Originally Posted by lonetraveler
But! She didn't confess. I'm curious as to WHY NOT.
she was married to one of the most arrogant,calculated,manipulative men I've ever seen,that's why,IMO
they BOTH seem to have done it,that's what's WEIRD!they both seem very detached,they wanna distance themselves from her (not necessarily the crime,but her)..."THAT child"..."NO,we don't know that she was assaulted",etc,etc,etc,long list...
lonetraveler;10215249]Let me see, name of thread is "What is eating me alive regarding this case". Well, I fully expected to hear Patsy Ramsey confess prior to her death and I was very disappointed when she didn't.
How do we know she didn't leave a letter? JR and/or BR or an atty could have destroyed it if she did. I'm not saying she did or she didn't but ya just never know with this family....
I just wanted to note something that is deeply satisfying in the middle of the frustration -
PR at least has got her karmic reward.
Not good enough. I am convinced that at least one if not both of the two surviving Ramsey's know what happened. Whether he committed the murder or not, I live to see JR exposed as a liar and deceiver. He is a big rat.
Just wanted to join in, and say that I agree- the holy grail would be to find one conclusive theory, that fits everything! But, maybe the problem is that everyone's scratching their heads, trying to find a logical explanation for all the bizarre aspects that seem to contradict each other, because we're all looking at it rationally, from a distance? And maybe sometimes in real life, things happen or people act/react in ways that aren't sensible/rational/logical at the time? I don't know, just my thoughts...?
<snip>
The only thing that prevents you from seeing Ramsey knowledge of the murder is your own mind, AK. Your last paragraph demonstrates why it would be futile to try to include IDI into any kind of unified theory and it angers me to see that one could be so blind. But you have a point about which evidence to include, since people tend to accept evidence that supports their own theory about what happened and reject evidence contrary to it. Maybe two unified theories, one for RDI and one for IDI. It would be much more difficult to unite RDI under a single theory than to unite IDI IMO.BBM
But, what is everything?
This is the problem. We dont agree on which elements are actually relevant to the crime. Some elements, the pineapple for example, may not be related at all, but some people insist that an explanation must incorporate it! And, we dont agree on what evidence is fact; for example, Mr Ramseys shirt fibers, prior abuse, the victims panties being changed, stun gun use, etc....
Perhaps, what we need is an explanation that describes the broader more widely accepted aspects of the case, one that doesnt necessarily incorporate every little thing that comes to mind or seems questionable.
While I can understand that to posit an unknown suspect with an unknown motive isnt very satisfying for many, I also think that many of the perceived bizarre aspects and oddities become vanishingly small when we consider the possibility that the Ramseys were not involved and simply had no idea as to what happened.
...
AK
BBM
But, what is everything?
This is the problem. We dont agree on which elements are actually relevant to the crime. Some elements, the pineapple for example, may not be related at all, but some people insist that an explanation must incorporate it! And, we dont agree on what evidence is fact; for example, Mr Ramseys shirt fibers, prior abuse, the victims panties being changed, stun gun use, etc....
Perhaps, what we need is an explanation that describes the broader more widely accepted aspects of the case, one that doesnt necessarily incorporate every little thing that comes to mind or seems questionable.
While I can understand that to posit an unknown suspect with an unknown motive isnt very satisfying for many, I also think that many of the perceived bizarre aspects and oddities become vanishingly small when we consider the possibility that the Ramseys were not involved and simply had no idea as to what happened.
...
AK
This post suggesting calculation resonated with me. Faster than the govt. can spend a buck, JR moves to retain lawyers. Thanks to Kolar, and a brief mention is in STs book as well, we know about lawyers for JR immediately trying to reach FW after JBs body is found. But this was before JBs body was even autopsied. What raised my hinky meter in terms of calculation were: Lawyers for the ex and all children, a lawyer retained by the Atlanta pastor, a move to Atlanta with a family whose son was a bff of BR (in the event BR spilled something to his bff? Ive an additional theory about that move to Atlanta which is simpler than the BC theory.) JR even admitted to once trying to find his ex-mistress, faulted for ruining JRs first marriage. All these calculated actions on the part of JR made me consider that JR did not want LE digging around too deep in his past. moo
No, the only thing that keeps me from seeing Ramsey knowledge of the crimes is the evidence. But, I completely agree that there can be no unified theory. How could there be? I also think that you are right that it would be difficult to unite RDI under a single theory, but Im not sure how much easier it would be for IDI to do the same.The only thing that prevents you from seeing Ramsey knowledge of the murder is your own mind, AK. Your last paragraph demonstrates why it would be futile to try to include IDI into any kind of unified theory and it angers me to see that one could be so blind. But you have a point about which evidence to include, since people tend to accept evidence that supports their own theory about what happened and reject evidence contrary to it. Maybe two unified theories, one for RDI and one for IDI. It would be much more difficult to unite RDI under a single theory than to unite IDI IMO.
lawyering up
he always wants to make it sound like it was no big deal,just a concerned friend (MB) trying to help them out in such a desperate situation...I don't buy it...ITA that they didn't want the cops digging around in his past.everything was strategy.not just an accident /nice friends helping out.big things needed to stay HIDDEN.
Your post got me thinking about the ever popular "anyone with any brains would lawyer up" which I have never bought. So I am trying to think of a case in a child abduction and/or murder where the parents lawyered up, set stringent guidelines for their questioning and basically behaved anything like the Ramseys and it was ultimately determined, beyondall doubt, that said parents were innocent?
I cannot think of one. Maybe they are there, I just cannot recall any right now.
But then, I have always believed that the actions of the Ramseys were more damning than all of the other evidence combined.
The Grand Jury had to consider the possibility that the Ramseys were not involved, and it doesn't look like the eccentricities of the case became vanishingly small to them...
No, the grand jury did not have to consider the possibility that the Ramseys were not involved, they had to decide if there was probable cause to charge them with a crime. Also, it seems clear that after all their time and consideration the jurors still had no idea who did what or why, and hoped that further investigation might answer these questions (that didn’t happen, either).
...
AK
No, the grand jury did not have to consider the possibility that the Ramseys were not involved, they had to decide if there was probable cause to charge them with a crime. Also, it seems clear that after all their time and consideration the jurors still had no idea who did what or why, and hoped that further investigation might answer these questions (that didnt happen, either).
...
AK
Your post got me thinking about the ever popular "anyone with any brains would lawyer up" which I have never bought. So I am trying to think of a case in a child abduction and/or murder where the parents lawyered up, set stringent guidelines for their questioning and basically behaved anything like the Ramseys and it was ultimately determined, beyondall doubt, that said parents were innocent?
I cannot think of one. Maybe they are there, I just cannot recall any right now.
But then, I have always believed that the actions of the Ramseys were more damning than all of the other evidence combined.