"His ability to deny the most overwhelming evidence against his guilt is evident in what follows:"

"It is the totality of the facts on the fact sheet which gives doubt....not just one thing. That's why it was done that way. That's why it is not me saying it but eight years of investigation proving all the points listed. Under our system of Justice a men is not guilty if the facts don't match the state theory of the crime or truth. That's why the doubt is listed not with the major things but all the things which point to showing that this was a poor investigation of the facts in this case."

"...They are giving you fantasy and not fact..."
That could have lead to believing my guilt and that was false."

JOHN WAYNE GACY
From his letter to Jason Moss
The Last Victim Jason Moss with Dr. Jeffrey Kottler.

Glen Stine John Ramsey Susan Stine Patsy Ramsey

TWENTY MINUTES EARLIER

This is what the "doomed" parents of JonBenet Ramsey tell us in their book Death of Innocence.
From the beginning it's been a game of cat and mouse.
A very deadly game, but a game none the less.

From the book,
"THE DEATH OF INNOCENCE"

"One of the tabloids came out with a picture of the Stines and John and me standing on the upper deck of the house with wine glasses in hand, enjoying the view. The caption under the photo said in effect, that we were celebrating our escape from the police. We broke into laughter as we heard about the story, because we realized that the photographer who took the rather docile picture of us relaxing with wine glasses had missed the jackpot photo of the century, had he arrived twenty minutes earlier."

"Susan Stine and John had been out on the deck, joking about setting up a machine-gun turret to pick off the paparazzi if the crawled through our bushes. It was always good to laugh at our problems when we could. Stored in the house was a collector's 12 gage shotgun that my dad had given John; we had never fired it. Jokingly, John brought the gun out on the deck and was standing there, playfully aiming it toward the water. Susan had said she needed a gun, so John gave her one!"

"However, he quickly put the gun away, realizing that photographers might be lurking somewhere within camera range. If the tabloids had gotten a picture of John with that shotgun, to telling what kind of headline and accompanying story they would have run. Whoever was sneaking around out there with his zoom lens was just twenty minutes too late!"

QUOTES FROM SOME OF THE PLAYERS

The "brilliant" Jamson speaks:

"The fact is, people who helped me discredit Foster saw the emails -
and they know that I did NOT "trick" Foster. My credibility is intact."

Who helped you discredit Foster, Susan? Are they in the photograph shown above?

This is from TOOTSIE

Re: both of Justamom's posts

Bravo!! It is truly AMAZING how you seem to post exactly what we are thinking & wanting to say!

Sorry, off the thread line - the most recent White's thread is excellent - really getting to the "MEAT" of what FW & his "409-ing wife) did, said, & why. None of his/her actions make logical sense to us.

Thanks for letting us pop in briefly to extend our applause to how very brilliant you all are!!

Hugs to all, (even NYL) afterall, news on the street is NYL will eventually help to finance JBR's Foundation & Lin Wood's next house, car, boat, trip, etc. (oh, that' right - correction, they're currently being funded by the Star). NYL, don't despair, they'll all put your money to good use, too!

Jams, we DO appreciate NYL posting early snipits of Thomas's book, especially because we have no desire to buy it!
Tootsie(s)

29 . "response"

Posted by jams on Apr-08-00 at 08:21 AM (EST)
Page 317 in the Thomas book:

"There was a new sex angle going on, of which we had been unaware, and it involved Susan Bennett, the Internet junkie known as Jameson.
Internet junkie? sounds like a libel case to me, DARNAY!!!!!!!! LOL

It was she who had sent the DA's office the early Internet communication that had turned out to be so damning for linguist Don Foster.

Not damning enough if Thomas is still singing his praises.

"Now we learned that Jameson was posting confidential information on the Web, and it looked to us as if she had an inside source."

The most "confidential" information I shared
(that her name wasn't in the ransom note,
that the note clearly was written before the abduction,
that her body was written on,
that I saw marks (I thought they might have been teeth marks, now I believe they were the two stun gun marks),
that I felt a large object in the killer's hand (Like a huge old boxcutter we own (now I believe this was the stun gun) - -
those bits of information were shared VERY early inthe investigation - before I had any contact with ANYONE.
I don't know what Thomas is referring to - would love to see his timetable on this.

"In the following days and weeks, Lou Smit admitted that he talked to Jameson "a lot" because "she has good information."

I would have to let Lou Smit respond to this. I was asked to contact him as a suspect in June of 1997... obviously I learned to respect and trust him and I admit passing him information later.
He did NOT reciproccate - and I would swear to that under oath.

I question anything Susan Bennett says, "under oath" means nothing to her.
She has her own definition of the "the truth." She has told me that "She lies well."
Not well enought for me Susan!

" Smit said Jameson claimed to have secret information about the Whites, their Christmas party, and what the children did. "

An absolute lie. THIS is the kind of thing that makes Thomas' book fiction.

Susan is Smit telling an "absolute lie" or were you telling Smit an "absolute lie?"

"S he passed Smit a tip about another Internet junkie who had found a Web site for child pornography and thought one of the children shown in an explicit sexual pose looked like the daughter of Ramsey housekeeper Linda-Hoffmann-Pugh.
The DA's office began an investigation."

This is true. Not complete, but true. I did pass such a tip to the authorities and the CBI investigation lasted 8 weeks.
(That should tell you how close a match the images were.)

I would note that the investigation was not shared on the forums, it was done quietly as it should have been.
It should NEVER have become public,
(it really still isn't - the whole story is not known to anyone but me, actually)
and, indeed, the fact that it DID get posted about later - MUCH later - well, that was not MY doing.

Oh not true susan. I have personal information that you offered to send the pornographic
photo through the U.S. Mail to a person known to me. The person rejected your offer. You're right, it should have
never become public, but that was your doing.

28 . "Jams"

Posted by Serendipity38 on Apr-08-00 at 08:11 AM (EST)
I also think that Alex Hunter believes the Ramseys to be innocent, and that he is now leaning toward the intruder theory. He seems to be making a gradual turn-around.
Regarding the Thomas book - I would like to read it - but hate to help the sales by purchasing it! Am reading DOI - so far very good.

30 . "I believe that Hunter..."

Posted by Seal on Apr-08-00 at 08:58 AM (EST)
is trying very hard to give a fair evaluation to this case. He has seen and heard both sides of the coin...but, I agree that I think he thinks there is a strong possibility of the Ramseys innocents.
There is no doubt in my mind that Hunter believes in the presumption of innocence until proven guilty...and I don't think you can give any DA a higher praise then to say this is how they believe.

As far as Thomas's book...I feel obligated to read this book because one needs to keep abreast of all opinions (pro and con) in order to make a fair evaluation as to how this investigation is going.
However, if the excerpts that NYL has posted are any indication of what this book is about...then, it leads me to believe that Thomas is a bitter little man that has a grudge against the DA's office.
It also reflects his willingness to borrow half truths and out and out lies...I don't like the Tabloid approach he may have taken to this serious crime. I detest tabloid journalism, and feel like the skanks that resort to this type of sensationalism are in it for the buck...they know what sells. JMO...Seal

31 . "I do think..."

Posted by Foster on Apr-08-00 at 10:43 AM (EST)
that Jams probably has a case for Libel if these things are lies printed as facts, and I would pursue that if I were her and could afford to do that.

But this deal about the bed soiling is really quite silly. Jams, I assure you normal healthy children can indeed pass a bowel movement at night and be unaware of it, because my daughters have done this.
Were the movements the size of grapefruits? Of course not. Could they look that big if the angle was correct? Probably not but possible I guess. At any rate what would it all have to do with JonBenet's murder?
I'm really at a loss to figure out the connection here. No semi-sane person would get angry, of all things, at a child who had an accident during the night. That's ridiculous.
Even the most tempermental of parents would be more likely to get angered if this happened during the day when the child had the oppurtunity to go to the toilet since they would be aware of having to go.
It is just a really silly far fetched idea to try to come up with a motive, since they simply can't admit there is no motive.

33 . "Jameson"

Posted by CaptDave on Apr-08-00 at 11:58 AM (EST)
To be wrong is not to inflict libel. There has to be damage

32 . "good for Jameson!"

Posted by LovelyPigeon on Apr-08-00 at 11:29 AM (EST)
Foster made a huge mistake nailing jameson as John Andrew Ramsey! AND of writing to Patsy Ramsey to assure her he would risk his credentials proclaiming her innocence.
AND in switching from JAR/Jameson *did it* to Patsy did it...all based on his *special* analysis of the ransom note and what Jameson had written.

Jameson didn't ask for Foster to try and identify her, or for Foster to stick his nose in the case. But what Jameson sure as heck DID do, is document every step of the way Foster stumbled along until he publicly fell SMACK on his face!

Jameson did GOOD! congratulations, Jameson, once again.
Where oh where are the Hoffman tidbits from the Thomas book?

34 . "Hoffman "Tidbits"

Posted by NewYorkLawyer on Apr-08-00 at 12:00 PM (EST)

Page 281:

Donald Foster: "In my opinion, it is not possible that any individual except Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note...Those are her words."

Page 299:

Mark Beckner: "I think she [Patsy Ramsey] did it. We should just charge them both with felony murder and aiding and abetting."

Page 297:

"We had interviewed 590 people,

consulted 64 outside experts,

investigated and cleared more than 100 possible suspects,

collected 1,058 pieces of evidence,
tested over 500 items at federal, state, and private laboratories,

gathered handwriting and nontestimonial evidence from 215 people,

built a case file that now bulged to 30,000 pages,

reviewed more than 3,400 letters and 700 telephone tips, and contacted seventeen states and two foreign countries.

AND IT ALL KEPT LEADING US IN ONE DIRECTION.

The detective team believed that John and Patsy Ramsey had knowledge of, and were involved in, the death of their daughter, JonBenet."

Page 327:

"We pointed out that [John] Ramsey's claim that he had supported Patsy throughout her cancer ordeal seemed at odds with his actions. While she flew to Maryland for treatment a dozen times, he had only been with her for two or three trips, and sometimes Patsy even went alone."

Page 322:

On why the Ramseys "yearned" for Atlanta: "John Ramsey replied that Patsy liked the South, enjoyed shopping and the country club life in the city,
and could not find lipstick in Boulder."

Page 312:

"What's going on in that DA's office is a disgrace," one of the FBI agents observed during out last supper. "This case has become an embarrassment to law enforcement."

Now go out and buy the book!!!

Now Susan I'm going to stick my neck out here and refer to you as a liar.
The investigation was shared on the Internet. I don't know how many thousands of people saw it, but I do know I did.
Now you say it was not your doing.
Are you saying that you didn't offer to send a pornographic photograph of a person who is not now a suspect in the investigation of the JonBenet Ramsey murder?
Are you saying that you did not post on the Internet the names of the persons you believed were in the photograph and what you thought the photograph depicted?
Of course the whole story is not known by anyone but you. Only you know the truth about how you came into possession of the pornographic photo. How many pictures did you look through until you found one that interested you?
You freely admit to "Ramsey research" revealing child pornography showing young children being raped.
I believe that was your doing.

Susan I recall one of your "life experience stories" explaining how a pubic hair could be left at the scene of a crime by someone fully clothed.
You mentioned that there are occasions when you choose not to wear panties and anywhere you sit could be a considered a location for hair evidence. I believe I have not been fair with you. I should have told you in the beginning that you
"would be surprised to find out who I really am."

I hope you are wearing panties today, because I suspect you may have to remove a grapefruit.