Poll: If an R confessed, would you accept it?

If an R confessed, would you accept


  • Total voters
    92
I would love to know what the pediatrician Dr Beuf knows. Well, if he would tell the truth. What was it ---- something like 33 visits to him in the last three years of JB's life? I bet he's a treasure trove.

P.S. Not to mention, he was one of the first people called wasnt he? Along with their pastor? Guess I should say ALLEGEDLY here because we dont have any phone records...lol.

If they really are still actively investigating this case, Dr.B should be one of the top names on their list of who to talk to again.

He wasn't at the home that morning but some believe that he is just one of the people they phoned before calling 911 that morning.
 
I would love to know what the pediatrician Dr Beuf knows. Well, if he would tell the truth. What was it ---- something like 33 visits to him in the last three years of JB's life? I bet he's a treasure trove.

P.S. Not to mention, he was one of the first people called wasnt he? Along with their pastor? Guess I should say ALLEGEDLY here because we dont have any phone records...lol.

Dr. Boef was a personal friend of the Rs, he was in the same country club and by some accounts very "taken" with them.
It has always been suspect that the pediatrician of a MURDERED child refused to allow police access to that child's medical records. The same can be said of the school, who refused access to the school nurse visits. And the DA, who refused to ask for a warrant for such records. And they want people to believe the parents are innocent? What is there in those records to hide, then?
It can only mean there IS something to hide- something that points to abuse in the house and possibly even to the killer. The FACT that the DA was complicit in keeping these records hidden speaks volumes about just what the DA knew about the Rs guilt.
Had this case come to trial, one can only hope the prosecution would call for Dr Boef and the school nurse. But since the DA WAS the prosecution, I doubt that would have happened.
 
Great post DeeDee and definitely inline with my way of thinking.

Immediately the Rs fly into combat-ready mode. I still think J made a lot of these calls during the time he allegedly disappeared for 90 min. He must have been/is great under pressure because he seemed to have all the bases covered right away. Why on earth would his ex wife need a lawyer? IIRC, he was still paying her mortgage and I've often wondered just what she knew about things.

And yes, not releasing the records of a murdered child does speak volumes to me as well. Again, I am amazed at all the things J thought about, all the covering of bases he did so early in this case. IMO this means both J & P knew all this stuff was out there and it apparently was on their minds constantly for him to be able to coordinate all this while trying to grieve and care for his other family members.

On a side note, something else that pokes at me. If this supposed "small foreign faction" kidnapped JB, then why did they send Burke back to the same school within two weeks? If it was all true, wouldnt any normal parents be scared to death to have their child back at school knowing these people were still out there?
 
Great post DeeDee and definitely inline with my way of thinking.
On a side note, something else that pokes at me. If this supposed "small foreign faction" kidnapped JB, then why did they send Burke back to the same school within two weeks? If it was all true, wouldnt any normal parents be scared to death to have their child back at school knowing these people were still out there?

An INNOCENT parent of a just-kidnapped child in possession of a ransom note threatening to kill her is they spoke to anyone might have still called the police, but would NOT have called over all their friends, their pastor, victim's advocates, etc. The best way to appear like a victim is to surround yourself with victim's advocates.
And, they would NEVER let the surviving child out of their sight, let alone that morning! But we all know that they knew they did not have to worry about their son. They knew there was no kidnapper.
 
No. The Ramsey's, each and everyone are proven liars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
No. The Ramsey's, each and everyone are proven liars.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I totally agree with Linda7NJ. The R's have lied so much over almost two decades that I wouldn't believe a thing, even if was an admission on their behalf by LW.

(Well, maybe if someone told the whole story and every single piece and detail added up, but I can never see that happening. Why would it?)
 
Yes, if the "confession" met the applicable legal requirements.

There will never be any confessions from any of the fanily, or the extended family. Reason being, they are soo wealthy, and they have over the top entitlemen issues. When you have entitlement issues, you never divulge to the poiice or the public what is our right to know. They think we are beneath them, and they will keep their lips seeled forever. OH, moo.
 
Since Patsy is now dead, the only confession I would accept would be John's as I have always thought he was the killer, the one to strike her with the golf club and tighten the garrote, both after sexually assaulting her. I don't believe Burke had any involvement in this crime.
 
Since Patsy is now dead, the only confession I would accept would be John's as I have always thought he was the killer, the one to strike her with the golf club and tighten the garrote, both after sexually assaulting her. I don't believe Burke had any involvement in this crime.

Long time, no read, LinasK.

I agree about Burke. Either way, John would have to confess, as he's the only one left.
 
Since Patsy is now dead, the only confession I would accept would be John's as I have always thought he was the killer, the one to strike her with the golf club and tighten the garrote, both after sexually assaulting her. I don't believe Burke had any involvement in this crime.

was just thinking of their possible roles in all this...if PR wrote the note,well she was careless enough to leave prints on it...I don't think she would have thought of putting on gloves just in order to fashion the garrote IMO...the one who handled the garrote did wear gloves IMO
 
was just thinking of their possible roles in all this...if PR wrote the note,well she was careless enough to leave prints on it...I don't think she would have thought of putting on gloves just in order to fashion the garrote IMO...the one who handled the garrote did wear gloves IMO

Patsy's prints were not found on the ransom note. Her print was found on the pad that it came from but not on the note itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Long time, no read, LinasK.

I agree about Burke. Either way, John would have to confess, as he's the only one left.

Not the only one. BR is still alive too. If HE were to confess, he knows there can be no prosecution anyway. JR could confess to the "companion crimes" of obstruction, and whatever else is listed in the NINE counts the GJ wanted to indict him for (and an identical 9 for Patsy) with no prosecution either, because the statutes of limitation on THOSE crimes has expired.
It always bothered me that there is NO statute of limitations on murder, but in crimes where investigating a murder has been obstructed and/or evidence tampered with (including a body) there are limits. It seems that ANY crimes associated with the murder, but not the actual act, should also be free of time limits. Or the limits should begin from the discovery of those crimes. I am suspicious of the timing of the release of the GJ reports. I am glad it happened, but isn't it "curious" that the statutes that would apply to the parents have expired (as did one of the parents) before they were released? You know what they say...there ARE no coincidences.
Won't happen though.
And no one has addressed whether AH committed a crime when he LIED to the public while holding a public office about whether indictments were returned for the parents of one of the most notorious child murders in the country. Seems reason enough to me- or loss of a pension at the least.
 
Yesterday I came across Steve Thomas' resignation letter and was amazed at what he said about Hunter and his attempts to stifle the case. Beckner seems to indicate the same thing. I think the easiest way to solve this mystery would be to investigate the people in power and find out why there was an obvious effort to ignore the Ramsey's participation in this crime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I would only accept a confession from one R, that of BR. To my knowledge, he has only lied by omission up until this point. If PR had confessed before her death or JR were to confess now, I would be wondering what their motive was. They have yet to be upfront and forthcoming with anything so I don't think you could honestly accept a confession any easier then you can accept their denials. It would just be one more thing that I would have to assume was concocted to throw me off the truth.
 
I would only accept a confession from one R, that of BR. To my knowledge, he has only lied by omission up until this point. If PR had confessed before her death or JR were to confess now, I would be wondering what their motive was. They have yet to be upfront and forthcoming with anything so I don't think you could honestly accept a confession any easier then you can accept their denials. It would just be one more thing that I would have to assume was concocted to throw me off the truth.

I agree. If JR were to confess, especially on his death bed, I wouldn't buy it because his motive may be to exonerate BR for the rest of BR's life. I hold on to hope that BR will one day confess what he knows. He may come forward after JR has passed. Or he will confide in somebody who turns on him (An ex-wife or ex-lover).
 
My thing is, that there's two things that could easily prevent BR from talking. 1) he doesn't know anything, and didn't witness a single thing that night. 2) if he played any role in it, even if his part was accidental, there's just no way I see him talking and voluntarily opening up a closet full of skeletons when he didn't have to.

I think the only way he'll talk is if he witnessed something or overheard something but didn't have any role at all in this. Even then, would we believe him? I mean, if this was his story, a lot of people would still speculate he played a role, or the most cynical among us might think he's doing it for some publicity stunt for money (book sales, interview circuits, something like that.)
 
My thing is, that there's two things that could easily prevent BR from talking. 1) he doesn't know anything, and didn't witness a single thing that night. 2) if he played any role in it, even if his part was accidental, there's just no way I see him talking and voluntarily opening up a closet full of skeletons when he didn't have to.

I think the only way he'll talk is if he witnessed something or overheard something but didn't have any role at all in this. Even then, would we believe him? I mean, if this was his story, a lot of people would still speculate he played a role, or the most cynical among us might think he's doing it for some publicity stunt for money (book sales, interview circuits, something like that.)

I could see a scenario where, if Burke didn't do it, that he would write a tell all book once John is dead and the Ramsey gravy train stops running. But only if at some point he finds himself in financial distress. It's kind of like a last poker chip to be used only if there are no other options.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Both parents knew who did it. Neither one was forthcoming at any point. The best (if not only) way this case would have been solved was if one rolled on the other. The police and FBI wanted to go that way, but the DA shot them down. It can't happen now.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
595
Total visitors
727

Forum statistics

Threads
625,644
Messages
18,507,482
Members
240,828
Latest member
The Flamazing Finder
Back
Top