Re: Just a question (JBR)
- From: "tiny dancer" <tinydancer357@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 29 Aug 2006 14:17:30 -0400
"Bo Raxo" <CheneysHeartIs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1156847880.253482.21430@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-L. wrote:
Tommy Selcraig wrote:
You don't know what you are talking about. That wouldn't explain the
garrote that strangled her or her being raped with a paintbrush.
What, exactly, is the motive for P&J to strangle their daughter to
death and post-mortem, sexually abuse her? Their daughter whom by all
accounts, they loved and adored? Whose photos they had plastered
virtually on every wall of their home?
The same motive that causes some parents to intentionally make their
child sick: to garner huge amounts of sympathy and attention. Why
would a parent engage in Munchausen by Proxy syndrome, to be up all
night with a sick child night after night, to see their own child
suffer?
Because they are attention whores. They like being in the role of a
very put-upon but heroic individual. Killing your child and making it
look like a stranger crime - in fact, here like two different stranger
crimes - has psychological rewards of a similar nature.
*And* if the child accidentally struck her head and was exhibiting
signs of severe brain damage, then they had the motive of not having to
deal with caring for a brain damaged child, of having people see their
beautiful daughter as something damaged. They could just end it right
there, and at the same moment get huge amounts of attention and
sympathy.
Enjoying attention from others is a reasonable personality trait to
infer for someone who competed successfully in several beauty pageants,
as Patsy did when she was younger.
The only "Ramsey's did it" theory that makes any sense at all (and very
little sense, IMO) is that they killed her either accidently or in a
"rage" as Steve Thomas claims, and then covered up the killing with the
staged kidnapping. But even that doesn't make sense because of the
lack of bleeding in the skull.
I'll make it simple for you: Patsy wanted a perfect little princess,
to serve her own needs as an attention whore. JonBenet hits her head,
and now Patsy has a brain-damaged vegetable instead of her perfect
little dress-up doll. So she decides to stage a kidnap crime scene, and
a molestation crime scene, (talk about overdoing it) so she can be the
grieving mother of the victim of a clumsy kidnapper, or maybe a sex
offender who's really good about not leaving any forensic evidence.
You have never explained how patsy managed to come up with all this staging,
fashioning the garrote, etc., within moments of the head injury? I'd really
like to know that? How else do you account for the lack of bleeding into
the childs skull? You did view the autopsy photo's of the actual head
injury, didn't you? And the numerous 'soft strangulations'? And why was
there no external swelling of her head at the point of injury? Have you
ever been around a child who has had a head injury to observe how quickly
that point of injury to the childs head *swells* up? I've had kids fall,
injure their heads, and by the time I could grab a handful of ice to put on
their head, it was already swelling to goose egg size, hence the term "she's
got a big old 'goose-egg' on her forehead" etc.
td
Bo Raxo
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Just a question (JBR)
- From: Iarnrod
- Re: Just a question (JBR)
- References:
- Just a question (JBR)
- From: Cliff and Linda Griffith
- Re: Just a question (JBR)
- From: Tommy Selcraig
- Re: Just a question (JBR)
- From: -L.
- Re: Just a question (JBR)
- From: -L.
- Re: Just a question (JBR)
- From: Bo Raxo
- Just a question (JBR)
- Prev by Date: Re: BREAKING: Charges Dropped Against Karr in J.B.R. Case
- Next by Date: Re: Just a question (JBR)
- Previous by thread: Re: Just a question (JBR)
- Next by thread: Re: Just a question (JBR)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|