Karr/John's reaction

[JMO8778]

xactl

Patsy died in June, Karr hit the headlines in August, and JR was on LKL for the 10th anniversary in December. This board lit up like the Fourth of July when the Karr scandal hit the media. There's no way I don't believe some of that was orchestrated (starting with Patsy's funeral), meant to perpetuate the intruder theory to the masses who haven't delved into the case farther than the RST rhetoric offered up in regular intervals through the latter part of the year.

exactly ! With Patsy dead,JR was just looking to improve his image,once again,for the general public that thought he helped cover for her.

 

[Ames]

Ames, thank you so much for your appreciation of my husbands service. He is definately an Officer and a Gentleman. We love this country and all that it stands for.

I come from a military background, my dad, uncle, brother and husband have all served, so believe me...I know the sacrifices that they have to make. Every active duty member of the miltary, and veteran...needs a handshake, and a thank you. It can be a thankless job....which is extremely sad...because of all that they have to go through.

My point is that even if John is completely at peace with what happened to his baby girl, shouldn't he still (especially right after the murder, while the perp is out preying on other children) be offering every little peace of information that he possibly could to help find the perp before someone else had to suffer through the loss of their precious child too?[/quote]

YEP!! It is a red flag that he did the opposite of what any other INNOCENT parent would do. (But, we all KNOW that he ISN'T innocent).

I would be riding LE like a bad wedgie! I could care less if they were looking at me under a microscope. If you are standing right in front of them totally exposed, they wont have to look so hard or spend so much time and resources doing it. THEN they can move outside the inner circle and look elsewhere.

:laugh: LOL ...that's funny!!

Even the most forgiving man in the world would, at the very least, want to stop this crazed maniac from harming another innocent child.
My husband and I are devout Christians. My husband has an amazing amount of integrity and morals. But I CANNOT FATHOM the wrath that would be unleashed if anyone ever hurt our little girls like this. I don't think he would sleep until he found the person responsible. Atleast not for the first year. After that it may dull a little, but he would never stop searching, trying to figure it out. He would spend countless hours researching online past and current cases that could be related... I just can't fathom a parent not caring.... and for both of them to say right away after the murder that they pray for forgiveness.... not for the killer to be caught and stopped from hurting other children..... but forgiveness.

Yes, and I know that as Christians we are supposed to forgive....but, the Ramsey's...imo...were taking it just a little bit too far. They were just a little too nonchalant about it, if you ask me. I heard a preacher once, say that if anybody killed his child, that he would tear them apart. Its only human nature. God didn't make any of us perfect, and so I am sure that if it took some time to forgive the killer of someone's child...that HE would understand. He (God) was probably in shock, that the Ramsey's forgave their daughter's killer...right off the bat...with no hesitation, whatsoever. From what I have read ....they went to church...but were not DEVOUT Christians....so why was it so easy for them to forgive? Would they have been so forgiving if an intruder REALLY DID kill their child....or what if there had really been an intruder, and he had killed BOTH of their children? I can guarantee you that if that had of been the case....that they would have said, that it would be a cold day in h*ll, before they forgave the killer.

 

[JMO8778]

Exactly, Ames...their need to appear calm and forgiving outweighs all else..wonder why that is ? (.. sarcastically) Seems they can't afford to appear to have a temper at all..

 

[Ames]

Exactly, Ames...their need to appear calm and forgiving outweighs all else..wonder why that is ? (.. sarcastically) Seems they can't afford to appear to have a temper at all..

That's exactly it. But its a Catch 22.....They try to appear all nice and forgiving, and everything...so that people will think that they have no temper...so they would not be capable of killing their child. AND you do have some people still lingering out there that buy their cr@p. But the other side to that is, that they look cold, and uncaring....and make people, like myself, believe that they are not only capable of killing their child...they DID kill their child. Catch 22

 

[JMO8778]

That's exactly it. But its a Catch 22.....They try to appear all nice and forgiving, and everything...so that people will think that they have no temper...so they would not be capable of killing their child. AND you do have some people still lingering out there that buy their cr@p. But the other side to that is, that they look cold, and uncaring....and make people, like myself, believe that they are not only capable of killing their child...they DID kill their child. Catch 22

exactly,even the nicest,calmest person in the world would have every right to be raging over thier child being killed...that's normal...that's how nice caring parents feel when that happens..they don't just go...'oh well..must have been God's will'

 

[DeeDee249]

The Rs used their Christianity as a shield to hide behind! They portrayed themselves as devout (and I am not saying this was never the case) so they would seem unlikely suspects. And Smit bought it.
They WERE Christians. And they prayed...not for the murderer to be caught, but that THEY woulnd't be. And looks like their prayers were answered.

 

[armywife210]

Right... But I am trying to give them every little benefit of every little doubt. Say they were the most devout of Christians..... etc. and even in doing that I cannot make ANY sense of their actions.
Their story itself seemed odd. SO MANY ASPECTS of it seemed really weird. There are so many small things that make no sense... Patsy wearing the same clothes two days in a row without washing them when it is obvious that vanity is such a big deal to her. Why there are no video or still photos of that day at the party. Those are just two small things out of my huge list of little oddities.... then there are the bigger oddities.
But I would be able to accept that while the story is odd, it may VERY WELL be true. However, the way the Ramseys reacted to the entire thing was what sealed it for me.

 

[Solace]

Right... But I am trying to give them every little benefit of every little doubt. Say they were the most devout of Christians..... etc. and even in doing that I cannot make ANY sense of their actions.
Their story itself seemed odd. SO MANY ASPECTS of it seemed really weird. There are so many small things that make no sense... Patsy wearing the same clothes two days in a row without washing them when it is obvious that vanity is such a big deal to her. Why there are no video or still photos of that day at the party. Those are just two small things out of my huge list of little oddities.... then there are the bigger oddities.
But I would be able to accept that while the story is odd, it may VERY WELL be true. However, the way the Ramseys reacted to the entire thing was what sealed it for me.

I believe she is questioned about and speaks of the photograph taken of her at the White's where she is wearing the same thing that she wore the morning of the call to 911.

 

[JMO8778]

Right... But I am trying to give them every little benefit of every little doubt. Say they were the most devout of Christians..... etc. and even in doing that I cannot make ANY sense of their actions.
Their story itself seemed odd. SO MANY ASPECTS of it seemed really weird. There are so many small things that make no sense... Patsy wearing the same clothes two days in a row without washing them when it is obvious that vanity is such a big deal to her. Why there are no video or still photos of that day at the party. Those are just two small things out of my huge list of little oddities.... then there are the bigger oddities.
But I would be able to accept that while the story is odd, it may VERY WELL be true. However, the way the Ramseys reacted to the entire thing was what sealed it for me.

the only reason she wore that unforgettable blue suit on CNN is b/c it was exactly a day after she was q'd about wearing the same clothes to the party the night b/f,b/c she wore that exact same suit to the questioning the day b/f ..the whole thing was set up so she could be seen on national TV wearing the same thing she had on the day b/f..and if it had gone to trial,that would have been brought up,no doubt.ie-Patsy often wears the same clothes 2 days in a row..what a put on.I bet her lawyer thought that one up.

 

[DeeDee249]

In the movie PMPT, Steve Thomas makes a point of saying that. When he sees her on CNN, he spots right away that she is wearing the same outfit and he says he knows she's done it on purpose specfically because he had questioned her on why she wore the same thing Dec. 26 as she wore the previous day. He knows she did it to make it seem like she wore clothes 2 days in a row ALL the time.
When people that knew her were asked about that same thing, I think they said that they never saw her in the same thing twice- that she had an extensive and expensive wardrobe.

 

[armywife210]

In my opinion, those two never undressed that night. They never slept.

 

[JMO8778]

In the movie PMPT, Steve Thomas makes a point of saying that. When he sees her on CNN, he spots right away that she is wearing the same outfit and he says he knows she's done it on purpose specfically because he had questioned her on why she wore the same thing Dec. 26 as she wore the previous day. He knows she did it to make it seem like she wore clothes 2 days in a row ALL the time.
When people that knew her were asked about that same thing, I think they said that they never saw her in the same thing twice- that she had an extensive and expensive wardrobe.

It's in his book,too.He said when he saw that, he imagined a defense attorney saying, ' Mr Thomas,what was Mrs. Ramsey wearing...'.

 

[BBB167893]

The Rs used their Christianity as a shield to hide behind! They portrayed themselves as devout (and I am not saying this was never the case) so they would seem unlikely suspects. And Smit bought it.
They WERE Christians. And they prayed...not for the murderer to be caught, but that THEY woulnd't be. And looks like their prayers were answered.

Pretty sleazy, imo.

 

[Ames]

In my opinion, those two never undressed that night. They never slept.

I agree.

 

[BOESP]

Check this out:

http://www.webbsleuths.org/dcforum/DCForumID79/106.html


Are these the words and actions of a grieving father?????

 

[Shae]

It looks to me that the only anger that JR was feeling was directed at the reporters. I just found this article by Frank Coffman. Scroll down a little till you get to

John Ramsey said on CNN six days after the murder that he wasn't angry about the crime

read that paragraph and the one after it.

I would post those sections here but, well… read it for yourself and you will see why.
All I can say is, what lovely Christian language, LOL Someone didn’t take his anger pills that day.

http://thehistoryvault.tripod.com/02291999feedingfrenzy-bw.htm

JMO

 

[calus_3]

The only time that John and Patsy came out of their 'grieving' was to sue/threaten to sue anyone who dare claim they were responsible for the death. Otherwise, they were happy as pigs in slop to just let it go...and that started what, a couple hours after the police arrived.

Patsy killed JBR in a rage over something...it was an accidental death meaning Patsy didn't mean to do it. Suddenly there is a dead child and the parents had to suddenly find some way to explain her death. They cooked up a half baked story of an intruder and faked evidence accordingly.

That is why there is so much evidence that can be used either way, for or against the intruder/RDI positions. They did such a poor job of covering their tracks yet provided enough doubt that nothing could be proven either way.

The bottom line for me is this. If someone broke in and killed my little girl, I would have to be arrested and put in the jail to keep me out of the police precinct. I would demand both a polygraph and an immediate interview. At the first sign of bungling of the case, I would be in the media screaming for someone to listen. I would be in my Senator/Representatives offices screaming at them to do something. I would not rest and would be consumed by finding who did it and would probably have gone crazy after 10 years of waiting. The willingness of the Ramseys to leave town and let the investigation take whatever course it took (as long as it didn't point at them) tells me volumes. John's admission about forgiving the perp is his way of releasing his hatred for what Patsy did. She died, he forgives, which explains how he moves on so well.

Cal

 

[Rino]

Let's suppose for a moment that an intruder DID kill JBR. JR has had to live for over 10 years with no knowledge of the killer. He's had to think about the murder probably every hour for 10 years and the knowledge that the murderer will probably never be found. Surely you'd have to reach a point of peace and an acceptance that the killer has got away with it. It's physically and mentally impossible maintain a vengeful attitude for such a large amount of time, especially when you're a Christian who is SUPPOSED to believe in peace and forgiveness.

I really don't think John's resignation is indicative of his guilt - it's more a survival mechanism (assuming he didn't do it, of course!).

I can certainly see reaching a point of acceptance that your child has been murdered and is at peace. But I don't follow that a grieving parent can be at peace and accept that the killer got away with it. Especially when this was such a horrible way to die if you beleive the IDI, and under you're nose. Where is the guilt he should feel having not protected her?

 

[calus_3]

I can certainly see reaching a point of acceptance that your child has been murdered and is at peace. But I don't follow that a grieving parent can be at peace and accept that the killer got away with it. Especially when this was such a horrible way to die if you beleive the IDI, and under you're nose. Where is the guilt he should feel having not protected her?

Exactly, it doesn't make sense except for the explanation that someone he also cares about (himself, burke, other son, or Patsy) did the deed. She is dead and there is no bringing her back, why send another member of the family to jail for the rest of their life when it was unintentional.

I think Patsy did it, which is why John has moved on.

Cal

 

[Solace]

Exactly, it doesn't make sense except for the explanation that someone he also cares about (himself, burke, other son, or Patsy) did the deed. She is dead and there is no bringing her back, why send another member of the family to jail for the rest of their life when it was unintentional.

I think Patsy did it, which is why John has moved on.

Cal

Agreed and that is why he was not angry with Karr.