posted on August 23, 2002 07:43:29 PM new
It's hard to believe they haven't found out who killed this little girl yet. (I think her parents killed her real *self and potential* long before her physical death but that's another topic.) It's what, 5-7 years now? And they have DNA. I understand that a certain someone was accused of screwing up the crime scene, but still, even with that, they're unable to do bettter than they did?
Since, especially, I descend from the Ramsey clan, I've always found this case interesting. This CNN report today brought it back to mind.
What do you think? And if your, say, 10yo killed your 6yo, what would you do?
posted on August 23, 2002 09:41:24 PM new
You know, it's hard to believe that a 9-yr-old boy would have the know-how and the strength to kill a 6-yr-old. I keep thinking, and I know this is off the wall, that the older son may have done it and been spirited off immediately, that night, to wherever he was when first contacted by the authorities. Other than that, it would almost have to be one of the parents, hard as that is to imagine.
I've thought all along that the theory that the mother killed her in anger over the bed-wetting is correct, and that then they could have concocted the rest of the scene. Their horror over doing that to their little daughter would only be exceeded by their horror over the mother's being arrested as the killer.
The family was planning to leave in the morning for a trip. Mothers are under huge pressure the night before a family trip, and the bed-wetting could have just sent her over the edge.
Just my humble opinion, and it is subject to change.
posted on August 23, 2002 09:53:19 PM new
I believe that unless God Himself comes down from the clouds and issues a verdict, or a full confession by the killer, we'll never know when we're doing justice or an injustice to the Ramsey family through our speculations. Who can trust the media? The Ramseys are busy now suing away gossip rags for libel like crazy and will most likely win after they tried and convicted the Ramseys in their magazines. But the mdia does it for a buck and we do it for fun. How nice of us.
I can't believe that the son, Burke, was involved because he would not have the strength and skill to carry out the murder or the ability to write the ransom letter. BTW, a copy of the ransom letter is included in the article.
Since the FBI ruled out an intruder the detective.s theory seems plausible...as horrible as it is.
posted on August 23, 2002 10:02:24 PM new
I wasn't aware of the bed wetting. But male "DNA" in the underpants? (If I read this right.) Didn't he parents take lie detector tests? I've been curious about this case but was never on top of it. Homicide must be going nuts. Sheesh, they're bringing people to justice for crimes comitted 30-50 years ago lately.. Is this 'the perfect crime'?
I have no reason to not suspect the immediate family. I have no reason to think that they sent this little girl out there in lipstick and mascara without totally objectifying her. In fact, whenever I see a baby made up to look like a young tart I wince.
But of course, these are only knee-jerk opinions without the facts. Something smells fishy tho'.
posted on August 23, 2002 10:15:42 PM new
sorry about the off topic remark
Back on topic...
This is the ransom letter which I don't believe that a ten year old could compose.
The note said:
"Mr. Ramsey,
"Listen Carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We do respect your bussiness (sic) but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession (sic). She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.
"You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a (sic) earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter.
"Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to outsmart us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities. Don’t try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don’t think that killing will be difficult. Don’t underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours. It is up to you now John!
posted on August 23, 2002 10:46:17 PM new
Funny how you cross threads, Helen, to vent your spleen. It is a childish act with no redeeming value. You called me "arrogant", a name, you drew first blood, like it or not. Too bad that you can dish it out but not take it on your high horse.
posted on August 23, 2002 10:51:49 PM new
Cyn, it is unfortunate for the Rasey case that the police and prosecutor's office can't releae all of its clues and evidence. The media is unreliable, as even mainstream media keeps repreating the reporting done by gossip magazines, and in fact, have done a great job of roasting the Rasey family. OUr speculations are just that - mere speculations, as we have few real substanciated facts to draw valid conclusions upon. Yet, here we are, having a go at it anyway. It passes the time and makes for fun conversation.
Interesting article last night thanks. I woke up this morning with my face in the keyboard tho', which is why I couldn't express my appreciation last night.
Borillar: Please understand I am trying to help you. Why do't you go start a brand new thread and talk to yourself in it for a couple of weeks?
posted on August 24, 2002 08:41:55 PM new
Borillar, no, I wouldn't call it fun by any means. It's a discussion just like our political threads. And, I don't feel bad at speculating that it was a member of that family. If there was any shred of evidence that it was an intruder I might think differently.
I think even you would admit the family is disfunctional. The exploitation of that little girl in those pageants was sickening. The mother appears emotionally unstable and the father emotionally detached. I just get the feeling that many things went on in that house that were not healthly.
posted on August 24, 2002 11:46:14 PM new
>I think even you would admit the family is disfunctional.
I would, if I bothered to follow the details of this case that closely. That isn't to say that I am totally ignorant about the case - I watched my share of TV interviews. But I severely dislike people being tried in the media and am always astonished at the number of people who believe every word of those checkout stand gossip magazines. And if this thread weren't any fun to speculate upon, I figure no one would have posted in it by now.
posted on August 25, 2002 07:58:58 AM new
>>And if this thread weren't any fun to speculate upon, I figure no one would have posted in it by now.<<
Fun. I suppose you could call it that. Some people love crime novels. Some people love real-crime stuff. Personally, I am fascinated my forensics and forensic pyschology. There actually is a club somewhere where they try to solve "dead" cases and unsolved crimes; I think they've even had a success or two.
Puzzles are fun. Einstein, other mathematicians and physicists, spend weeeks to years thinking about a single problem.
People do these things for a living or an avocation, or fun if you will.
Cheryl Seal grins at a big Aha rather than takes a long, solemn, walk or shoots a bag of dope, I'm guessing. Pinning the Basties down, is fun.
posted on August 25, 2002 11:06:12 AM new
Borillar, when a crime is committed and you hear about it on the news or whatever, then everyone starts to speculate about what might have happened. Don't you think it's just human nature to want to solve unsolved cases, especially when kids are involved?
Personally, I don't think the parents had anything to do with their daughters death. Some comes from the evidence, some is gut feeling. My thoughts tend to be the opposite of what many feel. So what? Shouldn't it be OK for us AND the media to voice an opinion without it being misconstrued as being a mock trial?
What about the way the media portrays Saddam? All I know about the man, I learned from watching TV and reading. He's portrayed as being very evil. How do I know that any of that is true? Why should I believe any reports that say he needs to be killed? What's the difference?
posted on August 25, 2002 11:10:01 AM new
>Don't you think it's just human nature to want to solve unsolved cases, especially when kids are involved?
Yes, for the ordinary citizen. But the media with its proven powerful influence should not. They need to be held to a higher standard in their reporting. They often have not in this and other cases and this time, they are going to pay for it in Libel court fees and puntative damage awards. Still, imagine being the father and mother and having yorselves second-guessed and tried and been FOUND GUILTY by the media alone! I strongly dislike it.
As for us here, like I also said: we have arn few facts and can only speculate for the fun of it. The media does it for a buck, we do it for fun.
posted on August 25, 2002 11:35:09 AM new
Borillar, why are you saying fun so much?
It's not the sole responsibilty of the police to solve crimes. Part of the responsibility of every citizen is to do what they can to help. They learn from the media and go from there. I don't feel mainstream media has condemned the Ramsey's. It's the tabloid type shows, newspapers and writers that are only interested in making money off this that have done the condemning... that I've seen so far.
posted on August 25, 2002 11:50:00 AM newFrom Webster...definition of fun.
1 : what provides amusement or enjoyment; specifically : playful often boisterous action or speech <full of fun>
2 : a mood for finding or making amusement <all in fun>
3 a : AMUSEMENT, ENJOYMENT <sickness takes all the fun out of life> b : derisive jest : SPORT, RIDICULE <a figure of fun>
4 : violent or excited activity or argument <let a snake loose in the classroom; then the fun began>
A discussion of a case which has gone unsolved is evidence of concern. We are all concerned about this little girl who was paraded around during her short life while dressed in a provocative manner and taught how to behave in a provocative manner in order to "win' the contest. And then she was murdered. How can you think that anyone here sees a discussion of that as "fun"?
posted on August 25, 2002 08:15:47 PM new
>>4 : violent or excited activity or argument<<
Conjecture, discussion, speculation, (banter, in short) disagreement, etc. would come under this, no? Whether it be politics, or politicos, or history, or the media, or cover-ups, or the friggin media , etc., etc., blah-blah, no? I mean I'd hate to be accused of having a bad vocabulary!
Maybe it is a matter of what matter we've each personally cathected that makes "fun" seem like a *bad* word.
"Fun" can be simply diversion, not necessarily Ha-Ha-Hee-Hee-Giggle. It's simply not a popular term to use, but it's not inapropiate(sp) or illogical if taken absolutely literally.
That being said, I would not feel comfortable coming out and saying, "hey let's have some fun talking about a murdered kid." And there are topics that I'd probably be enraged to think some people were in it for "fun", but in all honesty, that would be a purely subjective response. It so happens that this case and others are among those I am able to look at more or less clinically. (Somebody has to do it!)
Gotta go to bed. Kid's birthday and he wore me out. I let him live another year, I told him, and to bring it up again next year in early August concerning 8.
posted on August 25, 2002 08:29:26 PM new
But wait! Another thing!
I thought about this problem the definition of "fun" for about 22 seconds as I went into the kitchen and remembered the words "Serious Fun." "Ah, serious fun, yes that's the problem" then remembered further that this was the name of a series of a "New" music series of shows/concerts they held at Lincoln Center some years back. Laurie Anderson, already established, made a cameo there. (It is the only event I ever bought The Teeshirt from.) I never, ever thought about the meaniing of "Serious Fun", but apparently somebody did. And now we are.
posted on August 25, 2002 08:45:26 PM new
Helen, are you suggesting that we come here to participate in the RT as an onerous task? That it is sheer drudgery, often painfilled, and that we'd rather be anyplace else than here -- but that someone has to do it? We do it because it is ENTERTAINMENT, and for most people, it is entertaining because it is FUN to do! If it's not fun, then why sit around and speculate about something that we have few real facts about? Because we'll discover some sor of truth? Because it is educational? Nonsense!
posted on August 26, 2002 05:50:29 AM newBorillar...your comments in this thread...
........................
"But the mdia does it for a buck and we do it for fun. How nice of us."
"As for us here, like I also said: we have arn few facts and can only speculate for the fun of it. The media does it for a buck, we do it for fun."
"It passes the time and makes for fun conversation" "And if this thread weren't any fun to speculate upon, I figure no one would have posted in it by now."
"it is entertaining because it is FUN to do! If it's not fun, then why sit around and speculate about something that we have few real facts about? Because we'll discover some sor of truth? Because it is educational? Nonsense!" How nice of us!
.............................
Borillar, you are clearly using the word, "fun" in a derogatory manner, especially when followed by the phrase, "How nice of us!".
posted on August 29, 2002 06:21:14 PM new
Helen, we're not a special judiciary committee sitting around and analyzing the merits of the case, nor are we a citizen's group out trying to get new leads for the police to follow. We're a group of bored Internet users who enjoy sitting around taking potshots at the list of suspects already tried and convicted by the press, because we have few to no really substantial facts to go by. I can only imagine that if the parents of JonBenet are innocent as they claim and they happen to have someone point out our little thread for them, I'm sure that they're appreciating our thoughtful posts accusing them of the murder of their daughter. But, please, Helen - don't call it fun!
