Justice Watch Discussion Board "I wrote the Ramseys and got a response:" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... I wrote the Ramseys and got a response:, Jeanilou, 12:10:04, 6/10/2000 Jeani, Nandee, 12:42:03, 6/10/2000, (#1) hmmmmmm, sabrina, 14:48:34, 6/10/2000, (#2) J&P, Kelly, 20:08:06, 6/10/2000, (#3) Good for you Jeanilou, sally denver, 20:36:06, 6/10/2000, (#4) Geez, how naturally these lawyers, fiddler, 21:46:37, 6/10/2000, (#5) Third party =, Holly, 21:50:16, 6/10/2000, (#6) i think holly's right, Bunnyby, 06:13:31, 6/11/2000, (#8) holly and fiddler, Kelly, 06:06:09, 6/11/2000, (#7) Gutsy letter, Jeanilou, Ginja, 08:26:13, 6/11/2000, (#11) I thought that too...., sabrina, 09:26:13, 6/11/2000, (#12) truth, Luvsa Mystery, 09:45:01, 6/11/2000, (#13) Shades of Philosophy 301!, Ginja, 10:27:21, 6/11/2000, (#14) Luvsa Mystery, Ribaldone, 10:42:07, 6/11/2000, (#15) Thanks, Luvsa Mystery, 13:01:41, 6/11/2000, (#16) HELP!, Jeanilou, 16:20:47, 6/11/2000, (#18) Jeanielou, Ribaldone, 18:04:36, 6/11/2000, (#19) I agree with both LuvsaMystery and Ginja--, fiddler, 18:16:25, 6/11/2000, (#20) Fiddler, Luvsa Mystery, 20:12:13, 6/11/2000, (#21) Jeanielou, kdubois2, 08:51:17, 6/12/2000, (#22) Jeani, Luvsa Mystery, 10:35:24, 6/12/2000, (#23) ................................................................... "I wrote the Ramseys and got a response:" Posted by Jeanilou on 12:13:44 6/10/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 12:13:44, 6/10/2000 I did write to the Ramseys and I got a response back from Lin Wood. I guess now all e-mail is forwarded to him. It did not really address what I said or what I asked but more or less said things will come out during the civil trial. I am going to post both because I would like some feed back on the e-mails. I have removed Lin Wood's email address but not the Ramsey's since they published it in their book. I think I made my point to the Ramseys without being disrespectful. My letter 1st: Subj: About Boulder Police Department Date: 6/8/00 4:38:39 PM Eastern Daylight Time From: Jeanilou To: JonBenetinfo Dear Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey, As a person very much interested in seeing justice done for little JonBenet, it boggles my mind why her parents cannot sit down and work with the police to solve this crime. Why must you set up "conditions"? Don't realize how guilty this makes you seem? The fact that you won't be interviewed separately, the fact that you refuse to be interviewed as "suspects", the fact that you claim to have information found via your own personal investigators, and yet you have not shared this information makes you look GUILTY! If you want to convince America and the court of public opinion of your innocence, sit down with the proper authorities and for once give a "no holds barred, no conditions" interview. And take the FBI lie detector test. This is what will convince America of your innocence, not self paid for lie detector tests. Not dangling information supposed found by private investigators like a carrot in front of a donkey. Go to the police department and CO-OPERATE. That is what innocent people do. And before you start to talk about how you have co-operated on Dec 26th, 27th and 28th of 1996, let me point out that I know you were with the police on Dec26th but that was when it was thought to be a kidnapping. After it turned to a murder, you took refuge in the Fernie home, unavailable to the police except to give hair, fiber, blood etc samples. You were unvailable for the police but yet you went on national TV a week later. You did not get yourselves to a police interview until 4 months later. This is NOT co-operation. Not in the eyes of the general public out there. But it is NOT too late. Get yourselves to Boulder and into the Boulder Police Department and CO-OPERATE. I am begging you to do this a parent of 3, grandmother of 2, and as a concerned citizen of the USA who wants to see justice for JonBenet, no matter to whom it leads. I have said my piece and I eagerly await your answer. Sincerely, Jeani Jeanilou@aol.com And the response: Subj: John and Patsy Ramsey Date: 6/10/00 9:57:52 AM Eastern Daylight Time From: XXXXXXXX To: Jeanilou Jeani: Your e-mail to John and Patsy Ramsey has been forwarded to me by a third party. I wanted to give you the courtesy of a brief response. In time, all the facts and circumstances surrounding this case will be publicly revealed, debated and evaluated by virtue of the civil litigation. When the facts and evidence surface, I believe much of the anti-Ramsey rumors, speculation and innuendo will be discredited. I know from prior experience that it is difficult for the media and many interested members of the public to wait for the system of justice to produce information and results, but it is a worthwhile wait. Our system affords valuable protections to its citizens in terms of criminal investigations and prosecutions. We must never urge that these protections, usually enforced by defense counsel, be disregarded or eliminated lest we find ourselves in need of them one day and they not be available. Your interest in the case is appreciated. Your right to disagree with decisions of counsel and even the Ramseys in very difficult circumstances is recognized and respected. Best regards, L. Lin Wood Wood & Grant 2140 The Equitable Building 100 Peachtree Street Atlanta, GA 30303 404-522-1713 Thanks in advance for all input. Jeani Edited to correct grammar. [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "Jeani" Posted by Nandee on 12:42:03 6/10/2000 You said what a lot of us are thinging. Bravo to you for speaking your mind!! As for LW's response...... Did he provide a shovel with his BS? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "hmmmmmm" Posted by sabrina on 14:48:34 6/10/2000 Sounds like a canned response to me. I wonder if the Ramseys get a bill from Lin for "email responses?" hmmmmmm. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "J&P" Posted by Kelly on 20:08:06 6/10/2000 Do they actually do anything without the help of a lawyer? Jeani...at least it was Lin Wood that wrote you back and not Susan Stine. It's not that I have any respect for Lin Wood, he's just the lesser of the two evils. I guess what I'm thinking is that he hasn't been on the Ramsey bandwagon as long as Susan Stine has and hasn't had quite as long to get on my nerves. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "Good for you Jeanilou" Posted by sally denver on 20:36:06 6/10/2000 Your letter was perfect. My question is: Do lawyers learn "politically correct speak" in law school or do they come by it naturally? He said "in time it will all come out" I say, "yea, sure." I have absolutely NO respect for any lawyer or law firm who who assist the Ramsey's to get away with murder. "Defense" is one thing ie. Patsy is crazy, it was an accident, etc. Flat out lying is wrong, wrong, wrong. We will never know what happened to precious JonBenet because of the attorney(s). Remember, "Lizzie Borden took an axe, gave her mother 40 wacks...." JonBenet's death is bound to go down in history the same way. Hummm, let's see: "Patsy Ramsey hit her child, wrote the note, then she dialed...." Sorry, not funny but I loathe those detestable, lying Ramsey's SO much.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "Geez, how naturally these lawyers" Posted by fiddler on 21:46:37 6/10/2000 conflate things. "These protections may not be available?" Well, they're in the constitution, aren't they, and no one's saying the protections themselves should be abolished. We're only questioning WHY these people would feel the need to "hide behind them"--and to do it so publicly. People who, in material and political terms, are far from powerless, and far from being cowed by the government. We're not questioning the Ramseys' right to do what they've done. They have that right, undeniably, and they should have. We're only saying how it makes them look. How it makes them look, is guilty. And expressing that opinion is also a constitutionally protected right. Guilty in public opinion is very different from guilty in a court of law. The Ramseys now enjoy, and have always enjoyed, the presumption of innocence before the law. "Guilty in public opinion"--well, we're calling it the way it looks. And if the Ramseys and Lin Wood don't like it, that's just tough, isn't it? After all, where would we be without our constitutionally protected right to freedom of speech? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "Third party =" Posted by Holly on 21:50:16 6/10/2000 Sue Stine. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "i think holly's right" Posted by Bunnyby on 06:13:31 6/11/2000 because J***** has a copy of your email and the response. I can't tell if hir copied it from this board or if it was sent/forwarded to hir. Hir has it posted under negative responses or email. Negative something anyway. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "holly and fiddler" Posted by Kelly on 06:06:09 6/11/2000 Holly, good catch, I missed the third party part, glad you brought it to my attention. Boy, do they ever hide behind people. It's too bad JonBenet couldn't of hidden from them. Fiddler, that was wonderfully put. I couldn't agree with you more. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "Gutsy letter, Jeanilou" Posted by Ginja on 08:26:13 6/11/2000 As far as the one-man forum over there, hir can "steal" what she wants if it's from a public forum. Hir knows it and that's why hir did it! Unless you want to pay hir $50 for the benefit of "fighting back", forget it! It's not worth it. As far as the Ramseys hiding behind their lawyers, how true...but as Fiddler points out, it's their right. And according to the law, they have "cooperated"...as much as we hate to have to admit that. They answered questions on the 26th, and they gave dna and handwriting samples. That's all they have to do as far as the law is concerned. I understand what you're saying. But when they put their "conditions" on everything, that's their right, too. As a matter of fact, it's in the favor of their cries of cooperation. With what was "presented" to them, they cooperated. Now...if the cops had brought them in for questioning, via an arrest, that would have been fine. But the cops didn't do that. They probably knew they'd get no further by arresting them. Once arrested, the lawyers would have been brought in and again, the Rams wouldn't have had to talk. At most, the cops could have held them for forty-eight hours. But if they weren't talking in the first hour, what makes you think they'd talk at hour 47? They wouldn't have. And the cops wouldn't have had enough evidence to make a case and would have had to drop the charges. That's not to say they couldn't be arrested again on the same (or differentO charges. But again, at no point could the police force any answers from them. So in essence, with an arrest, or with so-called full cooperation by the Ramseys in going downtown to answer all questions, the cops would have gotten no further than they are now. And that's the suckey truth! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "I thought that too...." Posted by sabrina on 09:28:09 6/11/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 09:28:09, 6/11/2000 until one day I tried to send NYL an email and it referred back to Jams' email at AOL. I know our NYL that posts here is not Jameson, and is the same person that posts over there under NYL... Maybe there is a protection or something on the forum that only will send emails to posters that have agreed to it. ......But I do still think there are several hats to one oe more posters to make it look like there is a large membership! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "truth" Posted by Luvsa Mystery on 09:45:01 6/11/2000 Since when is the law of the land the supreme standard? According to our LAW, everyone is (considered) innocent until proven guilty. But there are higher standards than our infant nation's law. According to truth, if one is guilty, they are guilty whether or not they are ever proven so under the law. Therefore, one may be innocent according to law as well as guilty according to truth. The law is dynamic and therefore imperfect. Anything perfect would become imperfect if it changed or is changeable. Truth is static and perfect. It doesn't change because it is perfect. No matter what is done according to our law, it does not, nor can it change truth. We are born under the governship of the law and therefore subject to its imperfect judgements. The law is simply a rod, a measuring tool by which we attempt to determine truth. It is much like a clock or calendar or yard stick, with which we try to measure time, height, depth, width. In truth no one on earth knows what time it really is, nor how high high is, or how low is low, or how broad is wide. So, we should remember how humble is our little tool, the law. Yes, we must submit to its judgements and be at the mercies of its imperfections. But we must remember also that truth is supreme. So, I must agree that, (according to law) every suspect (offical or not) in this (or any pretrial) case, is, now, innocent. But, my heart is not governed by law, but rather by my own opinion regarding truth. Therefore, I can believe in my heart that someone is in fact guilty, while at the same time agree that they are presently (according to law) innocent. The human heart is just another tool by which we try to measure truth. It is finite and changeable, it is limited in that it does not not posess all knowledge and wisdom, therefore it too is imperfect. But there you have it. Two human courts, one of law, one of public opinion. Neither is perfect. But truth is perfect and it is the ultimate standard and the only righteous, fit judge. And I am content that ultimately the ultimate judge will pronounce judgement upon this case and all human affairs whether of thought or deed. Meanwhile we are all subject to the imperfect law of the land and the imperfect law of human opinion. And although I know my human judgements are imperfect and I know how foolish I am to sit upon the bench and pound my gavel, I continue to don my robe and make my judgements, even as I condemn myself for a fool. I am reminded of something the apostle Paul said: " . . . who will free me from this body of death?" It is believed that Paul was referring to a practice in his day (in Corinth, as I recall) to literally tie upon the living body of a convicted murderer, the dead body of his victim, and both were left to slowly decay. If we (the imperfect judges we are) condemn, how are we different from a murderer? And how can we help but make human judgements? I (at least) can't seem to help it. So, I, along with Paul cry out: "who will free me from this body of death?!!!" [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "Shades of Philosophy 301!" Posted by Ginja on 10:27:21 6/11/2000 Excellent post, Luvsa! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "Luvsa Mystery" Posted by Ribaldone on 10:42:07 6/11/2000 Outstanding post, Lusva!!! You said it all so I have nothing to add. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "Thanks" Posted by Luvsa Mystery on 13:01:41 6/11/2000 Thank you for your kind responses Ginja and Ribaldone. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "HELP!" Posted by Jeanilou on 16:20:47 6/11/2000 HELP! I want to remove all my posts on this thread except the original one. I just realized I have been drawn into something I want no part of (Jameson and her games) and have involved JW in it. Chris, could you please remove my posts # 9, 10, & 17. I have decided it is NOT the way I want to deal with the Jameson issue. Thanks so much. Jeani [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "Jeanielou" Posted by Ribaldone on 18:04:36 6/11/2000 You can click on the "edit" button for each post you want to delete and then just delete your comments that way. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "I agree with both LuvsaMystery and Ginja--" Posted by fiddler on 18:17:04 6/11/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 18:17:04, 6/11/2000 Without more physical evidence, or new forensic testing, I don't think the police are going to charge the Ramseys with anything. And as things stand, I think that's good. If prosecutors don't have enough evidence--or more likely, enough ADMISSIBLE evidence--to make a good faith effort in court, then the Ramseys shouldn't be charged, nor should anyone in the same boat. At the same time, the rest of us have the right to hold and express our opinions, however reasonable or crazy those might be. What disgusts me is how it isn't enough for JR and PR to enjoy the legal presumption of innocence--they're going to MAKE all of us change our minds. If they can't do it any other way, they'll use the civil law to threaten and intimidate. And they'll knowingly (at least on Lin Wood's part) misrepresent the meaning of "presumption of innocence" to do it. I see nothing noble about this "quest". It seems pretty close to advocating thought-control to me. John, Patsy, Lin Wood, and Joseph McCarthy--soul mates. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "Fiddler" Posted by Luvsa Mystery on 20:12:13 6/11/2000 Don't give up -- truth is a stubborn thing. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "Jeanielou" Posted by kdubois2 on 08:51:17 6/12/2000 I read over at the swamp today that Jams e mailed you. She said that she offered you 3free days over at the swamp. I think that you should take hir up on that. I know that you can hold your ground, and perhaps teach hir a thing or two. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Jeani" Posted by Luvsa Mystery on 10:35:24 6/12/2000 If I were you, I wouldn't pay hir any mind. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]