Justice Watch Discussion Board "Facts & Discreptancies" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... Facts & Discreptancies, Ryder, 11:30:58, 5/10/2000 The facts: everyone agrees, Ryder, 11:34:45, 5/10/2000, (#1) Up for interpretation, Ryder, 11:36:49, 5/10/2000, (#2) Discreptancies, I'd like help with, Ryder, 11:47:12, 5/10/2000, (#3) Ryder, momo, 12:15:14, 5/10/2000, (#4) momo, Ryder, 12:24:57, 5/10/2000, (#6) Ryder, you are right, momo, 13:52:13, 5/10/2000, (#13) The note, I think...., Greeality, 12:55:23, 5/10/2000, (#8) PMPT..., Jeanilou, 14:16:07, 5/10/2000, (#14) My opinion on, Watching you, 12:17:10, 5/10/2000, (#5) I just find it bizarre, gaiabetsy, 12:27:25, 5/10/2000, (#7) headstone date, Greeality, 13:01:17, 5/10/2000, (#9) Grreality, really, , gaiabetsy, 13:05:11, 5/10/2000, (#10) Ryder, lecarl, 13:11:21, 5/10/2000, (#11) Lecarl & gaiabetsy, Ryder, 16:01:12, 5/10/2000, (#18) lecarl,, gaiabetsy, 13:42:25, 5/10/2000, (#12) This may be odd....., Luvsbeagles, 15:06:56, 5/10/2000, (#15) Luvsbeagles, Ryder, 16:02:43, 5/10/2000, (#19) Greeality, Ryder, 15:57:02, 5/10/2000, (#17) gaiabetsy, Ryder, 15:52:32, 5/10/2000, (#16) I remember hearing, Real Stormy, 16:42:13, 5/10/2000, (#20) I say they are saying 12/25 because>>, ayelean, 17:01:47, 5/10/2000, (#21) Ryder, you could, lecarl, 19:11:14, 5/10/2000, (#22) lecarl..., Chickadee, 21:47:32, 5/10/2000, (#25) luvsbeagles--I don't think, fiddler, 20:34:53, 5/10/2000, (#23) Who is Next?, canadiana, 21:13:35, 5/10/2000, (#24) My my, Watching you, 05:39:12, 5/11/2000, (#26) Ryder this is for you..., Luvsbeagles, 11:34:14, 5/11/2000, (#27) Luvsbeagles, Ryder, 12:53:29, 5/12/2000, (#32) Ryder....interesting, Luvsbeagles, 22:05:21, 5/12/2000, (#35) Luvsbeagles, Ryder, 22:15:40, 5/15/2000, (#38) I thought it was, Househazard, 11:43:44, 5/11/2000, (#28) About the shower..., Jeanilou, 15:55:45, 5/12/2000, (#34) NOt only was that lame...., Luvsbeagles, 11:49:08, 5/11/2000, (#29) So she , Househazard, 11:59:58, 5/11/2000, (#30) Househazard, Ryder, 17:49:18, 5/15/2000, (#36) my favorite Ramnesia moment, Edie Pratt, 12:11:18, 5/11/2000, (#31) ST's book, Seashell, 14:02:56, 5/12/2000, (#33) Seashell, Ryder, 17:51:51, 5/15/2000, (#37) Ryder, Seashell, 14:49:43, 5/16/2000, (#39) There were three full baths on the second floor!, Cassandra, 15:05:00, 5/16/2000, (#40) I don't know about you, Cassie, Edie Pratt, 15:51:59, 5/16/2000, (#41) Sex and the Murder, Seashell, 21:54:58, 5/16/2000, (#42) Fingerprints and DNA, canadiana, 22:33:44, 5/16/2000, (#43) Fingerprints, Luvsa Mystery, 08:56:37, 5/17/2000, (#44) Some0, Househazard, 09:12:50, 5/17/2000, (#45) Househazard, Seashell, 11:27:48, 5/17/2000, (#46) Seashell, Househazard, 11:40:48, 5/17/2000, (#47) Flashlight, Luvsa Mystery, 18:12:20, 5/17/2000, (#48) ................................................................... "Facts & Discreptancies" Posted by Ryder on 11:30:58 5/10/2000 I first read the ST book when it came out, then read DOI. I am now reading PMPT. There are some discreptancies between the various books which I would like to sort out with anyone who can help me. For a while, I have thought of starting a thread where we could list all the things upon which all accounts, even the R's, agree and then isolate the issues which accounts leave up to individual interpretation. Others could add to these points, as they see fit. And I would appreciate correction on the following. I was going to list issues of different degrees of certitude here, but for the sake of organization of the thread, I will post replies related to the different areas. This will be particularly helpful to newbies or to those who have not read all the material out there. And since we are all waiting for something to happen, maybe you can all help me with this. [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "The facts: everyone agrees" Posted by Ryder on 11:48:50 5/10/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:48:50, 5/10/2000 1] That PR was wearing the same clothes on the 26th as on the 25th. 2] There were no R fingerprints on the ransom note, the Rs claiming that they did not pick it up, others claiming that Rs wiped all prints on it. 3] John was indeed making plans to fly family out to Atlanta shortly after the body was found. 4] In PMPT, Schiller states that the suitcase below the window belonged to JAR. Is this a fact or has it been disputed by anyone? I'd really like an answer to this one. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "Up for interpretation" Posted by Ryder on 11:58:21 5/10/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:58:21, 5/10/2000 1] Whether or not the blow to JB's head came before or after strangulation. 2] JBR as victim of sexual abuse prior to the 25th? (I tend to think that this is a given, but want to know if anybody is still claiming otherwise - it would seem that at least Dr. Boeuf questions this. Has anyone else - i.e. the Rams? 3] PMPT includes testimony by someone, forget who, who claims that during his speech at the funeral service, JR made it clear that he disapproved of JBR's beauty pageants. While he does not say this in DOI, he does recount telling JB that talent was more important than appearances. In interviews, it is always PR who asserts that "perversity" is in the eye of the beholder, while JR speaks of seeing the whole pageant think as PR, fearing death from cancer, wanting to live the "teen-age experience" right away. From all of this, I am beginning to assume that JR did not approve of the pageant thing. Anyone have any other material on this? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "Discreptancies, I'd like help with" Posted by Ryder on 11:47:12 5/10/2000 What prompted this thread is that I am now reading PMPT, after first having read the ST book and then DOI. So I'd really like help with issues coming from the Schiller book. 1] In the ST book, it says that the suitcase was originally NOT under the window, but that FW moved it towards the window. In the Schiller book, it says that the suitcase was originally under the window but that FW moved it away from the window. Does anybody know which it is? 2] In DOI, the Ramseys claim they got home at 9:00 p.m. on the 25th. In PMPT, the Whites say that the Rs left their house at around 9:30 p.m. AND the Rs also first said that they got home at 10:00 p.m.. These times correspond to one another. I believe that ST mentions the discreptancy between the R testimony of moving up arrival time by 1 hour. Given the consistency between both initial R and White testimony regarding this point, we can assume that 10:00 p.m. was the right time. Anyone have any ideas of why the Rs would have changed their testimony with regard to this? 3] In PMPT, the Rs were dropping off gifts at the Walker's and at the Stines'. In DOI, they claim that they just went to the Stines' and because it was too late, they didn't go to the Walkers'. Does anyone know which it is? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "Ryder" Posted by momo on 12:15:14 5/10/2000 I believe there were 7 prints on the note. 5 were Patsy's, 1 was from the worker at the CBI Lab, and 1 from a cop at the Ramsey's. I believe the reason for the inconsistency with regards to the time they got home Christmas night is this. The Ramseys want to show that they got home at the earliest possible time. This would give Patsy time to get things done before the trip the next morning. It also is to show that JonBenet was put to bed by 9. They said they were in bed by 10 or 10:30 which would give the perp plenty of time to get in and out. The scream was around midnight and the pineapple shows her time of death to be around 1am. Anytime the Ramseys lie about something, when we may seem to think it is silly(like why lie about it), there is a BIG reason. Whatever bases they may not have covered in the beginning, they have certainly tried to cover since. I believe that JonBenet was sexually abused for months if not years before her death. And believe it or not I still waiver on which came 1st, the hit or the strangulation. On the delivering of the presents, I know they stopped at 2 houses but decided to skip the 3rd and do it after they returned from the trip. Most of us here read the books in the opposite order that you have. Makes me think about getting the PMPT down off the shelf and reading it again. You should get A Mother Gone Bad by Andrew Hodges. It really shows the inner workings of Patsy's mind. momo [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "momo" Posted by Ryder on 12:24:57 5/10/2000 Correct me if I'm wrong but I thought that there were PR prints on the PAD but none on the ransom note. I have looked carefully at all R statements regarding the handling of the note and it looks to me that although they do not say directly that they did NOT touch the note, they go out of their way to say that they were leaning over it, walked over it, turned around to read it, were down on all 4 to read it etc. There seems to be a clear desire to imply that they never put their hands on it, thereby confirming the ST claim of the oddity of lack of R prints on the note. I think that this is an important issue to the case because it point to R cleaning of fingerprints - here unjustified and therefore suspicious. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "Ryder, you are right" Posted by momo on 13:52:13 5/10/2000 I guess this case is getting the best of me. It was the pad of paper that the prints were on. I had a brain fa*t(LOL). Please forgive me. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "The note, I think...." Posted by Greeality on 12:55:23 5/10/2000 >I believe there were 7 prints on >the note. 5 were Patsy's, 1 >was from the worker at the >CBI Lab, and 1 from a >cop at the Ramsey's. I have read so many things that I forget what was where - but I too have noted discrepancies and think this is an EXCELLENT idea for a thread! The above mentioned finger-prints, I believe - are from the PAD that the paper came from, but I am fairly certain that there were no good prints at all, except for a partial palm print, on the note itself. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong, and maybe someone can find the source for this. I have been very interested in the RNote lately also. I am also remembering that the Ramseys have "neither confirmed nor denied" touching the note. It was written that John "handed the note" to an officer,and also that FW (?) saw the note lying on the floor?? Looking forward to sorting a few things out with this thread! Thanks! -Gree [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "PMPT..." Posted by Jeanilou on 14:16:07 5/10/2000 >Most of us here read the books >in the opposite order that you >have. Makes me think about getting >the PMPT down off the shelf >and reading it again. I, too, am going to re-read PMPT. I just now got home from the library from checking it out. Just as soon as I finish the ST book, I am going to re-read and make a list of "facts" and compare ALL 3 books and see what is consistent and what is not. Maybe I can get all straight in my head then. Jeani [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "My opinion on" Posted by Watching you on 12:17:10 5/10/2000 #2, where the Rams claim to have gotten home at 9:00 instead of the earlier reported time of 10:00 - This is a puzzler - at first glance that one hour would not seem important. But, it becomes important, simply because the Rams thought it important enough that they change the time. It is my opinion that, because the Rams have since been questioned about the date they put on JB's headstone - 12/25/96 - they decided it might be wise to give themselves a little more time on that date during which she could have been killed. The time between 10:00 and 12:00 that would have been available for them to get home and for everyone to get soundly asleep would have cut a two-hour time period for the killer to strike down considerably, leaving perhaps an hour for the killing to have occurred on 12/25. Their answer as to why they put 12/25 on the headstone was pretty weird, actually - wanted to let everyone know their daughter was killed on Christmas. With the addition of that one hour, it gave them extra time to get everyone into bed, asleep, and for the killer to strike, perhaps making their 12/25 date as the day of JB's death more believable. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "I just find it bizarre" Posted by gaiabetsy on 12:27:25 5/10/2000 that if a person had a choice about the date of a murder being Christmas or the day after, they'd choose christmas. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "headstone date" Posted by Greeality on 13:01:17 5/10/2000 >that if a person had a choice >about the date of a murder >being Christmas or the day after, >they'd choose christmas. I hate to say anything seemingly in defense of the R's, but I can see the dates on a headstone as comemmorating the times that person was in our lives. My g-ma died overnight, and although the coroner said more like 3:30 or 4 am, we put the day before on her headstone. The days she was 'with us'. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "Grreality, really, " Posted by gaiabetsy on 13:05:11 5/10/2000 I find that somewhat bizarre. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "Ryder" Posted by lecarl on 13:11:21 5/10/2000 The Rams put the DOD as 12-25, which means she died before midnight. You can bet the change in time has something to do with the pineapple found in JBR. If they arrived home at ten & she ate pineapple & was killed before midnight, the PARENTS HAD TO BE AWAKE WHEN SHE ATE THE PINEAPPLE. It's just a little adjusting to fit the facts as they came up. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "Lecarl & gaiabetsy" Posted by Ryder on 16:01:12 5/10/2000 I also think that that's the reason the time was moved up, because of the pineapple. I wondered if there were any other possible reasons. Still, insofar as this would need confirmation from people other than the SS, it is going out on a limb. Do any of you know if this comes down to the word of the Rs and SS vs the word of the Whites? It seems to me that there were many other people at the Whites' who could provide confirmation, in addition to other friends (Walkers?) at whose house they dropped off a gift. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "lecarl," Posted by gaiabetsy on 13:42:25 5/10/2000 I'm with you about this. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "This may be odd....." Posted by Luvsbeagles on 15:06:56 5/10/2000 and not entirely rational, but if God forbid, one of my children were to die it would be EXTREMELY important to me that everything on their tombstone was correct. I am not sure why this it...but it is. I think maybe I would feel like it was important to show that here was this person, they were born on this day and died on this day and they existed. If something were wrong it would seem like they werent that important. Crazy I know, but for this reason I have always felt that JBR DIED on 12/25. It was before midnight. It would have been better for them to have put 12/26 for that gives them more leeway for an intruder....but I dont think they could do it. I think having everything right on her grave was important for them too. This topic makes me rather sick...so I'll close for now. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "Luvsbeagles" Posted by Ryder on 16:02:43 5/10/2000 I agree with everything you say. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "Greeality" Posted by Ryder on 15:57:02 5/10/2000 Well, here's what I find interesting about your post. Had I been the Ramseys, MY explanation for the choice of the date would have been that: I would say, well, I picked the 25th because that is the last time that I saw her alive. BUT, this is not the reason JR gives: he says that the 25th was picked to remind the world that someone evil picked Christmas day to bring their world to an end. Something like that - working from memory. The real quote is found in the LKL transcript and same thing in DOI. In other words, his reasoning is not the same as yours and mine. He seems to be saying that this famous date was picked on principle. I find that strange reasoning, personnaly. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "gaiabetsy" Posted by Ryder on 15:52:32 5/10/2000 Discussions about this point between the Ramseys would have been interesting .... assuming there were some. If they were linked to JB's death, then of course they would know. But, if we assume that they were not involved in the death, did not know if it was 25th or 26th (a lot of assuming which I am not naturally inclined to do here, but which I do for argument's sake) then I think that this ties in with Patsy's penchant for dramatics - the 25th being more so than the 26th. Still, given their initial testimony of a 10:00 p.m. arrival and in a 50-50 toss-up, this would not be the logical assumption for the simple reason that there was so much more time after midnight for the so-called "intruder" to do his dirty deeds. I find the letter placed at the beginning of PMPT really revealing of Patsy's mind set. It is all about winning, about advertising accomplishment, to such an obvious extent. What I also find interesting in this book are the different testimonies from various people like the dance teacher etc. If JR was a private person, it must have been hell to live with the likes of Patsy - who just can't get enough public attention for everything she and her family did. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "I remember hearing" Posted by Real Stormy on 16:42:13 5/10/2000 Either John or Patsy say they put the 25th to remind the world what it did to JB on Christmas. As I am part of the world and I did nothing to JB, I particularly resent that statement. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "I say they are saying 12/25 because>>" Posted by ayelean on 17:01:47 5/10/2000 Patsy says so! She had the gold bracelet engraved with the date! Patsy wanted to be remembered as the victim mother who lost her 'Christmas angel'. Even though I believe Patsy enjoys all this notoriety, she really wanted to be traveling around the country talking about JBR as a child taken away from her through the actions of a kidnapper. Talking about how rich, famous, Christian people suffer because their children are the targets of evil kidnappers. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "Ryder, you could" Posted by lecarl on 19:11:14 5/10/2000 look at it another way too. ST quotes a friend (ex?) of JR's as saying, "JR always does the right thing." This assumes JR KNOWS she was killed on the 25th and therefore wouldn't be able to put any other date on the stone. Here's what I think about things the Rams say--I think they are thinly veiled threats TO EACH OTHER. When JR says, "if the killer is still alive," what he's really doing is saying to PR, "if I don't kill you first." I've noticed that PR will always steal a good sound bite from him and in the very next interview, use it as her own. EX. After JR mentioned the killer might not still be alive, the next time I heard that remark, it was coming from PR. She does this ALL THE TIME altho I can't quote any other examples off the top of my head right now (it's too congested with allergies.) anyway, when he said, "I want the world to remember what they did Xmas night," he is probably just reminding PR of what she did--rubbing it in, if you can understand that) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "lecarl..." Posted by Chickadee on 21:47:32 5/10/2000 I agree.I've noticed a lot of what I feel is subtle finger pointing at P by JR...particularly in the last LKL interview.I'll have to review it for examples,but I posted a few on another forum at the time. One statement of his in that interview still puzzles and disturbs me; "I knew Patsy loved JB MORE THAN anything in the world,and she knew I loved JB AS MUCH AS anything in the world" There's no doubt in my mind that he had a reason for making that distinction.It seemed an attempt to somehow belittle her and extol himself...or at least distance himself from her. By the shows end, I had the sense that he felt if Patsy's goin' down,he's not about to go with her. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "luvsbeagles--I don't think" Posted by fiddler on 20:34:53 5/10/2000 the Ramseys ever really acknowledged that JonBenet existed as a person. Why should they change (and inconvenience themselves) just because she's dead? ayelean--I think Patsy is probably pretty happy these days. She can suffer to the max, PLUS get brownie points for it--definitely, the bereaved-and-wronged-saint trip is her most satisfying role ever, I'd say. If the BPD were smart (or, if the FBI were involved), they could figure some way to use PR's need for the spotlight against the Ramseys....if. I wonder, if Steve Thomas is sued, will it be just him personally, or the entire BPD? If it is just him, will the BPD stand behind him? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "Who is Next?" Posted by canadiana on 21:13:35 5/10/2000 Linda Arndt? After all I heard her say on television that she looked into JR's eyes and knew who the killer was; then she checked her bullets. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "My my" Posted by Watching you on 05:39:12 5/11/2000 what good thinkers we have on this forum. Just one thought, here, about JR's comment that they wanted to remind "the world" what "they" did to them on Christmas day, I think it was Real Stormy who brought this point up. RS, were you around when Kennedy was shot? I know there have been other comparisons made between the Rams and Jackie Kennedy, here is another one. Jackie Kennedy refused to change out of her bloody pink suit because she "wanted the world to see what they had done." Like you, RS, I resented that statement, even though at the time I knew she was distraught. I sure as hell did not kill the president, and I did not kill JBR. What is it with these people? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "Ryder this is for you..." Posted by Luvsbeagles on 11:34:14 5/11/2000 primarily because I like the way you think. Here is somthing that bothers me. Why do you think JR took a shower and changed that morning, but PR didnt? If they are guilty and both were awake all night dealing with the death, wouldnt they BOTH have decided to put on pajamas or other clothes to make it look like they went to bed? Why one and not the other? If JR knew nothing until he found the body wouldnt it have seemed odd to him that PR was still dressed from the night before? I have always wondered why, if PR did this, she didnt have enough sense to change. She could write what were probably several ransom notes but didnt think to throw on her nightclothes? Or at the very least different clothes? Is it possible that the reason she didnt was that JR was asleep in her room and she didnt want to wake him? To carry this further.....maybe the note was written totally for JR and she expected him to follow it. This would get him out of the house and then she could deal with the body. Maybe he didnt believe the note and challenged her to call the police. What do you think? (I apologize if this has been rehashed before) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "Luvsbeagles" Posted by Ryder on 12:54:57 5/12/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 12:54:57, 5/12/2000 I find the question of PR wearing the same clothes an interesting one. I have come up with several explanations for this, some of which are not incriminating for the Ramseys, but since I frequently think that the Rams drop in on this forum, don't know if I'd like to get in to them, particularly because I sense that the Ram version is made up as they go along. The reason why I think that she did not change is that she did not have the time. Honestly, I think this is my strongest hunch. I think there was no time for shower and no time for changing. JR got up and did whatever he usually does, I think. I believe that JR's involvement in the cover-up stems from what another poster (Lecarl?) mentioned here: doing the right thing. In line with this, I'm beginning to think that if there was sexual abuse prior to the 25th, I am increasingly inclined to look elsewhere. But that's another story/thread. Now the "lack of time for showering and changing" can be explained 2 ways. Either she really was busy right up until the time of the 911 call OR she finished all the staging extremely late - perhaps 4:00 am and then decided to attempt to doze off on a couch, not wanting JR to know at what time she went to bed. JR's statement that she was in bed before him and still in bed when he went to the shower, is part of his desire to protect her, IMO. The "broken shower" excuse is a ridiculous one in a house with 5 other showers. How she could best have explained that, was to say that when she got up, she was in a nigthgown or underwear, and then found the note, while still in underwear or whatever, and then after she read the note, in a state of panic, she simply grabbed the first thing she laid her eyes on - i.e. the previous day's clothing. I have actually wondered if PR is so stuck to the "perfect image" tendency that she may not have wanted to tell anyone that she was running around in underwear. But THAT to me would have been a believable reason for having on the same clothes. The broken shower is ridiculous and she must know it by now. I am reading PMPT now and I really think that the FBI's opinions on this death are extremely solid. I notice that they mention the possibility that the blow was intentional (because of the force) but perhaps not intended for JB. But this of course would put JR in more of a central role than ST attributes to him. Although I do not like the way innocent people's lives have been turned upside down here, and don't believe in intruder theories, I am curious about the Santa's daughter's kidnapping. There must have been articles on that event. Does anyone know anything about that? I do have to admit that these books populate the Ramsey entourage with some very peculiar figures/events. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 35. "Ryder....interesting" Posted by Luvsbeagles on 22:05:21 5/12/2000 but I have a problem with some of it. I can see her being in her underwear and then just grabbing something to put on.....but full makeup? Who would stop to put on full makeup (and in 7 minutes no less) not even PR could do that. I also cant see her taking time to sleep on the couch. I cant imagine after something as terrible as that being able to catch a cat nap while you wait for your husband to wake up and find everything. The only way that happened is if she took something or drank a lot, and then one would think she would have seemed drugged or drunk when the police arrived. I agree the shower thing is ridiculous.....I am tending to think that she couldnt change as she couldnt go back upstairs and wake everyone. And maybe that gave JR his first reason to disbelieve the note....why hadnt she been to bed? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 38. "Luvsbeagles" Posted by Ryder on 22:15:40 5/15/2000 The make-up would probably be a crucial thing for someone who had been up all night and had not slept a wink. I remember thinking that some interesting clues about who did what would be related to who would be looking rested or not. Granted, this is not exactly scientific, but I think that this could have been telling. If I had been their hosts immediately after the finding of the body, I would be asking myself which one of those 2 people looked like they absolutely had to have some sleep. For this reason, when I read the books on the case, I try and understand what their sleep schedule was like on the 26th/27th. I thought that the story was that PR took some drugs right away to be able to sleep and it sounded like JR was up and down a lot the following night. It sounded to me like it was PR who took to bed almost immediately. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "I thought it was" Posted by Househazard on 11:43:44 5/11/2000 stated that Patsy said she didn't shower, because the shower was broken? Where did I read this? Is it just a bunch of bunk? If it WAS broken, how could John take one? Why lie about it if it's obviously not true? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 34. "About the shower..." Posted by Jeanilou on 15:55:45 5/12/2000 John and Patsy BOTH had their own complete bathrooms. The shower in Patsy's was broken. John's worked just fine. And I quote from DOI or POS if you prefer: Pg 10... 1st paragraph: Patsy is talking/writing or whatever: "I hear John turning on the water in his bathroom and realize it is still dark....Slowly the normal routine of an early morning flight come into focus. 'Take a shower, get dressed, get going,' I swing out of bed and abruptly remember my shower is still broken." But like a previous poster said, there were numerous bathrooms in the house. She could have used another. Jeani [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "NOt only was that lame...." Posted by Luvsbeagles on 11:49:08 5/11/2000 it didnt account for why she put on the velvet "party clothes" from the night before to lug two kids to Michegan. She said this was because she wanted to "look good for her future son-in -law". Dont know about you...but when I want to "look good" at the very least I take a shower and wash my hair. And there were many bathrooms in that house...they couldnt all have been broken. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "So she " Posted by Househazard on 11:59:58 5/11/2000 DID say that? Maybe her reasoning in all her arrogance was that if she did shower that her future son-in-law would want her instead of Melinda? Just enough stank to keep the poor boy at bay. Another thing I have trouble with is the handling of the ransom note. They touched it, they didn't? Why lie about this? I don't know where Patsy said it originally, but a question posed to her in the abc chat was why didn't she pick up the ransom note. Her answer was she didn't know why she did anything that day. So she is admitting that she did not touch the note. Wouldn't they gain more sympathy by saying they clutched it to their hearts wondering what happened and who could have done this. How many of us parents out there would jump the steps and kneel on all fours to read a note saying our daughter was gone and would be murdered if we talked to anyone? Oh..... they p*ss me off! I'll be done before I start really rambling! :) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 36. "Househazard" Posted by Ryder on 17:49:18 5/15/2000 Whenever the Ramseys don't want to answer a critical question which can get them in trouble, they resort to the "I don't know, was so distraught, couldn't think straight, don't remember, maybe I did, maybe I didn't". This is only done when an anwer is crucial. And that is their answer to the question of whether or not they touched the note. In their book, in the second by second account, they do not mention handling the note, they just say they leaned over to read it. When I first heard Patsy say that the 3 pages were laid out side by side, I didn't think that she meant it literally, i.e. I imagined the three pages sort of bunched together. But she did mean "side by side" because this is the only way that the note could have been read in its entirety without either one of them touching it. My hunch is that Patsy wiped it clean or handled it with the glove, was very conscious of not wanting to leave her prints on it, not really realizing that an innocent parent WOULD have left prints on it. Then when John came down (assuming he was in the dark) she probably shouted at him not to touch it so that the police could just get the "intruder's" prints. No, it doesn't make sense but what else is new? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "my favorite Ramnesia moment" Posted by Edie Pratt on 12:11:18 5/11/2000 was on LKL when he asked Patsy, "what time did you get up that morning?" Her answer was, "Early", and he asked again, and again she said, "Early". IFOFLMAO, since they had just gotten thru writing a book with those details, and the time is forever etched in stone on a police report. (Unless, of course, they're going to call that a lie, too)Now, why can't she suddenly remember the time she awoke to find the world had gone mad and BEAT,STRANGLED,MOLESTED,AND BLUDGEONED the PEOPLE'S PRINCESS? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "ST's book" Posted by Seashell on 14:02:56 5/12/2000 Page 152 "Ubowski also pointed out that the tablet contained only seven fingerprints in all: five belonging to Patsy, one from the Police sargeant who handled the pad, and one from the laboratory examiner." Something's seriously wrong here. It was JR who turned over her pad to the cops. His prints had to have been on it! Page 153/4 re: questioning of Lucinda "...Jenkins(her atty) informed us that there were ground rules. We were not allowed to ask anything about John Ramsey and our time would be limited. NOW WHY IS THAT? Notice that I'm boldly screaming! What is this man hiding? Certainly not the possibility that his wife is a killer. He's hiding something that points ominously at himself IMO. Page 180 is a must read. I'm half way thru the book and so far it looks like JR is involved up to his neck despite ST's theory and AH is a pawn manipulated by the scuzzies Hofstrom and DeMuth. There's been a lynch mob after AH, but it's Hofstrom and his sidekick that need to be run out on a rail. I wonder how much embellishment went on in the writing, if any, and how many other errors there are besides the info about prints on the pad. I think they changed the time they got home becuz we had a long discussion here about how they wouldn't have had time to do all the things they claimed they did and still get to bed before the killing started. We actually figured it out. They would have still been up when she was attacked. They got wind of our discussion and changed their story, but they're already locked in to 10PM. Page 193 "Det. Gosage wrote in his official report that he could hear movement and noise, even when people were trying to be quiet, no matter where he stood in the house. Sergeant Wickman told him that Deputy DeMuth wanted that report changed. Gosage refused." That finally clears that up. I've always wondered who it was that was told to falsify reports. So, I think we need that posse for DeMuth and Hofstrom and put old AH out to pasture. I hope all voters in Boulder read this book. I'm going to start emailing all my friends and tell them to do so and spread the word. If nothing else, DeMuth and Hofstrom ought to have their a**es hauled in for obstruction. There's a fascinating statement by Meyer involving the TOD and I can't find it now. It gives a 5 or 6 window hour that brings the TOD possibly up to 6 AM or so. I'll look later.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 37. "Seashell" Posted by Ryder on 17:51:51 5/15/2000 There were prints on the pad, which JR turned over to the police. But there were no prints on the letter. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 39. "Ryder" Posted by Seashell on 14:49:43 5/16/2000 "Ubowski also pointed out that the tablet contained only seven fingerprints in all: five belonging to Patsy, one from the Police sargeant who handled the pad, and one from the laboratory examiner." We know there were no prints on the note, but ST says JR's prints weren't on the very pad he handed over. Did you read my post too quickly? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 40. "There were three full baths on the second floor!" Posted by Cassandra on 15:05:00 5/16/2000 Why didn't she just hop in the shower with John Boy, or would that have been considered too forward? Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 41. "I don't know about you, Cassie" Posted by Edie Pratt on 15:51:59 5/16/2000 but we don't feel too sexy after we kill our children. A shower together would be out of the question,lol. Now, ask me what a cat and mouse game with the police does for our love life, that's an entirely different kettle of fish! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 42. "Sex and the Murder" Posted by Seashell on 21:54:58 5/16/2000 LOL, Cassie and Edie I still want to know why his prints weren't on the pad he handed over. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 43. "Fingerprints and DNA" Posted by canadiana on 22:33:44 5/16/2000 JR has no fingerprints. Disappeared whilst playing with fire. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 44. "Fingerprints" Posted by Luvsa Mystery on 08:56:37 5/17/2000 Hello all from a newbie. Everyone doesn't leave fingerprints all the time. Did JR's prints show up anywhere, anywhere at all? Patsy's prints were found, i.e., the pineapple bowl, the death room door (palm print). But I don't recall reading anywhere where John's prints were found. It seems very odd that his prints are not found where one would expect to find them. ESPECIALLY on the tape he supposedly pulled from JB's mouth. Everyone doesn't leave prints all the time, but, I expect that it would be more likely that one's prints would be found on something sticky like duct tape. The absence of prints may be more revealing than the presence of prints in this case. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 45. "Some0" Posted by Househazard on 09:12:50 5/17/2000 (Sorry for the subject line. Baby hit the keyboard) Some people don't leave prints. Or they are so slight, they can't be detected. Ted Bundy is a perfect example of this. We DO know though that Patsy leaves prints. Yet her prints are not on the note. I don't understand how they expect people to believe they didn't touch a note that tells them their daughter is missing and they will kill her. And Patsy stepping over the note and bending to read it. That is such bull pucky, it's almost laughable. Also, how do they explain the flashlight being wiped down including the batteries? If it belonged to a police officer, it would have had his prints on it. I've heard (don't remember where) that Burke kept that flashlight on his nightstand or something. How much truth is there to that? Anyone? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 46. "Househazard" Posted by Seashell on 11:27:48 5/17/2000 "I've heard (don't remember where) that Burke kept that flashlight on his nightstand or something. How much truth is there to that? Anyone?" That info came from Patsy's mouth during one of the interviews. I couldn't believe my ears - or her mouth. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 47. "Seashell" Posted by Househazard on 11:40:48 5/17/2000 thanks for that. I don't understand this whole freaking thing! She said it, and now it's a mystery (maybe a policeman's, intruder's, etc.). Why don't the DA and his cohorts ever call them on this crap? I honestly think the investigators, etc. know JB was killed by at least one of her parents. Their problem seems to be with theories and agreeing with eachother on how to proceed. Things like the flashlight, fingerprints (or lack thereof) and Patsy's fibers should be enough to nail at least one of them! I also believe they are going down soon!! This case is not winding down in the public's eye by any means. The people will never let it rest. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 48. "Flashlight" Posted by Luvsa Mystery on 18:12:20 5/17/2000 Exactly! If the flashlight were left by an intruder, or by the police, then where is Burke's flashlight? If an intruder came in and found and used Burke's flashlight, it would make sense to wipe the outside of the flashlight clean. But why wipe the batteries clean unless, of course, he found it necessary to open the flashlight and touch the batteries? Are we supposed to think the intruder found Burke's flashlight, then, finding that the batteries were weak, or dead he then found some new batteries and replaced them with gloved hand? Then, pray tell, where are the spent batteries? The oddities in this case are limitless and maddening! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]