Space on Harp SAVED FOR JonBenet's Name

[shill]

"Christian" what christian throws their baby on a stage like a prostitute?

I must say I have never had any experience with prostitutes personally, but I am curious to know where you go to see them on stage?

What christian would be complaining of "oral sex".

In private, most of them.

[sharlock]

"Christian" what christian throws their baby on a stage like a prostitute? What christian would be complaining of "oral sex". Yes I read the testimony of the housekeeper, who said Patsy cried to her about John not being satisfied with her oral sex.

What does being Christian <or any religious beliefs have to do with the innocence or guilt of Patsy? Simply being Christian would not mean she couldn't allow her daughter to compete in pageants or indicate she thought of or treated her daughter as a prostitute. So what if she spoke of her concerns with oral sex to another woman, do you think Christians don't have oral sex? By the way we only have the word of the housekeeper that the conversation took place in the first place. IMO these comments are incredibly naive and biased. I think they are more worthy of a tabloid in a sleazy mag than a forum that is supposed to contain credible arguments about who might be guilty of JonBenets murder.
Sharlock

[Eagle1]

To me, Glick's having credentials, a Newsweek writer, gives him even more credibility that McReynolds said what Glick said he said.

It's such an unusual story, someone "saving" a space on a harp for another specific child who would die, who could ever just make it up?

It should have been given more publicity in my opinion, in case anyone out there might have an idea how McSanta (easier to type than McReynolds) would know JonBenet was going to be joining the other dead children.

I'm wondering HOW THEY DIED, and if he also had his fireplace wall papered with their pictures, wormed his way into their homes, and like that. And yes, I've seen a senior citizen heart patient after surgery look like a kid again. Could hardly believe my eyes. Then a few years later I heard she had a doctor appointment again and don't know if she's still with us. I've been meaning to ask at the Senior Center. Evidently that's what happened to McSanta. And yes it was naive, senility maybe, for him to tell that he'd saved a space on his harp for her. He wasn't 100% all there. Big slip up. And if he was involved as he must have been, obviously he wasn't acting alone.

Back to the question we keep getting distracted from, HOW DID HE KNOW to save a space for JonBenet among the OTHER children who'd died? He probably claimed to be just as fond of them, but they ended up as just decoration for his harp. Pedo's, Karr for example, typically claim to love and think they're loved by their targets.

Wish Glick would write an article or a book and give us a little more to go on. Would there be a way to contact him through Newsweek's website? I have some appointments this week and don't want to start anything new. Anyone that interested?

[Eagle1]

[QUOTE=thewhitewitch1;8845068]...............................

BTW, I've searched for that Newsweek interview with Glick, who was in on the Ramsey story from the beginning and Pro-Ramsey and could not find it anywhere. What I did find was this:

But before long, the media turned unfriendly. In late February 1997, Charlie Brennan of the Denver Rocky Mountain News and Daniel Glick of Newsweek went to Boulder district attorney Alex Hunter and told him of two odd facts they had uncovered: The McReynoldses' 9-year-old daughter had been kidnapped on December 26, 1974 (she was freed unharmed), and Janet McReynolds later wrote a play based on the 1965 torture killing of an Indiana girl that took place in a basement.

The two reporters then confronted the McReynoldses. Brennan's March 2, 1997, story carried the subhead "Strange Parallels In Couple's Life Lead Police To Take Hair, Handwriting Samples," though he opted not to report that he had a hand in tipping police to the "strange parallels." Among the news outlets to pick up the story: the Chicago Tribune, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, the Associated Press, CBS This Morning, and the Today show. Despite conceding that the two factoids may not be "anything more than unusual coincidences," Brennan still considers the story one of the best scoops he turned up while covering the Ramsey case. (Newsweek never ran the story.)

In light of this, that story about the harp and the saved space for JBs name is nothing but hear-say and has no basis of fact. Glick told Shapiro this and Shapiro passed it on and who knows if it was even said or how the story changed with the telling of it.As I said before, Glick must have done his story about the McSantas after JBs death because I can see no good reason why Newsweek would be interested in doing a story on him prior to that. And now it appears that the story was never even published. IMO............

Thanks for this much information.

Now I'm trying to find out if Glick's first name is Daniel, because Newsweek still has a columnist by that name in Colorado, search results, 1st page, http://www.Google.com/search?hl=en&l...8859-18q=Newsw...
and the quote above shows the two reporters were too distracted by their original question to notice this "Saving Space" one needed to be tracked down.

Newsweek wouldn't have been sued for printing it if they'd investigated and had good reason to assume or maybe absolute proof. The reporters just never did submit anything about this. So I'm wondering if they'd remember it now and be able to find out more after such a long time. I believe them, because of their responsible positions and because of the many other facts of the JonBenet case. The search term I used was Newsweek Glick Only Articles, because they have pages of "Find Articles" by many of their writers. I forgot to check if Brennan is still there.

Evidently he'd be a SECOND WITNESS to what Glick said McSanta said about saving a space on the harp for JonBenet's name. There ya go, two responsible witnesses.

Editing to add, thanks to your quote above, I was able to confirm it was in fact DANIEL Glick, and also that Brennan would be another source.

[Zoey]

What does being Christian <or any religious beliefs have to do with the innocence or guilt of Patsy? Simply being Christian would not mean she couldn't allow her daughter to compete in pageants or indicate she thought of or treated her daughter as a prostitute. So what if she spoke of her concerns with oral sex to another woman, do you think Christians don't have oral sex? By the way we only have the word of the housekeeper that the conversation took place in the first place. IMO these comments are incredibly naive and biased. I think they are more worthy of a tabloid in a sleazy mag than a forum that is supposed to contain credible arguments about who might be guilty of JonBenets murder.
Sharlock

I so agree with ya on this one Sharlock!

[thewhitewitch1]

To me, Glick's having credentials, a Newsweek writer, gives him even more credibility that McReynolds said what Glick said he said.

It's such an unusual story, someone "saving" a space on a harp for another specific child who would die, who could ever just make it up?

It should have been given more publicity in my opinion, in case anyone out there might have an idea how McSanta (easier to type than McReynolds) would know JonBenet was going to be joining the other dead children.

I'm wondering HOW THEY DIED, and if he also had his fireplace wall papered with their pictures, wormed his way into their homes, and like that. And yes, I've seen a senior citizen heart patient after surgery look like a kid again. Could hardly believe my eyes. Then a few years later I heard she had a doctor appointment again and don't know if she's still with us. I've been meaning to ask at the Senior Center. Evidently that's what happened to McSanta. And yes it was naive, senility maybe, for him to tell that he'd saved a space on his harp for her. He wasn't 100% all there. Big slip up. And if he was involved as he must have been, obviously he wasn't acting alone.

Back to the question we keep getting distracted from, HOW DID HE KNOW to save a space for JonBenet among the OTHER children who'd died? He probably claimed to be just as fond of them, but they ended up as just decoration for his harp. Pedo's, Karr for example, typically claim to love and think they're loved by their targets.

Wish Glick would write an article or a book and give us a little more to go on. Would there be a way to contact him through Newsweek's website? I have some appointments this week and don't want to start anything new. Anyone that interested?

Considering the comment about the harp came from a second hand source originally, I am still not giving it any credibility.
Obviously Dan Glick was out to find dirt on the McReynolds for a story because he was "on the Ramseys side". I don't think it's too hard to find "dirt" in anyones past if you try hard enough. Everyone has some.
I think it is presumptuous and naive of you all to believe that the BPD did not throroughly check the McReynolds and their family members. It seems fairly obvious that they did and the McReynolds were cleared.
I also think it is vicious and slightly sick that you imply that not only did they kill Jonbenet, but were involved in the deaths of other children. You have no evidence of that; nor do you have an evidence that McSanta was "senile".
There is also some question of whether or not JBs pictures were "wall-papered" all over his house. I think that is a huge exaggeration.
Many of the other suspects had "shrines" or pictures of JB also but simply because McSanta was at the party, he "must be guilty". What you've failed to provide is a motive and there is a total lack of physical evidence. All you have to go by is a string of coincidences and the Ramseys nasty accusations.
IMO
Zoey...do you really think that JRs comment about "Shirley Temple being more manly than Bill McReynolds" was called for? The Ramseys seemed to be doing a bit of "gay bashing" in that interview, as it wasn't just one comment, but many. I thought that might make you see beyond their "I'm a perfect Christian" front and make you realize that they might not be as they appear to be. Apparently not.
IMO

[LindaA]

When did the Ramseys claim to be perfect, Christian or otherwise?

[Zoey]

Considering the comment about the harp came from a second hand source originally, I am still not giving it any credibility.
Obviously Dan Glick was out to find dirt on the McReynolds for a story because he was "on the Ramseys side". I don't think it's too hard to find "dirt" in anyones past if you try hard enough. Everyone has some.
I think it is presumptuous and naive of you all to believe that the BPD did not throroughly check the McReynolds and their family members. It seems fairly obvious that they did and the McReynolds were cleared.
I also think it is vicious and slightly sick that you imply that not only did they kill Jonbenet, but were involved in the deaths of other children. You have no evidence of that; nor do you have an evidence that McSanta was "senile".
There is also some question of whether or not JBs pictures were "wall-papered" all over his house. I think that is a huge exaggeration.
Many of the other suspects had "shrines" or pictures of JB also but simply because McSanta was at the party, he "must be guilty". What you've failed to provide is a motive and there is a total lack of physical evidence. All you have to go by is a string of coincidences and the Ramseys nasty accusations.
IMO
Zoey...do you really think that JRs comment about "Shirley Temple being more manly than Bill McReynolds" was called for? The Ramseys seemed to be doing a bit of "gay bashing" in that interview, as it wasn't just one comment, but many. I thought that might make you see beyond their "I'm a perfect Christian" front and make you realize that they might not be as they appear to be. Apparently not.
IMO

If you read my posts tww, I say very clearly, not that I believe they killed JB. I don't know how else to word that I don't think for sure they had anything to do with JB"s death, nor have I come right out and said that I believe McSanta killed the other children that are on his harp. I ask questions, just as you do. Why is it okay for you to say what you do about the Ramsey's? I think what you say about them murdering their own little girl is very sick and wrong. But because it is the Ramsey's it is okay to say whatever you want? IMO.

I don't believe the Ramseys are perfect. I just don't believe they had anything to do with their daughter's death. I think they have made a lot of mistakes in this whole ordeal, but that does not make them murderers in my book. IMO.

I don't think it is naive of me at all to think the BPD did not thouroughly investigate everyone. I believe it is a very good assumption that they did not. They were so convinced that the Ramseys did it, that their haphazard investigation of others is actually laughable. Look at how they investigated the Amy incident. Look at how they investigated the Helgoth incident. As a police department, I think they are a out and out joke. Sure, they can catch the student selling pot, or the drunk driving down the road, but anything else is out of their league. Their track record speaks for itself, IMO.

Also, to be honest, if my daughter was found murdered in my basement, I would say anything and everything about any person I had ever had contact with that might have had contact with my daughter in any way. Right down to the paper boy. I would say whatever it took to get the officials to look at that person and investigate that person. Calling someone as queer as a three dollar bill sure as hell would have made it into my interview if that is how I perceived someone. I would have suspected my friends, my enemies and everyone else. But that may not be how anyone else would have been.

I know that you are going to say you never would have suspected your friends and done what the Ramseys did. I believe you would say that because you believe the Ramseys are guilty and therefore everything they did was wrong.

[andU]

I don't think bashing gays has anything to do with this forum. How a poster feels about that particular subject personally has no place in the Ramsey crime. Just as I don't feel a person should be judged by their beliefs or opinions, I don't think any of these things should be discussed here unless it does pertain to the case. IMO

[thewhitewitch1]

I don't think bashing gays has anything to do with this forum. How a poster feels about that particular subject personally has no place in the Ramsey crime. Just as I don't feel a person should be judged by their beliefs or opinions, I don't think any of these things should be discussed here unless it does pertain to the case. IMO

It was the Ramseys who were "gay bashing" and if it involves the Ramseys, it pertains to the case.
As you said, I would certainly discuss people who might have been suspects with the Police too if my child was murdered, but certainly not as viciously as the Ramseys did with the McReynolds. All they needed to tell them were what facts they found suspicious. There was no need to imply that McReynolds was a pedophile or that he was "effimate" (complete with gestures even). What does being "effimate" have to do with JB and the murder? Also, as I've said before, if the Ramseys found him to be so distasteful, why did they keep hiring him for their parties? I still think the Ramseys were ready, willing and apparently, able to implicate everyone and anyone in an attempt to take the focus off of themselves.
Why is it ok to make allegations about the Ramseys? Because they were/are suspects in this murder. They were there at the time of the murder and there is physical evidence that they may have been involved. It doesn't matter that they lived in the house...it is what it is. They can't be excluded simply because of that.
There is NO evidence that the McReynolds were involved and you can continue to believe the Ramseys that no one was investigated besides themselves if you'd like but it is NOT true. You seem to forget that the Ramseys had their own team of investigators. Do you mean to say that the Ramseys paid them to do nothing?
Also, (to whomever said it), I never said that the Ramseys claimed they were perfect Christians but they certainly implied it every chance they got. Patsy even "knows" she is going to "Heaven". Even if I thought that I was a "perfect Christian", I would certainly never assume what Gods final judgement of me is going to be. IMO

AndU...I know you think the Ramseys are innocent and I don't have a problem with that. I think you know that. I just don't happen to agree and am just trying to give you examples of why and to bring up some new things to discuss. OK?

[andU]

Well, gee ... I was referring to posts about other posters including asking gender, race, etc... but sure, we need fresh ideas. You are right, I don't believe the R's are guilty, and I have no problem with us agreeing to disagree about that. No one, including the Ramseys, has the right to judge anyone else.
Now, having said that, there are several people I would like more information about, but it seems to be not available. So, we have to go with what we have, minus the heresay.

[LindaA]

People who subscribe to Christian doctrine are taught that if they are baptised, they are "saved" -- forgiven for their sins -- and are assured a place in heaven. It has nothing to do with ego or one's opnion of oneself. Anyone who says they are sure they are going to Heaven is merely affirming their faith in salvation. Apparently the Ramseys, while human and imperfect, lived their faith and weren't afraid to let it be known.

[andU]

Sorry if I appear 'out of touch' but what does effimate mean? I could not find it in the dictionary. TIA

[Zoey]

Sorry if I appear 'out of touch' but what does effimate mean? I could not find it in the dictionary. TIA

Effeminacy is a trait in males that generally contradicts traditional male (masculine) gender roles. It is a term frequently applied to femininity; or womanly behaviour, demeanour, and appearance displayed by a man.

[Miss Marple]

I found it. Nederlands, where the McSantas lived, was 15 miles west of Boulder. It would have been a 30 mile round trip for Santa.

For the record, it is Nederland, a city that takes pride in celebrating Frozen Dead Guy Days every year....
http://www.nederlandchamber.org/FrozenDeadGuyDays/

Best wishes,
Miss Marple

[andU]

Effeminacy is a trait in males that generally contradicts traditional male (masculine) gender roles. It is a term frequently applied to femininity; or womanly behaviour, demeanour, and appearance displayed by a man.

Where did you find it, Zoey? I lookied in Merriam-Webster Online and got a response saying there was no such word. Maybe I used the wrong format of the word? I'm not saying it doesn't exist, I was taught to look things up if I didn't know what they meant and that's what I was trying to do.

Nevermind, I found it ... must have used an incorrect spelling.

[LindaA]

Effeminacy is a trait in males that generally contradicts traditional male (masculine) gender roles. It is a term frequently applied to femininity; or womanly behaviour, demeanour, and appearance displayed by a man.

Had the original poster correctly spelled the word I believe Zoey would have understood what it meant. Since it was written in quotes I assume it was misspelled in the document she was quoting.

[shill]

Also, as I've said before, if the Ramseys found him to be so distasteful, why did they keep hiring him for their parties?

They hired him for two parties and the third he forced himself on them

you can continue to believe the Ramseys that no one was investigated besides themselves if you'd like but it is NOT true. You seem to forget that the Ramseys had their own team of investigators. Do you mean to say that the Ramseys paid them to do nothing?

Private investigator can't order subpenas, do not have access to evidence, and suspects are unlikely to let themselves be interviewed by them.

IMO If LE had done a thorough job of interviewing all the suspects this case they would have an arrest, unless they haven't interviewed the killer yet.
So either they haven't interviewed the killer yet, or they need to investigate the suspects more intensely then they already have and that is why we are pointing out so many suspicions of suspects at large.

[Zoey]

Had the original poster correctly spelled the word I believe Zoey would have understood what it meant. Since it was written in quotes I assume it was misspelled in the document she was quoting.

Just to clarify, tww had it in her original post. Andu asked what it meant and I provided the definition. I totally understand what this word means, spelled correctly or incorrectly.

[LindaA]

Just to clarify, tww had it in her original post. Andu asked what it meant and I provided the definition. I totally understand what this word means, spelled correctly or incorrectly.

Sorry, I should have scrolled back to see who had asked the question.

[thewhitewitch1]

Had the original poster correctly spelled the word I believe Zoey would have understood what it meant. Since it was written in quotes I assume it was misspelled in the document she was quoting.

Sorry, all. The older I get, the more I mis-spell words. Comes with the territory.

[LindaA]

I quite understand, TWW. Actually, I thought the document you quoted was the guilty party.

[thewhitewitch1]

QUOTE Shill:

They hired him for two parties and the third he forced himself on them

END QUOTE

How did he "force" himself on them? That's an outright lie.
He asked and they consented. That is hardly forcing himself on them.

The fact is, the McReynolds were thoroughly investigated. What else was the point of the Ramseys interview with Mary Keenan about them? As far as I know, she did not think the Ramseys were guilty. IMO

[shill]

QUOTE Shill:

They hired him for two parties and the third he forced himself on them

END QUOTE

How did he "force" himself on them? That's an outright lie.
He asked and they consented. That is hardly forcing himself on them.

Webster's New World Pocket Dictionary 3rd Edition; force v. 1) make do something, compel 2) break open 3) impose, produce, ect.

How is what I stated an outright lie?

There was no Christmas party until he called Patsy up and compelled her to have one.
They had nixed the Christmas party, weren't going to have one, not going to happen.

You thinking he just "asked and they consented" IMO is ridiculous.
You claiming my statement is a lie is slanderous IMO.

[thewhitewitch1]

Webster's New World Pocket Dictionary 3rd Edition; force v. 1) make do something, compel 2) break open 3) impose, produce, ect.

How is what I stated an outright lie?

There was no Christmas party until he called Patsy up and compelled her to have one.
They had nixed the Christmas party, weren't going to have one, not going to happen.

You thinking he just "asked and they consented" IMO is ridiculous.
You claiming my statement is a lie is slanderous IMO.

You don't know to what extent he "compelled" them. How do you know that he didn't just ask because of the Charles Karult thing and they readily agreed? You don't know. It's your opinion; not a fact and therefore saying that it is a lie is not slanderous. IMO

[Zoey]

You don't know to what extent he "compelled" them. How do you know that he didn't just ask because of the Charles Karult thing and they readily agreed? You don't know. It's your opinion; not a fact and therefore saying that it is a lie is not slanderous. IMO

From Rocky Mountain News:

"Bill wanted to include our party in the filming, if possible, and he strongly encouraged me to have the party," Patsy Ramsey wrote.

[shill]

From Jeff Shapiro;

Kuralt was doing a show on men who play Santa, and if Patsy was willing to have the party, he could produce Kuralt on her front doorstep.

Despite the fact that Patsy had the party on Dec. 23, Kuralt bowed out after getting tired of following McReynolds during the daytime. Later, the Ramseys wondered if McReynolds used the Kuralt story as a way to see JonBenet at the Christmas party.

[shill]

Wouldn't Santa have left some physical evidence behind, such as hairs from his very long beard?

He was at the home two days before JB's murder for the Christmas party and apparently he did not leave any hair behind then or the 25th/26th.

[Eagle1]

He was at the home two days before JB's murder for the Christmas party and apparently he did not leave any hair behind then or the 25th/26th.

Why would you expect hairs or anything to still be there two or three days later, WW1 or whoever Shill's answering?

You said you just like to argue, I know, but nobody here said the McReynolds definitely did it, or anything about Christians. There is NO proof, absolutely none, that the R's did it, and yet, as others have already pointed out, anything goes as long as it targets them.

Forgive me if I'm getting a little blunt but so much oversensitivity about the McReynolds, when combined with your revealing hat and also criticizm of Christians, could actually be interpreted as your maybe even knowing something about the case that we don't?

There's nothing in Christianity about human sacrifice, but I've searched out and provided some examples about primitive religions that some might think are exciting or something. I didn't get to Tollund Man, but told you about Lindow Man and maybe another bog man, the "3-fold deaths", and there are special times of the year, I'm sure you're already aware, Beltane coming up, about May 1, and evidently there are parts of that at a couple of other times of the year. I forget what the Christmas time or NewYears one is called.

We're not saying that's the answer, only looking at it as I'm sure BPD did NOT, and we don't have the advantages they would have had. You said "I just like to argue," I know, but could we think about how the other children on the harp could have died, at the hands of whom, and how he knew to SAVE a place for JonBenet on the harp? Can we get right down to that important question, no distraction?

Why were all those children so "loved" by this guy and so important to him he'd put them on a harp, which to the celts had some kind of magical qualities? Obviously such a harp isn't just a travel souvenir, with dead childrens' names on it. It means something. Tell us what?

[nuisanceposter]

He was at the home two days before JB's murder for the Christmas party and apparently he did not leave any hair behind then or the 25th/26th.

Proof that anyone named McReynolds was in the Ramsey house on 12/25/96 or 12/26/96?

[Sharon]

If you read my posts tww, I say very clearly, not that I believe they killed JB. I don't know how else to word that I don't think for sure they had anything to do with JB"s death, nor have I come right out and said that I believe McSanta killed the other children that are on his harp. I ask questions, just as you do. Why is it okay for you to say what you do about the Ramsey's? I think what you say about them murdering their own little girl is very sick and wrong. But because it is the Ramsey's it is okay to say whatever you want? IMO.

I don't believe the Ramseys are perfect. I just don't believe they had anything to do with their daughter's death. I think they have made a lot of mistakes in this whole ordeal, but that does not make them murderers in my book. IMO.

I don't think it is naive of me at all to think the BPD did not thouroughly investigate everyone. I believe it is a very good assumption that they did not. They were so convinced that the Ramseys did it, that their haphazard investigation of others is actually laughable. Look at how they investigated the Amy incident. Look at how they investigated the Helgoth incident. As a police department, I think they are a out and out joke. Sure, they can catch the student selling pot, or the drunk driving down the road, but anything else is out of their league. Their track record speaks for itself, IMO.

Also, to be honest, if my daughter was found murdered in my basement, I would say anything and everything about any person I had ever had contact with that might have had contact with my daughter in any way. Right down to the paper boy. I would say whatever it took to get the officials to look at that person and investigate that person. Calling someone as queer as a three dollar bill sure as hell would have made it into my interview if that is how I perceived someone. I would have suspected my friends, my enemies and everyone else. But that may not be how anyone else would have been.

I know that you are going to say you never would have suspected your friends and done what the Ramseys did. I believe you would say that because you believe the Ramseys are guilty and therefore everything they did was wrong.

Well said. That is exactly how I feel regarding all your points. I feel that with the evidence available, and what we know about human nature and the incompetency of the investigation....the R. are the last ones to have killed their very own daughter. If evidence came up showing another evil side that they managed to keep hidden for all the years prior to the murder and after...then I would change my mind. But, these were pretty run of the mill inperfect but highly functioning parents. I think its sick to think they would do the specific things that were done to the child while she was alive to h

Not to mention the sick perps that we know exist in general in this world that would be far more likely to have done this than the parents.
jmo

[nuisanceposter]

I have to disagree with you, Sharon. IMO, Patsy in particular does not strike me a person who was completely mentally stable all the time. I believe Patsy had some serious issues that were not being addressed, and that those issues led to the unfortunate death of her favorite child - the same one she dressed up and played with as if the child were a toy and not a real human being with her own thoughts, feelings, and desires. Just my opinion.

[nuisanceposter]

And as for John Ramsey, IMO, it sounds like he was rarely home, and not personally all that involved with the kids' activities when he was. I also get the distinct impression that he had emotionally distanced himself from the family in his effort to overcome the grief and mourning he felt over Beth's completely unexpected death. Again, this is just my opinion based on what I have read about the Ramseys, in the last decade of researching this case (from their own mouths as well as those who knew them and those who worked to investigate this case.)

[Zoey]

Proof that anyone named McReynolds was in the Ramsey house on 12/25/96 or 12/26/96?

I have to look at it this way. Perhaps I am looking at it incorrectly, but...McReynolds was cleared as a suspect because his DNA was not matched to the DNA at the crime, and no fibers could be traced to him. This is what I find very strange. He was there for a few hours on the
23rd, yet he didn't shed one fiber, one hair? Or did they find hair and fibers that matched McReynolds, but brushed them aside due to the fact that he was there on the 23rd? How does one determine how long a fiber or hair has been there?

JB had taken him on a tour of the Ramsey home the previous year, which included the basement and her bedroom. Did he not shed anything then? I know that even an extremely clean house has fibers and hairs all over it, doesn't it?

[thewhitewitch1]

QUOTE Eagle1:

Forgive me if I'm getting a little blunt but so much oversensitivity about the McReynolds, when combined with your revealing hat and also criticizm of Christians, could actually be interpreted as your maybe even knowing something about the case that we don't?
END QUOTE

Would you please explain to me what exactly you meant by "your revealing hat"? What criticizm of "Christians"? The only Christians I've criticized are the Ramseys. I guess you missed my point again so nevermind.
Don't want to start a big religious arguement here.
For the record, I don't know anything more about this case than what I have studied; just like you.

[Sprocket]

All research on the McReynolds in relation to JonBenet

PDF Download document on McReynolds Family

Gee. Santa was investigated by Pat Wyton & Nathan Vasquez on 1-03-97.
Santa was investigated by Linda Arndt on 2-07-1997
Santa was investgated by Steve Thomas & ron Gossage 2-26-1997 & 2-2-1997. Tape recorded investigation.
Santa was investgated by Lou Smit & Dan Schuller 7-1997.
Santa was investigated by Trip DeMuth, Dan Schuller (this was the rope hunting raid on McReynolds mountain home.)
Santa was investigated by Dan Glick & Sharon Osborne by Newsweek.

I think it's about time to give Santa a rest.

[thewhitewitch1]

All research on the McReynolds in relation to JonBenet

PDF Download document on McReynolds Family

Gee. Santa was investigated by Pat Wyton & Nathan Vasquez on 1-03-97.
Santa was investigated by Linda Arndt on 2-07-1997
Santa was investgated by Steve Thomas & ron Gossage 2-26-1997 & 2-2-1997. Tape recorded investigation.
Santa was investgated by Lou Smit & Dan Schuller 7-1997.
Santa was investigated by Trip DeMuth, Dan Schuller (this was the rope hunting raid on McReynolds mountain home.)
Santa was investigated by Dan Glick & Sharon Osborne by Newsweek.

I think it's about time to give Santa a rest.

Sprocket, you and I just know that most IDIs will continue with insisting that no one except the Ramseys were ever investigated. After all, the Ramseys said so so it must be true. IMO

[Zoey]

Sprocket, you and I just know that most IDIs will continue with insisting that no one except the Ramseys were ever investigated. After all, the Ramseys said so so it must be true. IMO

Actually, I believe that most IDI's will insist that quite a few people have been investigated including the Ramseys. What we (generalization only) don't feel is that they were thouroughly investigated because LE felt they already knew the killers, as in John and/or Patsy Ramsey. IMO.

[andU]

I know others have been investigated, but there is a huge gap in either what is known to us or what is known to LE since there have been no arrests. IMO, anything is possible.

[shill]

LE will have thoroughly investigated everyone when they have an arrest.

Until then, other then the Ramseys, none of the hundreds of other suspects were thoroughly investigated enough IMO.