Is Patsy Ramsey losing her battle with ovarian cancer

[GuruJosh]

I ask because I believe an invitee would leave more obvious signs than proposed by your post.

Rainsong

like what? a note on the stairwell saying "thanks for the evening. Sorry about the unpleasantness"?

 

[Rainsong]

like what? a note on the stairwell saying "thanks for the evening. Sorry about the unpleasantness"?

No, but how about something left behind? According to Blue Crab's theory(ies), he believes a young friend of Burke's was invited to the home. In one rendition, he believe the friend's babysitter accompanied him to the Ramsey home. How many children do you know who leaves a friend's home and doesn't manage to leave something behind? A jacket, hat, gloves, a toy.

Of course there were things left behind--unsourced fibers, a paper bag, rope, a baseball bat, cord, duct tape, a handwritten note...but they aren't necessarily the type of thing left by a playmate--other than the bat.

They are, however, the type of thing left behind by someone who didn't belong in the home.

I do believe Blue Crab has thought long and hard about his theories, and on the surface, they sound a bit convincing. But I keep going back to one thing--secrets. Secrets are no longer secrets if they are shared, and this secret would necessarily be shared with a minimum of four people, two of whom were only nine at the time of the murder. Nine-year-olds aren't known for their discretion or remembering their belongings when leaving friends' homes.

Rainsong

 

[Voice of Reason]

maybe they left behind a glass of tea (who drinks hot tea out of a glass aside from someone who's young?) and a bowl of pineapple, childishly displayed with a giant spoon in it. wait a sec, someone did leave that behind...

 

[BlueCrab]

Secrets are no longer secrets if they are shared, and this secret would necessarily be shared with a minimum of four people, two of whom was only nine at the time of the murder.

Rainsong,

Now where have I heard lines similar to these before? Hmmm.

Naw, couldn't be..... there's an error in grammar in them.

 

[Rainsong]

Rainsong,

Now where have I heard lines similar to these before? Hmmm.

Naw, couldn't be..... there's an error in grammar in them.

Dat's 'cause I changed it from 'one of whom' to 'two of whom.'

Fixed it, just for you.

Rainsong

 

[Rainsong]

maybe they left behind a glass of tea (who drinks hot tea out of a glass aside from someone who's young?) and a bowl of pineapple, childishly displayed with a giant spoon in it. wait a sec, someone did leave that behind...

Yes, but since children were in the home earlier, and glasses of tea and bowls of pineapple cannot be dated...

My, that last phrase sounds familiar

Rainsong

 

[K777angel]

I recall a bag of children's clothes WAS there in the house at the time and I believe it was Linda Arndt that moved it.
Whose clothes were they? Why a paper bag?
I always thought that was odd to mention. I think it was Schiller's book.

 

[narlacat]

The bag had winter clothes for Jonbenet and Burke in it, maybe for their trip to Michigan. I thought it was Priscilla White that moved them.

 

[JBRMod2]

I wonder why this post stays ... while my very short previous post to lighten things up was deleted?

WS welcomes posters with a wide range of POVs. Rainsong is free to to attack/ridicule Toth's alien theory providing she doesn't do the same to Toth!

 

[Rainsong]

WS welcomes posters with a wide range of POVs. Rainsong is free to to attack/ridicule Toth's alien theory providing she doesn't do the same to Toth!

Actually, the ridicule is directed toward theories with no underlying foundation of fact. Toth's alien theory, per my interpretation, is based on the known evidence.

Rainsong

 

[IrishMist]

Ah, lack of evidence means the perpetrator was invited in.
Stephanie Crowe murder-no signs of forced entry, little evidence of intruder
Jessica Lunsford-no signs of forced entry, no evidence of intruder
Patricia Gertsch Hodges-found murdered behind locked doors, no signs of forced entry, no signs of a struggle or of an intruder.

Did all these people invite their killers in simply because there is no sign there was an intruder?

Rainsong

With Crowe and Lunsford, there's also no evidence that the intruder hung around in the house for such a long period of time. I don't think that can be discounted.
I haven't read on Hodges, so I won't comment.

 

[Jayelles]

Actually, the ridicule is directed toward theories with no underlying foundation of fact. Toth's alien theory, per my interpretation, is based on the known evidence.

Rainsong

Am I missing something here? You introduced Toth's theory above as "based on nothing but conjecture? "

Please demonstrate how Bluecrab's theory is NOT based upon known evidence yet Toth's alien theory is?

 

[Rainsong]

Am I missing something here? You introduced Toth's theory above as "based on nothing but conjecture? "

Please demonstrate how Bluecrab's theory is NOT based upon known evidence yet Toth's alien theory is?

While Blue Crab states there is evidence of a 'fifth' person being in the home, he attributes that evidence to an 'invitee' as opposed to an 'intruder.' I'd like to know how he determined there is a difference between 'fifth person' evidence and 'intruder' evidence. He says the Ramseys are lying in regard to the 911 tape and would only lie to cover for a family member. I don't believe the Ramseys are lying. If they were, they would have been arrested lonog ago for obstruction of justice, if nothing else.

So, Blue Crab's theories are based on 'no evidence.' At least, in my opinion.

Rainsong

 

[Jayelles]

Toth's theory involves a lot more than just a fifth invited person.

Intruder suggests someone who enters of their own volition. I don't think the Ramseys would cover for a friend of the family.

 

[Rainsong]

Toth's theory involves a lot more than just a fifth invited person.

Intruder suggests someone who enters of their own volition. I don't think the Ramseys would cover for a friend of the family.

Toth's theory?

I don't think they would 'cover' for anyone.

Rainsong

 

[BlueCrab]

While Blue Crab states there is evidence of a 'fifth' person being in the home, he attributes that evidence to an 'invitee' as opposed to an 'intruder.' I'd like to know how he determined there is a difference between 'fifth person' evidence and 'intruder' evidence. He says the Ramseys are lying in regard to the 911 tape and would only lie to cover for a family member. I don't believe the Ramseys are lying. If they were, they would have been arrested lonog ago for obstruction of justice, if nothing else.

So, Blue Crab's theories are based on 'no evidence.' At least, in my opinion.

Rainsong,

An intruder is an uninvited person in the house. A guest is invited and therefore not an intruder. But, of course, you already know that. Correct?

And every one of my BDI theories are based on the evidence. But, of course, you already know that too. Correct?

And in addition to following credible evidence, a good theory must also make sense. Correct? Common sense tells us there was no intruder because JonBenet would not have sat down with an intruder and snacked on pineapple while the intruder sipped on tea. Even John Ramsey admits JonBenet would not have snacked on pineapple with an intruder; he said "she would have screamed bloody murder".

BlueCrab

 

[Rainsong]

Rainsong,

An intruder is an uninvited person in the house. A guest is invited and therefore not an intruder. But, of course, you already know that. Correct?

And every one of my BDI theories are based on the evidence. But, of course, you already know that too. Correct?

And in addition to following credible evidence, a good theory must also make sense. Correct? Common sense tells us there was no intruder is because JonBenet would not have sat down with an intruder and snacked on pineapple while the intruder sipped on tea. Even John Ramsey admits JonBenet would not have snacked on pineapple with an intruder; he said "she would have screamed bloody murder".

BlueCrab

Naturally I know the difference between an intruder and an invited guest. What I don't see is where the evidence points toward a guest rather than an intruder, and no, I do not believe your theories include the known evidence in this case. As I said previously, intruder does not necessarily mean stranger. But I'll add to that; it doesn't necessarily mean 'invitee,' either.

I doubt JonBenet woke up prior to the perpetrator removing her from her bed, let alone sat at the breakfast room table and snacked on pineapple.

JonBenet was a heavy sleeper--as proved by her bedwetting. After such an exciting, event-filled day, she would have slept deeper than normal. Had anyone, even someone she knew, attempted to waken her, she would have kicked up a fuss.

The remnants of drink of snacks on the breakfast room table were likely leftover from the afternoon when the children's friends came to visit. Rates of digestion vary widely. There has been much pineapple discussion over the years, and many believe JonBenet ate the fruit a short time before her death. In this I disagree having had too many vomiting experiences with my own children and knowing when they actually ate the food they vomited.

I don't believe in conspiracy theories. I mentioned before, once a secret is shared, it is no longer a secret. Not only would the Ramseys have to keep quiet, so would the two boys and the other boy's family--and possibly the babysitter. Seven people sharing a secret is dangerous. ADd in the Grand Jury, the prosecutors, the defense attorneys and a majority of the entire BPD.

I don't think so.

Yes, a theory must make sense, but it also must follow the evidence. I don't believe yours meets either challenge.

Rainsong

 

[Moggie]

Personally, no matter what happened, i cant see how anyone could NOT feel some real, profound sympathy for the Ramseys. Things arent black and white. I dont know what happened in this case but i bet it wasnt black and white.

I agree....I think John & Patsy may have found themselves in a Sophie's Choice situation, a parent's worst nightmare.

I've been lurking for a couple of weeks, and I'm sincerely impressed with the amount of time and work people donate to this board, to keep it current and interesting.

 

[BlueCrab]

Rates of digestion vary widely. There has been much pineapple discussion over the years, and many believe JonBenet ate the fruit a short time before her death. In this I disagree having had too many vomiting experiences with my own children and knowing when they actually ate the food they vomited.

Rainsong,

JonBenet ate the pineapple about one hour before she died. This is based on the best scientific information available in regard to the digestion rate of fresh pineapple after eating it on an empty stomach.

Your comparison of digestion rates using your daughter's vomiting is not a valid analysis. If your daughter vomited then it means she was sick from something, and her rate of digestion would be no where near normal and useless to use as a norm.

 

[BlueCrab]

Of course there were things left behind--unsourced fibers, a paper bag, rope, a baseball bat, cord, duct tape, a handwritten note...but they aren't necessarily the type of thing left by a playmate--other than the bat.

Rainsong,

There was no baseball bat "left behind". Both baseball bats were proven to belong to Burke Ramsey.

From the 2000 Atlanta interviews with John Ramsey:

Attorney Levin: "If I can change gears here for just a second, one of the things you found significant, and, obviously since you found it significant, it was of great interest to us, was the baseball bat, the second baseball bat, aluminum bat. And we have, through confidential grand jury investigations, found that that bat, that second bat was Burke's."

Busted again! John tried to make the second baseball bat sound mysterious and not belonging at the house, and therefore perhaps the murder weapon carried by an intruder. But it turned out to be Burke's bat -- and the Ramseys likely knew that. All they had to do if they weren't sure, was to ask Burke. Kids know how many baseball bats they own.

Incidentally, the Swamp (where "only the truth is told") still falsely uses the second baseball bat as evidence of an intruder.

BlueCrab