Ramesy's Damed if they do, Damed if they don't, or is there more than meets the eye?

[Blondieskatz]

Yes, what about those phone records for the house. I would be interested in seeing any calls made after the Ramsey's returned home and before they called 911.

 

[Seeker]

Hmm...I see...interesting.

What about the house phone records?

Sorry, but I don't remember.

Details, I remember the case in SD you are talking about. They did have another suspect, even canvassed the neighborhood looking for him, and discounted him and yes, they focused on the brother. Even hounded him until he confessed just so they would leave him alone. Turned out the other suspect they had already known about and checked out was the guilty party. Luckily for the family it all worked out in the end and the brother was ultimately cleared.

Still, the family cooperated from the get go, they didn't stall and deny interviews with the PD for 4 months and then set conditions as well. The Ramseys REFUSED to be interviewed seperately and they REFUSED to go to the Police Dept as well. What INNOCENT parents do that from the get go?

Find me a list of INNOCENT parents that have behaved as the Ramsey's have, find me a list of parents that have done the same things as the Ramsey's will ya? Please? I'm serious. I have NEVER seen any truely innocent parent refuse, from the very begining, to fully cooperate.

Oh and while you're at it could you please also find me the name of ANY truely innocent parent that tells the Detective on the scene, "this was an inside job"?
TIA

 

[Seeker]

How can it be considered even remotely the same - being the parent of a missing, kidnapped child who has every chance of still being alive,

Did you forget that JonBenet was supposedly a kidnapped child to begin with? And did the Ramsey's even bother to take the note seriously? I suppose they were racing to find her before she was dead right?

and you have to race to find her before she is dead, and being the parent of a dead child - there is nothing you can do to bring her back - vengance against the killer isn't the first thing you think of, it's not your top priority as it is when trying to catch the kidnapper to find your child still alive - grief is the first priority, and your remaining family.

Being a major suspect that the police completely believe is guilty, versus being a secondary suspect, since there are witnesses saying you didn't do it yourself - also nothing alike.

Tell that story to the vanDams, or Mark Lundsford, or the Walsh's since NONE of them had witnesses to what happened to their children.
Do you know FOR A FACT that none of these parents would have had vengence in their heart towards the killer of their child?
That's just not so. Brenda vanDam would have killed DW to avenge her daughter if she were allowed to do so, so would Mark Lundsford done the same to Couey and if John Walsh would have been able to get his hands on the man who murdered Adam he wouldn't be hosting his own tv show now.

 

[Details]

In the SD case - the nightmare, court cases, accusations and harassment went on for many, many years!!! I'd bet a ton that those parents, who have really experienced the Ramsey nightmare, if they had it to do all over again, would have lawyered up, wouldn't have allowed the interrogations without some protection/support for themselves! They'd go the Ramsey way.

Their cooperation did nothing - absolutely nothing to either bring their daughter back, nor to help catch the killer - it probably delayed the killer's capture for many years - gave him his freedom.

 

[tumble]

And did the Ramsey's even bother to take the note seriously?

Seeker, they didn't even bother telling the police to be careful, as their presence at the house actually could lead to their daughters death.

 

[Louisa]

doesn't anyone remember how everyone just knew the Elizabeth Smarts family was guilty because they had a pr person and because the Dad had a lawyer and so forth. Don't you remember all the rumors about how the DAD had to be lying and was very feminine and was gay and so forth. How no one could have come in from the outside and taken her without the parents noticing.The only difference is Elizabeth was found alive and thank God could point to her abductor.
Patsy and John were in the same situation but no one has ever come forward.
I myself can't understand why Mark Klass keeps interjecting himself into this case. He was the father of a daughter who was abducted and murdered.JBR was found murdered in her home. Polly was found weeks after the abduction, there was time to close loose ends with the family and any leads......there were also two other little girls present when she was taken who knew that man wasn't her dad..... I promise, Klaas was NEVER under the same umbrella of suspision as the Ramsey's......two completely different cases in my opinion. The only similarity is that both children died.


Ned: Oh but you are forgetting that Elizabeth's sister saw the man that took her and eventually that lead to the killer's arrest. I did not for one minute think Mr. Smart was invovled and I don't think many others did as well.

Oh Ned, you weren't on the boards I was frequenting then. It doesn't matter whether you personally thought that Ed Smart was guilty. What matters is that all across the 'net, people were seething with venom about the effeminate father and his potential links to gay Mormon pedophilia rings that probably included his Mormon brothers. The original poster here is absolutely correct. This was a very widespread theory and persisted despite the fact that Mary Katherine witnessed Elizabeth being taken by force from their shared bedroom. Imagine how much more venomous things would have gotten had Mary Katherine not seen this happen--or if Richard Ricci had not incorrectly been identified as the perp in this case so that knee-jerk reaction all around the web could have focused on him as well.

The Smart case is a DUAL lesson at the very least in how very wrong it is to jump to conclusions about who the perpetrator of a crime is.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

And did the Ramsey's even bother to take the note seriously?

Seeker, they didn't even bother telling the police to be careful, as their presence at the house actually could lead to their daughters death.

Not to mention all the other people they called over to the house.

"Speaking to anyone about your situation such as police or F.B.I. will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies."

 

[Details]

Not to mention all the other people they called over to the house.

"Speaking to anyone about your situation such as police or F.B.I. will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies."

Ransom notes always include that, and only a fool who wants a dead daughter responds by not calling the police. And once you've called the police - what difference does it make how many others come over?

 

[Details]

Did you forget that JonBenet was supposedly a kidnapped child to begin with? And did the Ramsey's even bother to take the note seriously? I suppose they were racing to find her before she was dead right?

Yes - did they refuse any police interviews in the hours before they found her?

Tell that story to the vanDams, or Mark Lundsford, or the Walsh's since NONE of them had witnesses to what happened to their children.
Do you know FOR A FACT that none of these parents would have had vengence in their heart towards the killer of their child?
That's just not so. Brenda vanDam would have killed DW to avenge her daughter if she were allowed to do so, so would Mark Lundsford done the same to Couey and if John Walsh would have been able to get his hands on the man who murdered Adam he wouldn't be hosting his own tv show now.

Some may, others may not. Immediately after finding out about the death - I personally find it odd for your first thought to be vengance rather than grief - about the killer rather than the victim, rather than your other loved ones who are still alive and in great emotional pain. I doubt that any of these people you listed did not first think of their loved ones and their own grief before vengance. And where is John Walsh's wife? She's not guilty, but she's not responding the same way.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

Ransom notes always include that, and only a fool who wants a dead daughter responds by not calling the police. And once you've called the police - what difference does it make how many others come over?

The letter went at length warning them to contact no one.

In such a situation in doing the exact opposite of what they say...one has to hope the kidnapper is not serious, eh?

I suppose it just comes down to how seriously a person takes the threats.
So either way we have to assume the Ramseys were not worried the kidnapper would actually kill her because they were calling all sorts of people over, including the police in their obvious cars.

 

[Biz]

When you compare the Klaus and the Walsh case to the Ramsey's and say well, these people put their child first and did a polygraph, interview, etc. and the Ramsey's didn't..... I see a big difference:
This is a business man who is used to having other people handle things for him....like lawyers and PR firms. The case got so huge so fast it was too much for any family to handle.....media calling all day in, day out. They NEEDED a PR firm. This is what wealthy business men and women do when publicity gets out of control. They didn't care about their name, they needed someone who could handle the media in a professional manner.
The Klaus family and the Walsh family (at the time) were not exceedingly wealthy as the Ramsey's were.
John Walsh had a good job in the hotel industry but he wasn't a millionaire. It's a little different for that reason. Millionaires handle these matters differently. They are advised by lawyers daily and they TAKE THEIR ADVICE! The first thing a lawyer will tell you is that a polygraph is not admissable in court and it could be used against you to have LE looking solely at you as the perpetrator. If I were in their shoes and suspected that LE might try to pin the crime on me as a parent I would heed their advice too. Have you seen the David Duvovny (sp?) story? He was a step-parent who did jail time for killing his step daughter. His wife stood behind him and he was eventually vindicated and released. He cooperated FULLY with police....they pressured him so much that they almost had him believing that he did it. This is the way the law enforcement works. I wouldn't trust them after seeing the way they work people over during questioning and are able to have innocent people confess to crimes they didn't do. I do not blame the Ramseys in the least for changing their mind about working with the Boulder PD after they threatened to hold their dead childs body as a bargaining tool to get them to talk to them. They had already told the same story to them OVER AND OVER! It's not like they NEVER talked to them...they just refused to go back after the Boulder PD started playing their tricks and it was obvious to them that they were going to try to pin this crime on them.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Ransom notes always include that, and only a fool who wants a dead daughter responds by not calling the police. And once you've called the police - what difference does it make how many others come over?

I can understand calling police, but when you have a note saying your house is being monitored and your daughter will be beheaded if they see you calling police, you make damn sure to tell the police that when you're telling them your child has been kidnapped! And you sure don't turn around and dial up your buddies and tell them to come on over if you don't want your daughter's head to roll. You certainly do NOT allow your other child to leave the house, knowing someone who is holding your daughter is watching your house, unless you care nothing for the safety of either child.

They knew that ransom note was bogus. That's the only explanation for their impromptu tea party - that and they needed an audience to really make the performance look good.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

vengance against the killer isn't the first thing you think of, it's not your top priority as it is when trying to catch the kidnapper to find your child still alive - grief is the first priority, and your remaining family.


Ned: Hmmmm... how about a sense of helping other children who may be at risk by the hands of this murderer? Don't the Ramsey's have a duty to cooperate with police fully to help protect other innocent children?

Now John is threatening to leave the country?

When do the Ramsey's stop caring about themselves and start caring about their child and other children?

 

[Details]

The letter went at length warning them to contact no one.

In such a situation in doing the exact opposite of what they say...one has to hope the kidnapper is not serious, eh?

I suppose it just comes down to how seriously a person takes the threats.
So either way we have to assume the Ramseys were not worried the kidnapper would actually kill her because they were calling all sorts of people over, including the police in their obvious cars.

Yeah - ransom notes always do that. Because the kidnapper knows that once the police are involved, they'll probably be caught! And only a fool follows the rules of the kidnapper - they'll kill the victim anytime they can without endangering the money, because the victim has seen them. Give the money, and the victim is often dead. Call the police, and you've got better odds (IMHO) of getting your daughter back.

Yep - you hope the kidnapper isn't serious about that - but if they are - there's no way you'll ever get your daughter back alive - if they'll kill her that easily, they'll kill her for being a witness, once they get the money, or have you enough on the hook that she's more of an inconvenience than she's worth.

 

[Details]

...He cooperated FULLY with police....they pressured him so much that they almost had him believing that he did it. ....

That's how it was with the SD case - the poor kid was starting to believe he had done it, and just couldn't remember doing it.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Oh Ned, you weren't on the boards I was frequenting then. It doesn't matter whether you personally thought that Ed Smart was guilty.

Ned: You got that wrong Louisa, I was quoting another poster. I NEVER thought Mr. Smart was guilty. I completely agree with what you said below

What matters is that all across the 'net, people were seething with venom about the effeminate father and his potential links to gay Mormon pedophilia rings that probably included his Mormon brothers. The original poster here is absolutely correct. This was a very widespread theory and persisted despite the fact that Mary Katherine witnessed Elizabeth being taken by force from their shared bedroom. Imagine how much more venomous things would have gotten had Mary Katherine not seen this happen--or if Richard Ricci had not incorrectly been identified as the perp in this case so that knee-jerk reaction all around the web could have focused on him as well.

The Smart case is a DUAL lesson at the very least in how very wrong it is to jump to conclusions about who the perpetrator of a crime is.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Their cooperation did nothing - absolutely nothing to either bring their daughter back, nor to help catch the killer - it probably delayed the killer's capture for many years - gave him his freedom.


Ned: EXACTLY. It gave the killer his freedom, weather you think the killer is an intruder or one of the Ramsey's. Nicely summed up Details. Thanks

 

[tumble]

And you sure don't turn around and dial up your buddies and tell them to come on over if you don't want your daughter's head to roll..

And to do they you would not hang up the phone while the person you have called for help still tries to talk to you. You would not hang up the phone until you were told to, why would you, it's your only link to somebody who actually can help you.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Srange, JR may actually has to face false accusations to a crime he may very well be responsible for.

Ned: Now that would be something.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

Yeah - ransom notes always do that. Because the kidnapper knows that once the police are involved, they'll probably be caught! And only a fool follows the rules of the kidnapper - they'll kill the victim anytime they can without endangering the money, because the victim has seen them. Give the money, and the victim is often dead. Call the police, and you've got better odds (IMHO) of getting your daughter back.

Yep - you hope the kidnapper isn't serious about that - but if they are - there's no way you'll ever get your daughter back alive - if they'll kill her that easily, they'll kill her for being a witness, once they get the money, or have you enough on the hook that she's more of an inconvenience than she's worth.

Really depends on the kidnapper's disposition...and whether he'll really deal once he realizes the police is involved, and what his reactions to different and changing circumstances would be.
Some might continue to deal...another might never be heard from again period.

I'd be interested in the ratio of success between kidnappings that did not involve the police, and those that did...hmm...might have to research that out.