Posted on 06/24/2006 7:35:36 AM PDT by Brytani
According to Fox News, Patsy Ramsey, mother of Jonbenet Ramsey has passed away from ovarian cancer.
When the whole Ramsey thing happened, I remember seeing pictures of the little girl in full make-up and evening gown...It struck me as very weird. Then some TV show did a presentation on the whole thing and apparently there's a whole world of people out there who dress their kids like that...
If it's just playing dress up, as some posters here claim, then fine. A little odd, but who am I to judge?
The corporate CPA
Been there done that,good with a top agency-forget the pagents.I pulled my kids out.I was always with them-same sex abounds.
I cannot think of a single so called abduction where the child was left in the home.
I pulled my kids out.I was always with them-same sex abounds.
Gay people in the fashion industry? Say it ain't so!
Don't know if this is your personal analysis or not, but it is very enlightening.
I wish that you, and Rte66, would share your ideas/theories about what happened, why and who was responsible.
Heck I wasted one question.Did John and Patsy find out the amount before the letter was written?
It's a whole lot more than playing dress up. You saw the TV presentation.
It's a whole lot more than playing dress up. You saw the TV presentation.
Yes, but the producers could have just included interviews with the psycho parents. Look, I'm an old guy. I'm from an age when boys weren't provided with a suit until they were 18, except for formal functions. So I could be out of step with all this stuff. Hell, kids could be showing up for the first day of pre-school in gowns and tuxedos these days...
Exactly. As I was thinking about this case today, after reading this post, that fact is the one I remembered first. I couldn't get beyond it then or now.
Good grief, man!
Oh, come on. You can't be that out of touch. Because everyone does it, doesn't make it normal or right.
:)I was sent to the basement of an old Philadephia home while a trusted friend took pictures with Miss Phiadelphia and my 3 year old daughter.Miss Philadelphia was told not to wear underware under the nightgown because it would ruin the smooth line.She was not happy ,got to the basement and saw lesbo negative's hanging and walked back upstairs.The pictures made the Mag ,but I was done.
LOL, how true!
Oh, come on. You can't be that out of touch. Because everyone does it, doesn't make it normal or right.
Sometimes I feel very out of touch...But I do know something of the worlds (modeling, acting etc) I think some of these people are aspiring to and those aspirations may be very misplaced.
Each of them had an idea about it, in round numbers, such as 118. Or maybe 120. Or "over 100."
There was a woman who had been a partner in John's company - I'm not going to go into detail because I haven't thought about any of this in a very long time - but John fired her and I believe her husband was part of it, too. Don't hold me to that part.
They had lost a lawsuit to John for something and had to repay some money. It was divided into payments that she could make and she had paid it down to a balance of so many more payments, totalling $118,000.
It was believed that an alternate theory to the "John's bonus" theory about the sum of $118,000, was that *someone* may have been trying to implicate those people in the crime.
If I think of their names, I'll look for it. I want to say Carpenter, but that probably isn't correct. I don't have any of my reference materials anywhere where I could look it up.
One of my personal highlights was when a gay friend smuggled me backstage during Fashion Week many years ago...
Got a year? LOL. I don't know who did it.
Yes, indeed. EXCEPT that the ransom note exposes a strong familiarity with the Ramseys, including the bizarre wording, the ransom demand equal to John's bonus, etc. This would rule out a passing stranger, yes? So how many sex fiends are good pals with the Ramseys? Wouldn't the list of possible suspects decrease dramatically if you still want to accept that somebody *outside* the immediate family killed the child? And wouldn't any competant police department (this might not include Boulder's) be able to round up the possible suspects and begin crossing names off the list? Whoever did this knew at least who the victim was and the victim's father.
Now, you've lost me here. You claim the killing was a "sexual homicide" but them you turn around and say of beauty pageants :
I too find it to be embarassing and obnoxious but it has NOTHING to do with this case.
So, if your hypothesis is correct, why would you presume that the sexual deviant wasn't somebody who was turned on by Mommy dressing up her six-year-old to look like "Daddy's Little Hooker"? True, the man may have seen Jon Benet in skimpy clothes in some other setting but probably not around Christmastime in Colorado, don't you think?
I don't know how you can escape the conclusion that this was an "inside job" so, therefore, the list of possible suspects should be rather small - people who KNOW John Ramsey and his daughter. Once you establish that fact and the Ramseys' constant reluctance to beat down the door of the BPD demanding justice for their daughter's death tells me THEY KNOW WHO DID IT. They don't want the killer prosecuted.
How many people in the Ramsey's sphere on influence would they have such strong feelings about that they would not want to see the killer in their midst brought to justice? For most people, that would only mean beloved family members.
That's why, to me, the trail leads right to John, Patsy or Burke and that, however the death took place, they conspired to cover it up - maybe even to the point of stringing the girl up, providing some post-mortem blows and writing a fake ransom note to throw police and forensics off the trail.
While bizarre, this scenario fits the known facts of the case more to me that some wandering deviant who randomly breaks in and kidnaps the girl in her own bed and kills her in the basement while the parents are unaware.
If kidnapping is a ruse (and I agree it is), the ransom note is a key clue to what took place - not because of who it implicates but who it eliminates. It eliminates people with less than a passing knowledge of John Ramsey and his daughter. To me, that conclusion is inescapable.
LOL...oh, that final argument was the most ludicrous comment of all coming from 'le expert'.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.