Discussion:
Rest in peace, JonBenet.
(too old to reply)
CoachPotato
2006-08-16 23:03:26 UTC
Permalink
It's a shame that momma didn't live to see this day:


http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_ramsey_18
Tex Houston
2006-08-16 23:26:35 UTC
Permalink
The least you could have done was label this OT.

Tex
CoachPotato
2006-08-16 23:30:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tex Houston
The least you could have done was label this OT.
Tex
Sorry, Tex, didn't mean to confuse you with the well known JonBenet
motorhome.
Al Balmer
2006-08-17 00:46:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
Post by Tex Houston
The least you could have done was label this OT.
Tex
Sorry, Tex, didn't mean to confuse you with the well known JonBenet
motorhome.
You miss the point. Many people automatically filter OT posts. It
doesn't cost anything to let them do it, unless you like being
obnoxious.
--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
CoachPotato
2006-08-17 01:03:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Al Balmer
You miss the point. Many people automatically filter OT posts. It
doesn't cost anything to let them do it, unless you like being
obnoxious.
I have been reprimanded and I thank you for putting a stop to my crime
wave!

Maybe you should check out the local senior aid group that helps the
local police? You love playing cop and you might actually have fun
doing something constructive.

Dale
Bob Hatch
2006-08-17 02:06:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
Post by Al Balmer
You miss the point. Many people automatically filter OT posts. It
doesn't cost anything to let them do it, unless you like being
obnoxious.
I have been reprimanded and I thank you for putting a stop to my crime
wave!
Maybe you should check out the local senior aid group that helps the
local police? You love playing cop and you might actually have fun
doing something constructive.
Dale
It's a matter of manners, Dale. You either have them, or you don't. It's
considered proper usenet manners to put OT at the start of Off Topic posts.
--
"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog
will give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right!
I never would've thought of that!'"
--Dave Barry
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com
Lon VanOstran
2006-08-17 02:13:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
Post by Al Balmer
You miss the point. Many people automatically filter OT posts. It
doesn't cost anything to let them do it, unless you like being
obnoxious.
I have been reprimanded and I thank you for putting a stop to my crime
wave!
Maybe you should check out the local senior aid group that helps the
local police? You love playing cop and you might actually have fun
doing something constructive.
Dale
There's an easy fix for what ails you.
<PLONK>

Lon
Steve B
2006-08-16 23:32:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Tex Houston
The least you could have done was label this OT.
Tex
Yeah. There are people here who would read that and think it was RV
related. Probably some new French line of motorhomes, eh?

For the rest of us ..........................
Rick Onanian
2006-08-16 23:27:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_ramsey_18
Not that I give half a flying fsck about this old tabloid story,
but...from your link:

: District Attorney Mary Lacey said the arrest followed several months
of work.

Several months? What have they been doing the other 10 years? Heh...
Bryan
2006-08-17 04:05:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick Onanian
Post by CoachPotato
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_ramsey_18
Not that I give half a flying fsck about this old tabloid story,
: District Attorney Mary Lacey said the arrest followed several months
of work.
Several months? What have they been doing the other 10 years? Heh...
Hmm, several months of work on a new lead, maybe?
J***@aol.com
2006-08-17 04:58:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rick Onanian
Post by CoachPotato
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_ramsey_18
Not that I give half a flying fsck about this old tabloid story,
: District Attorney Mary Lacey said the arrest followed several months
of work.
Several months? What have they been doing the other 10 years? Heh...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I think you are right about the 10 years Rick. But wrong about the
current
set of DAs and Investigators.

The old original DA is toast. Did not win re-election, so is down the
road
due to the lousy job done.

This new DA went to work on this case and worked for some months
without ANY leaks about her investigation. Kept a lid on it until they
were sure they had wh they think is the right bad guy.

THAT sounds like some real GOOD work as opposed to the mess
of the original team. I'm sure we will hear more as this unfolds, but
that is what I heard tonight.

Keeping the lid on it like that is something I have GREAT RESPECT
for. All too often, authorities get all wound up in media hype/tripe
on cases like this. The fiasco at Duke comes to mind. What a can of
stench worms that mess is. As a public citizen, I do not need or want
to know every detail of an investigation. I want them to catch the bad
guy and then they can tell me. Leaking all types of crud is all too
often
about politics, power grabs and media spin bullshit slapping us in the
face
every night on the Boob Tube. <phtooie...phhhtooie>

Jan....who grabs the remote when he sees Greta Van Susteren's scowling
mutt!
"The media gene pool could use a little chlorine."
Steve B
2006-08-17 06:50:14 UTC
Permalink
<***@aol.com> wrote

All too often, authorities get all wound up in media hype/tripe
Post by J***@aol.com
on cases like this. The fiasco at Duke comes to mind. What a can of
stench worms that mess is. As a public citizen, I do not need or want
to know every detail of an investigation. I want them to catch the bad
guy and then they can tell me. Leaking all types of crud is all too
often
about politics, power grabs and media spin bullshit slapping us in the
face
every night on the Boob Tube. <phtooie...phhhtooie>
Jan
Bob Schieffer on the night they got Al Zarqawi ..............

"And what can you tell us about the identity and location of the informant?"

ABSOLUTELY THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD A "NEWSMAN" SAY. But what
can you expect for someone who replaced Mike Wallace?

Steve
Hunter
2006-08-17 12:20:56 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:50:14 -0700, "Steve B"
Post by Steve B
ABSOLUTELY THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD A "NEWSMAN" SAY.
The stupidest thing I've heard a newsman say was on the morning of
9/11/01.

"A second plane has hit the World Trade Center, there must be
something wrong with the radar in New York City."

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/summer2006.htm

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy shit...what a ride!"
Al Balmer
2006-08-17 16:06:49 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:50:14 -0700, "Steve B"
Post by J***@aol.com
All too often, authorities get all wound up in media hype/tripe
Post by J***@aol.com
on cases like this. The fiasco at Duke comes to mind. What a can of
stench worms that mess is. As a public citizen, I do not need or want
to know every detail of an investigation. I want them to catch the bad
guy and then they can tell me. Leaking all types of crud is all too
often
about politics, power grabs and media spin bullshit slapping us in the
face
every night on the Boob Tube. <phtooie...phhhtooie>
Jan
Bob Schieffer on the night they got Al Zarqawi ..............
"And what can you tell us about the identity and location of the informant?"
And I though Harry Reasoner was the king of dumb questions.
Post by J***@aol.com
ABSOLUTELY THE STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD A "NEWSMAN" SAY. But what
can you expect for someone who replaced Mike Wallace?
Steve
--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
Steve B
2006-08-16 23:31:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_ramsey_18
Yes, it is. I saw her in her last interview. All along I thought she knew
more than she was saying, but in the face of a dying woman, I saw no deceit.
That was the first time I didn't suspect her and her husband; what they did
to their child was atrocious, but that they had nothing to do with her
murder.

Now, if someone would just step forward and put Jimmy Hoffa to bed.

Steve, a retired Teamster
GBinNC
2006-08-17 00:16:16 UTC
Permalink
what they did to their child was atrocious,
Agree.
but that they had nothing to do with her murder.
Disagree.

What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder.

Regardless, I hope they fry the perp -- if he's the one -- to a crisp.

(Uh-oh. I said something conservative. Now I'm gonna get labeled <g>.)

GB in NC
CoachPotato
2006-08-17 00:33:17 UTC
Permalink
GBinNC wrote:>
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too. But
to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the little
girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality. Kiddie porn is one
thing, a little miss contest is quite another. Sick? Not hardly, not
even strange. It's not even uncommon.

Dale
GBinNC
2006-08-17 00:48:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too. But
to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the little
girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality.
When the family activity involves taking a small girl and dressing her
in outfits and using heavy makeup on her that would normally be expected
of a MUCH older person -- and teaching her to parade coquettishly across
a stage in front of an audience of mostly adults, and for their benefit
-- then yes, I question their mental health. That is NOT the way to
raise an emotionally healthy child.
Post by CoachPotato
Kiddie porn is one
thing, a little miss contest is quite another. Sick? Not hardly, not
even strange. It's not even uncommon.
I never mentioned kiddie porn. But what they did to her went way beyond
a "little miss" contest. These people were serious.

Do you honestly believe that a 3- or 4-year-old child has the capability
to evaluate whether this sort of activity might be mentally unhealthy?
If she doesn't, then the only people who can be responsible are the
parents -- usually a mother who is attempting to live vicariously
through her innocent child.

I am not saying that her parents are responsible for her death. But I
still say that if she hadn't been intentionally exposed *by her parents*
to all that publicity, she might still be alive today -- and probably a
much more emotionally healthy person than likely otherwise.

Have you ever known a young adult female who has spent virtually all her
life since kindergarten in one "beauty" contest after another? I have,
and it's not a pretty sight. A team of psychologists could have a field
day with her -- and her mother too.

GB in NC
CoachPotato
2006-08-17 00:58:01 UTC
Permalink
That attention probably led directly to her murder.
then continued...
...I am not saying that her parents are responsible for her death.
Well, gee... I am confused. Let me ask a personal question: Are you a
politician?

Dale
GBinNC
2006-08-17 01:02:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
That attention probably led directly to her murder.
then continued...
...I am not saying that her parents are responsible for her death.
Well, gee... I am confused. Let me ask a personal question: Are you a
politician?
Sorry, but I don't see the reason for the confusion. And I don't intend
to get into an argument about it. Believe what you want.

GB in NC
bill horne
2006-08-17 08:43:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by GBinNC
When the family activity involves taking a small girl and dressing her
in outfits and using heavy makeup on her that would normally be expected
of a MUCH older person -- and teaching her to parade coquettishly across
a stage in front of an audience of mostly adults, and for their benefit
-- then yes, I question their mental health. That is NOT the way to
raise an emotionally healthy child.
Have you ever known a young adult female who has spent virtually all her
life since kindergarten in one "beauty" contest after another? I have,
and it's not a pretty sight. A team of psychologists could have a field
day with her -- and her mother too.
Well, that explains it - her mother and her aunt were both Miss West
Virginias.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 13:32:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by bill horne
Post by GBinNC
Have you ever known a young adult female who has spent virtually all her
life since kindergarten in one "beauty" contest after another? I have,
and it's not a pretty sight. A team of psychologists could have a field
day with her -- and her mother too.
Well, that explains it - her mother and her aunt were both Miss West
Virginias.
And most of these beauty contestants have a brain that a goose wouldn't
want.
LZ
Nate
2006-08-17 15:48:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by GBinNC
I am not saying that her parents are responsible for her death. But I
still say that if she hadn't been intentionally exposed *by her parents*
to all that publicity, she might still be alive today -- and probably a
much more emotionally healthy person than likely otherwise.
GB in NC
Now this is a stretch. It could very well be that the first time this guy
laid eyes on Jon Benet she was parading in a beauty contest. I've not heard
that report, but it could be so. But still...to say that the parents should
have known this type of thing was posible and should not have participated
is a long stretch. Parents can't sheild their kids from every potential
danger in life. Unless the probability is so high that even a stupid person
would know the activity is likely to lead to this specific outcome, these
parents just can't know the future well enough to make those calls. You're
doing nothing more than Monday Night Quarterbacking. You made a connection
between two activities that you personally dislike. Only you made the
connection after the fact. After the media brainwashed you to blame the
parents. You're brilliant!

Now...tell us who's going to get killed in the future and tell us why. Then
I'll be impressed.

Nate
Hunter
2006-08-17 00:54:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too. But
to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the little
girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality.
No it isn't a stretch. That child was paraded around like she was a
sex symbol. Her hair, her *makeup* her clothes...

Her life and death were both so sad. One of the saddest things I ever
remember.

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/summer2006.htm

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy shit...what a ride!"
Steve B
2006-08-17 02:43:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter
Post by CoachPotato
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too. But
to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the little
girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality.
No it isn't a stretch. That child was paraded around like she was a
sex symbol. Her hair, her *makeup* her clothes...
Her life and death were both so sad. One of the saddest things I ever
remember.
Hunter
Much like any young girl today. What's the difference between a five year
old with makeup and a 7 year old or a 12 year old? They are made up to look
like something they are not. And they don't have a clue what's going on.
Something very strange going on here with adults standing behind them
controlling the marionette strings.

And then bewailing, "Oh, my! What has happened to my little child?" when
something goes haywire.

Maybe if you hadn't made her up to look like a five dollar hooker
.......................................
Al Balmer
2006-08-17 16:10:21 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 19:43:48 -0700, "Steve B"
Post by Steve B
Maybe if you hadn't made her up to look like a five dollar hooker
Actually, it's illegal to rape and murder five dollar hookers, too.
--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 01:11:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
GBinNC wrote:>
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too. But
to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the little
girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality. Kiddie porn is one
thing, a little miss contest is quite another. Sick? Not hardly, not
even strange. It's not even uncommon.
Dale
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why
flaunt something you treasure in a public place where it will attract
attention from those seeking what you are displaying?

Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
CoachPotato
2006-08-17 01:36:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lone Haranguer
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why
flaunt something you treasure in a public place where it will attract
attention from those seeking what you are displaying?
Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
Little girls are sexualized in many more ways than beauty contests
nowadays. I grew up in the 40s and 50s and I don't get today's
stupidity, either.

I'm not promoting kiddie beauty contests. But to draw a line from
taking part in one, as thousands of families do coast to coast, to
blaming that for her death is nonsense.

Did you guys let your boys play football? Me too. And that's a lot more
dangerous - likely with a lot more injuries and deaths - than a kiddie
beauty contest.

So I guess y'all ought not to let your kiddies enter one of those silly
contests. But I sure don't attach a stigma to them just 'cause I
wouldn't do it.

Dale
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 02:27:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
Post by Lone Haranguer
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why
flaunt something you treasure in a public place where it will attract
attention from those seeking what you are displaying?
Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
Little girls are sexualized in many more ways than beauty contests
nowadays. I grew up in the 40s and 50s and I don't get today's
stupidity, either.
I'm not promoting kiddie beauty contests. But to draw a line from
taking part in one, as thousands of families do coast to coast, to
blaming that for her death is nonsense.
Exposure is the key. You multiply the exposure, you multiply the risks.
Post by CoachPotato
Did you guys let your boys play football? Me too. And that's a lot more
dangerous - likely with a lot more injuries and deaths - than a kiddie
beauty contest.
They always had to wear protective gear. Little girls dressed up as sex
objects for perverts to view is like a golden shiner being trolled in
front of a hungry northern pike.
Post by CoachPotato
So I guess y'all ought not to let your kiddies enter one of those silly
contests. But I sure don't attach a stigma to them just 'cause I
wouldn't do it.
Dale
Some risks I take, others I don't. Maybe we were over protective with
our children but beauty contests and kiddy modeling were never considered.
LZ
Don Lampson
2006-08-17 02:28:13 UTC
Permalink
I would have bet a hundred bucks that JonBenet's dad was mixed up in
her murder. He even "looked" guilty to me! It just goes to show how
wrong a person can be..... Sorry I misjudged them both. (I also
thought mom was at least keeping her mouth shut about what she knew)
There's just something freaky about the "beauty contest mentality"...
However, there's been "stage mothers, & fathers", as long as there
has been stages for their kids to be "stars" on.....
Parents often have an "agenda" for their kids. They want them to be
all sorts of things which seem doubtful to the outside observer. The
most common is sports. I'd pity the poor kids, except that sometimes,
they want the dream just as much as the parents do!
I'm glad the real slimeball who killed the little girl has been
caught, and already confessed. Mr Ramsey has been proven innocent,
except maybe to "GB's ilk"?
In cases like these, it's a crying shame the perp can't get a dose of
"Islamic Justice" - ASAP!
The trial of the germ who did JonBenet will probably be the next
"media circus"....
I thought we'd hit bottom with O.J. Simpson, or "Bill & Monica"? I
guess I was wrong on that one too!
Don
GBinNC
2006-08-17 02:42:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lampson
There's just something freaky about the "beauty contest mentality"...
However, there's been "stage mothers, & fathers", as long as there
has been stages for their kids to be "stars" on.....
For the record -- although I've said more already on this topic than it
deserves -- I believe there's a world of difference between a teenager
who decides on her own to enter a beauty pageant and a preschooler who's
pushed into it by her mother.

Such a child wouldn't have a reason even to KNOW about such a thing on
her own -- let alone be able to actually participate in it.

GB in NC
Eisboch
2006-08-17 10:36:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by GBinNC
For the record -- although I've said more already on this topic than it
deserves -- I believe there's a world of difference between a teenager
who decides on her own to enter a beauty pageant and a preschooler who's
pushed into it by her mother.
Such a child wouldn't have a reason even to KNOW about such a thing on
her own -- let alone be able to actually participate in it.
GB in NC
My opinion is the same as yours, having raised three kids including a
beautiful daughter.
Part of the influence in the Ramsey household was that the now deceased
mother was also a child model and beauty pageant participant. I guess some
people see their kids as future stars. Shirley Temple syndrome.

Eisboch
Technobarbarian
2006-08-17 03:22:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lampson
There's just something freaky about the "beauty contest mentality"...
However, there's been "stage mothers, & fathers", as long as there
has been stages for their kids to be "stars" on.....
Parents often have an "agenda" for their kids. They want them to be
all sorts of things which seem doubtful to the outside observer. The
most common is sports. I'd pity the poor kids, except that sometimes,
they want the dream just as much as the parents do!
Yep,

http://www.tigerwoods.com/content/default.sps?iType=6266

"Born on December 30, 1975, Woods grew up in Cypress, California, 35 miles
southeast of Los Angeles. He was not out of the crib before he took an
interest in golf, at age 6 months, watching as his father hit golf balls
into a net and imitating his swing. He appeared on the Mike Douglas Show at
age 2, putting with Bob Hope. He shot 48 for nine holes at age 3 and was
featured in Golf Digest at age 5. He won the Optimist International Junior
tournament six times at ages 8, 9, 12, 13, 14 and 15."

The children of Hassidic Jews tend to become Hassidic Jews. The children
of Menonites tend to become Menonits, and most of us don't give it a second
thought. It's to be expected that fashionista parents will raise their
children to be fashionistas. It's pretty twisted to blame the parents for
the completely unexpected attack. I suppose that if someone were to kill
Tiger Woods in an attempt to get some of his money his now deceased father
would have to take some of the blame.

TB
Bob Giddings
2006-08-17 13:31:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Don Lampson
I would have bet a hundred bucks that JonBenet's dad was mixed up in
her murder. He even "looked" guilty to me! It just goes to show how
wrong a person can be..... Sorry I misjudged them both. (I also
thought mom was at least keeping her mouth shut about what she knew)
There's just something freaky about the "beauty contest mentality"...
However, there's been "stage mothers, & fathers", as long as there
has been stages for their kids to be "stars" on.....
Parents often have an "agenda" for their kids. They want them to be
all sorts of things which seem doubtful to the outside observer. The
most common is sports. I'd pity the poor kids, except that sometimes,
they want the dream just as much as the parents do!
I'm glad the real slimeball who killed the little girl has been
caught, and already confessed. Mr Ramsey has been proven innocent,
except maybe to "GB's ilk"?
In cases like these, it's a crying shame the perp can't get a dose of
"Islamic Justice" - ASAP!
The trial of the germ who did JonBenet will probably be the next
"media circus"....
I thought we'd hit bottom with O.J. Simpson, or "Bill & Monica"? I
guess I was wrong on that one too!
Don
Well, here's another wrinkle. Lots of people confess to crimes
they didn't do. Especially famous ones. Wonder what sort of
physical evidence they have on this guy? After 10 years?

This whole thing was, and is, a cesspool.

Bob


http://www.arcatapet.net/bobgiddings
Albert
2006-08-17 14:32:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Giddings
Well, here's another wrinkle. Lots of people confess to crimes
they didn't do. Especially famous ones. Wonder what sort of
physical evidence they have on this guy? After 10 years?
This whole thing was, and is, a cesspool.
Bob
http://www.arcatapet.net/bobgiddings
Bob,

I remember seeing on TV yesterday that they have seaman DNA from the
crime scene that had never been matched with anyone. Hopefully that
will answer the question one way or the other.
-
Albert Lason
http://www.advantas.net/lason/
Carl A.
2006-08-17 15:02:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Albert
I remember seeing on TV yesterday that they have seaman DNA from the
crime scene that had never been matched with anyone. Hopefully that
will answer the question one way or the other.
-
Albert Lason
http://www.advantas.net/lason/
There is absolutely no evidence to link a sailor to the crime.
--
Carl A. in FL
Photojournals of my travels are at
http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
GBinNC
2006-08-17 15:31:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carl A.
Post by Albert
I remember seeing on TV yesterday that they have seaman DNA from the
crime scene that had never been matched with anyone. Hopefully that
will answer the question one way or the other.
-
Albert Lason
There is absolutely no evidence to link a sailor to the crime.
Darn. If I'd been here when that was posted there's no way you'd have
beat me to that....

GB in NC
Albert
2006-08-17 18:01:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Carl A.
Post by Albert
I remember seeing on TV yesterday that they have seaman DNA from the
crime scene that had never been matched with anyone. Hopefully that
will answer the question one way or the other.
-
Albert Lason
http://www.advantas.net/lason/
There is absolutely no evidence to link a sailor to the crime.
LOL--Carl, you're absolutely right, I have no knowledge of any sailor
or seaman linked to the crime. semen, semen, semen a hundred times on
the blackboard.

As it turned out if everyone got as big a laugh as I did when you
pointed it out it was worth it. Alas it was a mistake on my part for
not proofreading my post.
-
Albert
Don Lampson
2006-08-17 18:57:43 UTC
Permalink
Bob G. is right about psychos who confess to crimes they didn't
commit. Some people will do anything for "attention".....
If the "suspect's" wife is correct about them being in Alabama the day
JonBenet was killed, then it's back to the old drawing board in this
mystery....
It appears that some of the posters feel that entering kids in beauty
contests led to this murder. I'm not one of them.
"Beauty Contests" may not be politically correct these days, but in
the past they were all the rage, as a vehicle to "stardom". Plenty of
movie stars began the "careers" twirling a baton, or reciting "Why I
love America" on a stage, while being ogled by (IMO) a bunch of
nincompoops, who might as well be watching a "geek"! HawHawHaw!
You can bet the real "competitors" in those contests were the ones who
got an early start in that line of work!
Don
Steve B
2006-08-17 16:00:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Albert
I remember seeing on TV yesterday that they have seaman DNA from the
crime scene that had never been matched with anyone. Hopefully that
will answer the question one way or the other.
-
Albert Lason
The guy sure looks like a sailor.

Steve
Dave Lee
2006-08-17 18:14:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve B
Post by Albert
I remember seeing on TV yesterday that they have seaman DNA from the
crime scene that had never been matched with anyone. Hopefully that
will answer the question one way or the other.
-
Albert Lason
The guy sure looks like a sailor.
Steve
Looks like ET
Nate
2006-08-17 16:01:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Giddings
Post by Don Lampson
I would have bet a hundred bucks that JonBenet's dad was mixed up in
her murder. He even "looked" guilty to me! It just goes to show how
wrong a person can be..... Sorry I misjudged them both. (I also
thought mom was at least keeping her mouth shut about what she knew)
There's just something freaky about the "beauty contest mentality"...
However, there's been "stage mothers, & fathers", as long as there
has been stages for their kids to be "stars" on.....
Parents often have an "agenda" for their kids. They want them to be
all sorts of things which seem doubtful to the outside observer. The
most common is sports. I'd pity the poor kids, except that sometimes,
they want the dream just as much as the parents do!
I'm glad the real slimeball who killed the little girl has been
caught, and already confessed. Mr Ramsey has been proven innocent,
except maybe to "GB's ilk"?
In cases like these, it's a crying shame the perp can't get a dose of
"Islamic Justice" - ASAP!
The trial of the germ who did JonBenet will probably be the next
"media circus"....
I thought we'd hit bottom with O.J. Simpson, or "Bill & Monica"? I
guess I was wrong on that one too!
Don
Well, here's another wrinkle. Lots of people confess to crimes
they didn't do. Especially famous ones. Wonder what sort of
physical evidence they have on this guy? After 10 years?
This whole thing was, and is, a cesspool.
Bob
http://www.arcatapet.net/bobgiddings
He knew details about the crime that was never released to the public. You
should study crime investigation before putting on your cop hat.

Nate
Al Balmer
2006-08-17 16:23:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Giddings
Well, here's another wrinkle. Lots of people confess to crimes
they didn't do. Especially famous ones. Wonder what sort of
physical evidence they have on this guy? After 10 years?
They have DNA found under the fingernails that didn't match anybody
who had a legitimate reason to be in the house. Age doesn't matter for
DNA.

They did say the guy they arrested knew details about the case which
had been withheld for just such verification purposes.
--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
Frank Tabor
2006-08-17 17:39:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Giddings
Post by Don Lampson
I thought we'd hit bottom with O.J. Simpson, or "Bill & Monica"? I
guess I was wrong on that one too!
Don
Well, here's another wrinkle. Lots of people confess to crimes
they didn't do. Especially famous ones. Wonder what sort of
physical evidence they have on this guy? After 10 years?
This whole thing was, and is, a cesspool.
Reportedly, his confession contained some details never released, that
only the killer would have known.
--
Frank Tabor
dm_callier
2006-08-17 18:34:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Frank Tabor
Post by Bob Giddings
Post by Don Lampson
I thought we'd hit bottom with O.J. Simpson, or "Bill & Monica"? I
guess I was wrong on that one too!
Don
Well, here's another wrinkle. Lots of people confess to crimes
they didn't do. Especially famous ones. Wonder what sort of
physical evidence they have on this guy? After 10 years?
This whole thing was, and is, a cesspool.
Reportedly, his confession contained some details never released, that
only the killer would have known.
Still something fishy about this...time will tell, but this bozo has
been in email contact with the journalism prof at the University of
Colorado who has a vested interest in all of this; he did a
"documentary" film about Jon Benet and is doing another book on the
subject...the details of the crime ARE widespread, so I'm wondering
what is "known", released officially or not...

I have a feeling a lot more is going to come to light over the next few
days.
Nate
2006-08-17 15:57:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
Post by Lone Haranguer
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why
flaunt something you treasure in a public place where it will attract
attention from those seeking what you are displaying?
Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
Little girls are sexualized in many more ways than beauty contests
nowadays. I grew up in the 40s and 50s and I don't get today's
stupidity, either.
I'm not promoting kiddie beauty contests. But to draw a line from
taking part in one, as thousands of families do coast to coast, to
blaming that for her death is nonsense.
Did you guys let your boys play football? Me too. And that's a lot more
dangerous - likely with a lot more injuries and deaths - than a kiddie
beauty contest.
So I guess y'all ought not to let your kiddies enter one of those silly
contests. But I sure don't attach a stigma to them just 'cause I
wouldn't do it.
Dale
Or how about letting your kids go to church? It's been proven over and over
that sexual predators seek victims in church groups. Yet we continue to
send our kids to church! It's shameful, I tell you!

Bowling...anyone ever let your kids participate in bowling leagues? Sexual
predators coach bowling leagues for kids too! And we keep letting them
bowl. I just don't get it!

It's amazing how connected people get to their theories they build from
watching TV. The TV Gods told us that the parents were responsible. Ten
years later they catch the bad guy and prove the TV Gods were wrong. Yet we
hang on to our beliefs and try to continue blaming the parents. I don't
care which TV news station you watch...they all spin the truth so bad you
can't recognize it when it hits you in the face.

Learn to doubt, people. It's a powerful tool.

Nate
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 17:17:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nate
Post by CoachPotato
Post by Lone Haranguer
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why
flaunt something you treasure in a public place where it will attract
attention from those seeking what you are displaying?
Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
Little girls are sexualized in many more ways than beauty contests
nowadays. I grew up in the 40s and 50s and I don't get today's
stupidity, either.
I'm not promoting kiddie beauty contests. But to draw a line from
taking part in one, as thousands of families do coast to coast, to
blaming that for her death is nonsense.
Did you guys let your boys play football? Me too. And that's a lot more
dangerous - likely with a lot more injuries and deaths - than a kiddie
beauty contest.
So I guess y'all ought not to let your kiddies enter one of those silly
contests. But I sure don't attach a stigma to them just 'cause I
wouldn't do it.
Dale
Or how about letting your kids go to church? It's been proven over and over
that sexual predators seek victims in church groups. Yet we continue to
send our kids to church! It's shameful, I tell you!
Bowling...anyone ever let your kids participate in bowling leagues? Sexual
predators coach bowling leagues for kids too! And we keep letting them
bowl. I just don't get it!
It's amazing how connected people get to their theories they build from
watching TV. The TV Gods told us that the parents were responsible. Ten
years later they catch the bad guy and prove the TV Gods were wrong.
I wouldn't bet the farm that Karr is even guilty of the offense.....

Let's get a fingerprint and DNA match instead of a confession.
LZ

Yet we
Post by Nate
hang on to our beliefs and try to continue blaming the parents. I don't
care which TV news station you watch...they all spin the truth so bad you
can't recognize it when it hits you in the face.
Learn to doubt, people. It's a powerful tool.
Nate
Nate
2006-08-17 15:51:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
GBinNC wrote:>
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too. But
to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the little
girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality. Kiddie porn is one
thing, a little miss contest is quite another. Sick? Not hardly, not
even strange. It's not even uncommon.
Dale
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why flaunt
something you treasure in a public place where it will attract attention
from those seeking what you are displaying?
Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
Not in an alley full of drug addicts...but maybe on a stage where the
audience is supposed to be looking at me for visual eye candy.

Reallity check! No one expected a rapsit to copme into the beauty pagent
and kill one of the little girls.

Nate
GBinNC
2006-08-17 15:54:38 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:51:33 GMT, "Nate"
Post by Nate
Reallity check! No one expected a rapsit to copme into the beauty pagent
and kill one of the little girls.
Wow. Four misspelled words in one line.

Slow down -- you're typing so fast we can't read what you're trying to
say....

GB in NC
Nate
2006-08-17 16:26:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by GBinNC
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 15:51:33 GMT, "Nate"
Post by Nate
Reallity check! No one expected a rapsit to copme into the beauty pagent
and kill one of the little girls.
Wow. Four misspelled words in one line.
Slow down -- you're typing so fast we can't read what you're trying to
say....
GB in NC
I'm multi tasking and can't give it proper attention. I'll go back to doing
one thing at a time as soon as this stupid graphics program gets fully
loaded. LOL

Nate
Tex Houston
2006-08-17 15:57:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nate
Not in an alley full of drug addicts...but maybe on a stage where the
audience is supposed to be looking at me for visual eye candy.
Reallity check! No one expected a rapsit to copme into the beauty pagent
and kill one of the little girls.
Nate
You'd make a better argument if you ran your OFF TOPIC message through a
spellchecker before sending.

Tex
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 17:12:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nate
Post by CoachPotato
GBinNC wrote:>
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too. But
to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the little
girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality. Kiddie porn is one
thing, a little miss contest is quite another. Sick? Not hardly, not
even strange. It's not even uncommon.
Dale
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why flaunt
something you treasure in a public place where it will attract attention
from those seeking what you are displaying?
Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
Not in an alley full of drug addicts...but maybe on a stage where the
audience is supposed to be looking at me for visual eye candy.
Perverts frequent sites where there potential victims can be found.
Parks, schools and child beauty pageants. You're trolling the bait in a
dangerous environment.
Post by Nate
Reallity check! No one expected a rapsit to copme into the beauty pagent
and kill one of the little girls.
Nate
Correction. Only people without a brain would expect such events not to
attract perverts.
LZ
Bob Hatch
2006-08-17 17:29:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lone Haranguer
Post by Nate
Post by Lone Haranguer
Post by CoachPotato
GBinNC wrote:>
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour"
spotlight -- for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted
public attention to her that she would not otherwise have
received had she been treated like a normal six-year-old child.
That attention probably led directly to her murder...
I completely miss the point of beauty contests for children, too.
But to somehow connect their choice of a family activity to the
little girl's murder is a stretch beyond all reality. Kiddie porn
is one thing, a little miss contest is quite another. Sick? Not
hardly, not even strange. It's not even uncommon.
Dale
It may not be uncommon but that doesn't mean it isn't stupid. Why
flaunt something you treasure in a public place where it will
attract attention from those seeking what you are displaying?
Would you wear a $100,000 necklace in an alley full of drug addicts?
LZ
Not in an alley full of drug addicts...but maybe on a stage where the
audience is supposed to be looking at me for visual eye candy.
Perverts frequent sites where there potential victims can be found.
Parks, schools and child beauty pageants. You're trolling the bait
in a dangerous environment.
Post by Nate
Reallity check! No one expected a rapsit to copme into the beauty
pagent and kill one of the little girls.
Nate
Correction. Only people without a brain would expect such events not
to attract perverts.
LZ
Exactly. Children should be kept out of church, school, playgrounds, city
streets, shopping centers, dance, swimming, baseball, football, soccer, Boy
Scouts, Girl Scouts, museums, campgrounds, RV parks, etc.
--
"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog
will give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right!
I never would've thought of that!'"
--Dave Barry
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com
Bob Giddings
2006-08-17 17:38:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Hatch
Post by Lone Haranguer
Correction. Only people without a brain would expect such events not
to attract perverts.
LZ
Exactly. Children should be kept out of church, school, playgrounds, city
streets, shopping centers, dance, swimming, baseball, football, soccer, Boy
Scouts, Girl Scouts, museums, campgrounds, RV parks, etc.
Do you really equate that list with dressing children up like
sexy adults and parading them around in front of other adults?
You don't see anything creepy about that? Or anything likely to
attract creepy types?

Get real.

Bob


http://www.arcatapet.net/bobgiddings
Bob Hatch
2006-08-17 17:45:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Giddings
Post by Bob Hatch
Post by Lone Haranguer
Correction. Only people without a brain would expect such events
not to attract perverts.
LZ
Exactly. Children should be kept out of church, school, playgrounds,
city streets, shopping centers, dance, swimming, baseball, football,
soccer, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, museums, campgrounds, RV parks, etc.
Do you really equate that list with dressing children up like
sexy adults and parading them around in front of other adults?
You don't see anything creepy about that? Or anything likely to
attract creepy types?
Get real.
I am. As a matter of fact, and it can be proven with little effort, there
are more children taken from and/or abused in any one of the list I posted,
than from all the little miss beauty pageants in the entire USA. Based on
that, children are in fact safer when involved in this type of event.

You, and the others trying to lay blame "anyplace" but on the bastard who
did it is sick, and shows a total lack of understanding of the facts.

Like you said, get real.
--
"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog
will give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right!
I never would've thought of that!'"
--Dave Barry
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com
Bob Giddings
2006-08-17 18:51:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Hatch
Post by Bob Giddings
Post by Bob Hatch
Post by Lone Haranguer
Correction. Only people without a brain would expect such events
not to attract perverts.
LZ
Exactly. Children should be kept out of church, school, playgrounds,
city streets, shopping centers, dance, swimming, baseball, football,
soccer, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, museums, campgrounds, RV parks, etc.
Do you really equate that list with dressing children up like
sexy adults and parading them around in front of other adults?
You don't see anything creepy about that? Or anything likely to
attract creepy types?
Get real.
I am. As a matter of fact, and it can be proven with little effort, there
are more children taken from and/or abused in any one of the list I posted,
than from all the little miss beauty pageants in the entire USA. Based on
that, children are in fact safer when involved in this type of event.
You, and the others trying to lay blame "anyplace" but on the bastard who
did it is sick, and shows a total lack of understanding of the facts.
Like you said, get real.
There's guilt to go around. Child pornography is not murder, but
it's still pornography. Prepubescent voyeurism is just part of
the package.

I am uncomfortable even contemplating the sort of mentality that
enjoys watching and photographing little children vamping around
like sex objects. Most especially parents.

Bah. I leave you to it.

Bob



http://www.arcatapet.net/bobgiddings
Bob Hatch
2006-08-17 20:10:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Giddings
There's guilt to go around. Child pornography is not murder, but
it's still pornography. Prepubescent voyeurism is just part of
the package.
I am uncomfortable even contemplating the sort of mentality that
enjoys watching and photographing little children vamping around
like sex objects. Most especially parents.
Bah. I leave you to it.
It appears you know as much about this subject as you do about dogs.
--
"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog
will give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right!
I never would've thought of that!'"
--Dave Barry
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com
Kevin W. Miller
2006-08-17 20:24:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Hatch
Post by Bob Giddings
There's guilt to go around. Child pornography is not murder, but
it's still pornography. Prepubescent voyeurism is just part of
the package.
I am uncomfortable even contemplating the sort of mentality that
enjoys watching and photographing little children vamping around
like sex objects. Most especially parents.
Bah. I leave you to it.
It appears you know as much about this subject as you do about dogs.
Bob Giddings did a good thing saving that puppy on the freeway.
--
Kevin W. Miller
Bob Hatch
2006-08-17 20:34:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kevin W. Miller
Bob Giddings did a good thing saving that puppy on the freeway.
Never said he didn't.
--
"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog
will give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right!
I never would've thought of that!'"
--Dave Barry
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 20:39:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Hatch
Post by Bob Giddings
Post by Bob Hatch
Post by Lone Haranguer
Correction. Only people without a brain would expect such events
not to attract perverts.
LZ
Exactly. Children should be kept out of church, school, playgrounds,
city streets, shopping centers, dance, swimming, baseball, football,
soccer, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, museums, campgrounds, RV parks, etc.
Do you really equate that list with dressing children up like
sexy adults and parading them around in front of other adults?
You don't see anything creepy about that? Or anything likely to
attract creepy types?
Get real.
I am. As a matter of fact, and it can be proven with little effort, there
are more children taken from and/or abused in any one of the list I posted,
than from all the little miss beauty pageants in the entire USA. Based on
that, children are in fact safer when involved in this type of event.
Do your study based on percentage involved, not on raw numbers.

Do a follow up study on the lives of these child performers.
Post by Bob Hatch
You, and the others trying to lay blame "anyplace" but on the bastard who
did it is sick, and shows a total lack of understanding of the fact
The killer gets the blame for the crime. The parents are responsible
for parading their child in a venue that attracts perverts. We don't
know at this point whether that is a factor in this case.

Have you followed the recent news on parents who are selling naked
pictures of their daughters on the internet? Just raising money for
their college fund. People pay to access the photos and the parents get
a percentage. Would you condone this behavior? I consider it just a
matter of to what lengths some parents will go to exploit their children.
LZ
Post by Bob Hatch
Like you said, get real.
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 20:04:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Hatch
Exactly. Children should be kept out of church, school, playgrounds, city
streets, shopping centers, dance, swimming, baseball, football, soccer, Boy
Scouts, Girl Scouts, museums, campgrounds, RV parks, etc.
In those environments, they are just one minnow in a whole school of
minnows. Beauty pageants are the opposite. You dress and coach the
performer to stand out and attract attention.

Perverts on the prowl are judging too.
LZ
Bob Hatch
2006-08-17 20:29:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lone Haranguer
Post by Bob Hatch
Exactly. Children should be kept out of church, school, playgrounds,
city streets, shopping centers, dance, swimming, baseball, football,
soccer, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, museums, campgrounds, RV parks, etc.
In those environments, they are just one minnow in a whole school of
minnows. Beauty pageants are the opposite. You dress and coach the
performer to stand out and attract attention.
You sure do. With figure skating, ballet, gymnastics, and on and on. In
every school play, the kids get dressed up to attract attention.
Post by Lone Haranguer
Perverts on the prowl are judging too.
Yes they are, at swimming events, on the play ground, at the girls softball
games.

Just curious. How many child pageant kids have been killed, in lets say, the
last 10 years. 20 years. 30 years.

There is no correlation. None. The mind of the guy who would do something
like that could just as easily have picked the child from a group of young
cheerleaders, ice skaters, or nearly any group. That we don't understand the
pageant thing, doesn't mean that those children are more vulnerable. The
facts and numbers say just the opposite.
--
"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog
will give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right!
I never would've thought of that!'"
--Dave Barry
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com
Will Sill
2006-08-17 01:37:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
So apparently you think the parents are guilty after all, and deserved
all the accusations and innuendo?

You surely are a moron, GB.

Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill

OTCS = Off The Charts Stupid
Hunter
2006-08-17 01:41:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
So apparently you think the parents are guilty after all, and deserved
all the accusations and innuendo?
He didn't say that and you know it.

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/summer2006.htm

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy shit...what a ride!"
Will Sill
2006-08-17 02:02:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter
Post by Will Sill
So apparently you think the parents are guilty after all, and deserved
all the accusations and innuendo?
He didn't say that and you know it.
What the jackass wrote, word for word (assuming he was quoted
Post by Hunter
Post by Will Sill
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
Oh, I forgot -- you recently visited his palace, and GB can now do no
wrong.

Sorry, but although I don't like the idea of these dumbass beauty
contests for kids, the idea that her parent's actions "led directly
to her murder" is really really sick. By that kind of twisted logic,
every provocative female who is raped and strangled "deserves" her
fate for jiggling her assets. I doubt you'd buy THAT - but I fail to
see the difference.

I categorically reject the disgusting idea that the parents caused her
death. It is legally, morally, and logically SICK.

Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Steve B
2006-08-17 02:48:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
I categorically reject the disgusting idea that the parents caused her
death. It is legally, morally, and logically SICK.
Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
I guess we'll see when the facts come out as to how this man became
interested in Jon-Benet. I'll reserve my judgement until that time. I can
see you have your mind made up. They may not have CAUSED her death, but
they MAY have CONTRIBUTED to it. You're getting as nitpicking about words
as GB. Time and facts will tell the real story.

YKW
Nate
2006-08-17 16:05:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve B
Post by Will Sill
I categorically reject the disgusting idea that the parents caused her
death. It is legally, morally, and logically SICK.
Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
I guess we'll see when the facts come out as to how this man became
interested in Jon-Benet. I'll reserve my judgement until that time. I
can see you have your mind made up. They may not have CAUSED her death,
but they MAY have CONTRIBUTED to it. You're getting as nitpicking about
words as GB. Time and facts will tell the real story.
YKW
Every parent contributes to the death of their child by merely giving birth,
and resulting life, to the child. Life always ends in death.
Therefore...all parents are ultimately responsible for their child's death
and should be punished!

Come on folks! Reality for just a minute.

Nate
Hunter
2006-08-17 03:35:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Sorry, but although I don't like the idea of these dumbass beauty
contests for kids, the idea that her parent's actions "led directly
to her murder" is really really sick.
That's not what you said... You said, "So apparently you think the
parents are guilty after all, and deserved all the accusations and
innuendo? "

The parents being guilty of the murder would mean they murdered the
girl.

GB didn't say they murdered her.

He said, "What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour"
spotlight -- for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public
attention to her that she would not otherwise have received had she
been treated like a normal six-year-old child. That attention
probably led directly to her murder... "

That is not the same as saying they are guilty of murdering her.

The fact that I stayed at his place has nothing to do with it, I agree
that the attention they put on the girl, dressing her up like that,
probably brought out that sickie who killed her.

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/summer2006.htm

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy shit...what a ride!"
Will Sill
2006-08-17 11:49:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter
Post by Will Sill
Sorry, but although I don't like the idea of these dumbass beauty
contests for kids, the idea that her parent's actions "led directly
to her murder" is really really sick.
That's not what you said... You said, "So apparently you think the
parents are guilty after all, and deserved all the accusations and
innuendo? "
True, that's exactly what I said in response to GB's dumbass,
Post by Hunter
He said, "What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour"
spotlight -- for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public
attention to her that she would not otherwise have received had she
been treated like a normal six-year-old child. That attention
probably led directly to her murder... "
And I'll say it again: he apparently thinks the parents are guilty
after all, and deserve all the accusations and innuendo.
Post by Hunter
GB didn't say they murdered her.
I shoulda known better than to try to reason with an ex-stripper who
sees nothing wrong with her behavior but condemns parents who
encourage kids to enter beauty contests.

There is absolutely NO credible evidence that the girl's visibility
was a factor. Even if it was, are you accusers actually suggesting
that the parents of attractive children are guilty when a predator
grabs one? I have seen a lot of truly sick accusations in this
forum, but this one is over the top.

Had the parents featured the kid on a kiddy porn site, I'd be happy to
heap abuse on them. They didn't - not even close.

Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Hunter
2006-08-17 12:17:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
And I'll say it again: he apparently thinks the parents are guilty
after all, and deserve all the accusations and innuendo. >
No he believes the parents are guilty of attracting unwanted attention
to the child. Not murder.
Post by Will Sill
I shoulda known better than to try to reason with an ex-stripper who
sees nothing wrong with her behavior but condemns parents who
encourage kids to enter beauty contests.>
Ex-stripper. Watch it Will, you are bordering on getting your ass
sued. I have never been a stripper, which you damn well know.
Post by Will Sill
Had the parents featured the kid on a kiddy porn site, I'd be happy to
heap abuse on them. They didn't - not even close.>
You are entitled to your opinion, but GB and my opinion is parading
your 5 year old around like a sex symbol, in makeup and suggestive
clothes, attracts unwanted attention from sexual predators.

The accused murderer said, "I loved her" as if she was an adult.

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/summer2006.htm

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy shit...what a ride!"
Will Sill
2006-08-17 12:39:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter
Post by Will Sill
I shoulda known better than to try to reason with an ex-stripper who
sees nothing wrong with her behavior but condemns parents who
encourage kids to enter beauty contests.>
Ex-stripper. Watch it Will, you are bordering on getting your ass
sued. I have never been a stripper, which you damn well know.
A thousand pardons. No, I don't know what you were or are. I seem to
remember you bragging about a brief career as - what - a topless
dancer? Was I mistaken?

Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Hunter
2006-08-17 13:26:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
A thousand pardons. No, I don't know what you were or are. I seem to
remember you bragging about a brief career as - what - a topless
dancer? Was I mistaken?
I've been thinking about you and have decided that dementia is setting
in so I'm going to give you some leeway here.

No, I wasn't a stripper and no I wasn't a topless dancer.

Just like you aren't, and never were, an engineer.

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/summer2006.htm

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy shit...what a ride!"
PaulT
2006-08-17 14:00:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Hunter
Post by Will Sill
A thousand pardons. No, I don't know what you were or are. I seem to
remember you bragging about a brief career as - what - a topless
dancer? Was I mistaken?
I've been thinking about you and have decided that dementia is setting
in so I'm going to give you some leeway here.
Hunter
--
Darn. I was imagining you as the new owner of Sill Hill. (Make that Hunter
Hill)
LOL!
Paul
GBinNC
2006-08-17 15:40:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by PaulT
Post by Hunter
I've been thinking about you and have decided that dementia is setting
in so I'm going to give you some leeway here.
Hunter
Darn. I was imagining you as the new owner of Sill Hill. (Make that Hunter
Hill)
That would have been a step down (although uphill) for Hunter.

I've been inside Will's home on Sill Hill and one of Hunter's former
homes -- and I've seen pictures of another. Will has a nice piece of
property up there, but I'm confident it wouldn't appeal to Hunter.

GB in NC
Carl A.
2006-08-17 15:48:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by GBinNC
Post by PaulT
Post by Hunter
I've been thinking about you and have decided that dementia is setting
in so I'm going to give you some leeway here.
Hunter
Darn. I was imagining you as the new owner of Sill Hill. (Make that Hunter
Hill)
That would have been a step down (although uphill) for Hunter.
I've been inside Will's home on Sill Hill and one of Hunter's former
homes -- and I've seen pictures of another. Will has a nice piece of
property up there, but I'm confident it wouldn't appeal to Hunter.
GB in NC
This is illusionary anyway. In order to win a judgment for slander, she
would have to be able to prove damages. Nowadays her activities 40+ years
ago would be considered laudable efforts to avoid welfare and wise
enhancements to her skill set.

Carl A.
Lon VanOstran
2006-08-17 16:14:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
A thousand pardons. No, I don't know what you were or are. I seem to
remember you bragging about a brief career as - what - a topless
dancer? Was I mistaken?
Surely you can't be so old that you really don't know what a Go-Go
dancer was!!!!

Lon
Will Sill
2006-08-17 17:00:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lon VanOstran
Post by Will Sill
A thousand pardons. No, I don't know what you were or are. I seem to
remember you bragging about a brief career as - what - a topless
dancer? Was I mistaken?
Surely you can't be so old that you really don't know what a Go-Go
dancer was!!!!
Sorry, must be I was mistaken. I did not realize the fine distinction
between strippers and go-go dancing. The honest truth is that I have
led a sheltered life and have never ever been inside a joint featuring
cavorting half-naked women. Perhaps I am after all the only person on
the planet who thinks badly of professions kept alive by blatant
sexual exploitation of women - most of whom know EXACTLY why they are
flaunting or renting themselves.

A little research suggests:
============
The phrase Go-Go was adopted by clubs of lesser reputation until it
developed seedy connotations. Abandoned by most regular clubs it was
appropriated by burlesque and nude dancing establishments, which
became known as Go-Go bars and the women working there known as Go-Go
dancers. Go-Go dancers that perform at night clubs or rave dances are
also called performance art dancers.
[from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Go-Go_dancer]
============

I suppose Hunter & associates would like us to believe her definition.

Back to the point: any suggestion that Jonbenet's parents caused her
death by having her compete in dumbass kid beauty contests is
unjustified and sick, IMO. The very same people who are suggesting
that idea would be furious if someone blamed a go-go girl's rape and
murder on the victim because of her provocative behavior!!

I realize that kind of thinking (sic) is common, since we blame the
victim of a car theft if he leaves the keys in sight, blame the
victim of a home invasion if he didn't lock all the doors, etc.

Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 19:45:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Back to the point: any suggestion that Jonbenet's parents caused her
death by having her compete in dumbass kid beauty contests is
unjustified and sick, IMO.
Just how dishonest are you? You know the difference between "caused"
and "contributed to".

At least I'm assuming you do so that leaves only deliberate
misrepresentation.

The very same people who are suggesting
Post by Will Sill
that idea would be furious if someone blamed a go-go girl's rape and
murder on the victim because of her provocative behavior!!
You can bet that in a trial it will be brought up as a contributing
factor and the jury will give it the appropriate weight. Sure the judge
may ask that it be stricken but the jury will consider it anyway.
LZ
Post by Will Sill
I realize that kind of thinking (sic) is common, since we blame the
victim of a car theft if he leaves the keys in sight,
Yep and some insurance companies may not even pay the claim if you do that.

blame the
Post by Will Sill
victim of a home invasion if he didn't lock all the doors, etc.
You've made an ass of yourself and are now bringing in the red herrings.
LZ
Post by Will Sill
Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
GBinNC
2006-08-17 04:02:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Sorry, but although I don't like the idea of these dumbass beauty
contests for kids, the idea that her parent's actions "led directly
to her murder" is really really sick. By that kind of twisted logic,
every provocative female who is raped and strangled "deserves" her
fate for jiggling her assets. I doubt you'd buy THAT - but I fail to
see the difference.
Will, I can't believe you're unable to understand the difference between
an adult woman's freely chosen behavior (of whatever kind) and that of a
six-year-old child whose titilliating exhibitionism is guided and
directed by her parents. JonBenet Ramsey was far too young to even
understand what she was doing -- or why. But you can rest assured her
parents knew.

And yes, that exhibitionism probably resulted in her sexual torture and
violent death. A child that young -- no matter how beautiful or
photogenic or whatever -- probably wouldn't have been noticed by a
stranger without her parents calling attention to her.

Little children should be protected, not exploited. JonBenet Ramsey --
like all other "little miss beauty queens" -- was exploited, and
publicly. That IS sick.

GB in NC
J***@aol.com
2006-08-17 04:31:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by GBinNC
Post by Will Sill
Sorry, but although I don't like the idea of these dumbass beauty
contests for kids, the idea that her parent's actions "led directly
to her murder" is really really sick. By that kind of twisted logic,
every provocative female who is raped and strangled "deserves" her
fate for jiggling her assets. I doubt you'd buy THAT - but I fail to
see the difference.
Will, I can't believe you're unable to understand the difference between
an adult woman's freely chosen behavior (of whatever kind) and that of a
six-year-old child whose titilliating exhibitionism is guided and
directed by her parents. JonBenet Ramsey was far too young to even
understand what she was doing -- or why. But you can rest assured her
parents knew.
And yes, that exhibitionism probably resulted in her sexual torture and
violent death. A child that young -- no matter how beautiful or
photogenic or whatever -- probably wouldn't have been noticed by a
stranger without her parents calling attention to her.
Little children should be protected, not exploited. JonBenet Ramsey --
like all other "little miss beauty queens" -- was exploited, and
publicly. That IS sick.
GB in NC
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I agree with your assessment GB. And I to am surprised at Will's
take on this. Maybe he has made a GIANT LEFT TURN? <VBG>

The attitude of those parents reeks of typical Hollywood Idiocy
as regards to parading a tiny child like that. Makes me wonder
if Will knows the whole story of how that kid was exploited from
the cradle.

But they have suffered a bunch for the last 10 years and I would
wager have rued the day they exposed their child as they did.
In recent photos you could see the grief in that mother's eyes.
Now perhaps she can rest in peace and be with her child.

I to am glad and hopeful that they now have the real beast in
this whole sordid mess.

Jan Eric Orme
Will Sill
2006-08-17 12:06:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by J***@aol.com
I agree with your assessment GB. And I to am surprised at Will's
take on this. Maybe he has made a GIANT LEFT TURN? <VBG>
And you surprise me, Jan. No <G>
Post by J***@aol.com
The attitude of those parents reeks of typical Hollywood Idiocy
as regards to parading a tiny child like that. Makes me wonder
if Will knows the whole story of how that kid was exploited from
the cradle.
WHOA UP. . .. I absolutely do NOT favor what they did. In fact I
think they had a lousy attitude about the kid's life. But they were
not even CLOSE to running a kiddy porn site, and there is _no_
credible suggestion that the child's participation in dumbass contests
was even remotely a factor in her demise. Not a scintilla of known
evidence.
Post by J***@aol.com
But they have suffered a bunch for the last 10 years and I would
wager have rued the day they exposed their child as they did.
In recent photos you could see the grief in that mother's eyes.
Now perhaps she can rest in peace and be with her child.
I to am glad and hopeful that they now have the real beast in
this whole sordid mess.
Whether they are actually dumb enough to blame themselves I don't
know. I do know that I don't. You and others seem to be suggesting
the kid shoulda been kept outa sight fer crying out loud - and I KNOW
you're not that stupid. Good heavens, people have been bragging about
their baby pictures for generations - I never heard of ANYONE claiming
that was incitement to murder!!!

Being dumb is one thing - and if asked whether Patsy was Dumb for
inciting the kid to compete I'd absolutely vote for Dumb. But mommy's
dumbass actions absolutely did NOT "lead directly to murder" by ANY
stretch of imagination.

The murder was done by a sick bastard who probably never SAW the child
on stage!

Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Hunter
2006-08-17 12:27:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
But mommy's
dumbass actions absolutely did NOT "lead directly to murder" by ANY
stretch of imagination.
You would only know that if you were the murderer.

Hunter
--
http://members.aol.com/hhamp5246/summer2006.htm

Life's journey is not to arrive at the grave safely in a well-preserved body,
but rather to skid in sideways, totally worn out, shouting "...holy shit...what a ride!"
GBinNC
2006-08-17 15:42:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
But they were
not even CLOSE to running a kiddy porn site,
Who the hell ever suggested such a thing?
Post by Will Sill
and there is _no_
credible suggestion that the child's participation in dumbass contests
was even remotely a factor in her demise. Not a scintilla of known
evidence.
I guess we'll have to wait and see how the perp became interested in
her.
Post by Will Sill
The murder was done by a sick bastard who probably never SAW the child
on stage!
See above.

GB in NC
Steve B
2006-08-17 15:57:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
The murder was done by a sick bastard who probably never SAW the child
on stage!
Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Probably?

I think I would like to wait for the facts.
Wingnut
2006-08-17 16:57:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Steve B
I think I would like to wait for the facts.
Gosh Steve, start a trend like that and this ng will be history in a hurry.

--
wingnut
"of no ilk"
Nate
2006-08-17 16:15:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
The murder was done by a sick bastard who probably never SAW the child
on stage!
Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Probably is a strong word. I assume you have some peice of information that
we don't that leads you to this probability claim.

What I heard was the guy fell in love with JonBenet. He has a warped mind
if he thinks he was in love with her. But what leads a warped mind to this
belief? The parents did cause JonBenet to act and look more like an adult
than a 6 yr old baby. This is fact. We know this. We can make an
assumption that the perp saw JonBenet acting and looking like an adult and
his trigger got tripped because of that. We may later find out that he
never saw her all made up...we may find out all sorts of things. But based
on what wee know now, we can easily conclude the above assumption.

I draw the line at concluding that the parents were a direct cause of her
death though. There is no way in hell they could have known that this guy
was going to make this sick leap. Knowing that in advance would have been a
neat trick. Knowing it now is not nearly as impressive.

Nate
bruce
2006-08-17 16:33:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nate
What I heard was the guy fell in love with JonBenet. He has a warped mind
if he thinks he was in love with her. But what leads a warped mind to
this belief? The parents did cause JonBenet to act and look more like an
adult than a 6 yr old baby. This is fact. We know this. We can make an
assumption that the perp saw JonBenet acting and looking like an adult and
his trigger got tripped because of that. We may later find out that he
never saw her all made up...we may find out all sorts of things. But
based on what wee know now, we can easily conclude the above assumption.
I draw the line at concluding that the parents were a direct cause of her
death though. There is no way in hell they could have known that this guy
was going to make this sick leap. Knowing that in advance would have been
a neat trick. Knowing it now is not nearly as impressive.
Nate
Actually, if the perp is a pedophile we can assume that seeing JonBenet all
dressed up would NOT have contributed to the crime. Pedophiles are
attracted to children of a certain age, whether it be 6 or 10 (or any other
specific age) and they are not attracted to children of other ages (and
certainly not to adults). So if he was interested in JonBenet because she
was six, her makeup and clothing would not have contributed.

What we have here (from GB especially, but also from his supporters in this
discussion) is a blatant attempt to blame the victims (yes, the parents are
victims too) rather than stick to the reality that the only person to blame
is the perp. As someone else said, blaming the parents is like blaming a
woman for wearing provocative clothing prior to being raped.

Bruce
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 17:28:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by bruce
Post by Nate
What I heard was the guy fell in love with JonBenet. He has a warped mind
if he thinks he was in love with her. But what leads a warped mind to
this belief? The parents did cause JonBenet to act and look more like an
adult than a 6 yr old baby. This is fact. We know this. We can make an
assumption that the perp saw JonBenet acting and looking like an adult and
his trigger got tripped because of that. We may later find out that he
never saw her all made up...we may find out all sorts of things. But
based on what wee know now, we can easily conclude the above assumption.
I draw the line at concluding that the parents were a direct cause of her
death though. There is no way in hell they could have known that this guy
was going to make this sick leap. Knowing that in advance would have been
a neat trick. Knowing it now is not nearly as impressive.
Nate
Actually, if the perp is a pedophile we can assume that seeing JonBenet all
dressed up would NOT have contributed to the crime. Pedophiles are
attracted to children of a certain age, whether it be 6 or 10 (or any other
specific age) and they are not attracted to children of other ages (and
certainly not to adults). So if he was interested in JonBenet because she
was six, her makeup and clothing would not have contributed.
What we have here (from GB especially, but also from his supporters in this
discussion) is a blatant attempt to blame the victims (yes, the parents are
victims too) rather than stick to the reality that the only person to blame
is the perp. As someone else said, blaming the parents is like blaming a
woman for wearing provocative clothing prior to being raped.
Bruce
We're not blaming the parents for the crime. We're criticizing them for
actions that increase the probability that their daughter would attract
the attention of perverts.

Big difference.
LZ
Nate
2006-08-17 17:43:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lone Haranguer
Post by bruce
Post by Nate
What I heard was the guy fell in love with JonBenet. He has a warped
mind if he thinks he was in love with her. But what leads a warped mind
to this belief? The parents did cause JonBenet to act and look more like
an adult than a 6 yr old baby. This is fact. We know this. We can make
an assumption that the perp saw JonBenet acting and looking like an adult
and his trigger got tripped because of that. We may later find out that
he never saw her all made up...we may find out all sorts of things. But
based on what wee know now, we can easily conclude the above assumption.
I draw the line at concluding that the parents were a direct cause of her
death though. There is no way in hell they could have known that this
guy was going to make this sick leap. Knowing that in advance would have
been a neat trick. Knowing it now is not nearly as impressive.
Nate
Actually, if the perp is a pedophile we can assume that seeing JonBenet
all dressed up would NOT have contributed to the crime. Pedophiles are
attracted to children of a certain age, whether it be 6 or 10 (or any
other specific age) and they are not attracted to children of other ages
(and certainly not to adults). So if he was interested in JonBenet
because she was six, her makeup and clothing would not have contributed.
What we have here (from GB especially, but also from his supporters in
this discussion) is a blatant attempt to blame the victims (yes, the
parents are victims too) rather than stick to the reality that the only
person to blame is the perp. As someone else said, blaming the parents
is like blaming a woman for wearing provocative clothing prior to being
raped.
Bruce
We're not blaming the parents for the crime. We're criticizing them for
actions that increase the probability that their daughter would attract
the attention of perverts.
Big difference.
LZ
Define "We". Cuz some here have blamed them for the crime. Add me to the
list of "We", cuz I'm right there with you as you described it above.
However...I still think the parents have a bigger job of predicting the
future than we have of picking apart the past.

Nate

Nate
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 20:18:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nate
Post by Lone Haranguer
Post by bruce
Post by Nate
What I heard was the guy fell in love with JonBenet. He has a warped
mind if he thinks he was in love with her. But what leads a warped mind
to this belief? The parents did cause JonBenet to act and look more like
an adult than a 6 yr old baby. This is fact. We know this. We can make
an assumption that the perp saw JonBenet acting and looking like an adult
and his trigger got tripped because of that. We may later find out that
he never saw her all made up...we may find out all sorts of things. But
based on what wee know now, we can easily conclude the above assumption.
I draw the line at concluding that the parents were a direct cause of her
death though. There is no way in hell they could have known that this
guy was going to make this sick leap. Knowing that in advance would have
been a neat trick. Knowing it now is not nearly as impressive.
Nate
Actually, if the perp is a pedophile we can assume that seeing JonBenet
all dressed up would NOT have contributed to the crime. Pedophiles are
attracted to children of a certain age, whether it be 6 or 10 (or any
other specific age) and they are not attracted to children of other ages
(and certainly not to adults). So if he was interested in JonBenet
because she was six, her makeup and clothing would not have contributed.
What we have here (from GB especially, but also from his supporters in
this discussion) is a blatant attempt to blame the victims (yes, the
parents are victims too) rather than stick to the reality that the only
person to blame is the perp. As someone else said, blaming the parents
is like blaming a woman for wearing provocative clothing prior to being
raped.
Bruce
We're not blaming the parents for the crime. We're criticizing them for
actions that increase the probability that their daughter would attract
the attention of perverts.
Big difference.
LZ
Define "We".
In this instance, supporters of GB's statement.
LZ

Cuz some here have blamed them for the crime. Add me to the
Post by Nate
list of "We", cuz I'm right there with you as you described it above.
However...I still think the parents have a bigger job of predicting the
future than we have of picking apart the past.
Nate
bruce
2006-08-17 17:58:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Lone Haranguer
Post by bruce
What we have here (from GB especially, but also from his supporters in
this discussion) is a blatant attempt to blame the victims (yes, the
parents are victims too) rather than stick to the reality that the only
person to blame is the perp. As someone else said, blaming the parents
is like blaming a woman for wearing provocative clothing prior to being
raped.
Bruce
We're not blaming the parents for the crime. We're criticizing them for
actions that increase the probability that their daughter would attract
the attention of perverts.
Big difference.
LZ
No, absolutely no difference at all. You are blaming the parents for the
actions of perverts. By definition perverts do perverted things. There is
no way to determine what "would attract the attention of perverts." They
find victims where ever they find them. That may be child beauty pageants,
but it might just as easily be school yards and playgrounds. There is no
logical reason for their behavior. And while child beauty pageants make no
sense to me, they are no more a cause of child sexual predation than t-ball
or cub scouts. Trying to attach your personal level of logic to their
behavior will always be a failure, they are attracted by things you cannot
understand.

Bruce
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 20:50:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by bruce
Post by Lone Haranguer
Post by bruce
What we have here (from GB especially, but also from his supporters in
this discussion) is a blatant attempt to blame the victims (yes, the
parents are victims too) rather than stick to the reality that the only
person to blame is the perp. As someone else said, blaming the parents
is like blaming a woman for wearing provocative clothing prior to being
raped.
Bruce
We're not blaming the parents for the crime. We're criticizing them for
actions that increase the probability that their daughter would attract
the attention of perverts.
Big difference.
LZ
No, absolutely no difference at all. You are blaming the parents for the
actions of perverts.
Wrong. I'm accusing them of exploiting their children in a venue where
predators are more likely to be active.

By definition perverts do perverted things. There is
Post by bruce
no way to determine what "would attract the attention of perverts."
You need to do your homework. Those who construct porn sites know
EXACTLY what attracts perverts. It's their business to know.

They
Post by bruce
find victims where ever they find them.
Some do. Random stalkers who use opportunity rather than careful planning.

That may be child beauty pageants,
Post by bruce
but it might just as easily be school yards and playgrounds.
Where there are large crowds of children who are relatively anonymous
compared to the "stars" of children's beauty pageants.

There is no
Post by bruce
logical reason for their behavior.
Not to you. To the predator, logic is not a factor.

And while child beauty pageants make no
Post by bruce
sense to me, they are no more a cause of child sexual predation than t-ball
or cub scouts.
You seem fixed on "cause". They simply provide a venue where a predator
can fixate on a special victim.

Trying to attach your personal level of logic to their
Post by bruce
behavior will always be a failure, they are attracted by things you cannot
understand.
I don't have to understand them to avoid situations where my child would
attract more than their share of attention. Safer in a crowd is all I
need to know.
LZ
Post by bruce
Bruce
Bob Hatch
2006-08-17 17:07:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Post by Hunter
Post by Will Sill
So apparently you think the parents are guilty after all, and
deserved all the accusations and innuendo?
He didn't say that and you know it.
What the jackass wrote, word for word (assuming he was quoted
Post by Hunter
Post by Will Sill
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour"
spotlight -- for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted
public attention to her that she would not otherwise have received
had she been treated like a normal six-year-old child. That
attention probably led directly to her murder...
Oh, I forgot -- you recently visited his palace, and GB can now do no
wrong.
Sorry, but although I don't like the idea of these dumbass beauty
contests for kids, the idea that her parent's actions "led directly
to her murder" is really really sick. By that kind of twisted logic,
every provocative female who is raped and strangled "deserves" her
fate for jiggling her assets. I doubt you'd buy THAT - but I fail to
see the difference.
I categorically reject the disgusting idea that the parents caused her
death. It is legally, morally, and logically SICK.
Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Well, Mr. Sill, I for one am disappointed in your stance.

I think it's common knowledge that any time a woman is raped, it's partly
her fault. She was walking in an inviting way, or was wearing clothing that
provoked the attack. She's at least 25% responsible, if not more.

And further, when there's a guy killing blonds, that are about 5' 3" tall,
it is the fault of the woman who keeps her hair blond if she gets killed.

Back a few years ago there was a poor guy who couldn't resist killing
nurses. What the hell did those women who remained in the nursing profession
expect? They asked for it.

And what about the guy who likes to rape and kill little boys, who he spots
playing little league baseball. The parents were "pushing", or at least
supporting that little boy to be involved in a sport that attracts child
molesters, and for that, they are partly to blame when their child ends up
dead.

The same thing can be said of sick bastard parents who support their
daughters involvement in Girl Scouts, then put the child on display selling
cookies. What else should they expect when the child is abducted, raped and
killed.

I think we can lay the same blame on non-caring parents who support their
daughters involvement in ballet, swimming, any kind of dance, gymnastics,
soccer, baseball, hop-scotch, and spending time on playgrounds. Even those
parents who send their daughters to church dressed in pretty little dresses
are just "asking for it."
--
"You can say any foolish thing to a dog, and the dog
will give you a look that says, 'My God, you're right!
I never would've thought of that!'"
--Dave Barry
http://www.bobhatch.com
http://www.tdsrvresort.com
Will Sill
2006-08-17 18:20:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bob Hatch
Well, Mr. Sill, I for one am disappointed in your stance.
I think it's common knowledge that any time a woman is raped, it's partly
her fault. She was walking in an inviting way, or was wearing clothing that
provoked the attack. She's at least 25% responsible, if not more.
Believe it or not, a self-appointed management consultant guru name
Fred Schutz made that point in his books - along with equally insane
remarks to the effect that people are sick because they want to be and
that consciouness-enhancing drugs are desirable!!!!!!!
Post by Bob Hatch
And further, when there's a guy killing blonds, that are about 5' 3" tall,
it is the fault of the woman who keeps her hair blond if she gets killed.
Back a few years ago there was a poor guy who couldn't resist killing
nurses. What the hell did those women who remained in the nursing profession
expect? They asked for it.
And what about the guy who likes to rape and kill little boys, who he spots
playing little league baseball. The parents were "pushing", or at least
supporting that little boy to be involved in a sport that attracts child
molesters, and for that, they are partly to blame when their child ends up
dead.
The same thing can be said of sick bastard parents who support their
daughters involvement in Girl Scouts, then put the child on display selling
cookies. What else should they expect when the child is abducted, raped and
killed.
I think we can lay the same blame on non-caring parents who support their
daughters involvement in ballet, swimming, any kind of dance, gymnastics,
soccer, baseball, hop-scotch, and spending time on playgrounds. Even those
parents who send their daughters to church dressed in pretty little dresses
are just "asking for it."
Obviously we are overlooking the key to this problem: we should compel
parents to stop sending little girls to school or into any public
place. When they go out to fetch water or gather roots they should
be covered with a shapeless shroud and a veil.

Not to worry, after the Islaamic Jihadists take over, that's the way
it will be. Allah be praised, and kill the infidels!

8-(

Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
Carl A.
2006-08-17 18:42:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Obviously we are overlooking the key to this problem: we should compel
parents to stop sending little girls to school or into any public
place. When they go out to fetch water or gather roots they should
be covered with a shapeless shroud and a veil.
That's a rather simplistic solution since it will only encourage shroud and
veil perverts.

I say, kill them at birth. In time, the problem will solve itself.

Failing that, some sort of chastity belt. The key to the lock would be
passed from father to husband as part of the wedding ceremony.
--
Carl A. in FL
Photojournals of my travels are at
http://sky.prohosting.com/chainfl/
bruce
2006-08-17 18:48:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Obviously we are overlooking the key to this problem: we should compel
parents to stop sending little girls to school or into any public
place. When they go out to fetch water or gather roots they should
be covered with a shapeless shroud and a veil.
Not to worry, after the Islaamic Jihadists take over, that's the way
it will be. Allah be praised, and kill the infidels!
8-(
Will Sill
Of course, since a child is more likely to be molested by a friend or family
member than a stranger, we should isolate all children, especially girls, or
at least keep them in the company of strangers, for their own protection.

Bruce
GBinNC
2006-08-17 01:49:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
So apparently you think the parents are guilty after all, and deserved
all the accusations and innuendo?
So then I take it you see nothing wrong with parents who sexualize their
little girls and put them on public display?

I have to admit, that comes as a surprise. I wouldn't have thought that
of you at all.

GB in NC
Lone Haranguer
2006-08-17 02:30:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Will Sill
Post by GBinNC
What they did was to push a little girl into the "glamour" spotlight --
for what sick purpose, who knows. This attracted public attention to her
that she would not otherwise have received had she been treated like a
normal six-year-old child. That attention probably led directly to her
murder...
So apparently you think the parents are guilty after all, and deserved
all the accusations and innuendo?
"led" to her murder and "guilty after all" are two different things.
Post by Will Sill
You surely are a moron, GB.
Maybe but I agree with his assessment in this case.
LZ
Post by Will Sill
Will Sill
The Curmudgeon of Sill Hill
OTCS = Off The Charts Stupid
Technobarbarian
2006-08-17 16:08:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by CoachPotato
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_ramsey_18
It sounds like this might not be the guy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/17/world/18ramsey.ready.html?ex=1313467200&en=5046c3267bde4667&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

"Ms. Karr said that she and Mr. Karr were in Alabama together on Dec. 25,
1996, the day JonBenet Ramsey was murdered in Colorado."

TB
TS
2006-08-17 18:19:19 UTC
Permalink
Wait until the dust settles. Most of you are jumping the gun on this
just as you did ten years ago. Haven't you learned anything about the
rotten stinking media? Just a day or so ago they broadcast a rumor
about that lady who go claustrophobic on that airliner.
The American media are about a reliable as Al-jahzeera.

TS
Post by Technobarbarian
Post by CoachPotato
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=514&u=/ap/20060816/ap_on_re_us/jonbenet_ramsey_18
It sounds like this might not be the guy.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/17/world/18ramsey.ready.html?ex=1313467200&en=5046c3267bde4667&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
"Ms. Karr said that she and Mr. Karr were in Alabama together on Dec. 25,
1996, the day JonBenet Ramsey was murdered in Colorado."
TB
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...