IDIs On This Forum?

[sandraladeda]

You're totally underestimating the person or persons who would be the intruders. If it was intruders, then they got away with murder on a 6 year old. That despite leaving a handwritten note. And did so with a weapon that they made from two dollars worth of material, while their parents slept. Writing the note with their pen and paper.

If they were intruders, then they're resourseful, cunning, deadly, and have many resources you can't see because they never showed them to you.

Your argument seems rather circular - they didn't get caught because they are sooo good (cunning, resourceful etc.), as evidenced by the fact they did not get caught....huh?!

 

[JMO8778]

Sounds like someone who lives under a rock,doesn't it? (the 'intruder')

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Your argument seems rather circular - they didn't get caught because they are sooo good (cunning, resourceful etc.), as evidenced by the fact they did not get caught....huh?!

I never said that. You did.

I said that if JBR was killed by intruders, then they must be cunning, as evidenced by the fact that they did not get caught, despite parents being in the same house. No circular here. Just an observation. If the parents were 1000 miles away and JBR were by herself in the desert, then the intruders wouldn't seem so cunning. Make sense?

Here's a better example of circular: There was a murder, so the R's become suspicious. The R's are now so suspicious, they probably murdered their daughter.

 

[BOESP]

I never said that. You did.

I said that if JBR was killed by intruders, then they must be cunning, as evidenced by the fact that they did not get caught, despite parents being in the same house. No circular here. Just an observation. If the parents were 1000 miles away and JBR were by herself in the desert, then the intruders wouldn't seem so cunning. Make sense?

Here's a better example of circular: There was a murder, so the R's become suspicious. The R's are now so suspicious, they probably murdered their daughter.

What about there was a murder; the Ramseys couldn't be suspects because I know they didn't do it; there is a possibility an Intruder did it so that proves the Ramseys didn't do it. Neither side of the fence should support such a thought process.

Statistics show parental involvement in juvenile homicides in a home where one or more parent is in residence at the time of death, let alone when the body is found in the residence. Professional investigators start with the inner circle (family) and work outward from there. On day one, someone in the Boulder Police Department or the Boulder DA's office told the investigators to treat the Ramseys as victims, not suspects. Whoever gave that order would likely been charged with malfeasance in most places.

If the Ramseys were innocent, they would have been dismissed and the detectives could have moved on to the next layer, close family members, and so. The Ramseys stalled the investigation. They take no responsibility for the actions that delayed the investigation and they blamed everyone under the sun but themselves when asked why they didn't cooperate. I don't believe them for a minute. Not one but both parents refused to cooperate in an appropriate manner. That speaks volumes.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

The one I really like is: "Neither John nor Patsy could have been the killer because they said they were asleep at the time."

 

[Toltec]

the RN says 'the 2 gentlemen watching over your daughter' implies that the author is not one of them,that in fact,there are 3 of them in the 'SFF'..the ones JR was trying to set up in the note.

Yes....three...

Son of aBit*h Tom Carson,

MERRICK,

MARINO.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The one I really like is: "Neither John nor Patsy could have been the killer because they said they were asleep at the time."

Its very likely neither JR or PR was even involved in their daughters murder. BR is out of the question.

Filicides just don't criminalize the murders of their children. Filicidal parents don't take their murder and make it even more criminal. They don't take something they could've called an accident (hit on the head) and add a garrote and kidnapping plot, sure to invite both the FBI and death penalty if caught. Nor do they leave 2 1/2 pages of writing for analysis. It doesn't make any sense at all. None.

• Black tape
• Strangulation cord made ahead of time.
• Ransom note with bizarre threats of violence directed at a child. Beheading a 6 year old is pretty hard core.
• Politically and socioeconomically charged references.

This is the stuff of a hard cord, hardened criminal. Got nothing to do with PR or JR being asleep. It has to do with characterizing the murder, something that the investigation falls short on, IMO.

 

[Ames]

The one I really like is: "Neither John nor Patsy could have been the killer because they said they were asleep at the time."

um hum...that's my favorite too. I have heard these too....."The Ramsey's couldn't have been the killer, because they are Christians"...and "Patsy wasn't criminal enough"...and one more..."The Ramsey's couldn't have done it because..they were good people". Now, how these IDI's KNOW for SURE that the Ramsey's were good people, when they didn't know them....is beyond me.

 

[JMO8778]

I never said that. You did.

I said that if JBR was killed by intruders, then they must be cunning, as evidenced by the fact that they did not get caught, despite parents being in the same house. No circular here. Just an observation. If the parents were 1000 miles away and JBR were by herself in the desert, then the intruders wouldn't seem so cunning. Make sense?

but she wasn't found in the desert,so the point is moot.she was found in her parents' house,wrapped as if done by parents,staged to look as if if wasn't done by the parents...RN written by parents to point away from parents...sis sent in for funeral clothes retrieves much more than such...

 

[JMO8778]

Yes....three...

Son of aBit*h Tom Carson,

MERRICK,

MARINO.

:clap:

 

[JMO8778]

Its very likely neither JR or PR was even involved in their daughters murder. BR is out of the question.

Filicides just don't criminalize the murders of their children. Filicidal parents don't take their murder and make it even more criminal. They don't take something they could've called an accident (hit on the head) and add a garrote and kidnapping plot, sure to invite both the FBI and death penalty if caught. Nor do they leave 2 1/2 pages of writing for analysis. It doesn't make any sense at all. None.

• Black tape
• Strangulation cord made ahead of time.
• Ransom note with bizarre threats of violence directed at a child. Beheading a 6 year old is pretty hard core.
• Politically and socioeconomically charged references.

This is the stuff of a hard cord, hardened criminal. Got nothing to do with PR or JR being asleep. It has to do with characterizing the murder, something that the investigation falls short on, IMO.

has it ever occurred to you that the above said would go for the SON,not the daughter of a businessman? ..the son would be more likely to 'inherit the business' so to speak,and to follow in his dad's footsteps.
but going for either is cowardly and not likely.the SFF then appears to be less than they are,not more.they'd go for the man himself,not his family.

 

[BBB167893]

Filicides just don't criminalize the murders of their children. Filicidal parents don't take their murder and make it even more criminal. They don't take something they could've called an accident (hit on the head) and add a garrote and kidnapping plot, sure to invite both the FBI and death penalty if caught. Nor do they leave 2 1/2 pages of writing for analysis. It doesn't make any sense at all. None.

none of this makes sense! In fact, when it does start making sense to me, I'll know I've lived too long.

Perp is an expert and has done it before?

I believe it.

HOLDON, I believe UKGuy was attempting to reinforce my point.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

has it ever occurred to you that the above said would go for the SON,not the daughter of a businessman? ..the son would be more likely to 'inherit the business' so to speak,and to follow in his dad's footsteps.
but going for either is cowardly and not likely.the SFF then appears to be less than they are,not more.they'd go for the man himself,not his family.

What makes you believe that a SFF is going to comply with some preconceived notion of what SFF does or does not do. There's no rule that states SFF will kill only men, because they're concerned about maintaining a non-cowardly appearance.

 

[coloradokares]

Yes....three...

Son of aBit*h Tom Carson,

MERRICK,

MARINO.

I strongly object to that kind of language use on the forum. I also disagree with the post, however there in no reason at all to lower the bar to tolerate such lanugauge.

 

[JMO8778]

I didn't take offense to it b/c I think she was just repeating what Nedra's explanation for SBTC was (and that's just what she said),and since she masked it,I wasn't offended,although I can see where others might be.

 

[JMO8778]

What makes you believe that a SFF is going to comply with some preconceived notion of what SFF does or does not do. There's no rule that states SFF will kill only men, because they're concerned about maintaining a non-cowardly appearance.

if a FF wants to appear strong,they won't behave like cowards.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

if a FF wants to appear strong,they won't behave like cowards.

Every single time the US is hit by FF, they are called cowardly. BTW, attacking any child is inherently cowardly. Its a given that the perp's a coward.

 

[DeeDee249]

The garotte was made right on her, not in advance. Her hair and gold chain were caught up in it. (as well as PR's jacket fibers).

 

[Ames]

I didn't take offense to it b/c I think she was just repeating what Nedra's explanation for SBTC was (and that's just what she said),and since she masked it,I wasn't offended,although I can see where others might be.

Yes, I think thats exactly what she was doing....repeating what Nedra's explaination for SBTC was. I wasn't offended either...

 

[JMO8778]

Every single time the US is hit by FF, they are called cowardly.

yes,but do they normally go after children?? If I didn't have a lick of common sense,I could believe that.
But where are all these terrorists groups that could have done this? It's weird that NOT A ONE has come fwd claiming responsiblity.B/c anytime a terrorist group commits a crime,ultimately they come fwd,flex their muscles (so to speak),and TELL the world they were the ones who did it.I think most ppl would agree,this was not an International incident.