A best-fit analysis of the facts and circumstances related to the death of JonBenet Patricia Ramsey
a causal inconsistency requiring foreknowledge
Download 5.45 Mb.
|
| a causal inconsistency requiring foreknowledge. The police attempt to explain to PR that they can establish causality because they know that, if the first picture was found on the roll before the Christmas morning photos the Ramseys already identified as such and on that same roll, it must causally precede the picture of the ransom note taken by the police on 26 December, 1996. Many have discussed this interview but few seem to understand its significance. If you read it carefully you will clearly see that what we are describing is in fact what was going on in these interviews. Though we can’t say that the particular example above was what happened, we don’t need to do that. We only need to establish a causal inconsistency requiring foreknowledge. This demonstrates foreknowledge of the crime (but not necessarily the ransom note that was found). The reader should focus their attention on that highlighted statement when reading the interviews below in order to fully understand what is going on here. It is, as some might call it, a smoking gun less known to the public and only identifiable as such by a careful reading of the interviews.
1998:
18 That's another one of those legal pads. 19 TOM HANEY: Right. 20 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that a (inaudible) 21 picture? 22 TOM HANEY: No. 23 PATSY RAMSEY: No. 24 TOM HANEY: But this photo was not taken 25 after, this was on, it's a -- 0527 1 PATSY RAMSEY: Right, right. 2 TRIP DeMUTH: -- similar photo to this one 3 here, but we're minus that. 4 PATSY RAMSEY: Right. 5 TOM HANEY: And probably minus the cleaning 6 fluid and we have some bags here. 7 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes). 8 TOM HANEY: And that's photo 52 that we're 9 comparing it to. 10 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that cleaning stuff over 11 there? 12 TOM HANEY: Hard to see. It could be the 13 same, but I'm not sure. Okay. 14 That photo 52 was taken by the police. 15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. 16 TOM HANEY: Well, this photo 12OTET8 was on 17 your roll of file in your camera. And on the 18 same roll is the next photo, a Christmas morning 19 photo of the kids. 20 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes). Oh, God. [editor’s note: Haney accidentally jumps prematurely to the suspect photo, then backtracks. PR immediately sees the problem] 21 TOM HANEY: Before we, before we talk too
[editor’s note: now he advances back to the suspect photo; 120TET] Like I say, this was on your role of
[not exactly the same as the police photograph] 3 that was taken by the police. 4 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes). 5 TOM HANEY: But it's, it's, it shows -- 6 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. 7 TOM HANEY: -- pretty much, I guess, or can 8 you tell me when that would have been taken? 9 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't have a clue why 10 anybody would take a picture like that. I don't 11 know (inaudible). Who took the picture? 12 TOM HANEY: Well, it's on your roll -- 13 PATSY RAMSEY: It's on my -- 14 TOM HANEY: -- of film on your camera. 15 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. 16 TOM HANEY: And this legal pad that you -- 17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right. 18 TOM HANEY: -- identified -- 19 PATSY RAMSEY: Right. 20 TOM HANEY: -- do you know when that would 21 have been in that position? 22 PATSY RAMSEY: No. So this, this was taken 23 before photo one was? 24 TOM HANEY: Before the police photos. 25 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, okay. I don't know 0529 1 when this was taken, or why it was taken. I 2 mean, it's nothing. [editor’s note: PR; “it’s nothing” after PR has already indicated that she sees the problem] 3 TRIP DeMUTH: Do you recognize that pad, I 4 know it's (inaudible) photo? 5 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but we had a lot of 6 those around. There was a picture in another 7 one. I think. 8 TRIP DeMUTH: Uh-huh (yes) 9 PATSY RAMSEY: I bought like those Office 10 Depot's or Office Max or whatever they are and I 11 usually kept a bunch of them, you know, kept 12 them over here, right around here in the 13 kitchen. [PR fumbles with her grammar] 14 TRIP DeMUTH: By the telephone? 15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but, you know, they 16 float all over. 17 TRIP DeMUTH: So it wouldn't have been 18 unusual to be where it is? 19 PATSY RAMSEY: No. No. Gosh. [editor’s note: Lou Smit interview of JR in which he blatantly whitewashes the causality problem] 12 LOU SMIT: Just one more
[JR stumbles over his grammar] 11 LOU SMIT: So then that would 12 show the pad in its spot that morning? 13 JOHN RAMSEY: Right. 14 LOU SMIT: Prior to you giving it 15 to the police officer? 16 JOHN RAMSEY: Right. 17 LOU SMIT: That explains that then.
The final parts of this interview are inconsistent with reality. The whole point of the exercise of demonstrating the ordering of the pictures on the roll was to show that the picture in question must have been taken before the morning of 25 December, 1996 (or earlier that morning). It could not have been taken the 26 as Lou Smit suggests, so it doesn’t “explain that then”. This murder was likely premeditated, as other observations corroborate. The exact role of the notepad is not clear from the interviews, but the causality issue demonstrating foreknowledge is. But there’s more concern regarding the Ramseys credibility. After PR expired in 2006 JR continued with the pattern the two had established since 1996. The “A Candy Rose” website has helped us document what we also discovered: every non-profit or other cause established by the Ramseys after their daughter’s death included phone numbers that were out of service, domain names that lasted an average of maybe one year, and too many related but distinct causes to demonstrate any sincere, coherent effort to identify JBR’s murderer – as the Ramseys purport these activities to be. As stated on the “Candy Rose” site: “There are 130 documented references on this web page directly relating or connected in one way or another to the JonBenet Ramsey Children's Foundation. The foundation was set up as the source of funding for the $100,000 reward being offered. In the Ramsey's book, "Death of Innocence," page 164/165 where the Ramsey are explaining the purpose of the JonBenet Ramsey Children's Founation, they are quoted as, "Patsy and I guaranteed a reward of one hundred thousand dollars." The site continues, “INCOME SOURCES TO THE FOUNDATION Included sources of monies pledged and possible donated contributions from friends and family, corporations and the general public. John and Patsy Ramsey pledged $15,000 PER YEAR for 1997, 1998 and 1999. There are no contributions of this scale from any source in any one of the three tax years listed.” While we dismiss this on the grounds of a state-of-mind objection, we include it here as another credibility issue for the Ramseys. For his part, JR stated the intent of the foundation to Larry King on a television show called Larry King Live: "The foundation we set up for JonBenet in her honor, we did the same for our daughter, Beth, when she died in 1992. It's a compassion that just, I think, flowed out of us. We weren't sure what we were going to do with it, but we wanted to do something to honor her name." 
“…a compassion that just, I think, flowed out of us.” This is the fingerprint of a Narcissist. Directory: 2012 2012 -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? 2012 -> Annual InStructional unit plan 2012 -> University of Hawai‘i Maui College dental assisting program review october 21, 2013 2012 -> Committee on the rights of the child the rights of all children in the context of international migration 2012 -> Background on the Haitian Earthquake 2012 -> The Collected Wisdom of Science Olympiad Coaches 2012 -> Federal Communications Commission fcc 12-81 Before the Federal Communications Commission 2012 -> Aa and na members Dying from Tobacco 2012 -> [Baby Crying] 01: 04 [Ching Download 5.45 Mb. Share with your friends:
|