Serial Killers Involved?

[Athena]

This was added - IDI - Possible Serial Killer??

http://tinyurl.com/ppp9r

Bill Gary. Internet poster Dan in Detroit claims that Bill Gary is the killer, in collaboration with Fleet White. Gary's known m.o. (redressing his child victims) was seen in JBR's case. Dan in Detroit claims that because the newspaper containing John Ramsey's circled face was 14 months old, the killing was planned at least a year in advance. "Bill Gary told me that they were planning the murder the year before at Christmas but that Fleet had to do something go somewhere. Gary got the dog hair 18 months before killing." Dan in Detroit provides the following details of how the crime was committed (post #501):
"He was in the house at 8. He went directly to the cellar room. Fleet had told him where the light switch was. He looked the house over. Was planning to be in the guest room but Patsy was packing in there, so he waited downstairs in basement."
"About 11 he`d just come upstairs to 1st floor grabbed the Maglite, heard noise, hid. There came Jonbenet downstairs from 2nd to 1st floor.(She ate pineapple)"
"He grabbed her wearing brown gloves, took her down to basement, stunned her, as he fondles her she awoke and screamed, he kneed her in head, lay there waiting to see if anyone heard, when police didn`t show in time it would take(he knew time because Fleet called 911) he garotted her in boiler room."
"She had messed pants. They said Friday. That wouldn`t do, this was a Wed murder. He`s killed lots on wed-sun. 2nd kid with same name had to be killed wed- sun. He`d already killed Ramsay in MT in 1996. Things had gone well, he had time. Went to 2nd floor. Parents slept on 3rd floor. Couldn`t find underpants, searched drawers, ripped open package, took out WED, didm`t know were too big, took blanket, etc. Heard noise. Went back downstairs."
"Jonbenet partly loose, paintbrush broken. Hit her in head with flashlight. Changed underwear, not shirt, tightened garotte, stuck something in her, went and put note on steps and johns picture, returned flashlight, returned, wiped her out, wiped off crusty spot blood with finger, put her in cellar, inspected blanket, ripped fibre 4 pieces, used tweezers put piece in garotte and put piece under tape, left through window, slipped on suitcase. etc..."

[rosebud]

Originally posted by Athena
This was added - IDI - Possible Serial Killer??

http://tinyurl.com/ppp9r

Bill Gary. Internet poster Dan in Detroit claims that Bill Gary is the killer, in collaboration with Fleet White. Gary's known m.o. (redressing his child victims) was seen in JBR's case. Dan in Detroit claims that because the newspaper containing John Ramsey's circled face was 14 months old, the killing was planned at least a year in advance. "Bill Gary told me that they were planning the murder the year before at Christmas but that Fleet had to do something go somewhere. Gary got the dog hair 18 months before killing." Dan in Detroit provides the following details of how the crime was committed (post #501):
"He was in the house at 8. He went directly to the cellar room. Fleet had told him where the light switch was. He looked the house over. Was planning to be in the guest room but Patsy was packing in there, so he waited downstairs in basement."
"About 11 he`d just come upstairs to 1st floor grabbed the Maglite, heard noise, hid. There came Jonbenet downstairs from 2nd to 1st floor.(She ate pineapple)"
"He grabbed her wearing brown gloves, took her down to basement, stunned her, as he fondles her she awoke and screamed, he kneed her in head, lay there waiting to see if anyone heard, when police didn`t show in time it would take(he knew time because Fleet called 911) he garotted her in boiler room."
"She had messed pants. They said Friday. That wouldn`t do, this was a Wed murder. He`s killed lots on wed-sun. 2nd kid with same name had to be killed wed- sun. He`d already killed Ramsay in MT in 1996. Things had gone well, he had time. Went to 2nd floor. Parents slept on 3rd floor. Couldn`t find underpants, searched drawers, ripped open package, took out WED, didm`t know were too big, took blanket, etc. Heard noise. Went back downstairs."
"Jonbenet partly loose, paintbrush broken. Hit her in head with flashlight. Changed underwear, not shirt, tightened garotte, stuck something in her, went and put note on steps and johns picture, returned flashlight, returned, wiped her out, wiped off crusty spot blood with finger, put her in cellar, inspected blanket, ripped fibre 4 pieces, used tweezers put piece in garotte and put piece under tape, left through window, slipped on suitcase. etc..."


I find it absolutely disgusting that you people speculate that Fleet White planned and killed JonBenet Ramsey. This type of irresponsible speculation says a lot about the person posting it.

What are you, Patsy Ramsey's sister?

[Athena]

Originally posted by rosebud



I find it absolutely disgusting that you people speculate that Fleet White planned and killed JonBenet Ramsey. This type of irresponsible speculation says a lot about the person posting it.

What are you, Patsy Ramsey's sister?

How did you guess, Priscilla?

[rosebud]

Originally posted by Athena


How did you guess, Priscilla?

It was easy to guess, Pam. Nothing else would account for so much nonsense posted here by you.

JMO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by rosebud


It was easy to guess, Pam. Nothing else would account for so much nonsense posted here by you.

JMO

Rosebud, Athena gave the link to the credible site that theory is posted on, as is required in the "Poster Expectations".

The nonsense you post rarely has a link, Rosebud. You make blatant statements that have no grain of truth, such as the one yesterday where you said Lou Smit was paid by the Ramseys. And the one where you said "The coroner who did the autopsy thought that pebbles she was dragged across may have made the marks."

Time after time we ask you for a link backing up your off-the-wall statments, Rosebud, but you ignore us or offer an excuse why you can't find it. I'm getting quite tired of you making things up, and presenting them to us as fact, to support your RDI beleif.

MOO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Athena


How did you guess, Priscilla? It appears that Priscilla was on the warpath last night! It's ok, Althena, I'll 'fess up...I'm the REAL Pam! ;) Hi ho hi ho, off to work I go...have a great day, folks!

[Athena]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Rosebud, Athena gave the link to the credible site that theory is posted on, as is required in the "Poster Expectations".

The nonsense you post rarely has a link, Rosebud. You make blatant statements that have no grain of truth, such as the one yesterday where you said Lou Smit was paid by the Ramseys. And the one where you said "The coroner who did the autopsy thought that pebbles she was dragged across may have made the marks."

Time after time we ask you for a link backing up your off-the-wall statments, Rosebud, but you ignore us or offer an excuse why you can't find it. I'm getting quite tired of you making things up, and presenting them to us as fact, to support your RDI beleif.

MOO

Unfortunately my mistake last night was to even look at the poster's response as I have this poster on ignore. It is apparent the poster shoots from the hip without really reading or cannot comprehend what she is reading since she thought that those were my words - but 'tis OK as it has reminded me why I did it in the first place. :shrug:

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena
This was added - IDI - Possible Serial Killer??

http://tinyurl.com/ppp9r

Bill Gary. Internet poster Dan in Detroit claims that Bill Gary is the killer, in collaboration with Fleet White. Gary's known m.o. (redressing his child victims) was seen in JBR's case. Dan in Detroit claims that because the newspaper containing John Ramsey's circled face was 14 months old, the killing was planned at least a year in advance. "Bill Gary told me that they were planning the murder the year before at Christmas but that Fleet had to do something go somewhere. Gary got the dog hair 18 months before killing." Dan in Detroit provides the following details of how the crime was committed (post #501):
"He was in the house at 8. He went directly to the cellar room. Fleet had told him where the light switch was. He looked the house over. Was planning to be in the guest room but Patsy was packing in there, so he waited downstairs in basement."
"About 11 he`d just come upstairs to 1st floor grabbed the Maglite, heard noise, hid. There came Jonbenet downstairs from 2nd to 1st floor.(She ate pineapple)"
"He grabbed her wearing brown gloves, took her down to basement, stunned her, as he fondles her she awoke and screamed, he kneed her in head, lay there waiting to see if anyone heard, when police didn`t show in time it would take(he knew time because Fleet called 911) he garotted her in boiler room."
"She had messed pants. They said Friday. That wouldn`t do, this was a Wed murder. He`s killed lots on wed-sun. 2nd kid with same name had to be killed wed- sun. He`d already killed Ramsay in MT in 1996. Things had gone well, he had time. Went to 2nd floor. Parents slept on 3rd floor. Couldn`t find underpants, searched drawers, ripped open package, took out WED, didm`t know were too big, took blanket, etc. Heard noise. Went back downstairs."
"Jonbenet partly loose, paintbrush broken. Hit her in head with flashlight. Changed underwear, not shirt, tightened garotte, stuck something in her, went and put note on steps and johns picture, returned flashlight, returned, wiped her out, wiped off crusty spot blood with finger, put her in cellar, inspected blanket, ripped fibre 4 pieces, used tweezers put piece in garotte and put piece under tape, left through window, slipped on suitcase. etc..."

At what point did he remove the flashlight batteries and wipe the Ramseys fingerprints off them - and why?

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


At what point did he remove the flashlight batteries and wipe the Ramseys fingerprints off them - and why?

I just want to make sure that everyone reading this realizes I did not write this post/theory. It was written by another poster who claims to have contact with the killer either directly or through an acquaintence and there are several posts of his relating to this on that site where it takes you if you click on his name.

Also re: the flashlight -- did it definitely belong to the Ramseys?

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


At what point did he remove the flashlight batteries and wipe the Ramseys fingerprints off them - and why? Wally, some things just cannot be explained...when the Lindbergh baby was kidnapped..the nursery was fingerprinted...not even the mother's nor the nanny's fingerprints showed up....the parents in that case were also accused of being too stoic....they did present that demeanor in pubic..but grieved privately! :seeya:

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Athena


<snip>

Also re: the flashlight -- did it definitely belong to the Ramseys?

I read somewhere - no link - that Patsy remembered that the flashlight was a Christmas present from John Andrew. ("Death of Innocence - maybe?) If it was a gift maybe the batteries were put in at the store.........which still wouldn't explain why no prints unless the person installing the batteries let them slide from the package into the palm of their hand which I have seen people do.

JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


I read somewhere - no link - that Patsy remembered that the flashlight was a Christmas present from John Andrew. ("Death of Innocence - maybe?) If it was a gift maybe the batteries were put in at the store.........which still wouldn't explain why no prints unless the person installing the batteries let them slide from the package into the palm of their hand which I have seen people do.

JMO

Thanks sweet. When I read the John and Patsy interviews 6/98 - neither one of them seems to be sure it's the one that John Andrew gave them. John's response says "if that's the same MAG one John Andrew gave it to them". Patsy says John Andrew gave them one that looked similar to the photo but that it was a "slicker, black". Trip DeMuth does say the color was a result of processing. Just did not appear conclusive to me.

I'm wondering if the batteries were actually "wiped clean" or there just weren't any fingerprints found. Where did the "wiped clean" come from? IMO if the flashlight belonged to the Ramseys there would certainly be no reason for them to take the batteries out and wipe them clean??? It would have been a non-issue if their fingerprints were found since it was their flashlight.

That could be another part of the staging by IDI. JMO

[harz]

Originally posted by Athena


I'm wondering if the batteries were actually "wiped clean" or there just weren't any fingerprints found. Where did the "wiped clean" come from? IMO if the flashlight belonged to the Ramseys there would certainly be no reason for them to take the batteries out and wipe them clean??? It would have been a non-issue if their fingerprints were found since it was their flashlight.

That could be another part of the staging by IDI. JMO

Don't forget the gloves were wore during that night. If the flashlight was Christmas gift to Andrew or brand new owned by Ramseys, then how come intruder didn't bring his own? If it was intruder's and if he forgot to take flashlight with him after, then he would not have remember to wipe off the fingerprints as leaving flashlight there, otherwise he would have taken the flashlight with him without the need to wipe off the fingerprints. Flashlight was just a part of Ramsey's staging, simple. The clues are right there, you aren't seeing it yet. IMO

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by harz


<snip>

The clues are right there, you aren't seeing it yet. IMO

What I'm not seeing is parents of a six year old with no motive killing their child. JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


What I'm not seeing is parents of a six year old with no motive killing their child. JMO

:beer:

[harz]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


What I'm not seeing is parents of a six year old with no motive killing their child. JMO

How would you know if JB’s death was a murdered or an accident? Even if there was a graphic photography or a videotape of the Ramseys staging the scene right in your face, you won’t see any motives in it. Ironies, if you could accept Ramsey’s staging but refuse to accept any motives behind it? So you won’t accept the staging which was done by the Ramseys, vice versa? JMO

[Athena]

According to this Internet poster he has sent information to Lou Smit re: this serial killer. I don't know who this guy is or if what he is saying is true - but he certainly seems to think it is.


http://tinyurl.com/qsegr

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Athena
According to this Internet poster he has sent information to Lou Smit re: this serial killer. I don't know who this guy is or if what he is saying is true - but he certainly seems to think it is.


http://tinyurl.com/qsegr :confused: Althena...I didn't notice where this Gary is originally from? Why would he have claimed to murder the headless horseman in Missouri...that story is as old as the hills....I've heard it for years...:confused:

[Athena]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
:confused: Althena...I didn't notice where this Gary is originally from? Why would he have claimed to murder the headless horseman in Missouri...that story is as old as the hills....I've heard it for years...:confused:

I agree Lady but it appears these murders span across years - 1976-1996. Those posts are bizarre - you have to read them with an open mind. I have no idea who this guy is but others seem to respect him over there and apparently whoever this guy is knows family members - I think his sister - the guy that supposedly is the serial killer is from Michigan? and is the Oakland County Child Killer (he murdered 4 girls) and his real name is Gary McGreen. I am just as confused as you are. :shrug:

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


Thanks sweet. When I read the John and Patsy interviews 6/98 - neither one of them seems to be sure it's the one that John Andrew gave them. John's response says "if that's the same MAG one John Andrew gave it to them". Patsy says John Andrew gave them one that looked similar to the photo but that it was a "slicker, black". Trip DeMuth does say the color was a result of processing. Just did not appear conclusive to me.

I'm wondering if the batteries were actually "wiped clean" or there just weren't any fingerprints found. Where did the "wiped clean" come from? IMO if the flashlight belonged to the Ramseys there would certainly be no reason for them to take the batteries out and wipe them clean??? It would have been a non-issue if their fingerprints were found since it was their flashlight.

That could be another part of the staging by IDI. JMO

If the R's prints were on the batteries, it would mean it was their flashlight. That would be the reason to wipe the batteries.

I admit I don't know if they were wiped, or just no prints were found. The killer didn't bring anything else with him- he used their pen and paper, their cord, their tape. (We know items priced exctly what the cord and tape were priced were bought at a local hardware with Patsy's credit card). It seems most likely it was the same flashlight JAR gave them.

Most stores don't install batteries. Flashlights and batteries come in blister packs then you install them at home. I think it would be difficult to install them w/o prints.

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
:confused: Althena...I didn't notice where this Gary is originally from? Why would he have claimed to murder the headless horseman in Missouri...that story is as old as the hills....I've heard it for years...:confused:

Because he's a lying nutcase?

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver

<snip>

(We know items priced exctly what the cord and tape were priced were bought at a local hardware with Patsy's credit card). It seems most likely it was the same flashlight JAR gave them.

Most stores don't install batteries. Flashlights and batteries come in blister packs then you install them at home. I think it would be difficult to install them w/o prints.

No link - but have you read about the study conducted by UC students re: items costing the same as the tape/cord? There were many items that cost the same.

Most stores don't install batteries unless you ask them to but some stores (at one time) kept a bin of batteries that they used just for that purpose. (Personal experience - Radio Shack - radio). JMO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by harz


How would you know if JB’s death was a murdered or an accident? Even if there was a graphic photography or a videotape of the Ramseys staging the scene right in your face, you won’t see any motives in it. Ironies, if you could accept Ramsey’s staging but refuse to accept any motives behind it? So you won’t accept the staging which was done by the Ramseys, vice versa? JMO

An accident? Why on earth would the Ramseys stage an accident to make it look like JonBenet was murdered? :confused:

[Athena]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


No link - but have you read about the study conducted by UC students re: items costing the same as the tape/cord? There were many items that cost the same.

<snip>

JMO

Re: the pricing -- I have no doubt there were several items that can have the same cost and the store could not produce itemized receipts. More speculation. jmo

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Athena


Re: the pricing -- I have no doubt there were several items that can have the same cost and the store could not produce itemized receipts. More speculation. jmo

Imagine, more than one item in the store selling for $1.99 and $2.29. :D

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


Because he's a lying nutcase? :lol: I think we finally agree on something! :)

[Athena]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
:lol: I think we finally agree on something! :)

LOL. I have to admit I'm kind of embarrassed having posted this here now. But by the same token goes to show you that the Wiki site (so-called encyclopedia) is made up of many internet posters' own thoughts, theories, opinions, speculation, and innuendoes, etc. and most of it is not based on fact. JMO

[lucky13]

IMO, any one of us on this message board could claim the same thing as this Gary person. With all of the info out there about this case, a scenerio would not be hard to come up with. I'm thinking.....John Karr the 2nd....

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Athena


LOL. I have to admit I'm kind of embarrassed having posted this here now. But by the same token goes to show you that the Wiki site (so-called encyclopedia) is made up of many internet posters' own thoughts, theories, opinions, speculation, and innuendoes, etc. and most of it is not based on fact. JMO Oh, no, Althena...I'm glad you posted it....it's intriguing..and if nothing else..it's good for a laugh...which we all need here occasionally!

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


No link - but have you read about the study conducted by UC students re: items costing the same as the tape/cord? There were many items that cost the same.

Most stores don't install batteries unless you ask them to but some stores (at one time) kept a bin of batteries that they used just for that purpose. (Personal experience - Radio Shack - radio). JMO

No, I hadn't heard about that study. That is interesting. Always room for reasonable doubt.

[harz]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


An accident? Why on earth would the Ramseys stage an accident to make it look like JonBenet was murdered? :confused:

An accident can be such as how they treated JB like pushing, hitting, punish her in a room in basement where heavy things fell on her head, or garrote game & the molesting gone wrong that had to be cover up. Some parents do threat each other to kill their children being against the divorce or some of their dark truths being expose. I can go on listing many possible reasons for the cover ups to make deceased to look like a murder was done by someone else if you like. I assumed you could figure why would an accident need to be cover up making it look like someone else murdered her. If JB was murdered by Ramseys, there still some possible motives which I and others did mentioned some here before. Most of the murder's motives doesn't make any sense, which is why we couldn't agree on one or the motives haven't been revealed to a sense yet. JMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by harz


How would you know if JB’s death was a murdered or an accident? Even if there was a graphic photography or a videotape of the Ramseys staging the scene right in your face, you won’t see any motives in it. Ironies, if you could accept Ramsey’s staging but refuse to accept any motives behind it? So you won’t accept the staging which was done by the Ramseys, vice versa? JMO harz, of course we would believe it if there was a videotape...but there isn't any! Most of us have no problem believing parents kill and stage...but I know of no other case that parents killed their child by strangulation (and I know theres been much debate on this board concerning that), which I do believe the strangulation came first...and then the head injury...sexually assaulting her..and leaving their own broken paintbrush? Does that really make sense to you? imho

[harz]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
harz, of course we would believe it if there was a videotape...but there isn't any! Most of us have no problem believing parents kill and stage...but I know of no other case that parents killed their child by strangulation (and I know theres been much debate on this board concerning that), which I do believe the strangulation came first...and then the head injury...sexually assaulting her..and leaving their own broken paintbrush? Does that really make sense to you? imho

If we may agreed the scene was staged, but both IDI & RDI could not come into an agreement on just one motive because the motives haven't been discovered yet. Both of us probably never will ever to learn the real motives behind JB's death or the staging. If we do discover a motive, then higher chance the killer would be exposed already. Maybe the motives are very well hidden as difficult for us to notice any. Maybe it would help for us to figure this case in backward as review the timeline of staging first by going backwards which may give clues on some ideas behind the staging caused by JB's death. What exactly happened that night is still vague to me, but I have strong opinion that one or both of Ramseys did the staging. But what the reasons or motives behind their staging are still puzzling to me.

If there was an intruder, he must be very professional or has IQ of 300 or the luckiest SOB alive on this planet. Do you know anyone who is the most cunning pedophile or a pedophile always have good lucks on anything in his life, or a professional doing the collateral damages jobs for living in Boulder back then? I wonder if anyone in Boulder noticed someone who no longer around as into hiding after JB’s death? Would you want to mention to police if you notice David Westerfield took off with his RV on the morning after Van Damme disappeared? His neighbors did that which helped police’s suspicion on him that lead to bring him into for the questioning then lead to the warrants on discovering Van Damme’s blood in his RV and on David’s clothes. Also his behavior had been obviously suspicion. How come no one noticed any suspicion behavior of an individual (Except Ramseys) with the ties to Ramseys in Boulder after JB’s death that they would want reports it?

If it was an intruder, he had a key, he knew the Ramseys, he knew where Ramsey’s had their stuffs inside Ramsey’s 6000 square feet house, he knew John came from south, he knew the alarm system was off, he knew the movies Speed, Dirty Harry, etc, he knew John’s $118,000 bonus, he knew about SBTC as clue for either John or Patsy, he knew John Ramsey had a local bank for withdrawal, he knew the wine cellar was remotest location of the house with latch lock, he knew where JB’s bedroom was, he knew when Ramsey went to sleep, he knew where Patsy tend to walk down on which stairs in the mornings, he knew who were home that night, and what else did he knew? Maybe he also knew Ramsey’s plans going to Michigan. So who is the suspect? Who does that leave us? Too many clues if you ask left by an intruder, then everybody would have already discovered who this killer was since the evidences suggested the killer had ties or connections with the Ramseys somehow. JMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by harz


If we may agreed the scene was staged, but both IDI & RDI could not come into an agreement on just one motive because the motives haven't been discovered yet. Both of us probably never will ever to learn the real motives behind JB's death or the staging. If we do discover a motive, then higher chance the killer would be exposed already. Maybe the motives are very well hidden as difficult for us to notice any. Maybe it would help for us to figure this case in backward as review the timeline of staging first by going backwards which may give clues on some ideas behind the staging caused by JB's death. What exactly happened that night is still vague to me, but I have strong opinion that one or both of Ramseys did the staging. But what the reasons or motives behind their staging are still puzzling to me.

If there was an intruder, he must be very professional or has IQ of 300 or the luckiest SOB alive on this planet. Do you know anyone who is the most cunning pedophile or a pedophile always have good lucks on anything in his life, or a professional doing the collateral damages jobs for living in Boulder back then? I wonder if anyone in Boulder noticed someone who no longer around as into hiding after JB’s death? Would you want to mention to police if you notice David Westerfield took off with his RV on the morning after Van Damme disappeared? His neighbors did that which helped police’s suspicion on him that lead to bring him into for the questioning then lead to the warrants on discovering Van Damme’s blood in his RV and on David’s clothes. Also his behavior had been obviously suspicion. How come no one noticed any suspicion behavior of an individual (Except Ramseys) with the ties to Ramseys in Boulder after JB’s death that they would want reports it?

If it was an intruder, he had a key, he knew the Ramseys, he knew where Ramsey’s had their stuffs inside Ramsey’s 6000 square feet house, he knew John came from south, he knew the alarm system was off, he knew the movies Speed, Dirty Harry, etc, he knew John’s $118,000 bonus, he knew about SBTC as clue for either John or Patsy, he knew John Ramsey had a local bank for withdrawal, he knew the wine cellar was remotest location of the house with latch lock, he knew where JB’s bedroom was, he knew when Ramsey went to sleep, he knew where Patsy tend to walk down on which stairs in the mornings, he knew who were home that night, and what else did he knew? Maybe he also knew Ramsey’s plans going to Michigan. So who is the suspect? Who does that leave us? Too many clues if you ask left by an intruder, then everybody would have already discovered who this killer was since the evidences suggested the killer had ties or connections with the Ramseys somehow. JMO I don't think anything was staged...I think everything including the way the body was discovered was a "signature" from the perp...no, I don't think he is quite as intelligent as you think...he has some education....If I was a betting woman, but I'm not...I would bet there were plenty of tips called into BPD that were not taken seriously....I don't have clue were the perp is today...maybe in jail, maybe in a psyche ward somewhere..he may never have killed again..but he'll get caught...imho

[americanpride91]

could the killer possable be Joseph Edward Duncan i know it a little bit out there and i don't know if he was in jail at the time but here why i think of this

1-All of the murders the Duncan been tie too have a same M.o to the JonBenet Ramsey case

2- the Groenes killing was plan out and to me JonBenet Ramsey was not maybe shown that he had to a better way to his target

3-Groenes kids would taking because he saw what like and Duncan had tie to the Ramsey case it could be the same reason

[harz]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I don't think anything was staged...I think everything including the way the body was discovered was a "signature" from the perp...no, I don't think he is quite as intelligent as you think...he has some education....If I was a betting woman, but I'm not...I would bet there were plenty of tips called into BPD that were not taken seriously....I don't have clue were the perp is today...maybe in jail, maybe in a psyche ward somewhere..he may never have killed again..but he'll get caught...imho

Police or detective said the note was "dumb down" also dont forget "and hence" phrase :) IMO

[Athena]

Personally I do not see the connection and his victims were boys:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8485031/

[Mishell1383]

Originally posted by americanpride91
could the killer possable be Joseph Edward Duncan i know it a little bit out there and i don't know if he was in jail at the time but here why i think of this

1-All of the murders the Duncan been tie too have a same M.o to the JonBenet Ramsey case

2- the Groenes killing was plan out and to me JonBenet Ramsey was not maybe shown that he had to a better way to his target

3-Groenes kids would taking because he saw what like and Duncan had tie to the Ramsey case it could be the same reason

Im not sure if I am grasping what you are saying?.. Maybe I'm not reading it correctly?

[americanpride91]

Originally posted by Athena
Personally I do not see the connection and his victims were boys:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8485031/

they did tie him to the killings of two little girls

[bullmoose]

I live only 50 miles from CoeurD'Alene and the Groene case is still very big news here; as a matter of fact Duncan is suspected in cases of child abductions of both male and female children; at the time he committed the Groene murders in May of 05 he was living in N. Dakota and was on bail for molestation charges in Minnesota. He is actually from the Tacoma, Washington area; in Washington state he spent many yearsin prison for a sexual assault on a teenage boy. If he was out of prison in 96, I do not know; I would be interested to find out, although Jonbenet's murder doesn't seem to match his MO.

[iminca]

Well it certainly got my attention when I heard he had used a hammer to murder. I then remembered JonBenet's head wound.

http://jetd63.blogspot.com/2005/07/joseph-duncan-timeline.html

He's certainly on my lists of suspects.

[Mishell1383]

no way.. It just doesn't make sense

[harz]

If it was Duncan, Ramseys would have recongized him. IMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by americanpride91



<snipped>
could the killer possable be Joseph Edward Duncan



ummmmmm....no IMO

[barskin&co.]

Exactly why would Duncan have written that nutty ransom note?

[Mishell1383]

And his MO seems to be killing the whole family and actually leaving the premises with the child... Why were the Ramsey's spared and JonBenet left in her own house? He spared Shasta for sheer convenience for his sick mind... IMO

[iminca]

Originally posted by barskin&amp;co.
Exactly why would Duncan have written that nutty ransom note?

He likes to write.

http://fifthnail.blogspot.com/

[Eagle1]

Originally posted by lucky13
IMO, any one of us on this message board could claim the same thing as this Gary person. With all of the info out there about this case, a scenerio would not be hard to come up with. I'm thinking.....John Karr the 2nd....

I was just thinking that too, but it's interesting. Thanks for posting it, Athena. We want to know every little thing. When he says he was going to hide in the guest room but Patsy was packing in there, he probably didn't mean at 8 o'clock but that she'd probably be working in there when she would get home from the Whites', right?

Re the Oakland County, Michigan child killings, a copy/paste quoting, I forget who, "but others seem to respect him over there and apparently whoever this guy is knows family members - I think his sister - the guy that supposedly is the serial killer is from Michigan? and is the Oakland County Child Killer (he murdered 4 girls) and his real name is Gary McGreen. I am just as confused as you are."

I live in an adjoining county, and I always perk up when there's any mention of that or the Co-ed murders, about which there was a book.

John Norman Collins was the only one accused and convicted, but in the book I think I remember reading that a loud scream was heard one night at the edge of a woods, and two or three white cars were parked there. She'd been raped with part of a tree branch and was included among the co-eds, in a university town where girls often walked to wherever they needed to go, didn't have cars. I know, these two kinds of cases are unrelated but the point is things happen in Mich., not just Colorado I guess.

[FurthurBB]

Originally posted by harz


Don't forget the gloves were wore during that night. If the flashlight was Christmas gift to Andrew or brand new owned by Ramseys, then how come intruder didn't bring his own? If it was intruder's and if he forgot to take flashlight with him after, then he would not have remember to wipe off the fingerprints as leaving flashlight there, otherwise he would have taken the flashlight with him without the need to wipe off the fingerprints. Flashlight was just a part of Ramsey's staging, simple. The clues are right there, you aren't seeing it yet. IMO

I would like to see exactly what evidence suggests that the batteries were wiped down. Did they find smeared fingerprints or cloth fibers. Does anyone know?

[FurthurBB]

Originally posted by harz


How would you know if JB’s death was a murdered or an accident? Even if there was a graphic photography or a videotape of the Ramseys staging the scene right in your face, you won’t see any motives in it. Ironies, if you could accept Ramsey’s staging but refuse to accept any motives behind it? So you won’t accept the staging which was done by the Ramseys, vice versa? JMO

If I saw a videotape of the Ramseys staging the scene that was authenticated I would believe it. I would also believe for that reasons unknown they killed their daughter in cold blood because that is the evidence that was presented in the autopsy report. IMO

[FurthurBB]

Originally posted by harz


Police or detective said the note was "dumb down" also dont forget "and hence" phrase :) IMO

And hence would be a pretty dumb down phrase to use. That is not proper English and is very repetative. The term hence, which I use quite often, really already includes the 'and'. It almost sounds like they were trying to sound more intelligent than they are. IMO

[harz]

Originally posted by FurthurBB


I would like to see exactly what evidence suggests that the batteries were wiped down. Did they find smeared fingerprints or cloth fibers. Does anyone know?

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/1107jonnn.shtml

I can't find other link I read before about the signs from wiped off but hushed about which fibers from cloth or paper towel.

[FurthurBB]

Originally posted by harz


http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/1107jonnn.shtml

I can't find other link I read before about the signs from wiped off but hushed about which fibers from cloth or paper towel.

All it says is that they did not find fingerprints on them and that is strange since they are a slick shiny surface good for fingerprints.

[rose]

I had just gotten done reading the book "Fatal Vision" for the third time. The reason for me reading it over again is the fact that some things bothered me. I read up on the computer about this case and read almost anything that had been printed about it. for some reason this case caught my attention. There are alot of questions that never were asked and there is evidence that does make sense to me. I am a 2 year criminal law student and I noticed from just the articles that were availble to me that something isnt right here.

What I want to know is .... If anyone out there has a opinion on this case. I would love to hear (read) it.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by rose
I had just gotten done reading the book "Fatal Vision" for the third time. The reason for me reading it over again is the fact that some things bothered me. I read up on the computer about this case and read almost anything that had been printed about it. for some reason this case caught my attention. There are alot of questions that never were asked and there is evidence that does make sense to me. I am a 2 year criminal law student and I noticed from just the articles that were availble to me that something isnt right here.

What I want to know is .... If anyone out there has a opinion on this case. I would love to hear (read) it.

Here ya go, Rose. It's the discussion for Jeffrey MacDonald:

http://boards.courttv.com/showthread.php?threadid=249916

[napa]

I have not read the books, but I have studied the case extensively. It seems to me that the 91) bloodstains and bloodtypes and (2) the pajama top make it an open and shut case against McDonald.

There is a lot of other circumstantial evidence that incriminates him, but those two pieces of evidence stand out.

[DolphinSpirit]

Originally posted by Athena
This was added - IDI - Possible Serial Killer??

http://tinyurl.com/ppp9r

Bill Gary. Internet poster Dan in Detroit claims that Bill Gary is the killer, in collaboration with Fleet White. Gary's known m.o. (redressing his child victims) was seen in JBR's case. Dan in Detroit claims that because the newspaper containing John Ramsey's circled face was 14 months old, the killing was planned at least a year in advance. "Bill Gary told me that they were planning the murder the year before at Christmas but that Fleet had to do something go somewhere. Gary got the dog hair 18 months before killing." Dan in Detroit provides the following details of how the crime was committed (post #501):
"He was in the house at 8. He went directly to the cellar room. Fleet had told him where the light switch was. He looked the house over. Was planning to be in the guest room but Patsy was packing in there, so he waited downstairs in basement."
"About 11 he`d just come upstairs to 1st floor grabbed the Maglite, heard noise, hid. There came Jonbenet downstairs from 2nd to 1st floor.(She ate pineapple)"
"He grabbed her wearing brown gloves, took her down to basement, stunned her, as he fondles her she awoke and screamed, he kneed her in head, lay there waiting to see if anyone heard, when police didn`t show in time it would take(he knew time because Fleet called 911) he garotted her in boiler room."
"She had messed pants. They said Friday. That wouldn`t do, this was a Wed murder. He`s killed lots on wed-sun. 2nd kid with same name had to be killed wed- sun. He`d already killed Ramsay in MT in 1996. Things had gone well, he had time. Went to 2nd floor. Parents slept on 3rd floor. Couldn`t find underpants, searched drawers, ripped open package, took out WED, didm`t know were too big, took blanket, etc. Heard noise. Went back downstairs."
"Jonbenet partly loose, paintbrush broken. Hit her in head with flashlight. Changed underwear, not shirt, tightened garotte, stuck something in her, went and put note on steps and johns picture, returned flashlight, returned, wiped her out, wiped off crusty spot blood with finger, put her in cellar, inspected blanket, ripped fibre 4 pieces, used tweezers put piece in garotte and put piece under tape, left through window, slipped on suitcase. etc..."
I have read all of what he has posted there and it is very interesting.......Unless someone was there the night it happened and witnessed it,,,I do not think we can throw anything to the wayside. Keep an open mind.

[MaryD]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


What I'm not seeing is parents of a six year old with no motive killing their child. JMO

Ok, I knew of a 17yr old boy who together with his 30 yr old girlfriend tied his mother up and beat her to death with a club. His only motive was that she wanted the girlfriend to leave their home. The thing is it was the crack they were taking that triggered them not the pathetic motive. They have been in jail for years now.

I've heard of a lot of rich folks who do drugs casually, cocaine, pot, alcohol etc. Give them the slightest excuse like a party or get together and their all hiding somewhere sniffing their heads off. Some are pill poppers and mix everything. You say they had no motive but you don't know what can trigger a person to insanity. Sometimes mind altering drugs need no motive. Of course you'll tell me now how there was no history. There are probably millions of people who take drugs and no one knows. So what may seem no motive to you can be hiding outside of your grasp or knowledge.

[Athena]

Originally posted by MaryD


Ok, I knew of a 17yr old boy who together with his 30 yr old girlfriend tied his mother up and beat her to death with a club. His only motive was that she wanted the girlfriend to leave their home. The thing is it was the crack they were taking that triggered them not the pathetic motive. They have been in jail for years now.

I've heard of a lot of rich folks who do drugs casually, cocaine, pot, alcohol etc. Give them the slightest excuse like a party or get together and their all hiding somewhere sniffing their heads off. Some are pill poppers and mix everything. You say they had no motive but you don't know what can trigger a person to insanity. Sometimes mind altering drugs need no motive. Of course you'll tell me now how there was no history. There are probably millions of people who take drugs and no one knows. So what may seem no motive to you can be hiding outside of your grasp or knowledge.

I doubt very seriously if Patsy were taking any such drugs. From all accounts she may have had a glass of wine. Remember she was in remission at that time from cancer. Don't think she would have done anything to jeopardize the length of time she had left on this earth. The Ramseys were investigated inside/out. If something was amiss I believe it would have been uncovered. Every parent I have read about that has killed a child has some type of precursive or psyhopathic behavior prior to. Also I firmly believe that the strangulation occurred before the head injury so this was no accident. It was a cold, malicious, calculated, perverted murder by a sicko. JMO

[MaryD]

Originally posted by Athena


I doubt very seriously if Patsy were taking any such drugs. From all accounts she may have had a glass of wine. Remember she was in remission at that time from cancer. Don't think she would have done anything to jeopardize the length of time she had left on this earth. The Ramseys were investigated inside/out. If something was amiss I believe it would have been uncovered. Every parent I have read about that has killed a child has some type of precursive or psyhopathic behavior prior to. Also I firmly believe that the strangulation occurred before the head injury so this was no accident. It was a cold, malicious, calculated, perverted murder by a sicko. JMO

Well because you doubt it doesn't mean it's not true. Did anyone do a drug test on them, no. People that party together never rat each other out. The Ramsey's left shortly after JB was found without being interrogated, they lawyered up immediately. Have you ever heard of a personality disorder? Not everyone who has a mental disorder has been treated for it. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. However if you want to believe only good things about the Ramseys for whatever reason go right ahead. Sadly, if you are wrong you have aided in denying Jonbenet the justice she deserves.

[LindaA]

Originally posted by MaryD


Well because you doubt it doesn't mean it's not true. Did anyone do a drug test on them, no. People that party together never rat each other out. The Ramsey's left shortly after JB was found without being interrogated, they lawyered up immediately. Have you ever heard of a personality disorder? Not everyone who has a mental disorder has been treated for it. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. However if you want to believe only good things about the Ramseys for whatever reason go right ahead. Sadly, if you are wrong you have aided in denying Jonbenet the justice she deserves.

And how do you know no drug test was ever done? They were investigated thoroughly and have been under public scrutiny ever since this happened. And as for your comment, "people that party together never rat on each other," is just wrong. Happens all the time. And I seriously doubt what any of us believes will deny JonBenet anything.

Athena, to whom you were responding, had done mountains of research on this case. Her feelings for the Ramseys are based on what she has read and her opinions are worth consideraton. JMO

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by Athena


I doubt very seriously if Patsy were taking any such drugs. From all accounts she may have had a glass of wine. Remember she was in remission at that time from cancer. Don't think she would have done anything to jeopardize the length of time she had left on this earth. The Ramseys were investigated inside/out. If something was amiss I believe it would have been uncovered. Every parent I have read about that has killed a child has some type of precursive or psyhopathic behavior prior to. Also I firmly believe that the strangulation occurred before the head injury so this was no accident. It was a cold, malicious, calculated, perverted murder by a sicko. JMO

The asphyxiation may have been an accident.

[MaryD]

Originally posted by LindaA


And how do you know no drug test was ever done? They were investigated thoroughly and have been under public scrutiny ever since this happened. And as for your comment, "people that party together never rat on each other," is just wrong. Happens all the time. And I seriously doubt what any of us believes will deny JonBenet anything.

Athena, to whom you were responding, had done mountains of research on this case. Her feelings for the Ramseys are based on what she has read and her opinions are worth consideraton. JMO

The investigators did mountains of research on the Ramseys and for some reason they don't agree with Athena. Their opinions are worth consideration too, no?

[MaryD]

Originally posted by MaryD


The investigators did mountains of research on the Ramseys and for some reason they don't agree with Athena. Their opinions are worth consideration too, no?

Correction on the Ramsey case.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by MaryD


Well because you doubt it doesn't mean it's not true. Did anyone do a drug test on them, no. People that party together never rat each other out. The Ramsey's left shortly after JB was found without being interrogated, they lawyered up immediately. Have you ever heard of a personality disorder? Not everyone who has a mental disorder has been treated for it. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist. However if you want to believe only good things about the Ramseys for whatever reason go right ahead. Sadly, if you are wrong you have aided in denying Jonbenet the justice she deserves.

Explain, please, how Athena would be aiding in denying JonBenet justice if she's wrong. I find that to be a very offensive statement. Why wouldn't that mean that anyone that posts their opinion here, whether RDI or IDI, if it's not the complete truth of what happened, is aiding in denying JonBenet justice, including you?

[Ames]

Originally posted by MaryD


<snipped>

I've heard of a lot of rich folks who do drugs casually, cocaine, pot, alcohol etc. Give them the slightest excuse like a party or get together and their all hiding somewhere sniffing their heads off. Some are pill poppers and mix everything. You say they had no motive but you don't know what can trigger a person to insanity. Sometimes mind altering drugs need no motive. Of course you'll tell me now how there was no history. There are probably millions of people who take drugs and no one knows. So what may seem no motive to you can be hiding outside of your grasp or knowledge.


Although I am one of the RDI folks...I do not, for one second...think that the Ramsey's did drugs. I would, however, like to know how much John had to drink at the White's Christmas party. Was John or Patsy on antidepressants? I thought that I had read that somewhere. If so, and they drank with it....you are not supposed to drink while taking antidepressants. My husband used to do that, and it would make him WHACKO...IMO..and he would have NO memory of what he did afterward.

[MaryD]

Originally posted by Ames



Although I am one of the RDI folks...I do not, for one second...think that the Ramsey's did drugs. I would, however, like to know how much John had to drink at the White's Christmas party. Was John or Patsy on antidepressants? I thought that I had read that somewhere. If so, and they drank with it....you are not supposed to drink while taking antidepressants. My husband used to do that, and it would make him WHACKO...IMO..and he would have NO memory of what he did afterward.

People who live a very fast pace life often use substances to aide them. They can be legal or illegal substances that they become addicted to. I did mention pill poppers. Patsys cancer bout could have caused her to take pain killers, anti-depressants, sleeping pills, etc. Legal drugs can be just as dangerous and addictive in the wrong hands as illegal ones. It was recently spoken about on the news that some people who were taking ambien were doing things in a sleep walking state that they had no recollection of. And if I am to believe the R's are capable of either staging this horrible crime against JB or actually killing her than I don't think it is such a stretch that they could be taking drugs either. JMO

[LindaA]

You're making some giant leaps here. I don't believe Ambien was even available 10 years ago. I'd like more details on your statement about the inventigators not agreeing with Athena -- with links provided.

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


The asphyxiation may have been an accident.

Sorry Wally. The strangulation was no accident unless you believe it was a pedophile trying to get his jollies off and pulled the cord too tight but I don't buy that. I certainly do NOT believe the Ramseys strangled their daughter in such a brutal manner. JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by MaryD


The investigators did mountains of research on the Ramseys and for some reason they don't agree with Athena. Their opinions are worth consideration too, no?

MaryD -- Please provide me with a credible link that says the Ramseys were doing mind-altering drugs. Hopefully the BPD checked out their prescription drugs which would not be hard to find. I have read everything I can on this case -- but granted perhaps I missed something. I'm a big girl and have no problem admitting when I am wrong or have overlooked something. So please do share.

TIA

[Athena]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Explain, please, how Athena would be aiding in denying JonBenet justice if she's wrong. I find that to be a very offensive statement. Why wouldn't that mean that anyone that posts their opinion here, whether RDI or IDI, if it's not the complete truth of what happened, is aiding in denying JonBenet justice, including you?

Wow -- didn't realize I could be that important. Now I'm denying JBR justice by posting my opinions. Too funny! :lol:

[Athena]

Originally posted by LindaA
You're making some giant leaps here. I don't believe Ambien was even available 10 years ago. I'd like more details on your statement about the inventigators not agreeing with Athena -- with links provided.

Ambien was introduced in 1993 however was not prescribed on a regular basis. It wasn't until recently the drug has become popular due to a massive ad campaign.

Having said that, I am sure the BPD during their investigation would have included drugs in their investigation which is why they were questioned about them. But to say they were taking mind-altering drugs and then to accuse me of aiding in the denial of justice for JBR if I'm wrong is totally nuts.

MaryD certainly needs to provide a link for making such an accusation. If I'm wrong -- I'll admit it. No big deal - but that statement is totally over the top. Giant leaps indeed! JMO

[LindaA]

Thanks for the info on Ambien. I knew I hadn't heard of it that long ago, but didn't know it was around at all.

Ditto on the statements by MaryD.

[MaryD]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Explain, please, how Athena would be aiding in denying JonBenet justice if she's wrong. I find that to be a very offensive statement. Why wouldn't that mean that anyone that posts their opinion here, whether RDI or IDI, if it's not the complete truth of what happened, is aiding in denying JonBenet justice, including you?

Your right I over stated my words. Sorry Athena. I just hope the endless hours you spend defending the Ramseys honor has some merrit . The fact is they are the only ones KNOWN to be in the home when she was killed, that in itself makes them suspect. To date there is no known proof of anyone else being there, just speculation. So to deny the Ramsey's as suspects is to deny reality. The ransom note does not prove or disprove an intruder because analysis has not excluded Patsy. IMO

[MaryD]

Originally posted by Athena


Ambien was introduced in 1993 however was not prescribed on a regular basis. It wasn't until recently the drug has become popular due to a massive ad campaign.

Having said that, I am sure the BPD during their investigation would have included drugs in their investigation which is why they were questioned about them. But to say they were taking mind-altering drugs and then to accuse me of aiding in the denial of justice for JBR if I'm wrong is totally nuts.

MaryD certainly needs to provide a link for making such an accusation. If I'm wrong -- I'll admit it. No big deal - but that statement is totally over the top. Giant leaps indeed! JMO

[MaryD]

Originally posted by Athena


Ambien was introduced in 1993 however was not prescribed on a regular basis. It wasn't until recently the drug has become popular due to a massive ad campaign.

Having said that, I am sure the BPD during their investigation would have included drugs in their investigation which is why they were questioned about them. But to say they were taking mind-altering drugs and then to accuse me of aiding in the denial of justice for JBR if I'm wrong is totally nuts.

MaryD certainly needs to provide a link for making such an accusation. If I'm wrong -- I'll admit it. No big deal - but that statement is totally over the top. Giant leaps indeed! JMO

Ok Athena let me clarify. I did not say they WERE taking drugs I was speculating on the possibility. Much like your comment above where you state, "I am sure the BPD during their investigation would have included drugs in their investigation which is why they were questioned about them." (speculation) Do you also have the results of this investigation? I was also speculating about which medications can account for odd or sometimes psychotic behavior. I obviously have no proof that they were taking any of them. The reason I brought up this possibility is because you seem very sure that there were no precursive behaviors (also speculation), you can't possibly be privy to all of their former behaviors. So what I was trying to point out is that sometimes crimes are committed under the influence of mind altering drugs. My only contention with you is that it seems, correct me if I am wrong, that you have totally eliminated the Ramseys as suspects?

[Athena]

Originally posted by MaryD


Ok Athena let me clarify. I did not say they WERE taking drugs I was speculating on the possibility. Much like your comment above where you state, "I am sure the BPD during their investigation would have included drugs in their investigation which is why they were questioned about them." (speculation) Do you also have the results of this investigation? I was also speculating about which medications can account for odd or sometimes psychotic behavior. I obviously have no proof that they were taking any of them. The reason I brought up this possibility is because you seem very sure that there were no precursive behaviors (also speculation), you can't possibly be privy to all of their former behaviors. So what I was trying to point out is that sometimes crimes are committed under the influence of mind altering drugs. My only contention with you is that it seems, correct me if I am wrong, that you have totally eliminated the Ramseys as suspects?

There is nothing in the documentation that says there was any form of child abuse, or anything else that would lead me to believe they mistreated their children. Do you really believe after 6 years of investigation something would not have turned up including mind-altering drugs? They interviewed family, friends, neighbors and work associates and none of them had anything bad to say about the Ramseys.

My conclusions were drawn LOGICALLY based upon the documentation. The Ramseys signed many documents giving the BPD access to their records including their medical records and part of any decent investigation of parents killing their children would be checking their medical records so my statement was based upon a logical conclusion not speculation.

Do you honestly believe that all of the people around them would not have noticed that their behavior was amiss which is what mind-altering drugs would do? Do you also believe their medical records were not checked?

So you now have a problem with me if I believe the Ramseys did not commit this crime? Guess what I don't care - I'm entitled to my opinon as you are yours - but don't accuse someone of denying justice to JBR because they don't agree with you -- seems pretty arrogant to me that you would even make a statement like that nor have you explained why you would say if I'm wrong I'm AIDING the injustice to JBR but no need to bother because it really doesn't matter since I realize I'm not important enough to make that much of a difference either way. LOL

For the record -- I have said many times if someone can convince me the Ramseys, either/or did this - I have no problem changing my mind if that is the way the evidence points. So far I have not been convinced and I certainly don't believe they took any mind-altering drugs. JMHO

[Athena]

Originally posted by MaryD


Your right I over stated my words. Sorry Athena. I just hope the endless hours you spend defending the Ramseys honor has some merrit . The fact is they are the only ones KNOWN to be in the home when she was killed, that in itself makes them suspect. To date there is no known proof of anyone else being there, just speculation. So to deny the Ramsey's as suspects is to deny reality. The ransom note does not prove or disprove an intruder because analysis has not excluded Patsy. IMO

Oh so you know for a fact the Ramseys did it? Give me a break. There is NO proof EITHER way which is why this case hasn't been solved to-date. What is to you that I defend the Ramseys and exactly what reality am I denying? What analysis are you referring to? The handwriting where there was a general consensus that she was NOT the author of the note and there is NOT one expert who said she was that examined the original documents.

LOL

[MaryD]

Originally posted by Athena


Oh so you know for a fact the Ramseys did it? Give me a break. There is NO proof EITHER way which is why this case hasn't been solved to-date. What is to you that I defend the Ramseys and exactly what reality am I denying? What analysis are you referring to? The handwriting where there was a general consensus that she was NOT the author of the note and there is NOT one expert who said she was that examined the original documents.

LOL

That's a pretty hostile reaction to an apology. I don't appreciate you distorting my words. Where did I say I know for a fact that the Ramsey's did it? I said "suspects." I don't care if you defend the Ramsey's but excluding them as suspects makes no sense. They were the only KNOWN people in the house is what I said. So what better proof is there of a suspect? If the Pope was KNOWN to be in the house that night he'd be a suspect too , and no I didn't say the Pope was there. It is the process of elimination. My interpetation of the general concensus of the handwriting analyists was that due to several similarities she could not be completely excluded as the writer. Call it a wash but what other suspects that were known to be in the house had a more compelling similarity in writing? None that I have heard of.

[Athena]

MaryD - Yes you did say "sorry" that you overstated your words. Still haven't figured out that "if I'm wrong, I am aiding in the denial of justice for JBR". Then in the next breath you use the word "contention" with ME. Argumentative and personal wouldn't you agree? The ignore button works well. JMO

[lucky13]

I've noticed that IDI's often mention that the Ramseys couldn't have done it because there was no previous abuse of JB or the other children.
Just to make a point, ya'll should watch some crime shows on Court t.v., A&E, TLC, or Discovery channel. They come on every day. Try Forensic Files, Cold Case Files, New Detectives, City Confidential, American Justice, etc...They are VERY informative. As someone who watches each & every episode of these true crime shows, I can tell you that there does NOT have to be previous incidents to commit a murderous act. It happens all the time. Sometimes people just snap. Just one example- they recently aired the story of Darlie Routier (look her up), who STABBED her 2 young boys to death in their own home. By all accounts, she was a very loving, caring, doting mother. Those who knew her well, including her own husband, could not believe that she had committed such a horrible crime against her own babies- BUT SHE DID. It was proven in court.
By the way, she also insisted that an INTRUDER came into their home & killed her boys....

[MaryD]

Originally posted by Athena
MaryD - Yes you did say "sorry" that you overstated your words. Still haven't figured out that "if I'm wrong, I am aiding in the denial of justice for JBR". Then in the next breath you use the word "contention" with ME. Argumentative and personal wouldn't you agree? The ignore button works well. JMO

I was appoligizing for that statement about aiding in denying JB justice. Used the word "contention" in the context of debate, dissagreement, nothing really hostile. Actually, though sometimes my feelings can get heated over this whole issue, I do look forward to hearing from you sometimes. Strange huh?

[LindaA]

Originally posted by lucky13
I've noticed that IDI's often mention that the Ramseys couldn't have done it because there was no previous abuse of JB or the other children.
Just to make a point, ya'll should watch some crime shows on Court t.v., A&E, TLC, or Discovery channel. They come on every day. Try Forensic Files, Cold Case Files, New Detectives, City Confidential, American Justice, etc...They are VERY informative. As someone who watches each & every episode of these true crime shows, I can tell you that there does NOT have to be previous incidents to commit a murderous act. It happens all the time. Sometimes people just snap. Just one example- they recently aired the story of Darlie Routier (look her up), who STABBED her 2 young boys to death in their own home. By all accounts, she was a very loving, caring, doting mother. Those who knew her well, including her own husband, could not believe that she had committed such a horrible crime against her own babies- BUT SHE DID. It was proven in court.
By the way, she also insisted that an INTRUDER came into their home & killed her boys....

I think most people here are familiar with the programs you mention. I am familiar with the Routier case and know that there are many people who believe she is innocent. There seems to be some "new" evidence in the case (at least evidence that came to light after the trial.) that points to an intruder. Those who believe she was guilty believe she did it in order to collect on the boys' life insurance. No such motive has ever come to light in the Ramsey case. As a matter of fact, no motive at all has ever been established.

Furthermore, those who are really serious about his case do their research from primary sources -- depositions, transcripts of interviews, etc. I'm sure both sides will agree that TV programs can be biased in what they presrnt and should be taken with a grain of salt. They are in large part responsible for the large amount of misinformation that is out there on both sides of the Ramsey case, IMO. I think you can learn more from reading the posts of reasonable posters on both sides of any case on these message boards than from the programs you mention. Also IMO.

Also no one here is so naive as to think that no parent is ever capable of murdering their child even in a brutal manner. In the Ramsey case it just seems to a lot of people that there are more reasons not to believe it of them than there are to believe it.

MOO

[Athena]

Originally posted by MaryD


I was appoligizing for that statement about aiding in denying JB justice. Used the word "contention" in the context of debate, dissagreement, nothing really hostile. Actually, though sometimes my feelings can get heated over this whole issue, I do look forward to hearing from you sometimes. Strange huh?

No problem MaryD. Thanks for responding. It does work both ways. :)

[MaryD]

Originally posted by lucky13
I've noticed that IDI's often mention that the Ramseys couldn't have done it because there was no previous abuse of JB or the other children.
Just to make a point, ya'll should watch some crime shows on Court t.v., A&E, TLC, or Discovery channel. They come on every day. Try Forensic Files, Cold Case Files, New Detectives, City Confidential, American Justice, etc...They are VERY informative. As someone who watches each & every episode of these true crime shows, I can tell you that there does NOT have to be previous incidents to commit a murderous act. It happens all the time. Sometimes people just snap. Just one example- they recently aired the story of Darlie Routier (look her up), who STABBED her 2 young boys to death in their own home. By all accounts, she was a very loving, caring, doting mother. Those who knew her well, including her own husband, could not believe that she had committed such a horrible crime against her own babies- BUT SHE DID. It was proven in court.
By the way, she also insisted that an INTRUDER came into their home & killed her boys....

True. Personally I have met so many Dr Jekyls/Mr Hides in my life, that after a while you can't put anything past anyone. They put up a great front publicly but the ugly stuff shows up behind closed doors.

[LindaA]

Originally posted by MaryD


True. Personally I have met so many Dr Jekyls/Mr Hides in my life, that after a while you can't put anything past anyone. They put up a great front publicly but the ugly stuff shows up behind closed doors.

Please explain that last sentence. I'd be interested kn knowing what you know about what went on behind the Ramseys' closed doors.

[Athena]

Originally posted by lucky13
I've noticed that IDI's often mention that the Ramseys couldn't have done it because there was no previous abuse of JB or the other children.
Just to make a point, ya'll should watch some crime shows on Court t.v., A&E, TLC, or Discovery channel. They come on every day. Try Forensic Files, Cold Case Files, New Detectives, City Confidential, American Justice, etc...They are VERY informative. As someone who watches each & every episode of these true crime shows, I can tell you that there does NOT have to be previous incidents to commit a murderous act. It happens all the time. Sometimes people just snap. Just one example- they recently aired the story of Darlie Routier (look her up), who STABBED her 2 young boys to death in their own home. By all accounts, she was a very loving, caring, doting mother. Those who knew her well, including her own husband, could not believe that she had committed such a horrible crime against her own babies- BUT SHE DID. It was proven in court.
By the way, she also insisted that an INTRUDER came into their home & killed her boys....

And there was also DNA evidence in that case that was not tested or the technology wasn't there and a motion for reconsideration was filed and granted in August 2006. Haven't heard anything else about it though; do you know of anything?

This is an extremely controversial case and not cut and dry as you appear to make it sound above. There are alot of people who believe in her innocence. I did not follow this case that closely so reserve opinion other than to say it IS controversial.

I am of the firm belief that in order for a person to kill their children they have to have some form of precusive behavior and or psychopathy or in this case if should remain as is was for insurance money. JMO

http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/

Search
Crime / Punishment
Advertisement


Darlie Routier - The Day of Her Arrest
Police Photo
Newsletters & RSS
Email to a friend
Print this Page

Death Row Inmate Darlie Routier - Guilty or Railroaded?

http://crime.about.com/od/current/a/darlieroutier.htm

[LindaA]

Here's the quote from the Routier site. Not to go too far OT, but it does demonstrate that an open and shut case is not always so open and shut.

"Forensic fingerprint tests conducted after Applicant's trial continue to demonstrate that Applicant is innocent of the crime for which she was convicted. In her First Application, Applicant identified a bloody fingerprint taken from her living roo m coffee table that did not belong to any of the persons known to have been in Applicant's household. In addition to this fingerprint from the coffee table, two separate prints from Applicant's utility room door have been analyzed by forensic print exami ners, who have excluded Applicant as the source of these prints. Examination of fingerprints from the utility room door is critical to Applicant's case, as it was this door – the door leading from the kitchen of Applicant's home to the garage – through w hich Applicant believes an unknown intruder fled after attacking her and her two sons. Despite repeated requests, the Court has never granted the evidentiary hearing necessary to investigate and evaluate this evidence.

Link: http://www.fordarlieroutier.org/Legal/Motions/040123.html

[MaryD]

Originally posted by LindaA


Please explain that last sentence. I'd be interested kn knowing what you know about what went on behind the Ramseys' closed doors.

I did not say "the Ramseys" closed doors. I was referring to people I have known. However, I do know that their daughter was found brutally murdered or staged murdered, behind their closed doors. Which leaves one of two possibilities they did it or someone else did it, and so we are back to square one.

[LindaA]

Sorry for misinterpreting your words. Yes, we are back at Square One with the Ramsey case -- a place most people who have been around here longer than you or I have visited frequently.

BTW, if anyone chooses to visit the Routier site a listen to that 911 call, be forewarned it it about 5 minutes long and very painful to listen to. I apologize for going OT again. One thing I would like to point out about that tape the the case that parallels the Ramsey case, is that DR was convicted in part because she did not behave according to the "Manual for Grieving Parents." Everything, thus, pointed to her guilt. One thing she was critized for was mentioning that she had touched the knife to the 911 opearator , thus making sure there was a reason her prints were on it. But if you listen to the tape, if it obvious that she was replying to the 911 operator who was admonishing her not to touch anything when she said that. That part is never quoted when people are building their case against her. I think the saem thing happens -- both ways -- with any case, including the Ramsey case.

[Athena]

Originally posted by LindaA
Sorry for misinterpreting your words. Yes, we are back at Square One with the Ramsey case -- a place most people who have been around here longer than you or I have visited frequently.

BTW, if anyone chooses to visit the Routier site a listen to that 911 call, be forewarned it it about 5 minutes long and very painful to listen to. I apologize for going OT again. One thing I would like to point out about that tape the the case that parallels the Ramsey case, is that DR was convicted in part because she did not behave according to the "Manual for Grieving Parents." Everything, thus, pointed to her guilt. One thing she was critized for was mentioning that she had touched the knife to the 911 opearator , thus making sure there was a reason her prints were on it. But if you listen to the tape, if it obvious that she was replying to the 911 operator who was admonishing her not to touch anything when she said that. That part is never quoted when people are building their case against her. I think the saem thing happens -- both ways -- with any case, including the Ramsey case.

You know I am now interested in this case. Thanks to you and Lucky I'm going to be fired!!! Just kidding - but this case definitely has my attention now. Alot of catching up to do though.
:eek:

[sweetcharlotte]

Originally posted by Athena


You know I am now interested in this case. Thanks to you and Lucky I'm going to be fired!!! Just kidding - but this case definitely has my attention now. Alot of catching up to do though.
:eek:

What's interesting to me is that IMO some people reacted to Darlie much the same way they did to Patsy Ramsey. (Guess we should go to that board, huh? :))

[LindaA]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


What's interesting to me is that IMO some people reacted to Darlie much the same way they did to Patsy Ramsey. (Guess we should go to that board, huh? :))

Yes, Sweet, that's exactly my point. Experts say that the reason she was convicted is because of a video tape that was shown at her trial of her holding a birthday party and the grave of her boys with balloons and silly string. They said no mother who loved her child could be so frivolous and happy at their grave.

Another parallel is that Darlie was very concerned with her appearance and was considered by some to be much too vain. Sound familiar?

There was one woman who wrote a book telling why she thought DR was guilty, but then changed her mind completely. So altho- she was convicted, it's not 100% sure she did it. She took quite a beating that night -- the photos are available. But that 911 call -- she would have to have been quite the actress to pull that off. I can hardly listen to it.

[Athena]

Originally posted by sweetcharlotte


What's interesting to me is that IMO some people reacted to Darlie much the same way they did to Patsy Ramsey. (Guess we should go to that board, huh? :))

Hey why not? I'm always for the underdog if it warrants it.

In all sincerity I am very interested in cases where a rush to judgment makes people appear to be guilty when in fact they may very well be really innocent.

Gosh you should have (or maybe you were) heard me during the MJ trial. Whether he did it or not -- don't know; but the evidence sure didn't show it but you wouldn't have known it listening to the media reports. I paid for and downloaded transcripts EVERY SINGLE DAY (I was home during that trial) and the media reports and the actual transcripts were like night and day. I think that trial is what turned me against the media big time!!

I have a thing for people with "gut feelings". Sure we probably do all get them at one or another but I don't let that interfere with me finding the truth and digging at the evidence and keeping an open mind. Just my nature. LOL Some people just stick to those "gut feelings" even if they are wrong.

In OJ's case the LAPD f'd up because they tampered with evidence and tried to frame a guilty man.

[Athena]

Hey sweet/Linda/Myr et al ....meant to add check out the Jason Wydette thread if you have not already. A 10 week old infant who died and the parents are accused of killing him via abuse in Boulder.

At first I thought maybe they too could be innocent because of a bone disease but then continued to read further and right now am leaning towards the parents in that case. Horrific and extremely sad!!!! :rose:

Looking forward to more info being released on that one! JMO

[LindaA]

Priginally posted by Athena;
"In OJ's case the LAPD f'd up because they tampered with evidence and tried to frame a guilty man."

Ironic, isn't it?