Patsy Ramsey

[DeDee]

It is appalling the besmirching of BPD that one is willing to do to boost the IDI.

The only misunderstanding is the outright dismissal of evidence. Scoffing at evidence as holding no evidentiary value only allows the prescient IDI to waltz in unimpeded.

None of us possess police reports for this case but we can interpret LE interviews. The LE interviews tells us a police report made by SL and JAR, as it pertains to JR finding his child's body at 11, does exist. LE would be investigators such as LA, Steve Thomas and James Kolar that are so easily dismissed by a minor few IDIs as underachievers and book-writing gold diggers.

This is what JR said about it:

1997-04-30: John Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo
Underlined and BBM

John Ramsey Interrogation by Steve Thomas, Tom Trujillo
Also present, Pat Burke, Bryan Morgan, Pete Hoffstrom, Jon Foster
April 30, 1997 - Boulder, Colorado
http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/1997BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm

JR: Ah, well, I remember they took me aside, and we sat in John Andrew’s room which is the one next to JonBenet’s and she went through what I should do when we talked to the caller and I must insist that I talk to JonBenet and that we need until 5 o’clock to raise the money. I’d actually called my (inaudible) and arranged for the money. Ah, and I think we had by that time started to wonder if one of the housekeepers might be involved. And there was some activity around that direction. We waited until past 11 and then we, and then I think we were in the living room and Linda said why don’t you take someone and look through the house and see if there’s anything you notice that’s unusual. And Fleet and I, Fleet was standing there and said he’d go with me. And we went down to the basement, went into the train room, which is, you know, the train set is, and that’s really the only window that’s, would let in entrance into he basement. And actually I’d gone down there earlier that morning, into that room, and the window was broken, but I didn’t see any glass around, so I assumed it was broken last summer. I used that window to get into the house when (inaudible) I didn’t have a key. But the window was open, about an eighth of an inch, and just kind latched it. So I went back down with Fleet, we looked around for some glass again, still didn’t see any glass. And I told him that I thought that the break came from when I did that last summer and then, then I went from there into the cellar. Pull on the door, it was latched. I reach up and unlatched it, and then I saw the white blanket, (inaudible).

Read below where JR does not deny telling his son, JAR, that he found his daughter at 11:00. That's because he did. JR was not in the basement doing Aerobics when he was absent during those forty five minutes LA lost touch with him.

April 11, 2000

Thomas writes that John Ramsey knew his wife was involved as soon as he read the ransom note but immediately began covering for her.

"If he truly believed that, I feel sorry for him," Ramsey said. "He's a mixed-up kid." Thomas theorized that John Ramsey found his daughter's body hours before he carried her out of the basement. As proof, he notes that according to police reports, Ramsey told his older children, John Andrew and Melinda Ramsey, that JonBenét was found about 11 a.m. Her body was brought out of the basement after 1 p.m. Dec. 26, 1996.

Ramsey said Monday that he had just found his youngest daughter dead and barely knew what day or year it was, let alone the time.

"Who knows what I told John Andrew?" he said.

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon041100a.htm

 

[Anti-K]

no. not the son who was 9 and 11/12, the oldest son. JR's whereabouts were not documented for a 90-minute period including 11am. please don't misrepresent the known circumstances

Arnt Depo:
"25 Q. And you had lost track of John Ramsey for a
1 period between 10:40 and twelve o'clock?
2 A. No.
3 Q. You didn't see him during that period of
4 time; is that correct?
5 A. No.
6 Q. It's not correct?
7 A. That is not correct.
8 Q. Didn't you report - all right. You said
9 sometime between 10:40 and 12:00 he went out to pick up
10 the mail.
11 A. No.
12 Q. What did you say?
13 A. I believe I worded it in my report rather
14 vaguely, and what I worded and what has been put out in
15 the media are not the same. I said something during
16 that time frame I saw John reading his mail.
17 Q. We will get back to that later.
18 But there was a period when you lost
19 contact with him, is that right, personal contact with
20 him?
21 A. I did not watch John Ramsey the entire
22 time."
.

Well, she didn’t watch him the entire time. But, she never said that she lost track of him or that he disappeared for any length of time.
...

AK

 

[midwest mama]

IIRC, LA didn't let anyone in after she was left there to manage on her own. The victim advocates left. She did corral everyone in the den off the back hall -- the Ramseys, Whites, Fernies, and Fr. Hoverstock. It was difficult to keep them in the room. There was no other police officer on hand to search the house again.

Yes, and IIRC, Arndt did request backup at that time, but was told there was a majorLE meeting going on, causing her to have to wait a while before another officer arrived to give additional support as the havoc began to unwind.

 

[Anti-K]

I did in fact go out of the house once, which would have been for, you know, half a minute.
JR: And that was from where to where?
ST: I went out the side door around to the back of the garage to see if that garage door into the garage was locked.
ST: And then immediately back into the house?
JR: Yeah.
ST: And that wasn’t an excursion that exceeded 30 seconds?
JR: No, at max.
...

AK

 

[Linda7NJ]

Wait...so when did John go for his little stroll?

Where the part of the interview when they got back to it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Anti-K]

'98 interview
12 MIKE KANE: Okay. I think it's, and this
13 may put things into perspective. I think you were
14 saying that you were expecting a phone call
15 between ten and 12. The note said between eight
16 and ten.
17 JOHN RAMSEY: Oh, really?
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Wait...so when did John go for his little stroll?

Where the part of the interview when they got back to it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What little stroll?
...

AK

 

[Meara]

Yes, and IIRC, Arndt did request backup at that time, but was told there was a majorLE meeting going on, causing her to have to wait a while before another officer arrived to give additional support as the havoc began to unwind.

Thanks. That is my recollection also.

Have you ever come across information about the LE meeting - I want to say "the alleged LE meeting"? Do we know what it was about, or why it took precedence over giving LA back-up? I have always found this part of the narrative strange. Who holds a major LE meeting the day after Christmas, to the exclusion of having at least two officers at the scene of a kidnap for ransom? That never made sense to me. :waitasec:

 

[midwest mama]

Chronic and acute trauma in the same position on the eroded hymen.
Not a coincidence.

This info got my attention also, 2 percent. It makes me believe, then, that the same person who could have been responsible for the chronic abuse was the perpetrator of the sexual attack against JB the night of her death.

Wouldn't the same type/location of physical evidence inside the vagina indicate the same type of method of assault? And it seems it would be more likely to be the same person perpetrating the movement, than to allow for the likelihood of more than one person injuring her the same way someone previously might have.

 

[midwest mama]

Thanks. That is my recollection also.

Have you ever come across information about the LE meeting - I want to say "the alleged LE meeting"? Do we know what it was about, or why it took precedence over giving LA back-up? I have always found this part of the narrative strange. Who holds a major LE meeting the day after Christmas, to the exclusion of having at least two officers at the scene of a kidnap for ransom? That never made sense to me. :waitasec:

Me either. I have read so many books and articles about JB's death over the past couple of years that it has become very difficult to keep all the respective resources singly sorted out in my mind. But unless I'm fairly confident of things I've gleaned from what I consider credible sources about the case, I will defer to not posting them.

I recall thinking it was pretty bizarre that the LE officers who were covering for some of the top dogs who were out of Boulder at the time on Christmas holiday vacations, would have pulled available resources into a lengthy meeting when it was obvious they should have been available for what was proving to become a complicated police matter.

IMO, there was something underway early on to put things in place that proved to be very helpful to keeping the R's at the long arm of the law.

Repeat,( MY OPINION ONLY), that a few people in LE connected to the Ramsey case very early on had to be extremely careful not to step on any toes that might have caused the R's any distress, and they would have needed support from colleagues in keeping themselves protected.

:moo:

 

[gramcracker]

if the previous perp was an adult they would realize that prior penetration needed to be accounted for. would a kid realize that? no. so we arrive at the scenario where perhaps the previous perp was not the only one who knew about the prior penetration. I think there's no getting around the fact that some amount of knowledge by an unknown combination of people in that house meant that staging the "acute" assault with the brush handle was necessary

otherwise, why even introduce the sexual aspect? molestation/rape is rarely seen during kidnap for ransom because money is the goal (along with returning the victim unharmed)

Wait...so when did John go for his little stroll?
Where the part of the interview when they got back to it?

Page 129

Q. So Sargeant Wickman had been with you earlier in the morning; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And Detective Patterson had been with you earlier in the morning; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. But when Sargeant Wickman left, were you left alone as the only police officer there?

A. When Wickman and Patterson left, I was the only police officer there.
Q. Did they leave together?

A. Yes.

Q. I'm sorry. This was approximately when?

A. 10:30, 10:35.

Q. And didn't you indicate that it was sometime between 10:40 and 12:00 noon that John Ramsey left to pick up his mail or that you lost track of him but later saw him reading the mail and assumed he had left to pick up the mail during that period you had lost track of him?

A. It has been widely reported that -

Q. I'm not talking about widely reported. I'm talking about what you know.

A. What I know? Okay. Ask me again then.

Q. I'll ask you again. Isn't it your recollection that it was between 10:40 and 12:00 noon that you lost track of John Ramsey, and when you later saw him opening mail you assumed he had gone out to get the mail during that period you had lost track of him?

A. As I told you when you asked before, I didn't personally watch him every minute from about 10:40 until noon.

Q. Would you read back the question?

(Record read by reporter as requested.)

THE DEPONENT: I'm sorry. What did I not answer?

Q. (BY MR. HALABY) Are you stating that you never lost track of him during that period?

A. I think I just told you that I personally couldn't account for every minute.

Q. Does that mean that you lost track of him then?

A. You could interpret it that way.

Q. All right. And during that period that you lost track of him, did you later conclude what he had done during that period in terms of going to pick up the mail?

A. When I didn't personally monitor him the whole time, what was the other half?

Q. Did you conclude that during that period you'd lost track of him that he had gone out to pick up the mail?

A. When I didn't personally monitor him, I didn't know how he had gotten his mail.

Q. And did you then put two and two together and believe that he had gone out to get the mail?

A. I thought he had gotten mail by stepping outside.

Q. You didn't believe somebody else had picked up the mail and delivered it to him inside the house?

A. I didn't know.

Q. But what you had concluded was that he had gone out to get the mail, correct?

A. I thought he had got - yes.

http://www.acandyrose.com/03182000-arndtdepo-04102000.htm

 

[Anti-K]

Yes, and IIRC, Arndt did request backup at that time, but was told there was a majorLE meeting going on, causing her to have to wait a while before another officer arrived to give additional support as the havoc began to unwind.

Arnt paged Mason to request backup, twice. Her pages were not answered. - Thomas; p. 26
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Me either. I have read so many books and articles about JB's death over the past couple of years that it has become very difficult to keep all the respective resources singly sorted out in my mind. But unless I'm fairly confident of things I've gleaned from what I consider credible sources about the case, I will defer to not posting them.

I recall thinking it was pretty bizarre that the LE officers who were covering for some of the top dogs who were out of Boulder at the time on Christmas holiday vacations, would have pulled available resources into a lengthy meeting when it was obvious they should have been available for what was proving to become a complicated police matter.

IMO, there was something underway early on to put things in place that proved to be very helpful to keeping the R's at the long arm of the law.

Repeat,( MY OPINION ONLY), that a few people in LE connected to the Ramsey case very early on had to be extremely careful not to step on any toes that might have caused the R's any distress, and they would have needed support from colleagues in keeping themselves protected.

:moo:

The so-called meeting was about what they believed to be a kidnapping.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

if the previous perp was an adult they would realize that prior penetration needed to be accounted for. would a kid realize that? no. so we arrive at the scenario where perhaps the previous perp was not the only one who knew about the prior penetration. I think there's no getting around the fact that some amount of knowledge by an unknown combination of people in that house meant that staging the "acute" assault with the brush handle was necessary

otherwise, why even introduce the sexual aspect? molestation/rape is rarely seen during kidnap for ransom because money is the goal (along with returning the victim unharmed)


Page 129

Q. So Sargeant Wickman had been with you earlier in the morning; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And Detective Patterson had been with you earlier in the morning; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. But when Sargeant Wickman left, were you left alone as the only police officer there?

A. When Wickman and Patterson left, I was the only police officer there.
Q. Did they leave together?

A. Yes.

Q. I'm sorry. This was approximately when?

A. 10:30, 10:35.

Q. And didn't you indicate that it was sometime between 10:40 and 12:00 noon that John Ramsey left to pick up his mail or that you lost track of him but later saw him reading the mail and assumed he had left to pick up the mail during that period you had lost track of him?

A. It has been widely reported that -

Q. I'm not talking about widely reported. I'm talking about what you know.

A. What I know? Okay. Ask me again then.

Q. I'll ask you again. Isn't it your recollection that it was between 10:40 and 12:00 noon that you lost track of John Ramsey, and when you later saw him opening mail you assumed he had gone out to get the mail during that period you had lost track of him?

A. As I told you when you asked before, I didn't personally watch him every minute from about 10:40 until noon.

Q. Would you read back the question?

(Record read by reporter as requested.)

THE DEPONENT: I'm sorry. What did I not answer?

Q. (BY MR. HALABY) Are you stating that you never lost track of him during that period?

A. I think I just told you that I personally couldn't account for every minute.

Q. Does that mean that you lost track of him then?

A. You could interpret it that way.

Q. All right. And during that period that you lost track of him, did you later conclude what he had done during that period in terms of going to pick up the mail?

A. When I didn't personally monitor him the whole time, what was the other half?

Q. Did you conclude that during that period you'd lost track of him that he had gone out to pick up the mail?

A. When I didn't personally monitor him, I didn't know how he had gotten his mail.

Q. And did you then put two and two together and believe that he had gone out to get the mail?

A. I thought he had gotten mail by stepping outside.

Q. You didn't believe somebody else had picked up the mail and delivered it to him inside the house?

A. I didn't know.

Q. But what you had concluded was that he had gone out to get the mail, correct?

A. I thought he had got - yes.

http://www.acandyrose.com/03182000-arndtdepo-04102000.htm

Mr Ramsey did not go outside to check his mail. The mail was delivered through a slot in the door. So, the mail as on the floor, beneath the slot (remember the story about the guy who tried to set the house on fire by sliding something through the mail slot?).
...

AK

 

[DeDee]

My comments are in green.

Thanks. That is my recollection also.

Have you ever come across information about the LE meeting - I want to say "the alleged LE meeting"? Do we know what it was about, or why it took precedence over giving LA back-up? I have always found this part of the narrative strange. Who holds a major LE meeting the day after Christmas, to the exclusion of having at least two officers at the scene of a kidnap for ransom? That never made sense to me. :waitasec:

What better time to plan a crime than when the LE departments are left short staffed due to the Christmas holiday?

Let's take a look at the TimeLine to see how many officers were involved on the CS by 10:30 and throughout the day:

Thursday, December 26, 1996
Approximate Sequence Events & Approximate Arrival/Departure

Patsy Ramsey dialed 911 (5:52am)
Patsy Ramsey phoned Whites
Patsy Ramsey phoned Fernies
John Ramsey (reading note)
Burke Ramsey (sleeping??)
JonBenet Ramsey (missing)
Officer Rick French arrived (5:59am)
Officer Karl Veitch arrived
Sgt. Paul Reichenbach arrived
Fleet White arrived (6:30am)
Priscilla White arrived (6:30am)
John Fernie arrived via the alleyway and walked to side patio to read the RN that was on the floor
Barbara Fernie arrived
Mary Lou Jedamus-Advocate (6:45am)
Grace Morlock-Advocate (6:45am)
Officer Barry Weiss (6:45am)
Officer Sue Barchlow (6:45am)
Priscilla White phones home (6:45am) and within 15 min. BR is ushered out of the front door.
Reverend Rol Hoverstock (7:00am)
Burke taken to Whites (7:00am)
K-9 Unit on standby (7:33am)
Sgt. Paul Reichenbach meets Arndt* to transfer recording devices required to LA
Det. Linda Arndt arrives (8:10am)* with the recording equipment, the 1st detective arrives
Det. Fred Patterson (8:10am)
Crime scene investigators dusting prints
JonBenet Bedroom sealed (10:30am)

Back at BPD while this is going on, we know calls were made to assure the Ramsey's were to be treated as victims. Maybe those were conf calls or meetings about the kidnapping in Boulder and Lockheed Martin because actually, the Ramsey's were provided with an island of privacy and lots of other comforts million dollar lawyers can provide.

Linda Arndt phoned Sgt. Mason (12:00pm)
Linda Arndt phoned Sgt. Mason (12:30pm)
JonBenet found murdered (1:10pm)
Det. Linda Arndt dialed 911 (1:12pm)
Officer Barry Weiss returned (1:20pm)
Det. Michael Everett (1:20pm)
Priscilla White phones home (1:30pm)
JRamsey phones Gary Merriman (1:30pm)
John Ramsey phones his pilot (1:40pm)
Sgt. Larry Mason arrives (1:45pm)
FBI Agent Ron Walker arrives (1:45pm)
JR signed search form (2:15pm)
Ramsey left residence (2:15pm)
House empty (2:35pm)
BPD Tech video taped house
Dr. John Meyer arrived (8:23pm)
Sgt. Larry Mason to press (10:45pm)
Det. Linda Arndt left house (11:44pm)


A proper shoutout to acandyrose for providing the above information by maintaining her website

:loveyou:​

 

[bettybaby00]

I did in fact go out of the house once, which would have been for, you know, half a minute.
JR: And that was from where to where?
ST: I went out the side door around to the back of the garage to see if that garage door into the garage was locked.
ST: And then immediately back into the house?
JR: Yeah.
ST: And that wasn’t an excursion that exceeded 30 seconds?
JR: No, at max.
...

AK

What happened to his surveillance from BRs bedroom where he reportedly saw a strange van in the alley behind the house through his handy binoculars?

Maybe he remembered it after this interview?

 

[claudicici]

I guess I never realized that JR called Merriman even before he called the pilot.You carry your dead baby upstairs and 20 minutes later you're on the phone with the director of your HR department who suggests you should get a lawyer and then you call your pilot to get the plane ready?????wow,just wow....

 

[midwest mama]

The so-called meeting was about what they believed to be a kidnapping.
...

AK

AK - I appreciate your interesting posts. This one sounds, to me, contentious to my opinion, perhaps based on some information you might have of which I am not aware?

Or, is the meeting agenda that day strictly your opinion?

I wonder why, since they were informed very early on by one of their own that there was a ransom note and a missing child, they then would have gone on to conduct a "so-called" meeting that day, with an agenda about kidnapping, that absorbed the time and resources of available law enforcement personnel to the point of not being able to provide textbook backup to the request of a crime scene officer.

I don't care how inadequate the BPD has been made to look regarding this case, it is senseless to think that once an officer securing a crime scene such as the one at the R's that day, should not have been given immediate response to her request for additional coverage/backup.

Cops protect their own. At the very least, one of the officers in the meeting should have been released from the meeting and dispatched immediately, for the sake of Arndt's safety, if for nothing else.

Further, I find it strange that Arndt was left alone in the first place. Why didn't at least one other officer remain with her until they had further instructions from upper command as to continued procedure for handling the prospective kidnapping ploy? At the time Arndt was left alone, there was still every indication there was a kidnapping underway, which was going to need continued involvement from law enforcement. I can't believe it is any where near textbook procedure to leave one officer alone under those conditions.

The R's were an important family in the community. Under the circumstances, if Arndt would have become indisposed at any time while being solely responsible for the security of the crime scene, how would BPD have ever answered up for any resulting disaster that might have occurred had the crime actually been a "real kidnapping"? Leaving her alone for as long as they did, if BPD was convinced there was an ongoing active kidnapping crime, they were taking a huge liability risk for not having backup for Arndt.

The whole thing just stinks to me.

:moo:

 

[gramcracker]

Mr Ramsey did not go outside to check his mail. The mail was delivered through a slot in the door. So, the mail as on the floor, beneath the slot (remember the story about the guy who tried to set the house on fire by sliding something through the mail slot?).

that post wasn't intended as referencing how the mail was received; pointing out that Arndt grudgingly admitted that she was unaware of where JR was and what he was doing from 10:35/10:40 until noon was the intention

her observation of his changed demeanor after she next saw him at noon has been documented. which in hindsight meshes with him discovering JB at 11am

if one cares to see it

 

[lawstudent]

Assuming they thought it was a real kidnapping, which I think they did, they didn't need many officers at the house. Instead, they'd have to think of a good negotiating strategy and how to locate or keep her alive until they could, or how to hand over traceable money and watch the location of the exchange. I don't believe the house was looked at as a crime scene at that time in terms of something that had to be "secured" - they could swipe the alleged exit for fingerprints/DNA, but not much else if she was actually gone. I don't think they thought the people in the house were in danger.