Gaslighting

I received a really nice email the other day from a blog follower who provided a link to a very convincing and disturbing article on gaslighting. The article got me thinking about the possible role of gaslighting in the Ramsey case, a topic we haven't considered for some time. As a result I've given this issue some thought lately and decided to once again go over the reasons why I believe John Ramsey very likely gaslighted Patsy into accepting his version of certain key events.

Existential Crisis

OK, I confess. I've committed the unforgivable sin of writing yet another book on climate change. My only excuse is that the premise behind my little book is very different from any other I've seen, as should be evident from the brief introduction I've reproduced below. Needless to say, the topic I've chosen is of the greatest importance, which is why I felt so compelled to make at least some sort of attempt to come to terms with what I regard as the central issue, all too frequently overlooked.

I decided to make a pre-publication version available to anyone reading here, in the hope that at least some followers of this blog will be interested enough to read it and chime in with comments, critiques and suggestions for improvement.  Over the years I've been impressed with the intelligence of so many who've contributed comments on this blog, and am eagerly looking forward to your responses.

I am therefor inviting anyone interested in receiving an MS Word copy of the entire preprint to email me at doktorgosh (at) live.com with their request. I'll promptly respond with the full text attached.

N.B.: The book is now available here, via Amazon.com.

And Now for Something Completely Different

This blog began as an investigation of the JonBenet Ramsey case, and it's largely continued along the same lines to this day. Over time, however, we've come to consider other issues as well, notably the Amanda Knox case, the Darlier Routier case, and the especially mysterious case of Rebecca Zahau and Max Shaknai. What they all have in common, which for me validates their inclusion here, is the fundamental issue of: justice. 

For many years now, I've become increasingly drawn, as have so many others, to an issue of far greater scope and consequence than anything we've covered or possibly could cover, in this relatively modest venue. Indeed it would seem to be the elephant in just about every room these days that can no longer be ignored. I'm speaking, of course, of climate change and the question of whether or not it's any longer possible to justify business as usual in the face of what's famously been called "an existential threat" to the future of humanity. Indeed, how can we justify our endless debate over the mysteries of a single murder case, no matter how horrific, when the future of the world as we know it is at stake? Don't all of us have an obligation to confront this issue head-on? If we're concerned above all with justice then how can we ignore the all-important question of climate justice?

New Thread

Time for a new thread, I've been told. (What's wrong with the old one, if I may ask?)

The Neverending Story

I must say I'm impressed. After all these years and all our many frustrations there is still enough interest in the Ramsey case to prompt the current torrent of comments. That's fine with me -- but don't expect me to chime in very often, as I believe I've already said just about everything I have to say on this topic.

Incidentally, I've been receiving reports that some, or all, of you are no longer able to comment. Maybe this new thread will solve the problem. If not, please keep me posted via email and I'll see what I can do.

What more to say?

Sorry folks. I've been neglecting this blog for some time. But not without reason. I feel that I've said all there is for me to say about the Ramsey case. And despite some very gratifying positive feedback from so many of you, I'm discouraged. Our efforts at clearing a path toward a solution have been futile. The CBS lawsuit offered some hope that new information could be forthcoming. But now that this case has been "settled," with all details suppressed, that hope has been dashed. Burke has, in effect, been thrown under the bus by his father, who could not even bring himself to demand an apology for the blatant libeling of his son. Without such an apology, the lawsuit that was supposedly intended to vindicate him has done the opposite. Now, as far as the general public is concerned, the CBS special must have been on track after all, leaving poor Burke dangling in the wind. All that's left is the money, which, as now seems clear, was the whole point from the start.

Any News?

OK, time for a new post, making room for a new round of comments. If anyone  DOES have any news regarding the CBS lawsuit please post it. I can't imagine what's taking so much time, but maybe CC can offer some insights into the process.

Darlie Routier case on Court TV

I just saw this very informative review of the case as broadcast on Court TV back in 2013. Everyone concerned about this case should watch it -- all the way through.

Part 1:

Darlie Routier: part 4

When Darlie foolishly agreed to let her husband off the hook and testify that he was not the one who assaulted her and her children, she signed her own death warrant, as all the evidence pointed to an inside job -- no sign of an intruder. Her own family must take a large part of the responsibility because they agreed to hire a lawyer who was already representing the husband in another case and was ethically constrained from even suggesting that he could have been the "intruder." I am now convinced that he is in fact the guilty party. If there could have been no intruder, and Darlie could not have done it (see my earlier posts), then the only possibility is Darin, her husband -- who had already contemplated staging a phony home invasion; who'd been spending recklessly for years and was now heavily in debt; who had over $200,000 in insurance money to gain upon Darlie's death; who had already expressed contempt for her over some  weight gain and driven her to contemplate suicide.

Darlie Routier: part 3

It's been reported that Darlie's husband Darin stated that, if Darlie had died, he'd be the one now sitting on death row. Think about that for a moment. Allow it to fully sink in. Because it's a literally mind blowing statement, a remarkable insight into the bizarre nature of this case. If Darlie Routier had died on the operating table, which was a  real possibility since the knife that slashed her came within 2 millimeters of her carotid artery, then she would have been deemed a victim, along with her two boys -- and given the total lack of intruder evidence, the only possible perpetrator would have been Darin. How very strange. If she dies, she's a victim; if she lives, she's a murderess. If she lives, Darin is an innocent bystander; if she dies, he's a murderer.

Darlie Routier: part 2

As long time readers of this blog know, I have a healthy skepticism when it comes to criminal profiling. (I sometimes have to laugh out loud when watching a show like "Criminal Minds" -- it's comical to see how those people are always so sure of themselves). What all too often happens is that the person identified from the start as the most likely suspect is subject to intense scrutiny -- every word, every inflection, every gesture is probed for signs of deceit or pathology. And all too often, the old adage "seek and ye shall find" is borne out. If you are looking for signs that someone might be lying or contradicting himself or dissembling or acting you will very likely find them. I saw this over and over when following the Ramsey case investigation and yes, I find it in the Routier investigation as well.

The Impossible Darlie Routier Case

No action around here for some time. Very unusual because this blog is usually overwhelmed with comments, often too many for me to keep up with. I get it though, because, well, what more is there to say about the Ramsey case that hasn't already been said a thousand times? We're all patiently waiting for news regarding the CBS lawsuits, but those wheels are grinding really, really slowly.

Meanwhile I've been preoccupied with various other, very different, projects, all of which are now complete -- which means I'm getting bored. The  other day, however, I accidentally came across a youtube video on the Darlie Routier case. That peaked my interest, so I decided to do a bit of research, and what I learned truly stumped me. For a brief summary of the case, for those of you who may not be familiar with it, I recommend this presentation of the Case Background.

Back to Basics

Aka "Making room for more comments."

The Mysterious case of Max Shaknai and Rebecca Zahau - guest post by Lou

On July 11, 2011 6 year-old Max Shaknai, son of  wealthy pharmaceutical company CEO Jonah Shaknai, was found lying on the floor at the foot of the staircase with his Razor scooter resting on top of his leg, the shattered chandelier nearby.  Rebecca Zahau, Jonah's live-in 32 year old girlfriend found Max, rushed to his side and heard him say the word "Ocean" - the name of her dog, before he slipped into unconsciousness. Rebecca's 13 year old sister was visiting at the time, and Rebecca instructed her to dial 911 immediately. 

The Case of Larry Nassar

I've been bothered for some time with questions regarding certain issues that have received much media attention during the past few months. And since I feel a need to share my thoughts, I've decided to go out on a limb here, despite the fact that these issues have no direct bearing on the  Ramsey case. While the focus of this blog is on JonBenet's murder, more general questions pertaining to justice and injustice have always been lurking in the background, which is why I've felt justified in occasionally addressing such issues in reference to both the Amanda Knox and Steven Avery cases.

The Gate

A gate can be either open or closed. If open, one can pass through. If closed, it becomes a barrier. Nevertheless, there is always a way to overcome such a barrier, by climbing over it or tunneling under it or breaking the lock, etc. But when the gate is a gateless gate, no barrier presents itself, in which case there is nothing to climb over, tunnel under or break. Consequently, the gateless gate is impenetrable.

Hoo Hah!

The judge rejected the defendants' plea that the accusations directed at Burke (and by implication, John and Patsy as well) on the CBS special we've all seen, were only statements of "opinion," protected by the First Amendment. So the case will proceed to the next steps. Read all about it here.

According to Judge Groner,

This Court finds that the statements at issue and the docu-series as a whole could reasonably be understood as stating actual facts about Plaintiff. This Court does not find that the “disclaimer” at the beginning and at the end of the program negate the docu-series potentially defamatory meaning.

As someone who watched this travesty with a growing sense of dismay, I fully agree

An Interview with Lin Wood

From Westword, dated Oct. 12:

Inside John Ramsey's CBS Lawsuit Over Brother-Killed-JonBenét Show

John and Patsy Opposite Hand Samples

Courtesy of Castor:

Did Putin Do It?

Depends on what your definition of "it" is. More room for comments. On all things Ramsey, Trump, Putin, whatever.