Steve Thomas's Theory/Murder Timeline

[eileenhawkeye]

John's explanation doesn't make sense. Most people would be disgusted about a child being murdered on any day of the year. And being killed on 12/26, in the early hours, is just as horrifying as being killed on 12/25. Heck, most people consider the entire month of December to be the Holiday season, and if they heard about a child killed on 12/10, they would remark about how it's so close to Christmas.

But if someone is walking in a cemetery, and sees the grave of a 6-year-old, I think that any date right around Christmas...12/25...12/26...12/24...might get a "OMG, she/he died right near/on Christmas" whereas a gravestone that says the child died on July 10 would just get, "OMG, this little girl/boy was so young when they died".

 

[Magdalyn]

Once again, here is an answer, straight from the lizard lips: (during an interview)

Response (John):``Of course, we don't know exactly when JonBenet died.... Her small body was cool and rigid when I found her (the morning of Dec. 26). I selected Dec. 25 because I didn't want the world to ever forget what it did to our daughter on the day of joy and peace, Christmas Day. I want people 50 years from now, a hundred years from now, to look at that marker and say,`The world went mad on that Christmas Day.'''

In other words, IMO, he felt it was his right to decry the decision of experts who used scientific methods to determine she died on the 26th, in favor of being able to shift the blame of her death on what the world had created in the personna of a heinous, murdering, monster. Why does everything he is involved in end of having to be about what HE wants, and what HE thinks? :yuck:

I read "I selected", "Because I didn't want", "I want people....to look at that marker and say".

So, taking him at his very own words, his foremost thoughts on his baby's headstone were: HE chose the day of death displayed because HE wanted a certain reaction from her headstone, and he wanted people to think and to say a specific thing.

He wasn't concerned about accuracy/truth. He was concerned what people, er, I'm sorry--THE WORLD--will think/say....even 100 years into the future. The headstone as a tool of thought/emotional manipulation upon the world. How Machiavellian....how....Team Ramsey. :notgood:

(I wonder if he chose the dates/wording on her headstone before or after requesting his golf club bag be retrieved from the house. :waiting

 

[dodie20]

Once again, here is an answer, straight from the lizard lips: (during an interview)

Response (John):``Of course, we don't know exactly when JonBenet died.... Her small body was cool and rigid when I found her (the morning of Dec. 26). I selected Dec. 25 because I didn't want the world to ever forget what it did to our daughter on the day of joy and peace, Christmas Day. I want people 50 years from now, a hundred years from now, to look at that marker and say,`The world went mad on that Christmas Day.'''

In other words, IMO, he felt it was his right to decry the decision of experts who used scientific methods to determine she died on the 26th, in favor of being able to shift the blame of her death on what the world had created in the personna of a heinous, murdering, monster. Why does everything he is involved in end of having to be about what HE wants, and what HE thinks? :yuck:

What I find interesting is JR saying, 'the world went mad on that Christmas day'. According to him and PR, Christmas DAY was picture postcard perfect, topped off with a bedtime story and song. It was the wee hours of the night when the world supposedly went mad. Or was it? This does make me wonder what all went on that morning and on into the day. moo

 

[Nom de plume]

What I find interesting is JR saying, 'the world went mad on that Christmas day'. According to him and PR, Christmas DAY was picture postcard perfect, topped off with a bedtime story and song. It was the wee hours of the night when the world supposedly went mad. Or was it? This does make me wonder what all went on that morning and on into the day. moo

The WORLD didn't go mad....just a Ramsey.

 

[dodie20]

Once again, here is an answer, straight from the lizard lips: (during an interview)

Response (John):``Of course, we don't know exactly when JonBenet died.... Her small body was cool and rigid when I found her (the morning of Dec. 26). I selected Dec. 25 because I didn't want the world to ever forget what it did to our daughter on the day of joy and peace, Christmas Day. I want people 50 years from now, a hundred years from now, to look at that marker and say,`The world went mad on that Christmas Day.'''

In other words, IMO, he felt it was his right to decry the decision of experts who used scientific methods to determine she died on the 26th, in favor of being able to shift the blame of her death on what the world had created in the personna of a heinous, murdering, monster. Why does everything he is involved in end of having to be about what HE wants, and what HE thinks? :yuck:

Reading his quote, we really get a sense of his self importance, don't we? I I I. And him blaming the whole world is just ridiculous and self serving. Yes, the world went mad, HIS world, and according to him, his world, is THE world. Even here, when talking about JonBenet's gravestone, he kept the murder suspect as 'the world'. IMO, no way did he want that suspect list narrowed down. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd want the actual, determined date of death on a loved one's gravestone. I wouldn't want a different day, so as to make some kind of statement, especially not a statement to the whole wide world. This seems so impersonal and just wrong. moo

 

[dodie20]

One more thing about this quote that bothers me. Even an innocent parent would feel a tremendous amount of guilt in a situation like this . He wouldn't absolve his responsibilities by blaming the world. For instance...the world didn't put JB in those beauty pageants and parade her around like a showgirl. The world didn't deactivate the house alarms or not fix the broken window in the basement. The world didn't put the children's bedroom on a separate floor from the parents. JR and PR were responsible for all of these things, and IMO, a normal parent, in hindsight at least, would be beating himself up for such poor decision making. If an innocent parent was in this situation, he would look for likely answers, and the pageant world and access into their non safe home, and the isolation of their daughter, would all be logical answers.

 

[Whaleshark]

Reading his quote, we really get a sense of his self importance, don't we? I I I. And him blaming the whole world is just ridiculous and self serving. Yes, the world went mad, HIS world, and according to him, his world, is THE world. Even here, when talking about JonBenet's gravestone, he kept the murder suspect as 'the world'. IMO, no way did he want that suspect list narrowed down. I don't know about anybody else, but I'd want the actual, determined date of death on a loved one's gravestone. I wouldn't want a different day, so as to make some kind of statement, especially not a statement to the whole wide world. This seems so impersonal and just wrong. moo

Yes, and explains why he is still writing books about HIS suffering, no?

 

[stmarysmead]

Once again, here is an answer, straight from the lizard lips: (during an interview)

Response (John):``Of course, we don't know exactly when JonBenet died.... Her small body was cool and rigid when I found her (the morning of Dec. 26). I selected Dec. 25 because I didn't want the world to ever forget what it did to our daughter on the day of joy and peace, Christmas Day. I want people 50 years from now, a hundred years from now, to look at that marker and say,`The world went mad on that Christmas Day.'''

In other words, IMO, he felt it was his right to decry the decision of experts who used scientific methods to determine she died on the 26th, in favor of being able to shift the blame of her death on what the world had created in the personna of a heinous, murdering, monster. Why does everything he is involved in end of having to be about what HE wants, and what HE thinks? :yuck:

JR blaming "the world" is quite telling to me. JBR was not killed in a terror attack, where a grieving parent might hold numerous govenments and nameless decison makers responsible for their child's death. She did not die in an airline crash where a parent might blame many people from the airline CEO, to mechanics, to traffic controllers and therefore their rage is widespread. No, according to the Ramsey parents, JBR was savaged by an intruder. Or at most, two or three Intruders. This is not..."the world."

John Ramsey seems to need to deflect the blame from the specific killer. This comment about the "world"... is a "see what you made us do....statement if I ever heard one. Why would he need to find excuses for the Intruder who murdered his child by expanding blame to the whole "world?" No, this is a pity party commentary. Maybe "the World" had too much sex and violence everywhere one looked...that corrupted their son? Who knows? But JR is certainly being kind to his child's killer by expanding out the blame to such a ridiculous degree. Think pf other grieving parents of murdered children....any others that did this?

The other lame comment here is changing the date of his child's death. Can you imagine anyone who had a loved one die on Sept 11...put Sept 10 on the gravestone...because it was...ahh, the victim's birthday and therefore made a sadder story? Huh? Is the "World" supposed to find this less of a tragedy because this child died too late to make the holiday? Who thinks like that? His baby daughters death date should be sacred to him, not something to change for dramatic effect. And I am sure it is...therefore this excuse is too bizarre to be credible.

 

[Nom de plume]

One more thing about this quote that bothers me. Even an innocent parent would feel a tremendous amount of guilt in a situation like this . He wouldn't absolve his responsibilities by blaming the world. For instance...the world didn't put JB in those beauty pageants and parade her around like a showgirl. The world didn't deactivate the house alarms or not fix the broken window in the basement. The world didn't put the children's bedroom on a separate floor from the parents. JR and PR were responsible for all of these things, and IMO, a normal parent, in hindsight at least, would be beating himself up for such poor decision making. If an innocent parent was in this situation, he would look for likely answers, and the pageant world and access into their non safe home, and the isolation of their daughter, would all be logical answers.

BBM

A little OT but this has always bothered me. How do you break a window in the summer and leave it that way through the winter? The Rs said BR played in the basement with the train set, etc. How? Bundled up like he was going outside to play in the snow? That whole basement would have been freezing cold! Can you imagine what that did to their heating bills? Not only the cold, but how about all the bugs, spiders, dirt, etc. getting into the house? (Oh and let's not forget SFF kidnapper intruders!)

With all the money anyone could want, why didn't JR make sure that window got fixed? Single paned window, $6-7 in glass, some glazing compound, and about 30 minutes work. Not that I would expect him to actually do any manual labor himself, but they had handymen working around there all the time. Whole thing makes NO SENSE! :banghead:

Another thing I never understood. JR had the perfect explanation for how the "intruder" got in and out of the house....the broken window. Yet he seemed to do everything he could to convince everyone that he had broken the window and it wasn't possible an intruder came or went that way. Why? :waitasec:

 

[Mitsana]

I feel the need to point something out in case you missed it. A grand jury voted to indict both Rs, (not just PR like so many expected), for this murder. And they voted based on CHILD ABUSE resulting in death. For these people to conclude that this is what happened, they saw convincing evidence that there was child abuse. And not only was there child abuse, but the abuse was so severe, that it resulted in JB's death...

The interviews with the GJ jurors who broke silence seemed like they didn't reach solid conclusions as to exactly what happened, but I am wondering if the GJ felt that BR was guilty of abusing JBR, would the GJ be able to indict the parents for child abuse, since they didn't protect JBR from an abusive situation?

 

[DeeDee249]

The interviews with the GJ jurors who broke silence seemed like they didn't reach solid conclusions as to exactly what happened, but I am wondering if the GJ felt that BR was guilty of abusing JBR, would the GJ be able to indict the parents for child abuse, since they didn't protect JBR from an abusive situation?

The wording around the GJ's vote is vague- the juror said "child abuse resulting in death" and also stated that the GJ believed the parents could have prevented it or "gotten help" (their words). Colorado's laws preventing children under 10 from being prosecuted for or even NAMED in conjunction with ANY crime, no matter how serious COULD have prevented charges against the parents from being brought if in so doing it would reveal the minor's involvement. Hunter was a coward, to be sure, but Colorado's law may have had a lot to do with it too.

 

[Simply Caustic]

Sorry to bump a super-duper old thread, WS friends, but I've a question: I'm reading Super Dave's book - and the appendix prompted me to think about Steve Thomas. Does anyone know if he speaks up about the case, anymore? Since the Grand Jury indictment was revealed? I tried using my Google-fu but I'm sorely lacking. I'd appreciate any help you all can offer.

 

[UKGuy]

Sorry to bump a super-duper old thread, WS friends, but I've a question: I'm reading Super Dave's book - and the appendix prompted me to think about Steve Thomas. Does anyone know if he speaks up about the case, anymore? Since the Grand Jury indictment was revealed? I tried using my Google-fu but I'm sorely lacking. I'd appreciate any help you all can offer.

Caustic,
Not to my knowledge. ST has participated in an interview with Tricia, but it was tame and lacked any insight or depth. We have to bear in mind the legal restrictions that bind any former officer of the law.

 

[bettybaby00]

Caustic,
Not to my knowledge. ST has participated in an interview with Tricia, but it was tame and lacked any insight or depth. We have to bear in mind the legal restrictions that bind any former officer of the law.

I've wondered about this as well. thanks for relaying the info regarding his remarks on Tricia's show.

 

[cynic]

For a number of reasons Steve has shunned the public eye since shortly after the publication of his book and subsequent lawsuit.
I can tell you that he still thinks about the case frequently. He has not publicly commented on the release of the Ramsey indictment, at least not that I'm aware of.

Here are some interviews…

August 28, 2006, KHOW Radio, Caplis and Silverman, Part One:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB50Vf41kv8

August 28, 2006, KHOW Radio, Caplis and Silverman, Part Two:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8R7SN7En6Fk

August 28, 2006, KHOW Radio, Caplis and Silverman, Part Three:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2aQhftBq3ts

August 29, 2006, Greta Van Susteren:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wz_DBZYkPuo

December 23, 2012, Tricia’s True Crime Radio:
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/websleuths/2012/12/24/websleuths-radio

 

[UKGuy]

cynic,
For sure, but nothing that complements or contradicts James Kolars suggested trajectory of events. How do officers of the law with much the same access to the forensic evidence arrive at such disparate views?

 

[chlban]

Even after all these years and all these books, most having been read multiple times by now,
I still find myself drawn back to Steve's theory or at least a variation of it. But Patsy reacting in rage, she thought JonBenet was mortally wounded (and having recent experience with witnessing a young girl hit in the head, accidentally, by a "shot", as in shot putting, I am even more convinced she would think that) and the rest as staging. John not being aware or in on the staging-which would explain why she had to call the police as soon as he was up, why that ludicrous RN was written and presented to LE-it all still works for me.

I still think overall, he had it right.

 

[Frigga]

Once again, here is an answer, straight from the lizard lips: (during an interview)

Response (John):``Of course, we don't know exactly when JonBenet died.... Her small body was cool and rigid when I found her (the morning of Dec. 26). I selected Dec. 25 because I didn't want the world to ever forget what it did to our daughter on the day of joy and peace, Christmas Day. I want people 50 years from now, a hundred years from now, to look at that marker and say,`The world went mad on that Christmas Day.'''

In other words, IMO, he felt it was his right to decry the decision of experts who used scientific methods to determine she died on the 26th, in favor of being able to shift the blame of her death on what the world had created in the personna of a heinous, murdering, monster. Why does everything he is involved in end of having to be about what HE wants, and what HE thinks? :yuck:

Wow! I don't know how I have never seen this statement before.

Would you even give a *advertiser censored* what "people" thought 50 or 100 years after the fact about your child's murder?

Maybe he should be more concerned about the time surrounding her death. Maybe be a bit more concerned in "finding the killer".

No... John says it all right there for me, in the last part of his statement. Only it is in Ramsey speak.

HIS world went mad that Christmas Day... it was his family that went "mad" and he damn well knows it.

 

[bettybaby00]

Wow! I don't know how I have never seen this statement before.

Would you even give a *advertiser censored* what "people" thought 50 or 100 years after the fact about your child's murder?

Maybe he should be more concerned about the time surrounding her death. Maybe be a bit more concerned in "finding the killer".

No... John says it all right there for me, in the last part of his statement. Only it is in Ramsey speak.

HIS world went mad that Christmas Day... it was his family that went "mad" and he damn well knows it.

I was aware of this statement, but was under the impression Patsy said it.

What's crazy about such a declaration--besides the obvious--is that in a 50 or 100 years from now, no one is going to know the circumstances surrounding her death just by glancing at her headstone. Of course, 100 years later, most people noticing her date of death will think, "what a shame this little girl died on christmas," but they would have no idea who she was or what happened.

This of course would only actually happen if in a 100 years her headstone was even still legible.

And as Midwest mama stated, it's always about him/them :facepalm:

 

[THE BUNK]

I want people 50 years from now, a hundred years from now, to look at that marker and say,`The world went mad on that Christmas Day.'''

Interesting choice of words, the world went mad...on Christmas Day. Not Christmas Night, not that night, not the dawn of Dec. 26th.

It may be nothing, but it suggests that terrible events surrounding his daughters death commenced in the daylight hours of the 25th.

It suggests that Christmas day from the time they woke up, to the time they came home was not a pleasant time for John. I wonder why?