With written permission from jameson, I may post what I want about this subject.
With written permission from Lin Wood, I post the text of this email which I received yesterday:

November 25, 2002

Dear Friends:

In its November 5, 2002 issue, The National Enquirer published a false story accusing Patsy of being the author of the ransom note found in the home on the morning of December 26. This bogus story was based on confidential handwriting documents that were obtained by the Enquirer from an anonymous source.

In its most recent issue dated December 3, 2002, The National Enquirer has published a series of articles and photographs covering 31 pages, which articles are headlined with accusatory statements about the Ramseys. These false articles are based on videotapes of the police interrogation of the Ramseys in June of 1998 and the transcript of their police interrogation in April of 1997 again obtained by the Enquirer from an anonymous source.

All of the above confidential documents and tapes were provided several months ago to Darnay Hoffman, the lawyer for Chris Wolf and Linda Hoffmann-Pugh, in response to federal court discovery requests directed to the Ramseys in the libel action filed against them by Hoffman on behalf of Chris Wolf. The materials were provided to Hoffman pursuant to a federal court protective order requiring that the receiving party maintain the confidentiality of the materials until further order of the court pursuant to the procedures and terms of the order.

I regret to inform you that I have learned this weekend that the materials and tapes utilized by the Enquirer to continue its war of false accusations for profit against the Ramsey family were sold to the Enquirer for Forty Thousand Dollars ($40,000.00) by Sue Bennett (a/k/a Jameson), an individual who maintains an Internet website about the JonBenet Ramsey case and has been perceived as a long time supporter of the Ramseys and their innocence. Ms. Bennett tells me that she received these materials and tapes anonymously in the mail and does not know who sent them to her. At the same time, Ms. Bennett states that she is honor bound not to reveal her confidential source. I plan to continue to investigate the misuse of these tapes to determine whether legal action is warranted against the involved parties. I have not been persuaded by Ms. Bennett’s efforts to convince me that her purpose in selling these materials to the tabloids was something other than her personal greed.

As you would expect, John and Patsy are deeply hurt by this betrayal for profit by a friend and supporter. However, the Ramseys are not vindictive people by nature and I suspect they will not seek legal redress against Ms. Bennett, whose desire for easy money may have allowed her to be unwittingly used by third parties to further their anti-Ramsey agenda or help the Enquirer earn more millions from the tragic murder of a child and false accusations against her parents. But I do know that John and Patsy will no longer communicate with Ms. Bennett and will not share any information with her. You will have to make your own decision about your future relationship, if any, with Ms. Bennett.

The Ramseys have allowed CBS, NBC and CNN to view the interrogation videotapes in their entirety. Objective reporting on the content of the tapes shows that the tapes evidence the innocence of this family, the level of voluntary cooperation by this family and the harassment of this family by law enforcement officials. CBS, NBC and CNN have objectively reported on the tapes. The National Enquirer, as any one should expect, has not fairly or accurately reported on the tapes or the Ramseys.

In providing the truth of the tapes to CBS, NBC and CNN, the Ramseys did not seek, nor have they received, one thin dime for the use and broadcast of the tapes.

If you have any further questions or comments about this development, please feel to contact me by e-mail or phone.

John and Patsy thank you for continued support, friendship and loyalty.

L. Lin Wood
L. LIN WOOD, P.C.
Suite 2140, The Equitable Building
100 Peachtree Street, NW
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Phone: 404.522.1713
Fax: 404.522.1716
E-mail: llwood@linwoodlaw.com
Internet: www.linwoodlaw.com

I can't understand why someone who has been pro ramsey for so long would allow tapes that WILL be spinned to point at Ramsey's guilt being released to the Enquirer? For 40K?

Jams, you've been friends with CBS for a long time. Why would they not buy them?

>I have not been persuaded by Ms. Bennett’s efforts to convince me
>that her purpose in selling these materials to the tabloids was
>something other than her personal greed.
I am surprised that any such efforts were attempted.
>
>John and Patsy are deeply hurt by this betrayal for profit by a
>friend and supporter.
A betrayal for money perhaps, but not for profit since based on an hourly basis, it still results in far less than the minimum wage and this calculation does not in any way include the loss of friendship, trust or credibility. In her defense, however, let me state that persons working below the minimum wage are often forced by circumstances to take actions that they otherwise would not entertain for a moment.

>Ms. Bennett, whose desire for easy money may have allowed her
>to be unwittingly used by third parties to further their
>anti-Ramsey agenda or help the Enquirer earn more millions
>from the tragic murder of a child and false accusations
>against her parents.
unwittingly????.

>Objective reporting on the content of the tapes
is not to be expected from the tabloids.

>the harassment of this family by law enforcement officials
will not cease based on the hue and cry raised by tabloid readers.

>the Ramseys did not seek, nor have they received, one thin dime
>for the use and broadcast of the tapes.
>

Maybe she needs the bucks? But she's savvy enough to know there's NO such thing as control with a tabloid.

We all know the Ramsey's aren't guilty, but does she now believe it?

*sigh*

All of my 3 posts over the years can be deleted. Cast my spreadsheet to the wind.

I will no longer put my NAME on this forum. I live in a doofus free zone.

I cannot approve of what she did (if this is the case) because she chastised others so vehemently for doing that very same thing without any regard for whether they needed the money just as badly. It's shameful and there is no excuse for it.

I don't really have any problem with her making money off the forum: I'm a healthy capitalist myself and if she works for it and people are willing to pay, so be it.

But the selling of the materials is different to me, anyway.

If she doesn't KNOW the source, why is she so quick to say she won't reveal her sources? That sounds a bit odd.

Jameson has not responded, so far, and I would like to hear what she has to say for herself.

In the meantime, it does not affect my belief that John and Patsy have been used by the media to make money and that these materials are spun by the Enquirer to make them look guilty to further secure their cash cow. If the Ramseys aren't the villains, their cash cow dries up fast.

If there are laws against what the Enquirer or Jameson did, then Lin and the Ramseys should sue because it's the right thing to do. If people make money by breaking the law and get away with it, then it makes capitalism look bad when it's actually the people who are bad and that needs to be addressed, IMO, of course.

Justice seeker

If the Ramseys are eventually exonerated, the Enquirer will not be able to plead ignorance of the facts if sued for defamation by the Ramseys.

It will be interesting to see if their (NE) position on Ramsey guilt softens in the future based on these interview tapes. If they don't take a more even-handed approach, I feel that they leave their publication open to civil suits on behalf of John and Patsy similar to those filed and won on behalf of Burke.

LP, my heart broke when I read this, but I can't allow myself to judge anyone or jump to conclusions without getting the story right from Jameson. I don't understand this. I can't believe this really happened, especially after the endless hours of dedication to find JonBenet's killer, the constant battle fought by Jameson against the tabloids and anyone who would so much as utter an accusing word against the Ramsey family. This does not make sense.

We do not know the circumstances surrounding this. Sometimes things are not as they seem. That is why I will wait to hear from Jams.

Jameson, I know you for a long time and even though I haven't posted regularly since my illness last year, I am still here reading every day. JonBenet and the Ramsey's are still very much in my heart and on my mind. When the smoke clears, I hope to hear from you.

AMM

I do not think that economic circumstances have in any way impaired her ability to weigh the evidence and come to a reasonable conclusion as to what is evidence and what is 'leak, innuendo and bald fabrication'. I am sure she still holds the Ramseys in high esteem and still believes in their innocence of the murder and their being non-deserving of the tabloid inspired hysteria.

The "incriminating" Aisenberg tapes revealed NO proof against them, and in fact paved the way for a lawsuit against the police department who violated their rights.

I view the Ramsey interview tapes with interest, but doubt that any future criminal case against JonBenet's killer will be affected by the release of the tapes.

Lou Smit was criticized (by some) for going public with the intruder evidence, but IMO he was right to do what he did. I would rather the tabs base their stories on the facts vs. the typical trumped up garbage they've resorted to in the past.

Summersue

Livvy- Dont leave :'-(

I am wondering why Lin Wood and the Ramseys are taking the stance that they are against jameson? Lin's letter has raised many questions in my mind that only he, jameson and the Ramseys can answer.

Lin is a brilliant attorney and for him to say what he has he must be basing this on a belief that jameson has harmed the Ramseys in her actions. I'm just looking for answers and the truth. Nothing more, nothing less.

Justice seeker

I have worked for nearly 6 years for this and while I don't mind taking the blame for not asking permission or blessing for releasing the transcripts, it does hurt that anyone thinks I did this for blood money. If you really think I became that monster overnight, I feel sorry for you.

This is what I just sent Summer - I think it will answer some questions and it is the only statement I will make.

I didn't do this to betray anyone. The tabloid promised to publish a book of the transcripts - - the truth. That was the point. It comes out in January. Very long - 400 pages, and little left out

If the Ramseys published it, it would be discounted as Ramsey "Crocumentary". But not if the tabloids did it.

Lin was encouraging when I mentioned I might write a book. If I made a million off that I don't think he would have cared - - but I took the coward way out - - I didn't write it, I went with the tabloid publisher because they were ready with a promise. And my story isn't going to get the facts out - the transcripts will.

The transcripts prove the Ramseys were totally cooperative, they are INNOCENT!

Now, Lin has cut the ties between me and the Ramseys and he has made this public. That was his choice. I have no control over that.

The flamers are having a party and some of the members here are having to sort out how they feel about this. I think it best if I step back and not interfere with that process at all. It is up to each poster to decide what they want to do.

Did I consider taking the forum down? Sure. But would that really be the right thing to do? This forum has done a lot of good. It will remain.

And as I always said, I would rather 10 good posters than 100 jello flamers. So if we end up with 10 people posting here - - that will be OK with me. The point isn't how many post, it's how many read and if it helps keep the discussion going and the investigation alive.

Posters wanted to hear from me, well here it is - - this is my statement. Do what you want with it.

No one wants to see their faith in human nature shaken. I will look forward to hearing from Jameson saying "I did it so I can donate the money to the Ramseys and/or their childrens fund"......we live in hope.

Jamesons unyielding support of David Westerfield, staggered me.

Money really is the root of all evil.

I can't remember how many times I've seen posters ask jameson why she didn't write a book on the Ramsey case.

I don't quite understand the legalities involved. Lin Wood states in his letter:

"All of the above confidential documents and tapes were provided several months ago to Darnay Hoffman, the lawyer for Chris Wolf and Linda Hoffmann-Pugh, in response to federal court discovery requests directed to the Ramseys in the libel action filed against them by Hoffman on behalf of Chris Wolf. The materials were provided to Hoffman pursuant to a federal court protective order requiring that the receiving party maintain the confidentiality of the materials until further order of the court pursuant to the procedures and terms of the order."

So...Darnay Hoffman was under a federal court protective order to maintain the confidentialty of the documents and tapes? Yet the Ramseys supplied the tapes to 3 TV stations. I don't get that part at all...wouldn't both parties be under the same protective order? I'm assuming jameson was not aware of any federal court protective orders when she sold them. If there's any question that a law was broken, IMO, she should reveal the source, if she knows it.

I have to believe jameson's intention were good, and the money way too tempting. On the other hand it appears the Ramseys could have been placed in a legally precarious situation--and then there's the issue of trust. They've been violated time and again--first with the horrible murder of their daughter in their own home, and then the last 6 years of vicious attacks on them and their family..fueled in a large part by the tabloids....and they trusted jameson---and based on Lin Wood's email, that trust was betrayed.

To coin a common expression on these forums--I'm on the fence, but do not condone any actions that are against the law.

When the book comes out in January it will, in my opinion, continue to a accuse the Ramseys of murdering
their daughter. Jameson expects the truth but I fear she will be sadly disappointed. They will selectively publish transcripts that can be twisted to put the Ramseys in the worst possible light. If the Inquirer has published a single article favorable to the Ramseys, it has escaped my attention. .

Jameson, why arn't you speaking out in your defence?

And why was Darnay a no-show in Atlanta? Was it an inner ear problem---too much security at the airport--or some other reason?

As for money being the root of all evil, well, money is the root of anything worth doing. I got that from a bumper sticker, calm down!

Money may not be everything, but it runs a close-second to whatever is first. In this case, the TRUTH is first.

Everybody just relax, and see how this plays out. It's far from over.

You can't excuse that.

In addition, jameson didn't even tell LP what she was doing. She allowed her to be blindsighted too. She was sneaky and underhanded and did the very thing she herself chastised others for and that is selling your story to the tabloids! I mean, she KNOWS how that old game is played by now.

If her intentions were for the truth to be out and for people to see the R's as innocent, it back-fired because public opinion is STILL that the Ramseys are guilty and the National Enquirer is continuing to further that with their warped stories.

Can the tabs be trusted? I don't think so.

I am thinking that jameson stabbed some people in the back really hard with a sharp knife and it might not be so easy to explain or even say I'm sorry.

>I am thinking that jameson stabbed some people in the back
>really hard with a sharp knife and it might not be so easy
>to explain or even say I'm sorry.
First perceptions of this can be misleading.

When I heard the word 'tapes' used, I thought Jameson had 'worn a wire' during her lunches with the Ramseys. That is far, far from the truth of what happened.

I'm sure there was no intent to 'stab someone in the back'.
There may well have been a desire and intent to write a book, an inability to do so (not all of us are authors or can devote the time and effort that is required) and a lack of knowledge of the publishing world. Economic circumstances may have clouded judgement too, but who amongst us has not heard the expression about a "bird in the hand"? And who amongst us has not followed that expression many, many times.

I have wished many times that Jameson would write a book, but I do realize it is a difficult task. I think such a book would have sold well and brought in far more in royalties than the sum in question. However, the shelves of bookstores often sag with unsold volumes that publishers thought would sell like hotcakes.

I'm sorry the Ramseys are hurt by her actions, but in time perhaps they will understand that jameson has always believed in their innocence and has through her persistence changed the minds of many others who formerly held a different opinion. I do not doubt that many tabloid authors who have written anti-Ramsey stories in the past may see the Ramseys in a different light in these police interviews.

Surely it is indefensible to continue to insinuate they are murderers when there is ample evidence in these interviews they are not.

I appreciate jameson's "let the chips fall where they may" attitude and think she passed on the interviews for the sake of the truth, not to profit from the NE. Surely if profit was her motive, she could have demanded a much higher price.

.

Jameson says that she has a promise from them that they will not trash the Ramsey's.

I am hoping that it was a "legal" promise and in writing.

I don't think that Jameson would do anything to harm the Ramsey's.

And although, The Enquirer or any other "rag mag" would have been my last choice, it can still have a positive impact. Especially since some of those interviews were on television on a very reputable program... they can't stray far from the truth.

I think that Jameson has a point, she could have written the book herself, but it would be discounted by many because of the earlier allegations of her place in the investigation.

If they (the Enquirer) stick to facts, this could be a very good thing for the Ramsey's. It will definately get more coverage than if Jameson were to write the book, even with as well known as Jameson is.

Let's let this play out.

Livvy, don't leave... please.

You hadn't told LP as late as the 25th when she got the e-mail from Lin Wood. I think it is safe to surmise that you wouldn't disclose this and probably felt your secret was safe with the NE.

However someone disclosed the possibility that you were the seller of the tapes to LW, he called you and you told him the things he refers to in his e-mail. He is a lawyer, though, and said he is not convinced by your weak defense. To paraphrase, he is left with the feeling that you did it for simple greed. Lin Wood is on a fishing expedition, make no mistake about this. He needs to get his ducks in a row for some kind of legal action. His target is Darnay Hoffmann, who left the Ramsey's holding the bag as defendants. He wants to do something about this. He did not make a motion for dismissal in the LHP-Hoffmann. So, he is digging.

Could be a separate action against Darnay, in which you will be called as either a co-defendant or witness. You will not be protected by privilege, etc (as a journalist) and refuse to name your source. It looks like a good possibility that legal action may happen to you, in which you will have to hire an atty and the fees will be steep. So, I wonder what it was all for? Money? Was half of the $40,000 promised to Darnay?

I don't believe he would have sent you the tapes w/o a promise to indirectly reap a reward from the NE. His type doesn't do "nuthin' for nuthin'." The stakes were too high for his career. So, now you have $20,00. You gotta pay taxes. There goes another $8,000-10,000. You may have 10,000-12.000 left, but there's that defense lawyer looming over you and his pesky retainer. Depending on the action,that retainer could be 10,000 to 20,000, minimum.

Jam, I really don't think you thought this thing through before you acted. You have deeply hurt the Ramseys. What ever did you gain?

It's all about lynching the Ramseys. What makes you think they will do anything different- ever?

You just don't do that to people who consider you a friend. That is not what a friend does. The Ramseys, at least, should have been warned. Poor Pam had been chatting with people on this forum thinking it was a friendly place to be and I'm sure she was crushed.

When you cause SO much hurt and pain for money, it's hard for anyone to think you are a person of any character at all.

Well, Jams, being on the "legitimate" side as opposed to the tabs, must say I'm a bit puzzled but on the other hand, I ,for one, have on occasion done the wrong thing (in retrospect) for the right reason so not doing a -30-on you. (In journalistic jargon, a traditional symbol for the end of the story in typewriter days.) I'll hang with KitKat and OTB on this one and see how it plays out.
I do hope you conferred with an attorney on this.....given what I've been reading on the forum you may be in a bit of a pickle on the "confidential source" claim but the devil is in the details and I haven't read all of the court orders. Me fears that Lin Wood has deeper pockets than you do. Read up on Vanessa Leggette.
And, my usual soapbox, if records were open, or opened quickly, this sort of thing wouldn't happen.

Why would someone send the complete set of tapes to Jameson---a known supporter and defender of the Ramseys? Was someone trying to muddy the waters because of the pending lawsuits? Did they think the finger would be pointed at Lin Wood or the Ramseys? Or did they simply want her to have them, because of her passion in her belief of Ramsey innocence?

After having a day to digest this, the thing that bothers me the most about the whole thing, is the motivation of the person sending them, and if he/she in fact knew about the court order? How many complete sets of tapes are out there?

I didn't read the November 5th edition of the Enquirer----how could handwriting documents and the videotapes both have gotten into jamesons hands?

Ziggy, how is she backstabbing people? She is trying to prove that the Ramseys are innocent, and show that they were telling the truth during this interview! She is proving there innocence, and thats what she has been trying to do since 96.

Summer

Ramsey friend sells material
Woman gets $40,000 for giving transcripts to National Enquirer

By Owen S. Good, Rocky Mountain News
November 28, 2002

BOULDER - A confidant of John and Patsy Ramsey sold handwriting samples and interrogation transcripts from their daughter's murder investigation to a supermarket tabloid for $40,000.

Susan Bennett, 51, of Hickory, N.C., who uses the name "Jameson" on Internet forums about the JonBenet Ramsey murder, insists she sold the material to the National Enquirer because she believed that its publication would prove the Ramseys' innocence.

It was used in the Dec. 3 edition in a 31-page story headlined: "JonBenet Secret Video Evidence: New Clues Expose Mom & Dad!" that hit Boulder newsstands on Friday.

Bennett, befriended by the former Boulder couple through her advocacy of their innocence, said she sold a transcript from an April 1997 police interrogation of the Ramseys, videotapes of a June 1998 police interrogation and handwriting samples from Patsy Ramsey.

"People make it sound as though I turned on the Ramseys," Bennett said Wednesday. "I still believe 100 percent they are innocent."

She said the National Enquirer intends to publish a book early next year about the case, and she said giving the tabloid the full transcript of police interviews with the Ramseys would show the couple's cooperation with investigators. Bennett said she understood that the information would be used in the tabloid first.

But she refused to give an explanation for why she accepted money from the Enquirer.

David Perel, editor of the National Enquirer, would neither confirm the source of the information in his publication nor say if that person was paid for it. He confirmed the Enquirer is planning to publish a book about the case next year.

Ramsey attorney L. Lin Wood said the couple feels betrayed that a friend would sell information to their enemies. Tabloids have cast suspicion on the parents throughout six years of reporting on the unsolved case. The Ramseys previously sued American Media, publisher of the National Enquirer, over a story about their son, Burke, and won a settlement.

"It's horribly naive to believe that the tabloids are going to fairly and accurately report on any issue or piece of evidence as it pertains to John and Patsy Ramsey," Wood said.

"Their stories are always accusatory and generally misrepresentative of the truth. She knew better than to believe the tabs would give the Ramseys a fair shake."

Wood said the information sold to the Enquirer was part of a discovery order in a federal libel lawsuit brought against the Ramseys by Chris Wolf, who the Ramseys called a suspect in a book they wrote about the murder.

Wood said Wolf's lawyer, Darnay Hoffman of New York, denied providing Bennett with the material.

Hoffman did not return a phone call seeking comment and Bennett said she did not know the source of the material, saying it arrived in an unmarked package.

She could not recall when it arrived.

Wood said Bennett does not face legal action, but said he will investigate to see if she obtained the information in violation of a court order, and if the source of that information can be prosecuted for it.

In the meantime, "John and Patsy will no longer communicate with Ms. Bennett and will not share any information with her," Wood said.

The email from Lin Wood came to me personally and not to this chat room. I opted to share the email by posting it, after gaining LW's permission to do so. He gave permission, if I removed the list of email addresses that also received the email, and if I posted the entire email text.

Jameson was not on the list of people Wood mailed the list to. I will not reveal the names of the other receipients.

I did not send Jameson a copy of the email although she asked me (by way of an email) for a copy. She did tell me by way of email to post whatever I wanted to about this subject, but that she would not respond.

I had no prior knowledge, not a hint, that jameson had copies of the 40 hours of tapes or transcripts of those tapes. I did not know, had no clue, no inkling that jameson had sold these materials or any other materials, ever, to the National Enquirer or any other tabloid.

I do not know who gave the copies of these materials to jameson for her to sell. I do not know who has/had copies of these materials.

I do not know why jameson took money for these materials from anyone, much less a tabloid.

I do not believe National Enquirer and American Media Inc Books will publish a collection of the full unedited 40 hours of transcripts. I believe there will be a book about the Ramsey case published by the NE, maybe in January, but it will be 400 pages representative of it's trashy tabloid reporting. (I would be extremely glad to be proved wrong about this belief)

To me, the greater offense was what was done to the Ramseys. If it is true they did not know ahead of time, then I think Jameson showed a serious lack of appreciation for what they’ve been through over the past 6 years. I am so sorry for them. They must (yet again) feel that there is no one anywhere who can be truly trusted.

But I want to make it clear that LP has NOT been part of anything I do on the outside. I didn't pass information on to her that I was passing on to the Ramsey investigators or the police. She was not part of any project I worked on - whether it was dealing with the Foster issue, dealing with Kane and the Grand Jury, meeting with Lou or Mills or Tracey or CBS or anyone else.

LP was not ever a part of those situations so her NOT knowing about this was not unusual at all.

LP was never a party to any of that and no one should blame her for any of it. I take sole responsibility for my decisions. LP didn't know I had the tapes, never saw the tapes, she knew nothing.

As for when did I intend to tell the forums what I was doing - - get real. The forums are a place for posters to discuss the case, not a right to my daily planner. If you think that I owe you all a report when I talk to a reporter or anyone else, you have it WAY WRONG! Didn't happen before and won't in the future.

Now, please leave LP out of it. She is guilty of NOTHING!

In addition, I don't feel those tapes really belonged to Jameson to sell...it's like selling "hot" merchandise because I don't think she was really supposed to have them. Whoever gave them to her could get into trouble. If someone gave you stolen merchandise and you sold it and it hurt someone, how would you feel? You only have to look at how the Ramseys feel to see they are hurt and again, no matter what the motive, it wasn't fair to ambush them like that.

Edited to add: I believe that jameson still thinks they are innocent. I don't think jameson is stupid or naive. I can't imagine her trusting the NE to do right by this family. They will use the information she sold to them to make the R's look even guiltier because they can and that, imo, does not help to prove their innocence. So what was the purpose? What was to gain?

I really will be quiet now - people will have to sort this out in their own minds. I can't do anything more than what I have.

I am going to go back to other discussions.

The strangest thing is that the transcripts show they WERE cooperative - - wanted to cooperate - - were answering all questions - - and not one forum is doing threads on that - - not even this one - - that is plain wrong.

the transcripts show they wereNOT accusing anyone of this - - they were answering questions so the police might know who was a reasonable lead to follow - - and not one forum is doing threads on that - - not even this one - - that is plain wrong.

the transcripts show they being totally honest - - admitting confusion and maybe missteps - - no staged story being repeated by memory - - and not one forum is doing threads on that - - not even this one - - that is plain wrong.

To be honest I am disappointed in the posters. Yes, this subject deseerved a thread - - but where are the ones that matter?

>To be honest I am disappointed in the posters.
With good reason, perhaps. But that is like the captain of RMS Titanic saying he was disappointed that the ship's steel was not stronger. Undoubtedly a true statement, but certainly one that ignores the fundamental issue involved.

>Yes, this subject deserved a thread - - but where are the ones that
matter?
The threads that matter would have been initiated and populated by posts from the outraged public who had read responsibly written articles published in respectable publications who had received the tapes.

The transcripts prove the Ramseys were cooperative and honest and INNOCENT.

The tabloids got the transcripts - - we all know that. We all know why.

Hate to be rude but it is time to decide if you want to discuss the evidence - - the evidence that shows this forum was right all along - -the Ramseys cooperated, answered every question, did not repeat some memorized statement - and they are frigging INNOCENT!

Stone me all you want. I did what I thought right at the moment. Had I gotten money from Mills and Tracey, or CBS, or Random House for a book, you wouldn't blink an eye.

Instead I sold it to the tabloids believing it would be far better than having the book be the old stories - - a book that will be out there for YEARS.

The book was coming. I made a choice. Hate me for that - criticize me and stone me if you want. I said long ago I am not here to make friends but to do what I can to advance the case and the investigation - - and I have done it to the very best of my ability.

Now - - the important thing isn't if you all like me for what I did. You don't. I understand that.

The important thing is the truth of the transcripts - the Ramseys were cooperative and honest and INNOCENT. There is NOTHING in there that points to Ramsey guilt. They did NOT accuse anyone - - they said they didn't think they knew anyone that evil. But they answered all questions and yeah, some answers prove they are human. Big damn deal.

>they said they didn't think they knew anyone that evil.
And six years later we still don't know if the intruder was indeed someone on the periphery of the family or if it was some total stranger .
Thats the real problem.

I understand wanting the truth out there by letting people see the whole story with the transcripts - bare reality.

I just don't trust that the NE will do any better with them (transcripts) for the sake of the R's than without them. Their slant will sell their books and their only slant has been that the Ramseys are guilty. Didn't the publisher for the NE state he personally thought them guilty and that he would be relentless in perpetuating that story? Does he suddenly change overnight?

Summer

That is totally insane.

I really wish people would just stop the gossip and let things work themselves out.

MY first thought is "OK, what's the punch line?"

My second thought is that Jameson would only sell out the Ramsey's if she thought they were guilty OR if it was somehow a misunderstanding. I buy her explanation that she thought a book would be put together with all of the transcripts. That's easier than "oh, she thought money was more important that the lives and reputations of a family who tragically lost a child."

I'll check back from time to time to see what's happening, but I just don't buy that she jumped ship. That's stupid.

Is Lovely Pigeon taking over? I hope not. No offense, LP, I know you are probably a very nice person, but over the years you've simply got under my skin as some people do. Teacher's pet -- Miss know-it-all, etc.

All good things must come to an end.

I keep seeing things unfold in the most unexpected ways. I keep reminding myself that everyone is human and reacting in their own ways and they don't always seem to me to be logical, but I don't know what else they are dealing with so - - Hell, I can't figure it out so can't imagine anyone else will.

I'm really making this post just to bring things back to the left margin, so if there are any further posts in this thread, it won't be so difficult for me to read them.

>"...tabloids were the only takers ..."
I would seriously doubt that more mainstream, responsible publishing avenues were unavailable.

THREAD CLOSED

THREAD CLOSED

THREAD CLOSED