Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just did some reading online--another theory. It seems that someone who had known the White family out in CA reported that she had been abused as a child by them. The Whites Jr family held the Christmas party that the Ramseys had attended that night. They were the ones who came over early the next morning and took Burke away.
This person (no way of knowing if this is credible) said that the sexual acts upon little children often took place around the holidays because no one would be suspicious of seeing a lot of cars parked at someone's house. She said there were weird rituals, sacrificial type things.
There was more. Re the $118,000 bonus in the ransom note--police? said there was a Bible opened to psalm #118 in the house. Supposedly Patsy had become very religious during her bout with cancer and she had gotten into ritualistic sacrificial type ideas. That the ransom note was not written by Patsy and it contained references to these rites, could have been written by one of their friends who participated in the spiritual rituals. They cited a case where a woman brought her 5 yr old child to a church and sacrificed her.
This is all one theory--of the "religious" rituals involving young girls, that Jon Benet could have been on display at the Christmas party, that often at these parties the "fun" begins after most of the guests have left for the night. There are groups of people who actually do this.
So while they weren't exactly pimping her out, they could have been using her in these spiritual rituals.
The body was supposedly washed and wrapped in a blanket, also suggesting a spiritual ritual.
I don't know.
I've heard of such sacrifices. From the stories I heard, the sacrificed was always an adult. I'd always hope they were just rumors. Wonder why Burke was spared? Too old?
Do you mean to say that you think it just as believable (or even likely) that one or both parents with no history of severe mental illness, nor atrocious child abuse, nor any criminal history whatsoever, having killed JonBenet, as it is believable that a burglar, who would, by definition, be endowed with criminal, antisocial tendencies, while lacking any endowment of paternal or maternal instincts for the child, having killed JonBenet?
This actually makes sense to you?
What makes sense to me is that your DRAMATICS are juvenile. What I mean to say is exactly what I say. What doesn't make sense is what YOU post, which is NOTHING more than an opinion, just like everyone else's opinion, no more, no less. Your use of extra punctuation does not add any more to your post than anything else. You have an active imagination and have placed the Ramseys in a place where you daydream they were, because you have idealized them. If you spent as much time analyzing yourself as you do trying to convince others that you are the one who can explain away whatever else others put forth, you would be improving. List your own shortcomings instead of denigrating opinions of others which mean as much or more than yours. You are clearly locked into one opinion and one opinion only, which is no more right than my opinion or any other opinion.
What makes sense to me is that your DRAMATICS are juvenile. What I mean to say is exactly what I say. What doesn't make sense is what YOU post, which is NOTHING more than an opinion, just like everyone else's opinion, no more, no less. Your use of extra punctuation does not add any more to your post than anything else. You have an active imagination and have placed the Ramseys in a place where you daydream they were, because you have idealized them. If you spent as much time analyzing yourself as you do trying to convince others that you are the one who can explain away whatever else others put forth, you would be improving. List your own shortcomings instead of denigrating opinions of others which mean as much or more than yours. You are clearly locked into one opinion and one opinion only, which is no more right than my opinion or any other opinion.
WRONG!!!
To say that one theory of this crime is just as valid as another is inane and idiotic. My theory is derived from probability and logical inferences based upon the available evidence. The same cannot be said about many other theories, including your own. Indeed, some theories, especially the ones suggesting that the Ramseys were "pimping" JonBenet out or using her in some bizarre ritual, are based entirely upon unsupported, extremely unlikely, sick, demented fantasy and nothing more. So please, do not lecture me about having an "active imagination."
Just so you know, I have no acquaintance with the Ramseys. I do not know them, nor do I know anyone who does know them. I do not know their attorneys, nor anyone who does. I have not been hired by the Ramseys or their attorneys as some internet mouthpiece, and I have no reason whatsoever to "idealize" them. That being said, I have seen no evidence that the Ramseys were anything other than decent, normal people. I doubt they were the perfect family, since no such family exists; but I have seen nothing to suggest that any of them could have been involved in this horrendous crime to any degree whatsoever.
And yes, I am locked onto one theory because I am convinced that it is correct. The fact that no one has yet been able to present a LOGICAL refutation of it makes me even more convinced of its validity.
BTW: If all YOU have left are petty personal attacks, why don't you just concede that my theory is the most probably correct of all the theories ever presented about this case, and save yourself any further embarrassment?
Last edited by SigTurner; 02-02-2014 at 09:22 AM..
…and please dispense with your scenario. It is profoundly illogical, no matter how you phrase it.
Your scenario just does not make any sense. Sorry.
Well we will never know which of our scenarios was closest to the truth...will we? It is a very sad case...there really is nothing for anyone to add...so I will to dispense with my scenario...if you do the same...!
Well we will never know which of our scenarios was closest to the truth...will we? It is a very sad case...there really is nothing for anyone to add...so I will to dispense with my scenario...if you do the same...!
It is redundant to dispense with your scenario, and my scenario is indispensable since it is the key to solving this case.
To say that one theory of this crime is just as valid as another is inane and idiotic. My theory is derived from probability and logical inferences based upon the available evidence. The same cannot be said about many other theories, including your own. Indeed, some theories, especially the ones suggesting that the Ramseys were "pimping" JonBenet out or using her in some bizarre ritual, are based entirely upon unsupported, extremely unlikely, sick, demented fantasy and nothing more. So please, do not lecture me about having an "active imagination."
Just so you know, I have no acquaintance with the Ramseys. I do not know them, nor do I know anyone who does know them. I do not know their attorneys, nor anyone who does. I have not been hired by the Ramseys or their attorneys as some internet mouthpiece, and I have no reason whatsoever to "idealize" them. That being said, I have seen no evidence that the Ramseys were anything other than decent, normal people. I doubt they were the perfect family, since no such family exists; but I have seen nothing to suggest that any of them could have been involved in this horrendous crime to any degree whatsoever.
And yes, I am locked onto one theory because I am convinced that it is correct. The fact that no one has yet been able to present a LOGICAL refutation of it makes me even more convinced of its validity.
BTW: If all YOU have left are petty personal attacks, why don't you just concede that my theory is the most probably correct of all the theories ever presented about this case, and save yourself any further embarrassment?
The autopsy showed she had signs that sexual abuse was not the first time. That's not "available evidence" according to you.
Actually, the autopsy doesn't say that, and even if it did, that would certainly not be evidence that her parents were pimping her out, would it, June?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
!
