to read?!
Just my own thougts, of course.
IMO it is NOT the case that the photograph showed what Komrik 'supposed' it might show. It is also not clear that the picture in question was taken before the Christmas morning ones. I think Komrik's document has introduced a lot of unnecessary confusion by even implying that someone was practicing in advance for the ransom note. I would love for that to be the case, but until someone shows any real proof of it then I consider that just fantasy. We have plenty of actual evidence to discuss without getting sidetracked on imaginary evidence. If we don't even know what was on the picture it is ludicrous to form conclusions based on a supposition.
I think Komrik is confused. He thought the picture in question was before the Christmas morning ones but in actuality it was taken after the Christmas morning ones but before the police photos. The photo in question was just JR taking pictures to advance the film to the end of the roll so he could remove the roll safely from his camera to give to LE. That is how I explain this entire incident.
InstantProof
Active Member
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
- Messages
- 367
- Reaction score
- 172
Maybe they were just trying to trick Patsy.
They were actually showing her the photos, not just asking about them, so I don't know how they could trick her. There was no photoshop then, I don't think. But even so, that would have been illegal. LE would never be allowed to tamper with a photo evidence to trick a suspect. Clearly, something was suspicious to police about what he photos from the R'z camera showed as opposed to what was in the crime scene photos taken the next day. Too bad we don't know exactly what that was.
Nom de plume
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2011
- Messages
- 730
- Reaction score
- 24
Meara
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2013
- Messages
- 512
- Reaction score
- 344
Hi Scandigirl :seeya:
I think you're spot on about why the police were so interested in that particular photo, and why John was dissembling.
However, I don't think anyone was pre-planning or practicing. Remember, no one ever saw the RN on the stairs, and Steve Thomas and his colleagues found they couldn't replicate PR's alleged sprint to the step below it without serious injury. My guess is that the RN never left the spot where it was written until shortly before people started arriving on the morning of the 26th. Why would the Rams have laid it out on the stairs for themselves? How easy it is for us to get caught up in the Rams' narrative when we've heard it for 17 years!
You've really got my synapses firing, though :takeoff: I'll bet the the pad and two pages were spread across one stair. Maybe they were PR's lists for the Charlevoix trip, Disneyworld, and the upcoming pageant - something like that. And when she needed a story for where she found the RN - voilà. She could describe exactly where it was...how it looked....
Is there any precendent for improvisations, half-truths and glib deceptions by Patsy before the murder? Absolutely. I'll lay out some pieces here in the hope you'll have the patience to follow along.
Rewind to 1976, when PR was competing for the title of Miss West Virginia. She wanted to use her dramatization based on The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie for the talent portion but found out (the night before, IIRC) that she'd have to cut two-thirds of it to meet the time limit. She rewrote it, memorized it, and reworked the presentation (http://whynut.blogspot.com/2006/09/patsy-paugh.html). At the Miss America pageant in 1977, she won a non-finalist talent award for a dramatic reading of an essay she wrote titled - I kid you not - "Kiss of Death" (http://www.re-newsit.com/p/the-bonita-papers-are-unedited-notes-of.html).
Fast forward a few years to early dating with JR. The scene I'm recalling went something like this. Patsy was about to enter JR's apartment holding two wine glasses when the mistress who had caught on that she was being dumped came up and asked, "Is he in there?" Patsy said, "Who?" and when the woman said "John Ramsey," Patsy said, "I don't know. I just came over to return these wine glasses." The woman left, and Patsy went inside, where JR was cowering behind a door, hiding from the dangerous dumpee. As John tells this story, he was enraptured by Patsy's ability to spin a cover story coolly and believably at the drop of a hat; and that was high praise from a man who had just spent two years lying to his wife. (Can anyone link a source for this story, by any chance? So sorry, can't locate it right now but will try again later.)
Fast forward now to 1995 or '96, when Patsy found out that Jacques, the Bichon Frise she'd just gotten for JBR, was very sick and wouldn't survive. She returned him to the pet store and got another. JBR noticed that Jacques looked smaller, but Patsy said it was because he'd been sick (Death of Innocence).
Skip now to late summer of 1996:
Patsy Ramsey had dyed JonBenet's hair from a light brunette to blonde during their last summer in Charlevoix, Michigan, in 1996. Judith Phillips, Patsy's former friend, immediately noticed the little girl's blonde hair when the family returned to their 15th Street mansion in Boulder. Judith asked Patsy why she had dyed JonBenet's hair. "It was the hot summer sun in Charlevoix," Patsy claimed.
(http://www.tommillerlaw.com/Chapter...ution-of-Justice-by-Thomas-C-Doc-Miller.shtml)
I'm not saying PR had only bad motives in these latter events. Maybe she really wanted to spare JBR's feelings about Jacques I. And I know her replies in the "John who?" and Judith Miller stories are in part Southern Belle-ian for 'Excuse me, but that's none of your damn business.' All that said, it's instructive to observe how, as early as 21, PR turned to falsehoods with practiced ease to avoid unpleasantness or disapproval, and how skillful she was at spinning a different reality around a bit a concrete detail. As she explained to the Charleston Gazette in 1977, "....[on stage] I feel very relaxed about my talent. When I say the first few lines and get everyone else in the palm of my hand, then I go into my own little world. It's as if I'm completely alone." (http://whynut.blogspot.com/2006/09/patsy-paugh.html)
Were those Patsy's lists on the stairs? That's speculation, but it's not wild speculation. There was no reason to put the RN on the stairs, and many people here and elsewhere have noted what a weird place that was for it. Why not JBR's bed? The kitchen counter? The idea had to come from somewhere, and it sounds to me like the police found a picture of it.
Thank you for getting me to think about this! If you can stand more, please stay tuned tomorrow for Part 2: Conclusions.
fftobed: