If you look at it logically it's very clear who did it!

[AddieBoo]

They hid behind the layer of protection the attorneys offered. Everyone knows that the early days in an investigation are critical. After months go by, memories fade. They could've submitted to interviews with counsel present to advise. They did not until they had favorable terms and access to the investigative files, which again is unprecedented. I have often referenced the Polly Klaas case and the marked differences in how the parents chose to respond. That was also a high profile case. The parents allowed themselves to be interviewed and investigated right up front so that the investigation could then focus on finding the perpetrator. Mark Klaas used the media effectively to put focus on the investigation and his daughter. He did not allow it to become a media circus. Huge difference.

It may not be flattering, but that's how many people described PR. She was so heavily medicated that she could barely function. She needed help bathing and dressing. When Pam Griffin and her daughter saw PR on the 27th at the Fernies, they thought she was 1 step away from overdosing. Dr. Beuf was a pediatrician and not PR's doctor. One can argue the ethics of him giving her high doses of Valium to begin with and then continuing on well after her own doctor should have been consulted. I'm not sure it would be considered standard practice to heavily medicate a mother in this case. That implies it's done all the time. Are there statistics that show this? In particular for the amount of time PR was medicated to the point where she could not function? I can recall interviews with Sharon Tate's mother after the murder of her daughter. She was nowhere near as dosed as PR was, if at all. Of course she spoke to LE first way before she spoke with the press.

The point is, she did not need to be that heavily sedated. It was OTT. I think most people would agree speaking to LE about the murder of your daughter should be a priority. As soon as you are able so valuable information and memories are fresh.

Again, who went to the press first? The Ramseys. At that time there was no huge presence of tabloids, etc. hounding them. The story went hugely national when the Ramseys chose to do a prime time national broadcast and it took off from there. They weren't pacifying the press at that point, they were getting ahead of the story to put out their narrative and they used the press to do so.

Let's not forget how DA Hunter used the press and in particular a specific reporter for a tabloid to put "all manner of lies" in the public's ears and eyes.

Only those involved with the investigation would know the specifics. Barb Fernie called police with her concerns, not the other way around. Until then the Fernies were staunchly supporting their friends. They like the other friends, cooperated with police immediately. It was only the Ramseys who did not cooperate. Where is the evidence that police were pitting them against the Ramseys? I have heard no such claim from any of the friends. Barb Fernie saw what she knew to be an obvious lie by the Ramseys, how was that a result of police pitting her against them? She came forward because she knew it was a lie. She came forward because she had justice for JonBenet at heart.

The media? How many interviews did John and Patsy Ramsey give the tabloids? How many photo shoots? How many interviews? They had a PR team.. gimme a break…IMO they loved it. That spectacle at their church? That “Ramsey Press Conference” on and on….
MOO

 

[Bekind89]

The media? How many interviews did John and Patsy Ramsey give the tabloids? How many photo shoots? How many interviews? They had a PR team.. gimme a break…IMO they loved it. That spectacle at their church? That “Ramsey Press Conference” on and on….
MOO

Anyone else remember that creepy and inappropriate (imo) photo of PR posing at JB's grave. Vomit inducing.

ETA: It reminded me of Darlie Routier and the silly string.
Inappropriate and disturbing.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Exactly. Such claims are a red flag. This is an opinion based upon what? I have watched and enjoyed all of the movies referenced and I am a woman. It isn’t disrespectful to call out total BS. Those comments were not only ignorant but insulting. From what expertise or extensive research were these comments made? BS.

Clouded Truth you provide some of the best factual due diligence on this forum. To see you called out, when I know you have researched and have vetted your posts with the utmost integrity, makes me angry. And then to throw up ridiculous statements as to PR viewing habits with nothing to back it up.
PR was questioned about the movies in the spare room. I believe it was her recovery room. I'm too tired to find it but it's in Candy Rose's transcripts from LE.
To think that the FBI or BPD didn't pick up on the dialog from very popular movies at the time would be shocking.
Add in the movie posters and it wouldn't have been an avenue of the investigation to ignore. Regardless of what anyone thought of BPD, there were many many eyes on this case. JR always made them out to be Laurel and Hardy but he was scared 'shirtless'
to be interrogated by them.

 

[AddieBoo]

Well said. Thank you.

This poster did the same to me earlier. Posting partial quotes changes the context so that it can be manipulated. And that is exactly why the Ramseys lack credibility. It’s deceptive.

This is the strategy and I have seen it used over different platforms but unmistakably the same way.
It’s like it was part of the curriculum at John Ramsey Bot Farm University. IMO.

The biggest PR blunder of John Ramsey is that he thinks the public is stupid. That they are unable to detect deception or willing to believe anything a “good Christian Man” quoting scripture and forgiveness platitudes” will believe anything he tells them.
MOO

That RN seemed to be all about John. Pretty narcissistic imo. Jmo.
Does anyone else often wonder how many Ramsey supporters may actually be paid to do this?
JR certainly isn't above doing this.

His business was computers….
Maybe there should be an investigation into this. A legal investigation in the context of obstruction of justice over the coarse of 29 years….
MOO

 

[AddieBoo]

Agree.

However, when you only quote a small part of a single sentence, it’s very easy to manipulate that because you’ve taken away all context that was included in the entire sentence. Not cool.

Snipping an entire lengthy post to concentrate on one point contained in a single paragraph for example, is appropriate and understandable.

Surely we can discuss like adults without the snide little jabs.

I was responding directly to your post about the Ramsey's building a narrative that "That started with the RN, then the 911 call."

That's a direct accusation that they wrote the RN and faked the 911 call.

I don't buy into that conspiracy theory so that doesn't work for me.

Why don't we all dial it down a notch and be respectful to one

I didn't quote you out of context. I simply isolated the claim and explained why you had it wrong. Even if I'd quoted your entire post, it would still have been incorrect. Nothing was manipulated. You were just wrong.

There's a distinct "attack the messenger" thing going on here.

We're allowed to respectfully snip posts for focus, but if you prefer, I'll answer your posts in their entirety. It won't change anything.

At least I try to post sources when I make claims. Several posters here have been caught making unverifiable claims and when asked for sources to back them up -- they don't respond.

They don’t respond because you are not interested in this case IMO.
You are interested in being a provocateur.
Blanket statements like “you are just wrong” That is a patently rude and obnoxious comment. IMO
No one has been discourteous to you, they have pointed out facts and their opinions.
Just because you don’t believe John and Patsy Ramsey SA their child, cracked her skull, then strangled an unconscious six year old to death is only your issue.
And who are you to “catch anything” What? To report it to the Ramsey Bot Farm Police?
Seriously? Who are you?

 

[Ponytale]

Just my opinion but I don't think using the smaller portion of a post to directly address what anyone might want to address is a big deal. I think the key thing is to be sincere in a response and not deliberately try to "twist" the words into something that was never meant in the first place. To be clear, YOU do not do that, Ponytale. I've never seen you do that.

I enjoy reading your posts because even when you might disagree on something - your sincerity comes through crystal clear.

Thank you for clarifying! I see what you mean.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Clouded Truth you provide some of the best factual due diligence on this forum. To see you called out, when I know you have researched and have vetted your posts with the utmost integrity, makes me angry. And then to throw up ridiculous statements as to PR viewing habits with nothing to back it up.
PR was questioned about the movies in the spare room. I believe it was her recovery room. I'm too tired to find it but it's in Candy Rose's transcripts from LE.
To think that the FBI or BPD didn't pick up on the dialog from very popular movies at the time would be shocking.
Add in the movie posters and it wouldn't have been an avenue of the investigation to ignore. Regardless of what anyone thought of BPD, there were many many eyes on this case. JR always made them out to be Laurel and Hardy but he was scared 'shirtless'
to be interrogated by them.

Thank you for your very kind words, ispywithmylittleeye! I appreciate this very much.

 

[CloudedTruth]

This is the strategy and I have seen it used over different platforms but unmistakably the same way.
It’s like it was part of the curriculum at John Ramsey Bot Farm University. IMO.

The biggest PR blunder of John Ramsey is that he thinks the public is stupid. That they are unable to detect deception or willing to believe anything a “good Christian Man” quoting scripture and forgiveness platitudes” will believe anything he tells them.
MOO

His business was computers….
Maybe there should be an investigation into this. A legal investigation in the context of obstruction of justice over the coarse of 29 years….
MOO

LOLing at "John Ramsey Bot Farm University".

But you bring up a good point......there are definitely some recognizable elements or traits to some posts that are seen on multiple platforms where the Ramsey case is discussed. The same tired and worn talking points, citing Ramsey paid "experts" as credible sources, repeating things that are well known to be false and pushing misinformation. The prospect that these "bots" are paid is something I would not put past JR. And there is definitely a noticeable increase in "noise" about this case that stacks up with the Netflix documentary and all the recent interviews JR is giving, despite his statements to Dr. Phil a few years back that he would never do another interview about this case and that was the last time we were going to hear from him publicly. HA!!

JR definitely thinks he is smarter than everyone else and he thinks he's brilliant at pulling the wool over people's eyes. One of his most prominent narcissist traits that we see. His arrogance is always on display whenever he speaks publicly. He has fooled some people, notably Lou Smit who could not get past the "good Christian man" persona, which he let take over to the point where he lost all objectivity and has left his legacy lacking in credibility.

Justice in this case has been obstructed from day one. There are a few who share the blame for that, but certainly JR has engineered that train for all these years.

As always, just my thoughts, my opinion.....

 

[CloudedTruth]

Anyone else remember that creepy and inappropriate (imo) photo of PR posing at JB's grave. Vomit inducing.

ETA: It reminded me of Darlie Routier and the silly string.
Inappropriate and disturbing.

Yes!

I look at things like that and seriously wonder about the mindset of someone who posts stuff like that. How could they not see the creep factor that jumps off the screen? It literally stops you in your tracks.....

It is disturbing and that's one of my biggest questions about the R's.......someone has been jamming the airwaves here with comments about how hounded they were by the press, yadayadayada. But pictures like that posted publicly came from them. Why would you even take a picture like that to begin with, and secondly why post it anywhere to be seen publicly? It's like having the funeral filmed, why? Clearly exploitation of private moments while they complain about intrusion of the press. The hypocrisy is hard to ignore. And I find it to be very disturbing.

 

[proust20]

Umm...Wow...So someone really thinks that the parents of a little girl found murdered in their basement would not immediately want to find the killer?!? Such absurdity deserves no reply.

The 911 is replete with deception. First it's "a note". Then it's "a ransom note". Wrong word order. Patsy is overly polite. "Please, please." "We have a kidnapping." ought to be "There's been a kidnapping." "I'm THE mother." should be "I'm HER mother." (It is as if Patsy were casting herself in a play/movie.) "We JUST got up": "just" is an unnecessary and distancing word. Of course, Patsy failed to mention JonBenet by name. For whom are BPD to search? Instead, PR offered "She's blonde." For her finale, Patsy hung up on the operator. Thank you, Miss West Virginia.

The Rs could have contacted an attorney before placing the 911. We do not know for sure as their phone records, as well as their credit card records, were not produced. Cooperative? No special treatment? LOL Patsy did not turn over her attire from the 25th/26th until months afterwards. Why the reluctance?

For the benefit of the uninformed or misinformed, the GJ returned two inditements against each parent for child endangerment. What led them to this? I'll take a wild guess, and say that it was based on evidence. In doing so, they implicitly rejected LS's intruder thru the window fantasy.

Proponents of IDI do not have any evidence. There is zero, zilch, nada to connect FW, CW, LHP to the crime. If someone has pertinent FACTS related to that theory, let the world in on what you have unearthed.

Hollywood films are made for as large an audience as possible. Slasher films actually appeal more to women. The artistic tastes of females should not be generalized. Chacun a son gout.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

They don’t respond because you are not interested in this case IMO.
You are interested in being a provocateur.
Blanket statements like “you are just wrong” That is a patently rude and obnoxious comment. IMO
No one has been discourteous to you, they have pointed out facts and their opinions.
Just because you don’t believe John and Patsy Ramsey SA their child, cracked her skull, then strangled an unconscious six year old to death is only your issue.
And who are you to “catch anything” What? To report it to the Ramsey Bot Farm Police?
Seriously? Who are you?

People also don't respond when posts have been discussed ad nauseum but the poster then

Clouded Truth you provide some of the best factual due diligence on this forum. To see you called out, when I know you have researched and have vetted your posts with the utmost integrity, makes me angry. And then to throw up ridiculous statements as to PR viewing habits with nothing to back it up.
PR was questioned about the movies in the spare room. I believe it was her recovery room. I'm too tired to find it but it's in Candy Rose's transcripts from LE.
To think that the FBI or BPD didn't pick up on the dialog from very popular movies at the time would be shocking.
Add in the movie posters and it wouldn't have been an avenue of the investigation to ignore. Regardless of what anyone thought of BPD, there were many many eyes on this case. JR always made them out to be Laurel and Hardy but he was scared 'shirtless'
to be interrogated by them.

Here is the transcript. I wonder what movies were out of place?

 

[snarast]

It's highly unlikely PR would have watched the movies quoted in the ransom note. It's unlikely most females would enjoy those movies, but especially not PR, who was wrapped up in being a social butterfly.

Totally out of her wheelhouse.

MOO

Oh many women do like those movies. That said, I can’t imagine PR being involved in writing that note. Because it’s basically satirical comedy - not the sort of thing you can generally spout when your child just died.

IMHO

 

[Soulmagent]

Just.
Is a distancing word?
I guess it just doesn't have any other vocabulary uses.
Not until you look up the Latin root word to try to figure out if facts are facts ,or 101 psyche class teachers don't have much to offer ,if N they didn't learn.

 

[WhoKnowsWhat]

Every time I hear Patsy “ran” up that spiral staircase, I question how feasible that was — I mean apart from how she maneuvered over the step on which the RN was *supposedly* spread, something for which we have only her word. How fit was she? We know she was weakened by cancer treatments that ended two years previously. Have we heard that she was engaged thereafter in strength-building, exercise, or fitness activities of any kind? I just don’t buy that whole staircase scenario. I’d love to hear opinions on this.

On Dr Phil, Burke said no one but he and his friends used the spiral staircase. JA said he would have thought the ransom note would have been left on the main staircase.

 

[Tricia]

The server upgrade took a bit longer than we thought, but there was never any doubt. Websleuths is back and STRONGER than ever.
If you enjoy what we do on Websleuths and don't want to see those obnoxious advertisements return, please take a moment and subscribe to DNA SOLVES.COM. By subscribing and making a monthly donation, you can be assured we can continue to improve your Websleuths experience. CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE TO DNA SOLVES

 

[concernedcitizen706]

In my mind it's clear what happened. I believe it has something to do with the neighbors. And their children. And that's what they were trying to cover up. I'm not sure how much more I can post on it because I would probably need more proof rather than speculation. But if you look at it like they were trying to cover something up, then all the further actions make sense.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

I'm also just trying to think how saliva gets on an object. We don't usually lick too many objects. I guess we can lick our fingers and then our fingers get on the object. This could be like napkins. I mean other than napkins, and tissues, I can't think of too many objects that we get our saliva on. So I'm just trying to think what item could have gotten on JonBenet to get the saliva DNA there, and how did it get there.

 

[snooptroop88]

LOLing at "John Ramsey Bot Farm University".

But you bring up a good point......there are definitely some recognizable elements or traits to some posts that are seen on multiple platforms where the Ramsey case is discussed. The same tired and worn talking points, citing Ramsey paid "experts" as credible sources, repeating things that are well known to be false and pushing misinformation. The prospect that these "bots" are paid is something I would not put past JR. And there is definitely a noticeable increase in "noise" about this case that stacks up with the Netflix documentary and all the recent interviews JR is giving, despite his statements to Dr. Phil a few years back that he would never do another interview about this case and that was the last time we were going to hear from him publicly. HA!!

JR definitely thinks he is smarter than everyone else and he thinks he's brilliant at pulling the wool over people's eyes. One of his most prominent narcissist traits that we see. His arrogance is always on display whenever he speaks publicly. He has fooled some people, notably Lou Smit who could not get past the "good Christian man" persona, which he let take over to the point where he lost all objectivity and has left his legacy lacking in credibility.

Justice in this case has been obstructed from day one. There are a few who share the blame for that, but certainly JR has engineered that train for all these years.

As always, just my thoughts, my opinion.....

There's so much discussion about how JonBenet's father is pushing for the DNA, that's going to solve the whole thing. And this has been going on for years, I very much get the impression from what's available in MSM that Jonbenet's father wants this perp apprehended-- desperately.

How does this square with his post-crime reaction of "forgiveness" for this same perp? Yes, I suppose it can square, but it's not a very easy process. Just in a vacuum, chasing down of a perp for decades doesn't seem like action that would be taken by someone who in the immediate aftermath of the crime-- when emotions are obviously very raw and the psychological wounds are very fresh-- wants "forgiveness" for the perp.

I find that difficult to reconcile. Not impossible, but difficult.

 

[concernedcitizen706]

So I was thinking how saliva could have gotten on an object. So I'm thinking, the worker, probably foreign, as I hear the DNA shows possible Hispanic background, was either eating or smoking, while they were assembling their items. So maybe while they were working, as they don't get much breaks, they were eating, licked their fingers after, and then they wiped their fingers on like their apron. But I noticed, when you wipe your fingers, if you don't wipe everywhere, you're still going to have wet areas like in between the fingers and on certain other areas. And then they continued to work. Getting some saliva on their items. Because those items were then packaged in plastic, they were well preserved. And then the perp opened up that package of tissues or cloths, or maybe clothing like the underwear, and then last minute, used that cloth item to grab on to the paintbrush and other areas like the long johns, to make some last minute adjustments.

The perp was probably foreign, because they probably would have found a closer match with ancestral DNA by now.

 

[imaxfli78]

Nope. You are wrong. No Ramsey ever had any idea who did it. I offered to show John, but he doesn't wanna know.