Re: Obsession with movies

[joeskidbeck]

It seems that Patsy did not believe that a sff killed or kidnapped her daughter. In one of her interviews she stated that she believed two people knew what happened to her daughter, the person who actually killed her and one other that this person probably confided in. This flies in the face of a small foreign faction. How can it matter what any of us believe about it if she doesn't believe it herself? And, how can you blame the BPD for not investigating it further? Like the movies the rn refers to, the sff is purely fiction.

 

[joeskidbeck]

It seems that Patsy did not believe that a sff killed or kidnapped her daughter. In one of her interviews she stated that she believed two people knew what happened to her daughter, the person who actually killed her and one other that this person probably confided in. This flies in the face of a small foreign faction. How can it matter what any of us believe about it if she doesn't believe it herself? And, how can you blame the BPD for not investigating it further? Like the movies the rn refers to, the sff is purely fiction.

Link for above statement by Patsy Ramsey:

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/05011997ramseymediainterview.htm

Also, this wasn't an interview of PR, it was actually stated in their press conference on May 1, 1997.

 

[BBB167893]

It seems that Patsy did not believe that a sff killed or kidnapped her daughter. In one of her interviews she stated that she believed two people knew what happened to her daughter, the person who actually killed her and one other that this person probably confided in. This flies in the face of a small foreign faction.

Not only that, but the look on JR's face when she said it was priceless. If you've never seen it, you're really missing out.

How can it matter what any of us believe about it if she doesn't believe it herself? And, how can you blame the BPD for not investigating it further? Like the movies the rn refers to, the sff is purely fiction.

:clap:

 

[daisydaisy]

From that same media interview:

PR: [...] I'm appalled that ... either John or I could be involved in such a hideous, heinous crime. [...]

That you could be involved? Or that people could think you could be involved? Just an observation...

 

[MurriFlower]

Link for above statement by Patsy Ramsey:

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/05011997ramseymediainterview.htm

Also, this wasn't an interview of PR, it was actually stated in their press conference on May 1, 1997.

Is there video footage of this please?

 

[joeskidbeck]

Is there video footage of this please?

I found this transcript at ACR under Resource Links/Media Transcripts.

There is also a link for the video footage but it does not work. It links to CNN so I am trying to search their site for the footage. I will post it here as soon as I can find it.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

It seems that Patsy did not believe that a sff killed or kidnapped her daughter. In one of her interviews she stated that she believed two people knew what happened to her daughter, the person who actually killed her and one other that this person probably confided in. This flies in the face of a small foreign faction. How can it matter what any of us believe about it if she doesn't believe it herself? And, how can you blame the BPD for not investigating it further? Like the movies the rn refers to, the sff is purely fiction.

Thank you MISTER wizard....

Now that we're hot on the trail with the DNA, that SFF thing seems silly, doesn't it? I mean, now that we know everything that happened, in retrospect the SFF was goofy.

 

[BBB167893]

Is there video footage of this please?

I'll check on Youtube.

 

[madeleine]

In both cases (RDI and IDI) I've always wondered why the note says one thing and what really happened is another thing.Why write a note that says she will be executed,behedead and then strangle and assault her?This makes me think there were 2 people involved.
If IDI one probably was busy writing the ransom note while the other had to keep the child quiet and something bad happened.They didn't have time to write another note and left it there so they gain more time to get out of town or prepare an alibi.
If RDI ,the same.One wrote the note while the other was busy staging the scene.They had no time to go through the details.
Maybe this means that JB's death wasn't planned after all,dunnr maybe the inconsistencies in the RN are meant only to confuse everybody.

 

[daisydaisy]

In both cases (RDI and IDI) I've always wondered why the note says one thing and what really happened is another thing.Why write a note that says she will be executed,behedead and then strangle and assault her?This makes me think there were 2 people involved.
If IDI one probably was busy writing the ransom note while the other had to keep the child quiet and something bad happened.They didn't have time to write another note and left it there so they gain more time to get out of town or prepare an alibi.
If RDI ,the same.One wrote the note while the other was busy staging the scene.They had no time to go through the details.
Maybe this means that JB's death wasn't planned after all,dunnr maybe the inconsistencies in the RN are meant only to confuse everybody.

I've always wondered about this, too, and I'm sure it's probably discussed somewhere here (just haven't seen it yet). I'd venture to guess that the average RDI would explain that it was written as a distraction--the creation of a motive--during a time of panic. It was only after JBR was discovered, in the home (and not beheaded), that people start to think, "Hey, wait a minute..."

But, I'm really curious to hear opinions from IDI (or people on the fence) on why there's this disconnect. Did it have the same distraction/"throwing off" intentions? Was it meant to be extra cruel? As in, "Listen to these horrible things we are going to do to your daughter unless YOU stop us...Gotcha! We were planning to kill her all along." Or, were there two (or more) people who got their communication lines mixed up? Somebody who DID have a sick obsession with fantasy/movies and just wanted to include it for the thrill? These are the ideas I can come up with, but I'm interested to hear others...

 

[madeleine]

Was it meant to be extra cruel? As in, "Listen to these horrible things we are going to do to your daughter unless YOU stop us...Gotcha! We were planning to kill her all along."

Works for the vengeful intruder who wasn't a stranger scenario.IMO

Or, were there two (or more) people who got their communication lines mixed up?

Works for the kidnapping gone wrong scenario.IMO

Somebody who DID have a sick obsession with fantasy/movies and just wanted to include it for the thrill?

Works for the sadistic killer theory.IMO

All make sense!

See how many possibilities there are?And they make sense.Too bad LE never bothered to look them up.

 

[daisydaisy]

Works for the vengeful intruder who wasn't a stranger scenario.IMO

Works for the kidnapping gone wrong scenario.IMO

Works for the sadistic killer theory.IMO

All make sense!

See how many possibilities there are?And they make sense.Too bad LE never bothered to look them up.

I don't know; I'm not sure I'd say they "never bothered to look them up." I've found the Flight755 page at A Candy Rose to be very helpful in learning about people--strangers, acquaintances, and friends to the Rs--who could fit into these very scenarios and were "looked into" by LE. (I'm not trying to say that the list proves that LE did all they could or anything. It's just an interesting read for reference and for brainstorming other possibilities.)

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-15thStreet.htm

 

[madeleine]

Sorry I should have added IMO.It's my opinion based on what I've read that LE didn't look them up properly.
If you want check ST's and Beckner's depo re how C.Wolf was "investigated" along with some other suspects or the books related to the case where neighbours,friends,acquintances are reported to have said LE weren't interested and didn't ask them much.Or people who called LE with info but LE never returned calls.
Of course they SAID they did follow up every lead,no surprise here...

 

[daisydaisy]

Sorry I should have added IMO.It's my opinion based on what I've read that LE didn't look them up properly.
If you want check ST's and Beckner's depo re how C.Wolf was "investigated" along with some other suspects or the books related to the case where neighbours,friends,acquintances are reported to have said LE weren't interested and didn't ask them much.Or people who called LE with info but LE never returned calls.
Of course they SAID they did follow up every lead,no surprise here...

Yea, I gotcha. No worries! I was actually going to add that of course the competence of LE is highly debatable. (i.e. "Looking up" vs. "Looking into" vs. "Taking seriously") For me, I guess DNA exclusion is important, but I think that's debatable, too. (Sometimes I feel like opposing WSers might debate the sky being blue. :innocent

Flight755 just helps me to see that there ARE people besides the Rs who could fit pretty easily into the scene. Did LE have the right one and let him/her go? I don't know. Did they miss something entirely, letting someone they never even knew about get away? I don't know. Did they botch the investigation from the get-go? We wouldn't all be here so many years later if things were handled differently to begin with...

Since this is the movie obsession thread - do you think of anyone in particular on Flight755 or elsewhere that (in your opinion) DID fit the "movie motivation" as being inadequately investigated? Is the movie avenue relevant? Sometimes I think of it as just one of those indirect/general media influences that becomes part of the greater public consciousness. I think lots of people could come up with a "classic kidnapping scenario," even if they can't recite lines from or identify a particular movie. JMHO

 

[madeleine]

Since this is the movie obsession thread - do you think of anyone in particular on Flight755 or elsewhere that (in your opinion) DID fit the "movie motivation" as being inadequately investigated? Is the movie avenue relevant? Sometimes I think of it as just one of those indirect/general media influences that becomes part of the greater public consciousness. I think lots of people could come up with a "classic kidnapping scenario," even if they can't recite lines from or identify a particular movie. JMHO

To be honest I never gave it much thought because I didn't think the movie avenue was relevant. :twocents:

 

[slug]

I've always felt the ransom note was fake whoever wrote it.
So the writer is there trying to make a believeable RN it is quite possible they would remeber the odd line from a film it may not have been a consious effort to put lines from
a film in there though.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

To be honest I never gave it much thought because I didn't think the movie avenue was relevant. :twocents:

Oh, but it IS relevant, according to the experts.

 

[madeleine]

Oh, but it IS relevant, according to the experts.

Yes but how is it relevant since it can be applied to anyone I guess.Anyone could have borrowed movie lines for the RN but we can't know for sure if that happened indeed.It doesn't tell us much about who the writer is even if so.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Yes but how is it relevant since it can be applied to anyone I guess. Anyone could have borrowed movie lines for the RN but we can't know for sure if that happened indeed. It doesn't tell us much about who the writer is even if so.

Can't be applied to me, so I guess I'm not 'anyone'. I had never seen neither Speed nor Ransom. The lines, expressions, tone aren't original material, they're borrowed from the movies.

I suggest reading a couple other 'real' ransom notes for comparison.

RDI has always claimed: its what JR or PR thought a real ransom note would sound like, but we're too clever and aren't fooled and can see right thru that.

But, if you're IDI (?) then one needs to ask how come so much Hollywood?
The idea that 'we're all holding these lines inside' obviously doesn't wash for the entire note, which threatens to execute a 6 year old by beheading. This appears to be completely original idea, without any precedent on a global historical scale.

It doesn't tell us much about who the writer is even if so.

Why not? According to experts: fascinated with techno-crime movies, even obsessively watches them.

 

[BBB167893]

If RDI ,the same.One wrote the note while the other was busy staging the scene.They had no time to go through the details.

I've often wondered that myself.