The cover of DOI

[circulon]

Does anyone else think its just odd that the Ramsey's put THEMSELVES on the front cover of their book, and JB on the back?
I mean usually on books, the author is on the back or the inside somewhere.
I just think its funny that they put themselves on the front, and their precious beloved JonBenet gets the secondary back.

Laughable, really.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by circulon
Does anyone else think its just odd that the Ramsey's put THEMSELVES on the front cover of their book, and JB on the back?
I mean usually on books, the author is on the back or the inside somewhere.
I just think its funny that they put themselves on the front, and their precious beloved JonBenet gets the secondary back.

Laughable, really.


Good heavens, that must be absolute proof of the Ramsey's guilt! I wonder why the DA didn't have them arrested them the minute that book came out! :rolleyes:

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by circulon
Does anyone else think its just odd that the Ramsey's put THEMSELVES on the front cover of their book, and JB on the back?
I mean usually on books, the author is on the back or the inside somewhere.
I just think its funny that they put themselves on the front, and their precious beloved JonBenet gets the secondary back.

Laughable, really.

Are you so sure the Ramseys choose the cover and not the publisher?

I find it VERY "odd" that something so silly as the cover of a book can be considered "odd" or "funny".

[circulon]

Oh for heavens sake, you two!
I didnt say it proved they were guilty, i just said it was pretty odd. Its a very selfish thing to do, put yourself on the front cover of your own book supposedly about how much you're grieving over the loss of your daughter.

Ok, it seems there are many people on this forum that like to jump down the throats of those that believe RDI.
Its probably apparent that i am an RDI supporter because of things i have posted.
But come on. I have my own opinion, and i'm allowed. I didnt post this thread to convince anyone to take my opinion, i was merely pointing out that i happen to think its funny - perhaps ODD was the wrong word!- that they put themselves on the cover.

Whatever, ok? Sheesh. :mad:

[msgatorslayer]

The way I see it, by the time they wrote the book, IT WAS all about them and not JB. They were trying to defend themselves and give their side of the story.

[circulon]

Originally posted by msgatorslayer
The way I see it, by the time they wrote the book, IT WAS all about them and not JB. They were trying to defend themselves and give their side of the story.

Fair enough. I kinda think it should always be about JB, tho. She was the victim.
I dont have kids, its true, but i would hope that if i was murdered (ha, that came out wrong, i dont hope i get murdered! :tongue: ) my mum would not turn it into a "what about me, poor me" publicity thing. JMO

[Paisley]

Originally posted by circulon
Does anyone else think its just odd that the Ramsey's put THEMSELVES on the front cover of their book, and JB on the back?
I mean usually on books, the author is on the back or the inside somewhere.
I just think its funny that they put themselves on the front, and their precious beloved JonBenet gets the secondary back.

Laughable, really. Considering all the rag mags and books that ALREADY had her picture plastered all over the place I can understand why they didn't want to put her picture on the cover. Her face had been exploited enough and who is to judge a cover of a book for crissakes!

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by circulon
Oh for heavens sake, you two!
I didnt say it proved they were guilty, i just said it was pretty odd. Its a very selfish thing to do, put yourself on the front cover of your own book supposedly about how much you're grieving over the loss of your daughter.

Ok, it seems there are many people on this forum that like to jump down the throats of those that believe RDI.
Its probably apparent that i am an RDI supporter because of things i have posted.
But come on. I have my own opinion, and i'm allowed. I didnt post this thread to convince anyone to take my opinion, i was merely pointing out that i happen to think its funny - perhaps ODD was the wrong word!- that they put themselves on the cover.

Whatever, ok? Sheesh. :mad:

Others are "allowed" their opoinion as well. This was mine!

breezy1234
Senior Member

Registered: May 2005
Location:
Posts: 2153
Re: The cover of DOI

Are you so sure the Ramseys choose the cover and not the publisher?

I find it VERY "odd" that something so silly as the cover of a book can be considered "odd" or "funny".

[Regina.Lampert]

Originally posted by Paisley
Considering all the rag mags and books that ALREADY had her picture plastered all over the place I can understand why they didn't want to put her picture on the cover. Her face had been exploited enough and who is to judge a cover of a book for crissakes! I thought one could judge a book by its cover?



:cool:

[Paisley]

Originally posted by Regina.Lampert
I thought one could judge a book by its cover?



:cool: Since the book is about the Ramsey's experience..it only makes sense that their picture be on the cover.

What else are people going to judge them on, what kind of toilet paper they use? Only people that use the soft, fluffy toilet paper are capable of murder.

[nutmeg22]

Originally posted by breezy1234


Are you so sure the Ramseys choose the cover and not the publisher?

I find it VERY "odd" that something so silly as the cover of a book can be considered "odd" or "funny".

I have a good friend who is the author of several children's books and she tells me that the publisher chooses the cover and also chooses the illustrator(if there were one). The author really does not have much say other than supplying the manuscript which is then edited! Just putting in my 2 cents.

[Paisley]

Originally posted by nutmeg22


I have a good friend who is the author of several children's books and she tells me that the publisher chooses the cover and also chooses the illustrator(if there were one). The author really does not have much say other than supplying the manuscript which is then edited! Just putting in my 2 cents. Thank you.

[msgatorslayer]

I just got the DOI from my library. Hard cover. And there is no picture of JB even on the back cover. Inside or out. Just Patsy&John on the front cover.

[msgatorslayer]

Originally posted by rosyredrobin


I believe you (of course), but out of curosity what is on the back?

No picture - just the story synopsis.

I just realized the book is in large print, if that make's a difference.
:confused:

[bullmoose]

It is a fact that there may be several different covers printed for a single book; even ones shipped at the same time to the same place. One book series that I have seen, the Harry Potter series, has a completely different cover in the U.S. verses G.B., or Mexico or China. I think it has to do with any number of marketing strategies by the publishing companies. bullmoose

[msgatorslayer]

Originally posted by bullmoose
It is a fact that there may be several different covers printed for a single book; even ones shipped at the same time to the same place. One book series that I have seen, the Harry Potter series, has a completely different cover in the U.S. verses G.B., or Mexico or China. I think it has to do with any number of marketing strategies by the publishing companies. bullmoose

Thanks for that info, Bull. It's no big deal. I just remembered this was the only place I posted this morning when I left and it stuck in my mind that JB shoud be on the back cover.

[FoxySly]

Originally posted by circulon
Does anyone else think its just odd that the Ramsey's put THEMSELVES on the front cover of their book, and JB on the back?
I mean usually on books, the author is on the back or the inside somewhere.
I just think its funny that they put themselves on the front, and their precious beloved JonBenet gets the secondary back.

Laughable, really.

Yup.
IMO the ramsey's made this whole case all about THEM and NOT their daughter. They ruled over the investigation, media ect....

Dang, the LETTER (3 pages is NOT a note) states not to call the police. They NOT only DO THAT BUT THEY CALL EVERYONE ELSE OVER TOO! Beyond pathetic IMO.

Now, I would have most defentantly called the law BUT I would have mentioned that the LETTER said NOT TO.....so please get here fast but without lights & sirens and sneak in or at least try to be un-noticeable.

But NO, the ramsey's did ever thing the LETTER said NOT to do.

IMO THEY KNEW their little girl was dead and KNEW they didn't have to worry about what the LETTER said. And they sure PROVED they didn't care.

Gezzzzzzzzzzzz, for the life of my Son I can NOT fathom calling over a bunch of people ....... ummmmmm unless I KNEW and wanted the crime scene disrupted.

IMO
Sly

[msgatorslayer]

On the Holiday board, some of us were discussing the morning time line of the 26th. Since that thread is closed I cannot post this there.

But, I am reading DOI right now. On page 25, second sentence, The Ramsey's say that their planned flight that morning was at 7am.

The discussion we were having was that it was impossible for the Ramsey's to wake up 5:30-5:40 and have enough time to get the kids ready and out the door to make their plane that was suppose to leave at 6:30

This is a private plane we are talking about, for those that didn't know.

So, are there many different time's listed depending on which report you read? Or who's book?

[bullmoose]

I can think of one reason Patsy called people over to the house for: moral support. I think she was in a full-fledged panic at that point of the morning. That note,as strange as it was and still is a mindblower to me. It makes absolutely no sense from any rational basis, IMO and would panic my wife to near insanity of fear for her daughter. That is what I think happened to Patsy that morning. I do not see in anything they did that day any evidence that they knew she was dead until after John found her in the basement; and I see no proof that they didn't care about Jonbenet. Who, in his right mind, would follow that note, filled with odd moviescript language. I see the fact that John set about raising the very strange ransom amount as proof that he was doing everything he could to get his daughter back. But that is my opinion. bullmoose

[FoxySly]

My Child would HAVE CAME FIRST!

I would NOT, could NOT be thinking ABOUT anything but the Safety of my Child.

Ummmm unless I already KNEW she was dead.

IMO
Sly

[Jadedblueeyes]

Originally posted by bullmoose
I can think of one reason Patsy called people over to the house for: moral support. I think she was in a full-fledged panic at that point of the morning. That note,as strange as it was and still is a mind blower to me. It makes absolutely no sense from any rational basis, IMO and would panic my wife to near insanity of fear for her daughter. That is what I think happened to Patsy that morning. I do not see in anything they did that day any evidence that they knew she was dead until after John found her in the basement; and I see no proof that they didn't care about Jonbenet. Who, in his right mind, would follow that note, filled with odd moviescript language. I see the fact that John set about raising the very strange ransom amount as proof that he was doing everything he could to get his daughter back. But that is my opinion. bullmoose

Exactly. They had a three page note they couldn't understand and they did the right thing. To call police immediately. LE tells us that time is the most valuable thing when a child has been kidnapped.

BUT we know if they HAD waited then they would be slammed in the dirt by some about that too!

There is proof positive that they should have called.....as this faux "kidnapper" was nothing more than a flat out liar and murderer all along!

IMO

Ocean

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by circulon
Does anyone else think its just odd that the Ramsey's put THEMSELVES on the front cover of their book, and JB on the back?
I mean usually on books, the author is on the back or the inside somewhere.
I just think its funny that they put themselves on the front, and their precious beloved JonBenet gets the secondary back.

Laughable, really.

I honestly think it probably wasn't their decision, but the publisher's and the publisher's art department.

Maybe the Ramseys were featured on the cover to differentiate the book from all the other JBR books out there.

At any rate, I think it's pretty insignificant.

JMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by bullmoose
I can think of one reason Patsy called people over to the house for: moral support. I think she was in a full-fledged panic at that point of the morning. That note,as strange as it was and still is a mindblower to me. It makes absolutely no sense from any rational basis, IMO and would panic my wife to near insanity of fear for her daughter. That is what I think happened to Patsy that morning. I do not see in anything they did that day any evidence that they knew she was dead until after John found her in the basement; and I see no proof that they didn't care about Jonbenet. Who, in his right mind, would follow that note, filled with odd moviescript language. I see the fact that John set about raising the very strange ransom amount as proof that he was doing everything he could to get his daughter back. But that is my opinion. bullmoose

I think Patsy was panic-stricken, too, but the note now makes absolute, perfect sense to me.

JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by circulon
Does anyone else think its just odd that the Ramsey's put THEMSELVES on the front cover of their book, and JB on the back?
I mean usually on books, the author is on the back or the inside somewhere.
I just think its funny that they put themselves on the front, and their precious beloved JonBenet gets the secondary back.

Laughable, really.

But if they put her on the front they could have been accused of exploiting her to gain sympathy for their plight. Personally I never gave it a second thought.

Another "damned if you do; damned if you don't". jmo :shrug:

[Paisley]

Originally posted by bullmoose
I can think of one reason Patsy called people over to the house for: moral support. I think she was in a full-fledged panic at that point of the morning. That note,as strange as it was and still is a mindblower to me. It makes absolutely no sense from any rational basis, IMO and would panic my wife to near insanity of fear for her daughter. That is what I think happened to Patsy that morning. I do not see in anything they did that day any evidence that they knew she was dead until after John found her in the basement; and I see no proof that they didn't care about Jonbenet. Who, in his right mind, would follow that note, filled with odd moviescript language. I see the fact that John set about raising the very strange ransom amount as proof that he was doing everything he could to get his daughter back. But that is my opinion. bullmoose I couldn't have said it better.