JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

[Wickerman]

It could equally be asked why would an 'intruder' ask for that sum?

One of those disgruntled employees had already complained that Ramsey owed him $118,000 before the murder.

You didn't notice any sarcasm in that remark then?

It does read like sarcasm, but John has to be a southerner for the sarcasm to work.
The writer seems to have believed John was a southerner, so he? knew John, but not too well.

Five others? Out of how many hundreds of other handwriting samples that were analysed?

And you don't think it's a coincidence that the handwriting of the murdered girl's mother matched that of the author of the note? I can put the comparison samples on again if you wish.

I've been waiting for you to put comparison samples up from the other five suspects who were also not eliminated - just to prevent anyone getting the idea that your posts seem to be biased.

Not at all. He was almost TEN and quite capable of making such a thing. He had probably practised already. Some kids are like that; a morbid interest in weird and cruel things; especially boys. We don't know the kinds of books and mags he read.

Steady on, wha'da'ya mean "especially boys"?
Yes well when I was at school one kid liked to tie knots. He used to show off tying knots, his dad was in the Merchant Navy and he taught him all about tying knots.
Which made me wonder if John had done the same with Burke.

And some children are sadistic. I could give examples of children who kill other children sadistically. Mary Bell comes to mind.

It isn't that he couldn't, you keep forgetting, there needs to be a 'history' of this kind of behavior to make a credible case for Burke being 'twisted'.

On 25th or 26th December John and PR knowingly allowed JRB to be in a dangerous situation and she died as a result.

How, what did they do that placed JB "in a dangerous situation"?

Wrong. They ARE there to speculate on what happened. Why do you suppose a jury retires to discuss the evidence?

I hi-lighted the applicable words, "the evidence".
In your objection you used the two words that scuttled your own case.
There was no evidence that implicated Burke. so, the GJ were not to speculate on his involvement - without a shred of evidence.

They obviously had plenty of evidence. The police had a mountain of it. Against Burke as well. They would have heard that he was awake and downstairs when the parents stated he was in bed. They would have heard the 911 call to the police, plus other evidence that has not yet been made public. It could be a revelation to us when it is eventually released.

Those 'noises' at the end of the 911 tape are not "evidence". The police have to prove Burke's voice was there, they couldn't do that. No consensus could be obtained to demonstrate those noises were even voices.
Just "noises".

[Wickerman]

Because you couldn't.

There was nothing remotely "off the wall" in the list that I posted, and you know it.
.

I meant what I said.

[louisa]

One of those disgruntled employees had already complained that Ramsey owed him $118,000 before the murder.

You know that isn't true so stop making things up.

I've been waiting for you to put comparison samples up from the other five suspects who were also not eliminated - just to prevent anyone getting the idea that your posts seem to be biased.

Why the heck should I put comparison samples up? YOU are the one who states there are five others, so YOU do it. You do your own dirty work.

I couldn't give a rat's behind about other samples - it is PR that I am talking about. HER writing matched the ransom note!

It isn't that he couldn't, you keep forgetting, there needs to be a 'history' of this kind of behavior to make a credible case for Burke being 'twisted'.

Nobody knows this child's 'history' as his medical records are not public knowledge.

And as for knots BR knew how to tie knots - the family were sailors.

There was no evidence that implicated Burke. so, the GJ were not to speculate on his involvement - without a shred of evidence.

Until we are privy to the transcripts then we will never know what was discussed. You show me a link that states that the GJ did not speculate on his involvement. They were deliberating for THIRTEEN MONTHS! This wasn't a formal trial but one where the jury members sit around a table and the witnesses are brought in to give their evidence.

Those 'noises' at the end of the 911 tape are not "evidence". The police have to prove Burke's voice was there, they couldn't do that. No consensus could be obtained to demonstrate those noises were even voices.
Just "noises".

The FBI and other agencies enhanced the tape until they were able to hear what was said. Just because your computer's speakers aren't man enough to let you hear the words then you cannot state that the tape was not decipherable.

In ALL murder cases there is police evidence that is not disclosed - things that only the culprit will know. This evidence will be withheld until they arrest somebody and they slip up and state something that only they will know.
.
.

[louisa]

Regarding the 911 call, this is the conversation....(according to James Kolar)

'Dispatcher Kimberly Archuleta had concluded her midnight shift..with the 911 call generated by Patsy Ramsey. She had driven home that morning, having a difficult time letting go of the emotions that had developed as a result of the kidnapping call. She had spoken to her son about it later that day, uncomfortable about what she had overheard on the phone call...

Upon hearing of JonBenet's murder, Archuleta nearly became ill. A supervisor directed her to her office where she sat and tried to calm her emotions. She could not get past the notion that something had been wrong about the 911 call..

Archuleta asked her supervisor if police had listened to the 911 tape and was told that they had already obtained a copy of the recording.'What about the end of the call? Have they listened to the tail end of the call after Patsy Ramsey had stopped talking?'

The 911 call didn't end when Patsy stopped talking to her, Archuleta explained. The telephone line had not disconnected immediately, and she had heard a definite change in the tone of Patsy Ramsey's voice before the call was fully terminated. Archuleta explained that the hysterical nature of Patsy Ramsey's voice appeared to have dissipated, and she thought she had been talking to someone nearby at the end of the telephone line..'

The rest of the phone call was analysed and BR was heard speaking (when, according to his parents) he was supposed to be in bed)
.
.

[Harry D]

The rest of the phone call was analysed and BR was heard speaking (when, according to his parents) he was supposed to be in bed)
.
.

In his book, “JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation,” Thomas claimed that by enhancing the tape you can hear John and Patsy talking to their son Burke. He claims that’s important because the Ramseys reportedly told police their son was asleep at the time of the call. If true, Thomas claims it suggests the family was altering their story right from the start.

But both the FBI and Secret Service — who examined the tapes — said such a conversation could not be heard.

NBC News had the tape tested by experts at two different labs that examine 911 tapes to see if there was any conversation after the hang up.

“I would say my findings are much more in parallel with the FBI’s findings. There’s not enough there to give any sort of conclusive, intelligible argument,” says Frank Piazza of Legal Audio in New York City.

David Mariasy from Team Audio in Toledo, Ohio, agrees. “When it was suggested that we look for these other lines of dialogue and there’s two or three other people after the hang up, that didn’t happen,” he says.

http://www.today.com/news/new-video-audio-ramsey-case-2D80554305

[louisa]

Harry - that is a very biased article. I see Trip DeMuth is answering most of the questions. You do know that he was in partnership with the Ramseys' lawyers?

http://www.acandyrose.com/12261996-911.htm

In preliminary examinations, detectives thought they could hear some more words being spoken between the time Patsy Ramsey said, "Hurry, hurry, hurry" and when the call was terminated. However, the FBI and the U.S. Secret Service could not lift anything from the background noise on the tape. As a final effort several months later, we contacted the electronic wizards at the Aerospace Corporation in Los Angeles and asked them to try and decipher the sounds behind the noise.

Their work produced a startling conclusion. Patsy apparently had trouble hanging up the telephone, and before it rested on the cradle she was heard to moan, "Help me, Jesus, Help me, Jesus." Her husband was heard to bark, "We're not talking to you." And in the background was a young-sounding voice: "What did you find?" It was JonBenet's brother, Burke..
.

[Harry D]

I've heard the enhanced audio on the new documentary. It's inconclusive.

However, I did read an interesting point that someone raised: If the Ramseys suspected that there could still be an intruder in the house, why did they leave Burke upstairs in his bedroom alone after calling the police? Wouldn't the natural instinct be to have their son with them? There is certainly no shortage of peculiarities when it comes to the Ramsey's behaviour.

If it weren't for the garrote, I would probably agree that the Ramseys did it, but that particular aspect of the case leaves a niggling doubt in my mind about an inside job. It's inconceivable to me that the parents would use a torture device to finish her off and interfere with her sexually to stage a murder scene. I can understand that they would want to protect their son, but to resort to those extreme, fetishistic lengths doesn't sit well with me. Also, the garrote cord couldn't be definitely traced back to the Ramseys, and they couldn't find the object that inflicted the head injury. You could argue that the Ramseys disposed/cleaned up those items, and yet they weren't smart enough to get rid of the notepad and the practice ransom letters?

[Abby Normal]

I've heard the enhanced audio on the new documentary. It's inconclusive.

However, I did read an interesting point that someone raised: If the Ramseys suspected that there could still be an intruder in the house, why did they leave Burke upstairs in his bedroom alone after calling the police? Wouldn't the natural instinct be to have their son with them? There is certainly no shortage of peculiarities when it comes to the Ramsey's behaviour.

If it weren't for the garrote, I would probably agree that the Ramseys did it, but that particular aspect of the case leaves a niggling doubt in my mind about an inside job. It's inconceivable to me that the parents would use a torture device to finish her off and interfere with her sexually to stage a murder scene. I can understand that they would want to protect their son, but to resort to those extreme, fetishistic lengths doesn't sit well with me. Also, the garrote cord couldn't be definitely traced back to the Ramseys, and they couldn't find the object that inflicted the head injury. You could argue that the Ramseys disposed/cleaned up those items, and yet they weren't smart enough to get rid of the notepad and the practice ransom letters?

How about one or more of the family members were sexually assaulting, torturing and killed her?

We need to get over motive and our preconceived notions of what we think a parent would or would not do. And just go with the evidence.

[Abby Normal]

And re the 911 call. I place little faith in the so called enhanced version and voices being heard. It's nonsense.

Whats not nonsense is the 911 operator and what she heard and what she felt what was going on and that she thought patsy was faking it and something was not right.

[Wickerman]

And re the 911 call. I place little faith in the so called enhanced version and voices being heard. It's nonsense.

Whats not nonsense is the 911 operator and what she heard and what she felt what was going on and that she thought patsy was faking it and something was not right.

The 911 operator was not a sound witness. She told investigators there was a distinct change in Patsy's voice, then after she hung up the phone the operator heard Patsy say, "Ok, I've called the police, now what do we do"?

No such exchange is evident on the recording, neither is there a change in Patsy's voice.
The operator was creating her own drama, her claims were dismissed.
Likewise, the background noises at the end of the tape are just that, background noises.

[Wickerman]

You know that isn't true so stop making things up.

Clearly, you do not know me yet.

Why the heck should I put comparison samples up? YOU are the one who states there are five others, so YOU do it. You do your own dirty work.

I couldn't give a rat's behind about other samples - it is PR that I am talking about. HER writing matched the ransom note!

That's the point, you came on here weeks ago asserting that Patsy was the ONLY person who had not been eliminated as the writer, so I provided the other five that you choose to ignore - Wrong again!

All you have been doing is pushing your theory, not considering all the evidence. You don't even care about what the other guy's say, Smit, Ainsworth, DeMuth, Ramsey, Hunter, etc. etc.
To you they're all idiots or liars.

And yet, you choose to believe the one group of detectives who are universally known to have royally screwed this case up "beyond any reasonable doubt".

Until we are privy to the transcripts then we will never know what was discussed. You show me a link that states that the GJ did not speculate on his involvement.

Why bother, you'll just come up with another aimless argument.
Why don't you educate yourself on the responsibilities of the Grand Jury, and their assignment in this case.

By the way, the original enhanced copy of the 911 call (from 1997) has never been released, so you have not heard it either.
A copy of the original 911 call was enhanced (in 2012) for a documentary and played on TV. for the world to hear.

Unless you choose to believe 1997 audio enhancing technology was superior to 2012 audio enhancing technology, then you can resign yourself to accepting there's nothing on that tape beyond, hums, hissing, crackles and buzzing.

[Wickerman]

Ramsey owes me $118,000

Now, the police decided, everyone who disliked John Ramsey for any reason had to be interviewed without delay.
Jeff Merrick was someone Ramsey had mentioned to the police on Dec. 26.
Ramsey had met Merrick when they both worked at AT&T in 1971.

In 1994 Ramsey found Merrick a job at Access Graphics, but he didn't fit in.
Ramsey tried Merrick in different positions and eventually demoted him from Director of Distributions to Director of Security, while letting him keep his six-figure salary.

In March 1996, Ramsey could no longer justify Merrick's salary to Lockheed-Martin (parent company of Access Graphics), and told Merrick he would have to take a large pay cut or leave by April 30.
Merrick chose to leave.

Later, he claimed the company owed him close to $118,000. He settled for half that amount, but one director of the company heard him say he was going to get Ramsey.

Jeff Merrick remained a suspect.
Perfect Murder / Perfect Town, Schiller, p.67.

[louisa]

Clearly, you do not know me yet.

I know enough, thank you.

That's the point, you came on here weeks ago asserting that Patsy was the ONLY person who had not been eliminated as the writer, so I provided the other five that you choose to ignore - Wrong again!

Hello - wake up and smell the truth.

HUNDREDS of handwriting samples had been analysed. Only FIVE could not be eliminated. And guess who was amongst those five? Patsy Ramsey! What a surprise!

And it's just so amazing isn't it.....that one of those people just happened to be in the house at the same time as the intruder.

Coincidences - aren't they wonderful?


.
.
.

[louisa]

All you have been doing is pushing your theory, not considering all the evidence. You don't even care about what the other guy's say, Smit, Ainsworth, DeMuth, Ramsey, Hunter, etc. etc.
To you they're all idiots or liars.

Now you know that isn't true. I have considered ALL the evidence, where it exists. And unfortunately for your theory, NONE exists of an intruder.

As for those other people you name, they were Ramsey employees, so what can you expect. Hunter was one of Ramseys golfing buddies., DeMuth was in business with Ramsey's lawyers, Ainsworth couldn't stop leaking evidence to the media and was reprimanded many times by his bosses for this.

As for Smit - he couldn't get a grasp on modern forensics. His theories were so outlandish that even the DA stopped listening to him.

Why bother, you'll just come up with another aimless argument.
Why don't you educate yourself on the responsibilities of the Grand Jury, and their assignment in this case.

There's nothing on that tape beyond, hums, hissing, crackles and buzzing.

"You'' just come up with another aimless argument" - that sounds like something a frustrated and petulant child would say in a playground when they have no further input.

Please tell me what my "aimless arguments" have been? I've put a mountain of evidence on here. You ignore my more relevant posts and latch onto trivia. Perhaps that is because it is all you can understand?

I try and put something new on here every day about the case.

Your posts consist of nit-picking mine.

And when I ask for evidence you then start repeating rubbish about stun guns and sticky tape. We've heard all of that over and over. It is now boring, very boring.

As for me not discussing any other evidence other than my own theory - we have discussed the stun gun, the sticky tape, the open windows, the footprints in the snow, the DNA, the marks on her neck, the garrote - just about every single thing you could think of - so don't tell me I will not listen to anyone else's theory. I've done nothing BUT listen to your nonsense and managed to give very logical answers.

Any by the way - it is YOU who seems to know nothing about the workings of a Grand Jury.

Try posting something about the case that we haven't heard before.

I'm probably asking too much.

.

[louisa]

JEFF MERRICK - "Thrown Under The Bus"

This is an important article from 2006 about one of the first people under the bus, Jeff Merrick. Many people believe the ransom note was specifically written to frame Merrick for the crime. The article shows John Ramsey's viciousness in naming Merrick repeatedly to the police, without any merit whatsoever:

Named in Ramseys' book

Some suspects were publicly named by the Ramsey family or legal experts they hired. One was Jeff Merrick, who was described as a suspect in a book by John and Patsy Ramsey.

"I was flabbergasted I had been named. I was fingered for a horrendous crime," said Merrick, a former employee of John Ramsey's at Access Graphics. "It had a tremendous impact on my life."

Merrick said John Ramsey three times asked authorities to investigate him, apparently on a theory that Merrick was a disgruntled former employee seeking revenge.

But Merrick said that he was laid off by Access Graphics, which has since changed its name, only because he was a whistle-blower and he received a settlement from Ramsey's company. By the time of JonBenet's murder, he had a higher-paying job at another company, he said.

"There was no reason at all that I would be motivated to kill his daughter," Merrick said. "I was a very, very unlikely suspect. Maybe (John Ramsey) wanted to take revenge."

Lin Wood, John Ramsey's attorney, did not return phone calls.

Merrick said he found it odd that the Ramseys would so freely throw his name around as a suspect, knowing how devastating the accusations against them had been.

"My wife was subjected to a lot of this stuff," he said. "The media was tough on us. The police delved into my past as deeply as anyone."

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-jeff-kathy-merrick.htm

.
.