James Kolar's book giveaway

[cynic]

James Kolar's book, Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet?, is being offered by James for free on Amazon.
It is a limited-time offer available from Dec. 23rd to Dec 25th.

 

[ipse425]

I recall an interview with Lin Wood, the Ramsey's lawyer who said this book was self-published so he did not bother to sue him.

 

[887sMtreme]

I recall an interview with Lin Wood, the Ramsey's lawyer who said this book was self-published so he did not bother to sue him.

Because there’d be no money in it. Wood has his priorities.

 

[Tricia]

Please, everyone. Get James Kolar's book. There was no intruder. Who killed JBR? I have no idea, but IMO, there was no intruder.

 

[Mr.Dandy]

Hmm I don’t have a kindle.

 

[Slebby]

Hmm I don’t have a kindle.

You can get the kindle app on your phone or tablet.

 

[bugis]

It's good to read the three major books on the case in addition to the available police reports and police interviews with the Ramseys in order to come to one's own informed opinion on the case.

I think James Kolar had his heart in the right place but I don't think his book is a good analysis of what likely happened in this case. There are several important factual inaccuracies and misleading reports in the book as well as major leaps of logic and a large omission of relevant facts and arguments that were put forward by Steve Thomas and others. I plan on writing and sharing a detailed review of the book in which I'll analyze the arguments and evidence that Kolar puts forward and I'll compare it with the evidence and arguments that Thomas puts forward in his book. There is a clear difference in their style of reasoning and reporting of evidence.

In my opinion, Kolar's book has really damaged the case by dividing the camp of people who understand that the Ramseys are obviously involved in a cover-up into separate camps in which JonBenét's murder is framed as a whodunnit mystery as if equally valid and strong arguments can be made for either of the three Ramseys. I think this is clearly not true and has helped take attention away from the person most implicated in JonBenét's death by evidence: Patsy Ramsey.

That said, Kolar did have access to many materials that the public doesn't have access to and his book does contain several interesting tidbits of information that can be found nowhere else so it's still recommended reading. But don't think his suggestive style of reasoning brings you closer to the truth.

 

[887sMtreme]

Hmm I don’t have a kindle.

You don’t need it. Just download the free app.

 

[Slebby]

It's good to read the three major books on the case in addition to the available police reports and police interviews with the Ramseys in order to come to one's own informed opinion on the case.

I think James Kolar had his heart in the right place but I don't think his book is a good analysis of what likely happened in this case. There are several important factual inaccuracies and misleading reports in the book as well as major leaps of logic and a large omission of relevant facts and arguments that were put forward by Steve Thomas and others. I plan on writing and sharing a detailed review of the book in which I'll analyze the arguments and evidence that Kolar puts forward and I'll compare it with the evidence and arguments that Thomas puts forward in his book. There is a clear difference in their style of reasoning and reporting of evidence.

In my opinion, Kolar's book has really damaged the case by dividing the camp of people who understand that the Ramseys are obviously involved in a cover-up into separate camps in which JonBenét's murder is framed as a whodunnit mystery as if equally valid and strong arguments can be made for either of the three Ramseys. I think this is clearly not true and has helped take attention away from the person most implicated in JonBenét's death by evidence: Patsy Ramsey.

That said, Kolar did have access to many materials that the public doesn't have access to and his book does contain several interesting tidbits of information that can be found nowhere else so it's still recommended reading. But don't think his suggestive style of reasoning brings you closer to the truth.

I just finished Kolar’s book which I picked for free on Kindle.
I agree 100 percent that Kolar’s heart was in the right place, just like Steve Thomas. I really feel for these guys. I’m glad I read it.
Imo

 

[ipse425]

Because there’d be no money in it. Wood has his priorities.

Wood does not work for himself, he represents the Ramseys and sues those who try to defame them and secures judgments in the millions.
I don't think Kolar has millions to lose in a lawsuit.

 

[887sMtreme]

Wood does not work for himself, he represents the Ramseys and sues those who try to defame them and secures judgments in the millions.
I don't think Kolar has millions to lose in a lawsuit.

Wood clearly spoke for himself in that interview. And btw, he no longer represents any client; to avoid being disbarred, he voluntarily surrendered his law license and retired. Let’s not ascribe lofty ethics to him.

 

[AuDHD]

just read it after picking it up for free with my kindle unlimited account (thx for that!)

I’ve now read several books on the JBR case (*see attached pic) and I found this one to be the most informative and to the point regarding the DA’s office reluctance to prosecute or even investigate the Ramseys.

I have tried to read books that espoused varying theories so I could more reasonably make a determination on what I thought most probable. Only one I couldnt get past the first chapter of was The Unheard Call (the one where a woman is convinced that her ex boyfriend did it). I never bothered with the Ramsey’s book, for obvious reasons. I have also read threads in here & media reports so have seen many a point argued and refuted…

Anyway, I think I’ve finally chosen a camp! I now believe Burke inflicted the blow to the head (intentionally or accidentally, I’m not sure, and it looks like under Colorado law it wouldn’t have mattered much bc children under 10 could not be prosecuted).
From there it was decided that Patsy would take on the task of covering up the crime with the goal of causing as much misdirection and confusion as possible. Why? bc Patsy didn’t have much time left to live and she wasn’t going to lose Burke, too. (paraphrased from her comments to police during burke’s social services interview). Post- cancer treatments for that stage of cancer, it could be said she was already ‘on borrowed time.’

She/ possibly both parents jointly would have reasoned that they couldn’t possibly let John go down for this crime. He needed to be as far removed from it as possible in order to maintain their lifestyle, pay for attorneys and care for Burke after Patsy passes.

This is why Patsy’s DNA was on the garrote etc but john’s was not. I think they had Patsy do as much as possible with the staging, even potentially the final tightening of the garrote etc.

Patsy was the clear author of the ransom note (in her hand writing, in her linguistic style, composed on her notepad). The second (final) draft of the letter was addressed only to John, painting him as the victim of a kidnapping plot perpetrated by business associates who are angry at his success. I’m not a psychologist but perhaps this edit was made to further point suspicion away from John and make him more sympathetic to media etc.

The note reads to me as overly familiar. Like, the writer is personally irritated with john, but also respects him and has concern for him. eg (paraphrased) “Make sure you get enough sleep” I’m not sure anyone outside of their mom, their doctor, or their spouse, in the history of the universe has shown concern for someone’s sleep. Certainly odd to show this concern for someone they’re deliberately trying to hurt by kidnapping and ransoming that person’s child. I’m (sarcastically) surprised that such a caring kidnapper didn’t leave a continental breakfast and a bottle of Xanax to help John get through the day.

The sign off of “SBTC victory!” and the fact that Patsy claimed not to have read past the second sentence of the note but recited the closing to it on the 911 call perfectly.

It did surprise me that she made the ransom amount so low given that she’s so concerned with appearances (couldn't it look to outsiders as tho they weren’t as rich as they were?) So, I
pondered that awhile…

I think bc she knew that this kidnapping ruse wouldn’t last very long, she picked an amount she knew they had easy access to and could produce that day with a simple stop at the bank. It being his year end bonus, it probably had recently hit their checking account and they hadn’t yet had the chance to move it around, invest it, etc. So the amount was chosen for their convenience, should they find themselves having to actually go through the motions of filling up an attaché.

But back to patsy as the patsy- they wouldve (correctly) assumed that if they could make the evidence point most to patsy of anyone in the house, then even if the DA was keen to prosecute the frail, bereaved, cancer patient mother (with the fancy legal team) they could stall prosecutors for probably years with motions etc and by the time any trial would begin, Patsy would be either frail or have passed on naturally. I mean, absolute worst case scenario she’d close out her last year in some cushy federal joint or hospital. But burke & john needed to keep going, they had lives ahead of them.

That’s what I think. So maybe Patsy tightened that garrote or maybe burke had done that too (as Kolar seems to think).

My questions for yall

1.If you think Burke inflicted the head injury, who actually tightened the garrote?
2. If the grand jury had concluded that burke struck his sister but couldn’t be prosecuted due to age, might that explain the recommendation to prosecute the ramsey parents for “putting her in harms way” (i forget the exact charge)?