Internet Subculture and the JonBenet Ramsey Murder Case

Archived Early Postings From Members

of the Geraldo Message Forum

following the JonBenet Ramsey murder case.

March 29, 1997

The Geraldo Forum, thread titled, “JonBenet Murder”

I think it is terrible for parents to dress little children up to be sex pots. If there has to be beauty contests, then let the kids be in their natural beauty. The whole case seems awfully fishy to me!

jams jameson - 05:23pm Mar 29, 1997 (#31 of 1285)

I don't think the Ramseys are guilty. I think they are the shattered parents of a murder victim. I think they are being unfairly judged by others for things that had nothing to do with this crime (pageants), or that have not been proven (prior sexual molestation).

Longhorn - 05:24pm Mar 29, 1997 (#32 of 1285)

Hi just found this forum and wonder if anyone knows just how many people were in the house in addition to the family before the police came the morning of the 26th? My understanding is that the 911 call was placed at 5:52am, and the police arrived about 6:00am. The police have stated there were many people already there, and in the CNN interview, John Ramsey himself stated that "almost from the moment they found the note..." they were fortunate to have a doctor,lawyer,a minister and friends with them.With a supposed kidnapping in progress, it certainly seems strange to have so much activity surrounding the house.

Nora Nora - 05:47pm Mar 29, 1997 (#33 of 1285)

Just found this forum. I am interested in finding out further information on both Fleet White and Grandpa Paugh.

jams jameson - 06:05pm Mar 29, 1997 (#34 of 1285)

Does anyone have a tape of the Robert Ressler interview on American Journal? I would like a copy of it but can't find it on-line. Help anyone?

wendy melillo - 06:09pm Mar 29, 1997 (#35 of 1285)

Hi Jameson I want to know why you are getting posted and I am not? Is this board moderated to the point where you cannot state an opinion?

jams jameson - 06:09pm Mar 29, 1997 (#36 of 1285)

In the Dec.28th Boulder News, the neighbor Mr. Barnhill said he saw Burke riding his bike on Christmas day. He also said he saw John Andrew going to the house.

It could not have been JAR, he was in Atlanta. So who was it? Maybe Mr. Barnhill saw the killer going to the house.

On Christmas Eve, Mr. Barnhill received a request from the BP not to speak to reporters. The other neighbors had no request. They chose not to talk anyway. But the McReynolds were talkers, they were not asked not to talk to reporters. So why ask Mr. Barnhill to be quiet about what he saw? Hmmmmm

jams jameson - 06:21pm Mar 29, 1997 (#38 of 1285)

I am sorry - in the last post - it was New Year's Ee when Barnhill was asked to be quiet. This information was in the Denver Post on Jan. 1st.

wendy melillo - 06:03am Mar 30, 1997 (#45 of 1285)

Hi to all,

I would like to add my ideas to this forum. Even though it seems to many people that the Ramsey's are guilty, I believe they are just following the advice of their lawyers. I think this crime was commited by someone outside the family. It had to be someone with knowledge of the layout of the house, who had a key, and who had access to private family information. The housekeeper and her husband had all these things. I think they deserve a closer look.

Oh, and Zvetlana is not Nick.

Karen Salmond - 08:45am Mar 30, 1997 (#46 of 1285)

Jams, sometimes it just takes awhile for a post to show....I have noticed the shorter the post the quicker it appears.

jams jameson - 08:57am Mar 30, 1997 (#47 of 1285)

Karen - I think the killer was an outsider. What is your theory?

Karen Salmond - 09:05am Mar 30, 1997 (#48 of 1285)

There are a lot of things that just don't JIVE, but to me I think it was an inside job.....now this is just my personal opinion. And thanks for trying to get this back to subject matter debates. I applaud you.

mapek - 09:20am Mar 30, 1997 (#49 of 1285)

Although the Ramseys are well within their legal right to abstain from cooperating with BPD by submitting to separate interviews, I still find it morally questionable. Are they hiding something? It's not like their attorny won't be present to signal them when to stay silent.

jams jameson - 09:30am Mar 30, 1997 (#50 of 1285)

MAPEK!! - YOU MADE IT!

I think they want to be there for each other. If they are each there with their own attorney and a doctor in the back of the room, other ground rules could be agreed upon. Maybe just 1. answer only those questions directed at you and 2. no interrupting.

If the BP want the interview bad enough, they will have to compromise. Personally, I don't think they need it.

Zvetlana - 09:33am Mar 30, 1997 (#51 of 1285)

Mapek! How good to see you over here. I think it is more clear everyday thay at least one of the Ramseys is involved in this murder. There is a big difference in having a right to something and in having a reason to exercise that right. Although all of their behaviors have been within their rights, most of them have been without conceivable reason in the case of innocent people who have had a child murdered.

jams jameson - 09:35am Mar 30, 1997 (#52 of 1285)

The BP gave the Ramseys a copy of the ransom note on Jan.21st. If they really thought the Ramseys were serious suspects, what would be the reason for doing that?

The BP has not cleared anyone but JAR and Mindy - not JR, PR, Burke, Santa, Geraldo, Bill Clinton - no one. The only ones saying the Ramseys are the #1 suspects are the Ramseys, because that is their feeling.

The recent cooporation between the investigative teams makes me go Hmmmm.

jams jameson - 09:39am Mar 30, 1997 (#53 of 1285)

Hi Zvet -

In recent reading I found out something interesting. John Walsh rejected the help of the FBI after the evidence of Adam's death was found. He felt that since they had not helped in the search while Adam may have been alive, he didn't need their help when Adam was obviously dead.

People under stress act in unexplainable ways. I am sure John wanted Adam's killer found, but under the pressure of the moment, his actions were questioned too.

Zvetlana - 09:41am Mar 30, 1997 (#54 of 1285)

Jameson, you could be right. Recent events are puzzling. I still see no way it could be an outsider. But my suspicion of Granpaugh grows more feasible everyday.

jams jameson - 09:44am Mar 30, 1997 (#55 of 1285)

GPP will forever be one of the unknowns, I fear. He is far more mysterious than any of the others. I also would like to know who was at his place in Boulder that night. Would like to have a clear picture of the movements of he and any guests.

GERALDO???????

Zvetlana - 09:44am Mar 30, 1997 (#56 of 1285)

How interesting, Jameson. Did the article you read give any reason for the FBI not having participated in the investigation before Adam's death was obvious?

jams jameson - 09:48am Mar 30, 1997 (#57 of 1285)

It was not an article but in the Robert Ressler book. If there was no evidence of interstate involvement, the FBI could not be involved. I do remember later a statement being made by John that more work went into locating a stolen car than a kidnapped child.

The Ressler book is very good - Whoever Fights Monsters

Zvetlana - 10:01am Mar 30, 1997 (#58 of 1285)

I will try to get that book. I so enjoy the fiction books by Patricia Cornwell. They are about a female coroner who works closely with the FBI profilers out of Quantico. Since she really did work in the coroners office and spent much time at Quantico, I think the environment she creates must be somewhat accurate.

Zvetlana - 10:06am Mar 30, 1997 (#59 of 1285)

But Jameson, if you respect Ressler, how do you feel about his opinion that one of the Ramseys must be guilty?

jams jameson - 10:10am Mar 30, 1997 (#60 of 1285)

I have been trying to get a copy of the American Journal interview. I saw it but want a copy. I remember him talking about going to the house during the day and then again at night. He went onto the tree platform and said it provided a view into the 2nd floor rooms.

I have yet to see in print where he said who he thought did it - have you an address?

Zvetlana - 10:20am Mar 30, 1997 (#61 of 1285)

No, not without doing some research. I must admit that I just have a memory of the flavor of his comments, not any declarative statement to that effect.

Zvetlana - 10:25am Mar 30, 1997 (#62 of 1285)

Actually, if memory serves me right, his words were that it had to be "an inside job." And this has been in later interviews. Not the original Hard Copy to which you refer. You know, now he is their "staff profiler" or something like that.

jams jameson - 10:27am Mar 30, 1997 (#63 of 1285)

An inside job? I wonder how inside? I agree it had to be someone who knew the family, not a random stranger, but not family. Would love to see that interview again.

mapek - 01:12pm Mar 30, 1997 (#64 of 1285)

Hello Jameson & Zvet! Yes, I finally made it: using Netscape instead of Lynx. Still having problems getting the hang of it though.

After all this discussion about Ressler, I would like to see another interview with him. Do you suppose Hard Copy would loan him to Geraldo? Then maybe he could clarify some of our questions.

Longhorn - 01:49pm Mar 30, 1997 (#65 of 1285)

hi zvet,jameson and mapek...i too would love to see ressler expound on this case. the only interview i heard had him say he refused to work for the ramsey's because he felt he would be in "the killer's den", that it had to be either family or a very very close friend.

Nick Husband - 04:28pm Mar 30, 1997 (#66 of 1285)

It makes sense that it had to be someone in the family or close to the family, Longhorn. I also read yesterday that the BPD said they may still be months from making an arrest. I also heard that because of the time lapse from the first report and because John Ramsey carried his daughter from where he found her, that DNA may not play much of a role at all in this case. I forget who said it, but I think it was an attorney from Boulder.

Nick Husband - 07:34am Mar 31, 1997 (#67 of 1285)

If you've covered the subject so well Carol, then you must know that JonBenet seemed very happy doing what she was doing. Friends of the family have said so, and her babysitter said wonderful things about her. Just because you don't approve of her being in the beauty contests it doesn't point a finger at anyone's guilt of anything. And Mrs. Ramsey is the one who handled her being in the shows, I think. I can't believe you'd see that little baby girl as anything but a beautiful baby girl, no matter what she was wearing. Just a kid having fun, it seemed to me.

john valentine - 07:39am Mar 31, 1997 (#68 of 1285)

I think you all jumping in conclutions!! You can not believe in everything the media reports to the public. The Ramseys are going through enough pain and here we are accusing them for murdered their own child! Let's be a little more kind.

wendy melillo - 07:48am Mar 31, 1997 (#70 of 1285)

HI all I think Patsy showed poor judgement in making her daughter look so much older than she was. She made her more attractive to pedophiles (IMO). I believe she loved her daughter very much. The pageant thing was a part of her life so she wanted to share it with her daughter. Poor judgement does not make her a murderer.

Nick Husband - 07:49am Mar 31, 1997 (#71 of 1285)

Every single thing you've said and the posts you point to prove that you started this crap Karen so when you say someone has a garbage mouth you're right YOU DO LOSER

Dianne Murray - 07:49am Mar 31, 1997 (#72 of 1285)

This looks as though it may be a good place for serious posters from the Boulder News Forum to move since the other one has gotten out of control. Any comments?

Zvetlana - 07:50am Mar 31, 1997 (#73 of 1285)

How nice to discover this site. Hope it turns out to be a pleasant alternative for those of us who have become discouraged with the Boulder News Forum which has gotten out of control. Glad to see some of my old friends have found this forum as well.

Zvetlana - 07:50am Mar 31, 1997 (#74 of 1285)

Okay, guess my last post wasn't acceptable though it didn't say anything bad. Just said I hope this place is a nice alternative for those of us who have become discouraged with "another forum." (I think the name of the other one may have been the offending material in the other post.) Glad to see some of my old friends have discovered this place as well.

Shorty - 07:50am Mar 31, 1997 (#75 of 1285)

One of my theories is that the Ramsey's housekeeper and her husband may have killed Jonbenet. They had access to and knowlegde of the house as much as any family member.

Longhorn - 07:50am Mar 31, 1997 (#76 of 1285)

Hi Shine, I also think there is a knowledge and sexual awareness(beyond sadness) in JonBenet's eyes. I knew nothing of this crime until I saw the video of her in pagents, and it struck me to the core as a parent to see the sexual awareness that cannot be"taught" as in play acting, but only from experience, IMO. I too look forward to discussion and no personal attacks here. This is no contest, and we all are looking for answers to the unthinkable in this case.This represents every parent's worst nightmare, your child safely tucked in on Christmas night with the family that loves and protects her----and then this happens. It has nothing to do with being rich, white or anything but an innocent child who should have been in the safest place of all.

Nick Husband - 07:51am Mar 31, 1997 (#78 of 1285)

I agree with your statement that the Ramseys are following the advise of their attorneys, Wendy. And I don't see any information that we've been given that would make them seem guilty. It does make sense that it is someone who has knowledge about the layout of the house, and private family information. With the large number of people who have been guests at the house, it wouldn't be any stretch at all to find out someone has a key. And I'm VERY sure Zvetlana isn't NICK!! (Grin)

mapek - 07:52am Mar 31, 1997 (#79 of 1285)

Jams! Yes, I made it. Using Netscape as Lynx browser apparently won't work. :(

I still feel that Ramseys would go out of their way to assist BPD, even if it means a separate interview, if they cared more about solving the crime than protecting their own image. Just my humble opinion. And you know, Jams, if it is an outsider like you think, it should give them even more reason to do separate interviews so a sidelong glance or squeeze of the hand doesn't distract the interviewee from his/her train of thought.

Longhorn - 07:53am Mar 31, 1997 (#80 of 1285)

I too believe the R's are correct in having lawyers, I just fail to see the objection to separate interviews with lawyers present. There isn't a one of us who could pick what police officers we talk to, and being the only adults known to be in the house, it is natural for them to be interviewed. They may know somehting they think is unimportant but could be very important to the police. I as a parent would be camped out doing everything to clear myself and get the focus on the real killer(s).the fact that Patsy can go to the police and file a report about her friend, Pasta Jay and press harrassment, but NOT go for her daughter is appalling to me.

Longhorn - 07:53am Mar 31, 1997 (#81 of 1285)

Hi Zvet and jameson. If you are talking about the ressler interview, i say him on Extra where his exact words were the he did not accept the job with the R's because he feared "being in the den of the killer(s)" He said he felt certain it was either a family member or a very close , close friend. Don't knoe if this helps.

CJBooks - 07:53am Mar 31, 1997 (#82 of 1285)

Hi, I see several friends here. Jameson, Thanks for the directions.. I think it has to be family. Pretending a kidnapping is typical way to cover-up for family members. An outsider wouldn't have left the note. There wouldn't be any point.

Shine On - 07:53am Mar 31, 1997 (#83 of 1285)

4:15pm EST

Jameson -

You can't possibly compare Jon Ramsey and John Walsh. John Walsh beat the bushes down trying to find Adam. This happened in Florida and I remember the first moments. Jon Ramsey doesn't seem to give a darn who the killer is, at least that's the way it looks. He sure hasn't done anything to help.

John Walsh, after his son's body was found, made sure that the laws would be changed and that no longer would it be necessary for a parent to beg the FBI for help and not get it because of a technicality. What has Jon Ramsey done. Rumor has it that he's keeping track of the new pornography out there. How does that help his dead daughter or the case.

I love our conversations jams,

Shine "S"

wendy melillo - 07:54am Mar 31, 1997 (#84 of 1285)

Hi Jams, mapek, Zvetlana, and Longhorn'

Hope everyone had a wonderful Easter. I am glad we have finally found a forum to express our ideas about this case. I just read the article about Eller being a not so perfect investigator and I got that sinking feeling again. Are we ever going to see this case solved? regarding Resler: didn't he say that he thought it might be someone from the college who knew the family? I can't remember his exact words. Is there a copy of his interview online?

Hope to see you guys in sleuths later.

jams jameson - 07:54am Mar 31, 1997 (#85 of 1285)

I think he said that before the American Journal interview. With the passage of time, his work with American Journal, the evidence as it stands now, and no arrest, I wonder how he feels about the case now.

Longhorn - 07:55am Mar 31, 1997 (#86 of 1285)

Nick, the only thing I can see that would make a difference is if the DNA proved another person was there, not a family member. I think the testing is to cover all possible senarios, rather than point to one person.If only the family DNA is represented....I just cannot understand Patsy going to the police to make a statement in defense of Pasta Jay, but not to aid in the apprehension of her daughter's killer. I would be camped at the police station.

wendy melillo - 08:08am Mar 31, 1997 (#87 of 1285)

Hi Longhorn I think the reason Patsy went down to bpd to stick up for Pasta Jay is because she had nothing to lose. Going down to bpd about jbr could be dangerous. Just my opinion.

LisaMarie - 08:40am Mar 31, 1997 (#88 of 1285)

Just wanted to let my friends know that I'm here and lurking. :)

Keep posting.

I still think that JR or PR was not involved in the killing. I am still leaning towards someone else that is involved in the family but not in the family.

Lisa Marie

jams jameson - 10:27am Mar 31, 1997 (#89 of 1285)

I think Patsy went down because she didn't want Jay Elowsky to have any trouble because he was willing to take them in. He is a friend who didn't turn his back on them. They are at his house and he is arrested trying to protect their privacy. Patsy couldn't do anything to help JonBenet at that time, but she could help her friend. I think Patsy has told everything she knows about the case to the BPD already. She sees no need to go in just to face a possible railroad squad, the BPD who is under pressure to make an arrest.

just my opinion.

jams jameson - 10:41am Mar 31, 1997 (#90 of 1285)

OK, you killed your daughter and you are the prime suspect. The press is hounding you - cameras everywhere. Do you go to the local smut shop? Only if you are tired of the bad press and decide to really give them a story.

Choices: a, untrue or b, a bad joke by JR

I bet a

CStuart - 10:45am Mar 31, 1997 (#91 of 1285)

Where is it verified about JR going to a smut shop in Denver???? I've heard this discussed many times but have never seen hard facts about it. Help.

Nick Husband - 10:47am Mar 31, 1997 (#92 of 1285)

See, I hadn't even heard that yet either. Where you guys getting all your info from so quick? I'd like to read it TOO.. Heh heh

CStuart - 10:50am Mar 31, 1997 (#93 of 1285)

It's a blizzard here, so if anyone has this weeks tabloid report, I would love it. Thanks. Heard they've switched to "Patsy did it." Any details worth pondering?

Nancy B. - 10:52am Mar 31, 1997 (#94 of 1285)

I havent' heard any of that either. Where's all the info coming from? Oh guys, I've been to the Boulder forum - you are right - really got out of hand. Welcome here!

jams jameson - 11:08am Mar 31, 1997 (#95 of 1285)

The info on the smut shop supposedly came from a preview of the tabloids for this week. I think it was the Star that has a picture of JR with a scratch on his face. Don't know which one is carrying the smut-shop story.

Nick Husband - 11:15am Mar 31, 1997 (#96 of 1285)

Are they online, Jams? Or reported about somewhere in particular online?

CStuart - 11:31am Mar 31, 1997 (#97 of 1285)

Jameson, Scratch on JR's face??? Is that an recent photo or one from right after Xmas? Or was the photo possibly photoshopped?

Kathaleen Ray - 12:03pm Mar 31, 1997 (#98 of 1285)

I just heard on Geraldo this AM, that dad Ramsey put JonBenet's body under the Xmas tree after finding her. (I'd heard it before but, this time it nudged me)

What does that say?? They have a big house, sofa (probably two) all kinds of room, WHY??? under the Xmas tree?? I put GIFTS under tree, I hope JonBenet's body wasn't a gift. I can read all sorts of things into that.

jams jameson - 01:00pm Mar 31, 1997 (#99 of 1285)

I think he put her on the floor, a hard surface preferable to a soft one if considering trying CPR. Every room had a tree - hard to put her down without one nearby.

Longhorn - 03:27pm Mar 31, 1997 (#100 of 1285)

did anyone notice on the show today, I swear they said that John Ramsey put JonBenet FACE DOWN when he placed her beneath the Christmas tree. Did anyone tape it, can anyone verify that?

Nick Husband - 03:30pm Mar 31, 1997 (#101 of 1285)

I missed it Longhorn, but I'd like to know that too...

Longhorn - 04:56pm Mar 31, 1997 (#102 of 1285)

Nick, I found someone who taped it and that wasn't said. I'm sorry, I came in in the middle so wasn't sure I heard correctly, but Shine taped it and reviewed it. Just said placed her down by the tree.

Nick Husband - 05:53pm Mar 31, 1997 (#103 of 1285)

Oh okay. I hadn't seen anything that said she was face down, and you guys know alot of things I haven't heard. Cool. Thanks

The ACandyRose© Internet Subculture Web site is an privately owned archive site for documentation on the history of the JonBenet Ramsey murder case investigation via the Internet. All information has been accessed from public domains and/or quotes following the rules under the "fair use rule of copyright law." This web site is non-profit. Donations are welcome via the PayPal donation button on the home page. God willing someday there will be justice for JonBenet Ramsey.
Home	First Amendment	Sister Site	1998 to 2007 ACandyRose©		E-Mail	Disclaimer