JonBenet sitting up front with John and Judith having to squeeze in the back seat

[Mama2JML]

Well, I don't know who that is.. Cookie???

But even what she posted is just a story and to be honest, Not much of one.

It was just that she had to ride in back???

Non starter..

I agree, Scarlett. Here's the original quote:

"I saw John with JB alone together once. He was driving her to school and I was there measuing a wall for a photograph that Patsy was interested in buying. There was the normal activity in the house that morning trying to get the kids to school. John offered to give me a lift home. When we got to the Jeep, he pulled back the seat and expected me to climb in the back while he and JB rode in the front. I thought this was somewhat strange, because when an adult rides with me, kids always get in the back."

I don't think there's enough substance here to speculate. To each there own?...

 

[Charterhouse]

During this past year someone gave an example of something their younger brother had done. I wish I could remember who it was because it has given me lots of laughs.

It went something like the little brother insisted suede was a color when he was younger. As he got older he knew it wasn't a color but still insisted it was. The sister asked "why do you still insist suede is a color?" He said just because he wanted to keep it going.

I can't remember who it was that told this story but "Thank You". It has given me a lot of laughs and explains many posts on this forum.

Please whoever posted this, tell the story. You told it much better than I did.

 

[icedtea4me]

Perhaps John viewed JonBenet as an adult as opposed to a child.

 

[wonderllama]

[modsnip]
Original questions were answered - who said it, what book.

I didn't think anything was implied by it [modsnip].

That's my opinion anyway.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I agree, Scarlett. Here's the original quote:

"I saw John with JB alone together once. He was driving her to school and I was there measuing a wall for a photograph that Patsy was interested in buying. There was the normal activity in the house that morning trying to get the kids to school. John offered to give me a lift home. When we got to the Jeep, he pulled back the seat and expected me to climb in the back while he and JB rode in the front. I thought this was somewhat strange, because when an adult rides with me, kids always get in the back."

I don't think there's enough substance here to speculate. To each there own?...

There isn't. The quote is just factual. [modsnip]

 

[Dewey2Me1MoThyme]

I agree, Scarlett. Here's the original quote:

"I saw John with JB alone together once. He was driving her to school and I was there measuing a wall for a photograph that Patsy was interested in buying. There was the normal activity in the house that morning trying to get the kids to school. John offered to give me a lift home. When we got to the Jeep, he pulled back the seat and expected me to climb in the back while he and JB rode in the front. I thought this was somewhat strange, because when an adult rides with me, kids always get in the back."

I don't think there's enough substance here to speculate. To each there own?...

I wonder who would have been getting out of the Jeep first. If JonBenet was to get out before the lady would, it makes perfect sense to me. BTW I had a Jeep CJ7 and getting into the back seat with a passenger up front is not that hard or awkward.

 

[Meara]

Here's the post that was being drafted the other night before the Benadryl hit.....

It's interesting to me to see the different readings of the R's behavior in Judith (Phillips) Miller's anecdote -- maybe strange, maybe just unusual, maybe meaningless, maybe rude, maybe treating JBR as an adult, maybe practical. I'll go with unusual and rude, plus irritating, and something else that stood out for me.

Judith and the Ramseys were friends in Altanta before they moved to Boulder - Phillips first, then the Rams. She was a photographer, and did some photoshoots with them. And she and Patsy were on the women's softball team together. So, she was a friend who also did some paid work for them.

In this story about JR offering her a ride in the Jeep, she has just left their house after measuring a wall for hanging some of her framed work there. JR has a choice to make, to treat her primarily as a friend or as someone they've hired, and he chooses the latter. It's subtle, but that's exactly what he does, IMO. I think this emphasis is more important than his keeping JBR next to him. It reveals something of JR's mentality and character. He sees a person he hires/pays as less than. He's a snob. Would he have asked Priscilla White to squeeze in back? That's hard to imagine. He wasn't putting Judith in the back seat; he was putting her in her place.

Why does this matter? The Rams cultivated an image of an upstanding, normal, happy family...and yet JBR was found brutally murdered in the basement the day after Christmas under highly incriminating circumstances. If the parents were involved, as I believe they were, then there was quite a gap between the projected image and the reality, and this is where the stories and observations of those who knew them gain significance. Like the Vicar caught kicking the dog, people who have substituted some ego ideal for true character will often give themselves away in small moments, and it's to these moments and stories I look, not to the projected image, to understand who the Rams really were and what went on in that household.

 

[Mariel Van Arkle]

If the R's were "trying to get the kids off to school", and the woman was offered a ride secondarily to that fact, I would assume that the order of dropping off would be first JB, then the woman. If JR has a more logical than emotional brain, it makes sense that he would have the first drop-off in the front seat and not think anything of it. I don't see anything weird about it at all.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

If the R's were "trying to get the kids off to school", and the woman was offered a ride secondarily to that fact, I would assume that the order of dropping off would be first JB, then the woman. If JR has a more logical than emotional brain, it makes sense that he would have the first drop-off in the front seat and not think anything of it. I don't see anything weird about it at all.

That does make sense. Since it was a 2-door car, that means whoever was sitting in the front seat would need to get out of the car, pull the seat forward, for the person in the back to get out.

 

[Nom de plume]

If the R's were "trying to get the kids off to school", and the woman was offered a ride secondarily to that fact, I would assume that the order of dropping off would be first JB, then the woman. If JR has a more logical than emotional brain, it makes sense that he would have the first drop-off in the front seat and not think anything of it. I don't see anything weird about it at all.

Why do you assume that JB would be dropped off first? Maybe Judith was closer? Not saying she was, but I wouldn't assume either way.

General comment not directed at you MVA. [modsnip]

 

[chlban]

[modsnip] not everything that gets thrown out as "odd" seems all that odd to me. This is a case in point. Maybe I have just seen so many over-indulged, bad mannered children that this doesn't really point to much more than that. Of course, bad mannered children are the fault of the parents and on my planet, John would have instructed JB to move to the back. Funny thing, when I was kid, my parents would not have had to instruct me, because I got the whole respect for elders stuff, but alas, that was a very different time.

I think JR is a despicable man. However, I also think he is smart. If there was an inappropriate relationship between him and JB (which I have never personally been convinced of) I think he would be very careful not to do something like this that could bring questions. More likely a lazy parent, unwilling to bother with teaching his child manners, IMO.

I have also never thought Patsy wearing the same outfit the next day, when she was not planning to see anyone other than immediate family that had seen her in that outfit, pointed to anything one way or the other.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

One thing I have noticed is that people have no problems speaking up if they disagree about what a parent(s) is doing or saying, even if they think they are innocent. Nobody gets a pass. I was reading an article, maybe like 2 or 3 years ago, about parents like Erin Runnion and Marc Klaas, ones who become advocates, and being shocked by the comments. I can't remember exactly what they said, but people were extremely critical of the parents, despite the fact that no one thought they had anything to do with their child's murder. People might bite their tongue a bit, but nobody gets excused to do and say whatever they want because their child is missing or was murdered.

 

[Anyhoo]

[modsnip] not everything that gets thrown out as "odd" seems all that odd to me. This is a case in point. Maybe I have just seen so many over-indulged, bad mannered children that this doesn't really point to much more than that. Of course, bad mannered children are the fault of the parents and on my planet, John would have instructed JB to move to the back. Funny thing, when I was kid, my parents would not have had to instruct me, because I got the whole respect for elders stuff, but alas, that was a very different time.

I think JR is a despicable man. However, I also think he is smart. If there was an inappropriate relationship between him and JB (which I have never personally been convinced of) I think he would be very careful not to do something like this that could bring questions. More likely a lazy parent, unwilling to bother with teaching his child manners, IMO.

I have also never thought Patsy wearing the same outfit the next day, when she was not planning to see anyone other than immediate family that had seen her in that outfit, pointed to anything one way or the other.

A couple of problems with what you said:

The issue in the jeep would be bad manners on the part of the parent, not the child IMO. No one would expect a young child to know what to do, but anyone would expect a grown man to know what to do.

PR was planning to see other people the next day outside of family members. Remember the vacation they were going to take that morning or don't you know about that?

 

[Mama2JML]

A couple of problems with what you said:

The issue in the jeep would be bad manners on the part of the parent, not the child IMO. No one would expect a young child to know what to do, but anyone would expect a grown man to know what to do.

In your opinion, this story shared by Judith is evidence of something. IOW, it's significant for whatever reason, but your interpretation isn't absolute, nor are your inferences necessarily shared by others. This statement, for example:

If this happened, it is very odd. I think any parent in that situation who had a guest riding in their jeep would ask their young daughter to sit in the back. To me it possibly reveals something about a secret relationship between JR and JB that they only shared in private (by in private, I mean absent PR). JR appeared to be treating JB not as a child but as an adult, and not just as his daughter but as someone he preferred above Judith. I would not expect JB to know better, being so young, but JR definitely.

I would ask you to elaborate, but I think the implication is rather clear; incest? That's quite a leap. If I've misinterpreted what you've suggested, please clarify. (BTW, I don't understand the comment about JR's preference.)

PR was planning to see other people the next day outside of family members. Remember the vacation they were going to take that morning or don't you know about that?

???

 

[Anyhoo]

In your opinion, this story shared by Judith is evidence of something. IOW, it's significant for whatever reason, but your interpretation isn't absolute, nor are your inferences necessarily shared by others. This statement, for example:
I would ask you to elaborate, but I think the implication is rather clear; incest? That's quite a leap. If I've misinterpreted what you've suggested, please clarify. (BTW, I don't understand the comment about JR's preference.)

???

In your opinion, this story shared by Judith is evidence of something. IOW, it's significant for whatever reason, but your interpretation isn't absolute, nor are your inferences necessarily shared by others. This statement, for example:

M2M, I am not certain about any of this. All of this may be meaningless. I am just giving a possible interpretation of what this might mean. I really don't understand why we are discussing this in such detail.

I would ask you to elaborate, but I think the implication is rather clear; incest? That's quite a leap. If I've misinterpreted what you've suggested, please clarify. (BTW, I don't understand the comment about JR's preference.)

Again, what I said was just a possible indication of what this incident might mean, if it means anything at all. I was implying a relationship outside of a normal parent-child relationship. That does not necessarily indicate incest but perhaps it would. But again, this is purely conjecture on my part in terms of this one incident about the jeep.

???

[modsnip]

 

[Mama2JML]

In your opinion, this story shared by Judith is evidence of something. IOW, it's significant for whatever reason, but your interpretation isn't absolute, nor are your inferences necessarily shared by others. This statement, for example:

M2M, I am not certain about any of this. All of this may be meaningless. I am just giving a possible interpretation of what this might mean. I really don't understand why we are discussing this in such detail.

I would ask you to elaborate, but I think the implication is rather clear; incest? That's quite a leap. If I've misinterpreted what you've suggested, please clarify. (BTW, I don't understand the comment about JR's preference.)

Again, what I said was just a possible indication of what this incident might mean, if it means anything at all. I was implying a relationship outside of a normal parent-child relationship. That does not necessarily indicate incest but perhaps it would. But again, this is purely conjecture on my part in terms of this one incident about the jeep.

???

[modsnip]

UBM
Yes, please...

 

[questfortrue]

What is available to us amateur sleuthers has been referred to as only a “portion of the evidence” collected, though Kolar stated in a recent interview that most of the evidence is in the public domain. Initially I was confused about this, since both Prosecutor K and LA mentioned we only have a “portion of the evidence.” But, what I think Kolar was referring to is the forensic evidence collected – the RN, the autopsy report, the knife near the body, etc. What we do not have access to is the testimony of the many people interviewed by the GJ. So, it is stories such as this which give us glimpses of the family, or call it the not-so-perfect picture of the R’s.

According to our own backgrounds, any of us can discount any personal stories about the R’s as meaningless or irrelevant. But it’s like with all of the other case evidence – that is, add all the stories from friends and associates together, and one begins to be able to form some ideas about the dynamics of the Rams family.

Now consider some thoughts on the part of a forensic psychiatrist, Hodges, as to how JR treated JB In this story. When PR was undergoing her grave illness, it was JR, BR, JB and the helpers at home . From this story Hodges takes away that JR was treating JB more like a little adult than a child, giving her the passenger side of the car, where his wife receiving cancer treatments would normally sit. Respectfully, not to inflame the passionately held beliefs of IDI, but Hodges does believe incest to be at the crux of the crime which is why he looks at the Rs’ dynamics.

Also, as Meara interprets, Judith could also have felt she was being treated more like an employee than a friend. This was strange because of her background in friendship with the R’s. But here’s another story about how JR ran his business. It was stated by one of his former employees that JR would make an employee into the “golden star” for a while, and then, on whim, knock them down or fire them. So people would receive mixed messages. Employees would certainly fashion their behavior to adapt to the corporate culture and survive. Imo, it points to a manipulative kind of control on the part of JR. But interpret this as you will.

If one is IDI, then these stories carry no importance at all, or, If one finds it meaningless or disagrees with someone’s interpretation, then fine. One can always just scroll on by. One cannot prove or disprove anyone’s interpretation, especially when it comes to behavior. (Interestingly, though, police do rely on behavior background to assist them in building motive.)

As Detectives RG and ST asked one another after visiting the R house: “What the h**ll happened in this home?!.” That’s what we all want to know and why these stories can be relevant, imo.

______________________________________
All of the above, jmho, derived from publicly available sources.

 

[Chelly]

sorry. changed my mind.

 

[chlban]

[Anyhoo;10135755]A couple of problems with what you said:

The issue in the jeep would be bad manners on the part of the parent, not the child IMO. No one would expect a young child to know what to do, but anyone would expect a grown man to know what to do.[/quote]I believe it to be bad manners on the part of both the child and the parent and I clearly stated that I believe bad manners on the part of the child are the fault of the parent. It is still bad manners even in a child, IMO.

PR was planning to see other people the next day outside of family members. Remember the vacation they were going to take that morning or don't you know about that

And again, I said she was not planning to see any of the same people outside of immediate family. So, yes thank you, I know about the vacation. They were not planning to see anyone they had seen on Christmas day outside of each other.

Clearly that changed, but I don't think it is that unusual that if a woman wears a nice outfit, it is not stained or overly dirty, that she might throw on the same outfit for an early morning flight knowing that none of the friends that had seen her in the outfit would be crossing her path that day. I might do it myself and, trust me, I am a major clothes horse. Of course I would not put on the same undergarments, that would be gross, but we have no i dea about that, do we?

 

[Mama2JML]

PR said her shower was broken and that she didn't need to take a shower, so let me just stop you right there. Would PR sleep in her clothes? No. If she made breakfast first, she would stay in her night clothes to do so. If she dressed, she would dress for the vacation. But what she would not do is dress in the clothes she wore yesterday. But even if she did, by any stretch of the imagination, put on her previous day's clothes the next day to make breakfast in, what she would definitely not do is put on makeup wearing those clothes. She would change into the clothes she planned to wear that day prior to putting on her make up.

[modsnip] but to me it shows one thing: the entire morning story was nothing but that, a cover-story.

But this whole line of thought started because some other poster said there was nothing unusual for PR to be dressed in the same clothes because she was not expecting to see anyone other than family members that day. I was merely pointing out that that was not true, that PR should have expected to see other people that day because she was supposed to be taking a vacation with her family. M2M could not understand that. Can you?

They were going to their home in Charlevoix. ...on their plane, to celebrate Christmas with their children. Mrs. Ramsey wore a 'nice' outfit she had on for only a few hours the night before. JonBenet's clothes were laid out as if Patsy also intended for her to re-wear what she had worn to the Whites.