JBR, PR and UMI

[WHITEFANG]

I fully understand how they were their own worst enemies as far as public perception of them was concerned. I didn't see and hear a lot of what went on after the murder (TV, tabloid, etc), but there are parallels with the Chamberlain case here. They too were frequently interviewed on TV and parents, especially the mother, came across as cold and calculating. People could not reconcile her behaviour with someone whose baby had been taken and most likely eaten by a dingo. One TV interview especially (some time after) probably clinched it, with LC showing no emotion as she described in detail how she thought the dingo had killed and dismembered her baby.

The difference between the two was the Rs had money, the Cs had religion (he was a Pastor) and in people's minds, they similarly thought themselves immune from prosecution. The depth of feeling against LC both in the public's and Police's perception gave them a 'let's get 'em' attitude. The investigation and the forensic evidence were similarly suspect. The only difference here is that the body was never found but despite this LC was convicted of murder and spent quite a few years in jail before being cleared and freed (with a nice little compensation pay out as well).

Regardless, there would be a large percentage of people who were around when all this happened who still believe LDI. Her years in jail did not soften her image.

So yes, I understand how an image presented can sway both the public but more importantly the Police and direct their investigations right from the beginning. That's what I think the main problem was here with the Rs and if as HOTYH suggested, there had been an RDI and an IDI team, each independent of the other, the evidence we have to work with would likely have been very different.

Apparently, they heeded the advice of their lawyers, too, who may not always be as devoted to the management of public image and perception as other professionals.


JonBenet was cute, blond and wore make-up during a number of public performances; She was dressed in expensive, custom tailored outfits, appearing to be older or trying to appear older; She danced and sang before audiences, all at six years of age. Apparently, some people interpreted these gigs as ostentatious displays of a mother's gloating, selfish ego, even to the point of exploiting a voyeuristic, sexual, mystique of some kind.


A certain bias/envy/resentment/suspiciousness against/of the wealthy, especially the newly rich, played a part in the country's love to hate this woman, too, I think. Again, make Joni a girl scout, dressed in a hand-me-down uniform, the child of working class parents, struggling to make ends meet, and they would have faced less public outrage.

 

[MurriFlower]

Apparently, they heeded the advice of their lawyers, too, who may not always be as devoted to the management of public image and perception as other professionals.

No true, judging by the perception of Lawyers in general and expressions on this forum about the image projected by the Rs Lawyer(s) in particular.

JonBenet was cute, blond and wore make-up during a number of public performances; She was dressed in expensive, custom tailored outfits, appearing to be older or trying to appear older; She danced and sang before audiences, all at six years of age. Apparently, some people interpreted these gigs as ostentatious displays of a mother's gloating, selfish ego, even to the point of exploiting a voyeuristic, sexual, mystique of some kind.

Ah yes, 'every man's dream'. Innocence of a child with the looks of a hooker.

A certain bias/envy/resentment/suspiciousness against/of the wealthy, especially the newly rich, played a part in the country's love to hate this woman, too, I think. Again, make Joni a girl scout, dressed in a hand-me-down uniform, the child of working class parents, struggling to make ends meet, and they would have faced less public outrage.

Hmm, yes, BUT... Parents who are irresponsible, addicted to substances, with a history of abuse, who are slovenly, lazy and simply unfit to be parents receive more sympathy than these two. I can't help but wonder if it is something to do with this forum that encourages a "parents did it" mentality. I commented on the MMcC forum earlier and as it has been suspended I cannot see what has happened, but it appears her parents are also being held responsible by some on there as well. I guess it was naive of me to think this was just a 'who done it' forum where everyone is dedicated to solving these old murders by re-examining the available evidence.

 

[WHITEFANG]

No true, judging by the perception of Lawyers in general and expressions on this forum about the image projected by the Rs Lawyer(s) in particular.

Ah yes, 'every man's dream'. Innocence of a child with the looks of a hooker.

Hmm, yes, BUT... Parents who are irresponsible, addicted to substances, with a history of abuse, who are slovenly, lazy and simply unfit to be parents receive more sympathy than these two. I can't help but wonder if it is something to do with this forum that encourages a "parents did it" mentality. I commented on the MMcC forum earlier and as it has been suspended I cannot see what has happened, but it appears her parents are also being held responsible by some on there as well. I guess it was naive of me to think this was just a 'who done it' forum where everyone is dedicated to solving these old murders by re-examining the available evidence.

I don't get it, either. She was a little kid in a Halloween costume to me. Our culture has been on a steady decline morally for some time. While some say overall crime rates are down, you could have fooled me.

Parents, statistically, may commit more crimes against their children than adults who are not related. I think Super has referred to those kinds of facts. And, while that may be true, obviously it doesn't mean they have to be guilty when a child is harmed.

 

[DeeDee249]

I would be just as suspicious of poor, slovenly, addicted parents if the acted the same way. It is not because the Rs are wealthy that they are viewed the way they are. But I will say that the average person of modest means looking at this case sees their wealth as a means to hire pricy lawyers who can work as many billable hours as needed to prevent their clients from being charged with the crime. And that would be true of any wealthy person facing serious criminal charges. Look how many members of the Kennedy family have avoided prosecution for serious crimes. I can name several right off the bat.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Apparently, they heeded the advice of their lawyers, too, who may not always be as devoted to the management of public image and perception as other professionals.


JonBenet was cute, blond and wore make-up during a number of public performances; She was dressed in expensive, custom tailored outfits, appearing to be older or trying to appear older; She danced and sang before audiences, all at six years of age. Apparently, some people interpreted these gigs as ostentatious displays of a mother's gloating, selfish ego, even to the point of exploiting a voyeuristic, sexual, mystique of some kind.

Should be a harmless activity for little girls. Like playing with dolls or something.


A certain bias/envy/resentment/suspiciousness against/of the wealthy, especially the newly rich, played a part in the country's love to hate this woman, too, I think. Again, make Joni a girl scout, dressed in a hand-me-down uniform, the child of working class parents, struggling to make ends meet, and they would have faced less public outrage.

The RN author eludes to status, therefore it was likely a factor. Probably the perp had a certain bais/envy/resentment/suspiciousness against/of the wealthy, and of this country too.

Just a hunch...

 

[WHITEFANG]

That person is either no longer living, or is still here among us. I believe if that person is still among the living, someone close to them knows or suspects. Usually, people in that capacity are extremely defensive and protective, pointing everywhere else but to the obvious. They often are so extremely defensive that they can seem ill themselves.

For all but the most extreme sociopaths, having committed this kind of crime will eat at their gut continually


Sociopaths do not have consciences. WF


Spellcheck me please Fang. I'm feeling a little lazy today. Feel free to add the correct punctuation also. I see that I'm leaving that out too.[/QUOTE]

 

[MurriFlower]

That person is either no longer living, or is still here among us. I believe if that person is still among the living, someone close to them knows or suspects. Usually, people in that capacity are extremely defensive and protective, pointing everywhere else but to the obvious. They often are so extremely defensive that they can seem ill themselves.

For all but the most extreme sociopaths, having committed this kind of crime will eat at their gut continually

Sociopaths do not have consciences. WF

Spellcheck me please Fang. I'm feeling a little lazy today. Feel free to add the correct punctuation also. I see that I'm leaving that out too.

There are other options WF.

1. If this was a SFF, then the Victory! will indicate a 'war'. Not saying that those who engage in war do not suffer regret, but for the small number of people for whom killing is a tool in a terrorist battle, conscience may be overridden by zeal.

2. If this was an extortion attempt gone wrong, (by a little family group), then it will be harder to keep together. However, fear of being caught and (all) going to jail will make it easier to stay quiet. That and the fact they did not get anything out of it ($$) to fight over!

 

[WHITEFANG]

We see murders committed everyday by both mothers and fathers whose signs of mental illness were ignored...I have changed my life to care for a granddaughter. Her mother is exceptionally bright, creative, fun, charming, kind, compassionate, etc., except when she is stressed, and then her mental illness makes it dangerous for my granddaughter to be left in her care. We could just ignore this and act as though it doesn't happen because no one ever sees these actions in public.

How does she avoid stress when she is around her friends and in public? Is her mental illness in complete remission when she isn't stressed? Are you able to tell us what her mental illness is? WF

Her close friends are not around when the worst behaviors happen. However, she is in the care of highly qualified psychiatrists, and they tell us to be vigilant and not leave her alone with her child when she is stressed.

 

[WHITEFANG]

There are other options WF.

1. If this was a SFF, then the Victory! will indicate a 'war'. Not saying that those who engage in war do not suffer regret, but for the small number of people for whom killing is a tool in a terrorist battle, conscience may be overridden by zeal.

2. If this was an extortion attempt gone wrong, (by a little family group), then it will be harder to keep together. However, fear of being caught and (all) going to jail will make it easier to stay quiet. That and the fact they did not get anything out of it ($$) to fight over!

Maybe we got off the track? My point is this. A sociopath, by definition, does not have a conscience, whether or not he is extremely sociopathic.

 

[MurriFlower]

Maybe we got off the track? My point is this. A sociopath, by definition, does not have a conscience, whether or not he is extremely sociopathic.

Ok, hmm, was this maybe a quote from someone else? You might have to master the little quote thingo at the top (looks like a cartoon "speak balloon") to avoid confusion.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Ok, hmm, was this maybe a quote from someone else? You might have to master the little quote thingo at the top (looks like a cartoon "speak balloon") to avoid confusion.

Yes, it was.

I'm trying the balloon thing. Let's see.

 

[OneLove]

How does she avoid stress when she is around her friends and in public? Is her mental illness in complete remission when she isn't stressed? Are you able to tell us what her mental illness is? WF

Welcome back, WhiteFang.

My daughter-in-law's mental disorders are Bipolar I with Psychosis, Borderline Personality Disorder, and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

When she is around friends and in public, it is usually because she is enjoying herself and having fun, which is, in and of itself, a stress reliever. It is also my opinion, based on long-term observations, that these are the people she does not want to see her behaving badly because they are less likely to be as "long-suffering" and tolerant as her close family members. But that is a personal opinion. Being asymptomatic for periods of time is not the same thing as remission. Think of chronic conditions, such as arthritis, lupus, fibromyalgia.

And about my nasty little tirade directed at you that you referenced earlier: it was in direct response to your attack on me personally, an important distinction, a sad little tit-for-tat. It was an old 'behavior modification' technique pulled out of a dusty old file drawer lost in time long ago, with the hope that you would quit with nastiness and focus more on the subject matter. I'm well aware of the birdwalking away from the issue that is used by attorneys (sp :biggrin when the truth is near and the prior argument is indefensible. I respect your intelligence and love the witty repartee, but I simply like you much better when the scathing cynicism is absent. Really. I also am particularly sensitive, not just here in this forum, but in all of life, to hypocrisy that says "I can act any way I want, but how DARE you do the same thing." It is a prevalent attitude, for what it is worth, in bipolars, borderlines, narcissists, and the overriding hallmark of grandiosity. Pointing out the hypocrisy to these folks allows them to recognize it and change. Most people, instead of pointing out the hypocrisy, duck and run because they don't want to deal with the raging temper tantrums that usually follow in the attempt to avoid the real issue at hand.

In any case, Murri's comment was a direct insult to people's THEORIES, OPINIONS, and BELIEFS, not a response to rude or obnoxious conduct and behaviors directed at her. I stand by my statement that it was rude, uncalled for, and has no place here. My statement to YOU probably had no place here either, but it was a direct retort to bullying behavior that needed to be refocused on the subject at hand.

People stating their theories can in no way be perceived as "bullying" or personal attacks on anyone, no matter the theory they support or question. Sometimes, people even find something that causes them to change which theories they 'believe'. Me, well, I'm not a believer at all. I'm just a questioner. There is only one truth. It is what it is. I don't know what it is.

Glad to have you back. Really. And I hope it stays that way.

 

[WHITEFANG]

My daughter-in-law's mental disorders are Bipolar I with Psychosis, Borderline Personality Disorder, and Narcissistic Personality Disorder.

no one ever sees these actions in public.

It is also my opinion, based on long-term observations, that these are the people she does not want to see her behaving badly

She has sufficient self-control over these mental illnesses to be able to hide them from her friends and the public?

 

[BBB167893]

I don't get it, either. She was a little kid in a Halloween costume to me.

Fang, think about this. A Halloween costume is worn one time a year by a kid to have fun. That's worlds apart from this. Think about all the time and the money that went into JB's pageant life. We're talking dozens of hours and thousands of dollars here. NOBODY puts that kind of emotional investment into their kid purely for the kid's sake. No way, man.

Parents, statistically, may commit more crimes against their children than adults who are not related. I think Super has referred to those kinds of facts.

You bet.

And, while that may be true, obviously it doesn't mean they have to be guilty when a child is harmed.

Of course not. But if you compare this to the cases where someone really did break into a house and kidnap a child, it's the difference between night and day, in every sense.

 

[WHITEFANG]

John Douglas FBI profiler
Douglas: And here is a young child, such force cracking her skull. This is not a crime of parents. Parents certainly kill. But not these kinds of parents.

Indeed, Douglas says, even when parents commit murder, it’s not usually as horrific as the scene at the Ramsey’s.

The Ramseys described to Douglas the horrific details of what they said happened in those next few frantic moments.

Douglas: It was a real emotional scene for the family, putting the child in front of the Christmas tree as they’re trying to rub the skin, the body is cold, the mother’s hysterical, the father’s hysterical, the minister is there, neighbors running in and out, so there really isn’t a crime scene...

The desperate rescue attempt, which completely contaminated any evidence at the scene, painted a picture of a family in agony, Douglas said, and he told Dateline this week that he couldn’t believe the Ramseys he encountered in his interview were capable of such brutality.

Douglas: When parents kill, there’s generally a softening of the crime scene. Where they take a blanket, cover up the child, roll the child over, face down or something like that. The child was found, JonBenet was face up. Her hands were tied together. Her head was off to the side. She had a piece of duct tape over her mouth.

And now, looking back nine and half years later, Douglas can’t shake the conclusions he first made about the case:

Douglas: I came to a very quick resolution that they’re barking up the wrong tree. This investigation is going in the wrong direction here.

 

[OneLove]

She has sufficient self-control over these mental illnesses to be able to hide them from her friends and the public?

Generally speaking, yes. This was not so true when she was teenage and young adult. But after losing many friends over time, she seems to have become more able to exert willpower over her actions in very specific circumstances. I watched this up close and personal before and after her most recent hospital commitment this winter. It sure seemed to me that behaviors (not necessarily internal thought patterns, but the outward behaviors) were better controlled by WHO she was around than by the medications she was administered. I have to say, watching this has made me sit back and reconsider what I have been taught by the book.

I think a somewhat similar thing in a milder form is when a person may be in the habit of treating store clerks and wait staff shabbily, as they are annonymous, but being nothing but angelic sweetness to those considered 'important' to their security, happiness, and/or wellbeing. This kind of vague Jekyll and Hyde switching should be a clue to be wary and observant around these folks. Might just be bad manners; might be UMI,lol. You never really know unless you happen to be the one treating them professionally. :twocents:

 

[BBB167893]

She has sufficient self-control over these mental illnesses to be able to hide them from her friends and the public?

Sort of like how alcoholics can make you think nothing's wrong.

 

[BBB167893]

John Douglas FBI profiler
Douglas: And here is a young child, such force cracking her skull. This is not a crime of parents. Parents certainly kill. But not these kinds of parents.

Indeed, Douglas says, even when parents commit murder, it’s not usually as horrific as the scene at the Ramsey’s.

The Ramseys described to Douglas the horrific details of what they said happened in those next few frantic moments.

Douglas: It was a real emotional scene for the family, putting the child in front of the Christmas tree as they’re trying to rub the skin, the body is cold, the mother’s hysterical, the father’s hysterical, the minister is there, neighbors running in and out, so there really isn’t a crime scene...

The desperate rescue attempt, which completely contaminated any evidence at the scene, painted a picture of a family in agony, Douglas said, and he told Dateline this week that he couldn’t believe the Ramseys he encountered in his interview were capable of such brutality.

Douglas: When parents kill, there’s generally a softening of the crime scene. Where they take a blanket, cover up the child, roll the child over, face down or something like that. The child was found, JonBenet was face up. Her hands were tied together. Her head was off to the side. She had a piece of duct tape over her mouth.

And now, looking back nine and half years later, Douglas can’t shake the conclusions he first made about the case:

Douglas: I came to a very quick resolution that they’re barking up the wrong tree. This investigation is going in the wrong direction here.

Fang, you might as well have not brought this up. Douglas made a fool out of himself on this case, and weathered a storm of criticism from his colleagues over his lack of professionalism. He took the Rs at their word without studying any evidence and threw an "everybody's wrong but me" tantrum when others pointed out his failings. As ST points out in his book, Douglas came breezing through like he knew everything and denied his own writings in order to give his clients a pass. Case in point:

Douglas: When parents kill, there’s generally a softening of the crime scene. Where they take a blanket, cover up the child,

AHEM!

Douglas: And here is a young child, such force cracking her skull. This is not a crime of parents. Parents certainly kill. But not these kinds of parents.

That kind of thinking is exactly what poisoned this case from the beginning. It has no place in the legal system.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Fang, you might as well have not brought this up. Douglas made a fool out of himself on this case, and weathered a storm of criticism from his colleagues over his lack of professionalism. He took the Rs at their word without studying any evidence and threw an "everybody's wrong but me" tantrum when others pointed out his failings. As ST points out in his book, Douglas came breezing through like he knew everything and denied his own writings in order to give his clients a pass. Case in point:

Ad hominem.

 

[WHITEFANG]

If JonBenét was hit on the head first there would be some length of time between the time you would even think of staging this crime - then you would have to go out and you would have to find duct tape, you would have to find cord and you would have to construct a garrote and you would have to tie her hands, and you would have to bring her down into the basement. That would have taken all that time to do this, there would have been massive bleeding. So, it's ludicrous even to think the head blow came first. That did not happen. The head blow came last, almost at the time of death. Lou Smit

LOU SMIT - Somebody brutally bludgeoned JonBenét that night. This is a brutal massive head wound. Head wounds normally bleed very profusely. If someone is hit on the head with any force at all it will either swell or it will bruise or it will bleed. In the case of JonBenét, even the coroner did not see a head wound. There was no swelling, there was no bleeding that was visible, there was no bruising.

Parents don't kill in that manner. They bash, they throw the child down, they hit them on the head and they do things of that nature. And what makes me believe this is also probably a sexual kind of killing is that there, there is an object that's jammed through the vagina of the child because blood is drawn. And that's not something a parent does, let alone a mother.

Garroting requires a deliberation, you have to think about it, you have to throw the rope around the neck. In this particular case you had to create an exact kind of knot, he had to twist the knot, all while that child is still alive. Most of the time that's a sexual kind of killing.

BOB RUSSELL - We spent five or six hours going through some of the evidence and the pictures he has and at that time I became convinced that the Ramseys didn't do this.

Russel's view is widely respected. He's an expert on violent crimes against children. He was spokesman for the US National District Attorney's Association on the subject.




Super, remove the request you attributed to me.

MIKE DOBERSEN - Lou had found a weapon with characteristics which fit as exactly as you could expect, the injuries on JonBenét's body.

NARRATOR - Since then, Mike Dobersen has conducted experiments on anaesthetized pigs. The Tazer stun gun exactly replicated the injuries on JonBenét and the distance, 3.5 centimeters, between those injuries.

LOU SMIT AT COMPUTER - First of all, it was done in a very calm and controlled way. The person was not writing in panic. I have interviewed many many murderers - and even psychopaths, after a murder they're extremely agitated. It is very difficult for them even to sit down. In my estimation there is just absolutely no way that they could have written that note after that murder. I believe that this note was written before the murder.

Bill Ritter: This is an investigation that you could still pick up tomorrow and work and the less the public knows about intimate details more likely you are to apprehend the killer or killers.


The killer could have entered through an unlocked door or with a key. Could have left through a door. WF

Laying low?

Under assault by a national and international media feeding frenzy, some of whom were offered incentives to find (even stimulate) headline attention grabbing material, the Ramsey's did their best to handle this predatory onslaught, a Pearl Harbor like attack on their dignity and privacy, on their essence as human beings. No one is trained how to cope with that kind of pressure. They were stripped naked before a world-wide audience, in a vacuum of, in the absence of and total disregard for America's honored tradition of common decency. "Innocent until proven guilty," a long held sacred tenet of our coveted way of life in the land of the free, left on a train for the coast (along with the Holy Ghost). There was no way to prepare for it.

As if that wasn't more than enough unwanted pressure, at the very same time they were left grieving from the shocking, brutal murder of their youngest child. Under siege, this marauding mass of character assassins and hooligans, on orders from powerful media conglomerates' executives, (businessmen relaxing and imbibing spirits in penthouse luxury, thousands of miles away) aimed their lust for dark gossip and profit, directly at wounded parents. And the citizens of the Home of the Brave ate it up with every news account screeching across amber waves of grain, Lincoln and Washington turning over in their graves. It was a media bonanza.