[Update: Last night I found part three of the ID/Discovery program on the Ramsey case on youtube. It contained two especially interesting segments, a fascinating interview with John Mark Karr, and a clear statement by a DNA expert asserting that the DNA evidence should not be seen as an essential element in this case. In other words, there was never any reason to exonerate "the Ramseys." I was going to post the link but now I can't find it anymore. (I've just now found it: here. Not sure how long this is going to be up. It's much more interesting than part one.) Instead I see a copy of part 1 posted by some lady who feels sure she'll have to take it down soon due to copyright laws. But for now you can find it here. Looks like youtube is going to be an interesting place to search for Ramsey related materials in the next few weeks at least, so I suggest you check there periodically.]
Wow, the comments are coming thick and fast. I can no longer keep up. I'll try to find time to read them all but probably won't be responding much as I feel overwhelmed at this point. All I'll say for now is:
it was NOT Burke -- do a search here on his name and you'll see why; it was NOT Patsy -- my take on her should be obvious by now; Patsy's prints on the pineapple bowl mean nothing -- she probably placed them in a cupboard at some point; Burke's prints were on the glass, NOT the bowl; absence of prints means little since prints often don't show up -- e.g., neither John's nor Patsy's prints were on the ransom note, which they obviously handled; it was most likely John and not Patsy who was responsible for the notorious "and hence"; it was NOT Linda the housekeeper, though the book Little Girl Blu makes some provocative points -- she did not have the vocabulary or the education to have written that particular note; if she'd entered with a key then the scene at the basement window can't be explained; no kidnapping actually took place; if her intention was to frame Patsy she would not have written the note in her own hand, but forged Patsy's -- while she claimed the note looked just like Patsy's hand she was wrong, it looks totally different; she was thoroughly investigated and is no longer considered a suspect; the ransom would have done her no good as any attempt to spend it would have been a red flag; finally, there is too much evidence pointing at John, including his patently phony broken window story.
Don't forget the upcoming CBS series, starting this Sunday at 8:30. And another episode with Burke and Dr. Phil on Monday. Steelers play Cincinnati Sunday at 1. Go Steelers!
I am just curious what and why you think John's phony broken window story is so much more damning and so much bigger evidence then Patsy's story about the Christmas Bear ? Other than PR was blatantly caught in her lie.
ReplyDeleteIf Patsy had recalled the true origin of the Christmas bear she would have had no reason to lie about it because she'd have been aware that the truth would soon come out regardless. Also her "forgetting" about the bear would have done her no good in any case, because she was a suspect rather than an objective witness, so her belief that the bear must have been introduced to the house by an intruder would have carried no water in a court of law. Therefore it's not difficult to conclude that she just had a lapse of memory, possibly prompted by her desire to find some sort of intruder evidence.
DeleteOn the other hand, John's story about the window was absolutely necessary to prevent him from being arrested, because otherwise it would have looked like insider staging. Patsy's statement about the bear has little relevance to the case as a whole, while John's window story is key -- it's his alibi. Patsy's memory lapse was easy to uncover, while John's much more sophisticated and complicated lie, based on misdirection, has been accepted by the authorities to this day.
I agree that misdirection is the name of the game and JR is surely the ringleader. However when analyzing PR's misdirections, which is exactly what they were, she definitely is involved. Whether by manipulation or by collusion. Also I can not find any logical reason for JR to do what he did with the window. Had he staged, then needed to "unstage", it would make no sense for him to bring up or even mention a word of the window in the first place . For whatever reason there was, it seems a much bigger risk on his part with the window than PR's with the bear. I do not understand your logic about the bear, PR obviously did not think the bear could or would be traced back to a pageant. It was only by chance that it in fact was. Pretending as if the woefully inept BPD would just automatically catch PR lying and figure out where the bear came from is a little more than wishful thinking.
DeleteGreat blog. I'm glad I found it.
DeleteI also believe the murder to be an inside job. But not premeditated. I go back and forth between the three family members. And I also wondered why no one was seriously considering JR as the killer.
The note is my reason for not believing an intruder did it.
I think that they were going to stage a kidnapping and get rid of the body. Then changed their minds. Perhaps to give jonbenet her proper burial which was important to the Ramseys.
Also JR might have been afraid to take the body off somewhere. That someone would notice he was gone. Or would see him leave and come back. Better hide the body in the basement.
DeleteIf they abandoned their original plan then there would no longer be any point in reporting a kidnapping and handing over a note whose only function would be as evidence against them. Also no point in hiding the body in the most remote room in the house. There is simply no getting around it. If they were in this together then the 911 call would not have been made until the body had been removed from the house.
DeleteI find it incredible that even with all the who-dunnit theories out there, the JDI theory is barely existent. When Dr. Phil asked Burke if he was aware of all the theories, he told Burke the various initialisms for each "camp": PDI, BDI and IDI. He did not mention JDI.
ReplyDeleteWhich brings me back to what Doc has said all along . . . John was ruled out. How can ruling out someone be so final? It's like he was given a total pass and they never gave him another thought as a possible suspect. It was always Patsy. Then Burke. Then back to the intruder. Then to Gary Olivia and Michael Helgoth. And then to the every popular John Mark Karr. But rarely do you talk to someone, read something (other than this blog, of course) or see anything on television that points the finger at John. Boy did he get lucky! It's like there was a perfect storm of events that allowed him to disappear in the background where he watched his wife take all the heat.
If you want to know why this case has never been solved, and may never be solved, there's your answer. The name of John's game is misdirection. How he managed it I'll never know. Maybe he just got lucky.
DeleteSo why are we posting on here? We get it, you have your opinion, but is no one else supposed to have an opinion? I think BURKE did it.
ReplyDeleteThat is just MY opinion, though. I don't belittle anyone else's opinion and I don't demand anyone believe my theory. There is a difference between discussing different theories and expecting everyone else to subscribe to my theory. I don't behave that way.
Very frankly: no one cares if you think Burke did it. And no one cares if I think John did it. Anyone can have an opinion but opinions don't matter. It's our attempts to critically think through the various aspects of this case that make a blog such as this worthwhile.
DeleteI've never prevented anyone from presenting his or her views on this blog. And I've never censored those critical of my own views. But I do insist on the right, along with anyone else, to defend my own take on this case. I'm sorry to learn you have a problem with that.
You just told me no one cares if I think Burke did it. Yet, you repeatedly claim you think John did it and then just stated you "insist on the right, along with anyone else, to defend [my] own take on this case".
DeleteThat makes absolutely no sense and completely shows a significant lack of care about the people who take the time to post on this blog.
Thank you for showing your blog readers what type of person you are.
Also, it is like you are a college student trying to win a race with elementary students. You are kind of a bully on your own blog.
DeleteEVERYONE on here is trying to figure this case out. Quite frankly, your theory is the least popular one out there. It is great that you have your stance on this case, but no one is beating you down for what you believe. Others on here are more respectful about their opinions and what they agree with/don't agree with than you, the owner of this blog.
Before you continue to waste everyone's time with your offensive comments, please: learn to read.
DeleteLets just say there was an intruder what are the reasons the ransom note was still left knowing Jonbenet was still in the house?
ReplyDeleteCould it be he left the note on the stairs before he went to the basement, and it was too risky to go back up and remove the note?
As I see it, the only reason for an intruder to leave such a note without kidnapping his victim would be if he had deliberately hidden the body and was hoping to be paid a ransom before the Ramseys discovered it.
DeleteHowever, in that case he would have been sure to call them with instructions as soon as possible that morning before they had a chance to thoroughly search the house. Instead, the note says that the kidnapper's call will come tomorrow. Which makes no sense if that was the plan.
Otherwise, leaving the note makes no sense at all -- telling us there was never any kidnapping, never any kidnapper and never any intruder.
As for the intruder being reluctant to go back up the stairs from the basement - that would be his only way to exit, I'm afraid, so he'd have had no choice. No one passed through the basement window, so we know he didn't go that way.
DeleteNot to mention the important part....the ransom call never came. No shock there.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think Burke was jealous of JB. He woke his sister up fed her pineapples out of guilt for what was going to do. Just as he hit her with a club in the past, I believe he brought her down stairs, tried something she fought against, he strangled her to keep quiet, went up stairs out of fear to tell his dad that there had been an accident. John and Patsy realized their son killed her and figured to protect him as well as the rest of their personal wealthy lifestyle. They contrived the ransom note written by Patsy yet helpfully dictated by John. There was also a rough draft of a ransom note found. What intruder has all of that time write and rewrite a ransom note? He related to a foriegn faction who could "write ENGLISH" so well. He mentioned the $118,000 to make it seem someone who knew of his job bonus aka foreign faction. Then JR has the task of figuring out how to cover up the seen to protect Burke. Of course you learn how to tie knots in seamenship..hello. He tied the garret and strung her up and hit her in the head with the bat. Very little blood cause she'd already been dead. Then he hid her in the wine celler.
ReplyDeleteAll items used were from within the house. the suitcase for the money moved to the basement as an after thought cause he mentioned attaché. There were undisturded cob webs stillin front of the broken window JR mentions the intruder might have entered.So that was a lie. The only motive that makes sense in that jealous BR accidentally killed JB and parents were in a defensive position to try and protect him.
Put yourself in their shoes..if your son killed your daughter, would you want him to bare all that burden? Since his sister was a national star, the hatred for BR would motivate the parents to cover it up. A fabricated intruder story would be the only way to get the spot light off his son and preserve their lavish lifestyle and reputation. They lost one and didn't want to lose both. That is why it was so easy for them to lie cause they didn't kill her, Burke did.
He took a career where he had little interaction with people so he could hide till it was safe to proactively discuss his sisters death without noticeable guilt. Figuring he should proactively go on Doctor Phil to discuss rather than be accused.
In an interview with Anderson Cooper, JR was nearly slipped. He said he was told children Burkes age where good at Cov....Compartmentalizing. His Freudian slip was the word....cover up.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI was reading a post from August and everyone was talking about the parents different reaction to grieve. Going from what I witnessed when one of my good friends lost a young child. She reacted exactly as Patsy did. She was drugged up 100% of the time. This was years ago and she later told me that the pain was so bad that it caused physical pain. She stayed on heavy meds for months. She just could not function nor could she deal with reality. I think doc is 100% accurate on John getting her to do anything. The sadness is just too much for the mother to ahandle. Men,most anyway, get to work on damage control. Just a thought I had...
ReplyDeleteIn researching the solid evidence in this case I still like others are left with many questions. However i do not believe in some intruder theory! Common sense went out the window a long time ago in this case. The fact that JR was ruled out on the basis of the ransom note is bullshit! Sorry I have no other way to state that! I have studied this case and I'm amazed that politics, money and the forgetting of an innocent child has fallen to the back burner. No intruder did this and although one could say that perhaps we will never have all the answers...I am convinced that both parents perhaps in different ways ARE responsible for the death of that child.The attention in my opinion should be put forth to demand Mary lacy be held more accountable for her exoneration of the Ramsey's and anyone for that matter based on that crazy DNA...My heart aches for Jon Benet because people have dropped the ball on this case over and over again. What if anything can we all do to pick that ball back up and demand justice for Jon Benet?
ReplyDeleteSleepless in the South��
My god the one thing we have in common no matter our theories...we want justice for Jon Benet. Perhaps combined passions of us all could bring forth a movement to see that at the very least justice should be attempted to be served,no matter someone's political career. What can we All do? Grasping at straws after all these years I feel we should grasp harder!
ReplyDeleteCheck out dateline's take on it
ReplyDeleteI posted on the last thread, not knowing we were moving to a new one so here goes again. This is just interesting, nothing more. On 10/12/08 an article/interview with John Ramsey called "John Ramsey's Lingering Suspicions" for the Daily Beast said "as a public service and a personal crusade Ramsey now spends much of his time promoting the laws that mandate the lifting of a DNA sample from anyone accused of a felony, which would substantially expand the national DNA registry. His website is DNAFINGERPRINTLAW.COM." It goes on to say as to lawyering up immediately he says "I got a call from someone in the law enforcement system on the second day. They told me I better do it, because the police were already considering me the prime suspect." I can't imagine someone calling him from law enforcement, when law enforcement were investigating the Ramsey family tipping off John to lawyer up. And interesting that John says HE was being considered as the prime suspect.
ReplyDeleteIs it not a fact that everyone here regardless of theories want to see justice done for Jon Benet? We should unite and perhaps raise all kinds of hell? We all must do something. We have to try.
ReplyDeleteSleepless in the South��
If Patsy were involved in this murder, either alone or with John, I don't think she would want to make that 911 call. Not just because the body was still in the house, but also because she would know that she had to put on the performance of her life and sound convincing as a mother in panic, anguish and fear. I don't think she'd volunteer to make that call but more likely would have John do it.
ReplyDeleteIf you listen to that 911 call, it is obvious, at least to me, that she is not performing at all.
I may buy that in the beginning She may have been oblivious to the crime but even if one believes this to be true.. ultimately booth parents in some capacity contributed to that little girls death. Cover up is still a crime. They were the adults in that house and were responsible for the outcome of whatever transpired after any said accident or crime.
DeleteSleepless in the South
Sorry both parents is what I meant to say.
DeleteI am so sick of hearing people say "a parent would not do that to their child" and I can tell that PRs 911 call is genuine. Neither of these carry any value and someone saying it is a waste of words and time. Time and time again we have seen parents who "arent capable" who have done just that. As far as the 911 call whether it was rehearsed or whether it was not, trying to figure out if someone is acting or putting on a performance is nothing more than guesswork. If you put that aside and ONLY pay attention to the words used you will find PR using plenty of distancing words and alibi setting. Doc likes to point out that it can not be used in a court of law. Well that is beside the point, there IS a common language and behaviors that go with lying. This is common sense, regardless if it can ve used in court or not. She almost asked for an ambulance during the call but cut herself just short. Could she have really been upset and hysterical yet still known or even been im on a cover up ? Of course she could have.
DeleteCan you go into more detail about where she almost asked for an ambulance during the call?
DeleteI think she was half faking/half real. She WAS upset. She wanted the help but knew she couldn't really get help, because they covered up the accident. She knew the call was the beginning of the end for them. It was not something she could take back once it happened and it scared her. So, there WAS real emotion but, I agree, she distanced and was elusive.
If you listen to the call, the dispatcher asks her who has her daughter or who took her daughter. Patsy then says, sharply, "WHAT?". Then the dispatcher asks again and now that Patsy has had time to think about her response, she nervously reads part of the ransom note.
911: Does it say who took her?
PR: What?
911: Does it say who took her?
PR: No I don’t know it’s there...there is a ransom note here.
911: It’s a ransom note.
PR: It says S.B.T.C. Victory...please
Yes, in the very beginning of the call PR says, We need an, and then she pauses and says Police. My opinion and many others is that she slipped and was going to say we need an ambulance. For further breakdown of the obvious distancing and alibi setting in the 911 call broke down here-
Deletehttp://statement-analysis.blogspot.com/2015/02/understanding-analysis-of-911-call-by.html?m=1
I looked at a lot of the 911 transcripts last night and listened to a lot of videos of the 911 call Patsy made (some were enhanced, some were not), and none made mention of anything before Patsy said "police". Her saying "we need an" was not anywhere that I saw. Was that purposefully left out?
DeleteI listened to the enhanced 911 tapes last night and to me, I hear Burke's voice at the end.
You listened to the enhanced 911 tapes? Where did you get them? As I understand it they have never been released. If you have a copy, by all means please share.
DeleteThe aerospace 1s were released by someone about 10 yrs ago, however they were pulled for some reason and I can not find them anywhere. I am sure that after all these shows more will popup soon, whether they will be as good as Aerospace's I do not know. Here is an unenhanced 911 call for above commenter. 2 secs into the call PR says We need an "pause" Police. I think she was going to ask for an ambulance as do many ppl. She then pauses just as she does when she says What, then pauses for time to think of what to say.https://youtu.be/NFMrNtTPaSY
DeleteI've watched all the recent shows and have come away with the conclusion that you can't exonerate anyone due to the DNA they found. It was touch DNA and it could've been transferred from one garment to another easily. So the DNA is out.
ReplyDeleteHere are my questions:
1. They claim JBR dug her nails into her neck trying to free the garotte. Yet none of her own skin or DNA was found under her own nails?
2. There was no prior history of JR being a pedophile or pervert. And there was none after this event. It's my understanding that this type of behavior doesn't stop.
3. I heard that they found a dictionary opened on the page of the word "incest". An adult would not have needed to look that up. JB was too young, so I think BR looked that up.
4. One of the shows mentioned that police checking the house upon their arrival early that morning. They missed that wine cellar room completely? How is that possible?
5. When JR went to search with FW, he saw the broken window with the suitcase and mentioned it to FW. So odd that he remembered breaking it months earlier, but no one can remember whether or not it had been fixed? That's just odd that yo u'd leave a window broken for months.
6. That RN is definitely something that was part of staging. If this was a true kidnapping, they would've taken JBR out of the house immediately and not lingered and left a short note. The RN is what makes me think it was an inside job. But who inside is the question. Would a parent go to such lengths to save a child that murdered their other child? Would a mother or father stage such a depraved scene? Would BR be able to keep such a secret if he was the one who had done it?
I am left baffled, like the rest of you.
EG
I'm baffled on many things. I have my theoretical thoughts but it is very tiring. I just wish us all no matter where we theorize fault lies would all agree on the fact that someone needs to stand and answer to this injustice.Common sense. Common sense! There was no stranger intruder looking to kidnap...that I'm certain of.
DeleteEG:
Delete1. There were no nail marks on her neck either. They were identified by the ME as "petechial hemorrhages." By almost all accounts the head blow came first and she was unconscious when she was strangled.
2. People keep talking about John having no prior history. Please. He cheated on his wife for over a year, meaning a history of systematic lies and deceit. A young lady came forward and claimed she'd had an affair with John, and that he liked to dress her in pageant costumes like JonBenet's. John denied that and she eventually changed her story. Take that one for what its worth. John was away from home much of the time, off on various "business trips," including trips to Amsterdam, the world capital of prostitution. No one can say what he was up to on these trips, but no one can claim they were completely innocent either.
After the murder: well obviously he had to keep his nose clean for a long time since anything he tried would most likely find its way into the tabs. No one knows much about what John is up to these days, because no one seems to care. Except maybe his wife -- who designs pageant costumes, by the way.
3. That dog eared page may or may not mean something. I'd like to see a photo of it to be sure it's pointed where it's been reported to have been pointed.
4. The policeman couldn't open it because it was latched by a piece of wood at the top that he failed to notice. He didn't persist because he was told (by John?) that the room had no window and could not have been a point of entry or exit. At that point they were looking for entry/exit points, not for JonBenet whom they assumed had been kidnapped.
5. Read my series of posts beginning with "The Window Scene." John obviously lied about that whole story. It was his alibi.
6. The answer to all your questions is: no.
Doc, in the earlier comment I made John's interview with The Daily Beast 10/08, he even inserts that PR had said that JB was too friendly, that she had even "flirted" with strangers during the pageants. This is really misdirecting. P can't defend that she said that or didn't say that, and it is just more evidence of how JR could throw everything in there including the kitchen sink in order to send the investigation down multiple paths, hoping one of them would stick.
DeleteDoc
DeleteSo basically, JR told the police officer there was no windows in the WC room, therefore no entry possible, but meanwhile when asked to search the house later on with FW, that was the first room JR went to look in?
Now that's odd.
To me, the most damning piece of evidence is the RN. No intruder would write a note like that. It's obviously part of the staging.
Why the blow to the head first? Was it a fit of rage, was it an accident, was it intentional? EG
"I heard that they found a dictionary opened on the page of the word "incest". An adult would not have needed to look that up. JB was too young, so I think BR looked that up."
ReplyDeleteWas this on one of the shows or is this what Doc calls "folklore" of this case? I ask because I have never heard of this.
I have read and watched so much on this case, that I'm not sure if I read that online or whether it was mentioned in one of the shows.
DeleteEG
Doc -
ReplyDeleteBetter brace yourself for a barrage of comments following Sunday - Monday airing of 'The Case Of: JonBenét Ramsey'. Retired FBI investigator says he and his colleagues will name a suspect. Link to: https://www.yahoo.com/tv/jonbenet-ramsey-case-of-murder-suspect-named-003047334.html
Interview with this guy is rather ambiguous...no doubt purposely so. You can infer they will name Patsy but also conclude they intend to name John. We will see!
This is the one and only series I hold hope will do justice to this case in the best ability they can! I stand silent but hopeful.
DeleteSleepless in the South��
Thanks for the heads up. And yes, I will brace myself. If you've read here long enough you'll know I don't think much of profilers and am equally skeptical of any attempts at "statement analysis." I feel sure they'll name Patsy, because Patsy became fair game ever since John was "ruled out." You can't go wrong with Patsy, because the intruder theory is so lame and because John -- well John faded into the background long ago.
DeleteBut even in the extremely unlikely event they name John, that won't matter as far as I'm concerned, because this case is not going to be solved by yet another analysis of the ransom note. Whatever conclusion they come to can easily be disputed. It will be nothing more than yet another opinion by yet another "expert." More of same.
Everyone seems to think they can solve this case by dissecting all that evidence over and over and over again. But every piece of evidence is inconclusive-- including the note.
Oh and by the way, the Unabomber was outed by his brother. Donald Foster also took credit for naming him and I wonder how many others have followed suit. It was the brother, not some "expert" on statement analysis. Sheesh!!! Double sheesh!!!!
Yep. This case will only be resolved by a confession (not likely) or an "outing" by someone who knows something but has not come forward (who knows? Maybe they did come forward and were ignored!) I hate the thought this is all going to be pinned on Patsy once again but I fear this may happen.
DeleteDoc always like to point out that lie detectors do not work at all and are nothing more than voodoo science. Also that statement analysis and handwriting analysis do not work either, that is unless of course they support his theory. Then they work just fine, coincidentally. The fact of the matter is that lie detectors are actually correct a very high percentage of the time. (PR had an inconclusive and/or failed 1) so again that does not match Docs theory and presto, Lie detectors never work and are then called voodoo science on this blog. There is a science behind all these and while they are not 100% correct and mostly non-admissable in court, they ARE surely great indicators and clues.
ReplyDeleteI never said lie detectors were voodoo science. But they are far from perfect and for that reason not permitted in courts of law. All the methods you mention can be useful indicators, yes, and can have a meaningful place at the early stages of an investigation when possible suspects are being evaluated. However, they are no use at all as evidence of guilt, especially when they are used without the necessary scientific controls.
DeleteWhich is why I don't attach much importance to such findings, even if they were to support my own take on the case. My analysis of John's exemplars was intended as a demonstration of why he should never have been ruled out, NOT as proof positive he wrote the note.
My methods are focused on facts and logic, because facts are facts and can't be disputed and logic is logic, i.e., basic to our human though processes.
It was reported by LE and their notes that JR had said he read to JBR before she went to sleep. The next time JR spoke to LE he said that there was a mix up in wording and that he did not say he read to JBR before bed but that he read (to himself) before bed.
ReplyDeleteJohn and Patsy changed all their answers. They made sure they kept themselves very elusive and evasive. When they couldn't guarantee Burke would do the same at his young age, they kept him out of everything (ie. he was asleep in his bed the whole time/ushered out of the house immediately once police arrived/wasn't thoroughly investigated). Their answers change all the time. Either the police/detectives were completely incompetent or they were intimidated by the Ramsey's wealth and status.
DeleteIt looks like Burke learned well the evasive techniques, the use of the word "maybe" and the term "I don't remember".
They have strength in numbers. If they all evade, they have strength. If one evades, the others get suspicious. WE don't know John, Patsy, or Burke, but they know each other. If John, Patsy, or Burke lie to the police/detectives/reporters, no one is going to know the difference. But they know each other very well. If one of them lies or is evasive to authorities, the other(s) are going to be able to pick up on it. Maybe not right away, but eventually. If the ALL are evasive, which we, the readers and viewers of all the documentation, can even pick up on, then they are all in it together. All evading. All lying. All covering for one another.
Another example of their elusiveness and keeping Burke out of it. Something that Patsy says:
DeletePatsy: “I don’t give a flying flip how scientific it is. Go back to the damn drawing board. I didn’t do it. John Ramsey didn’t do it, and we don’t have a clue of anybody who did do it. Quit screwing around asking me about things that are ridiculous and let’s find the person that did this.”
She states emphatically "John Ramsey" didn't do it...but doesn't mention Burke...the other person in the house that night.
Does anyone remember JR staying that he or "they" had given BR benedryl - two of them I believe, and sent him back to bed that morning, or perhaps it was during the night. He, himself, took a melatonin before bed so he could be "clear headed" the next day for their flight to Michigan. Then later in the 2008 interview he says in the aftermath of the death he has had moments of being so disraught he would take 2 benedryl and go to bed at 6 p.m. on a regular basis. He does seem overly fond of ingesting or giving sleeping aids to family members. One wonders if he did perhaps drug his wife and child that night. Perhaps PR could have fallen asleep in her clothing from that evening - and BR's memory would be clouded and very very fuzzy.
ReplyDeleteI don't remember reading that, but as a theory it sounds like a plausible explanation. I personally think Burke doesn't remember much because he didn't witness much of anything. But I do think that he could tell us that his parents were arguing that morning. I also wonder if he heard some arguments or heated discussions in the days, months, and years after the funeral.
DeleteThat is an interesting theory, but that is something that should have been discovered by the police during interviews with Patsy and Burke. Again, fail on the part of police/detectives.
DeleteThat would also explain no one hearing JBR scream, if she did scream, something the neighbor heard, though.
I'd look at the timeline of when Burke said he was downstairs playing and when JBR was determined to have been killed. Did Burke state his dad gave him a Benadryl after he was downstairs playing or before?
Again, their elusive details of that night/morning are what helped the Ramseys.
Burke never mentioned anything about benadryl. It was John who said he had given Burke beneadryl, two of them I believe. But, it's been so long I don't remember if he said he gave them to him exactly when. If he gave them to him in the morning when Patsy was hysterically looking for JB and after reading the note and either before or after calling 911 then JR would have wanted Burke back in bed and sleeping - until he was taken out of the house later and over to the Fernie's. That would also explain that IF Burke was overheard by the 911 operator (and I"m not saying he really was, enhancement of that call could not prove he was overheard) giving him benedryl at that point would have been expedient for John. But again, another theory could be that he gave them to Burke and Burke drank it with his iced tea that night, because John knew he had something to do. So I need to see the transcripts of the police interview to be 100% sure but I do remember him saying he did give benedryl to Burke. The WHY of that would be more revealing of course.
DeleteDid anybody notice when Burke was on Dr. Phil and they showed his interview right after the murder (when he was 9), he said he heard his parents talking loudly and his dad said, "Ok, all right. Calm down. We'll call the police."
ReplyDeleteThat doesn't fit with it being John's idea to call the police, or John telling Pasty to call the police. It fits more with John saying, "Look it says right here we can't call" and Pasty just being completely hysterical and wanting them called. Patsy said she just read part of the note and then ran screaming looking for Jonbenet. People have questioned that, but I think I would do the same thing. I think that is more the normal reaction. I think John expected her to sit there and ponder the note and come away with the conclusion they couldn't call the police, but Patsy just saw her daughter was missing and panicked, like I think most people would do.
I wondered if he just wanted her to be quiet, so she wouldn't wake up Burke, and said, "Calm down. We'll call the police..." getting ready for another stalling tactic like "Let's just go over the note again," or something, thinking he could get her to see that calling the police was too dangerous, when Patsy just ran downstairs and called them.
more misdirection and attempts to control and fashion and manipulate the investigation by JR even long, long after the murder. Burke was kept out of the public eye and any sort of questioning and also put into therapy for two years. John has technically "gotten away with it", but has he really? He will never have gotten away with it because he is still alive, and can be brought to justice if someone willing to go out on a limb and turn a spotlight on him will just come forward.
DeleteI think he knew his wife all too well. He knew she was an "out there" extroverted and emotional person. He fully expected her to have the reaction she did, that was all a part of their dynamic. She the emotional social person, he the in control, calm, logical and very manipulative one. He would expect an emotional reaction to the note, and got one. He just let that one play out.
DeleteBottom line: if the two of them were in it together, there'd have been no reason for Patsy to get hysterical, or for John to tell Pasty to calm down and call the police. That would already have been part of the plan.
DeleteThere was no reason for PR to be hysterical ? Of course there was a good reason for her to be hysterical ! Even if PR accidentally killed JBR herself, she would still probably be hysterical.
DeleteScrew "he was ruled out". It is so obviously JR that it's not even funny. Just plain logic. They have successfully clouded everyone's minds over the years. Go over the basic evidence without anything you've ever heard about this case. Basic evidence. Basic logic. It's JR. I would love for them to get a young jury together that knows nothing about this case and see what they think. I am so annoyed that he still gets away with everything. That poor child and poor PR just being thrown under the bus. She might have lied a little, but trust me, as a mother, I would have lost my mind and not known what end was up. Who knows what he told her. Doc G is spot on. I wish we could get this resolved once and for all.
ReplyDeleteHey everyone. Not sure if anyone knows this, but Lin Wood is both JR's attorney and Dr. Phil's. Of course it was edited to whatever the agenda was. Of course they were counseled to say what would fit the purpose. Both Dr. Phil and BR/JR. It was probably Mr. Wood's suggestion in the first place to put them on TV and of course they chose Dr. Phil because the attorney could manipulate everything. What a joke.
ReplyDeleteYup, and did Dr. Phil disclose that during the interview? No he did not.
DeleteRemember the other comment the neighbor made that night, that she heard a scream sometime around midnight, and a sound of metal scraping, possibly on concrete, I don't remember what she thought it sounded like metal was scraping on. I've thought and thought about that. Was she ever asked WHEN the metal scraping noise took place - right after the scream, an hour later, I know she's discounted what she heard now, but I thought long and hard about that metal noise. I thought it could be JR getting rid of the tape, the glove, the cloth used to wipe down JB, the panties, the chord, but those items are all soft items. Even throwing them in a dumpster would not have made a metal sounding scrape noise. So it occurred to me it could have been the sound of a suitcase being moved over to the window. Which makes me wonder even more just when she heard that noise. Since the suitcase was placed as part of the staging. Also I think he stashed the items to be thrown out prior to the 911 call, to be gotten rid of later - probably when Linda Arnt was already in the house and he disappeared for an hour in the morning.
ReplyDeleteThe neighbor was way too far away to hear suitcase being moved. My theory is that JR was trying to lift the grate of a storm drain in order to dispose of some things. Its more likely that the neighbor could hear goings-on outside the house, not inside.
Deletesome of the items he could have cut up and flushed down the toliet
Deleteyes, that is more plausible, that it was an outside noise rather than an inside noise. Of course the neighbor recanted the scream as well, saying it could have been a dream she was having. It's always startling to me how ear witness recounts are discredited, like in the Oscar Pistorius case when so many neighbors heard something and all of that evidence was thrown out. I think we all can agree that had the house been sealed off from the get go, the inhabitants been relocated, if Linda Arnt would have had back up, if the case would have been investigated as homicide instead of a kidnapping early on (of course they would have had to have found the body early on, but they would have if the house had been sealed, etc.), and if John had been looked at as hard as they looked at Patsy, this all would have turned out differently.
DeleteExcuse me, I don't mean "evidence" referencing what the neighbor heard, but account. And nothing should have been discounted. I most especially like Doc G's theory that the note was penned by a lefty, trying to make the note look like the letters slanted in the right, except when he forgot to.
DeleteNot sure how you are coming up with that. John saying calm down, Lets call the police, we'll call the police suggests that it was JR's idea to call the police. I guess you could read whatever else you want into what we dont know. What we do know is it was JR idea. This is coming out of BR's mouth and I can tell you he is not telling the complete truth either so.
ReplyDeleteSeems to be a lot of talk lately about Burke committing this crime. Obviously, his interview with Dr. Phil has reignited this theory. In many eyes, he did not look good during this interview. People say he was lying. Let's stop right here. IF he was guilty and JR knew it and was part of a coverup, why would Burke agree to go before millions of people and give that interview?
ReplyDeleteLet's assume for the sake of argument that he DID do it; that he got upset with his sister that night and hit her over the head with that flashlight (or something else never discovered). And let's also assume both JR and PR decided to cover it up to protect their son. Personally, I don't think this would have happened. I believe they would have called for an ambulance immediately. But, continuing with this scenario, let's suppose the parents knew for a fact she was dead and calling for medical help would be futile. They then decide to cover it up and make it look like a kidnapping. OK . . . I can see them writing that long, wordy ransom note, but why would they feel the need to garrote her and sexually abuse her with the paintbrush? Wouldn't just hiding her body in the basement be enough, especially if they staged the window better so that police would agree an intruder entered there. If the garroting and paintbrush assault was part of staging, I find it really hard to believe the parents would do this violent over staging.
Does anyone REALLY think that these parents, or any parents for that matter, would be able to violate their dead daughter's body in such a way just to cover for Burke? REALLY? Common sense tells me that they would NOT be able to do those things even if they felt the need to protect Burke.
The same goes for Patsy covering for an accidental death that she caused. It is improbable that she would go to such horrific lengths -- abusing her dead daughter's body -- to stage an intruder.
The only one who could have done those things as part of staging is John. If he had already hit JonBenet over the head to keep her quiet about what he'd been doing to her, I think it would be easy for him to then garrote her and abuse her further with the paintbrush. In other words, if he had already been abusing her, going that extra length to cover his crime would be fairly simple. And his motivation to save himself from jail would only add to his ability to do those things.
Yes, see Anonymous, you have thought it out correctly. Although I don't think the sexual assault was done with the paintbrush, Doc G already went over that. But it's really simple, it got convoluted as JR attempted, successfully so, to derail the investigation. Patsy couldn't have done it because of the 911 call. Burke couldn't have done it because of the sexual attack, and, prior trauma perhaps over the last year or two, that showed up at autopsy.
DeleteI have heard it said that Larry Schiller in his book "Perfect Murder Perfect Town" inferred JR was the murderer. If so, he's the only one! To do so in print anyway. The made-for-tv movie based on his book makes JR look guilty as well. I may have to read that book again.
DeleteCyril Wecht, in his book, certainly implied that John was the guilty party, though in his view it was an accident.
DeleteSteve Thomas thought it was PR and that it was an accident.
DeleteHi Doc. I watched the new series and I have a question regarding the jonbenet body and the strangulation. In one of the shows that aired recently they mentioned that because of the scratch marks on jonebent neck, they believe she couldn't have been hit first or unconscious. She couldn't have made the scratch marks if she was unconscious. What's your take on that?
ReplyDeleteThanks
To repeat myself: there were no scratch marks on her neck. The ME described them as petechial hemorrhages. There were no skin cells found under her nails. She was almost certainly unconscious when she was strangled.
DeleteMy feelings exactly ^^^^ Nothing I have seen in all of these recent shows has changed my mind. John did it. Alone. Premeditated. Obvious motive.
ReplyDeleteOnly thing I wonder is if Patsy realized sometime before her death and covered for John or remained in her own little world of IDI.
Wouldn't a grown man know that hitting a child JBR's size on the head would kill her? Why would he need to "silence" her in that way? He is a big, strong man. He could have done anything else to keep her quiet. And if she HAD been abused throughout the past year as you claim, what changed for him to feel the need to silence her that night? Why risk killing his own daughter?
ReplyDeleteI thought I remember reading years ago that JBR was suffocated first with the garrote and then hit on the head to finish the job or for the staging. Is that accurate or was it the other way around?
The garrote was tied so tight it burrowed into her skin. If it was John, was the intention to kill JBR that night?
As disgusting as it might sound, and I apologize for that, I think there may have been an erotic component to this strangulation. He could have been totally out of control at the time.
DeleteOn the other hand, it could have been staging. We'll probably never know.
Intention? To keep her from telling others what he had been doing with her. To silence her. That head wound and the subsequent cracking of her skull was no accident. It was a very forceful, intentional, blow. The head blow came first, heart was still pumping blood - she was alive for they estimate 45 min. to 2 hours before the strangulation but he could have STARTED the strangulation first perhaps as Doc G suggested as an erotic component. Yes, we will never know. I would like to focus on what he has said in subsequent interviews as evidence of his guilt. Because I have been round and round so many times trying to envision what could happened that night, the sequence of events, the staging, how long it must have taken to compose the note and whether it was written in advance or not, whether anyone woke else woke up or heard anything, etc. Answer: I don't know. But watching JR during the depositions, his PR campaign and interviews right on up to what he said on Dr. Phil, is interesting to me. And in the light of considering him as being the "mastermind" I like to see just how that mind might be working.
DeleteWhy resort to killing her though? That is my point. Many molesters put the fear into the victim in other ways and don't resort to killing. Killing the molestation victim is very drastic. It doesn't seem like John was prepared for an actual death given that his staging was kind of shoddy, yet he HAD to know that such force on the head of JBR would kill her or cause significant damage. If the other reports are to believed, this wasn't the first time he potentially molested JBR so it wasn't like this was a first time failed attempt. Whatever he did in the past was successful. If his molestation that night did get out of hand and he did accidentally kill her, you have to remember all the other evidence like the RN, John's own behavior, and any lies he told to cover the murder of his own child WOULD be picked up by other family members and friends, including his wife. I don't buy that she would not pick up on his handwriting and wording and references in the RN and his odd behavior and evasiveness. This was her little daughter. He little pagent princess. She had Burke, she had her own family; she could have gone off on her own and didn't need to stay day in and day out with a man she was suspicious of molesting and murdering their six year old child. Patsy was smart and strong-willed. I know John is convincing, but the RN would be too obvious. The forensic pathologist determination that there was prior sexual abuse. Would she stay and defend that kind of person?
DeleteNo one would defend that kind of person, let alone stay married and sleep next to them for 10 more years as they would have to be worried about their own welfare and life for sure. As far as all the signs PR had including, the RN, JR trying to take off on a plane 20 mins after the body was found and all the inside info that only someone who spent everyday with another person would know, this would be easily picked up on even by Helen Keller. There is no way PR did not know. Which leads us to why she would cover up and be caught lying to LE repititively...or as Doc would claim she just forgot repitively, if you believe that .
DeleteThe Case Of: JonBenét Ramsey premieres Sept. 18 at 8:30 p.m. on CBS, and concludes Sept. 19 at 9 p.m.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.yahoo.com/tv/jonbenet-ramsey-case-of-murder-suspect-named-003047334.html
"You are going to name who you think committed this crime?
Yes."
"We feel very firm in rendering an opinion within the last 15 minutes of the show."
"In this particular case, what I wound up saying was that [the note] has a maternalistic sound to it. If you want to make that into female, you can certainly do that."
Very interesting....
CC2
If JR was capable of molesting his daughter then he was capable of anything. He thought about the shame and prison sentence and just did what his CEO mind told him to do. If Jbr pediatrician said there was no evidence of prior abuse means one of two things. ..he was covering his a** or he simply never checked her that closely for evidence. That would take a very extensive exam of JBR. John after he realized she was dead just molested her with something to probably try to cover for her prior bruising and swelling He also thought that no one would think a parent could be so cruel but look at the man. He was at this point desperate to save himself.
ReplyDeleteKathy agreed - he might be capable of anything. But Im not sure how useful that statement is. The same could be said for any perp or family member or intruder.
DeleteAs Ive said before - JR had no known history of paraphilia. In my opinion, he and other sexual molesters dont begin that activity in the 5th decade of their lives. That behavior would have been evident much earlier in his life. No porn was found in the home by LE.
The tape, cord, and other evidence brought into the house to render the crime would also lead one to believe IDI.
There were supposedly 38 known sex offenders in the area at the time of the crime.
The Ramsey's admitted they could not determine exactly who may have been given a key since so many workers and various bldg contractors worked on the home over the years.
When we read about similar cases of young girls being "kidnapped" we dont read of fathers as the perps, instead we read of Richard Allen Davis, and Brian David Mitchell types.
All this being, said, I dont know who did it, but obviously, IDI makes far more sense to me.
Cant wait to hear the CBS "verdict" from "seven experts" tomorrow night. It sounds like they are going to predict PDI. Huh.
One of those experts will be Kolar, who in his book suggested BR so oops, down that road again. They will be consulting with Dr. Henry Lee who I have no respect for ever since he testified "something wrong here" in the O.J. case, and Dr. Spitz (sp) who testified I thought, wrongly, in the Casey Anthony trial on the skull without ever examining it. I don't have alot of hope for the CBS special, but of course I will watch it.
Delete@ANONYMOUS. ..With all due respect the IDI theory is not likely AT ALL. I would believe that the Easter bunny did it before I believed an intruder did it. Ok if I was a sex crazy pervert he/she would have use some logic and common sense.It's Christmas night...family is in large house...surely they have an alarm system.He is also thinking there might be additional family in for the holidays.The house is huge...can he find his way around in the dark with out waking the family.Is he going to sit down and compose "the War and Peace" of ransom notes. Is he going to risk it to get his thrill on. I think not. The killer lived in the house.IMO...:-)
ReplyDeleteWe dissent - thats your right and I respect it.
DeleteFYI - the family had an alarm on the residence - but the alarm wasn't armed. Crazies do enter houses, read all about Brian David Mitchell. BTK routinely entered residences, and waited in the wings, sometimes for hours. Yes, they found their way around. These crazies risked everything for their thrill, I don't think it can be denied.
Also, if there was an intruder, wasn't Burke downstairs? Why didn't they take him?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIts Showtime people !
ReplyDeleteoh good grief, this show is overly dramatic. Even if Patsy did say "what did you do," we don't know who she's addressing, Burke or John.
ReplyDeleteThat is a real stretch and surely not what I took out of it, especially not with PR reaction or lack of reaction to someone hanging up on her, especially with police on the way already. Nor would it make any sense for JR to do that with LE already en route to the house.
DeleteIt is a great piece of evidence. What it does prove is, at the least that PR knew the whole time that it was 1 of the 2 of them so now we have to figure out why she would lie. Now that we know for a fact that she knew, I find it impossible(even though Doc will disagree) that PR or anyone would stay married to and sleep next to someone who brutally raped and killed her daughter, obviously. That leaves us with only 1 person .....
ReplyDeleteThe 911 operator said Patsy hung up prematurely, while she was still speaking to Patsy. IF JR pressed down the receiver, Patsy could have been saying "what did you do?" to him. Asking "what did you find" seems like an innocent question by Burke to me.
DeleteIt's amazing how so many people overlook John because he was such a "good Christian man." Meanwhile, the most heinous things are done by religious folks. And another thing to consider is that John and Patsy's sex life deteriorated with her cancer diagnosis. You don't think he noticed his sexualized daughter? In America, people blame rape victims rather than the perpetrator.
ReplyDeleteI agree RSmith. I just have to wonder with all of those visits to a doctor was it 27 times Patsy took JB to the doctor in one year? she must have had a reason to suspect all was not right in her home.
DeleteGet your facts straight. JBR had 32 visits to her pediatrician in 3 years. 29 of those were not vaginal realated and were for things like ear infections etc.
Deleteokay, chill dude
DeleteI raised two children and even so 32 visits in 3 years is an incredible amount of visits. ANd I didn't say they were vaginal related. We have no idea why she took her to see the Pediatrician.
DeleteYes we do, her pediatrician (Dr. Beuf) reported to law enforcement what the visits were for.
DeleteActually, all of JBR's medical records became availaable per Grand Jury subpeona.
Deletewhat were the visits for, all 32 of them?
DeleteGeez... I do not think my 13 year old has even been to the doctor 32 times in her whole life! That seems like a LOT to me in 3 years. Guess I got lucky - she never gets sick...
DeleteWhy did no one find out where JR was for the hour and a half he was missing?
ReplyDeleteLinda Arnt was overwhelmed in that house. She called for backup four times and was told they were all in a meeting and couldn't come to the house. She had two couples there, the pastor, JR, PR and BR. The house should have been sealed off, inhabitants removed, or if they were expecting a call from the "kidnapper" the phones then only one person, JR, should have been allowed to stay in the house, and been closely monitored. The case was bungled from the get go.
DeleteThey asked him where he was and he said he was upstairs watching a strange van parked by the alley with binoculars to see if the house was being watched.
DeleteThis show is very interesting. Not like the others.
ReplyDeleteCompletely agree with above commenter. This show is what I kind of expected of the other shows. I feel like this show is getting somewhere.
ReplyDeleteI cant tell which route they are heading but it appears to me that it is either JR or BR.
ReplyDeleteNew facts (new to me):
ReplyDelete1. JR walked BR to his bedroom using a flashlight to see where they were going. Flashlight found on kitchen counter, wiped clean of fingerprints. Batteries also clean of fingerprints.
2. John called his banker after reading the ransom note and had him deliver $118 to a friend's house by 7:30 AM. He stated this on a video on one of the programs.
3. On Dr. Phil, BR admitted that he snuck downstairs to play with a toy after everyone was sleep on Christmas night.
These facts may not change anyone's mind, but they are new to me and seem very important for consideration.
the 911 operator said she heard Patsy say "Ok, we called 911, now what?" after Patsy thought she hung up. NOT EVEN CLOSE to what the enhanced tape picked up. I mean, why did she lie?
ReplyDeleteAgree -- not sure what the 911 operator really knew that could be helpful beyond what was already recorded. That said, the enhanced tape, to me, is only helpful in the sense that it seems to indicate that Burke was awake and in the room. I can only conclude that a) Patsy was clearly upset b) she may have said "what did you do" to either John or Burke. If that question was directed at John, she may have been addressing an action by him to cut off the phone call, c) someone might have said "we're not talking to you - possibly in response to Burke overhearing the call and asking questions about what he heard Patsy say to the operator, d) Someone possibly said "what did you find" - again possibly in response to hearing Patsy talking to the operator, stating that she found a note. We can only only speculate on the meaning behind what we think we may have heard. Overall, the phone call events aren't helping me that much, other than Burke heard more than he's telling.
DeleteI recall though that the 911 operator noticed a distinct difference in demeanor, after the emotional 911 call was made, then the tone of the voices or voice she heard when P had thought she had hung up. That to me is interesting. The 911 operator has been consistent in the retelling of this story of what she heard. That the voice went from frantic, to calm.
DeleteThose enhancements that some think are "Help me Jesus, Help me Jesus" don't sound calm to me. Even if the words were something else, the person does not sound calm. For this reason, I have to wonder what the operator really could make out.
DeleteI think it's interesting that Burke said he snuck downstairs to play that night. And then the bit about his dad taking him back to bed with flashlight. First off why did he even have a flashlight at the moment? Just seems odd that only now they bring up they did use one that nigh . Was that burkes statement and John later had to agree? Just makes me wonder. and in the tapes of him being Interviewed by the psychologist and his fetal position in another interview tells me he definitely SAW something but of course can't say. his body language conveys that IMO. I don't think there is any doubt in my mind, if he snuck down and for all John could know never knew he was there. Saw something, took him back to bed via flashlight as to not wake more people, and threatened him not to even leave his room. That makes a lot of sense about him not even leaving his bed upon hearing his mom crying and freaking out, and staying until cops came.
ReplyDeleteand possibly given a bendryl at that time
DeleteAgreed. Honestly I think only reason the dr Phil episode even aired is because his father's lawyer saw a publicity move as a benefit to John. Remember, Dr Phil and John have the same lawyer. And so Burke probably got forced into it. John knew the other stuff airing would possibly make people wonder about him and so he took opportunity to try and beat the press so to speak.
DeleteI think what Burke said about the flashlight could be a significant clue. I never before heard of anything that linked John with that flashlight on the night of the crime, and as we know the flashlight was probably used for the head blow.
DeleteExactly. I almost even wonder if that statement was deliberately made...he made the statement sort of rushed...then looked sort of to the side. it did cross my mind maybe Burke got forced to do this but maybe this was a subtle way to try and say something that may have otherwise seemed innocuous. After all, John agreed with that after the fact. Not before and it certainly was NEVER mentioned before as he EASILY could have explained that away if it wasn't for the wiped down flashlight.
DeleteI wonder if Burke would risk perjury at John's trial or finally reveal what he knows that he's hidden for 20 years.
ReplyDeleteI hope the two Boulder detectives assigned to the case were watching but it's hard to be optimistic that they'd piece things together.
ReplyDeleteFinished watching Part 2 of the Case of JonBenet Ramsey with these FBI guys and other experts. In the end, they suggest it was an accidental killing by Burke, and the parents both covered up for him. They did consider Patsy alone, but dismissed that idea. NEVER considered John by himself as the murderer.
ReplyDeleteOf course not. He's teflon. And they ignored the signs of prior sexual abuse. Even if all don't agree on the prior abuse, it should be fully vetted if they expect anyone to believe they did a thorough investigation.
DeleteLooks to me like John spelled "occasions" with two S's (occassions) in the sample of his own handwriting.
ReplyDeletePlease send a link to the handwriting same to which you refer.
ReplyDeleteSolving the JonBenet Ramsey Case Some Handwriting Evidence
ReplyDeleteThis is a link on Dr G - you can "search" for Some Handwriting evidence". Do you see what I see on the word "occasions"
Yes. Good catch! It does seem like John has problems with double-s's.
DeleteThanks! He probably spells business with two S's as well: bussiness. Guilty as sin.
Deletehttp://www.lulu.com/shop/pamela-lillian-valemont/jon-ben%C3%A9t-ramseythe-home-team/ebook/product-22890361.html
ReplyDeletehttp://www.lulu.com/shop/pamela-lillian-valemont/jonben%C3%A9t-ramseythe-home-team/paperback/product-22890289.html
Your book looks interesting, but the paperback is awfully pricey. And I'm not sure if I can read the e-book version on my Kindle. It would help if you could provide a summary, so we could get a sense of how much in your book is new or if it's simply a rehash.
Delete