Mr. Clean v. The State and The Tabloids

[why_nutt]

If you are guilty you need a lawyer. If you are innocent, you need a good lawyer.

48 hours after JonBenet was found dead, Don and Nedra Paugh did not lawyer up. Pam Paugh did not lawyer up. Patsy's sister Polly and her husband Grant did not lawyer up. John's brother Jeff did not lawyer up. The Whites did not, the Fernies did not, Reverend Hoverstock did not, Dr. Beuf did not, the McReynolds did not, the Pughs did not, the Stantons did not, the Barnhills did not, Glen Meyer did not, Chris Wolf did not, Gary Oliva did not. Even Mike Bynum, who advised the Ramseys to get a lawyer, did not himself get a lawyer to protect his interests as a person who would be called as a witness to the events of December 26th. Why do you think all these people, even Bynum, refused to lawyer up? Might it be because they all knew they were innocent, even Bynum, and therefore they knew their innocence was a better shield than any lawyer, at least until such time as criminal charges were imminent and realistically on the horizon?

 

[why_nutt]

Quite simply because it challenges the parents' accounts of events. They say she was fast asleep at 9-ish and was put straight to bed. They left for the Whites at 4.30-ish which means that if she ate the pineapple BEFORE going to the Whites, then she must have died very soon after she came home - which could mean ... when the Ramseys were still up and about.

It also means that in the approximately four to five hours JonBenet was at the White house, her body was stubbornly refusing to digest a few chunks of pineapple. This would tend to indicate a severe malnutrition problem, since a body cannot extract the vitamins and minerals present in food until it has been digested. If JonBenet could not digest a few chunks of pineapple, her GI tract surely would have been overwhelmed for days had she eaten a full meal. And yet, this is what Ramsey defenders want us to believe.

 

[Toth]

The cops were not leveling their sights at all those people you listed, just the parents.

 

[K777angel]

I said nothing about a conspiracy.
He simply should have determined what the substance was based on his training and the tests he performed without any suggestions as to what it might be.
AFTER he has made a determination, then it can be noted that pineapple in the intestines might have been ingested at the home since a bowl of pineapple was found there, albeit it may have been put out by the witness advocate.

I didn't say you said anything about a conspiracy. My point is that you must believe there was a conspiracy the way you dismiss, discredit and discount each and every professional involved in this case that does not see evidence as pointing to an intruder. According to you - the cops are all idiots, the forensic experts are goons and not to be believed, the FBI is just out to get the Ramseys and in cahoots with the local police, detectives on the scene that morning are crazy and any observations they made are simply not to be believed if they were not favorable observations toward the Ramseys, forensic pathologists and pediatric specialists consulted in this case
are all inept, inferior and wacko to suggest what they see things in the evidence and in the facts that might cast suspicion on the Ramseys. On and on. You have NO evidence that Coroner Meyers did NOT use his "training and tests he performed" to determine what the substance was in JonBenet's system!!

Therefore you MUST believe there is some vast conspiracy out there among the throngs of experts consulted worldwide on this case - some who have never met one another nor a Ramsey - to continually make claim after claim that they are ALL wrong who make diagnosis in their specialty that does not look favorable toward the Ramseys. What possible motive would all these experts have that you continually dismiss as inept and wrong - to "find" reasons to LOOK for evidence pointing to a Ramsey? THAT is what you are suggesting. And it is ludicrous. But - when you don't like the message, I guess you just "kill the messenger".

By the way - How can a "witness advocate" put out a bowl of pineapple and leave Burke and Patsy Ramseys fingerprints on it??

And you make a very obvious error in your accusation against Coroner Meyers.
Before the autopsy - NO ONE had any clue that pineapple would be found in JonBenet's digestive system. So how in the world could it have been "suggested" to Meyer prior to or during the autopsy discovery for it to
influence him? And I think it is despicable that you would even have the nerve to make such an accusation against the coroner. Just because you don't like his diagnosis.

 

[why_nutt]

The cops were not leveling their sights at all those people you listed, just the parents.

To the contrary, the cops were "leveling their sights" at people who were not JonBenet's parents. They took DNA samples from some persons or persons who were not members of JonBenet's immediate family, samples redacted but present in the CBI DNA summary report you have seen. A search warrant was issued to search the property of someone who was not an immediate member of JonBenet's family, said warrant still sealed to this day. Linda Hoffmann-Pugh was required to give handwriting samples on the morning of December 26th; surely her handwriting was not taken because police thought she was a parent of JonBenet. The CBI report, the search warrant, the facts of the investigation as manifested in actions taken on December 26th and after, speak truth against the falseness of your statement.

 

[K777angel]

To the contrary, the cops were "leveling their sights" at people who were not JonBenet's parents. They took DNA samples from some persons or persons who were not members of JonBenet's immediate family, samples redacted but present in the CBI DNA summary report you have seen. A search warrant was issued to search the property of someone who was not an immediate member of JonBenet's family, said warrant still sealed to this day. Linda Hoffmann-Pugh was required to give handwriting samples on the morning of December 26th; surely her handwriting was not taken because police thought she was a parent of JonBenet. The CBI report, the search warrant, the facts of the investigation as manifested in actions taken on December 26th and after, speak truth against the falseness of your statement.

The police and FBI simply followed where the evidence led them. Can they help it if something so blatantly obvious as the staged "ransom" note was left by the stager? They knew right away from that alone that something was way, way amiss in that home. HUGE red flag. But they persevered as if it truly was a kidnapping. Investigating this lead and that person and that theory.
As why_nutt stated, they tested and investigated a great number of people OTHER than John, Patsy and Burke Ramsey.
But, as is often the case in child homicides, the

 

[why_nutt]

By the way - How can a "witness advocate" put out a bowl of pineapple and leave Burke and Patsy Ramseys fingerprints on it??

The role of a victim's advocate is not to be a caterer. Their role is (surprise, surprise) to advocate for a victim as that person passes through the legal process. You would think this would be obvious. Let us see: A victim has just been raped, or been robbed of valuables, or had a family member murdered. So the logical thing to do is to stuff that victim full of food, right? Because as we all know, the first thing a victim of crime feels is a drastic increase in appetite, right? And while we are at it, let us make sure the advocate brings bagels despite not knowing whether the victim has a gluten allergy, and pineapple despite the potential for the victim having a sulfite allergy, yes? Because a victim's worst day is never complete without the risk of a visit to the emergency room for an allergic reaction just because the advocate wants to play Jewish mother, right?

I do not think so.

 

[Toth]

Most, but not all, of those other persons were 'elimination prints' or their dna equivalents.

 

[tipper]

According to Schiller, (pg. 12 ppbk) the advocates did in fact go out and get bagels and fruit. The role of a victim’s advocate is much broader than just to advocate for the victim in the legal process. They are there to support the victim and the victim’s family. That support can taken many forms (emotional as well as practical) and getting food would not be out of line.

As I recall it was Arndt who first suggested to Meyer during that autopsy that the “apparent vegetable or fruit material” might be pineapple. But I would have to look for the source on that. I believe it was pineapple. But I also believe pinning down digestion times is a very inexact science and JBR was a very excited, busy child. The excitement of the day and the party could have easily slowed down her digestion time. I also think the warmth of the basement and her small size would have considerably sped up the time it took for full rigor to set in.

 

[why_nutt]

According to Schiller, (pg. 12 ppbk) the advocates did in fact go out and get bagels and fruit. The role of a victim’s advocate is much broader than just to advocate for the victim in the legal process. They are there to support the victim and the victim’s family. That support can taken many forms (emotional as well as practical) and getting food would not be out of line.

Getting food would be out of line for the circumstances. Nobody present wanted food, nobody asked for food, and nobody ate food. What would the point be of a victim advocate bringing food to a house which was already full of food? this was not a disaster scene where electricity was absent, not a remote crime scene far from human dwellings. Perhaps if the advocates looked into the walk-in refrigerator and saw it was empty, such would be understandable, but if that were the case, then I would imagine some eyebrows would raise at the concept that the Ramseys were prepared to starve their children of their breakfast because they had allowed their food supplies to dwindle to nothing. The advocates did not even have the excuse of making sure Burke was fed, as by the time they arrived, he was already gone. So who was this food supposed to be for? And why is catering not listed among the requirements for the job? Boulder asks the following requirements of its advocates:

http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/police/directory/volunteer_victim_advocate.htm

Duties and Responsibilities
Provide crisis intervention by phone and/or in person to victims of crime and survivors of tragedy in the city of Boulder.
Provide support and inform victims of case status.
Connect victims with appropriate resources and referrals.
Conduct case management; retrieve and review case reports.
Send appropriate literature to victims, follow up with officers and detectives, and assess any other follow-up requirements.
Complete necessary paperwork.

Qualifications
Must be at least twenty-one years old.
Have an open, non-judgmental attitude with genuine concern and empathy for crime victims and tragedy survivors.
Able to cooperate with police, staff and other agencies.
Excellent interpersonal communication skills, and a high comfort level with telephone interactions.
Must have your own transportation and telephone.
Be willing and able to follow regulations for appropriate Victim Advocate behavior.

I see nothing in there about shopping for meals.

 

[Maxi]

I think the very first suspects were actually the Hoffman-Pughs -- at least, until JBR's body was discovered. Even then, the police hightailed it over there to talk to them and gather possible evidence.

 

[tipper]

I suspect bringing food would fall under the "genuine concern and empathy" part of the job description.

Given the situation as they knew it, the food was fine. People had been there since early morning. I doubt anyone was likely to be cooking up a full breakfast and food in a crisis can be a calming thing. I've never read whether anyone ate the food that was brought in but if they did that would suggest it was wanted.

 

[why_nutt]

I suspect bringing food would fall under the "genuine concern and empathy" part of the job description.

Given the situation as they knew it, the food was fine. People had been there since early morning. I doubt anyone was likely to be cooking up a full breakfast and food in a crisis can be a calming thing. I've never read whether anyone ate the food that was brought in but if they did that would suggest it was wanted.

If we are to believe what John has said about the events of December 26th, Patsy was variously crying in hysteria, nauseous, or curled into a fetal position behind a curio cabinet. Anyone with an ounce of genuine concern or empathy would know at that point that hunger was not in any way a problem a Ramsey was having which could be solved. Anyone with an ounce of genuine concern and empathy would also know that the first thing one does at a crime scene is deal with the scene, not pretend it is some remote event disturbing one's picnic. When the World Trade Center towers fell, I did not see anyone, victim advocate or otherwise, rush to bring bagels and fruit to those who were covered in ash and coughing their lungs out. Nobody said, "Your spouse is missing and you have no idea where to look? Here, have something to nosh." Yes, food can be comforting, but not[b/] within a couple of hours of the most traumatizing event one has ever experienced. It is comforting after time, after days and weeks, but not within minutes, not even within hours.

 

[Toth]

I don't think its relevant to argue about job requirements or sensible acts; the point is the witness advocate did set out food and clean the counter for the food spread. Whether its in their job description or not is hardly relevant. They did it.
Whatever fingerprints might have been there are gone.
Whatever pineapple they found in the fridge and put out or not, they don't deny having tried to provide snacks for everyone there.
Personally, I think they were idiots but then just about all the BPD were that day.

 

[Blazeboy3]

If we are to believe what John has said about the events of December 26th, Patsy was variously crying in hysteria, nauseous, or curled into a fetal position behind a curio cabinet. Anyone with an ounce of genuine concern or empathy would know at that point that hunger was not in any way a problem a Ramsey was having which could be solved. Anyone with an ounce of genuine concern and empathy would also know that the first thing one does at a crime scene is deal with the scene, not pretend it is some remote event disturbing one's picnic. When the World Trade Center towers fell, I did not see anyone, victim advocate or otherwise, rush to bring bagels and fruit to those who were covered in ash and coughing their lungs out. Nobody said, "Your spouse is missing and you have no idea where to look? Here, have something to nosh." Yes, food can be comforting, but not[b/] within a couple of hours of the most traumatizing event one has ever experienced. It is comforting after time, after days and weeks, but not within minutes, not even within hours.

I agree!~must be why Patsy said it's/was PREMEDITATED?! Go Patsy Go:= cover those bases if you can huh? LOL?! FYI, the following URL/info :slap:
http://www.rense.com/ufo6/inno.htm
...but as a full scale, premeditated sex crime.
As we look through our spread of scenarios, one key make-it-or-break-it point has been the ransom note. First of all its length, not so much a note as a letter, argues against its being written by an intruder. Secondly, there is a tone of barely suppressed rage against John Ramsey that permeates the entire letter. This strongly suggests a personal connection and motive. However, there is a certain degree of confusion in the note -- John is not from the South -- which suggests that the author confused John Ramsey and Patsy's father, Don Paugh, who is from the South. As we will see, this just might be the single most significant clue in the whole ransom note.

 

[Toth]

It is not a ransom note.
No amount of referring to it as a ransom note will ever convert it into being a ransom note.
I agree with the 'barely suppressed rage against John Ramsey that permeates the note' but disagree with your conclusion that the rage indicates a spouse.
I would not term the 'Southern' stuff "confusion" but would instead use the term "ignorance". The note writer was ignorant about John Ramsey's actual background but did know of the 'previously lived in Atlanta' ane erroniously concluded that he was 'from Atlanta' and therefore 'Southern'. These represent errors based on lack of information, not 'confusion' due to memory lapse or emotional state.

 

[Nehemiah]

It is not a ransom note.
No amount of referring to it as a ransom note will ever convert it into being a ransom note.
I agree with the 'barely suppressed rage against John Ramsey that permeates the note' but disagree with your conclusion that the rage indicates a spouse.
I would not term the 'Southern' stuff "confusion" but would instead use the term "ignorance". The note writer was ignorant about John Ramsey's actual background but did know of the 'previously lived in Atlanta' ane erroniously concluded that he was 'from Atlanta' and therefore 'Southern'. These represent errors based on lack of information, not 'confusion' due to memory lapse or emotional state.

So, you think this was premeditated by the perp, or at least knew the Rs?

 

[Shylock]

I said it is possible that it was lemon: pineapple was suggested to the coroner, it was not tested.

You're wrong Toth. It WAS tested. It's pineapple and it matched what was in the bowl on the kitchen table "right down to the rind." We know that as fact, so please don't waste our time regurgatating the 's old "lemon lie"...Thank you.

 

[Shylock]

I still do not see how pineapple in her digestive tract makes anyone think there is something wrong with the known timeline.

Food does not swap position in your digestive tract. The cracked crab and everything else she ate over at the White's party was ahead of the pineapple and had already been fully digested. That means that the pineapple had to come AFTER the party.

Since it matched what was in the Ramsey bowl, she could have only eaten it AFTER they arrived home, which means the parents lied about her being asleep.

Pretty simple Toth. The evidence shows they lied about JBR being awake when they got home, and the 911 tape shows they lied about Burke being asleep the following morning. Obviously they don't want people to put 2+2 together and connect Burke to JonBenet.

IMO

 

[Toth]

You're wrong Toth. It WAS tested. It's pineapple and it matched what was in the bowl on the kitchen table "right down to the rind." We know that as fact, so please don't waste our time regurgatating the 's old "lemon lie"...Thank you.

And just how on earth did they test the substance that they had accidentally discarded?