Justice Watch Support JW "Enquirer - Thread Four" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... Enquirer - Thread Four, darby, 15:18:25, 3/22/2001 Where, V, 15:35:34, 3/22/2001, (#1) fixing supper, South, 15:41:41, 3/22/2001, (#2) eating supper, freebird, 15:44:11, 3/22/2001, (#3) Aw C'mon, Ned , darby, 15:44:45, 3/22/2001, (#4) oh lordy : ), Gemini, 16:01:01, 3/22/2001, (#5) How Odd, Rose1, 16:10:17, 3/22/2001, (#9) Here are the KEY words people, Nedthan Johns, 16:02:18, 3/22/2001, (#6) Darby, Nedthan Johns, 16:03:35, 3/22/2001, (#7) Ned, mary99, 16:20:04, 3/22/2001, (#11) Not Front page....., Mee Too, 16:05:20, 3/22/2001, (#8) That's right, Watching you, 16:17:12, 3/22/2001, (#10) CYA, Sabrina, 16:28:36, 3/22/2001, (#12) $1,000,000, JR, 16:31:07, 3/22/2001, (#14) Gemini, WatchingYou, LurkerXIV, fly, 16:30:07, 3/22/2001, (#13) Watching you, JR, 16:36:24, 3/22/2001, (#15) ......MEE TOO, jonesy, 16:36:38, 3/22/2001, (#16) Rose1....., Mee Too, 16:37:03, 3/22/2001, (#17) HI....JONESEY...., Mee Too, 16:42:08, 3/22/2001, (#20) the word for the day is:, Nedthan Johns, 16:41:15, 3/22/2001, (#19) Pay attention, Ned, Ginja, 16:40:58, 3/22/2001, (#18) Ned, Rose1, 16:50:27, 3/22/2001, (#25) Ned, JR, 16:46:30, 3/22/2001, (#23) Ginja..., Nedthan Johns, 16:43:44, 3/22/2001, (#21) First, Harley, 16:52:02, 3/22/2001, (#26) jeez , freebird, 16:45:20, 3/22/2001, (#22) So..., Country Girl, 16:59:48, 3/22/2001, (#28) You do not address, Watching you, 16:47:32, 3/22/2001, (#24) Hey everyone!, Msracoon, 16:59:36, 3/22/2001, (#27) Ned...., rose, 17:29:05, 3/22/2001, (#33) Thanks WY, DuBois, 17:23:44, 3/22/2001, (#31) Nedthan has, Watching you, 17:07:52, 3/22/2001, (#29) She also said, darby, 17:28:42, 3/22/2001, (#32) Obstruction of Justice...., Charley, 17:21:17, 3/22/2001, (#30) I agree with Ned, watchin', 17:29:35, 3/22/2001, (#34) And even if they knew he, darby, 17:49:11, 3/22/2001, (#38) ohhhh Yawwwwwwnnnnnnnn, Nedthan Johns, 17:44:00, 3/22/2001, (#36) OK, Burke was awake, Edie Pratt, 17:43:58, 3/22/2001, (#35) Edie, Nedthan Johns, 17:45:58, 3/22/2001, (#37) more to come?, reporter, 17:55:22, 3/22/2001, (#39) Nedthan, Watching you, 17:58:44, 3/22/2001, (#40) Will they....., rose, 18:25:02, 3/22/2001, (#44) yeah, Rose, Edie Pratt, 18:30:39, 3/22/2001, (#47) no, Nedd, not murderers, Edie Pratt, 18:17:04, 3/22/2001, (#42) Missing the point..., Diwi, 18:12:52, 3/22/2001, (#41) Opportunities, Starling, 18:37:56, 3/22/2001, (#48) Well, here's the thing, see, Watching you, 18:25:57, 3/22/2001, (#45) You are right, Diwi,.........., sds, 18:24:39, 3/22/2001, (#43) Oh, BTW, Watching you, 18:28:25, 3/22/2001, (#46) Inappropriate behaviour, Real Stormy, 18:43:59, 3/22/2001, (#49) Three foul balls do not make a strikeout..., Diwi, 18:50:22, 3/22/2001, (#50) Personally, I think Nedd Called it some ..., Dunvegan, 19:49:18, 3/22/2001, (#52) BS detectors , mary99, 19:21:07, 3/22/2001, (#51) Clintonesque, v_p, 19:53:12, 3/22/2001, (#53) Personally, Rose1, 20:08:10, 3/22/2001, (#54) V_P, momo, 20:19:18, 3/22/2001, (#55) Thanks for the refresher, Dunvegan, FT, 20:51:18, 3/22/2001, (#59) Kicked off chat!, Rose1, 20:50:36, 3/22/2001, (#58) Confidential to you-know-who-you-are , darby, 20:46:40, 3/22/2001, (#57) Why They Sang, sarah, 20:37:30, 3/22/2001, (#56) Colo. DA...., rose, 22:02:23, 3/22/2001, (#65) Sarah....Exactly Right!, LurkerXIV, 21:35:15, 3/22/2001, (#61) ARRRGGHHH!, LoriAnn, 21:34:24, 3/22/2001, (#60) HAHAHA!, LurkerXIV, 21:52:40, 3/22/2001, (#63) There was also Newsweek, janphi, 21:49:38, 3/22/2001, (#62) Good find, janphi...., LurkerXIV, 21:56:57, 3/22/2001, (#64) Shoes foundation....., rose, 22:11:56, 3/22/2001, (#67) Please..., Pedro, 22:10:08, 3/22/2001, (#66) NO!, LoriAnn, 22:21:19, 3/22/2001, (#68) Pedro?, Rose1, 22:53:45, 3/22/2001, (#69) Rose..., Pedro, 23:04:38, 3/22/2001, (#71) Lori..., Pedro, 23:02:52, 3/22/2001, (#70) ................................................................... "Enquirer - Thread Four" Posted by darby on 15:18:25 3/22/2001 For our webbies. As Lacey would say, carrion... [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "Where" Posted by V on 15:35:34 3/22/2001 Where is everybody? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "fixing supper" Posted by South on 15:41:41 3/22/2001 ! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "eating supper" Posted by freebird on 15:44:11 3/22/2001 Been over yonder looking around, I think they are having funeral services, its deader 'n a doorknob over there. LOL Poor guys, a wasted 50 bucks doncha know [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "Aw C'mon, Ned " Posted by darby on 15:44:45 3/22/2001 If you are so aghast at us making hay out of a tab article, then you ought to be even more incensed at the Ramseys for generating the article we're discussing. Let's face facts. The only reason that the article even exists is because the Ramseys granted an interview to the Enquirer. Doesn't make them guilty of murder, of course. But I'd be mighty disgusted with the Ramseys for doing such a hypocritical thing if I were you. These people went so far as to make a prime-time "documentary" about their utter outrage over what the tabs have done to them. John supposedly made it his life mission to change the tabloid method of delivering news to the American public. And now the Ramseys are doing this very thing they have claimed is unethical--and turning a profit in the process. Some life mission! These people have made a mockery of themselves. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "oh lordy : )" Posted by Gemini on 16:01:01 3/22/2001 This, along with Craig Lewis' article a week or so ago, makes me think Ramsey POV articles were part and parcel of the last settlement they reached with ... hmmm ... was it The Star? Don't all the main tabs have a common owner? After glancing through this one, they come across as either the most naive people ever ... or people who are dumbing down for what they perceive to be the level of tab readers. What they must not realize is, this makes them sound at best insincere, at worst, manipulative liars. I don't think they (Patsy especially) live on the same planet as mainstream America. These tab interviews were a very bad move on their part ... whether they're innocent or not. Thanks WY. Yeah, L-XIV, not a good move to use GEM and tabloid stories together. : ) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "How Odd" Posted by Rose1 on 16:10:17 3/22/2001 What a lovely bunch of coconuts ovah yanda. What a nice slap in the face. The real funny part is watching the back paddling! LOL.....Little ol Lilac, the wilted flower, claimed it to be a LIE and then Jams had to straighten her out....LOL..ROFLMAO...by telling her it was TRUE! LOL....of course, Jams has to add her comments, like the tabs are reading it..LOL. She really is out of the loop isn't she! LOL...LovelyPenquin is running a close third on laughs. For those that never ventured to the swamplands, it really is good for a laugh now and then....especially now! ROFLMAO.... OK, here is my question. PR hopes that Nedra will come back and tell her the murderer? Now, I thought PR didn't believe in this kind of stuff? She has refused the offer of James Van Prague for a free session in which he could have helped her talk to the "other side"? (He is a renowned psychic in this regard). AND, if they claim they knew about Burke awake back in 1999, then why did they lie on the Today Show with Couric about Burke being asleep? Hmmmmm? Their ship is sinking and they are taking their first mate with them, at the ovah yanda! Ahhhhh, more amusment - just what I needed this month! Thanks for the chuckle PR and JR, AND especially JAMS! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "Here are the KEY words people" Posted by Nedthan Johns on 16:02:18 3/22/2001 DOI: Both of us race to Burke's room at the far end of the second floor and find him apparently still asleep. Best not to arouse him until we figure out what's happening her, I think. He's better off asleep for now. I step into the hall." APPARENTLY. . Visibly. [Obs.] Hobbes. 2. Plainly; clearly; manifestly; evidently. If he should scorn me so apparently. Shak. 3. Seemingly; in appearance; as, a man may be apparently friendly, yet malicious in heart [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "Darby" Posted by Nedthan Johns on 16:03:35 3/22/2001 If you are so aghast at us making hay out of a tab article, then you ought to be even more incensed at the Ramseys for generating the article we're discussing. Let's face facts. The only reason that the article even exists is because the Ramseys granted an interview to the Enquirer. Doesn't make them guilty of murder, of course. But I'd be mighty disgusted with the Ramseys for doing such a hypocritical thing if I were you. These people went so far as to make a prime-time "documentary" about their utter outrage over what the tabs have done to them. John supposedly made it his life mission to change the tabloid method of delivering news to the American public. And now the Ramseys are doing this very thing they have claimed is unethical--and turning a profit in the process. Some life mission! These people have made a mockery of themselves. APPARENTLY, I don't see the hypocrytical angle to all this by the Ramsey's [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "Ned" Posted by mary99 on 16:20:04 3/22/2001 OK, you want to read 'truth' into their use of the word 'apparently'-- but how can you deny that in parsing their words as they did, to distort the truth, when they could have simply told the truth, that it doesn't make them liars? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "Not Front page....." Posted by Mee Too on 16:05:20 3/22/2001 ......I guess it's ok in Hir's eyes that the Ramsey's gave an interview with the Enquirer as long as their mugs weren't on the FRONT page....LOL go figure :-) wonder if Patsy knew before hand that she wasn't gonna make Pin-Up/POSTERGal rather being stuffed inside the Tab....However if one seeks attention...something is better then nuttin...... FWIW...You can bet your bottom dollar there was a Ramsey reason in their favor that they gave this interview... ......(Mee Too) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "That's right" Posted by Watching you on 16:17:12 3/22/2001 Ned, but why did they not clear that up when they wrote their book. Why did they not clear it up in the paperback edition of their book? They have continued to say that Burke was asleep. I see nothing incriminating in that statement - that Burke was apparently sleeping. The incrimination comes by omission. If they knew after Burke's GJ testimony that he had indeed been awake, why did they not clarify that in the book they wrote AFTER the GJ finished its work. That is quite strange. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "CYA" Posted by Sabrina on 16:28:36 3/22/2001 This is such a poor show of C.Y.A.... and couldn't Lin Woody come up with someone a little more mainstream and reputable than the Enquirer??(sorry Scribe and A.K.- I still love 'ya) Even People? But I guess they don't pay, huh? Only the tabs pay. And the Ramseys are penniless now so they need the income. I think this is a case of C.Y.A. (cover your a--) because of the upcoming lawsuits!! They know they have to cover up some of their inconsistancies. They think we are all stupid. Can't wait to see what the swamp mistress is saying about this. I wonder if she likes her crow medium or well done? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "$1,000,000" Posted by JR on 16:31:07 3/22/2001 Maybe PR and JR are going to confess in the tabs soon and cash in on that big reward - having lots of money in prison helps the prisoner but lots of favored treatment. Didn't the R's make the statement on several of the talk shows that they had never doubted nor questioned each other? Now PR says she did wonder if JR had molested JBR - they just can't keep their story straight. But then liars usually have that problem not to say they are lying - maybe just having "Senior Moments?" Why would it take 4 1/2 years (they now say 2+ but have denied much of what is said here recently in the talk show circuit) to remember an important detail like your only child remaining at home was awake for one of the saddest, scariest and most important periods in your life? Again...gag! Having trouble swallowing all this chit! If this interview is really direct quotes (this is the tabs after all) I suspect this investigation may get hot real quick and the R's 1)know they are about to be arrested 2)know they do not have the right friends in the right places anymore to protect them or 3) have been threatened by Burke to that he will reveal all. (IMHO of course.) Moving this from Enquirer orginal to here - Gosh Y'all have been busy while I was at my attorney's office and I was a dummie and didn't cehck for continued threads. Sorry. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "Gemini, WatchingYou, LurkerXIV" Posted by fly on 16:30:07 3/22/2001 Thanks for that section you quoted, WY + LurkerXIV. I'm with Gemini that the Ramseys are disingenous, at best. They should have added the caveat suggested. I'm beginning to think my alien theory is correct, only the Ramseys are the aliens. Nobody from this earth would think the way they apparently do. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "Watching you" Posted by JR on 16:36:24 3/22/2001 Watching you on 16:17:12 3/22/2001 Ned, but why did they not clear that up when they wrote their book. Why did they not clear it up in the paperback edition of their book? They have continued to say that Burke was asleep. I see nothing incriminating in that statement - that Burke was apparently sleeping. The incrimination comes by omission. If they knew after Burke's GJ testimony that he had indeed been awake, why did they not clarify that in the book they wrote AFTER the GJ finished its work. Perhaps so they can later say they were misqouted? (Batting eyelashes...) Also, maybe now that the GJ info is a free for all they forced Burke to tell them what he said if they hadn't already done so? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "......MEE TOO" Posted by jonesy on 16:36:38 3/22/2001 ..sure glad you finally crawled out from under those juniper bushes ~! I too, as other posters, noticed that Patsy was now going to 'use' nedra to her advantage, wonder what else we will hear now that she has gone ~! Gem - I agree that there had to be some negotiation point with 'the tabs' over the rams lawsuit, as we know they obviously did not come near getting what they wanted - or we sure would have heard about it - of course it is all sealed, LMAO - [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "Rose1....." Posted by Mee Too on 16:37:03 3/22/2001 Recall Pam Paughs a believer (Talking with the other-side)...she just forgot or just didn't ask JonBenet WHO murdered her.....Now then there's Patsy...she claims she converses with JonBenet.like where's my car keys etc all those little meaningless questions...OH course she's never asked JonBenet that "pesky' little question either ..... Sylivia Brown has offered her opion... .......(Mee Too) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "HI....JONESEY...." Posted by Mee Too on 16:42:08 3/22/2001 How ya been.....good to see Ya :-) ......Mee [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "the word for the day is:" Posted by Nedthan Johns on 16:41:15 3/22/2001 Apparently. Apparently they thought he was asleep, he wasn't. I don't see how that makes them liars in the least. If the tabs were doing an interview with the Ramsey's couldn't they come up with anything better then this? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "Pay attention, Ned" Posted by Ginja on 16:40:58 3/22/2001 Old Janus-faced John continues to speak doublespeak out of both sides of his mouth (with Patsy not far behind in her own outrageousness!) Their story is that Burke Ramsey (I think Pats included the last name because there was another Burke there that night. Where's Lake when you need him? LOL) was sleeping until 7 a.m. when John and Fleet went upstairs and woke him up. They stick to that story for more than 4 1/2 years. Then, they admit that yeah, Burke was awake. But we didn't know it until his grand jury testimony. That was in 1999; yet right up until this "special Enquirer scoop", both continue to claim Burke (Ramsey) was NOT awake. And then, (to clarify their admission that he was awake?) they not only admit that he was awake, but crying and very upset!!!! Duh! Oh, and then we have an excuse for why John couldn't have molested his daughter; the reason being that Nedra shares JBR's bedroom while caring during Patsy's stage 4 cancer days. Is this an unconcious admission that John was molesting his daughter at age 3? At age 3, wouldn't "Jonny B" be in bed early? Was Nedra calling it a night at the same time? All this says is that John didn't molest his daughter in the bedroom while Nedra was in it!!! Duh again! Your six year old daughter is brutally murdered, and when you think about it, your heart goes "pitty pat" ?????? !!!!! That's what I say when I see a Tom Berenger movie!!!! When I think about my precious dog Maximillian dying in my arms this past Christmas morning, my heart skips beats and races, my throat constricts and I burst into tears. This couple makes me sick and I just don't understand you! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "Ned" Posted by Rose1 on 16:50:27 3/22/2001 You really should add your comments to the public forum, where more postings are needed and yours will certainly be appreciated. Surely you jest? This article plainly shows that the R's have, if nothing else, been thwarting the truth and for quite some time. Watching You is correct. IF they knew about this since 1999, then why not say so earlier - in there book and all the interviews they did for their book? "Apparently" is a cover word for people who are covering for something or someone. How can they say they never discussed this with Burke? Wouldn't they want to get info from him? Maybe vital info? Puullleeezz. The suggested "apparently, he was awake", is well.....blatantly....dumb. Now, I wonder if they have given this interview in lieu of something else. Why not a paper they consider reputable? Why this paper - a tabloid? This is very suspicious if you ask me. Way to wierd. Something is going on here, IMO, something big. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Ned" Posted by JR on 16:46:30 3/22/2001 Nedthan Johns on 16:41:15 3/22/2001 Apparently. Apparently they thought he was asleep, he wasn't. I don't see how that makes them liars in the least. If the tabs were doing an interview with the Ramsey's couldn't they come up with anything better then this? Uh Ned - how long have you been studying this case and have you read all the books, seen all the interviews and such? It won't get much better than this except the complete confession IMHO! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "Ginja..." Posted by Nedthan Johns on 16:43:44 3/22/2001 I am sorry they make you sick. I still don't see where they lied. There is DNA at the crime scene and that's why they won't be arrested. It doesn't belong to them, so hate them all you want, someone out there is getting away with murder, and the evidence is what is important here, not that the Ramsey's weren't clear regarding whether Burke was or wasn't awake. They thought he was, and that's what the stated. This thread bores me. Bye [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "First" Posted by Harley on 16:52:02 3/22/2001 of all if Burke was only "apparently" asleep how did they no he was not dead. Would be hard to tell the difference without going over and checking to see if he was breathing. If my daughter was missing and I had found that ransom note I would make damm sure my son was okay. As far as the article perhaps Burke had let slip to someone (a friend perhaps) that he had been awake earlier than the Rams said and they figured shoot better get our spin on this before the friends says something to someone else... and the word gets out. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "jeez " Posted by freebird on 16:45:20 3/22/2001 Some people deserve to be duped. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "So..." Posted by Country Girl on 16:59:48 3/22/2001 When do you think we'll hear that now they'll remember JonBenet eating pineapple? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "You do not address" Posted by Watching you on 16:47:32 3/22/2001 the question, Nedthan. Why did they not clear this little matter up when they wrote their book. Why did they continue to lead everyone to believe Burke was asleep the whole time? Please answer the question. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "Hey everyone!" Posted by Msracoon on 17:00:20 3/22/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 17:00:20, 3/22/2001 Can we say "MPD"? Edit: Can we also say: "generational"? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "Ned...." Posted by rose on 17:29:05 3/22/2001 I will never believe you again, if you can not admit that the Ramseys have lied!!!! Any right thinking person knows that the Ramseys have talked to Burke and discussed his sisters death with him. You can spin this any way you want, but I will take any thing you say from now on with a grain of salt. Something has got to be going down for this interview to have happened. We will hear shortly what will be revealed. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "Thanks WY" Posted by DuBois on 17:23:44 3/22/2001 I knew we could count on you for the latest! Maybe they saw my million dollar reward thread and Patsy thought i might as well cash in! Ned-- Quit being a wet blanket! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "Nedthan has" Posted by Watching you on 17:07:52 3/22/2001 what is referred to as selective hearing, or in this case, selective reading. My kids have this to some extent. It is not heritary, but my mother has it, too. You hear and respond to only what you wish to hear and respond to. You will answer only to that which you wish to hear and repond. You will pretend to not have heard or seen the rest of whatever it was that person had to say or write. Sort of like being deaf in one ear and can't hear out of the other ear. Or blind in one eye and can't see out of the other eye. Has anyone ever seen Nedthan get bored and leave a thread? Bwa hahahahahahahah, not. Must be it got too hot for him here. But, I digress. Jams says the Rams absolutely did not get paid for the interview - that is a BORG lie. Imagine that. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "She also said" Posted by darby on 17:28:42 3/22/2001 "darby on JW summed up the attitude for the day on that forum - - "We are going to have LOTS of fun with this article." Called this "typical." Can anyone blame us? As I said earlier, whether or not they are murderers, this interview with the Enquirer goes right against the very grain of what they supposedly were trying to convey in their documentary. What happened to John's life mission? How can anyone believe in their sincerity--on this or anything else? They come across as complete buffoons. How can anyone--BORG or not--defend the Ramseys' latest stunt? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "Obstruction of Justice...." Posted by Charley on 17:21:17 3/22/2001 Hello Mary Keenan. Now is the time to lock them up in separate cells and individually interrogate them! No time restriction for interrogations when your in lock up....Shit they lie, how in the heck would they know that Burke had tears in his eyes...when they didn't know he was awake until GJ? So telling to me was when Patsy said she questioned whether JR was abusing JB....fits my idea of what happpened to JB. That Patsy accidently killed JB and then JR helped her cover it up because he was previously abusing her and knew that police would find out and the finger would be pointed at him! Next came the staging and digital penetration from the paintbrush handle to cover previous abuse. Patsy probably didn't know for sure the JB was abused until after her death. Afterall, what parent would cover for another when it comes to their child? (IMO) Geez, where is the prosecution team...what ***ing more to they need? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 34. "I agree with Ned" Posted by watchin' on 17:29:35 3/22/2001 Apparently IS the key word! Apparently he was asleep. He could have been dead, Ned! Shows little concern for their son, doesn't it? What kind of parents who have just 'discovered' one of children missing and ASSUME the other is JUST SLEEPING? Ned, you are sorely needed over yonder. They are frantic from hand crankin' that darn spin machine. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 38. "And even if they knew he" Posted by darby on 17:49:11 3/22/2001 was sleeping, what kind of parents wouldn't wake him up and ask a million questions on whether he had heard or seen anything out of the ordinary during the night or in the recent past? You see, this a case where the Ramseys are damned if they did and damned if they didn't. If they didn't wake Burke up, something is hinky. If they lied--denying that he was awake and that they talked to him--something is hinky. The only thing that would have made sense from a standpoing of innocence, is if Burke's parents had grilled him immediately (perhaps necessitating waking him up), and then subsequently told the truth about doing so. Anything short of that makes it look like they weren't truly worried about the prospect of JonBenet losing her head. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 36. "ohhhh Yawwwwwwnnnnnnnn" Posted by Nedthan Johns on 17:44:00 3/22/2001 the question, Nedthan. Why did they not clear this little matter up when they wrote their book. Why did they continue to lead everyone to believe Burke was asleep the whole time? Please answer the question. Nedd: Answer What question? Please they thought their son was alseep. You people eat this tabloid stuff right up don't you? Apparently they thought he was, and he wasn't BIG DEAL And NO Rose I don't think they lied. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 35. "OK, Burke was awake" Posted by Edie Pratt on 17:43:58 3/22/2001 sooooo, I guess that means he has more to offer should the BPD want to have another word with him, no? He was awake, had tears in his eyes, and heard all the commotion! Tears over what? What did he see in the night that would make him cry? If he didn't know what was going on, then why would he be upset? Why PRETEND to be asleep? Afraid? Of whom? He didn't ask anyone why the cops were there, didn't ask about the supposed trip that was planned, so what's he crying for? And, Nedd, nomatter how deep in the sand you choose to put your head, the fact that these two gave an interview to A TABLOID for MONEY, rather than sharing this "newfound" revelation with the BPD, says they are far more interested in THEMSELVES than they have ever been in finding the killer of their child. THAT makes them scum, Nedd, nomatter what you spew. I pity Pat, too. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 37. "Edie" Posted by Nedthan Johns on 17:45:58 3/22/2001 sooooo, I guess that means he has more to offer should the BPD want to have another word with him, no? He was awake, had tears in his eyes, and heard all the commotion! Tears over what? What did he see in the night that would make him cry? If he didn't know what was going on, then why would he be upset? Why PRETEND to be asleep? Afraid? Of whom? He didn't ask anyone why the cops were there, didn't ask about the supposed trip that was planned, so what's he crying for? And, Nedd, nomatter how deep in the sand you choose to put your head, the fact that these two gave an interview to A TABLOID for MONEY, rather than sharing this "newfound" revelation with the BPD, says they are far more interested in THEMSELVES than they have ever been in finding the killer of their child. Nedd: Do you have confirmation they did it for money? Where is the proof??? THAT makes them scum, Nedd, nomatter what you spew. I pity Pat, too. Edie, that may be true, but it still doesn't make them murderers. This is my opinion. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 39. "more to come?" Posted by reporter on 17:55:22 3/22/2001 I bet we are just seeing the tip of the iceberg. A two hour interview might yield much more than we have seen. What wee the ground rules? Is it filmed? Perhaps an article about the eye blink analysis? The voice stress analysis? The who knows what analysis? And then an article telling even more tidbits. And then an article about the setting up of this interview. And then an article about what Lin Wood did during the interview. Oh, this could be the crack everyone is hoping for. I don't like the tabs, but must admit that their relentless pursuit for good stories has allowed them to scoop main stream media time and again. The main stream are owned by humungous conglomerates now and might jump in now that the E has tested the waters. Carry on. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 40. "Nedthan" Posted by Watching you on 17:58:44 3/22/2001 Duh [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 44. "Will they....." Posted by rose on 18:25:02 3/22/2001 Suddenly remember that JonBenet woke up briefly when Patsy was putting her to bed and they feed her pineapple? Lou Smitt is another christian who has lost my respect. He has known about this and other lies and has continued to keep quiet. Ned, can you honestly say you don't belive the Ramseys have never sat down with Burke and talked about JonBenets death and his rememberances of what he did and heard that morning? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 47. "yeah, Rose" Posted by Edie Pratt on 18:30:39 3/22/2001 they probably took him to the basement and put him under the light, lol! He's smart keeping mum, a good soldier. Hopefully, one day, he'll win the war on JFJBR. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 42. "no, Nedd, not murderers" Posted by Edie Pratt on 18:17:04 3/22/2001 suspects yes, but not bonafide murderers - yet. Seems they're dying to tell it to anyone for a price, because NYL wouldn't make that up. I trust his word over yours, Nedd, I'm sorry to tell you. That night and morning should be CRYSTAL in their minds, and specifically the morning of December 26th, 1996. They should have told the police about the tears in Burke's eyes, about his fear that something was "very very wrong", that morning when it mattered. Instead, they had him spirited away by the very person they told the police "knows knots", no doubt the minute they left. I know I'm not supposed to call you an idiot, Nedd, but if you think this new version of the truth sounds benign, then I'm just going to have to think it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 41. "Missing the point..." Posted by Diwi on 18:12:52 3/22/2001 As usual, anything possibly damaging to the Rams is jumped on in here like wild rabid dogs on a bloody lamb. The Burke thing is minor, and does not prove anything. No one is perfect, and no one should be expected to have perfect memories of every little detail of every little thing, and especially in times of great trauma and stress. The Rams may be lying, or may not. But the Burke inconsistency is hardly the issue here (for me at least). What is disturbing is that the Rams have all of this time been blasting the tabs, even making it all some moral/philosophical issue, i.e., most of the media have distorted the truth here, and have also sabotaged our basic rights as citizens under the law to be presumed innocent until proved guilty. Now, what does their willing sit down with the NE say about all of their criticism in the past? And what does it say about any which may be forthcoming in the future? I agree with another poster in thinking that this at the very least paints them as somewhat disingenuous and hypocritical, or extremely naive. I tend to lean strongly towards the former however, at least until more hard information is forthcoming. It also raises a deeper possibility for myself, in that I've always thought the Rams very sincere in expressing what they believe. Now, with this, I'm not so sure about that anymore. Kinda guessing that the IRC chat rooms will be a jammin' about this though. I'll try to pop in tomorrow nite if everyone brings their own beer... :-) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 48. "Opportunities" Posted by Starling on 18:37:56 3/22/2001 They have had plenty of opportunities to state that Burke was pretending to be asleep. Their book and the Couric interview. Jameson is the one stating 1999 is when they found out about this pretending to be asleep. But no matter what - it still does not account for the description John gives, regarding Burke having big tears in his eyes. You wouldn't know it, unless you saw it. A lie is a lie, and no - a murderer it does not make. But wake up and smell the coffee folks, for it's been brewing for five years now. Why would innocent people tell lies? Change their stories? It doesn't help them, but it does hurt them, because they are the prime suspects in this case. I know it, you know it and they know it! It is manipulative. They are manipulative. And John Ramsey has been King Manipulator from day 1. People who make excuses for them, are the ones I feel sorry for now. Even if you don't want my pity - it's there. Starling [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 45. "Well, here's the thing, see" Posted by Watching you on 18:25:57 3/22/2001 someone over yonder has it all fingered out. Lin Wood did this deliberately so he could trap the Enquirer into making false statement (and probably sue them, right?) I will bet my left leg the Enquirer did not attribute any quotes to the Ramseys that they did not make. However, it wouldn't surprise me any to learn they may have spun things just a tad. Not as much as usual, though - I think a real effort was made to keep it as factual as possible. If anyone would admit it, just about every reporter with just about every newspaper in this country spins a little - everyone is slanted a bit - even the New York Times. The ENQUIRER sensationalizes quite a bit, but that doesn't mean their facts are not usually right. They very often are. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 43. "You are right, Diwi,.........." Posted by sds on 18:24:39 3/22/2001 Why did they go to the Tabs after they lambasted them (the Ramseys) and more importantly, why did they do it now? What are they afraid of and why do they (the Ramseys) want specific information (Burke's cying) out before it becomes public knowledge? I guess the Atlanta intruder ruse didn't work, so they are trying this angle to attract attention to themselves. What a bunch of loosers. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 46. "Oh, BTW" Posted by Watching you on 18:28:25 3/22/2001 don't expect much out of jams right now. Hir's still trying to 'splain spiders. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 49. "Inappropriate behaviour" Posted by Real Stormy on 18:43:59 3/22/2001 What always strikes me where the Rams are concerned is that they exhibit inappropriate behaviour and make inappropriate statements. It was inappropriate for them to give an interview to the NE and inappropriate for them to accept money for it, if they did so. And Patsy always makes inappropriate comments--"Pity pat????? Poster girl????" How bizarre. But then, it is also inappropriate to kill one's daughter. These people are wierd. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 50. "Three foul balls do not make a strikeout, however..." Posted by Diwi on 18:50:22 3/22/2001 How's that for an esoteric post title? :-) This makes 3 very suspicious things the Rams have been involved in for me in recent times. Yes, the intruder, right when they were being sued. Second, John's "refusal" to fork over a measily $3000 to possibly clear their names forever AND bring the "real" perp to justice, especially when as the Star presented it, the Rams themselves seemed to take the caller seriously. And now this, sitting down cordially with the "devils" they've been condemning for years. None of this makes the Rams guilty. I still lean strongly to thinking they're not. However, from day one, I've never really "liked" these folks, and this makes me dislike them even moreso. In all fairness however, my liking them or not has no real relevance to the evidence and hard facts. I understand the pent-up emotions and sincerity of a lot of you, now going on so many years, but to me, giving into that and letting it cloud our fairness and reason, will never bring justice for Jon Benet. The same goes for any "denial" which may be ongoing in the die-hard pro-Ram side, ever since the intruder story broke. Now we have two more "stories," and none of them really paint the Rams in a favorable light. This is an interesting phenomenon for me however, being a member of a basically anti-Ram and pro-Ram forum. I think the truth of this case is no doubt somewhere in the middle. In any event, it is an event sociological... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 52. "Personally, I think Nedd Called it some ..." Posted by Dunvegan on 20:01:42 3/22/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 20:01:42, 3/22/2001 19. "O.K. Diwi, let me answer some of your questions.." Posted by Nedthan Johns on 11:15:09 10/25/2000 Diwi: No one, despite protestations to the contrary, "knows" who killed Jon Benet. RIGHT, NO ONE KNOWS FOR CERTAIN, YET! BUT CERTAINLY WHAT WE DO KNOW AT THIS POINT LEADS TO PATSY RAMSEY. And for whatever reasons, this "case" has never even got into a preliminary hearing, let alone a court. RIGHT AGAIN, NOT YET. REMEMBER IT MAY TAKE YEARS. LOOK AT THE MOXLEY MURDER. Why not? Is it, as some (or most) of you may wish to believe, for reasons other than a lack of evidence and motive which would cause a sure acquittal under the laws of the land (reasonable doubt)? If so, I'm all ears. Start with motive if you like. MOTIVE? EASY, ONE DISTURBED MOTHER, OBSESSED WITH HER DAUGHTER TO THE POINT SHE WAS DYING THE CHILDS HAIR, AND SPENT COUNTLESS HOURS ON DANCE CLASSES, PHOTOGRAPHS, AND COSTUMES. SHE EXPOLITED HER DAUGHTER, HAD GONE THROUGH A BOUT OF CANCER (ALTHOUGH SOMEWHAT OVER DRAMATIZED IF YOU ASK ME) AND WAS FAST APPROACHING HER 40TH BIRTHDAY. HER HUSBAND (YOU KNOW WHO THAT IS) WAS HAVING EXTRA MARITAL AFFAIRS ON HER, AND SHE SNAPPED ONE LATE NIGHT, AFTER A LONG EXHUSTING CHRISTMAS DAY. WITH LITTLE TIME LEFT TO PACK AND WRAP PRESENTS TO TAKE TO MICHIGAN, WHEN SHE DIDN'T WANT TO GO ANYHOW, AN ALTERCATION TOOK PLACE WITH PATSY AND HER DAUGHTER. WHEN SHE SAW WHAT SHE HAD DONE, SHE TRIED TO COVER HERSELF, AND THEREFORE STAGED A KIDNAPPING SCENE. That's my main reason for presuming the Ramseys innocent. IF YOUR MAIN REASON IS LACK OF MOTIVE. PLEASE TELL ME WHAT THE INTRUDER'S MOTIVE WAS? Diwi: how anyone can be so firmly certain of the Ramsey's guilt. It's a real mystery to me. WELL IF YOU PICKED UP THOMAS BOOK AND READ IT, THEN MAYBE IT WOULDN'T BE A MYSTERY ANYLONGER. FACTS ARE, PASTSY FIBERS ARE ALL OVER THE CRIME SCENE. PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THIS CAN HAPPEN, WHEN SHE SAID SHE HAD NEVER BEEN IN THAT BASEMENT THAT MORNING? THAT'S FOR STARTERS. THEN EXPLAIN TO ME, HOW AN INTRUDER FED JB PINEAPPLE? WAS THIS BEFORE OR AFTER HE STUNED HER WITH THE IMAGINARY STUN GUN? THEN WE HAVE THE 911 CALL. O.K. YEA, NONE OF US HAVE HEARD IT. SO EITHER ONE, MSNBC NEWS, AND OTHER TOP NEWS OFFICALS AND EXPERTS ARE EITHER a.) LYING OR b.) THERE REALLY IS AUDIBLE SOUND OF BURKE BEING AWAKE IF b. IS TRUE THE RAMSEY'S ARE LYING. WHY? LET'S REVIEW BURKE'S TESTIMONY. HE CLAIMED HIS SISTER WAS AWAKE AND WALKED INTO THE RAMSEY HOME THAT NIGHT. MUCH DIFFERENT FROM HIS PARENTS STATEMENT THAT JB WAS ASLEEP AND JOHN CARRIED HER INTO BED. SO WE CAN EITHER ONE BELIVE: a.) BURKE IS LYING b.) THE PARENTS ARE LYING WHY WOULD A 9 YEAR OLD CHILD LIE ABOUT SOMETHING AS SMALL AS WHETHER HIS SISTER WAS AWAKE OR NOT? Diwi: I hope you and Chris understand this. In my internet travels I have also been the subject of viruses sent to me, email bombs, and so forth. COULD IT BE PEOPLE DON'T LIKE YOU? WONDER WHY? BY THE WAY LET ME THANK YOU FOR COMING ON AND TALKING HERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CAN OFFER, SINCE THE QUESTIONS WE ASK HERE ARE THE SAME THE BPD HAVE BEEN TRYING TO ASK FOR 4 YEARS. I THINK MR. KLAAS SUMS IT ALL UP WITH HIS STATEMENT: "IT NEVER PASSED THROUGH MY MIND ONCE TO EVER HIRE A LAWYER, OR NOT WORK WITH POLICE" "IF YOUR CHILD IS MISSING OR FOUND MURDERED, YOU WOULD DO EVERYTHING WITHIN YOUR POWER TO LOOK FOR HER OR BRING THE MURDERER TO JUSTICE." PLEASE TELL ME DIWI WHAT THE RAMSEY'S HAVE DONE TO BRING THIS MURDERER TO JUSTICE? EVEN THEIR OWN FAMILY WEB SITE LISTS A NUMBER THAT IS NOW DISCONNECTED. WHAT I FIND PATHEDICALLY SAD, IS THE THAT THE TWO HAVE JOINED TOGETHER, AND SOMEHOW THINK THEY ARE GOING TO GET AWAY WITH THIS. I CAN'T IMAGINE WHAT IT IS LIKE TO LIVE A LIE, OR HOW EITHER ONE OF THEM CAN FACE THEMSELVES IN THE MIRROR EVERY DAY. ONE THING FOR CERTAIN DIWI, IF I WERE TO MAKE A BET, I WOULD BET MY ENTIRE HOUSE, CAR AND FORTUNE THAT THE RAMSEY'S ARE GUILTY. CAN IT BE PROVEN IN A COURT OF LAW? NOT YET, BUT IT'S COMING MY FRIEND, IT'S COMING. Preach on, Brother Neddy, Preach on! (Geeesh...and some folk complain about my emphasising a word or two with capitol letters on occasion...whatever....) Sure you wouldn't like to do an interview with one the tabs, about now, Nedd, ole fella? Clear up some of the discrepencies between what you said then...and what you've said lately? Obviously, before the lobotomy...or accident, or whatever it was that happened, Nedd...you had the Ramseys down cold. This Enquirer interview is a tactical maneuver...chess pieces are being moved by different players into the best offensive and defensive positions. Let the games begin.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 51. "BS detectors " Posted by mary99 on 19:21:07 3/22/2001 Diwi, what you're describing, sounds to me, like a person who is torn between believing in the absolute presumption of innocence as a Constitutionally protected right....and knowing a load of BS for what it is. Let them have their presumption of innocence - in a courtroom. Meanwhile, believe what every fiber of your heart, mind and soul is telling you- they are consummate liars who have been manipulating the justice system for 4+ years while their daughter lies dead. Justice is good. JonBenet deserves it. The Ramseys are out for only one thing - saving their @sses. Justice for JonBenet had nothing to do with this article. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 53. "Clintonesque" Posted by v_p on 19:53:12 3/22/2001 I agree with whomever said this was just pre-trial cya. The 911 tape will be played and they know it. They will just say they were so traumatized they didn't really hear Burke get up. "Was he awake or not Mr. Ramsey?" "Well, that depends on what your definition of "was" is. Another trick he learned from Clinton, "I was watching the movie but I didn't have the ear-phones on." (I didn't inhale). [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 54. "Personally" Posted by Rose1 on 20:08:10 3/22/2001 I don't care what was actually said in the article itself. I am more curious as to why they gave an exclusive to a tabloid, of all papers. Why from Lin Wood's office? Why THAT paper? Why not something more legit? They have been suing these tabloids for years, NOW they embrace them for an interview? Something is up here - and to me, I am more curious about that. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 55. "V_P" Posted by momo on 20:19:18 3/22/2001 I think I was the one who said that the Rams are just trying to CTA (cover their ass). There's only one reason they would use the Enquirer and that is because lawsuits coming down the pipes are going to reveal their lies, one by one. Maybe they will soon say that JonBenet was awake when they got home. I think Burke testified before the grand jury that JonBenet was awake. I hope the 911 tape is played that proves Burke was on the tape. This isn't the last that we will be hearing from the Rams. What I want to know is why they wouldn't go to the cops with this instead of the Enquirer. Now who isn't cooperating with the police as usual? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 59. "Thanks for the refresher, Dunvegan" Posted by FT on 20:51:18 3/22/2001 This bolsters my theory that Nedd is not so much interested in JfJBR as he is in stirring things up and drawing attention to himself. Luckily for Nedd, he is spoonfed with attention here at JW. Please, Nedd, come disagree and argue with us! We thrive on bickering, dissension and controversy! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 58. "Kicked off chat!" Posted by Rose1 on 20:50:36 3/22/2001 Well, I went to chat ovah yanda, was civil, tried to get answers to my questions about the article......LOL...I have now been banned from chat. LOL.....she said I was trying to get quotes....LOL....well, I don't do quotes about them, but I will paraphrase. My questions: Why THAT paper: Paraphrased Answer by Jams: Well, the Enquirer has been asking for months, so why not? Then she went off on discussing the lies the paper told about John calling and changing his answer. My reply: That is precisly why I don't understand why they chose that paper, and not one more legit. Maikai had several answers. 1. because that paper gave a reward (which they no longer do) 2. because the R's knew it would have world wide distribution...geez. LP had no replies. I wonder why????? Another answer: Because the R's felt it was time. Another answer: Because it was old news anyway. And then, and finally, I was told to say goodbye and I wasn't welcome there and my questions had been answered......*poof* kicked off channel by Jams....LOL.....and she says that the fun we are having with this here is typical! LOL....ROFLMAO. *yeah right, lets talk typical...really* LOL.. Bottom line is this. They HAVE no answers to those questions. They ARE out of the loop, and have been for some time. "Hence", why the answers are far and few between on the thread about the article ovah yanda. They didn't know about the article before NYL busted another of their huge bubbles. They have been posting double and triple posts, as if trying to convince their own minds of what they are saying. They have completely fallen apart over there ever since the CW suit was allowed to go forward. Jams is always very telling, as she starts swearing and posting redundant replies when she gets nervous. Lilac showed herself quite well today to be completely out of the loop, by claiming the whole article was a lie - till Jams told her it was true, then the little lilac flower hid in the shade for the rest of the day, wilting no doubt. LP is ferociously trying to make good of the whole sorted mess. Maikai is desperate, looking for answers that will satisfy MaiKai, and is still looking for them...LOL. Oh yeah, of course, Jams said she was on the phone quite a bit today with Atlanta........LOL.....*yeah, right* next spin please....this one is quite old "hat". Now, where is that suit against Thomas by the R's, hmmmm? The clock is ticking fast on that one. And a note to the little spy/s on this forum for Jameson: if you are going to email her everything said here about her by me and/or others, do it right - don't edit it, have some balls and email all of it will ya, geeezz. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 57. "Confidential to you-know-who-you-are " Posted by darby on 20:46:40 3/22/2001 I guess I should be flattered. I realize you are busy, so I'll be nice and chalk it up to that. I just don't want anyone to think *I* was the one who copied your stuff. The time each was posted tells the truth. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 56. "Why They Sang" Posted by sarah on 20:37:30 3/22/2001 "John's admission that Burke was awake came after The ENQUIRER revealed to him and Patsy the details of our earlier exclusive report that Burke's voice is heard on an enhancement made of the 911 call. The youngster says, "What did you find?" and "What do you want me to do?" -------------------------------- The Enquirer made them do it. They heard the tape in their attorney's office, and they had to 'splain it. That swooshing sound you hear is some major backpeddling going on.. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 65. "Colo. DA...." Posted by rose on 22:02:23 3/22/2001 The DA's office in Boulder just does not want to take this case to court. They could have pictures of the murder being committed and they would not admit to having enough to go to court. Now here we have a child murdered in her own home. Just so happens her brother says she walked up the stairs, her father says he carried her from the car and she was so sound asleep he was amazed. Then we find she had pineapple in her digestion track that was ate after she arrived home. They have fibers from Patsy in on the tape and in the paint box that the killer retrieved supplies from. We have a war and peace Ransom note that is consistent with Patsy's handwriteing. A RN that is indented and uses familar family saying. The we have Burke saying he was up and awake and then his parents swearing for 4+ years that he never woke up. His father saying he never spoke or saw Burke while Patsy was on the telephone talking to the 911 operater. 911 recording saying otherwise. All the evidence points to Patsy as the killer and setting up the crime scene, and John ampowering her story by going alone. What is the DA's problem? And don't come back with DNA evidence that can be excused as transfer innocently!!! A jury can understand this DNA and get passed it, then can't the DA understand that. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 61. "Sarah....Exactly Right!" Posted by LurkerXIV on 21:35:15 3/22/2001 The Enquirer made them do it. They heard the tape in their attorney's office, and they had to 'splain it. Up to this point, the Ramseys have had to guess about much of the evidence against them. Was the tape enhancement accurate, and was Burke's voice actually heard? Was John Ramsey's DNA found in the panties? Were his prints on the garrote? Their buddy John Douglas likes to point out the FBI investigative stratagem of leaking false evidence. Maybe Beckner has done this, just to see which points are picked up and spun by the Ramsey Team. The enhanced tape is one item that may have been true or false. Now that Lin Wood is doing discovery for his defense of the Wolf and Pugh suits, it looks like he has finally gotten his hands on the enhanced tape. Patsy probably pissed her pants right there in Lin's office when she heard Burke's voice on the tape! Enter Damage Control. The purpose of this interview. However, as is usual with Patsy, once that mouth starts going, you never know what's going to come out. Suspicions of John molesting JonBenet; her heart going pitty-pat; JonBenet was "zonked". Lin Wood probably wanted to garrote Patsy then and there! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 60. "ARRRGGHHH!" Posted by LoriAnn on 21:34:24 3/22/2001 Jammy is deleting my posts almost as fast as I make them. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 63. "HAHAHA!" Posted by LurkerXIV on 21:52:40 3/22/2001 jams is busier than a one-armed paperhanger deleting posts by the borgmeisters! Did you do that naughty Kimberly Ballard post, Lori? ROFL! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 62. "There was also Newsweek" Posted by janphi on 21:49:38 3/22/2001 From the Newsweek interview 3-19-00: [NW:] There is also a report that the tape of Patsy's 911 call to police that morning may also have captured the sound of your youngest son, Burke, asking, 'What is going on?' You told the police that Burke was upstairs asleep in bed when you called the police. JR: That 911 thing is a Red Herring. I have never heard it, but people have told me that at best it sounds like chipmunks. Not particularly intelligible. I'd like to see the media demand that the police release it. [NW:] Do you recall Burke coming down and you having any kind of conversation? JR: I have no recollection of that. At all. With 99.99 percent certainty that did not happen. PR: We saw him asleep in bed - we had run to check on him and he was asleep in his bed - and the next time I saw him was when I was sitting in the sunroom and he was walking down the front stairs with John and Fleet White to leave. JR: I remember we looked in on Burke and saw that he was asleep. My thought was that was where he needed to be; let's just leave him there. People said to me, 'Why didn't you wake him up and see if he knew anything?' That's bizarre. If Burke knew his sister had been taken he would have woken us up. He wouldn't go back to sleep. That never crossed my mind to wake him up and ask if he knew where his sister was. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 64. "Good find, janphi...." Posted by LurkerXIV on 21:56:57 3/22/2001 ...the totality of their lies on just the tape ALONE is amazing. All of you who said-- just let them talk and talk and talk, and sooner or later they will be hanged by their own words--well, you were right. Spin, unspin, re-spin; forget what you said to this one and that one -- liars always get caught in their own web of deceit. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 67. "Shoes foundation....." Posted by rose on 22:11:56 3/22/2001 Remember the Shoes Foundation that they talked about in their interview on CBN interview? Have any of you heard any more about this? They seem to tell any one who interviews them what they think will impress the audience they are talking to!!! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 66. "Please..." Posted by Pedro on 22:10:08 3/22/2001 ....forum rules are clear regarding mentions to other forums and other forum's posters. Take this as a warning. Paraphrase and mentions when in context and mention of names to give credit where it belongs are welcome, however this thread has to cold down a little bit. Thank you. Pedro [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 68. "NO!" Posted by LoriAnn on 22:21:19 3/22/2001 For once in my life, I'm innocent. Colding down now, Pedro, LOL! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 69. "Pedro?" Posted by Rose1 on 22:53:45 3/22/2001 Excuse me, but who is Pedro? Other than someone who posts over there and likes it. Pedro, you will soon watch and learn exactly what happens at the so called public forum. She has already deleted Gsquared, me (of course), some from Snuffles, some form Masq and has threatened several others, and now claims she will delete more "a LOT more" and "will not apologize for it". *gag* Why? Because they don't agree with her, or won't learn fast enough TO agree with her and her parishners. Get it? If you don't you soon will. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 71. "Rose..." Posted by Pedro on 23:05:51 3/22/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 23:05:51, 3/22/2001 ...I am a moderator at JW. Rose, I know jameson has deleted some posts by Masquerade and she ahs explain me they were deleted during jameson's attempt to delete yours by mistake and because they make no sense after delete yours. I read your and i would have delete them too. BTW: Rose I post whereever I want and you better learn good maners, I am sorry your forum was a fiasco. Pedro [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 70. "Lori..." Posted by Pedro on 23:02:52 3/22/2001 ...I know you're innocent, my remarks weren't addressed to you at all. I know you know rigth from wrong. Pedro [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]