Posted on 08/18/2006 9:11:49 AM PDT by fivecatsandadog
A U.S. law enforcement official tells CNN that the man held in the slaying of JonBenet Ramsey offered details about the condition of her body that have never been made public.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
I'm not buying the Shall be the Conqueror either. Where's the identifier? Who is the conqueror? Where is the "I"? If it was really so important, he would have spelled it out so there would be no question in anyone's mind who held the power. He would have signed it more along the lines of - "Victory! I AM the Conqueror". SBTC in the note is meaningless and is of no consequence the way it is written to anyone but the writer.
On the other hand it could be the writer wanted to mislead the police and wrote the letters off the cuff.
On the third hand (or would we be to feet now?), it could be a common greeting or saying. I'm not leaning toward a cult, but as an example a cult/group/secret society might end conversations with "So Be The Cause" or "So Be The ... whatever".
There was also mention of LE checking a similar case in TEnn. WOuld that make it four?
And yet NOT ONE person has jumped to the foreground placing this guy in Colorado either. I find that even more significant.
At least his ex-wife and brother came forward (or more likely were surprised by the first wave of media inquiries) and then probably consulted a lawyer who told them to shut up.
Is there NOBODY in Colorado who wants to be on television to say "I saw him in Boulder. I remember him."? You'd think there would be 20 or 30 who would lie about seeing him just to get their mug on TV. So far...silence.
SO the kidnap/murder was pay back to hurt/humiliate the father?
Just think...see, we're calling her Patsy. The Media and even her family (in public anyway) are calling her Patsy. Then he goes on international TV and refers to her as "Patricia", several times. Talk about intruding into and trying to control the Ramseys' world...
My grandfather had an older sister who as the family's eldest child was made to feel she was "in charge" of her siblings when they were young.
Their whole lives she continued to act that way. She would barge into one of their homes uninvited and begin to "take control" of whatever was going on.
Here's what reminds me of this situation: My grandfather had a middle name that NO ONE in the family ever called him...it was a family name from the past and not the kind of name you'd want to go by...
But his elder sister called him by that middle name and was the only one in the family who ever did.
At a family gathering they would call out to him and say, Hey, Harv (Short for Harvey), but she would always say, now Griggs, what about this and what about that.
When my mom told me about that, I told her she was just trying to show him, and all the others, that SHE was in control.
The injury to her head was quite large and severe, and left a big bashed in hole. I see your point, but this appeared to investigators as a most deliberate and brutal act. They said it might have been done NOT to kill her, though, for whatever reason in was done, because she had already died from strangulation.
in = it
In case a defense attorney is lurking, I wouldn't float such stuff....he'd probably snap it up and then hope he gets a jury as dumb as Orenthal's to suck up such a scenario.
Dismissed Simpson juror being interviewed: "DNA don't mean nuffin - lotsa peoples gots the same blood type".
No comment. I don't trust my temper at the end of this difficult, tiring day. Was for me anyhow...
Ya got to admit, if he thought the head injury killed her it would fit in to his "It was an accident".
The last time I checked, that wasn't against the law.
Not necessarily. It may be that the family was smart enough (cough) to have hired a lawyer and he advised them to keep the photos locked up. There are many people out there who just aren't organized and can easily put their hand on a photo 10 years old. I worked with families and it's amazing how many parents called the office a few weeks after a visit claiming they lost their kids' pictures and do we have copies. I've also been in more than one home that's been vacated and there's family pictures and kids' school pictures thrown in the garbage or left here and there in the trashed out rooms. Some people just couldn't care less about such things.
This was my first trip over to the autopsy report at Drudge. Skimming through it, it says the heart was drawn on the left hand. If she was right handed, and I certainly don't know if she was, then she could very well have drawn it herself making it a non-issue.
On CNN, they mentioned a neighbor claiming Karr was at his ex-wife's that Christmas. That's the ex, the brother, and a neighbor. Frankly, I couldn't tell you who was at my neighbor's last weekend much less their family Christmas ten years ago.
I don't see why a lawyer would advise any of the family to not release evidance that John Karr could not have been the killer. This would be highly unethical and could be considered hindering an investigation to not turn over pictures to the authorities. I don't think your senario of a lawyer telling them to hold onto family pictures and not show them to anyone is likely and I disagree.
I can only speak for my family I see every Christmas. A neighbor, forget it!
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.