Apology To The Ramseys?

[Linda7NJ]

If an honest to God killer of JonBenet is found and convicted, I will send John and Burke an apology letter. I just don't think Karr is their man.

ditto

 

[luvbeaches]

ditto

double ditto.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

Something else, that well...I do hold up against them is their either lying or misleading when it came to the facts.

It's obvious they were lying when they said they carried a sleeping Jonbenet into the house and right into bed.
Their own son contradicted them.

John Ramsey also originally said he read to Jonbenet before she went to sleep for the night.
He later denied this.

Jonbenet also ate pineapple from a bowl in the kitchen...and nobody knows anything about it.
They won't even speculate on it either. Patsy I believe even went so far to claim the bowl wasn't their's.
All they could say (which they never did) is either Jonbenet went down and got it herself without touching the bowl (impossible), Burke gave it to her during the night...or an intruder did (unlikely).
So either the parents gave it to her or Burke did.
Why do the parents have to lie about who gave her the pineapple? What spooked them so much about it?

The Ramsey's final story is meant to be one that avoids questions about that night.

Their story just doesn't add up against the facts.

 

[Nova]

John Ramsey also originally said he read to Jonbenet before she went to sleep for the night.
He later denied this.

On the whole I agree with you about the Rs' inconsistencies, but I think this point was explained pretty well. JR said, "I put her to bed and read." The officers present assumed he meant "read to JBR" - but he didn't.

That's an easy misunderstanding and not so tough to believe.

 

[Woodsman]

I agree with a previous poster who said that John Mark Karr has just as much of a right to walk the streets as anyone else. Okay, so he's an effeminate weirdo with a morbid fascination in child murder cases. If that's all he proves to be, so what? Until he's actually convicted of a serious crime he's an ordinary citizen like anyone else on this forum and is entitled to clink champagne glasses and eat grilled prawns with whomever he wants.

The guy is innocent until proven guilty.
​

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

Poco....if your not real familiar with this case, be sure and check out Tricia's thread here which is called.....

"The JBR forum is just a wee bit different than the rest"


Read everything in it, including all links that Tricia provides.

You'll be simply amazed! .........and it will catch you up on the case.
Xxxxxxoooooo
mama

Thanks, Mama...will do.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

On the whole I agree with you about the Rs' inconsistencies, but I think this point was explained pretty well. JR said, "I put her to bed and read." The officers present assumed he meant "read to JBR" - but he didn't.

That's an easy misunderstanding and not so tough to believe.

Ahhh, yeah, if that's how that was, then yeah I'd have to give them that one.

Here's where he denied:

ST: OK. Sir, I have a question regarding the security of the home on the night of the 25th, which led to the morning of the 26th, and I don’t know if you’ve had an opportunity to review the police reports that were provided to you.

JR: I scanned them.

ST: Did those, what you read in those, are those factual?

JR: Well, they was a couple of areas where I think there was some misunderstanding or wasn’t correct. I did not check every door in the house the night before. I don’t think I checked any door. I think I was tired, wanted to go to bed, get up early. Ah, and I think the other part I noted in there was they said I read to both kids before I went to bed, and that did not happened. What happened was the kids went to bed and then I read to myself in bed.

ST: John, let me ask you this. Do you attribute that to simply an officer’s error in recollection or might you have said that and . .

JR: I wouldn’t have said that. I think it might have been, maybe the way I said it, that was misinterpreted, but we clearly did not read to the kids that night. JonBenet was asleep, we wanted Burke to get to sleep, so we could get them up early the next morning, so . . .

I don't have the original statements...so I can't compare.

 

[kazzbar]

You know, I don't hate the Ramseys. I've never really looked very hard at how I really feel, but I don 't hate them. I find them to be strange. They have never behaved in a way that made any sense to me when it came to finding their dead child and trying to find the killer.

I do not 'hate' them but find their demeanour wierd. Patsy in particular, is just not likeable but this does not mean she is a killer. I think the fact that they were relucant to help law enforcement is the biggest question over them. They are just arrogant . The bad Pr rap is partially there fault but also L E's fault as well. the thing that amazes me the most at the moment is the amount of ex-detectives, pathologists and private detectives that seem to be in the media pushing there own barrows and sharpening there axes. Everyone has a theory but they should just shut up and let LE and Ms.Lacey deal with it. There constant carping about evidence etc. is just like vultures around a body.
I am particularly 'pissed' at Henry Lee.this man should be gagged!:banghead:

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

Uh oh.

SD, gotta tell you, while I am normally in lurker mode since the Peterson case is over I did come out for this one. You NEVER fail to crack me up. Great posts and funny when need be. :crazy:

 

[Pocono Sleuther]

There was a special on A&E last night about the case and I watched parts of it. Every time I tuned in I could see that the debates here have been asnwered, but people don't want to believe what they hear. The Ramsays were not questioned the day of the murder because the police did not follow proper procedure. The Ramsays soon learned that they were the focus of the investigation and were advised to hire lawyers, but today that is used against them. On the advice of their lawyers, they agreed to meet with the police at their lawyers office with a PI and doctor (Patsy was sick, after all). This is not unusual given the circumstances, but in this case the police refused to cooperate. Again the Ramsays were criticized. I understand that eventually there were 3 teams investigating the murder and none of them were talking to each other, but the DA was talking to the Globe rag magazine. The Ramsays were not given updates on the investigation of their own child's murder. The police tried to withhold their child's burial as leverage in their investigation. There are so many irregularities in the investigation that would make any innocent person run to a lawyer, yet the family is constantly criticized.

I think it's horrendous that John Ramsay is criticized for not taking up the cause of murdered children, or that he just wants to be left alone by the media. When my father died of cancer, my mom took up the cause but I enrolled at university and buried myself in my work - taking 7 courses per semester to make sure that I was too busy to think. It's a well known fact that some people deal with stress by burying themselves in their work. It doesn't matter what John Ramsay does now or what he and his wife did 10 years ago, some people are going to criticize it all. If John is not an activist, leave him alone. I'm not an activist and if people were in my face complaining that I wasn't taking up the cause of all people that died of cancer, I would probably move away as well. Is Natalee Holloway's father an activist? Absolutely not. No one says a word about it because he has a job and other children to raise. John Ramsay is in the very same situation so why not afford him the same respect we extend to other men in the same situation. The double standard makes the criticism of John Ramsay very transparent.

Being that I'm on the fence on this one I'd like to respond. Wonderful post Otto! I watched the A&E special too. You are right. It does come down to the fact that the BPD did NOT follow procedure. You're also right, imo, that as a result of the BPD's wrongs, the Ramseys got a bad rap. I think had things been handled much differently in this case FROM THE BEGINNING, we would have the murderer in custody now...heck, maybe we do. I agree about people dealing with stress differently too. My dh just shuts down in a tragedy involving family/loved ones. I, on the other hand, keep busy and throw myself into work...just like you. There certainly is a double standard in this case and it wouldn't be there if things had been handled properly. The Ramseys were willing to be questioned that day, but last night on the A & E special Koby states that it wouldn't have been right to question them then. Why the heck not? It's a botched case.
Then there are times, as a parent, I wonder HOW the Ramseys could be involved in her murder...and last night I'm wondering WHY John isn't in the media pushing for answers. I think I'd want to be public and ask why? and how???? But it occurs to me now, my dh probably wouldn't be much different from JR in this situation. He might be quiet and wait for justice. This case is just too confusing!!!

 

[otto]

otto - I was being sarcastic. The murderer of JonBenet bears the blame.

oops sorry. I'm just blown away by how much people want to blame the Ramsays ... even if they had nothing to do with their child's death.

 

[otto]

I agree with a previous poster who said that John Mark Karr has just as much of a right to walk the streets as anyone else. Okay, so he's an effeminate weirdo with a morbid fascination in child murder cases. If that's all he proves to be, so what? Until he's actually convicted of a serious crime he's an ordinary citizen like anyone else on this forum and is entitled to clink champagne glasses and eat grilled prawns with whomever he wants.

The guy is innocent until proven guilty.
​

Yup. The Ramsays are innocent until proven guilty too and look what's happened to them. There is evidence of child with Karr yet still he seems to be the darling 'innocent' in this case. He can have all the kiddie he wants but heaven forbid that we deny him champagne while we believe that Ramsay's are guilty of their own daughter's murder. Karr has been arrested and should be treated like a prisoner, not a celebrity.

 

[otto]

Being that I'm on the fence on this one I'd like to respond. Wonderful post Otto! I watched the A&E special too. You are right. It does come down to the fact that the BPD did NOT follow procedure. You're also right, imo, that as a result of the BPD's wrongs, the Ramseys got a bad rap. I think had things been handled much differently in this case FROM THE BEGINNING, we would have the murderer in custody now...heck, maybe we do. I agree about people dealing with stress differently too. My dh just shuts down in a tragedy involving family/loved ones. I, on the other hand, keep busy and throw myself into work...just like you. There certainly is a double standard in this case and it wouldn't be there if things had been handled properly. The Ramseys were willing to be questioned that day, but last night on the A & E special Koby states that it wouldn't have been right to question them then. Why the heck not? It's a botched case.
Then there are times, as a parent, I wonder HOW the Ramseys could be involved in her murder...and last night I'm wondering WHY John isn't in the media pushing for answers. I think I'd want to be public and ask why? and how???? But it occurs to me now, my dh probably wouldn't be much different from JR in this situation. He might be quiet and wait for justice. This case is just too confusing!!!

Thanks. As I listened to the program I reflected on all the debates here and clearly many points are being debated that have been answered by the experts - the debates seem to doubt the truthfulness and credentialed abilities of everyone involved. This is just another example of the media turning human tragedy into prime time entertainment ... but there should be no reasonable expectation that the real life victims of the tragedy play out their roles on TV.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

Yup. The Ramsays are innocent until proven guilty too and look what's happened to them. There is evidence of child with Karr yet still he seems to be the darling 'innocent' in this case. He can have all the kiddie he wants but heaven forbid that we deny him champagne while we believe that Ramsay's are guilty of their own daughter's murder. Karr has been arrested and should be treated like a prisoner, not a celebrity.

Karr was allowed to wine and dine on the flight because they wanted him to talk.

I myself am not totally convinced the Ramsey's are innocent...there are unanswered things and many odd things about the case...and they were rather unhelpful when it came to certain things.

 

[otto]

Karr was allowed to wine and dine on the flight because they wanted him to talk.

I myself am not totally convinced the Ramsey's are innocent...there are unanswered things and many odd things about the case...and they were rather unhelpful when it came to certain things.

I think I prefer the way they handle suspects in Aruba ... seriously, if the only way the LE can get a suspect to talk is to treat them like royalty, then there are some serious problems with their training.

 

[newtv]

I am waiting for the Boulder DA to provide evidence, convincing enough for an actual conviction before a jury of 12 people, that Karr is guilty of JonBenet's murder. Until then, I'm on the fence.

thats fair and mature-its all we can expect of each other..I dont think the ramseys did it-however, I am on the fence with this guy and the whole arrest, etc.
But I didnt think the ramseys were guilty from the beginning-and nothing has convinced me otherwise..if I did have doubt I too would just stay on the fence.
I am open to any one committing this crime if it could be proven in a court of law.

 

[Backwoods]

Otto--
Great post. I have had a long day and don't feel much like typing somehow, so it is great to see someone else voicing so many of the thoughts I've had while reading this thread.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Ahhh, yeah, if that's how that was, then yeah I'd have to give them that one.

Here's where he denied:

ST: OK. Sir, I have a question regarding the security of the home on the night of the 25th, which led to the morning of the 26th, and I don’t know if you’ve had an opportunity to review the police reports that were provided to you.

JR: I scanned them.

ST: Did those, what you read in those, are those factual?

JR: Well, they was a couple of areas where I think there was some misunderstanding or wasn’t correct. I did not check every door in the house the night before. I don’t think I checked any door. I think I was tired, wanted to go to bed, get up early. Ah, and I think the other part I noted in there was they said I read to both kids before I went to bed, and that did not happened. What happened was the kids went to bed and then I read to myself in bed.

ST: John, let me ask you this. Do you attribute that to simply an officer’s error in recollection or might you have said that and . .

JR: I wouldn’t have said that. I think it might have been, maybe the way I said it, that was misinterpreted, but we clearly did not read to the kids that night. JonBenet was asleep, we wanted Burke to get to sleep, so we could get them up early the next morning, so . . .

I don't have the original statements...so I can't compare.

Thomas goes on to say that in order for John to be correct about being misunderstood, then three individual police officers - Officer French, Detective Arndt, and Sergeant Reichenbach - all would have had to have heard him wrong. Now what are the chances that all three of those officers talking to JR at different times misunderstood him?

JR is also changing his story about the doors being locked here. Thomas notes that his original story was that EVERY door was locked, and then he changed it to he didn't know if ANY door was locked. In PMPT, Schiller says Patsy told frineds just after the murder that all doors were locked.

Why are they changing their stories?

 

[Jack]

"JR: Well, they was a couple of areas where I think there was some misunderstanding or wasn’t correct. I did not check every door in the house the night before. I don’t think I checked any door. I think I was tired, wanted to go to bed, get up early. Ah, and I think the other part I noted in there was they said I read to both kids before I went to bed, and that did not happened. What happened was the kids went to bed and then I read to myself in bed."


So he was too tired to check the doors yet he read to himself in bed. I know when I'm tired and want to go to bed and get up early the next day I usually don't read to myself. And even if I'm tired I always check to be sure the doors are locked. There are just so many statements such as this that make me question things.

 

[otto]

"JR: Well, they was a couple of areas where I think there was some misunderstanding or wasn’t correct. I did not check every door in the house the night before. I don’t think I checked any door. I think I was tired, wanted to go to bed, get up early. Ah, and I think the other part I noted in there was they said I read to both kids before I went to bed, and that did not happened. What happened was the kids went to bed and then I read to myself in bed."


So he was too tired to check the doors yet he read to himself in bed. I know when I'm tired and want to go to bed and get up early the next day I usually don't read to myself. And even if I'm tired I always check to be sure the doors are locked. There are just so many statements such as this that make me question things.

I have gone to bed many times and then wondered if I locked the doors so I get up to check. Other times, I haven't. I have left my back door wide open far too many times because I'm enteraining on the deck and have the back door open for guests to use the bathroom. I go in and out of the house through the patio door. The next day I see my mistake. If someone asked me if the doors were locked, I would answer that they're always locked - but I make mistakes.