So who does Aphrodite Jones think is the killer is?

[Roy23]

Roy, did you just call Beck an idiot? Because its reading that way to me. And well thats not playing nice and exactly what one would expect from IDI and I thought maybe you were better than that, I would hate to think I was wrong about you...

Absolutely not.

 

[Agatha_C]

You're right Beck... I see where the confusion came in whew.. Sorry for the misunderstanding Roy, but I get it now..

 

[Agatha_C]

Absolutely not.

I see that, Im sorry for the misunderstanding.. I didnt think you were that kind of person, I just had to ask...

 

[Roy23]

BIG WAY, pilgrim.



Not NOW, certainly. If the DA had arrested the Ramseys and thrown them into separate holding cells like the police WANTED to do and like the FBI, Dream Team lawyers and even Lou Smit SAID he should have done, we might not be here right now!



That's not the impression I get. It HELPS to read some of his OTHER statements. I know YOU weren't one of them, but I know of several IDIs who were quite worried when the police took back this case. And between you and me, maybe they OUGHT

Now I KNOW you don't understand! The cross fingerpointing defense was already in play WITHOUT the Rs having to actively blame each other for it. That was the whole point of my post. Take another look:

the cross-fingerpointing defense is where two people are involved in a crime, one as the leader and one as the accomplice, but the evidence is structured in a way that LE can't be sure which one was in the driver's seat and which one was along for the ride. Under the law as it is in America today, a prosecutor cannot--CANNOT--go before a jury and say "one of these people killed such and such, the other helped cover it up. You make up your mind as to which is which." No way! A prosecutor MUST, MUST bring specific charges against each person.



But against WHICH ONE? The reason why the Ramseys were not charged is not because there wasn't enough evidence. There was and is plenty. There just wasn't enough to say for sure which one KILLED her and which one HELPED.

Also, let's not kid ourselves here. Let's be prefectly honest about what KIND of "prosecutors" were at work here. Do you think they could have figured it

You DID read it, did you not? I don't do this for my HEALTH, you know!

I don't understand what in the h*** is so DAMN hard to understand about all of this!!

Dave, oh Dave,

Be careful in saying all the FBI wanted to take this to court. Cause that just ain't true. Take it for what it is worth.

 

[joeskidbeck]

Becky,

I appreciate those kind words. I truly do. You have to understand that we can't continue this discussion and not be either rude or condescending. Dave and I once had a respectful internet relationship. But eventually we are at each other. I respect his passion but I hate his message. Because I don't live here and write a book that doesn't mean his passion and or opinion should be stronger than mine.

I have already been categorized as like all other IDI's. I don't have a clan here and I challenge you to look through the history here and tell me otherwise. It is me by myself with my beliefs. And to all of you, I have posted Beckner's quote before and won't do it again. It is not taken out of context. Dave could post it if he wants. And of course i was not calling you an idiot.

The law enforcement now is investigating this crime as an intruder did it. Believe it or not. If the investigation changes to a Ramsey even with the DNA, I am listening. They had tunnel vision and couldn't make the case. It isn't cross fingerpointing, it is facts. I will never change your mind nor you mine. The investigators really believed the original DNA was transferred innocently and tried to prove it. They failed and ultimately advances proved the DNA is very significant. This is where the case stands. If you or anyone else can prove me that i am wrong, I am listening. But you can't.

I don't believe in punishing the Ramsey's anymore. I don't believe Alex Hunter or anyone else was a great man. Nobody. A lot of money was set to be made by taking this to court. Lots of publicity. I am not naive either. I don't pretend to know more than the investigators or DA. There is no statute of limitations on murder. Dr. Henry Lee advised Hunter to let this go for now. A lot has changed since then since he was the one who suggested a factory workers DNA in the panties. So much has changed since then.

We can't keep conversing on this until Mark Beckner is proven an idiot. Or that you guys know more than him.

Roy, I absolutely believe we can have discussions without resorting to rudeness and name calling. We've been doing pretty good so far, right? I would truly love to know why you believe so strongly in the R's innocence.
Man I ask you one question? If the dna did not exist, would you still believe they had no part in their daughter's death? I have to leave again for maybe twenty minutes but I will be back and I would love to continue this conversation.
TIA,
Becky

 

[Roy23]

Roy, I absolutely believe we can have discussions without resorting to rudeness and name calling. We've been doing pretty good so far, right? I would truly love to know why you believe so strongly in the R's innocence.
Man I ask you one question? If the dna did not exist, would you still believe they had no part in their daughter's death? I have to leave again for maybe twenty minutes but I will be back and I would love to continue this conversation.
TIA,
Becky

Becky,

The biggest reason I believe the R's are innocent is because that is what the investigation is saying. I also don't believe the R's are stupid enough to have had an accident and desecrate their daughter like what happened. There is no sign in their past that suggests abuse or crime. In fact, the opposite is suggested.

On the other side, I am also aware of the FBI playbook on in home murders and Ransom notes. The parents have to be looked at first. The percentages prove that. The BPD embarrassed themselves. They forced the Ramsey's into a corner. With all the leak they would have been fools to not Lawyer up. I believe if they would have shown any sign of professionalism cooperation would have occured.

It is a very strange case. They tried everything to put this on the family. But we are not going to agree and can't have real discussion until the investigators tell me that the Ramsey's are still under the umbrella. They say the answer is the DNA and it also suggest that the perp does not have DNA on file. I think the answer is right under their nose very close to the neighborhood.

 

[joeskidbeck]

Believe me, I know where you are coming from as I once felt the same way. It just seemed to me that they could not have done this to their daughter. One day I realized that there is a lot more to this story than any of us could possibly know. The only thing that makes any sense is that they are covering for someone. You know, there is the possibility that LE and the DA's office know exactly who killed JonBenet and they cannot name him. I am not a big fan of the BDI theory but I do believe there are huge family secrets in play here. At times I've even wondered if the R's actually found JonBenet with the head bash and automatically assumed BDI so they went into protect mode. One thing that really bugs me about the dna is that the owner is obviously not in CODIS and never has been. This tells me that an intruder would have had to have been the best intruder ever OR he had never commited any crimes at all. If the latter is the case, then he hasn't committed a crime since. We can agree on that much, right? I guess my next question for you is do you consider an intruder to be anyone that's not a Ramsey? There's just no way I can give credit to this person for committing the perfect crime and, if you think about it, he actually did if he is someone unknown to the family. I'm sorry for being all over the place but you have to understand that you are the first person I've ever been able to have this conversation with (at least since I've been RDI). I truly appreciate your input and I promise I won't be throwing any rotten tomatoes!

 

[Roy23]

Believe me, I know where you are coming from as I once felt the same way. It just seemed to me that they could not have done this to their daughter. One day I realized that there is a lot more to this story than any of us could possibly know. The only thing that makes any sense is that they are covering for someone. You know, there is the possibility that LE and the DA's office know exactly who killed JonBenet and they cannot name him. I am not a big fan of the BDI theory but I do believe there are huge family secrets in play here. At times I've even wondered if the R's actually found JonBenet with the head bash and automatically assumed BDI so they went into protect mode. One thing that really bugs me about the dna is that the owner is obviously not in CODIS and never has been. This tells me that an intruder would have had to have been the best intruder ever OR he had never commited any crimes at all. If the latter is the case, then he hasn't committed a crime since. We can agree on that much, right? I guess my next question for you is do you consider an intruder to be anyone that's not a Ramsey? There's just no way I can give credit to this person for committing the perfect crime and, if you think about it, he actually did if he is someone unknown to the family. I'm sorry for being all over the place but you have to understand that you are the first person I've ever been able to have this conversation with (at least since I've been RDI). I truly appreciate your input and I promise I won't be throwing any rotten tomatoes!

Yes, I believe an intruder could be anyone that is not a Ramsey. But let me say that I don't believe the motive to be a sexual one. Even with the act that occured. This will fit the RDI theory actually as well. You have to also consider what crimes that they will take your DNA. It is usually a violent crime or a sexual crime. You can be arrested for battery or robbery and they will get your prints but not DNA.

I dont have all the answers Becky and I am not claiming that I do. If I throw out theories then I am just as guilty as I claim RDI's are. So I am general about my thoughts. The motive is just as key to this case as the DNA. Hell, I struggle with this just as anyone does. The ransom note is important but they can't and will never prove who wrote it. I take it for what it is. A ransom. It seems to me that someone was in that house comfortably so to speak and had intentions on a kidnapping. Something changed and so did the plan.

It seems like a unprepared novice to me. The movie quotes suggest someone who is younger and not quite mature. To me at least. All the tools used were at the scene for the most part. But some of it is missing. The note being so long suggest insecurity. The answer is right there and I believe that someone was planning on shaking the Ramsey's down and hurting them. But I don't know who. And I don't trust the media for nothing on this case anymore

 

[joeskidbeck]

I agree with most of what you say so we are not so different after all. I will tell you that the R's behavior goes a long way with how I feel about them. In the same way that you have a hard time believing they could have desecrated her body, I have a hard time believing that they never showed righteous anger over the fact that her body was desecrated. For that matter, I just don't see any anger over anything that happened except the fact that they were being blamed. I will never forget JR's words when JMK was arrested. Not wanting to rush to judgement because of the way they were treated? It just doesn't make sense to me. I know I've never been in their shoes (thank God) and I am a Christian but if this had happened to my daughter I don't think I could be so forgiving. It would have helped my opinion of JR if he had been praising LE and anyone else involved in arresting JMK, but no, nothing. If anything his reaction convinced me that he already knew Karr was not guilty.
I appreciate your taking the time to talk to me about these things. I have to leave now, but I hope you are still willing to come back and talk. Have a good evening and let's talk more tomorrow.
Becky

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I agree with most of what you say so we are not so different after all. I will tell you that the R's behavior goes a long way with how I feel about them. In the same way that you have a hard time believing they could have desecrated her body, I have a hard time believing that they never showed righteous anger over the fact that her body was desecrated. For that matter, I just don't see any anger over anything that happened except the fact that they were being blamed. I will never forget JR's words when JMK was arrested. Not wanting to rush to judgement because of the way they were treated? It just doesn't make sense to me. I know I've never been in their shoes (thank God) and I am a Christian but if this had happened to my daughter I don't think I could be so forgiving. It would have helped my opinion of JR if he had been praising LE and anyone else involved in arresting JMK, but no, nothing. If anything his reaction convinced me that he already knew Karr was not guilty.
I appreciate your taking the time to talk to me about these things. I have to leave now, but I hope you are still willing to come back and talk. Have a good evening and let's talk more tomorrow.
Becky

John Ramsey made the statement about how he felt bad for JMK during the 48 Hours episode which aired in November 2006. Although it had come out by then that JMK had not killed JBR, it was true that he had sent sick, perverted emails about her murder. His email addresses was the day she died! I really don't see how John could have had any sympathy for JMK at all. He WISHES he had raped and murdered your daughter, John.

 

[Agatha_C]

John Ramsey made the statement about how he felt bad for JMK during the 48 Hours episode which aired in November 2006. Although it had come out by then that JMK had not killed JBR, it was true that he had sent sick, perverted emails about her murder. His email addresses was the day she died! I really don't see how John could have had any sympathy for JMK at all. He WISHES he had raped and murdered your daughter, John.

:goodpost::clap::clap::clap:

 

[BBB167893]

Dave and I once had a respectful internet relationship. But eventually we are at each other.

Don't you go blaming me. Yes, we HAD a respectful understanding. Until I realized a few things.

I respect his passion but I hate his message.

I'm not here to win friends.

Because I don't live here and write a book that doesn't mean his passion and or opinion should be stronger than mine.

Roy, when I think about how much of my life has been devoted to this, I can only envy your detachment.

The law enforcement now is investigating this crime as an intruder did it. Believe it or not. If the investigation changes to a Ramsey even with the DNA, I am listening. They had tunnel vision and couldn't make the case. It isn't cross fingerpointing, it is facts. I will never change your mind nor you mine. The investigators really believed the original DNA was transferred innocently and tried to prove it. They failed and ultimately advances proved the DNA is very significant. This is where the case stands. If you or anyone else can prove me that I am wrong, I am listening. But you can't.

Proud words. But pride goeth before a fall, does it not?

I don't pretend to know more than the investigators or DA.

I don't think we ARE pretending. I'd be willing to bet that we know more than at least some of the people who are "working" this case.

 

[BBB167893]

Thanks Agatha. What I'm wondering is this: When he said Beck's statement, could he have been shortening "Beckner"? That's really the only way for me to not feel like I've been called an idiot. Oh well, I'm sure Roy will straighten this out, he doesn't strike me as the kind of person who would call someone an idiot because they disagree with him.

You don't know him like I do, becky. Allow me:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5355200&postcount=274"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Why would the Ramseys need to stage?[/ame]

 

[Roy23]

Don't you go blaming me. Yes, we HAD a respectful understanding. Until I realized a few things.



I'm not here to win friends.



Roy, when I think about how much of my life has been devoted to this, I can only envy your detachment.



Proud words. But pride goeth before a fall, does it not?



I don't think we ARE pretending. I'd be willing to bet that we know more than at least some of the people who are "working" this case.

Where did I blame you for us going at each other? But hey you can go ahead and think you know more than the investigators. Is it okay with you that I am not buying that?

 

[BBB167893]

Dave, oh Dave,

Be careful in saying all the FBI wanted to take this to court. Cause that just ain't true. Take it for what it is worth.

Well, a few things:

1) Technically what you say is true, and I should have rephrased it. It would be more accurate to say that the FBI agents who actually worked on the case alongside the police told them to arrest the Ramseys (not necessarily take them to court; let's not confuse things).

2) As for what it's worth, if the people you're speaking of are the same ones I'm thinking of, it's worth nothing.

3) Don't change the subject. You called down the thunder, and I obliged.

 

[BBB167893]

I also don't believe the R's are stupid enough to have had an accident and desecrate their daughter like what happened.

Ah yes, the old IDI stand-by: "too nice to do this." Like I haven't heard that one before.

There is no sign in their past that suggests abuse or crime.

Yeah, that's what the FBI agents said about the person who committed this crime, too! So you're in pretty good company!

 

[Roy23]

You don't know him like I do, becky. Allow me:

Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - Why would the Ramseys need to stage?

Dang right I said that Becky. I wish I would not have used the word that I did. But I sure meant it at the time regardless whether it was appropriate or not. You don't need to prove anything to her Dave. She is squarely RDI. She just hasn't conversed with an IDI like me before. Don't excommunicate her for expanding her horizions a little.

 

[BBB167893]

Where did I blame you for us going at each other?

That's in case you do.

But hey you can go ahead and think you know more than the investigators.

Well, not ALL of them. I'm sure Michael Kane knows more than I do. Isn't it funny how the previous DA made sure to specifically exclude him from the investigation when she took over?

Is it okay with you that I am not buying that?

Not really. I'm actually trying NOT to be a jerk about this. I'm serious.

 

[BBB167893]

Dang right I said that Becky. I wish I would not have used the word that I did. But I sure meant it at the time regardless whether it was appropriate or not. You don't need to prove anything to her Dave. She is squarely RDI. She just hasn't conversed with an IDI like me before. Don't excommunicate her for expanding her horizions a little.

I wouldn't think of it. I just thought it would help her out.

 

[DeeDee249]

And let's not forget that in any case of abuse, whether it results in a death or not, there is always a FIRST time. Even serial killers have a FIRST victim. In the JB case, the sexual abuse occurred on more that one occasion, so obviously there was a first instance. As for the violence of the death, there need not be ANY prior history of physical abuse (as opposed to sexual abuse). A burst of temper- a knee-jerk reaction to her scream- both easily translate to bashing her on the head with whatever was handy (maybe the flashlight) or slamming her into something hard enough to punch a piece of her skull out. NEITHER require a pattern of abuse. Sometimes the COD is the ONLY time.

SO many cases of both physical and sexual abuse happen in families where there was absolutely NO indication or "history" of abuse. "Pillars of the Community" seem to be especially prone to such cases- you know- the SECRET abusers. The people NO ONE would expect or believe could be guilty.