Patsy Ramsey

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
behavior and/or demeanor most certainly are evidence. before, during and after an event. behavior/demeanor often reveal motive, truth and deception in ways that nothing else does

behavior = action(s) or lack of same
demeanor = affect, tone, manner
 
behavior most certainly is evidence. before, during and after an event. behavior often reveals motive, truth and deception in ways that nothing else does

It depends on the behavior. It is not evidence if it has no link to the crime.
It is just someone's reporting of something. Someone with a bias or issues is not giving a clear picture. How many times do we hear about bad eye witnesses because humans skew things with their bias.

If she is a messy housekeeper, so what?

There is nothing in her behavior that points to murder.
 
kindle locations/Steve Thomas' Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation

2784
Actually, the detectives would have loved to have found some stranger whom we could wrap in a tight cloak of evidence, for there is no joy in looking at a parent for murder.

3212
If there was one certainty in this investigation, it was the nearly unanimous consensus within the law enforcement community that probable cause existed to arrest Patsy Ramsey. I believed that, as did every detective on the investigating squad and our boss Tom Wickman, who one day suggested, "The probable cause is there. Maybe the five of us should just go make the arrest." Commander John Eller believed it, as did Police Chief Tom Koby and his successor, Mark Beckner, who personally told me so.

Chief Koby would also tell me later that District Attorney Alex Hunter thought "from day one that Patsy did it" and that probable cause existed.

5964
Just as she had done with me, Patsy went one-on-one with Haney without hesitation ... she would sometimes close her eyes and retreat into herself before giving her answers. She began very politely, although she was rather vague on general topics during the first two days, denying involvement and saying, "I just did my best."

By the third day Haney had figured out how to push her buttons. "She's not a very good actress," he observed. He needled her by saying that the $100,000 reward they had posted was not really very much compared with the family's total wealth. It was about the price of a new boat, he noted.

As her patience grew exhausted, she grew animated and aggressive on that third day, and Haney bored in. Instead of the teary victim, I saw an agitated and curt woman. I saw the southern belle vanish and a steel magnolia emerge. During the breaks she stood outside chain-smoking.

When he brought up the prior vaginal abuse, she demanded to see the evidence. Haney pressed. "It's a fact," he said. "I want to see it," she replied. "I'm shocked, I am very distressed." Her voice, however, remained calm at that point. "Does this surprise you?" he asked. "Extremely," she said. "Who could have done it?" Haney asked. She had no idea.

But when he indicated that we might have trace evidence linking her to the death of her daughter, Patsy became indignant. "Totally impossible. Go retest it," she ordered, with a sharp edge to her voice. "I don't care what you have. I don't give a flying flip. Go back to the drawing board."

She pointed a finger straight at her questioner. "We have to start working together to find out who the hell did it! My life has been hell ... this child was the most precious thing in my life. Quit screwing around asking me this stuff and let's find the person who did this."

Haney said they were not ready to show her evidence and challenged her further. "Pal, you don't want to go there," she warned, adding that she was a good Christian woman who did not lie. She pushed back against the couch and exhaled in disgust. "Criminy," she exclaimed.

Haney continued to be inhospitable and probed about whether the death could have been an accident resulting from bed-wetting. Patsy help up a hand, like a stop sign. "You're going down the wrong path, buddy!"

Later she said, "If John Ramsey were involved, honey, we wouldn't be sitting here. I'd have knocked his block off. Read my lips! This was not done by a family member. Didn't happen. Period. End of statement."

Still Haney came on, polite but insistent, inquiring about any family secrets, and she tired of him. "Cut to the chase," she barked.

"Oh, no," Haney responded smoothly. "That would spoil the ride."

"Then spoil my ride," Patsy said, her eyes riveting him. She didn't give an inch.

It was a spellbinding exchange. Tom Haney, with his no-nonsense style and three days in which to ask his questions, had found something I felt had to be there somewhere not too far below that polished beauty queen surface. Patsy Ramsey had, for a few moments, lifted her mask. Beneath it, I saw cold rage.
 
Sorry, That source is not valid for me. He has an agenda.

Show me the real interview tape, or depo.. Other than that it is nothing more than a ST story for me.
 
Hold on. While I agree speculation can get wild (I'm not necessarily referring to this case or this site), there are some things we know. No one is looking at a random woman with a bruise on her arm and stating it's a result of spousal abuse with no knowledge.
We're talking about a woman whose behavior has been observed and documented in police reports and other official capacity. Whose behavior was witnessed on several occasions before and after. Direct evidence of her behavior, if you will

Then we have the absolute reality of the prior molestation. While discussion of who did it remains speculative, the reality is that someone did it. In most cases of a child this young, it is family or friend. Statistically, the speculation that it was someone in the house who sexually assaulted her both prior and that evening is on firm ground - access, timing (very late at night), etc.



Patsy is still a POI in this case.
A case has been made for her guilt that is no more based on rhetoric and fantasy than any other theory. And there is slightly more evidence against her than others.



The entire point of this leg of the discussion is that we don't really know Patsy did have a "normal existence". For all we know this was a long time coming.
BBM

No, this isn't "the absolute reality." The FBI doesn't believe so, and neither do I.
 
Doesn't everyone have some sort of agenda, if you really want to break things down?
 
Doesn't everyone have some sort of agenda, if you really want to break things down?

No. Not everyone does. Some people are neutral looking for evidence some are looking to sell books. When money is a motivator it gives you a clear and bias objective.

I don't have an agenda to further here. I only want justice for JBR. I look for that in evidence.
 
Question for everybody, were the R's motivated by money to write all of their books?
 
Behavior is nothing more than an observation and someone's interpretation of that observation. Nothing more. It does not mean guilt. Nothing she did points to guilt. just oddness.

[snip]

Behavior means nothing. Really. Unless it is being observed burning clothes, or dumping bodies in a lake it means nothing.

the FBI's CASKU (Child Abduction and Serial Killer Unit) is all about observing behavior

Im sorry but in this case the only evidence against patsy comes from people not liking her.

did the FBI "dislike" her?

for those who may wonder why I frequently post these book excerpts when the case is so familiar to everyone here: we have a lot of guests. perhaps they haven't read the books and perhaps the excerpts are interesting enough that they will read them. thank you for your patience
_ _ _ _ _ _ _

Steve Thomas' Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation/kindle location 4015

On Monday morning an FBI van with tinted windows picked us up at our hotel, then swung by another hotel for the DA's contingent. The long ride to the FBI Training Academy at Quantico was made in total silence.

About two dozen people were waiting for us - some of the nation's foremost pathologists, behavioral science specialists, CASKU team members, hair and fiber experts, the Critical Incidence Response Group, and other veteran agents.

Bob Miller and Dan Hoffman of our Dream Team took chairs beside Detectives Gosage, Harmer and Trujillo, Sergeant Wickman and me. The DA's group - Deputy DAs Pete Hofstrom and Trip DeMuth and investigator and Lou Smit - were scattered around the table.

As I presented the overview of our case and Detective Trujillo reviewed the evidence, DeMuth heckled: "Can't hear you!" and "Is that all you have indicating Ramsey involvement?" The FBI agents were openly surprised by his effrontery.

[snip]

We reviewed the autopsy results and crime scene photos and I mentioned how the duct tape seemed to be part of the staging. There was a perfect lip impression on the tape and no tongue indentation to indicate that JonBenet had been alive and fought to remove it. Pictures showed that bloody mucus in the mouth area had been covered by the tape, indicating that is was applied after the injuries. To me, the inescapable conclusion was that the tape was applied after she was dead.

In turn, the CASKU agents noted that of the more than seventeen hundred murdered children they had studied since the 1960s, there was only one case in which the victim was a female under the age of twelve, who had been murdered in her home by strangulation, with sexual assault and a ransom note present - and that was JonBenet Ramsey.

They told us that while it might be possible that someone broke into the house that night, it wasn't very probable. The staging evidence, and totality of the case pointed in one direction - that this was not the act of an intruder.

The crime, they said, did not fit an act of sex or revenge or one in which money was the motivation. Taken alone, they said, each piece of evidence might be argued but, together, enough pebbles become a block of evidentiary granite.

These conclusions by the FBI's highly respected profilers were exactly what I hoped would provide a breakthrough in the case, but Hofstrom, DeMuth and Smit seemed unimpressed. They ignored CASKU just like they had ignored us.

[snip]

CASKU observed that they had never seen anything like the Ramsey ransom note.

[snip]

Based on their studies of the evidence we provided, they believed the note was written in the home, after the murder, and indicated panic. Ransom notes are normally written prior to the crime, usually proofread, and not written by hand in order to disguise the authorship.

The FBI deemed the crime "criminally unsophisticated," citing the child being left on the premises, the disingenuous $118,000 demand in relation to the net worth of the family, the description of the accomplices as "gentlemen," and the concept of a ransom delivery where one would be "scanned for electronic devices." Kidnappers prefer isolated drops for the ransom delivery, not a face-to-face meeting.

[snip]

The crime was in incredibly risky one for an outsider to undertake, the profilers said, and was committed by someone who had a high degree of comfort inside the home. The note was created to misdirect law enforcement and focus attention elsewhere and it was a cathartic act that allowed the offender to "undo" the murder in one's own mind.

Their bottom line was that there had never been a kidnapping attempt.

CASKU further said that placing JonBenet in the basement was consistent with a parent not wanting to put the body outside in the winter elements. The familiarity with and relocking of the peg on the white cellar door were noted. The ligatures indicated staging rather than control, and the garrote was used from behind so the killer could avoid eye contact, typical of someone who cares for the victim. They had the gut feeling that "no one intended to kill this child."

(to be continued)
 
Question for everybody, were the R's motivated by money to write all of their books?

That's a tough one Venom.
If I had to speculate, the money was a factor but the main motivator was influencing public opinion.
 
Question for everybody, were the R's motivated by money to write all of their books?

Their books don't matter. It is their story to tell. Their dd was murdered. They get to tell their story. No one thinks it is going to be an unbiased account but their story of events.

AS for ex cops et al writing books that is a different thing altogether. They only can be motivated to write what will sell their books. They are motivated by ego and fame.
 
Their books don't matter. It is their story to tell. Their dd was murdered. They get to tell their story. No one thinks it is going to be an unbiased account but their story of events.

AS for ex cops et al writing books that is a different thing altogether. They only can be motivated to write what will sell their books. They are motivated by ego and fame.

How is it the Ramseys can write for their convictions but not the cops?
Both have agendas...but only the Ramseys are interested in saving their heinies
 
:scared:
I'm not going to start to beat this horse again. Everyone has a story to tell. Isn't not knowing but speculating why someone wrote a book a form of meaningless gossip? To each their own.
 
How is it the Ramseys can write for their convictions but not the cops?
Both have agendas...but only the Ramseys are interested in saving their heinies

The Ramseys daughter died. Just like Sharon Rocha, or The simpsons they have a story to tell about their loved one. It matters not what their motive is.

The problem comes from cops saying the have the answer when they don't. They are selling books trying to push an agenda. Stating things as fact that are not.

Cops should never right books if you ask me. When they do their motive goes from justice to money. IMO
 
From PMPT (p.239-240; nook): "The FBI believed that JonBenet's vaginal trauma was not consistent with a history of sexual abuse, and they had turned up no evidence of any other type of abuse."
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
126
Guests online
1,311
Total visitors
1,437

Forum statistics

Threads
599,280
Messages
18,093,785
Members
230,840
Latest member
Zoyasalas
Back
Top