The "set up' questions

[Blue Bottle 01]

The Ramsey's were caught in quite a few lies, once you tell lies it makes you a liar. It's not a hunch if they are known liars.
Isn't this a discussion board? It seems like you are trying to bait people here with some sort of agenda..it doesn't seem like you want to discuss to me. Moo

Is it just me?

What were their lies?

 

[Sandstorm]

What were their lies?

Blue Bottle,

After reading several of your Websleuth posts, I kindly suggest that you read:

Websleuths link http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenetindex.htm,
Steve Thomas' book
A James Kolar's book

which will enable you to very easily answer your own question: "What were their lies?"

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/JonBenet-Inside-Ramsey-Murder-Investigation-ebook/dp/B003JMFATW/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1384587569&sr=8-1&keywords=steve+thomas+jonbenet"]Amazon.com: JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation eBook: Steve Thomas, Donald A. Davis: Kindle Store@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51dJ3mR%2BNDL.@@AMEPARAM@@51dJ3mR%2BNDL[/ame]

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Foreign-Faction-Really-Kidnapped-JonBenet-ebook/dp/B00D5GVSXY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1384587537&sr=8-1&keywords=james+kolar"]Amazon.com: Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet? eBook: A. James Kolar: Kindle Store@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41xNdplu5lL.@@AMEPARAM@@41xNdplu5lL[/ame]

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

I have read all the major books on the case. I have talked with Peter Boyles, Steve Thomas, Craig Silverman, Dan Caplis, Dale Yeager, e-mails with Boyles, Thomas, Charlie Brennan, Griffith, et. al. and have contacts with local LE (I live in a county next to Boulder county Co.).

The question is legitimate. The determination as to what is a lie is subjective unless supported by irrefutable evidence. It is too easy to say "the Ramseys lied".

Picking out which is a lie and which is not is often guided by a bias toward a preconceived theory. Not to litigate the entire case but: It is not clear whether JonBenet was carried to bed asleep or walked to bed. It is not clear whether Burke was up when the 911 call was made or not and the tape that is public does not help. It is not clear whether the report that John first saw the note when Patsy handed it to him is correct or not. It is not clear whether the report that John found the body at 11 am is correct or not.

I have my suspicions as to what were lies but I leave the questions open ended. I am adamant about my theory yet I do not employ absolutism as to what was a lie and what was not.

When I ask someone to point out the lies I am getting at their theory and the next question is to provide the evidence to back up the theory. So often there is a failure to do so and people are left with their initial suspicions only to back up their conclusions.

This is not sophistry, this points out the difficulty of this case, the difficulty the Grand Jury faced when they could not determine who did what between John and Patsy having seen much evidence not made public.

MOO.

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

As an example: I think Patsy did the whole thing alone. John may have never seen the "set up" that day and not even until he was shown crime scene photos and Patsy denying the set up may be due to her repressing the memory or by whatever psychological mechanism is at work under dissociation. In this scenario neither lied. MOO.

 

[dodie20]

Here's a lie, backed up by evidence. 'BR slept through everything'. Both parents said it but BR later admitted to faking sleep. His voice was picked up by experts, on the 911 conversation. Here's another lie backed up by evidence. The Rs said JB was asleep when they arrived home from the Ws. BR said JB was awake and walked into the house. Undigested pineapple, (pineapple that was matched by experts to pineapple in the kitchen), was found in JB's autopsy. I guess somebody could call BR the liar and find justification for the Rs statements, but evidence plus common sense point to the Rs lying. Here's another lie from the Rs backed up by evidence. The Rs said JB suffered no prior abuse. Experts proved she did. And these are some big ones. and they go on and on.

 

[Anyhoo]

Here's a lie, backed up by evidence. 'BR slept through everything'. Both parents said it but BR later admitted to faking sleep. His voice was picked up by experts, on the 911 conversation. Here's another lie backed up by evidence. The Rs said JB was asleep when they arrived home from the Ws. BR said JB was awake and walked into the house. Undigested pineapple, (pineapple that was matched by experts to pineapple in the kitchen), was found in JB's autopsy. I guess somebody could call BR the liar and find justification for the Rs statements, but evidence plus common sense point to the Rs lying. Here's another lie from the Rs backed up by evidence. The Rs said JB suffered no prior abuse. Experts proved she did. And these are some big ones. and they go on and on.

I agree, and this evidence destroys IDI. Whether the parents killed JB or not, anyone who wants to paint either of them as purely innocent victims is deluding themselves. Both of these people knew exactly what the score was BEFORE the 911 call was even made. Their later actions and behavior prove this to be true. The reason BB and others have a hard time accepting this is that they cannot fathom the parents involvement in this horribly grisly murder of a six year old girl, but that is where the evidence points. The how and why of it is still a mystery (at least to me).

 

[borndem]

I completely agree ... and there are so many other telltale signs PR & JR had prior knowledge Jonbenet was already dead.

It begins in the early morning when they claimed they got up at 5:30 - 5:45 AM and within minutes PR was calling hysterically on the phone to a local police station demanding they rush right to the house.

That should be the last thing any normal parents would do ... their immediate thoughts should be for the safety of the daughter .... they would ponder the ransom note carefully and wonder IF they should call the police or not ... or should they just wait for the kidnappers to call back.

You would think there would have been some sober discussion ahead of time , especially from cool headed John who appears to function well under pressure.

And IF they decided to involve the police , we should expect a frightened and unsure parent on the phone saying NOT to let it be seen police were involved , the parents would plead for experienced officers to discretely advise them on what would be the best thing to do. The last thing they would want was the neighborhood full of police cars with lights flashing.

For PR to immediately pick up the phone and insist police come immediately indicates she knew Jonbenet was already dead and there were no kidnappers to worry about.

I couldn't agree more, Arnie M!

IMO, JR would have had PR sit down with him at a table and discuss quietly & calmly what their next step should be. If they decided to call the police, they would have stressed that they come in unmarked cars and to dress in casual clothes -- no LE uni's and no suits -- too FBI-ish. They would have been in near panic about having LE involved altho they would have wanted their help. At least that would be my 1st concern if LE were gonna come to my house. But the 1st priority is The Body.

And why didn't they hide the body??? JR could have said he made a run to buy batteries or something the kids needed for the trip -- anything -- and he could have, in darkness and with his car behind the house, taken the body, and found a place & hidden it and then gone to a quick-mart, etc., and made a purchase that would look reasonable, and kept the receipt to show why he left the house. What a difference that would have made.

And then JR would have set about arranging the ransom $$$. And absolutely no friends at the house. At 6:00--7:00 in the morning? On the day they were leaving early for their trip? Puh-leeze. Call friends if you must -- JR wouldn't have wanted it, I feel sure -- but swear them to secrecy and insist that they stay away. JR would start a checklist for things/items that had to be done. That would have made it appear that they were innocent victims of their child being kidnapped. Oh, well.

What a mess.

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

Here's a lie, backed up by evidence. 'BR slept through everything'. Both parents said it but BR later admitted to faking sleep. His voice was picked up by experts, on the 911 conversation. Here's another lie backed up by evidence. The Rs said JB was asleep when they arrived home from the Ws. BR said JB was awake and walked into the house. Undigested pineapple, (pineapple that was matched by experts to pineapple in the kitchen), was found in JB's autopsy. I guess somebody could call BR the liar and find justification for the Rs statements, but evidence plus common sense point to the Rs lying. Here's another lie from the Rs backed up by evidence. The Rs said JB suffered no prior abuse. Experts proved she did. And these are some big ones. and they go on and on.

With all due respect this is an example of the problem.

There is nothing audible on the 911 recording past Patsy, Patsy, Patsy ...

The enhanced version has not been made public, so one cannot conclude Burke was there.

9 year old Burke cannot be taken as THE authority as to JonBenet being awake or asleep.

I have already explained my version of the pineapple.

And the chronic abuse falls under the same idea: John Knew nothing about it because Patsy was doing it and she repressed the memory of it.

IMO, the open dictionary dogeared to the word incest was a way for Patsy to squeel on herself.

 

[BOESP]

Burke stated JonBenet walked from the car into the house that night. Why would he lie about that, especially since it contradicts statements made by his parents that John carried her into the house because JonBenet was asleep?

I see reason for the adult Ramseys to want it to seem JonBenet was asleep. I don't see any reason for Burke to lie about or forget her being asleep.

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

Burke stated JonBenet walked from the car into the house that night. Why would he lie about that, especially since it contradicts statements made by his parents that John carried her into the house because JonBenet was asleep?

I see reason for the adult Ramseys to want it to seem JonBenet was asleep. I don't see any reason for Burke to lie about or forget her being asleep.

As if there are only two possibilities: he is lying or telling the truth. When he could simply be wrong, he was afterall 9.

 

[Anyhoo]

As if there are only two possibilities: he is lying or telling the truth. When he could simply be wrong, he was afterall 9.

But he wasn't wrong. I don't know who killed JB, but after studying this case for so long, some things become painfully obvious, such as both parents lying repeatedly and obstructing justice. That they did that is not in question, but the real question is why did they do it? The RN was a fabrication by the parents. I can already tell it will be impossible to convince you of anything and that is not my goal. Who would the parents lie for? They would lie for BR. They would lie for PR. Maybe they would even lie for JR. Whatever the case, they did not want the truth about their daughter's murder to be revealed and they both conspired to hide it.

 

[BOESP]

<snip
I don't see any reason for Burke to lie about or forget her being asleep.

As if there are only two possibilities: he is lying or telling the truth. When he could simply be wrong, he was afterall 9.

BBM. I believe that "forget" falls under the umbrella of "he could simply be wrong." He was also only three weeks shy of being ten years old. He was old enough.

 

[prima.facie]

I'm not suggesting Burke ate any pineapple. His fingerprints on the bowl indicate he may have been part of putting the set up together and may still be able to tell investigators about that if he didn't years ago.

The whole case hinges on the pineapple and the "set up". IMO.

IMO.

the pineapple was not a "set up". it was merely an event that took place amongst other events from that night/morning and a piece of evidence to show that the ramseys are liars.

not sure how one comes to the conclusion that the entire case is relying on the pineapple. :facepalm:

 

[Sandstorm]

But he wasn't wrong. I don't know who killed JB, but after studying this case for so long, some things become painfully obvious, such as both parents lying repeatedly and obstructing justice. That they did that is not in question, but the real question is why did they do it? The RN was a fabrication by the parents. I can already tell it will be impossible to convince you of anything and that is not my goal. Who would the parents lie for? They would lie for BR. They would lie for PR. Maybe they would even lie for JR. Whatever the case, they did not want the truth about their daughter's murder to be revealed and they both conspired to hide it.

Anyhoo,
Thank you for this insightful post.
You hit several nails directly on the head!
Your statement sums it up for this we DO know:
"Whatever the case, they did not want the truth about their daughter's murder to be revealed and they both conspired to hide it."

 

[Sandstorm]

(Snipped )

This is not sophistry, this points out the difficulty of this case, the difficulty the Grand Jury faced when they could not determine who did what between John and Patsy having seen much evidence not made public.

MOO.

The Grand Jury did not have difficulty in the indictment. The Grand Jury concluded there was sufficient evidence to indict both John and Patsy for conspiring in the cover up of JonBenet's murder. The point is not which one of them - rather BOTH OF THEM were indicted. We do KNOW that is a FACT.

 

[Tawny]

The fact that the pineapple snack is SO important that they had to lie about it speaks volumes. So what if JonBenet was asleep or awake when she got home? So what if she had a snack before bed? The lies about the snack are absolutely absurd because the snack is irrelevant to the crime, yet they insist she wasn't awake and couldn't have eaten the pineapple that night.

 

[dodie20]

With all due respect this is an example of the problem.

There is nothing audible on the 911 recording past Patsy, Patsy, Patsy ...

The enhanced version has not been made public, so one cannot conclude Burke was there.

9 year old Burke cannot be taken as THE authority as to JonBenet being awake or asleep.

I have already explained my version of the pineapple.

And the chronic abuse falls under the same idea: John Knew nothing about it because Patsy was doing it and she repressed the memory of it.

IMO, the open dictionary dogeared to the word incest was a way for Patsy to squeel on herself.

with all due respect, where's the evidence for PR repressing memories? And saying she didn't remember something to LE, doesn't count. She and JR sure didn't have a problem with memories when writing their books. IMO, PR's memory lapses were self serving, nothing more. You're right about PR possibly being responsible for the prior abuse though, but I wouldn't be so quick to give JR a pass. Call it a 'hunch' based on stats. Think about it like this...say a mother knows incest is being committed against her daughter. Some mothers might get their kids and leave, but what about mothers who are scared to leave-a mother whose own family depends on the abuser for a paycheck? Just maybe that kind of mother might turn into a clean fanatic where the daughter is concerned. I can believe that... because face it, what's dirtier than incest? Who wouldn't want to clean it up? And maybe one day, the mother just snaps from the pressure of wanting it to just stop. I can believe that too. Especially from a mother who's sick and not real young and can't exactly move home to her parents. I'm not saying this was the case here, just pointing out that the abuse wasn't necessarily being committed by PR. It's easy to see the abuse as coming from PR, but IMO, she just wasn't as insane as you make her sound. Also IMO, there were signs that she was covering for someone else. All moo.

 

[Tawny]

She was very much lucid, intelligent, and calculated. Sociopath maybe, psychotic she never appeared to be (but I am no psychologist/psychoanalyst).

 

[dodie20]

The fact that the pineapple snack is SO important that they had to lie about it speaks volumes. So what if JonBenet was asleep or awake when she got home? So what if she had a snack before bed? The lies about the snack are absolutely absurd because the snack is irrelevant to the crime, yet they insist she wasn't awake and couldn't have eaten the pineapple that night.

I've given this a lot of thought and here's what I think. I think they lied about the snack because they knew she was eating very near the time of the head bash...and they knew investigators would know this. How could they admit to feeding JB, but then have an investigator turn around with, 'and she was bashed within minutes of eating and we can prove it through digestion'. How could the Rs even pretend to not hear anything, if this so called intruder attacked their daughter within minutes of swallowing what they, the Rs fed her? I think at least one of the Rs was smart enough to understand that coroners find what the last thing eaten was, and can pinpoint the time it was eaten. moo

 

[Tawny]

I've given this a lot of thought and here's what I think. I think they lied about the snack because they knew she was eating very near the time of the head bash...and they knew investigators would know this. How could they admit to feeding JB, but then have an investigator turn around with, 'and she was bashed within minutes of eating and we can prove it through digestion'. How could the Rs have even pretended to not hear anything, if this so called intruder attacked their daughter within in minutes of swallowing what they, the Rs fed her? I think at least one of the Rs was smart enough to understand that coroners find what the last thing eaten was, and can pinpoint a time it was eaten. moo

Exactly! If they are so innocent... why would the snack be so important to them that they'd lie about it? It reeks of guilt and cover up.