Local News: Los Angeles, CA 

 | 

Sign Up

 | 

Sign In

Ramsey-isms

Posted in the JonBenet Ramsey Forum

Read

48 Comments

More JonBenet Ramsey Discussions »

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of48
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
The Truth Hurts

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Dec 1, 2011
 

Judged:

5

4

3

Was just looking around the net and found this. This is from the Ramseys "secret meeting" with "select Boulder Media" on May 1, 1997:

"Mr. Ramsey: We have spoken with the police. We spoke with the police approximately eight hours on the 26th, another two hours on the 27th, have supplied them with every piece of information we have. So the impression that we haven't spoken with the police is totally false. What we have...what has been delayed...has been this formal interrogation of us as suspects. And frankly, we were, as you might imagine, insulted that we would even be considered suspects in the death of our daughter and felt that an interrogation of us was a waste of our time and a waste of the police's time but because they have to do this, we were willing to do it but not under any circumstance that was presented to us."

Evidently he is counting the 8 hours the police spent at his house until JBs body was found as having "spoken to the police." (What was he going to do? Ignore them?) That is just a ridiculous statement.

Who did he think he was to dictate to the police the "circumstances" of submitting to a formal "interrogation?"
John Ramsey was/is a pompous ass.
candy

East Lansing, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Dec 1, 2011
 

Judged:

3

2

2

John Ramsey has always been a piece of work. He's "insulted" that the people inside the house with the victim COULD DARE be called suspects, BUT he threw countless INNOCENT PEOPLE under the bus as suspects in this case HIMSELF, and through his surrogates like Smit, Jameson, etc.
BrotherMoon

Denver, CO

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Dec 1, 2011
 

Judged:

5

3

2

The pompous ass wrote:
John Ramsey was/is a pompous ass.
Takes one.

What are you other hats? Why do you hide?

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Dec 2, 2011
 

Judged:

3

3

3

The Truth Hurts wrote:
Was just looking around the net and found this. This is from the Ramseys "secret meeting" with "select Boulder Media" on May 1, 1997:
"Mr. Ramsey: We have spoken with the police. We spoke with the police approximately eight hours on the 26th, another two hours on the 27th, have supplied them with every piece of information we have. So the impression that we haven't spoken with the police is totally false. What we have...what has been delayed...has been this formal interrogation of us as suspects. And frankly, we were, as you might imagine, insulted that we would even be considered suspects in the death of our daughter and felt that an interrogation of us was a waste of our time and a waste of the police's time but because they have to do this, we were willing to do it but not under any circumstance that was presented to us."
Evidently he is counting the 8 hours the police spent at his house until JBs body was found as having "spoken to the police." (What was he going to do? Ignore them?) That is just a ridiculous statement.
Who did he think he was to dictate to the police the "circumstances" of submitting to a formal "interrogation?"
John Ramsey was/is a pompous ass.
I think my very favorite part of this is the father of a murdered CHILD saying that interrogation by the police would be a WASTE OF THEIR TIME. Can you believe he would say such a thing, knowing that they needed to eliminate them before looking OUTSIDE? Every other parent of a murdered child knows that, except for the Ramseys it seems

Has anyone ever heard a parent say that anything relating to the investigation of a murdered child was a WASTE OF THEIR TIME? With John's NO JOB and Patsy's incoherence, I'm sure their time was extremely valuable.

Golf doesn't play itself you know!
pinker

Elkhorn, WI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Dec 2, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

The circumstance the police wanted was only to talk to them separate, not as Siamese twins. This is standard procedure in any investigation. To veer off that path was as ridiculous as allowing the Ramseys to remove possible evidence from the crime scene.

Being separated during questioning was the Ramseys biggest fear as they had to know what the other said so they could corroborate answers… The truth always is remembered correctly, it's lies and falsehoods that people have trouble remembering.
The Truth Hurts

Detroit, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Dec 2, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Capricorn wrote:
<quoted text>
I think my very favorite part of this is the father of a murdered CHILD saying that interrogation by the police would be a WASTE OF THEIR TIME. Can you believe he would say such a thing, knowing that they needed to eliminate them before looking OUTSIDE? Every other parent of a murdered child knows that, except for the Ramseys it seems
Has anyone ever heard a parent say that anything relating to the investigation of a murdered child was a WASTE OF THEIR TIME? With John's NO JOB and Patsy's incoherence, I'm sure their time was extremely valuable.
Golf doesn't play itself you know!
Why is it that only certain people "get this?"
I knew that the IDIs would go into convulsions when I started this thread and they never disappoint. They really don't WANT the Ramseys to be guilty. They never question anything the Ramseys said or did, no matter how suspicious or weird and I just don't understand that.

John Ramsey talked out both sides of his mouth. On the one hand, he professed to understand about LEs need to interview them separately in order to move on, but then he whines about how insulted he was to be asked to be interviewed separately (and no one was even calling him a "suspect" during those early days when getting those interviews done was crucial to moving on.) And he complains about the "circumstances" of the interviews....as if he or ANYONE has the right to dictate the terms of being questioned by the police.

It always was all about themselves and never about finding justice for JonBenet.
The Truth Hurts

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Dec 2, 2011
 
Officials list conditions for Ramsey interviews
Alli Krupski, Camera Staff Writer

Friday, April 25, 1997

Investigators remain willing to interview the parents of JonBenet Ramsey, Boulder Police Chief Tom Koby and Boulder County District Attorney Alex Hunter said Thursday in a conciliatory letter to the family's attorneys.

Koby and Hunter, however, listed six conditions for the proposed interrogation:

* John and Patsy Ramsey must be interviewed separately.
* Patsy Ramsey must be interviewed first.
* There must be an open-ended time frame for the interview, with reasonable breaks.
* The interviews must be tape-recorded.
* The interview must be conducted by two Boulder police detectives selected in consultation with Hunter. The Ramseys may be accompanied by their attorneys.
* The interviews must be conducted at a neutral location such as the Child and Family Advocacy Center in Niwot.

Hunter and Koby also noted they "understand the feelings of frustration" the Ramseys have experienced. The officials acknowledged the "unfortunate miscommunication" between investigators and the family. "We're encouraged to hear you indicate a continued willingness to accomplish the critical interviews with Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey. We share that goal."

The Ramseys' lawyers have not decided if the couple will submit to questioning under such circumstances.

"They are pretty reasonable conditions, and we really need to talk to them separately to validate their accounts," a source close to the investigation said. "We want to talk to Patsy first for a lot of reasons. There's a possibility she might reveal some information that her husband might not. And we can then check that information with him after we talk to her."

City spokeswoman Leslie Aaholm would not elaborate on authorities' request to interrogate Patsy first.

"They (Ramsey attorneys) evidently felt a need to go public with this information, and we felt there were some inaccuracies in what they put out," Aaholm said. "We felt that it would be appropriate to provide first to the attorneys and then to the public the conditions, which frankly are not significantly different from the conditions we set on Feb. 11."

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/...
The Truth Hurts

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Dec 2, 2011
 
Ramsey sources say cops turned over info
By ALLI KRUPSKI
Camera Staff Writer

Saturday, April 26, 1997
In an effort to schedule an interview with JonBenet Ramsey's parents, authorities investigating the murder provided Ramsey family attorneys with Dec. 26 police reports detailing the family's behavior the day of the homicide, sources said Friday.

"They gave them to the Ramseys earlier this week, and they tell everything police and officials observed and what friends and family said when they were at the house the day (JonBenet) was killed," a source close to the family said.

"By having a chance to look at the documents, the Ramseys get a better understanding of what police might ask during an interview before the interview actually takes place," the source said. "And by allowing such a thing to happen, it makes you wonder whether the police will ever solve this case."

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/...
The Truth Hurts

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Dec 2, 2011
 
Report on family's behavior provided
By ALLI KRUPSKI
Camera Staff Writer

Wednesday, April 30, 1997

The decision to provide John and Patsy Ramseys' attorneys with Dec. 26 police reports detailing the family's behavior is unusual and may influence investigators' interviews with the couple, legal experts said Tuesday.

"An investigator would not ordinarily disclose what he knows to a suspect he is preparing to interrogate, because it allows a suspect to tailor his story to the facts that are known to the police," said Mimi Wesson, a law professor at the University of Colorado and a former federal prosecutor. "The decision to make such a disclosure is an unusual one."

Detectives began requesting official interviews with the Ramseys shortly after their 6-year-old daughter, JonBenet, was found strangled in the basement of the Ramseys' Boulder home on Dec. 26.

Investigators interviewed the couple extensively on Dec. 26, according to a letter from the Ramseys' attorneys to Boulder County District Attorney Alex Hunter.

On April 21, the family's lawyers obtained police documents discussing the Ramseys' statements on Dec. 26. "This was an absolute condition by the Ramsey attorneys before they would allow their clients to give interviews," Hunter said in a statement.

BUT INVESTIGATORS SUDDENLY CANCELED SEPARATE INTERVIEWS WITH THE COUPLE LAST WEEK AFTER THE FBI CONCLUDED THE CONDITIONS WOULD NOT FACILITATE AN EFFECTIVE INTERROGATION.

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/...

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Dec 2, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Everything they did was just unheard of before or since and what is the most perplexing aspect is the disbelief that people have that the public thinks they are suspicious and involved in the cover up at the very least of their daughter's death

Nobody does what they did....if they have nothing to hide or fear and with a team of the best lawyers in the country.

No matter how many times you revisit their demands, it never ceases to flabbergast
The Truth Hurts

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Dec 6, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

For anyone to argue that the Ramseys did not get special treatment is beyond ridiculous.
More and more I am beginning to think that the authorities in Boulder know exactly what happened to JB. They know that the Ramseys were involved and for whatever reason, they are letting it slide.
The "open investigation" is a front to appease the public. IMO

Since: May 11

Seattle, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Dec 6, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

The Truth Hurts wrote:
For anyone to argue that the Ramseys did not get special treatment is beyond ridiculous.
More and more I am beginning to think that the authorities in Boulder know exactly what happened to JB. They know that the Ramseys were involved and for whatever reason, they are letting it slide.
The "open investigation" is a front to appease the public. IMO
That's exactly what I think too..BPD knows.

Since: Mar 07

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Dec 6, 2011
 
They know but they can't prove

That's the problem so they have to by law, keep it an open case
The Truth Hurts

Royal Oak, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Dec 10, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Patsys lies about the pineapple -

2000 interview w/Patsy -

11 MR. WOOD: I just want to make
12 sure it's clear that you're stating it as a
13 matter of fact and not opinion that it is
14 pineapple.
15 MR. KANE: It is pineapple.
16 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Why did you state,
17 let me ask you, WHY DID YOU STATE IN YOUR
18 BOOK THAT IT WASN'T PINEAPPLE?
(SNIP)

14 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Have you talked to
15 anybody about findings of pineapple in her
16 digestive system?
17 A. No.
18 Q. IN YOUR BOOK YOU SAID THAT THIS
19 WAS -- THAT BECAME AN URBAN LEGEND.
(SNIP)

1 A. I'm not - no one ever has told
2 me that it was definitively pineapple.

3 Q. All right. Did John -- so John
4 never told you that Lou Smith told him that
5 it was definitely pineapple?
6 A. No.

NOW THIS FROM 1998 INTERVIEW:

24 TOM HANEY: There were the remains of
25 pineapple in JonBenet's system.
0479
1 PATSY RAMSEY: I had heard that, yeah.
2 TOM HANEY: This is not a shock to you?
3 PATSY RAMSEY: No, it is not. No.
4 TOM HANEY: Okay.
The Truth Hurts

Royal Oak, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Dec 10, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

John 1998 interview:

12 LOU SMIT: Do you remember any fruit like
13 apples, oranges or anything like tat?
14 JOHN RAMSEY: Not specifically. I know we've
15 been asked indirectly a lot about pineapple
16 rounds.
Chief Beckner

West Bloomfield, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Dec 10, 2011
 

Judged:

3

2

2

The Whore of Babylon wrote:
<quoted text>
Because they're the same person!
Whatever you say, Sherlock.
The Truth Hurts

West Bloomfield, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Dec 10, 2011
 
Really? No one wants to comment on Patsys outright lies about the pineapple?

IDIs? Aren't you going to come up with an excuse for her? ;)
Henri McPhee

London, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Dec 11, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

The Truth Hurts wrote:
Really? No one wants to comment on Patsys outright lies about the pineapple?
IDIs? Aren't you going to come up with an excuse for her? ;)
That's not outright lies by Patsy. It looks as though the Ramseys thought the pineapple matter was an urban legend from what they wrote in their book DOI. Just because Lou Smit and Tom Haney said it was pineapple in JonBenet's body wasn't evidence. They never backed that up with a forensic report and test results.

It looks as though there was an opinion from a Dr. Sperry. The Ramseys might have consulted their own experts about the pineapple matter but all that seems to be shrouded in secrecy.

This is an edited version of the legal wrangling about the pineapple matter from the Atlanta 2000 Ramsey interview, if anybody can make any sense of this:

21 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Have you had any
22 forensic people look into the issue of the
23 pineapple that was found in JonBenet's
24 digestive tract?
25 MR. WOOD: Let me ask you this,
0052
1 Michael. Are you stating as a matter of
2 fact that it was pineapple without any
3 question?
4 MR. KANE: That was stated two
5 years ago in the interview. Yes. There is
6 no doubt about it.
7 MR. WOOD: Are you stating it as
8 fact?
9 MR. KANE: Lou Smith told Mr.
10 Ramsey that too.
11 MR. WOOD: I just want to make
12 sure it's clear that you're stating it as a
13 matter of fact and not opinion that it is
14 pineapple.
15 MR. KANE: It is pineapple.
16 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Why did you state,
17 let me ask you, why did you state in your
18 book that it was pineapple?
19 MR. WOOD: Are you going to
20 withdraw the last question?
21 MR. KANE: Lin, look, this is not
22 -- we are not in court.
14 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Have you talked to
15 anybody about findings of pineapple in her
16 digestive system?
17 A. No.
18 Q. In your book you said that this
19 was -- that that became an urban legend.

9 MR. WOOD: All right. We're back
10 to Mr. Kane's question now. Did you have a
11 page, Michael?
12 MR. KANE: Yeah, on Page 273 in
13 the middle.
14 Q.(By Mr. Kane) You say
15 apparently, during the autopsy, an issue was
16 raised about the possibility of JonBenet
17 having eaten pineapple. Do you recall -- do
18 you recall, during the interviews in June of
19 1998, being told that there was, in fact,
20 pineapple in her system?
21 A. I don't remember the specific
22 discussion. I believe someone said there may
23 have been something that looked like
24 pineapple.
25 Q. Okay.
0056
1 A. I'm not - no one ever has told
2 me that it was definitively pineapple.
3 Q. All right. Did John -- so John
4 never told you that Lou Smith told him that
5 it was definitely pineapple?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Have you, whether it was pineapple
8 or any other type of fruit, it is your
9 understanding that you haven't asked any
10 forensic experts to, gastroenterologist or
11 someone of that nature, someone with a
12 medical background, what their opinion of
13 that being in her system is?
14 A. I don't know. That may have been
15 part of the presentation that was being
16 prepared.
17 Q. Well, the presentation was Dr.
18 Sperry. Let me just clarify this. Was
19 anybody else besides Dr. Sperry going to take
20 part in that presentation, to your knowledge?
21 A. To my knowledge, there were
22 several people involved.
23 Q. But you don't know who these
24 people are?
25 A. No.
0057
1 Q. Do you know what their fields of
2 expertise were?
3 A. I am sorry, I don't.
The Truth Hurts

Farmington, MI

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#25
Dec 11, 2011
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Henri McPhee wrote:
<quoted text>
That's not outright lies by Patsy. It looks as though the Ramseys thought the pineapple matter was an urban legend from what they wrote in their book DOI. Just because Lou Smit and Tom Haney said it was pineapple in JonBenet's body wasn't evidence. They never backed that up with a forensic report and test results.
It looks as though there was an opinion from a Dr. Sperry. The Ramseys might have consulted their own experts about the pineapple matter but all that seems to be shrouded in secrecy.
This is an edited version of the legal wrangling about the pineapple matter from the Atlanta 2000 Ramsey interview, if anybody can make any sense of this:
21 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Have you had any
22 forensic people look into the issue of the
23 pineapple that was found in JonBenet's
24 digestive tract?
25 MR. WOOD: Let me ask you this,
0052
1 Michael. Are you stating as a matter of
2 fact that it was pineapple without any
3 question?
4 MR. KANE: That was stated two
5 years ago in the interview. Yes. There is
6 no doubt about it.
7 MR. WOOD: Are you stating it as
8 fact?
9 MR. KANE: Lou Smith told Mr.
10 Ramsey that too.
11 MR. WOOD: I just want to make
12 sure it's clear that you're stating it as a
13 matter of fact and not opinion that it is
14 pineapple.
15 MR. KANE: It is pineapple.
16 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Why did you state,
17 let me ask you, why did you state in your
18 book that it was pineapple?
19 MR. WOOD: Are you going to
20 withdraw the last question?
21 MR. KANE: Lin, look, this is not
22 -- we are not in court.
14 Q.(By Mr. Kane) Have you talked to
15 anybody about findings of pineapple in her
16 digestive system?
17 A. No.
18 Q. In your book you said that this
19 was -- that that became an urban legend.
9 MR. WOOD: All right. We're back
10 to Mr. Kane's question now. Did you have a
11 page, Michael?
12 MR. KANE: Yeah, on Page 273 in
13 the middle.
14 Q.(By Mr. Kane) You say
15 apparently, during the autopsy, an issue was
16 raised about the possibility of JonBenet
17 having eaten pineapple. Do you recall -- do
18 you recall, during the interviews in June of
19 1998, being told that there was, in fact,
20 pineapple in her system?
21 A. I don't remember the specific
22 discussion. I believe someone said there may
23 have been something that looked like
24 pineapple.
25 Q. Okay.
0056
1 A. I'm not - no one ever has told
2 me that it was definitively pineapple.
3 Q. All right. Did John -- so John
4 never told you that Lou Smith told him that
5 it was definitely pineapple?
6 A. No.
7 Q. Have you, whether it was pineapple
8 or any other type of fruit, it is your
9 understanding that you haven't asked any
10 forensic experts to, gastroenterologist or
11 someone of that nature, someone with a
12 medical background, what their opinion of
13 that being in her system is?
14 A. I don't know. That may have been
15 part of the presentation that was being
16 prepared.
17 Q. Well, the presentation was Dr.
18 Sperry. Let me just clarify this. Was
19 anybody else besides Dr. Sperry going to take
20 part in that presentation, to your knowledge?
21 A. To my knowledge, there were
22 several people involved.
23 Q. But you don't know who these
24 people are?
25 A. No.
0057
1 Q. Do you know what their fields of
2 expertise were?
3 A. I am sorry, I don't.
If you would ever read before you post, you would see that I already posted most of what you just posted. I also pointed out the LIE.
YES, it WAS a LIE.
lee dummett222

Manchester, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26
Dec 31, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

john and patsy were hiding behind there legal team from the start, and that says everything. there was no intruder, and they wrote that ransom note to divert attention from themselves.

Tell me when this thread is updated:
(Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker

Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of48
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

20 Users are viewing the JonBenet Ramsey Forum right now

Search the JonBenet Ramsey Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
John Ramsey to speak in Charlevoix, 5/23/12 52 min OneWhoCares 66
signs of guilt 2 hr Shadow Heart 3
The Oakland County Child Killer (Feb '07) 6 hr Notles 9,631
now is the time for your tears 10 hr Danny 73
riddles 7 11 hr Danny 1
Gideon's Risk 11 hr Sparky 5
The Door 12 hr Sparky 2

Daily Horoscope for June 4

Cancer

If you want to make changes to your working environment or career prospects, do your best to get on with your colleagues today. It's a powerful Lunar Eclipse, so the Moon-ruled could encounter opposition as the knives come out. Perhaps someone objects to the way you're doing things, or maybe they're just plain jealous. Ensure that you're acting in everyone's best interests and not just your own, or you'll really land in hot water!

Get your Horoscope »