Justice Watch Discussion Board "Hinky #4" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... Hinky #4, Starling, 09:46:22, 5/23/2000 curiouser and curiouser, maundy, 09:58:27, 5/23/2000, (#1) Original Article, Chris, 10:29:53, 5/23/2000, (#2) They really, Holly, 11:21:01, 5/23/2000, (#3) Does anyone know , lee2, 11:45:56, 5/23/2000, (#4) lee2, Starling, 11:52:36, 5/23/2000, (#5) Starling, lee2, 12:10:43, 5/23/2000, (#8) Lee2, momo, 12:11:23, 5/23/2000, (#9) WHY is Tal..., Dianne E., 11:58:02, 5/23/2000, (#6) is Tal a friend of , Edie Pratt, 12:04:47, 5/23/2000, (#7) a very wild speculative guess, darby, 14:08:28, 5/23/2000, (#10) Circle of FIENDS, Seashell, 14:42:38, 5/23/2000, (#11) I'm with you, Seashell, sds, 15:33:09, 5/23/2000, (#13) So is Heather, hareen, 15:19:02, 5/23/2000, (#12) Heather, Seashell, 15:54:14, 5/23/2000, (#14) Oh, come on!, darby, 20:48:36, 5/23/2000, (#15) Veeeerrry Interesting..., mary99, 02:48:54, 5/24/2000, (#16) Well?, hareen, 06:34:18, 5/24/2000, (#17) Hareen, momo, 06:47:26, 5/24/2000, (#18) Answer, Chris, 07:00:58, 5/24/2000, (#19) The "Bo Knows" factor --, Holly, 07:17:36, 5/24/2000, (#20) Holly, fly, 08:03:16, 5/24/2000, (#21) Thanks, Chris, hareen, 08:11:20, 5/24/2000, (#22) Difference?, Chris, 08:26:38, 5/24/2000, (#23) Chris, fly, 09:04:51, 5/24/2000, (#24) fly. There was, Holly, 09:17:37, 5/24/2000, (#25) Holly, fly, 09:23:11, 5/24/2000, (#26) ................................................................... "Hinky #4" Posted by Starling on 09:46:22 5/23/2000 Not to long ago, Inside Denver carried an on-line posting forum, that used the same software as the old BNF. The forum it'self was short-lived and during it's brief debut on the net, the MW story had broke. At a time when people were speculating, who MW was and pondering the tidbits of info she brought forth , someone posting as "The Truth" made a few posts at the now closed forum. "The Truth" used a Hotmail account, for posting rights at the forum and interestingly enough the name attatched to the hotmail addy ironically matched up with Tal Jones wife/girlfriend. Here are three posts made by The Truth which provide further proof, that people associated with MW are not only internet savvy but also the posts are thinly veiled with statements concearning control issues. TheTruth - 09:01pm Feb 26, 2000 Her name is *****. She is the eldest of 3 children. *****'s job is to care for her 87 year old grandmother. She should get back to work. ***** has suffered sexual abuse but it has no connection to the Ramsey case. *****'s family has assured the Boulder police that the allegations regarding the White family have no basis in fact. *****'s family has encouraged the Boulder police to look into Lee Hill, Mary Bienkowski, and Steven Singular's roles in manipulating *****'s actions. TheTruth - 01:30pm Mar 2, 2000 MDT IMO if ***** is in danger, she should be a lot more wary of Lee Hill than of her family. It appears to me that Hill is controling who she communicates with. For example, *****'s brother, who she loves dearly, has been trying to reach her since last week and Hill refuses to let her talk to him. In addition, Lee Hill gave *****'s name to the Boulder Camera PRIOR to introducing her to Hunter. The Camera has a reporter in California bugging *****'s relatives. He should be ashamed of himself. THERE IS NO CONNECTION BETWEEN ***** AND THE RAMSEY CASE. NONE! In addition, Hill contacted *****'s best friend and tried to get her to move all of *****'s belongings to storage. In addition, Hill said that ***** was going to be in Boulder for a long time and that her friend would probably "never see her again". This is looking more and more like a publicity stunt for Singular's book that has spun out of control. If that turns out to be the case, I hope the Whites and *****'s family sue all these unscrupulous publicity seekers. TheTruth - 03:53pm Mar 3, 2000 MDT (#23 of 24) Please, if anyone can contact *****, ask her to call Heather, her mom and grandmother A in CA and her little brother in AZ. They all love ***** and are concerned about her welfare. [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "curiouser and curiouser" Posted by maundy on 09:58:27 5/23/2000 thanks for posting this, starling. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "Original Article" Posted by Chris on 10:29:53 5/23/2000 Looks like TheTruth was right on top of things. Barry Hartman's original piece was 2/25/00 and by 2/26/00 along comes TheTruth. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "They really" Posted by Holly on 11:21:01 5/23/2000 sound threatened to me. What about that AZ brother? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "Does anyone know " Posted by lee2 on 11:45:56 5/23/2000 right off hand (I know - I could go look in PMPT) the year the Ramseys moved to Boulder? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "lee2" Posted by Starling on 11:52:36 5/23/2000 From my JR Bio: "APG merged with CAD Source and CAD Distributors to form Access Graphics 1989 John Ramsey's commutes to Boulder 1989-90 JonBenet Ramsey is born August 7, 1990 Lockheed Martin Acquires AG during 1991. Ramsey's move to Boulder 1991 January 8, 1992 Beth dies. His father James Ramsey died in 1992." The actual move was in 91 - but John was commuting as early as 89 and possibly was even there in 88 hatching out the deal for the initial merger. Starling [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "Starling" Posted by lee2 on 12:10:43 5/23/2000 Thanks. I read two separate items during a search on the internet this a.m. - and the dates you just provided coincide perfectly with an unrelated (?) event/program that was supposedly starting in Boulder at the same time. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "Lee2" Posted by momo on 12:11:23 5/23/2000 The year was 1991. Patsy says in the POS that the movers were loading their things on Thanksgiving Day. That would mean they arrived in Boulder about the first week of December. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "WHY is Tal..." Posted by Dianne E. on 11:58:02 5/23/2000 ..dismissing the claims and he seems to be in direct contact with the rest of the clan. WHY did Tal get the ball rolling on the Star issue claiming Burke Did it? My guess is the Star folded so quickly on the lawsuit when they figured out the "shaky" evidence that had been sold to them via G2 from Tal. Could be a few things, Tal set up the Star so the R's could win a hands down lawsuit. Tal really thinks Burke did it. Tal is so connected to child porn himself that he sees Mystery Juvenile offenders everywhere or what? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL Dianne E. ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "is Tal a friend of " Posted by Edie Pratt on 12:04:47 5/23/2000 Pasta Jay? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "a very wild speculative guess" Posted by darby on 14:08:28 5/23/2000 The Circle of Fiends split on what they thought would be the best theory to push. One faction pushed Burke Did It; another pushed Patsy-In-a-Rage. Any theory would do, so long as the truth of what really happened never came out. (Anyone who so much as brought up the idea of a Ring has been ridiculed...to this day.) Spade went for the BDI theory. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "Circle of FIENDS" Posted by Seashell on 14:42:38 5/23/2000 I bet lake regrets THAT spelling error, or was it an error? The crime was staged to look like either PR. Burke or an intruder did it - over kidnapping, sibling fight or bedwetting. JBR was a sexually abused child, there's no doubt about that, yet that theory is ALWAYS attacked, ignored, dismissed or minimized. When crimes point in too many absurd directions, I think we should look hard in the direction many people don't want us to go - the road less traveled - as slimey and disgusting as it may be, as well as dangerous and difficult to crack. Sexual abuse, possible incest and pedophilia are directions no one wants to go, and that's the very direction that leads to the truth, IMO. And now to make fly happy, I'll state a Betsy-like theory. JonBenet was really 22 years old and made up to look 6. I think I just outBetsyed Betsy. :-) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "I'm with you, Seashell" Posted by sds on 15:33:09 5/23/2000 in that the Rams are pleased with the general public thinking that one of them could have done it. Because it is really a cover for what really happened that night, which is too awful for any one of us to know. What I mean, is what they really were involved with, with their "circle of friends." Think of it, a Christmas Eve murder, three pieces of gold, a garrot. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "So is Heather" Posted by hareen on 15:19:02 5/23/2000 Heather Cox? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "Heather" Posted by Seashell on 15:54:14 5/23/2000 I was wondering that same thing. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "Oh, come on!" Posted by darby on 21:11:36 5/23/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 21:11:36, 5/23/2000 "This is looking more and more like a publicity stunt for Singular's book that has spun out of control." Is this the BEST reason Tal Jones can come up with to explain the emergence of MW? Give me a break! Singular's book has been on the market for quite some time. This would be some publicity stunt! Let's see, Singular wanted to sell more books, so he went to California and found a woman whose mother is Fleet White's father's goddaughter, and who had actually put a garroting step-uncle in prison and documented, prior to the murder, years of abuse which included garroting. How convenient. THEN, Singular thought, hmmm, if I just get this woman to destroy an innocent man, I could REALLY sell some books. And somehow, he was able to get the woman to go along with this plan. He conspired with MW to make it look as if Fleet White is a garrote-toting pedophile, just to sell some books. What a plan! Not only that, but it seems that Singular was able to get Lee Hill and Mary Bienkowski to go along with this scheme. I suppose Tal Jones thinks that Singular will be sharing the extra profits from the book with Lee, Mary, MW and anyone else who is apparently backing MW. Think about how crazy this sounds. It looks as if Tal Jones is a menacing, GJ-manipulating family member of MW's who made up this bogus story about Steven Singular in a lame attempt to explain why MW has come forward, with people supporting her. So how come the truth isn't good enough? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "Veeeerrry Interesting..." Posted by mary99 on 02:48:54 5/24/2000 Ah yes, The Truth. I remember those posts and how chilling the implications of MW's family attempting to use the Internet to send a message to her. They had no trouble finding that forum either, do you think they were reading Denver Online or were here at JW and learned about it? Starling, thank you for preserving that. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "Well?" Posted by hareen on 06:34:18 5/24/2000 Is anybody going to answer my question? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "Hareen" Posted by momo on 06:47:26 5/24/2000 I'm pretty sure this is Heather Cox. I can't imagine it being another Heather. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "Answer" Posted by Chris on 07:00:58 5/24/2000 It's my understanding that the 'Heather' mentioned in that email is not 'Heather Cox' [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "The "Bo Knows" factor --" Posted by Holly on 07:17:36 5/24/2000 If you are an IMUS fan you know former NYPD detective, Bo Dietl. A few months ago, the computer savvy Dietl, investigated the murder for the STAR and came up with the brother did it scenario. He hyped his story on IMUS, and the I man did not seem too impressed. Gooding and someone else at the STAR personallly asked Dietl to investigate. It seemed to me at the time, that it was a STAR attempt to bolster their Tal Jones inspired position, that Burke did it. And the fact is, nearly every cop I talk to thinks "the brother did it". At about the same time "Bo Knows" appeared at Cybers, baiting posters and being unusually provocative. Among other things said, was the suggestion that Lin Wood had used/dealt cocaine. So it seemed to me that the usually credible Bo Dietl (if he was also Bo Knows) had fallen for the STAR scenario. And now it appears to be the Tal Jones/sex ring thug scenario. I wonder if Bo Knows he's been had. He should re-name his computer software to monitor kids and computer access marketed as "One Tough Computer Cop", to One Stoopid Computer Cop". Bo was had. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "Holly" Posted by fly on 08:03:16 5/24/2000 Holly - Or stick to doing movie reviews for IMUS. To those of you accusing Tal Jones of trying to influence/manipulate the GJ: Why haven't I seen the same labels used with Evan Ravitz and his pal? Both Tal Jones and Ravitz were trying "influence" the GJ. Although I'll admit the possible link between Tal Jones and MW is intrigueing, is there any solid reason to suspect that one was trying to lead the GJ astray any more so than the other? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "Thanks, Chris" Posted by hareen on 08:11:20 5/24/2000 I've been wondering about that ever since these were first posted in Feb. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Difference?" Posted by Chris on 08:26:38 5/24/2000 I think the difference to me, fly, is that one of them was trying to do so under what appeared to be underhanded and/or backdoor methods. Ravitz and McFarland screwed up (by sending their letters to the Grand Jurors) but they did so on the advice of legal counsel after Alex Hunter and his crew ignored their request through the DA's office. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "Chris" Posted by fly on 09:06:50 5/24/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 09:06:50, 5/24/2000 That's a reasonable point, at least to some degree. Tal Jones, from what I understand, was planning to get his information in the system via his contact, Haney, right? Although rather backdoor, it was going to go to an official involved, and there's no indication that it would bypass the DA and be given directly to the GJ, is there? Ravitz and McFarland (appropriately) sent their materials to the DA's office, but unsatisfied that the DA's office apparently had seen fit not to pass it along to the GJ jury foreman, decided to bypass the DA and go directly to the GJ foreman. By ignoring the chain of command, so to speak, and not allowing the DA to make the determination of whether the book should be seen by the GJ, Ravitz & McFarland chose a side, if not back, door approach. Their intent was to circumvent the plans of the DA (rightly or wrongly) and influence the GJ directly. I'm not supporting Tal Jone's apparent plan. I just don't think Ravitz/McFarland's was terribly different, even if it started out with a more legit approach. Bottom line, both Jones and Ravitz/McFarland were trying to influence the GJ. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "fly. There was" Posted by Holly on 09:17:37 5/24/2000 another link in that chain. I think, the duo checked with Lee Hill to see if approaching the jurors was illegal -- not sure. I think they decided they were on semi-sound legal footing. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "Holly" Posted by fly on 09:23:11 5/24/2000 Right. According to the materials posted on Ravitz/McFarland's site, the law says you can request to testify by contacting the DA "or" the GJ. I imagine that was the basis for the advice that they would be on legal ground. I'm not saying what they did was illegal. My point is that they knowingly circumvented the DA's office and tried to influence the GJ through other means. Do we have evidence that Tal Jones was going to do anything more illegal/questionable than the route used by Ravitz/McFarland? Maybe I'm just not aware of something. I only know what I've read (and remembered) online. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]