Found Deceased NY - Jennifer Ramsaran, 36, Chenango County, 11 Dec 2012 - # 4

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Lingerie found = nonsense IMO

Who would need to use that as evidence if their other half left without implying that the said person missing was "shady!"


Jennifer doesn't strike me as that shady person.

Who cheated? Why isn't he being exposed? She is being dissected and his life is moving on in whatever capacity.

Look, I don't know for sure what happened but I would hope that it I were ever missing that my other half would be much more engaged to find me instead of pointing out reasons why I may have left.

Poor her. Jennifer, if by some slim chance that you're reading this, know that you are loved by people who don't even know you!

That's pretty awesome. IMO
 
I agree LJ, if my husband found my lingerie, in our home, I'd sure hope he wouldn't call the police. I find that SO odd.
 
Sharoneonta said:
I agree LJ, if my husband found my lingerie, in our home, I'd sure hope he wouldn't call the police. I find that SO odd.
Click to expand...

Right! He would either feel sad that he didn't get to share it with you if you were a victim of foul play or he would have confirmation that you didn't leave Him as the proof was there that you had purchased it to enjoy together.
 
LivingJuicy said:
Lingerie found = nonsense IMO

Who would need to use that as evidence if their other half left without implying that the said person missing was "shady!"

Jennifer doesn't strike me as that shady person.

Who cheated? Why isn't he being exposed? She is being dissected and his life is moving on in whatever capacity.

Look, I don't know for sure what happened but I would hope that it I were ever missing that my other half would be much more engaged to find me instead of pointing out reasons why I may have left.

Poor her. Jennifer, if by some slim chance that you're reading this, know that you are loved by people who don't even know you!

That's pretty awesome. IMO
Click to expand...

BBM -

Well-stated, Juicy!! He's the one who was having a secret affair with her best friend for 6 whole months, and he wants everyone to think that SHE was the one living some secret life? He wants everyone to think that SHE was the rotten person in this whole situation?? Riiiggghhhht.
 
Finally getting the time to check out the validity of the likes/dislikes list (from this morning we found her favorite drink has been water w/lemon for years, but they say she only recently started drinking it). I feel like there was another difference we found, but can't think of it right now.
I just found this:
http://www.goodreads.com/user/show/9927170-jennifer-ramsaran
It looks like a list she had of books she was currently reading and had read in the past. I'm finding a BUNCH of classic literature (is that the right phrase?) and western romance, but not much at all in the way of sci-fi. However, the list only says she likes sci-fi and romance. I understand that she probably didn't have every single book she read on that list, but I would expect more in the way of sci-fi.
 
is anyone getting "the people who live in the woods" feeling??
 
The people who live in the woods can’t see the forest for the trees.

One interpretation could be that GR is putting so many trees in the way that no-one can see the forest clearly, if you know what I mean.

To me, he definitely seems to be creating confusion.
 
Ummm. If she ran away to be with some other lover, wouldn't she have taken said lingerie with her???? Why leave it home in the closet when you finally run away to be with him? It makes no sense whatsoever.
 
Bettylou4you said:
Ummm. If she ran away to be with some other lover, wouldn't she have taken said lingerie with her???? Why leave it home in the closet when you finally run away to be with him? It makes no sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...

And good lingerie always comes wrapped anyway.

I guess she forgot the new lingerie and her shoes
 
SouthAussie said:
The people who live in the woods can’t see the forest for the trees.

One interpretation could be that GR is putting so many trees in the way that no-one can see the forest clearly, if you know what I mean.

To me, he definitely seems to be creating confusion.
Click to expand...

Ahh, thanks Aussie!! From the way you describe it, I completely agree. In the beginning, I was so sure he was innocent and that JR ran away, and the main reason I felt that way was because GR seemed so NICE in all his comments. I'm sure he is quite good at using charm to deflect the truth. And now he doesn't even have to say much of anything, because he has others spinning his story for him.
 
Not sure if anyone reads my comments but I noticed on the likes/dislikes list JR wrote that when she is mad she used to throw unbreakable things now she yells and it doesn't last long. Kind of goes with throwing the rings....
 
Amanda79 said:
Not sure if anyone reads my comments but I noticed on the likes/dislikes list JR wrote that when she is mad she used to throw unbreakable things now she yells and it doesn't last long. Kind of goes with throwing the rings....
Click to expand...

:wave: I read and enjoy your comments :wave:

You make a good point, it does fit. I thought at first that maybe he took them off of her last-minute, but it does make good sense that she could have thrown them during an argument, and he went back and "found" them later that day and placed them in the jewelry box. He could have done so at any point before the cops began their search of the home.
 
Speaking of the rings, everything is just way too CONVENIENT, and reeks of a set-up. At the same time, it wasn't entirely thought through by GR, because some things are contradictory when you think about them:

What woman would leave her rings in such an obvious place if she wanted people to think she met with harm? And alternatively, who would throw her phone on the side of the road if she wanted people to think she ran off? The two don't jive. If she ran off like GR claims, then either a) she wanted people to know she ran off (rings), or b) she wanted people to think she met with foul play (phone). It would make no sense for her to do one and then the other.

I know I've basically already said this before, but think it bears repeating.
 
I have a question from waaaaaay back. Were we ever able to determine if the phone was in an Otterbox case?
 
Real quick, to compare this case to the Ivy case again.... people did worry that she'd met with foul play somewhere along her journey, but we pretty much always knew/suspected she'd run off because she left *real* signs (not sketchy signs like GR is claiming were left by JR). She boarded her dog before leaving, notes were found inside her car when it was finally found, and she was caught on a surveillance camera in a coffee shop near where her car was left. It made sense when you looked at it (not really why she left, but that she did leave), whereas here, nothing makes sense when trying to follow GR's line of logic. And it's been 2 months now, and there hasn't been a single possible sighting that we know of - no surveillance tapes, nobody who thought they saw her in a gas station or restaurant anywhere.

It always astounds me that someone can maintain the same story for so long, even when everyone is questioning it. Jodi Arias does the saaaaaame thing. And I bet if/when GR is ever charged for this, and presented with evidence, he'll change his story pretty fast.
 
krey said:
Speaking of the rings, everything is just way too CONVENIENT, and reeks of a set-up. At the same time, it wasn't entirely thought through by GR, because some things are contradictory when you think about them:

What woman would leave her rings in such an obvious place if she wanted people to think she met with harm? And alternatively, who would throw her phone on the side of the road if she wanted people to think she ran off? The two don't jive. If she ran off like GR claims, then either a) she wanted people to know she ran off (rings), or b) she wanted people to think she met with foul play (phone). It would make no sense for her to do one and then the other.

I know I've basically already said this before, but think it bears repeating.
Click to expand...

Totally agree - if you were running off and leave the rings behind, the only reason you wouldn't leave your phone with them, is that you had to make one last phone call - and that would be in evidence - I hope. Otherwise you would definately leave the phone at home so you couldn't be traced.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 81 more.
Total: 226 (members: 82, guests: 144)

Online statistics

Members online
82
Guests online
144
Total visitors
226
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
608,829
Messages
18,246,152
Members
234,460
Latest member
Mysterymind
Back
Top