FW

[BlueCrab]

I don't think FW killed JB either ... was he involved somehow? I don't know ... I can't rule him out.

capps,

IMO you should rule him out. The Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up to protect Fleet White. They would only lie and cover up to protect a Ramsey.

 

[capps]

capps,

IMO you should rule him out. The Ramseys wouldn't be lying and covering up to protect Fleet White. They would only lie and cover up to protect a Ramsey.

BlueCrab,

Nope,can't do it BlueCrab.
Time and time again I tried to dismiss Fleet.But without sounding too dramatic,there is this strong gut feeling I have,along with the list of suspicions I posted above,that keeps bringing me back to him.

He's in this story somehow ...maybe he's somehow intertwined in what you are stating above. I don't know.

 

[Zman]

You can make what you want of their actions, but to me, there's no way they can be explained away. Nope...not at all.

........and people think I'm closed minded.

 

[aussiesheila]

They would only lie and cover up to protect a Ramsey.

Please BlueCrab, would you refrain from stating this as fact. It is NOT a fact and you cannot use it as such to draw conclusions from.

IMO there is one Ramsey who has been lying and covering up to protect someone and I do not believe this someone she is protecting is a Ramsey. While I cannot claim this is fact it is most certainly possible.

 

[BlueCrab]

Please BlueCrab, would you refrain from stating this as fact. It is NOT a fact and you cannot use it as such to draw conclusions from.

aussiesheila,

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. For instance:

It's a fact the Ramseys lied about Burke being in bed at 5:52 AM during the 911 call, while he was actually in the kitchen talking to his parents, as proven by the professionally-enhanced final four seconds of the 911 tape.

It's a fact the Ramseys lied about Burke not owning Hi-Tec hiking boots, while Burke eventually admitted to the GJ that he did own Hi-Tecs.

It's a fact the Ramseys lied about not knowing where the Santa Bear came from (sending the entire nation on a hunt for it), while they knew all along the Santa Bear had been won by JonBenet at a pageant just days before she died and at which John and Patsy both attended, and the Santa Bear had been stolen from the bed by Aunt Pam after the crime scene photos were taken. Private detectives eventually found the Santa Bear stored in a box at the Ramseys house in Atlanta. It was a mean-spirited Ramsey trick.

The list goes on and on.

BlueCrab

 

[aussiesheila]

Time and time again I tried to dismiss Fleet.But without sounding too dramatic,there is this strong gut feeling I have,along with the list of suspicions I posted above,that keeps bringing me back to him.

He's in this story somehow ...maybe he's somehow intertwined in what you are stating above. I don't know.

I agree with you absolutely Capps.

But whenever I have said that some people have started jumping up and down saying "how could he possibly have done it?"

But just because someone thinks FW acted suspiciously doesn't necessarily mean they think he killed JonBenet and I don't think he did. I do not think he was present at or involved in the murder. I think it was some other pedophiles that did it. What I believe is that FW was a member of the same group of pedophiles that some of the perpetrators were also members of. I believe the suspicious behaviour on his part arose from the fact that he was involved in the coverup. I think he masterminded the coverup for his pedophile mates, the ones that had been abusing JonBenet with him for years, a fact that he was afraid would become become public knowledge as a result of the killing.

I think he had someone in the BPD under his control who he could manipulate and believed he would be able to control the direction of the investigation. I think his initial coverup plan was for JonBenet to 'disappear' and to pass it off as a kidnapping with hopefully only a skeleton being found in the mountains years later. He had planned for Patsy to call only him and his wife when she 'found' the note so that there would be no police brought in until after the body had been removed. That plan fell through when the body was found in the house. It appears to me that then he began pushing the kidnapping-gone-wrong theory; and when that became untenable he went with the anger-payback killing directed at John theory, and finally when the sexual molestation aspect became obvious he then turned against John and Burke and pushed the incest-linked murder theory.

 

[aussiesheila]

aussiesheila,

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree. For instance:

It's a fact the Ramseys lied about Burke being in bed at 5:52 AM during the 911 call, while he was actually in the kitchen talking to his parents, as proven by the professionally-enhanced final four seconds of the 911 tape.

It's a fact the Ramseys lied about Burke not owning Hi-Tec hiking boots, while Burke eventually admitted to the GJ that he did own Hi-Tecs.

It's a fact the Ramseys lied about not knowing where the Santa Bear came from (sending the entire nation on a hunt for it), while they knew all along the Santa Bear had been won by JonBenet at a pageant just days before she died and at which John and Patsy both attended, and the Santa Bear had been stolen from the bed by Aunt Pam after the crime scene photos were taken. Private detectives eventually found the Santa Bear stored in a box at the Ramseys house in Atlanta. It was a mean-spirited Ramsey trick.

The list goes on and on.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,
I'm not complaining that you say the Ramseys are lying , what I am complaining about is that you say they would only lie to protect a Ramsey.

It really gets to me because one of the fundamentals of my theory is that Patsy Ramsey lied and covered up for a group of pedophiles who were ALL NON-Ramseys. It's my theory and while it might not be correct it is most definitely possible and when you keep repeating "They would only lie and cover up to protect a Ramsey" you are essentially saying it isn't. That's all.

 

[Zman]

BlueCrab,
I'm not complaining that you say the Ramseys are lying , what I am complaining about is that you say they would only lie to protect a Ramsey.

It really gets to me because one of the fundamentals of my theory is that Patsy Ramsey lied and covered up for a group of pedophiles who were ALL NON-Ramseys. It's my theory and while it might not be correct it is most definitely possible and when you keep repeating "They would only lie and cover up to protect a Ramsey" you are essentially saying it isn't. That's all.

Uggh!...........
Why would PR ever cover up the murder of her daughter by a group of pedophiles? Why would she cover up for anyone? What kind of monster do you think she is? Just because she enters JBR in pagents? Thousands of mothers do that everyday.

Why do we feel the need to be so nice here? I think you can complain any time you wish aussieshella. Especially when it comes to the spread of false and misleading facts. Of which some unamed individual is quite fond of doing. Its one thing to discuss opinions, its quite another to state your opinions as facts.

Not to mention that there is not one piece of real evidence that even proves a "coverup" of any kind. Lying, although the R's have never done so is not even proof of a "coverup".

 

[narlacat]

The Ramsey's have indeed lied. Bluecrab is right.
They lied from day 1 and pretty much haven't stopped. I don't know how some people can't see that. It is as plain as the nose on my face. When they weren't lying, they couldn't remember anything.
I agree also with Bluecrab that the Ramsey's would only lie for one of their own. With respect Aussie, I dont agree with your theory, consciously or sub consciously...I dont think Patsy would have allowed JonBenet to be sexually abused. I think she was being abused but I dont think it was a pedophile ring. While John and Patsy's comments....."I'm sorry, so sorry" and "We didnt mean for this to happen" are certainly suspicious, they could mean alot of things..
What makes you think that Patsy would allow all her friends to abuse JonBenet?? I have read your theory but I still wonder....is it because of Nancy Krebs?? I just dont see how some people come to the conclusion that JonBenet was the victim of a pedophile ring.
I suspect John of abusing his daughter, I think that's why he said 'I'm sorry, so sorry"...but I'm not entirely convinced. Someone was....I wonder about Granddaddy Paugh, but havent read much about him.
Could it be said, that the person who was abusing JonBenet was also the person responsible for her death? Or were the two totally unrelated?
You could wonder all day about this case and what happened to that poor little girl.

 

[Rupert]

First of all I don't think it's anywhere near a proven fact that there is an enhanced tape with Burk's voice on it. Have you heard it? Can you play it for me? Why can't we hear it?

Second, how come I can't seem to find a deposition by FW to compare with that of JR, or is FW excused for that as well?

 

[sissi]

First of all I don't think it's anywhere near a proven fact that there is an enhanced tape with Burk's voice on it. Have you heard it? Can you play it for me? Why can't we hear it?

Second, how come I can't seem to find a deposition by FW to compare with that of JR, or is FW excused for that as well?

Fleet has managed to keep his secret/hidden.

Within the ranks of the police , does anyone remember another speaking out with the claim of actually hearing Burke's voice? Was it only Steve? Did he make the claim that others in the room heard it ,as well?

 

[sissi]

I agree with you absolutely Capps.

But whenever I have said that some people have started jumping up and down saying "how could he possibly have done it?"

But just because someone thinks FW acted suspiciously doesn't necessarily mean they think he killed JonBenet and I don't think he did. I do not think he was present at or involved in the murder. I think it was some other pedophiles that did it. What I believe is that FW was a member of the same group of pedophiles that some of the perpetrators were also members of. I believe the suspicious behaviour on his part arose from the fact that he was involved in the coverup. I think he masterminded the coverup for his pedophile mates, the ones that had been abusing JonBenet with him for years, a fact that he was afraid would become become public knowledge as a result of the killing.

I think he had someone in the BPD under his control who he could manipulate and believed he would be able to control the direction of the investigation. I think his initial coverup plan was for JonBenet to 'disappear' and to pass it off as a kidnapping with hopefully only a skeleton being found in the mountains years later. He had planned for Patsy to call only him and his wife when she 'found' the note so that there would be no police brought in until after the body had been removed. That plan fell through when the body was found in the house. It appears to me that then he began pushing the kidnapping-gone-wrong theory; and when that became untenable he went with the anger-payback killing directed at John theory, and finally when the sexual molestation aspect became obvious he then turned against John and Burke and pushed the incest-linked murder theory.

This sounds logical. Someone could have paid for the kidnapper to bring Jonbenet to him, for a photo shoot, a pedophile session, any dark reason, not expecting the pick-up person to kill her. When that happened, what recourse would he have, certainly nothing within the law, ya' can't call the police and tell that the kidnapper you hired to bring the child to you "slipped up".
Would this narrow our suspect pool? Fleet...photographers...santa..any others..could we include a competing pageant family?
I have never found the Ramseys to lie, btw, I see no cover up on their part.

 

[aussiesheila]

Uggh!...........
Why would PR ever cover up the murder of her daughter by a group of pedophiles? Why would she cover up for anyone? What kind of monster do you think she is? Just because she enters JBR in pagents? Thousands of mothers do that everyday.

I think Patsy was pressured into covering up by the pedophiles themselves. She was closely connected to some of them and I imagine they had a powerful hold on her. I do not think that this makes Patsy a monster. I do not think Patsy is a monster, they are your words. I think Patsy was a victim of sexual abuse herself. She had been mentally affected by the abuse in her own childhood was incapable of stopping her daughter's abuse. IMO Patsy is to be pitied, not condemned. As far as I am concerned pageants have got nothing to do with this case.

 

[aussiesheila]

The Ramsey's have indeed lied. Bluecrab is right.
They lied from day 1 and pretty much haven't stopped. I don't know how some people can't see that. It is as plain as the nose on my face. When they weren't lying, they couldn't remember anything.
I agree also with Bluecrab that the Ramsey's would only lie for one of their own. With respect Aussie, I dont agree with your theory, consciously or sub consciously...I dont think Patsy would have allowed JonBenet to be sexually abused. I think she was being abused but I dont think it was a pedophile ring. While John and Patsy's comments....."I'm sorry, so sorry" and "We didnt mean for this to happen" are certainly suspicious, they could mean alot of things..
What makes you think that Patsy would allow all her friends to abuse JonBenet?? I have read your theory but I still wonder....is it because of Nancy Krebs?? I just dont see how some people come to the conclusion that JonBenet was the victim of a pedophile ring.
I suspect John of abusing his daughter, I think that's why he said 'I'm sorry, so sorry"...but I'm not entirely convinced. Someone was....I wonder about Granddaddy Paugh, but havent read much about him.
Could it be said, that the person who was abusing JonBenet was also the person responsible for her death? Or were the two totally unrelated?
You could wonder all day about this case and what happened to that poor little girl.

Narlacat, to find examples of mothers turning a blind eye to the sexual abuse of their daughters you have to delve into literature dealing with childhood sexual abuse. You will find examples of it and I agree it is very hard to believe.
I think JonBenet's medical history provides evidence for longstanding sexual abuse. Her urinary problems were not minor IMO no matter how much that pediatrician tried to downplay them. I think the fact that he did not refer her to a urologist highly suspicious, there was clearly something wrong with her and he did nothing to determine what it was, he just kept on reassuring Patsy that everything was fine. That to me is evidence of a ring and a pediatrician who was linked to them. But there, I'm getting carried away again and I know no-one believes me. So that's enough for tonight.

 

[narlacat]

Thanx Aussie for explaining your theory a bit more for me, you have probably already explained that somewhere here, but sometimes I miss stuff....
Any one of us could be right about what happened that night...
Do you think Burke was abused also, or just JonBenet?
I have read somewhere and not from something official like the autopsy report,I cant remember where, that JonBenet's vagina looked considerably different than vagina's of other little girls her age....have you read that??

 

[Zman]

I think Patsy was pressured into covering up by the pedophiles themselves. She was closely connected to some of them and I imagine they had a powerful hold on her. I do not think that this makes Patsy a monster. I do not think Patsy is a monster, they are your words. I think Patsy was a victim of sexual abuse herself. She had been mentally affected by the abuse in her own childhood was incapable of stopping her daughter's abuse. IMO Patsy is to be pitied, not condemned. As far as I am concerned pageants have got nothing to do with this case.

So now you claim PR is closely connected to pedophiles and she was a victim of sexual abuse and narlacat wants to throw Bruke in the ring too.

Where's the evidence.

 

[Toltec]

Zman....Here is one case of Patsy lying...she claims she never knew of John's mistress. In FACT...she denied it three times to Detectives.

When it came to John talking about his "fatal attraction" mistress, he tells Detectives a story of how he had Patsy get rid of his mistress when she came a knockin.

John explains Fleet White's notetaking this way:...he was trying to be helpful.

There is no way no how Fleet is involved in JonBenet's murder. He and Priscilla are angry at how the Ramseys have handled themselves with law-enforcement and by hiring high-powered defense attornies.

 

[tipper]

Zman....Here is one case of Patsy lying...she claims she never knew of John's mistress. In FACT...she denied it three times to Detectives.

When it came to John talking about his "fatal attraction" mistress, he tells Detectives a story of how he had Patsy get rid of his mistress when she came a knockin.

[...].

I don't recall him saying in that story Patsy knew the woman was his (former?)mistress. Personally I think it's a coin toss as to whether he would tell that to Patsy. He already was on thin ice with her family by being divorced. Would he add an affair into the pot?

 

[narlacat]

I recall the story quite clearly. John was quite impressed with how Patsy handled herself and the situation. She ended the affair that apparently John didnt have the guts to do himself. He said the woman was obsessive and then made a comparison to the movie "Fatal Attraction".
I'm sure I read that in one of John Ramsey's interviews at ACR.

 

[narlacat]

So now you claim PR is closely connected to pedophiles and she was a victim of sexual abuse and narlacat wants to throw Bruke in the ring too.

Where's the evidence.

Seeing as you directly mention my name and yet again state untruths about what I have said, I will reply to this post.
I did not say I want to throw Burke in the ring too, I asked Aussie if in her theory she thinks Burke was being abused also. If you do not already know from some of my other posts, I do not agree with aussies theory, but am interested enough in finding out the truth about what happened to JonBenet to take into account other people's theories. This is in stark contrast to you zman, you are here two minutes and you think you, and only you, knows exactly what happened at the Ramsey home that night. That is all well and good, but there is no need to run people down and be rude, for thinking differently than you.