I would probaby place more credibility in it if she herself hadn’t accused Patsy Ramsey of murdering her child and writing the ransom note.
And? It could easily be that the housekeeper did indeed say something weird about “kidnapping” and, then realizing that such a discussion would be private and thus impossible to prove, simply denounce it just to make sure she didn’t get put under any police suspicion. Innocent people aren’t above lying. And then after awhile maybe said housekeeper spoke with a lawyer (maybe she hired a lawyer when the police questioned her, in fact) who said, “You know, Patsy Ramsey may have libelled you” the housekeeper then thinks “yeah, and the Ramseys are rich, time to cash in.”
It could easily be the housekeeper who lied, but didn’t murder JonBenet. It could also easily be the case that the housekeeper simply didn’t remember her statement to Patsy Ramsey. I personally do not remember everything I have said in my life.
Now, if Patsy Ramsey is lying, then that is probably a more nefarious sign.
It’s also possible on the matter of being kicked out of her house that the housekeeper is lying, but again, has nothing to do with the murder. Maybe the housekeeper told Patsy Ramsey she was in desperate need for $2,500 and created a sob story just so she could be sure she would get the money from the Ramseys. A less likely alternative is the housekeeper was being kicked out of her house but later lied about said fact, that is less likely because such a lie in that case could have been exposed by now with a simple interview of the housekeeper’s land lord (her sister.)
If the first lie is the case, the housekeeper has a vested interest in not sharing to the world she was lying to her employers to get extra money.
And now, folks, a mindreader from the Houston Chronicle recites for us the thoughts of the killer Karr:
Gotta hand it to the guy – he even managed to shoehorn in a swipe at Hillary.
:rolleyes:
I do know, though only because there was a show on the other night My wife wanted to watch in which a retired Boulder detective who disagreed with the department’s suspicions of the Ramseys showed how easy it would’ve been for an intruder to lift the grate and go in through the broken window. It was roughly flush with the ground, raised only a couple inches.
Agreed, thus my “All of that presumes the police were looking,” comment.
Martin Hyde maybe all that. Maybe Hoffman-Pugh really had said that and that’s what gave a panicked Patsy the idea in the wee hours to fake a bogus kidnapping and claim her housekeeper did it and then the panicked Housekeeper denied saying it. Maybe. Or not. I don’t dispute anything you said. Maybe indeed.
DtC -Unless we think Hoffman-Pugh is guilty I say she has a right to say what she wants about Patsy Ramsey whose false (right? anyone say different?) accusation utterly and completely destroyed Hoffman-Pugh’s life. You speak eloquently for Patsy but haven’t much to say for this woman ? FTR as the Ramsey’s Lawyer Lin Wood has noted Hoffman-Pugh was Patsy’s biggest supporter – until (And what Lin Wood’s linked statement shockingly :rolleyes: leaves out) Patsy made public, for her own gain and purposes, her accusations against Hoffman-Pugh (re-read those last few words).
Here’s [url=http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-08-23-karr-evidence_x.htm]USAToday’s[/ur]] latest:
I wonder if the letters were written before or after the murder.
If before, thats pretty darn incriminating. If he was writing these letters after the murder and his obsession with it, he may have simply adopted the killers signature.
Or if it’s accurate. His ex-wives’ families generally seem to loathe him.
I believe in my heart of hearts that, regardless how this turns out, pretty much everybody who knows about this case will loathe him. He seems pretty loathesome.
Then again some will point out how I shouldn’t loathe somebody as crazy as him, that Christian charity should lead us to pity him instead. So I’ll loathe what he did, be it murder, pedophilia, or just general creepiness, and pity him.
God, I hate playing nice. :mad:
I have been hearng for a couple of days about testing Karr’s DNA.
I don’t recall ever hearing that unidentifiable DNA had been found at the crime scene. I would have thought the Ramseys and their attorneys would have trumpeted that far and wide at the time, as it’s pretty strong exculpatory evidence from their point of view.
Can anyone fill me in on this? Is my memory faulty?
There was DNA of unknown origin on JonBenet’s panties, but the Boulder, PD quickly discovered that it could simply have come from someone in the factory where they were sewn.
Really? Does the DNA hang on after the underpants are laundered? Just wondering.
Apparently so, but don’t forget that the DNA tests they were using back then were considerably less sophisticated than the ones we have today. It may have simply been that they got a “hit” with their DNA tests, and couldn’t tell from the condition of the DNA how long it’d been there.
Just came across the wire on CNN.com.
Discuss!
Our long national nightmare is not over.
CNN news banner now reads “DA drops charges”.
again I ask - what wine goes best w/crow?
He just wanted a first class ticket to the states?
Well, it was business class, so the joke was on him!
Really?
But still, how inconsiderate. How is the media supposed to get rid of their hard-on now?