Patsy Ramsey

[Chewy]

Why would they indict the R's for child abuse resulting in death and accessory to a crime? Would a GJ indict the parents for those charges thinking that the parents helped an intruder murder their child?
jmo

If they knew the person, they may have helped cover it up.

The murder charge is one thing, but they weren't even indicted for manslaughter or accidental death.

So that says a lot.

 

[Chewy]

Im confused.. Because there is a book somewhere that uses the word confided you connected it to Patsy? Because I use the word confided all the time. I am not sure I see any connection.

This is a classic problem with the PDI theories. Generally they seem to rely on making vague and ridiculous connections to "words" "attitudes" "not normal emotional reactions" "life style choices." Apparently Patsey Ramsey was the Joan Crawford of pageants, much more evil and conninving that the thousands of other pageant participants in the world.

Every time I read a "theory" on why PDI it's filled with incredible bias and typical women hating jealousy. Very similar to Lindy Chamberlain.

No actual "evidence" is actually put forth. :waitasec:

I felt the same way for the longest time. That is, until I did an in depth study into the Ransom Note.

In the RN, Patsy sure seems to be plenty mad at John about something and it sure wasn't because his bonus was only $118,000. She seems jealous. Envious. Angry. Devious. Dangerous. Deadly.




Maybe I should go read the third day of Patsy's interview with TH again knowing he is his toughest ever with her.

I saw an interview when Patsy was snapping at the detective and basically IMO she saw through their BS and wasn't getting played by them. She came across as exasperated to me because she knew she didn't do it and they kept insisting (and lying, as cops are allowed to do) that "tests" and "evidence" pointed to her doing it. At one point she says "I don't care what the tests say, then the tests are wrong, I didn't do it."

So how is a person supposed to react if they are actually innocent and they know this, so they know the cops are lying and pretending that they have information and evidence that points to her when she knows full well that she didn't do it?

She comes across as intelligent and annoyed to me. Because she didn't "act" the way people thought she was supposed to act many people judged her harshly.

Here is the interview clip where she's supposedly "going ALL OUT" To me she's reacting normally, not in some deranged crazy way. Her frustration shows in the way she's holding back her emotions and trying not to cry. I bet half the people judging her for this interview react ten times worse when fighting with their husband over some ridiculous marital squabble.

If this woman IS innocent, she's been through a shocking trauma of the death of her child and then being drilled and accused by police. And people want her to act "polite?" She was pretty respectful, IMO if that's the case.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlxJRb5T_XM


On the other hand we have this chick who looks like a raving loon in the interveiw. But people think THIS woman is normal and Patsy is crazy. I just dont' understand what people are seeing. LOL

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Aly2fPK-XE


Also the theory that Patsy's SPLIT PERSONALITY did it, just goes to show how absolutely ridiculous the PDI theories have gotten. There is absolutely NO EVIDENCE that points to Patsy having DDI.

 

[Linda7NJ]

This is a classic problem with the PDI theories. Generally they seem to rely on making vague and ridiculous connections to "words" "attitudes" "not normal emotional reactions" "life style choices." Apparently Patsey Ramsey was the Joan Crawford of pageants, much more evil and conninving that the thousands of other pageant participants in the world.

Every time I read a "theory" on why PDI it's filled with incredible bias and typical women hating jealousy. Very similar to Lindy Chamberlain.

No actual "evidence" is actually put forth. :waitasec:





I saw an interview when Patsy was snapping at the detective and basically IMO she saw through their BS and wasn't getting played by them. She came across as exasperated to me because she knew she didn't do it and they kept insisting (and lying, as cops are allowed to do) that "tests" and "evidence" pointed to her doing it. At one point she says "I don't care what the tests say, then the tests are wrong, I didn't do it."

So how is a person supposed to react if they are actually innocent and they know this, so they know the cops are lying and pretending that they have information and evidence that points to her when she knows full well that she didn't do it?

She comes across as intelligent and annoyed to me. Because she didn't "act" the way people thought she was supposed to act many people judged her harshly.

There's far more to it than that.

There is physical evidence, she's connected to the crime scene in several ways.
Her deliberate lies and distancing from her household items.
Her tale of how she found & stepped over the note on the stairs.


There is a mountain, not a molehill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Venom]

If they knew the person, they may have helped cover it up.

The murder charge is one thing, but they weren't even indicted for manslaughter or accidental death.

So that says a lot.

So they would have helped cover up the death of their beloved daughter and let her killer get away with it? :waiting:

It sure does say a lot.

 

[Chewy]

It could, except they didn't convict them of anything. Basically they stated there was enough evidence to accuse them of it and go to trial.

But there was NOT enough evidence to accuse them and go to trial for either manslaughter, accidental death, murder.

But no let's just ignore the reality and jump back into the fantasy land version of how a crime investigation works.


The Ramseys were able to intimidate and brainwash or bribe, the entire Boulder police force, two different DA offices, the entire Grand Jury, and lots of neighbors.

Patsy is actually Sybil and one of her alters killed Jonbenet and left no evidence.

And foreign DNA came from an underwear manufacturing plant.


That is a much more realistic theory. .

 

[Chewy]

There's far more to it than that.

There is physical evidence, she's connected to the crime scene in several ways.
Her deliberate lies and distancing from her household items.
Her tale of how she found & stepped over the note on the stairs.


There is a mountain, not a molehill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You keep saying this, list just three examples. Her "tale" of how she tripped over the ransom note might be ..........oh......I don't know..........maaaaybeee she wasn't quite remembering exactly how she came upon the ransom note since five seconds after finding it she found out her daughter was abducted.

You know, maybe it's just me, but I kinda think that might freak a person out enough to confuse their memories of what happened.

Car accidents have unreliable witness accounts for exactly the same reason.

How dare she not remember it specifically. And what evidence connected her to the body since DNA evidence ruled her out? She was the kids MOTHER and this happened in her own home, of course there would be connections. What EVIDENCE do you have?

 

[Linda7NJ]

You keep saying this, list just three examples. Her "tale" of how she tripped over the ransom note might be ..........oh......I don't know..........maaaaybeee she wasn't quite remembering exactly how she came upon the ransom note since five seconds after finding it she found out her daughter was abducted.



You know, maybe it's just me, but I kinda think that might freak a person out enough to confuse their memories of what happened.



Car accidents have unreliable witness accounts for exactly the same reason.



How dare she not remember it specifically. And what evidence connected her to the body since DNA evidence ruled her out? She was the kids MOTHER and this happened in her own home, of course there would be connections. What EVIDENCE do you have?

Fibers TIED into the knot.
Fibers in the paint tray
Fibers on the duct tape.

Murders have been solved with far less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Junebug99]

Chewy, I think I love you lol!

 

[Junebug99]

JBR, a happy well adjusted child the people who knew her said she loved life and was a happy little girl. No evidence of abuse by either parents.

Burke hit her once I believe and she was taken to hospital iirc. I pushed my lil bro down on a side walk and split his head open and once shot him in the back with BB gun to see if it hurt. He wiped his on my tooth brush one time, luckily the brown was a dead give away lol. We were not abused sociopaths, we were normal kids who did normal, sometimes disgusting things to each other.

 

[Junebug99]

Fibers TIED into the knot.
Fibers in the paint tray
Fibers on the duct tape.

Murders have been solved with far less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Name one, especially when victim was a young child and lived with her parents. Patsy fibers mean nothing she lived there for crying out loud.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

"The Prime of Ms Brodie" has been described by PR, friends, detailed in books as PR's favourite book. There have also been links made to phrases in the book that were on the ransom note, PR's notes to friends, etc. I am sure a search will show you different posts made by posters w more knowledge of the case where "The Prime..." and PR have been discussed


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

ANDDDD??? I read Patricia Cornwell books. Some I have read over and over.. All with grisly murders.. Does that mean I am a murderer?

That she used the word confided properly in a sentence can not be tied back to a book. It is just proper use of a word.

There is so much really far reaching that it has nothing to do with the case. IT is one thing to take evidence and try and tie it to someone another altogether to take a book that millions of people may have read and use one word to connect it.

Ug.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Fibers TIED into the knot.
Fibers in the paint tray
Fibers on the duct tape.

Murders have been solved with far less.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

A lot hae been soled with DNA too..

 

[Linda7NJ]

A lot hae been soled with DNA too..

When it's been sourced.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

When it's been sourced.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure, That will come. I think it just goes to show it was no one that was investigated. It is a shame someone won't open this back up and look at it from moment 1. I really feel that if they did that, It could indeed lead us to new prospects.

 

[Linda7NJ]

Sure, That will come. I think it just goes to show it was no one that was investigated. It is a shame someone won't open this back up and look at it from moment 1. I really feel that if they did that, It could indeed lead us to new prospects.

It's been done, repeatedly and well documented.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Junebug99]

Lindy Chamberlain, Julie Rhea Harper, come to mine. Made up stories,, ridiculous theories. Lindy supposedly sacrificed her child in the woods.

 

[Chewy]

Name one, especially when victim was a young child and lived with her parents. Patsy fibers mean nothing she lived there for crying out loud.

Exactly. Fibers that could have been on the child from when the mother tucked her into bed. Meanwhile the DNA evidence ruled them out.

So basically the theory is Patsy handled the body enough to leave fibers but not enough to leave DNA.

:facepalm:

 

[Chewy]

The GJ does not issue indictments. The DAs office holds that responsibility. AH chose not to do so.


Patsy could not be eliminated as the writer of the RN. She wrote that RN for herself, not to protect an intruder.

In what world does "Could not be eliminated" translate to "She definitely wrote it" ?

More of the leaps without actual evidence.

There was talk around town

That's called GOSSIP not evidence.


Also someone has yet to explain why if they were writing the ransom note to point the suspicion at another person why they would specifically mention the $118,000 that only the Ramseys and few other people would know about? That detail drew attention directly to the Ramseys and their family and friends.

Any typical ransom note would say a million dollars or 200,000 dollars. And it's not even a careless mistake. It's a specific detail written into the letter.

 

[Tawny]

Please explain to me who the R's would cover for outside of their immediate family, and why.

 

[Tawny]

Also, if it's a specific number that only the R's and close associates would know, how exactly does that point TO an intruder? The failure in logic is astounding.