Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Jon Benet case: did the Santa do it?

Apparently the podcast True Crime Garage makes this case.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 600August 2, 2022 1:19 AM

She was promised a special visit by Santa and told several people this before she died.

by Anonymousreply 1July 21, 2022 2:02 PM

John Ramsey did it. All of it.

by Anonymousreply 2July 21, 2022 2:02 PM

Was he wearing a Santa suit at the time?

by Anonymousreply 3July 21, 2022 2:05 PM

[quote] She was promised a special visit by Santa

Santa visits good little girls, not pint-sized harlots.

by Anonymousreply 4July 21, 2022 2:41 PM

Santa is the devil in some cultures. "Santa" could have been the child's way of saying "Satan"

by Anonymousreply 5July 21, 2022 2:56 PM

Jinx I owe you a Coke!

by Anonymousreply 6July 21, 2022 3:05 PM

No one will never know the depths of evil that existed and invaded that house.

by Anonymousreply 7July 21, 2022 3:08 PM

More likely, Jon Benet was saying that she was going to get a visit from Satan, but since it was Christmas and since she was such a precious child, everyone didn't hear what she was actually saying--they only heard what they wanted to hear "Santa."

by Anonymousreply 8July 21, 2022 3:09 PM

And how does Satan visit a child? Often in the form of the mother. In this case, Patsy was possessed by a demon when she murdered her own daughter and later had no memory of what she had done.

by Anonymousreply 9July 21, 2022 3:11 PM

I agree completely, R2, it was John Ramsey on his own. This is the only explanation that has ever made any sense. It amazes me that so few people can see it.

by Anonymousreply 10July 21, 2022 3:28 PM

R10- We have a brilliant poster here on DL who laid this case out step by step. Once you read it you can not see it any other way. Of course he did it! Who else would know their way around that dark house with it's many rooms, stairs, the basement? Who " found" her body in a pitch black room and saw it BEFORE the light was switched on? Who was on the phone trying to book a flight out of Boulder within 30 minutes of finding his daughter dead? Who hired THREE attorneys within the hour of finding his dead little girl? One for him, another one for Patsy, and one for his ex-wife. Odd, isn't it? The oldest male in the home usually the killer in these cases. He was molesting his daughter. He hurt her that night and couldn't get her to stop crying. The fear of Patsy hearing her cries and finding out what he was doing caused him to decide to kill her. He tried to buy enough time to remove her body from the house so he wrote the note hoping to scare Patsy into not calling the police. He had a suitcase in the basement ready to put her body in. He was going to carry her out in that suitcase under the guise of leaving the home to pay the ransom money. But Patsy called the police anyway, upsetting his plan. He is a decrepit child molester and child killer. There isn't a hell hot enough for him.

by Anonymousreply 11July 21, 2022 3:39 PM

Exactly, R11. That “ransom note” was written with one reader in mind…Patsy. At least half of it was threats of what would happen if the police were called. He was desperately trying to buy time. But Patsy called the police before he could stop her. This exonerates her completely, imo.

I am certain the police believe this is what happened too, but they’ve never had any evidence and probably never will have. He’s gottem away with murder.

by Anonymousreply 12July 21, 2022 3:52 PM

^gotten

by Anonymousreply 13July 21, 2022 3:53 PM

R12- I agree that Patsy had nothing to do with this. That little girl was her life, her mini -me. He escaped justice because of his money and Boulder PD's incompetence. They allowed him to bully them and buy them off. I will always wonder what made Patsy call the police so soon that night. I believe a part of her was afraid of him.

by Anonymousreply 14July 21, 2022 3:57 PM

R14 If John did it, I think Patsy lived her entire life in denial and being gaslighted into the grave.

by Anonymousreply 15July 21, 2022 3:59 PM

Umm hello....EVERYBODY knows it was a 'foreign faction'. Geez some of you queens are dense! Now cease and desist with this heinous libel!

by Anonymousreply 16July 21, 2022 4:00 PM

R15-That is the perfect definition of what he did, imo. Gaslighting. She had just completed chemo and was on heavy medications. It was easy for him to confuse her. He threw everybody under the bus, including his own son.

by Anonymousreply 17July 21, 2022 4:02 PM

I've often suspected JonBenet's last words were "I'm gonna tell."

by Anonymousreply 18July 21, 2022 5:13 PM

R18- That poor little child. Sadly I think they were too.

by Anonymousreply 19July 21, 2022 6:07 PM

John did it. After all, he "discovered" the body and took good care to fuck up the evidence.

by Anonymousreply 20July 21, 2022 6:18 PM

R20- He sure did, even using a paint brush that belonged to Patsy to SA and garrote his little girl with.

by Anonymousreply 21July 21, 2022 6:20 PM

I agree John did it. Patsy helped cover it up but still called the police. Patsy lived in denial but remember this was a conservative religious woman. That pristine image of having a wholesome family was the most important thing to her. It's ridiculous to think Burke did it.

by Anonymousreply 22July 21, 2022 6:33 PM

R22- John Ramsey has underhandedly encouraged that suspicion on his innocent son. He is diabolical.

by Anonymousreply 23July 21, 2022 6:38 PM

He's already started to rot in hell.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 24July 21, 2022 6:42 PM

Hiding behind religion like the hypocritical pervert he is. What a spineless coward.

by Anonymousreply 25July 21, 2022 6:45 PM

If he was molesting her, was she his only victim? He had other children, even sons and daughters from other marriages.

by Anonymousreply 26July 21, 2022 10:30 PM

How do we know she was the only one, R26?

by Anonymousreply 27July 21, 2022 11:09 PM

John Ramsey

by Anonymousreply 28July 21, 2022 11:10 PM

R26 There’s no evidence that he’s ever molested anyone else which people have used as evidence that he didn’t molest JB. But that’s not how human beings work. I hate to put it like this but she may have been more attractive to him than his other daughter(s). Quite possibly he had the tendency knocking around the back of his mind for years but controlled it - or never had the opportunity until JonBenet.

by Anonymousreply 29July 21, 2022 11:13 PM

Burke did it unintentionally with a maglight flashlight in a display of sibling rage that went way too far.. The parents, upon realizing what he’d done, finished the job in a panic, and Patsy wrote that absurd random note. All to save face and “save” their other kid.

And while John probably did literally kill her, by finishing off what Burke started, in reality, one spouse, chemo-brain/gaslighting or not, isn’t very likely to defend the other spouse for murdering their kid. Especially when there’s a ton of money in the family. But spouses will and do put on a united front and do crazy things to defend their child - in this case, Burke. And that’s what happened here. John and Patsy covered up and finished Burke’s violent outburst.

The Santa theory is weak. The guy was old and feeble, and there was zero evidence of an outside intruder. Zero. No footprints in the snow, nothing tracked into the house, and there’s no way old Santa climbed through that basement window. There is lots of evidence that it was done by Burke, including and especially his history treating JB horribly, her Maglight flashlight-shaped head wound that fit the same flashlight sitting near where she had been eating pineapple with Burke before she died, and his responses with a psychiatrist afterward.

Burke did it.

by Anonymousreply 30July 21, 2022 11:39 PM

I believe that r11's story is what actually happened. Fibers from John's shirt were found in JonBenet's underwear, and the autopsy showed that JonBenet had been sexually abused.

by Anonymousreply 31July 21, 2022 11:48 PM

[quote] Burke did it unintentionally with a maglight flashlight in a display of sibling rage that went way too far.. The parents, upon realizing what he’d done, finished the job in a panic, and Patsy wrote that absurd random note. All to save face and “save” their other kid.

So, otherwise loving parents find their daughter with a severe head injury and rather than call an ambulance they set about abusing her with a paint brush, tying her up and finishing her off by garotting her?

Even if they wanted to protect Burke, why not leave her at the bottom of the stairs and say she fell?

Absurd nonsense that has never made a whit of sense. Nobody disguises an accident by making it look like murder.

by Anonymousreply 32July 21, 2022 11:54 PM

Even if Burke did it, he was a young child and couldn't be held accountable especially since he clearly had behavioral issues and probably neurodivergency. I could understand Patsy covering it up to protect her baby boy in hysteria. But I don't think John would cover for his son at all. He doesn't seem to be a loving person like that.

by Anonymousreply 33July 21, 2022 11:56 PM

Let's just think about the Burke did it theory a second. If as a parent your son fatally wounded your little girl, why the hell would your first thought/solution be to cover for him by SA your child? You would make it look like an accident, a kidnapping, but never would an innocent parent decide to get a paint brush and SA their six year old daughter and brutally garrote her. That is absolutely unfathomable. It was the oldest male in the home. Statistically speaking it nearly always is. Someone who felt comfortable enough there to write the War & Peace of ransom notes. Someone who knew their way around that big house in the dark. Someone who knew the spiral staircase was the first place Patsy would see the ransom note. Someone who lied to police about a broken basement window. John Ramsey killed his daughter.

by Anonymousreply 34July 22, 2022 12:02 AM

One other fact is that the Ramsey's immediately allowed Burke to leave the house and stay with the neighbors. Why would they take such a dangerous risk? He was only nine years old and very scared and confused. How could the Ramsey's possibly know he wouldn't say something incriminating? They would have never let Burke speak to anyone else had he killed or hurt his sister.

by Anonymousreply 35July 22, 2022 12:20 AM

A 9-year-old boy would not be good at keeping a secret like that especially under the pressure of police and the public. He would badgered constantly for answers. Since he was an impulsive child and prone to spontaneous outbursts, it's make it even less believable he could be this evil mastermind. People watch way too many movies thinking some little kid could be an adultlike sociopath.

by Anonymousreply 36July 22, 2022 12:29 AM

Jon Benet was an adorable child, so horrible and monstrous the way it played out. I only hope and pray that she is resting in peace...

by Anonymousreply 37July 22, 2022 12:39 AM

R36- I agree . The head injury to JB's head would have killed a 300 pound man according to the medical examiner. That took a lot of strength and rage

by Anonymousreply 38July 22, 2022 12:40 AM

John was old and probably had ED. He was on the road traveling for business all the time and could hire hookers for sex.

The brother did it and the parents covered it up. Patsy dramatically write the note. She used her daughter's death for attention. She did it to save her son from being labeled a murderer for killing his sister.

And for dramatic attention reasons.

by Anonymousreply 39July 22, 2022 12:54 AM

Having erectile dysfunction does not mean your sex drive decreases, there's many ways men get pleasure and that's from touching private parts. Sexual pleasure can be achieved without ejaculation. Predators don't stop being predators even when they get old, it's an addiction almost they have to the power of breaking their victims.

by Anonymousreply 40July 22, 2022 12:59 AM

If Burke did do it and John and Patsy staged the scene to cover it up so they wouldn't lose both kids, it was a useless gesture. At the time, Colorado didn't prosecute kids 10 and under and Burke was 9.

by Anonymousreply 41July 22, 2022 1:06 AM

Bad Santa

by Anonymousreply 42July 22, 2022 1:07 AM

[quote]The head injury to JB's head would have killed a 300 pound man according to the medical examiner.

Burke couldn't have done that at his age.

by Anonymousreply 43July 22, 2022 1:13 AM

ED or chemical castration just makes predators more rageful monsters it doesn't make them less likely to abuse.

by Anonymousreply 44July 22, 2022 1:13 AM

Why do some people prefer to think a little nine year old boy killed his sister instead of his horrible, rotten, bully of a father?

by Anonymousreply 45July 22, 2022 1:16 AM

R44, that's not true

by Anonymousreply 46July 22, 2022 1:18 AM

They also use some weird justifications like Burke hit JonBenet before. Okay? Siblings fight and small kids can be reckless. That doesn't mean he ever had any intention to actually seriously harm her.

by Anonymousreply 47July 22, 2022 1:18 AM

John Ramsey had no history of abuse

by Anonymousreply 48July 22, 2022 1:19 AM

Most very young kids are SA by oral/digital means not penile.

by Anonymousreply 49July 22, 2022 1:20 AM

A slight little 9 year old hit her with enough force to put down a 300 pound man? SA her then used a garrote? Ridiculous.

by Anonymousreply 50July 22, 2022 1:20 AM

John Ramsey was of a time when men got away with a lot of abuse especially white men with wealth. The world changed so drastically after the turn of the 21st century and in many ways an improvement was people are listening to abuse victims who in the past would have been silenced.

by Anonymousreply 51July 22, 2022 1:22 AM

His daughter from his first marriage would not have anything to do with him. She hated him. She died in a automobile accident a few years before he killed JB. He is an opportunistic predator, imo. Patsy had to go to another state for weeks of chemo and I think that is when Ramsey began SA little JB.

by Anonymousreply 52July 22, 2022 1:26 AM

R48 No ‘known’ history of abuse. But even if he doesn’t, that proves nothing at all.

by Anonymousreply 53July 22, 2022 1:53 AM

He read my list, checked it twice and I LET HIM KNOW who was naughty or nice!

by Anonymousreply 54July 22, 2022 2:00 AM

That is a really good true crime podcast. They go over some very famous crimes. And there are no girls laughing and joking either. Hate those crime podcasts.

by Anonymousreply 55July 22, 2022 2:15 AM

BUT through it all I never understood the ransom letter, which obviously was written by Mrs. Patsy Ramsey, formerly of Boulder, Colorado, wasn't it?

It must have meant that John was blaming Burke for what happened. Would she really have agreed to be complicit if she believed it was her husband? As pathetically naive the letter was, it also was cold-blooded and a plain coverup, so she was an accessory at best.

For her son? Maybe.

"It was a terrible accident and we have to protect him for the family's and his sake."

by Anonymousreply 56July 22, 2022 2:37 AM

R56, it has never been established who wrote the letter.

by Anonymousreply 57July 22, 2022 2:38 AM

R55 You might like Small Town Murder. It’s two comedians and while they aren’t for everyone, they make sure to tell listeners that they never make fun of the victims because “we may be assholes, but we aren’t scumbags”. They’ve grown on me and I like that they focus on, well, small town murders.

by Anonymousreply 58July 22, 2022 2:44 AM

R56 it's thought the letter was written by Patsy because of some of the unusual phrasing, but her husband could have imitated her. He is an extremely devious man. And has always refused to submit a sample of his handwriting IIRC.

by Anonymousreply 59July 22, 2022 3:22 AM

R56 But why do you say Patsy Ramsey “obviously” wrote the ransom note? Based on what? And why are people so convinced that the Ramsey’s would rather have the world believe that their tiny daughter died at the hand of a sex crazed killer in their own home than that it was a tragic accident involving another child?

As I said, who on earth tries to disguise an accident by making it look like a murder?

People need to step back and look at the facts rather than engage in these dumb “Movie of the week” plotlines.

The idea that anyone would set up a “kidnapping gone wrong that morphed into a sex crime” scenario because of a head injury is too absurd to contemplate. It just didn’t happen. Because that’s what we’re expected to believe…not that they faked a kidnapping, but that they faked a kidnapping that went wrong before they could even exit then house and then decided to engage sexually with the body. Ridiculous.

John murdered his daughter in the middle of the night. He panicked and at first tried to set up an “intruder came in and raped her while we were asleep” narrative but then started to worry that his own DNA might be inside her. So he changed it to “she was kidnapped” so that he could get rid of her body entirely. He needed to get Patsy out of the way and willing to delay calling the police so that he could get the body out of the house. That ransom note was written to fool Patsy, no one else.

He made a really big mistake, though…the threats to kill if the police were called did not start until half way down the letter. I very much doubt Patsy even got that far before she was overwhelmed with panic and terror. All she knew was JB was gone and the letter, in it’s first sentence, said she’d been kidnapped. If John had written “don’t call the police or we’ll kill her” first, I bet she wouldn’t have been on the phone as quickly.

by Anonymousreply 60July 22, 2022 4:56 AM

Here’s a copy of a Reddit thread that has examples of John’s handwriting and the ransom note. They are uncannily similar.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 61July 22, 2022 4:59 AM

R60 I agree with the gist of what you are saying, but if Patsy didn't know what was going on, why was she so blase when the ransom time came and went? That makes me think she knew Jonbenet wasn't kidnapped.

by Anonymousreply 62July 22, 2022 5:45 AM

According to the note, the kidnappers were going to call at 10am. When 10am came, Patsy was happily chatting on the phone and the young rookie cop who the detectives left at the house had to tell her to get off the line.

by Anonymousreply 63July 22, 2022 5:51 AM

This is still the top 10 craziest stories of my lifetime. Born in 1993

by Anonymousreply 64July 22, 2022 5:58 AM

Ryan Murphy needs to do an American crime story on this, Chandra levy or Natalie Holloway

by Anonymousreply 65July 22, 2022 5:59 AM

R62 Good question, but impossible to answer. We don’t know what she was told or what she knew at that stage. It’s highly likely that she didn’t sit down and read the letter closely - I think she was completely hysterical and had to be calmed with drugs. So, it’s not impossible that details weren’t really making much impression.

But I don’t know - and it’s undoubtedly true that she was behaving in strange ways after JB’s murder which is part of the reason the mystery endures.

But she called the police at 5am. This is a fact and it’s impossible, literally impossible, to square that with the idea that she crafted a ransom note intended to buy time with regards to calling the police and then ruined it by calling them anyway.

They (if they were guilty) had every reason to believe that JB’s dead body would have been found by the police almost immediately - and that would have happened if the police weren’t so useless. So exactly how was Patsy Ramsey going to benefit by crafting a long-winded ransom note then immediately calling the police knowing they’d know there’d been no kidnapping as soon as they arrived?

It was only John who stood to benefit. Get Patsy out of the house with Burke…remove JB in the suitcase, collect the ransom money, fake a phone call to the house at 10am from a phone box then go home claiming no kidnappers showed up. Not exactly a water tight plan but the best he could come up with on the fly.

by Anonymousreply 66July 22, 2022 6:50 AM

R63 That’s not true.

by Anonymousreply 67July 22, 2022 6:51 AM

John Ramsey killed JonBenet. End of story

by Anonymousreply 68July 22, 2022 7:39 AM

I don't know who did what, but it was one of the Ramseys.

by Anonymousreply 69July 22, 2022 7:43 AM

Patsy used "and hence' in a Christmas card.

'And hence' was in the random note.

Dismissed it later as being picked up from writing it so often, -or maybe because it's a popular phrase.

No, it's not a popular phrase. And/hence mean the same thing therefore it's redundant and superfluous.

by Anonymousreply 70July 22, 2022 12:57 PM

It must have been extremely overwhelming for Patsy to find out her son accidentally killed his sister.

The social weight was too much.

by Anonymousreply 71July 22, 2022 1:03 PM

The lower-case As in the ransom note are too practiced. Whoever wrote that (with their left hand) was someone who wrote As that way in their everyday life.

by Anonymousreply 72July 22, 2022 1:11 PM

They also did a handwriting analysis that showed if the ransom note was typed on a computer first and printed and then the font traced that it was a perfect match for a computer font traced by hand. That also points to John, who was a computer expert.

by Anonymousreply 73July 22, 2022 1:28 PM

The theory about Patsy Did It was that if she wrote the note, she was not thinking logically. She was panicking after killing JB, the person she loved most in the world, in a fit of uncontrolled rage and couldn't deal with the guilt and shame of her unplanned act. So, nothing she did after that made logical sense--the staging, the note, the calling the police were all acts of a panicked, unwell mind. At the time, Patsy, aging beauty queen about to turn 40, was in treatment for serious cancer that most women don't survive, under high stress from the holiday and having all the holiday planning put on her, including staging her house for holiday tours, having multiple holiday events to coordinate with perfection, all where she wanted JB to look and act a certain way when JB was starting to act out, and the family having a flight for another holiday event early in the morning after an holiday night party that followed all day Christmas celebrations, and having the packing for all put on her, so she had a night of no sleep. She was stressed, overwhelmed, unwell, and did something in the heat of the moment and panicked. That's the Patsy theory.

by Anonymousreply 74July 22, 2022 1:34 PM

R73, you know there were two versions of the note found in the kitchen, don't you? The relatively clean final version version on the steps and an obvious practice version with lots of strikeouts and changes on the back pages of the pad the final version had been written on.

by Anonymousreply 75July 22, 2022 2:44 PM

Santa? Heavens, no.

Good little girls go to heaven.

Pint-sized harlots get a dirt nap.

Any questions?

by Anonymousreply 76July 22, 2022 4:17 PM

R74 A “theory” that is not attached, even slightly, to any evidence is simply a fictional narrative.

by Anonymousreply 77July 23, 2022 12:26 AM

new 60 minutes sunday...australia

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 78July 23, 2022 5:40 AM

If Burke accidentally hit JB, no PD/DA in their right mind would lock him away - that is the running theory on the family’s cover up. It’s ludicrous to believe that the Ramseys were concerned about losing both children, ergo they put together this convoluted scenario, adding in so much extraneous evidence that could easily have caught the parents in this twisted tale and created an immense amount of trauma for them to live through.

Patsy didn’t do it, Burke didn’t do it. I don’t know about John - the only thing I know for sure is that the Boulder PD and DA were either inept or corrupt or both. Poor little girl. If you don’t know much about the case, please look for her more candid pics - she seemed like such a happy, sweet child and was just a baby when she was brutalized.

by Anonymousreply 79July 23, 2022 12:00 PM

And “creating”

Oh, DEAR!

by Anonymousreply 80July 23, 2022 12:01 PM

It was definitely Santa:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 81July 23, 2022 1:18 PM

The reason people thought an intruder did it was because they were rich.

Because they were rich, Patsy was into social circles, popularity, being a pageant queen is exactly why I think she covered it up. She didn't want the social circle shame and gossip of being a bad Unchristian mother to an evil little boy that killed his sister. Sure, they could explain the accident but wouldn't it fall back on her? The whispers, the social declining invites?

Concoct a story to be a victim and not lose the attention. Burke is protected and the horror of what really happened is lessened. Besides there really are killers on the loose and parents should hug their children closer anyway.

by Anonymousreply 82July 23, 2022 1:26 PM

The father did it, wifey wrote the note, horrible case, people joke about that poor little girl. All these disgusting "kiddie" pageants.

by Anonymousreply 83July 23, 2022 1:36 PM

R61 but was she dead dead?

by Anonymousreply 84July 23, 2022 3:04 PM

One of us got what they wished for.

by Anonymousreply 85July 23, 2022 3:07 PM

I'm not certain John vs. Burke (lean John), but the intruder theory is so ridiculous I'm amazed that people believe it. How do supporters of that explain the details of the ransom note? I'm genuinely curious.

by Anonymousreply 86July 23, 2022 3:21 PM

Doesn't the ransom note's randomness seem desperately random, like the exaggerations of a bad liar?

Ta.

by Anonymousreply 87July 23, 2022 3:53 PM

Part of the reason people suspected Patsy was the content of the ransom note seem fantastical, childish, stupid, and exaggerated in the style of someone who had grown up as a dramatic beauty queen with little real life experience but highly focused on movies and fairytales. John was thought to be more intelligent, logical, mature, and no-nonsense and not as likely to have written such a stupid note.

by Anonymousreply 88July 23, 2022 4:02 PM

There was a cover up. His business was in process of being sold to MIC affiliated corporations.

Regardless of what actually happened or who killed her, meddling to obscure until the biz deal went through occurred.

And that is why we most assuredly will never know the truth.

by Anonymousreply 89July 23, 2022 4:15 PM

The only handwriting " experts" who claimed the random note was written by PR were the ones hired by and paid for by John " child killer" Ramsey.

by Anonymousreply 90July 23, 2022 4:18 PM

R90- Ransom, sorry for the typo.

by Anonymousreply 91July 23, 2022 4:22 PM

John could have written the note mimicking Patsy's style to deflect blame on him.

Note that their local pastor refused to shake either one's hand ever again, as reported by other regular church goers.

by Anonymousreply 92July 23, 2022 4:22 PM

R92- I remember that and it was very telling. JR looked so very guilty in that news clip.

by Anonymousreply 93July 23, 2022 4:26 PM

how does one write a note without their hand touching the paper and getting DNA on it? You can't put a pen to paper for 3 pages and not have the pages move while writing without either holding it down with the opposite hand or your palm pressed.

by Anonymousreply 94July 23, 2022 4:36 PM

R94- Rubber kitchen gloves? Long sleeved shirt?

by Anonymousreply 95July 23, 2022 4:39 PM

Jon and Patsy are aspies but they are innocent of killing Jon Benet. The Boulder police know this which is why they are sitting on evidence and wont do further dna testing. I went down a serious rabbit hole about this last Christmas when I had covid. It was either Santa or the the same guy who broke into a young girls bedroom two stories up during the middle of the night two miles away from the Ramsay’s shortly after Jon Benet died. You dont hear much about that intruder from Boulder police. Wonder why.

by Anonymousreply 96July 23, 2022 6:32 PM

R69 Can you expand on that?

by Anonymousreply 97July 23, 2022 6:33 PM

R89 I mean. Can you expand on that?

by Anonymousreply 98July 23, 2022 6:33 PM

R35 Because they were weirdos. Rich, and out of touch with reality weirdos. Rich people do weird things.

by Anonymousreply 99July 23, 2022 6:41 PM

R96- John Ramsey.

by Anonymousreply 100July 23, 2022 6:42 PM

Natalie Holloway’s mother dated John. She never would have done that had he given off vibes that he killed his daughter. Fathers dont just fuck their toddlers. People have run wild with their theories.

by Anonymousreply 101July 23, 2022 6:43 PM

I wonder if Burke (the shit smearer) ever farted in his sister's face?

by Anonymousreply 102July 23, 2022 6:45 PM

Beth Holloway was one thirsty media whore.

She'd have dated Hitler if it had brought her a little extra attention.

by Anonymousreply 103July 23, 2022 6:48 PM

John has been pushing for more dna testing, to no avail by the Colorado police. Dna testing has advanced since and no doubt could solve this case easily today. You have to ask yourself why the Boulder police will not cooperate in doing so.

by Anonymousreply 104July 23, 2022 6:51 PM

R103 I think she was a mother desperate to have her daughter’s killers brought to justice.

by Anonymousreply 105July 23, 2022 6:53 PM

Covid rabbit hole digger here. I was 1000% convinced John did it before I discovered evidence that wasn’t made public or that was glossed over by Boulder police. Jon lawyered up because his attorney friend ordered him to do so asap. I think Jon and Patsy are odd, cold and just bizarre people. Bad parents. But they did not kill their daughter.

by Anonymousreply 106July 23, 2022 6:56 PM

R101- She also quickly dumped the pos.

by Anonymousreply 107July 23, 2022 6:56 PM

R107 I would be willing to bet it had more to do with him being an insufferable bible thumping aspie rather than daughter fucker. I think she would have done interviews saying so if she believed the latter. A mother who loses her daughter to rape and murder isn’t going to cover for some man who may have done the same. That being said, the Jon Benet threads are my favorite on DL so keep the comments rolling

by Anonymousreply 108July 23, 2022 7:01 PM

John Ramsey is still trying to control the narrative, I see. John, you filthy perverted baby killing pedophile, we KNOW you killed your innocent young daughter to hide what a filthy, nasty, perverted child molester you are. Your God knows too.

by Anonymousreply 109July 23, 2022 7:01 PM

R100 I promise you its not. Its the covid rabbit hole troll

by Anonymousreply 110July 23, 2022 7:06 PM

R53, very few people turn into abusers when they're 50. If he'd abused anyone, you'd think a victim would have come forward by now

by Anonymousreply 111July 23, 2022 7:12 PM

R111- His daughter died in an auto accident. She hated his guts and would have nothing to do with him. Within one hour after " finding" his dead daughter he hired an attorney - for his ex-wife. He is an opportunistic molester. Also, many victims never talk about their abuse and if they do it is in private with a therapist, not to the media.

by Anonymousreply 112July 23, 2022 7:20 PM

R94 The family DNA on the notepad and fingerprints from family were meaningless because it was a pen and notepad taken from their house--it was Patsy's notepad and pen, so her DNA were expected, as were the DNA and prints of other family members. Just like their fingerprints in their home were expected.

by Anonymousreply 113July 23, 2022 8:01 PM

R89 I'm intrigued by the theory you mention about a cover up being connected to the high-profile sale of John's business. Under what circumstances do you see the connection, besides the odd timing? For instance, did someone kill Jon Benet because they were upset about the sale? Or, would the killing of Jon Benet have threatened the business deal, and if so, how? The ransom note seems to suggest she was targeted as a message to John. Do you think that's true? What would be the connection between the killing of a little girl and a high-profile business deal? And what would be the motive for such a cover up involving the deal and the murder?

by Anonymousreply 114July 23, 2022 8:04 PM

R113- Written on their notepad with a pen that belonged to them, a pen that was kept in one of the kitchen drawers.

by Anonymousreply 115July 23, 2022 8:04 PM

R114- A scandal of that level would be every business owners nightmare. That makes absolutely no sense to me.

by Anonymousreply 116July 23, 2022 8:10 PM

R114 the covering up of whatever crime may have occurred, the stifling of the investigations, the blockades the parents put up around them, and the extensive interviews with that couple who were their friends and major supporters in Boulder of that time but later fell out with them suggest a need to stymie the truth, whatever it was.

You can make up nearly any scenario you want. But these parents weren't acting in any way "normally" (whatever that means, considering the circumstances) and did not aide the investigation as much as retreat behind the wall of their money and lawyers to wait it out.

I don't see a pure accident causing such a cover up. People who commit murder struggle often to cover over the crime with "accidents", not the other way around. If your kid falls, or the one kid hits the other kid, you don't finish the job by strangling the kid and staging a kidnapping.

The police department, the DA and all of the bureaucracies involved also did not trust each other. Why was that, one wonders? It suggests leaks and trying to prevent them. Because money was involved behind the scenes, trying to shut shit down.

This is not my kind of case (I don't like studying crimes against children). But this is what reading has suggested.

His business had revenue of $1billion, was affiliated with Sun Microsystems, was a subsidiary of Lockheed Martin and was later sold to GE.

by Anonymousreply 117July 23, 2022 8:29 PM

^addendum-read the fake "ransom note" with biz end & connections in mind.

by Anonymousreply 118July 23, 2022 8:40 PM

R117- Excellent post and that about sums it all up very nicely. When all of this plus all of the other evidence is taken into account there it is very clear who committed this crime. I have seen this case described as a such a mystery when it is very clear to most people that John Ramsey killed JB and got away it because of his wealth.

by Anonymousreply 119July 23, 2022 8:41 PM

R96, who cares if they are aspies or if crimes were committed nearby? Explain the ransom note, please. That's what makes it clear that someone inside the house was involved.

by Anonymousreply 120July 23, 2022 9:01 PM

I’ll always think it was Burke because there is no other reason for the parents to work together to cover it up.

by Anonymousreply 121July 23, 2022 9:03 PM

R121- No other reason except to cover John Ramsey's disgusting perverted ass.

by Anonymousreply 122July 23, 2022 9:16 PM

Piecing it all together--John molests Jon Benet in a way that causes her enough pain that he can't keep her quiet and she threatens to tell or just won't stop screaming, so he kills her because he can't have a scandal interrupting the business deal in progress or because he can't have Patsy find out, and then all the lawyers and people involved in the business deal help cover up the murder because they don't want the taint of being business partners with a child murderer to corrupt a 1 billion dollar deal?

by Anonymousreply 123July 23, 2022 9:21 PM

R123 or something like that.

If you are an intruder and you come to molest, abduct, murder or any combo and it goes wrong you don't bother writing a diversion and staging a scene to suggest a kidnapping. You obscure the evidence you know about and get the hell out ASAP.

There is no need to buy time to escape if you've already absconded from the scene.

by Anonymousreply 124July 23, 2022 9:26 PM

At the time, I don't think U.S. society could accept that a rich, white male would do such a thing. Several posters in this thread, like R96 and R111, still exhibit this type of thinking.

Some people refuse to believe that a rich man who could have a hot girlfriend on the side would instead choose to routinely drag his 6-year old daughter into the basement to sexually assault her. But pedos marry and have kids. They always have. Some are not exclusively attracted to children but see them as easy and convenient victims.

by Anonymousreply 125July 23, 2022 9:27 PM

R123, the police made a lot of mistakes and succumbed to pressure from the Ramseys but I don’t think there was a comprehensive conspiracy connected to the sale of his business. That would involve too many people. Besides, the minute the crime made the national news everyone thought someone in the house did it.

by Anonymousreply 126July 23, 2022 9:35 PM

Have any of you watched the police video of the house that they filmed the day/night of the murder? First of all it is so very eerie, but once you see just how many different rooms there were and how cluttered the basement was, you really understand then that whoever killed her had to live in that house.

by Anonymousreply 127July 23, 2022 9:39 PM

R126 you don't need to continually cry out "conspiracy". The govt (at all levels) is a lot more amenable to pressure placed by prosperous, influential, connected and "upstanding" citizens than it is to sad ghetto mom calling about missing daughter.

by Anonymousreply 128July 23, 2022 9:39 PM

R128- How many wealthy people who are clearly guilty of serious crimes ever do one day in jail in this country? Hell, look at the former45. OJ Simpson, Robert Blake. Justice is for sell in this country. The rule of law only applies to the poor.

by Anonymousreply 129July 23, 2022 9:43 PM

Well, how did they find all of the stuff needed to stage the thing. The paper and pens, the garrote materials. Her blanket. I have also read some underwear that wasn't the child's proper size, that Patsy had either bought by mistake or had bought for someone else, had been used to redress her. That package was supposedly not in the child's room. Who goes looking around the house for clean underwear and not in the dresser drawer of the bedroom where you are snatching the kid in the first place, and manages to also find some?

The entire house and most of its contents locations would have had to have been prescouted or lucked upon.

by Anonymousreply 130July 23, 2022 9:44 PM

R130 the underwear detail is interesting and disturbing to me. Why would John or Patsy or anyone have redressed Jon Benet in underwear so very large from a package of adult sized underwear? I remember hearing that Patsy had bought the underwear for one of the nieces but Jon Bennet liked it so much it was kept for her? If so, why put it on her when it was so many sizes too large? Everything else she was wearing was hers. It's odd and doesn't fit.

by Anonymousreply 131July 23, 2022 9:52 PM

R130- Exactly. A real kidnapper or child molester would want to get out of that house fast. No one would take the time to write an abnormally long ransom note, a real kidnapper would already have that with him before entering the house.

by Anonymousreply 132July 23, 2022 9:54 PM

R131- That sounds like something a father who never dressed his daughter would do. In a hurry, grab the first pair he saw without really caring how they fit.

by Anonymousreply 133July 23, 2022 9:56 PM

Did John recently remarry a blond woman who is involved with child pagents? Doesn't his new wife make the little girls' dresses for competition or something? Maybe he really likes child beauty queens.

by Anonymousreply 134July 23, 2022 10:03 PM

R134- He absolutely did. I think he has a fetish for little girls in pagents. He is a sick bastard.

by Anonymousreply 135July 23, 2022 10:07 PM

The cap was put back on the pen and the pen was returned to the drawer. Of course John or Patsy wrote the ransom note.

by Anonymousreply 136July 23, 2022 11:24 PM

R136- It boggles the mind how complicated some people have tried to make this crime. It isn't complicated at all. It is very obvious that John Ramsey killed his daughter. No one else except someone who lived in that house could have done this.

by Anonymousreply 137July 23, 2022 11:34 PM

No kidnapper in the history of the fucking world has written a ransom note at the crime scene, in the process of committing the crime. The ransom note is always pre-written and taken with them to the crime scene. People who think John and Patsy didn't do it are idiots.

by Anonymousreply 138July 23, 2022 11:44 PM

R138- Exactly and he knew where to leave the note right where Patsy would find it when she awoke. The spiral staircase.

by Anonymousreply 139July 24, 2022 12:06 AM

FWIW, this is what I think happened:

John had been abusing JB for some months. On Christmas night, he waits for Patsy to fall asleep then goes to JB’s bedroom and abuses her. She is overtired and becomes hysterical and noisy.

Unable to quiet her, he takes her downstairs to the kitchen out of Patsy”s earshot. He gives her a snack and makes himself some tea…an alibi explanation for them being there if Patsy comes down. JB cannot be calmed and possibly says that’s she’s going to go and tell her mother. John panics and hits her on the head with a blunt instrument - possibly the torch. She is immediately deeply unconscious and John think she is dead.

His first thought is to stage an accident - she fell down the stairs. He goes to her room to collect clean underwear because he doesn’t want her found in the ones she was wearing while he abused her (blood & maybe his DNA too). Unfamiliar with her clothes he selects a pair that’s too big. He also wipes down her body to try and clean away any evidence.

He then realises that her body probably has internal signs of his abuse, so he changes his plan to - “Pervert broke in and raped her”. He takes her to the basement and trusses her up in a manner that he thinks makes her look like a victim of sexual assault….hands tied etc. He violates her with the paintbrush handle in the hope of removing any DNA innside her and to further brutalise her body in the manner of a rapist.

He realises that if his DNA is inside her, a paintbrush won’t remove it and there may also be signs of him on her that, not being a scientist, have not occurred to him. She has to disappear completely and never be found so kidnap is the only way.

He cannot risk getting rid of her that night because the sound of the garage opening and his car driving off would probably alert the neighbours, and possibly Patsy so he needs to buy himself enough time to stage a kidnapping.

He writes a “ransom note” with a heavy emphasis on not calling the police. His plan is to convince Patsy to take Burke to safety while he ”deals with the kidnappers”. He can then come back and say they never showed up…amd finally call the police.

In the confusion and hysteria that accompanies Patsy finding the note and seeing that JB is missing he, for whatever reason, is unable to stop Patsy from calling the police - and he’s sunk.

The great red herring of this case is the almost universal belief that Patsy must have been involved - the moment you realise she can’t have been it all falls into place. That ransom note, if you read it, has one function…to delay any call to the police and, given that JB’s body is still in the house, that extra time can only be needed to remove her. It is impossible for the writer of that letter and the person who phoned the police at 5am to be the same person. Impossible.

Patsy phoning the police when she did exonerates her.

by Anonymousreply 140July 24, 2022 12:19 AM

I left a bit out…

The garrotte was part of the “sex crime staging”. John doesn’t realise that she’s actually - although barely - still alive and the strangulation kills her.

by Anonymousreply 141July 24, 2022 12:21 AM

I agree with your analysis, R140.

But Patsy must have realized at some point before she died that John was guilty. How do you go to your grave knowing such a thing and not say anything? Plus, she was leaving her other kid behind with that monster.

by Anonymousreply 142July 24, 2022 12:31 AM

I also agree with r140. I would bet $$$ that's exactly how it happened.

by Anonymousreply 143July 24, 2022 12:36 AM

They weren't that wealthy. Doubtful it's like a Patty Hearst kidnapping. He had a few million and his own company.

FBI never saw a note written so lengthy. Usually it's quick and to the point. Patsy and John wrote the wordy, rambling note.

So the motive was to cover up assault on John's behalf? Because she was in pageants. Lots of southern girls are in pageants in the south and their dad's don't abuse them. It doesn't mean he directed it. They said it was something Patsy liked to do to bond with her daughter.

The man was out of town on business most of the time! Patsy did some half baked plan after some accident and John went about trying to cover it up.

She says in the video Daddy's not there. Didn't he take a bunch of trips to Amsterdam? A rich man can get as many hookers as he wants, not destroy his own family.

Just because he's a man doesn't mean he did it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 144July 24, 2022 12:39 AM

Yes, R142 - I think she must have at least begun to suspect before she died. Reed White (a friend who was there that morning) came to think it was John.

by Anonymousreply 145July 24, 2022 12:40 AM

R144 and just because he's a man doesn't mean he DIDN'T do it.

And yes, a rich man can get hookers. If that is what he wants.

But sometimes, a rich man wants to have sex with his own 6-year old daughter. Why do you think he would see that as "destroying his family"?

He would just see it as something that no one was ever going to find out about it so it would have no impact on HIS life.

by Anonymousreply 146July 24, 2022 12:48 AM

Your post is absurd, R144.

JB’s body had evidence of chronic sexual abuse - almost every pathologist consulted agreed on that. It is nearly always men who abuse in this way. The statistics on men who abuse their biological daughters is horrendous- something like 1 in 20, so this is not a rare event.

JB’s dead body, showing clear signs of sexual assault, was found in the home with no evidence whatsoever of an intruder. And you think it can’t have been the most obvious suspect - the only adult male in the house - because he “wasn’t around much”? And how do you know that anyway? He was around enough.

by Anonymousreply 147July 24, 2022 12:58 AM

That ransom note backfired on him. After she called 911 he went into a panic. He was acting so odd that his friend suspected him immediately. So did that female officer who was there. He wanted to immediately book a flight out of Colorado. The police stopped him from leaving. When he came up the stairs with her body he carried her with his arms straight out. The way one would carry a muddy pet to avoid getting dirty. He is a murderer and a monster.

by Anonymousreply 148July 24, 2022 1:01 AM

If "the Santa" did it there would be evidence enough to have him arrested. But there is none.

by Anonymousreply 149July 24, 2022 1:04 AM

R142, Patsy was very sick at the time of the murder. She may have known at some level what had happened, but there are countless cases of women who have closed their eyes to child abuse and worse. They just can't admit it.

by Anonymousreply 150July 24, 2022 1:07 AM

Occam's Razor.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 151July 24, 2022 1:10 AM

The medical examiner said that JonBenet had been a victim of ongoing sexual abuse. John Ramsey was the only adult male who was ever alone with her.

He totally did it. He's a sick twisted fuck.

by Anonymousreply 152July 24, 2022 1:13 AM

Where is Jessica Fletcher!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 153July 24, 2022 1:13 AM

Wasn't it misreported and the irritation could have caused a bubble bath?

How would it be rule out Burke? Is the report he smeared his own feces in her room true?

by Anonymousreply 154July 24, 2022 1:14 AM

The detective on the case who had access to more evidence than we do thought Patsy did it while John was asleep.

He confronted them directly on Larry King.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 155July 24, 2022 1:21 AM

R150- She stayed heavily medicated until the day she died. She was medicated the night he killed JB. I also believe that she somehow knew what he did. She was being accused of killing her daughter in the media and JR pretended to be her only supporter while throwing her under the bus the way he did everyone in his life. I have always wondered why she called 911 against his wishes. Was she afraid of him? Everyone who was there said he wasn't acting normal.

by Anonymousreply 156July 24, 2022 1:21 AM

Nothing was misreported, R154.

JB’s hymen was missing - gone. In a five year old child this only occurs with ongoing sexual abuse (excepting some very rare medical abnormality).

11 pathologists looked at her autopsy findings. 9 said definite sexual abuse. 1 said probable sexual abuse. 1 said no sexual abuse - amd that was the pathologist hired for the documentary that blamed Burke.

Bubble bath cannot cause a hymen to disappear.

by Anonymousreply 157July 24, 2022 1:32 AM

Some say three voices are heard on the 911 call. *If* that's true, then why lie about Burke being asleep upstairs?

by Anonymousreply 158July 24, 2022 1:33 AM

This page lays out the evidence for sexual assault, with citations and links.

Importantly:

[quote] In mid-September, a panel of pediatric experts from around the country reached one of the major conclusions of the investigation - that JonBenet had suffered vaginal trauma prior to the day she was killed. There were no dissenting opinions among them on the issue, and they firmly rejected any possibility that the trauma to the hymen and chronic vaginal inflammation were caused by urination issues or masturbation. We gathered affidavits stating in clear language that there were injuries "consistent with prior trauma and sexual abuse", "there was chronic abuse" ... "Past violation of the vagina" ... "Evidence of both acute and injury and chronic sexual abuse." In other words, the doctors were saying it had happened before [quote]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 159July 24, 2022 1:36 AM

R158 Yes, some people say they can hear that - and just as many say they can’t. So it’s a matter of interpretation.

Lots have said they can hear John say, “We’re not talking to you” which can only be to Burke.

Firstly, isn’t that a very odd thing to say? Of course they have to talk to him if he ‘s just killed his sister and they all need to get their stories straight.

Secondly, if John is actually saying something that sounds like that, maybe it’s “Who are you talking to?” which is similar. I can well imagine him saying that if he comes into the kitchen while Patsy is hanging up.

But, this is all a bit tenous because the recording is not at all clear so not evidence of anything.

by Anonymousreply 160July 24, 2022 1:45 AM

R159- I believe that he started abusing her when Patsy was out of the state getting her chemo treatment. She was gone quite awhile. Patsy had cognitive difficulties because chemo causes " Cog fog". Chemo brain is a common term used by cancer survivors to describe thinking and memory problems that can occur during and after cancer treatment. Chemo brain can also be called chemo fog, cancer-related cognitive impairment or cognitive dysfunction. MS causes also causes cog fog. I have MS and I have severe memory problems at times and also confusion. I also believe she may have been abusing her prescription medication. It was so easy for him to gaslight her in her condition.

by Anonymousreply 161July 24, 2022 1:45 AM

Suuure John has, r103.

by Anonymousreply 162July 24, 2022 1:46 AM

[post redacted because linking to dailymail.co.uk clearly indicates that the poster is either a troll or an idiot (probably both, honestly.) Our advice is that you just ignore this poster but whatever you do, don't click on any link to this putrid rag.]

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 163July 24, 2022 1:55 AM

^^^ I mean…”tenuous”.

by Anonymousreply 164July 24, 2022 1:56 AM

And it was quite grubby too, apparently, R163.

by Anonymousreply 165July 24, 2022 1:56 AM

R163- It was also filthy and cluttered. If I had been lucky enough to have such a beautiful home it would be spotless and tastefully decorated.

by Anonymousreply 166July 24, 2022 1:57 AM

[quote]That house was so tacky. Patsy had atrocious taste.

You know what she reminded me of? A rube. A well-scrubbed hustling rube with minimal taste.

Ta.

by Anonymousreply 167July 24, 2022 1:58 AM

R131, They were out of Child Size at the time? Patsy was in an ungodly rush and panic? She wasn't paying that close attention?

by Anonymousreply 168July 24, 2022 1:59 AM

R167: She was also very lazy in my opinion and not very concerned with personal hygiene. Hers or the children's.

by Anonymousreply 169July 24, 2022 2:00 AM

r167 it was like a white trash person's idea of how "classy" people decorate.

I've read that the Ramseys lived like pigs. They were dirty, slobby and unhygienic. Gross family.

by Anonymousreply 170July 24, 2022 2:02 AM

just putting this out there. Whoever wrote the note, it didn't happen quickly. It took time and concentration, and practice. And a steady hand. If John was tracing a computer printout, he had to type it up first, print it out, etc. Where's that printout? The note really confounds most other evidence. If it was meant purely for Patsy, why did he go to all that trouble? And Patsy could not have had the nerve to do it, if she had been involved at all.

by Anonymousreply 171July 24, 2022 2:06 AM

[quote]it was like a white trash person's idea of how "classy" people decorate.

I wonder if her daddy was a coal miner and stunk of the lamp.

Ta.

by Anonymousreply 172July 24, 2022 2:08 AM

It has been debated as to what was done in what order, but I do believe the pathologists' theory is that she was strangled first. She had petechiae and the skull fracture did not bleed very much, highly suggestive she was likely dead when the head wound occurred.

Meaning the killing was intentional.

by Anonymousreply 173July 24, 2022 2:11 AM

R172-. I don't know about that but her entire family was like some southern gothic story from the 1800's. Have you seen her mother? I think I would rather be an orphan.

by Anonymousreply 174July 24, 2022 2:13 AM

Ok so DL has solved it. Poor Saint Patsy never had anything to do with it and John was the evil, disgusting mastermind.

A Christmas Message from the Ramsey Family With the Christmas season upon us and the anniversary of JonBenet's death approaching, we are filled with many emotions. We, as a family, miss JonBenet's presence among us as we see the lights, hear the music, and recall celebrations of Christmases past. We miss her every day - not just today.

On the one hand, we feel like Christmas should be canceled. Where is there joy? Our Christmas is forever tainted with the tragedy of her death. And yet the message rings clear. Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life,****** AND, HENCE, ******* no hope of ever being with our loved ones again.

As the day of the birth of our Lord and Savior approaches, we thank all across the nation and around the world for your continued prayers of concern and support. It is those prayers that sustain us. We ask that as you gather with your families and loved ones this Christmas, be joyful in the celebration of the birthday of Christ, knowing that this is truly the reason for the season. We must continue to celebrate the birth of Christ . . . for our hope of life together ever after.

Thank you for all you meant to her and mean to us.

With blessing and prayer for a Joyful Holiday and the Grace of God's ever present love for the New Year,

John, Patsy, John Andrew, Melinda, and Burke

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 175July 24, 2022 2:14 AM

Religious people are remarkably stupid.

by Anonymousreply 176July 24, 2022 2:18 AM

Look at the jaw!

The world will never know, will they?

by Anonymousreply 177July 24, 2022 2:20 AM

A lot of people misuse "and" with "hence" just like a lot of people misuse "from" with "whence". Some even more familiar with "hence" even append "to" to hence even though all of these additions are redundant.

by Anonymousreply 178July 24, 2022 2:22 AM

Hiding behind religion. Such a southern thing to do. I know because unfortunately I have lived here most of my life. It really is a different world and I have never felt like I belonged here. I am an agnostic life long democrat who hates guns. It is very lonely, lol.

by Anonymousreply 179July 24, 2022 2:22 AM

Did the police ever search the Ramsey's computer, assuming they had one? In '96 personal computers weren't nearly as common as they later became.

by Anonymousreply 180July 24, 2022 2:22 AM

Christ, will you pathetic queens lay off poor John already!

He was innocent. INNOCENT! I-N-N-O-C-E-N-T, I tells ya...fucking innocent!!!

Oh God, John. I need you. I want you.

I'm open for your big Republican cock to plunge into my quivering love pudding. Give it to, John. I love you!!!

I can suck your cock better than any 5 year old whore off the streets.

GIVE IT TO ME!!!!

by Anonymousreply 181July 24, 2022 2:22 AM

Good question, R180. I have heard they never found the "practice pages" of the notepad that preceded the "ransom" note.

by Anonymousreply 182July 24, 2022 2:24 AM

R161 The suggestion is that he may have typed the letter on to his computer then held the paper up to trace the letters…deleting before saving. No way to know whether that’s true.

“Why did he bother going to the trouble if it was just for Patsy”? You are missing the point - it was Patsy, and only Patsy, that he had to fool initially. She had to be willing not to call the police when she found her five year old child missing from her bed. That’s a big fucking ask of a mother. I personally doubt the police would ever have seen that note. He’d have found some way and some explanation for getting rid of it.

R178 One pathologist has said, others have said the opposite. Skull fractures frequently don’t bleed that much - the fact that it bled at all means she didn’t immediately die of that. Dead bodies don’t bleed. And she was not moving when he tied her up and garotted her. Her wrists show no chaffing as she tried to get free..and they weren’t tight enough to hold her, anyway…and there was nothing under her fingernails showing her grasping the rope or the hands of her attacker. Also no disturbance on the floor where she would have thrashed around.

R175 Not as clever as you think you are. John also used the term “and hence” in a 2000 webcast interview with Newseum:

"The justice system is a government organization, and hence should be looked at with some degree of skepticism”

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 183July 24, 2022 2:27 AM

Here's a scenario: the father did it. In the process of covering his ass, he implicated Burke to Patsy, now involving her in his work of covering up.

If she thinks he did it, how would he convince her to hide his crime? The money? Threats?

If she thinks the son did it, she helps but she can't avoid slipping in things that implicate John and herself. Most things in the letter betray too intimate knowledge of John, his work, his bonus money.

Then they call all of the cops, friends etc. Because they think they have been clever enough to have the cops or friends find her body within short time of the cops coming, but the dude that searched the basement did a half-assed job and she wasn't "found" until later.

Notice the dad on the second search went right there. They had intended the body to be found by the cops. Many killers staging a crime make sure not to be the one "discovering" the body because they know the discoverer is immediately implicated and they know they aren't that good of actors.

John betrays himself by muddling up the discovery site, dragging the body around while even admitted he knew she was dead and there was no hope of resuscitation.

by Anonymousreply 184July 24, 2022 2:33 AM

So they wrote the note together to save Burke. They were afraid of going to jail for being negligent parents. They weren't supervising the little shit that whacked his sis for getting more presents, attention and pineapple.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 185July 24, 2022 2:33 AM

Dictionary in the Den

Opened to Word "Incest." "When we checked the photos from a big manila envelope marked as evidence item #85KKY, I almost fell out of my chair, and Peck inhaled in sharp surprise. A picture showed Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary on a coffee table in the first floor study, the corner of the lower left-hand page sharply creased and pointing like an arrow to the word incest. Somebody had apparently been looking for a definition of sexual contact between family members".

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 186July 24, 2022 2:34 AM

Was Burke trying to seduce the interrogator?

by Anonymousreply 187July 24, 2022 2:37 AM

If someone mistakenly uses "and" with "hence", yes they are likely to keep doing it.

But many people do it. It alone is not enough to truly pin the tail on the donkey.

And the pathologist I have listened to said there are signs she fought and struggled. She wasn't very big nor very strong though. Especially not if a grown man was doing it and also somehow immobilizing her. Even just by leaning against her, or pressing her against something, or into the floor.

by Anonymousreply 188July 24, 2022 2:40 AM

Some people suspect this is is significant.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 189July 24, 2022 2:40 AM

R186 Read on & you’ll find reasons why that is probably not true. And has anyone seen this picture? Nope.

Exactly the kind of twaddle people think is significant, but isn’t. Like Patsy “peering through her fingers” at the police and still wearing yesterdays clothes. Meaningless.

by Anonymousreply 190July 24, 2022 2:41 AM

Right, R188 - and several pathologists I’ve listened to say the complete opposite. That’s why none of this can be considered conclusive - we don’t know.

What do we actually know, for a fact, about this case?

JB was found dead in the basement of her own home

A letter, strongly urging against calling the police or JB will be “beheaded”

Patsy calls the police very early in the morning

While it’s possible to come up with all sorts of convoluted explanations, all of them ask more questions than they answer…except one. That her father murdered her and concocted the letter to prevent the mother calling the police too quickly.

I am not saying it is therefore a 100% fact that it happened this way…I don’t know, I wasn’t there - but it is the only explanation that fits the evidence without raising even more questions. So, on the balance of probabilities it’s likely correct.

by Anonymousreply 191July 24, 2022 2:48 AM

You don't stage both a sex crime and a kidnapping to cover up a head wound.

Head wounds are easily explained away. The rest is not. No one in their right mind would obscure the head wound with that other shit.

You would say she fell and call an ambulance. Or even that they were roughhousing and she bumped her head.

by Anonymousreply 192July 24, 2022 2:52 AM

Here's the theory CBS proposed and got sued for. It's wrong and inaccurate, according to DL:

The come home from a nice evening of neighbor's Fleet White family party. Supposed to go to Charlevoix Michigan vacation home the next day, private plane.

Burke said he was downstairs in the basement on Dr. Phil poking about with a flashlight looking at presents. JB was around, getting ready for bed, having snacks while Patsy was packing and getting ready for trip upstairs.

Burke's eating a bowl of pineapple in milk. The undigested pineapple found in JBs stomach doesn't get digested. So she stole a piece of pineapple. Burke gets mad, hits her with flashlight that had been wiped clean.

Then. Instead of calling for an ambulance like normal loving parents would to save the life of a child... The parents eventually realize she's not going to make it. Stage a while scene because their daughter is a star even in death!

It doesn't make any sense at all.

by Anonymousreply 193July 24, 2022 2:52 AM

R191- Once it is all laid out and you go step by step that night it always comes back to John Ramsey. Always.

by Anonymousreply 194July 24, 2022 2:53 AM

With regard to the issue of what came first…head injury or strangulation, there’s a table of pathologists findings on this list:

6 say head injury, 3 say strangulation and 1 doesn’t know.

So we can’t make any real conclusion - except maybe that the head injury was more likely to have come first.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 195July 24, 2022 3:03 AM

Sorry…wrong link

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 196July 24, 2022 3:04 AM

I don't even think the letter was meant to delay Patsy. She didn't even read it. Yeah you panic when you realize your kid is gone and maybe start going into shock, but if you have any sense at all you read that letter about 20 times and you fucking memorize its details. And if you think they snatched your kid, you do what it says until you know better.

This, and the fact that she possibly wrote it herself are why I don't think the letter was to throw her off and delay her. It was part of a multi-layered cover story.

by Anonymousreply 197July 24, 2022 3:06 AM

R197- I would have done exactly the same thing she did and immediately called the police if my child were missing and I have a ransom note full of threats to her life. John Ramsey was well known to have an explosive temper. He is a bully. He most likely went into a rage when JB threatened to tell on him. He fractured her skull with tremendous force. I have seen the photos of her skull. It is heartbreaking. He struck her with enough force to kill a 300 pound man. That was personal. She was unconscious but still breathing so he strangled her with the garrote. He also put an empty suitcase near the door to

by Anonymousreply 198July 24, 2022 3:22 AM

2) remove her body but he needed an excuse to leave the house. That was also another reason he wrote that ransom note. Patsy Ramsey for all of her faults lived through that little girl. There is no way she would have killed her child. She immediately laid on top of JB's body and cradled her. John Ramsey could barely stand to touch his child. Patsy was hysterical with grief. John Ramsey never shed a tear and that police officer watched their every move and reaction. The officer stated that when he came up those stairs with her body and laid her down she looked him right in the eye because she knew he did it and he knew she knew he did it.

by Anonymousreply 199July 24, 2022 3:31 AM

I don’t believe she’d have sat down and memorized the letter before calling the police, R197. No way.

She’d have seen “kidnapped your daughter” & been in a state of panic from then on. I don’t think she even got as far as the threats to kill & if she did, didn’t quite take it in.

Her daughter was gone and she wanted the police.

In any event, it doesn’t really matter what Patsy did - it’s what John wanted the letter to achieve that really matters. The body of his daughter was hidden in the basement & I think he’d have done almost anything to delay the police by as long as possible so he had time to get rid of it.

The thing about all this is if Patsy hadn’t called the police, I reckon JonBenet would have been remembered in the same way as the Lindbergh baby is…a kidnapped and ultimately murdered child. One whose body is never found, maybe.

His plan could have worked.

by Anonymousreply 200July 24, 2022 3:32 AM

R200- You nailed it. That was his plan and Patsy calling the police immediately ruined it for him. Patsy passed her lie detector test. Even the investigators said they never caught her in a lie and her story never changed. The same can not be said for John Ramsey. He got away with murdering his child. He is a child killer. It sickens me. He should be in prison.

by Anonymousreply 201July 24, 2022 3:40 AM

No, you read the letter

Your kid is gone, you verified she is gone and now all you have is a letter.

You read it. You read it again. You totally decipher that thing for how to get her back. If you can't settle yourself enough to read it, you wake up your spouse and have them ready it.

You find out what the people who took your kid want and what they expect. Then you debate what to do next.

You don't fly off at the handle. You would have to be very stupid and not even really care that there are likely details in the letter like "call cops and she will be killed".

Who does not know this? You may panic, you may get hysterical but you are going to read that letter and understand it before you do anything else. Even if you are going to eventually call the cops. Then when you call them you can caution them properly about approaching the house in a surreptitious enough manner to not risk your kid's life.

Even when the 911 dispatcher asked her what it said, she acted like she couldn't be bothered to find out. So unless she was already doped up so badly she couldn't think at all, I don't think this letter was meant to delay her.

by Anonymousreply 202July 24, 2022 4:08 AM

Lie detector tests aren’t real. They also concluded she wrote the note. Anyone who believes there was a break-in - someone stayed in the house for hours and pulled all that shit while the family slept, even going back to leave a note and let themselves out. is an idiot.

by Anonymousreply 203July 24, 2022 4:08 AM

[quote]Patsy Ramsey for all of her faults lived through that little girl.

You are such a no life frau.

by Anonymousreply 204July 24, 2022 4:09 AM

Maybe, R202…or maybe you panic because your tiny daughter has been stolen and you ring the police as fast as possible, hyperventilating & sobbing, like any normal parent would.

I genuinely find your analysis too absurd to be likely, but if you believe it, that’s fine.

So what was the point of the letter then? To convince the Keystone Cops that someone broke into your house to kidnap your child and were then so overcome with lust they trussed her up before they even left the house and sexually assaulted her? When they did eventually leave (locking the door behind them) they forgot to take the now redundant “ransom note” (that they’d written with your own pen and paper), but didn’t forget to wipe her pubic region and change her underwear?

And all this, presumably, to hide the fact that one child hit another.

Ok then.

by Anonymousreply 205July 24, 2022 4:17 AM

R204- And you are too ignorant to understand overwhelming evidence in a murder case.

by Anonymousreply 206July 24, 2022 4:49 AM

R205 either she wrote it herself, well knowing that the child was dead, or he wrote it and told her they needed to cast a wide net to cover their asses, or he dictated it to her.

You don't fail to read and understand the letter, if you think kidnappers actually took your kid. Even if you need someone to help you do that.

I think they wanted the cops or the friends to find a staged kidnapping gone wrong, after whatever happened had happened that they knew would be worse than that. And after they had spent all night making it look that way.

Since the keystone cops couldn't even handle keeping them where they could see them then having other police go over the place to find a point of entry, they didn't find the body immediately.

My general theory is that for the "kidnapping gone wrong" scenario to be believable, it would have been preferable for the cops to find her in the carefully staged basement. And if you need them to find her in the basement after staging the scene, and you know no kidnapped is involved, you don't care that you've called the cops over immediately instead of at least pretending to follow the instructions given in the ransom note.

by Anonymousreply 207July 24, 2022 5:13 AM

John Ramsey killed JB. I do not believe Patsy had anything at all to do with it.

by Anonymousreply 208July 24, 2022 5:56 AM

And yet, R207, you are completely unable to offer an even remotely believeable explanation for why their ridiculous “kidnapping that went wrong and morphed into a sex attack by an intruder who left no evidence of themselves” was preferable to “she fell down the stairs and banged her head”.

In my opinion, John Ramsey murdered his daughter and is out there living his best life, writing books and running for office - all without any real suspicion attached to him because internet “sleuths” ignore the obvious amd come up with plotlines that would make the world’s crummiest writer blush.

by Anonymousreply 209July 24, 2022 6:24 AM

I don't think Burke did it, but he's a creepy looking fucker.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 210July 24, 2022 6:48 AM

I think Elijah Wood should play him in the movie R210.

by Anonymousreply 211July 24, 2022 7:01 AM

The brother probably did it but the family had to pretend it was a kidnapping. Maybe it was an accident but they weren’t gonna lose 2 children.

by Anonymousreply 212July 24, 2022 7:37 AM

If Patsy wrote the note, including the word ‘beheaded,’ why did she call police so early?

She didn’t write it.

by Anonymousreply 213July 24, 2022 11:48 AM

If Patsy had wanted to help cover up Burke hitting and killing Jon-Benet, she would not have agreed to this crazy sex crime and kidnapping scheme. She would have put Jon-Benet at the bottom of some stairs and said she'd fallen.

If Patsy found out that Jon-Benet was not only hit on the head but strangled, it's possible that John told her Burke was responsible, she believed it at first in a panic and agreed to play along. If that were the case, then that could explain why she called the cops too soon for the plan to work. If she'd suddenly realized John had done it and had falsely blamed Burke, she might have called the police too soon in hopes that they'd find some evidence linking John to the murder. Once they didn't, it would explain why she went along with the lie afterwards, not just because she was probably scared of John, but because she was afraid if she told the police the truth, that she'd get nailed for being an accessory.

by Anonymousreply 214July 24, 2022 12:42 PM

R209 notice i said "kidnapping gone wrong appears better than what really did happen, hence they staged that".

I didn't make any theories in that response about whatever that worse happening was. And if sexual abuse was going on, the covering up using "kidnapper did that too" probably seemed like a plausible one to someone who had sexually assaulted and strangled their kid and was trying to get away with it.

If you did all of that and then spent all night staging it to look a certain way, call the cops and let them find what you desire them to find.

Another thought--if she died at midnight, there's five hours to dispose of the body and make it look like a "real" kidnapping. Whoever did all that staging within the house wasted time they could have spent actually covering their tracks by hiding the body elsewhere. They wanted her found in the basement, in a staged "pervert kidnapping gone wrong" to cover up "pervert strangles kid and then other catastrophic things happen".

by Anonymousreply 215July 24, 2022 2:21 PM

John Ramsey killed his daughter to cover up his sexual abuse of her. It was John Ramsey and only John Ramsey.

by Anonymousreply 216July 24, 2022 3:19 PM

As someone above noted, the blow to JonBenet's head was very powerful, so powerful that whoever struck it was confident that had killed her. It's impossible to believe that 9-year-old Burke or dying Patsy could have done that.

by Anonymousreply 217July 24, 2022 3:31 PM

From a previous DL thread:

The police had to tell him he could not leave. Early in the day, the sole police officer instructed John to search the house she stated, “I want you and Fleet to start from the top of the house searching again, and work your way down.” John instead bolted into the basement. Fleet followed and said that when John found the body the light switch wasn’t on in the cellar — making it impossible to see a figure in the pitch black. But John stood in the doorway and screamed.

John hired the high priced legal power house team immediately. It was John’s team, HIS team, that put out a statement that the experts had “ruled” out John as the possible ransom note writer — in less than a week. So John barreled out of the gate with an aggressive PR strategy to get crossed off the list. And incredibly, the police allowed him to publicly rule himself out — though he couldn’t be bothered to get his wife ruled out. John accused scores of people over the years, people who were his best friends, anytime they focus went back to him,

John keeps Lin Wood on retainer — Lin Wood is one of the most powerful, successful, evil, dangerous lawyers in America. Every single thing points to John, and people cannot believe a man would write that way. That’s ridiculous and just a weird gender bias. If you read the note, notice how it starts out very formal and distant but by the end, the note has shifted like John is playacting with himself.

John planned to get Patsy to fly out ahead of him so he could move the body. But Patsy screwed that up when she called police, there are two television interviews where she discussed the chaos that morning. In the first interview, she says John didn’t want her to call. The second time she changes that story and says it was John’s idea to call. The handwriting matching Patsy is only a theory and it is easily debunked. For example, “best practice” handwriting analysis is that you can’t accurately compare writing when one is attempting to disguise their writing, so already there’s a problem with it being Patsy, no one (including John) should be ruled out because the handwriting is disguised. Second, the samples of the writer from should be before the crime not after for a true comparison. John has made it a point to sign nothing all these years, so that there are no public records with his signature.

There has never been a single shred of intruder evidence, not one. I could go on and on, I had major surgery five years ago and went down a rabbit hole. Here’s my last tidbits...some where on that blog I shared above, there are links to the only known handwriting sample of John. There is also a post where that blogger succeeded in matching the letter perfectly to a particular font and character size, it was literally traced maybe 70% of the note. That means it was traced off a laptop monitor word processor — John worked in IT. John knew his bonus amount.

by Anonymousreply 218July 24, 2022 3:32 PM

Part 2: No, the *sole* scenario that makes sense is that John wrote the note to stall Patsy, avoid cops, withdraw the “ransom” money, hide the body. But the only thing it succeeded in doing is to buy him time. As stated above, he did indeed disappear multiple times that morning. Boulder Police Detective Linda Arndt became so alarmed as the body was brought up, as she leaned over the body across from John, she stated that it was an almost visceral response, she and John made eye contact, and in the brief moment, he knew that she knew he did it, she could see the frenzied panic in his eyes, and so she counted her bullets, trying to anticipate who he might fire at first.

Again, when you understand that the purpose of the note centered on Patsy, then it all makes sense. The “foreign faction” was to terrorize Patsy, as were the threats of beheading. It explains his disappearance, it explains why he didn’t follow the detectives instructions and instead bolted into the wind cellar to start the search (as documented by his BFF Fleet), and just sooooooo much more. It explains why he lawyered up, why he stopped interrogations, why he booked a plane and planned to leave in mere minutes of discovering her body, on and on and on. It explains Patsy’s behavior that day too — by all accounts, she was hysterical for many months and was kept under heavy sedation, most noticeably seen in their CNN interview the week after the murder.

For sure, BPD completely fucked the case up, they were corrupt and unprofessional, but not more so than the actual DA, who literally allowed the Ramsey’s (John) to dictate all the terms of their cooperation. As did the state’s attorney too if my memory is correct, when she cleared the Ramsey’s, what a clown she was, she should be disbarred for that stunt — have you ever heard of a poof black/brown person getting eliminated along with an apology from LEO? But even with all that, there is still a prosecutable case if they would hire a DA with balls. I originally thought the new DA might finally go after them, but nope!

If you run the case through the lens of facts only, then a few things are clear, one of which is that the killer wrote the note (obviously). We know JonBenet was never kidnapped. We know she was sexually assaulted both that night, and at least one other time. We know that the killer placed JB in an obscure part of the house that could not be found by a stranger. We know that the killer put the note on the circular staircase used by the family, so the killer knew their routine and location in the house. We know that real random notes are always, and I do mean always, very short. We know that a child-murder is 13-1 the eldest male in the house. We know the blow was powerful enough to fell a 300 lb man (imagine swinging a battle ax over your head with all your might) and that she was hit from straight above.

We know the mag-lite is a strong contender for the murder weapon, we know it was wiped clean of prints, including the batteries! We know that the window had not been broken earlier that year, we know no one entered the locked house because JOHN said so that morning as he walked the property checking all windows and doors with coppers.

There are a few people still alive who have knowledge that needs to be released. Detective Arndt was supposed to write a book, she maintained an extremely tight bond with Patsy and hoped she would reveal all she knew when she died during their visits.

John went to retrieve his mail while he was waiting for the kidnappers to call. Do you think that’s normal? To worry about opening mail? There was nothing John did that was in anyway normal, he never has, and so many don’t want to believe it’s that simple. Go talk to Fleet White, read what he has written and said. It is obvious who the White’s believe killed JB.

by Anonymousreply 219July 24, 2022 3:37 PM

Link to Previous Thread:

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 220July 24, 2022 3:38 PM

It was Blitzen, helped by Donner.

by Anonymousreply 221July 24, 2022 3:38 PM

[quote] Fleet followed and said that when John found the body the light switch wasn’t on in the cellar — making it impossible to see a figure in the pitch black. But John stood in the doorway and screamed.

Guilty AF

by Anonymousreply 222July 24, 2022 6:22 PM

Santa had nothing to do with it.

by Anonymousreply 223July 24, 2022 6:33 PM

One reason I think John might not have done it is rich white male privilege. Even if he was abusing her, he did so knowing he would always be believed over the word of a young girl. So what if she threatened to tell? John knew he would be believed, as a wealthy adult male, not his little girl. It was easy enough for him to control Patsy, the narrative, and the local law. He knew that. He could also control the narrative if his daughter spoke out. People didn't listen to children then (not like they even do so now). So why bother to kill his own daughter?

by Anonymousreply 224July 24, 2022 6:39 PM

R224, people kill other people—ok, it’s mostly men who kill other people—just for having the absolute gall to defy them. Most murders are not deeply calculated.

by Anonymousreply 225July 24, 2022 6:47 PM

John Ramsay helped create this petition to the CO governor to allow an independent lab to test the DNA and try to find a genealogical match. The Boulder PD are using the DNA to test against possible suspects but independent labs have access to advanced technologies the PD don’t.

An intruder did it. John Ramsay had adult children and absolutely no earlier indications of abusive tendencies. He was by all accounts a good parent, reasonable boss, and an active member of the church/community with lots of friends so a lot of people would have known or interacted with him and you’d think there’d be SOME other tangible stories about him being violent or perverse.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 226July 24, 2022 7:21 PM

r226 is too stupid to live.

by Anonymousreply 227July 24, 2022 7:26 PM

R226- John did it. All of the evidence backs this up. It is ridiculous to think an intruder knew his way around that huge, dark house, knew where things like pen and notebook were, and spent so much time writing a thesis of a ransom note. Just absolutely insulting to ones intelligence.

by Anonymousreply 228July 24, 2022 7:27 PM

R226 All of your second paragraph is entirely irrelevant..

Regarding the DNA - so what? He already knows that the several (and exceptionally tiny) traces of touch DNA do not match him and can’t incriminate him in any way, so there’s no danger in having them tested.

Petitioning to have them tested makes people like you think, “See? He must be innocent”.

Logic. Try it.

by Anonymousreply 229July 24, 2022 7:31 PM

R226- John Ramsey

by Anonymousreply 230July 24, 2022 7:33 PM

Imagine this took place in a trailer park. Patsy works at the 7-11 down the street. John mows lawns with his lawn mowing business. Burke in cutoffs chasing neighborhood cats in barefeet. JaneyB was found in the shed out back. A poorly worded 8th grade education rambly note on the aluminum stairs of the rv.

Who did it? You know exactly who in this case but because they're rich it changes.

by Anonymousreply 231July 24, 2022 8:58 PM

John,

Call me.

I give great head!

You won't be sorry.

by Anonymousreply 232July 24, 2022 9:01 PM

There is a scary theory that it was an intruder who had come in as part of the Christmas house tour. (The Ramseys had their house open for public tours before the murder.) Someone didn't leave, hid in the cavernous house, wrote the ransom note while hidden in the house while the Ramseys were away at the holiday party, and then killed Jon Benet while the rest slept. There was even a baffling ass-cheek imprint on the carpet outside of Jon Benet's room, and the police evidence said it looked like someone had been sitting in that place on the carpet for hours to make that ass imprint. So odd.

by Anonymousreply 233July 24, 2022 9:05 PM

For years I thought it was Patsy. Then Burke.

I've now become convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that it was John. Taking all available evidence into consideration, it seems very likely.

It has the ring of truth.

by Anonymousreply 234July 24, 2022 9:10 PM

There was no fucking intruder. John did it. Rich white people can commit heinous crimes. I don't know why so many people have a problem believing this. Just because someone is rich and white doesn't mean they can't be a sick psychopath. JFC

by Anonymousreply 235July 24, 2022 10:12 PM

R229, DNA from the same unknown male is on her underwear and long johns. That is why the DA exonerated the family.

John Ramsay is pressing to continue the investigation so that random people like me will assume he’s innocent? I doubt it.

by Anonymousreply 236July 24, 2022 10:16 PM

R236, the claim that “DNA from the same unknown male” was found on two separate items of clothing was disproven back in 2016.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 237July 24, 2022 10:21 PM

This crime may never be solved because it's unimaginable that someone would murder this lovely child in her own home on Christmas and then desecrate the body. And the person who did it was likely a beloved family member. No theory I've ever read could make that make sense, and yet no other theory comes close.

by Anonymousreply 238July 24, 2022 10:24 PM

R233, In no reputable source is there any mention of a butt impression. Unless you can provide one?

by Anonymousreply 239July 24, 2022 10:40 PM

R235, "Can"? DO, and quite often!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 240July 24, 2022 10:45 PM

R238, I find the crime only too "imaginable."

by Anonymousreply 241July 24, 2022 10:47 PM

R239 There are True Crime groups that have analyzed every piece of evidence available, including crime scene photos and descriptions in crime scene files. There are hundreds of pieces of evidence, many lesser known. The butt impression is real. But it was a few years ago that I read about it on something like Websluths. I wish I had the link, but it is real and could be found on one of those sites.

by Anonymousreply 242July 24, 2022 10:50 PM

R231, all other conditions being the same? Patsy and John have regular employment (but in blue collar jobs), are active in their church, have numerous close friends, and no history of civil or criminal issues, whose children were happy and well cared for according to their doctors and teachers, or by their own testimony in the case of john’s two adult children? I wouldn’t assume they killed their daughter.

The BPD are mad that the Ramsay’s wealth made it impossible to steamroll them, in court at least. They’ve done all they can to convict them in the court of public opinion.

by Anonymousreply 243July 24, 2022 11:02 PM

r243 you are an idiot. All the evidence points to John. An intruder, based on all the evidence, would have behaved like no other kidnapper/intruder in the history of the world.

by Anonymousreply 244July 24, 2022 11:07 PM

John Ramsey deserves that and so, so much more. He is murdering bastard and a child molester.

by Anonymousreply 245July 24, 2022 11:07 PM

R242, People make up stuff, too.

by Anonymousreply 246July 24, 2022 11:08 PM

R237, you are either dumb or dishonest. From your linked article, which is ABOUT the effort to rethink this case as a DNA case (rather than a softer, more sociological investigation) that can be solved through further testing of the DNA,

“In the notes, the lab concluded that a “partial DNA profile” obtained from samples taken from JonBenet’s underwear and long johns “contains a mixture” of DNA -- JonBenet, an unknown male and, in one sample, a third unidentified person. Therefore, the lab said, these DNA sample results “should not be considered a single source profile,” according to the documents obtained by “20/20.”

So… the unknown male DNA was found on her underwear and long johns, but there was ALSO DNA from a third person (aside from Jon benet and the unknown male) on one of the samples.

Here’s the quote from the District attorney who exonerated them based on these new DNA (which the police don’t want to test because they are convinced the Ramsay’s are responsible) tests advocated by the newspaper reinvestigatipn.

“Lacy said she has taken criticism for her decision to write the exoneration letter in the past. "I've withstood worse than this," she said. "And it's nothing compared to what the Ramsey family has gone through targeted as suspects in their own daughter's murder."

by Anonymousreply 247July 24, 2022 11:25 PM

The Ramseys ARE responsible, r247

by Anonymousreply 248July 24, 2022 11:27 PM

As requested--Butt Imprint Article

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 249July 24, 2022 11:28 PM

R239, the district attorney’s own words about what she saw at the crime scene isn’t a reputable source?

by Anonymousreply 250July 24, 2022 11:29 PM

The source is real, but some might say she's as crooked as a dog's hind leg. Here's the Reddit discussion devoted to the Butt Imprint as evidence and how it was interpreted. For those who enjoy rabbit holes!

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 251July 24, 2022 11:33 PM

from ^^^ "As I was packing up my computer and projector, she told me about something that Tom Wickman had purportedly observed during the execution of the search warrants at the Ramsey home. He reportedly had observed the impression of someone’s buttocks in the carpet of the hallway outside JonBenét’s second floor bedroom. It appeared that someone had been sitting on the floor with their knees up around their chest, leaning against the wall / cabinets. Wickman purportedly told her that he thought it was where the intruder had been waiting while the family was at the White dinner party. I was aware that some intruder theorists believed it possible the perpetrator had entered the home while the family was away that evening, and that he had written the ransom note while awaiting their return. Apparently, Lacy thought that Wickman was suggesting the intruder had found some time to sit on the floor outside JonBenét’s bedroom after penning his note."

by Anonymousreply 252July 24, 2022 11:34 PM

I always wondered if the butt imprint was from one of Jon Benet's parents--which ever one killed her that night. In that scenario, the parent killed her in her bedroom either in a fit of rage or by accident and then agonized for hours with guilt and fear, waiting in the hall outside Jon Benet's room, perhaps listening to her last rattling breaths and pondering what to do and the nightmare that would result if the parent killer had to tell the other parent and the living child. So, the parent killer, sitting in the hall in remorse and terror, cooks up this insane plan to do anything to conceal the truth. I lean towards Patsy in this theory--an uncontrolled unplanned rage due to being over tired and unwell and reacting to Jon Benet's bedwetting or other problematic behavior.

by Anonymousreply 253July 24, 2022 11:38 PM

I mean, I have hardwood floors, so how long do you have to sit to leave an indelible butt print that's still there days later?

by Anonymousreply 254July 24, 2022 11:40 PM

John Ramsey killed his daughter to hide the fact that he sexually molested her.

by Anonymousreply 255July 24, 2022 11:40 PM

R254 I'm assuming their floors were carpeted, but someone would have to be sitting on the carpet for a long time to leave that sort of visible imprint.

by Anonymousreply 256July 24, 2022 11:42 PM

Still waiting for supporters of the intruder theory to explain the ransom note.

by Anonymousreply 257July 24, 2022 11:48 PM

R252, "Purportedly," "reportedly," "appeared," "purportedly [again]," "Apparently...suggesting."

Yep. Great evidence.

by Anonymousreply 258July 24, 2022 11:49 PM

R257, And incredible stealthiness.

by Anonymousreply 259July 24, 2022 11:50 PM

R257, what has to be explained about the ransom note? I assume you mean the length of the note, that it was written on scene, and that it feints a kidnapping when she was actually already dead?

Let’s see, a nut who is obsessed with Jon Benet and irrational so does something that doesn’t make sense? Maybe it is written on scene because he’s disorganized and only thought to write something while he was waiting for her to get home and it’s exciting to think about taking her? And then maybe it describes a kidnapping because that was the original plan but he accidentally killed her?

I guess that begs the question of why he assaulted her at the house rather than taking her away. Well, again, because he’s obsessed with her, has been edging for hours while he waits for her, and he is crazy and so not as scared as he should be?

by Anonymousreply 260July 25, 2022 12:04 AM

r260 there was no intruder. John Ramsey did it. Rich white males can be psychopathic sickos just like anyone else. If John Ramsey had been a blue collar plumber, he would've gone straight to jail with all the evidence against him.

by Anonymousreply 261July 25, 2022 12:06 AM

R260- Nope. John Ramsey killed JonBenet. He was molesting her.

by Anonymousreply 262July 25, 2022 12:09 AM

From December 2021: “At issue is unidentified DNA found in JonBenet’s underwear and touch DNA discovered on the waistband of her long johns. Investigators said the DNA doesn’t match any of the persons of interest in the case.

So far, the profiles have not had a positive hit in the FBI’s Combined DNA Index System. The database, known as CODIS, includes genetic profiles from more than 20 million known offenders and arrestees and has helped in 545,000 investigations.

Boulder police said they have analyzed nearly 1,000 DNA samples, including 750 reference samples through the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.

Ramsey thinks the case can be solved through DNA. On the other hand, Boulder police have consistently said DNA is only one part of the criminal investigation and not the smoking gun.

by Anonymousreply 263July 25, 2022 12:14 AM

R263- Fuck off John.

by Anonymousreply 264July 25, 2022 12:18 AM

R247, this article has the actual underlying documents from the DNA study. The unknown DNA from JonBenet’s underwear could not be said to match the unidentified DNA on the long-johns

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 265July 25, 2022 12:20 AM

R265, ok, all the more reason for the DNA to be tested again and compared to profiles in genealogical databases (and not only to profiles in CODIS).

Why is the BPD so resistant to using science rather than gut instincts and tunnel vision?

by Anonymousreply 266July 25, 2022 12:29 AM

Because they know John Ramsey did it and couldn't be bothered with a bullshit intruder theory.

by Anonymousreply 267July 25, 2022 12:31 AM

I think there is also a question of the reliability of the type of DNA that is being tested. It's "touch DNA." This means you could touch an object and someone could brush against that same object and your DNA might get on their clothes. So, it could come from anywhere and anyone if she just brushed against something someone else touched or something she touched, even at the party before. It is also a mixture of different people's touch DNA, so it could have even come from a worker at the factory who made or packaged the clothing. It is that small of a sample and of a type that would be very inconclusive.

by Anonymousreply 268July 25, 2022 12:40 AM

R268, yes, it might turn out to be unrelated—DNA from a worker at the underwear factory and from the cashier who rang up the long johns—or too partial to return anything, but what’s the harm in trying? I’d love to see this solved like EAR/ONS.

by Anonymousreply 269July 25, 2022 12:53 AM

r269 John Ramsey did it. There, it's solved for you.

by Anonymousreply 270July 25, 2022 12:55 AM

They have 60 Minutes Australia fooled. How can you do a story like thos when you have that ridiculous ransom note? Come on.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 271July 25, 2022 1:13 AM

Is there anything new here? I think JR did it, but I doubt it will ever be solved. Potential confession of what he knows, perhaps late in life: BR.

by Anonymousreply 272July 25, 2022 2:02 AM

This photo gives off a specific vibe of shame from him

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 273July 25, 2022 10:59 AM

There are six different DNA profiles that have been found at the crime scene, and the police have tested all of them - contrary to what Ramsey and his cheerleaders say.

What’s the argument here? That there was a gang of six that murdered JB? If not, then at least five of those profiles (taken from truly minute traces of touch DNA) got there innocently. And if five of them can, why not all six?

Of course Ramsey is going to publicly push for tracing efforts - it makes it look as if he’s fearlessly running down the murderers of his daughter. But he knows perfectly well that this won’t go anywhere…no one was in that basement that night except himself and his murdered daughter.

by Anonymousreply 274July 25, 2022 11:28 AM

I mean, I assume a group of six intruders would fit the definition of a small foreign faction....

by Anonymousreply 275July 25, 2022 11:38 AM

Did John ever try to "grow a brain"?

by Anonymousreply 276July 25, 2022 12:55 PM

John did seem to spend a lot more time deflecting, defending and explaining.

Lou Smit thought he was innocent because of foreign DNA.

by Anonymousreply 277July 25, 2022 1:28 PM

Why did this happen on Christmas of all days? Those who think John did it, why this day of all days? Was he extra stressed due to the business deal?

by Anonymousreply 278July 25, 2022 4:54 PM

Burke told him tonight was the night otherwise he'd smear his feces on the company's annual report!

by Anonymousreply 279July 25, 2022 5:13 PM

Was it Burke who would go to his friend's homes, take a shit and refuse to flush do the unsuspecting parents would discover it?

by Anonymousreply 280July 25, 2022 5:14 PM

Of all days to kill your own child, why Christmas?

by Anonymousreply 281July 25, 2022 5:15 PM

R280 Yes I believe it was. He also placed poo in Jon Benet's box of chocolates in her bedroom. I'm sure that was an interesting piece of evidence for the authorities to record.

by Anonymousreply 282July 25, 2022 5:16 PM

Another reason I have a hard time believe John did this is that he knew he and the rest of the family had a VERY early flight the next morning--hours after the murder. The timing sucks.

by Anonymousreply 283July 25, 2022 5:17 PM

Right. Even if the abused her and he thought she would "tell," it is way worse to cover up a murder than abuse, which is very hard to prove. John was cold and logical. This was an illogical, impulsive act.

by Anonymousreply 284July 25, 2022 5:18 PM

[quote]He also placed poo in Jon Benet's box of chocolates in her bedroom.

It'd have been funny if Nedra Paugh had grabbed a nougat, bit into it and said, "Christ Patsy, this chocolate tastes like shit!"

by Anonymousreply 285July 25, 2022 5:21 PM

R285 Maybe that did happen and maybe that's why Burke kept at it. Sadly, I've read just about every book on the murder, and one of the books discusses what a terribly ODD household it was because Patsy and her mother (Nedra?) would often talk about Burke's penis--specially how big it was! What mother and grandmother talk about a little boy that way? (And I'm not kidding! This is in one of the better regarded books on the family.)

by Anonymousreply 286July 25, 2022 5:24 PM

R273, In that presentation Patsy declares that there were two killers.

by Anonymousreply 287July 25, 2022 6:13 PM

Backing up r286. Read the same book.

by Anonymousreply 288July 25, 2022 6:14 PM

Thanks R288 .

by Anonymousreply 289July 25, 2022 6:19 PM

I do wonder at the IQ of anyone who thinks a kid who doesn’t flush the bog must be a psychopathic murderer.

All of these Buke did it theories are utterly cretinous. There’s never been the slightest evidence linking him to this. All you’re doing is picking him as a suspect then working backwards trying to shoe horn in evidence to make it fit. Idiotic.

R278 Why Christmas? Why not? I don’t believe Ramsey was intending to kill his daughter. I think he smacked her over the head to stop her screaming, and thought he’d killed her - which he very nearly did.

by Anonymousreply 290July 25, 2022 6:21 PM

[quote]Another reason I have a hard time believe John did this is that he knew he and the rest of the family had a VERY early flight the next morning--hours after the murder. The timing sucks.

Well then you're just a fucking idiot

by Anonymousreply 291July 25, 2022 6:22 PM

[quote]All of these Buke did it theories are utterly cretinous. There’s never been the slightest evidence linking him to this.

The ME said the blow to JonBenet's head could've felled a 300lb. man. A skinny little 9 year-old child could not have done that.

by Anonymousreply 292July 25, 2022 6:23 PM

I don't think Burke did it either but is fascinating how enamored he was of his own feces up to the point of trying to have his baby sister consume it.

Then there was the instance of him trying to present hole to the detective questioning him.

Oh, indeed....

by Anonymousreply 293July 25, 2022 6:47 PM

Most murderers don’t plan to kill…and I doubt Ramsey did. It was a panic action. The neighbours (two of them) heard a child’s scream that ended abruptly.

What are the actual alternatives here?

That a crazed intruder (or six of them) broke in so surreptiously that no one could later determine how. They left no footprints or fingertips. They brought nothing with them and took nothing away. They sat down and wrote a lengthy letter then grabbed the child but instead of spiriting her away they stayed even longer in the house to abuse her, presumably because temptation overcame them and they couldn’t wait. Once done, they crept back to her bedroom to grab some clean knickers (although left the rest of her clothes on her), wiped her pubic region, redressed her and then found the most remote area of the house to hide her in before leaving in the same magic way as they got in.

I have questions. Were they actually planning to kidnap her for money? If so, why didn’t they do exactly that? If it was a ruse to abuse then murder her then who was this “ruse” supposed to fool since they left her body in the house? If it was all supposed to try and redirect the police away from them then why leave the two biggest pieces of evidence behind - her body and a letter in their own handwriting? What nonsense. How can anyone think this happened.

Even worse…a puny, prepubescent 9 year is so infuriated that his sister steals a piece of pineapple that he summons up the strength of an adult and smashes her over the head so violently she goes into an immediate, and unsurvivable coma. He then tells his loving mother and father who, rather than immediately call for medical assistance for their still breathing child, decide their best course of action is to truss her up, rape her with a paintbrush handle, change her underwear but nothing else (why?) then strangle her to death with a garrotte. They then write a “ransom letter” so they can pretend to the police she was kidnapped and hope they don’t bother looking in the cellar for her because, even though they have every opportunity to, they can’t be bothered to dispose of her body which will start to stink in a few short days.

I have questions here too….but if I start listing them I’ll be here till next Tuesday..

Whether people like it or not, the ONLY explanation that makes sense in light of the EVIDENCE, is that her father sexually abused her that night as he had previously. She became impossible to calm so he lost his temper and smashed her in the head thinking she was dead. Everything he did from then on was to hide what he’d done - most importantly trying to buy time to hide her body by pretending to Patsy she’d been kidnapped.

Just think…what was the actual purpose of that ransom letter? To disguise a murder? No…nothing could do that since the body was in the hoyse.

It was to explain the absence of JonBenet and try to prevent Patsy from calling the police. NOTHING else makes sense. Nothing.

by Anonymousreply 294July 25, 2022 6:48 PM

[quote] If it was all supposed to try and redirect the police away from them then why leave the two biggest pieces of evidence behind - her body and a letter in their own handwriting? What nonsense. How can anyone think this happened.

Absolutely. If intruders had done it, they could've easily taken the body of a tiny 6 year-old child with them when they left the house. Why write a ransom note at all?

The intruder theory is such bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 295July 25, 2022 6:52 PM

There are so many books about the Ramsey case, can any of you recommend one of the better ones?

by Anonymousreply 296July 25, 2022 6:55 PM

James Kolar’s book is the best at laying out the evidence. Then there’s a little known one called “Ruled In - Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case”, which is the only John Did It book that I’m aware of.

by Anonymousreply 297July 25, 2022 7:20 PM

R296. I like ‘Perfect Murder, Perfect Town’ by Lawrence Schiller.

Detective Steve Thomas wrote one called ‘JonBenet’ which is filled with gossipy tidbits about the Ramsey family

Then, of course, there is Patsy and John’s ‘The Death of Innocebce’. It’s interesting to see how often Patsy and John contradict each other

by Anonymousreply 298July 25, 2022 7:59 PM

I've read almost all of them. Foreign Faction is the book that best disproves the intruder theory. Perfect Murder, Perfect Town was one of the earliest and best detailed and makes a strong case for Patsy Did It and is by former investigators who resigned due to problems with lack of local government cooperation in the case.

by Anonymousreply 299July 25, 2022 10:00 PM

When you really study the evidence it is glaringly obvious that John Ramsey is guilty. Some people think both parents are guilty but I do not. But the intruder theory is absolute nonsense for so many reasons, especially considering the layout of that house. No stranger could have found his way around that house in the dark, especially while trying to control a 6 year old girl who would have been screaming her lungs out if a stranger appeared in her room at night. Watch this police video of the house that they took the night of the murder. Impossible.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 300July 25, 2022 10:30 PM

That house was a dirty, cluttered mess! The Ramseys were slobs.

by Anonymousreply 301July 25, 2022 11:58 PM

R300. That basement was like something out of a horror movie. Creepy as hell.

R301. Steve Thomas wrote in his book that the Ramsey house had cobwebs. The housekeeper said that the kitchen counters were always covered in peanut butter.

by Anonymousreply 302July 26, 2022 12:17 AM

It’s amazing the lengths people will go to to disbelieve an “upstanding” rich white man could be a violent sexual predator.

by Anonymousreply 303July 26, 2022 12:26 AM

R302- They found feces in both JB and Burke's bedrooms. That house was filthy and the basement was as you said something out of a horror movie. That is where that poor little girl was molested and killed.

by Anonymousreply 304July 26, 2022 12:27 AM

This police video shows JonBenet's body. She was placed under the Christmas tree after John Ramsey brought her body upstairs. Please do not watch it if seeing her will upset you. It is a heartbreaking case.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 305July 26, 2022 12:33 AM

What are we to think of the mark on her cheek? I think a stun gun was ruled out

by Anonymousreply 306July 26, 2022 12:35 AM

Poor baby. That is quite a skull fracture. Can’t believe it wasn’t immediately fatal. Could she have survived that?

by Anonymousreply 307July 26, 2022 12:37 AM

One theory is that it's the imprint of a piece of train track from Burke's train set.

by Anonymousreply 308July 26, 2022 12:38 AM

R306- I do too. That child's skull was cracked in two. There is no way in hell a little 9 year old child did that. That took a lot of rage. The kind of rage John Ramsey was known for.

by Anonymousreply 309July 26, 2022 12:38 AM

If they had a house keeper, why was the house a pig stye? What did she do all day?

by Anonymousreply 310July 26, 2022 12:38 AM

R310- Good question.

by Anonymousreply 311July 26, 2022 12:39 AM

Wasn’t their home part of a Boulder Christmas Home Tour shortly before the murder? It would have been spotless for that.

by Anonymousreply 312July 26, 2022 12:46 AM

I think the general idea was that Patsy kept the parts that people would see in good shape, but anything that wasn't part of that could just rot.

by Anonymousreply 313July 26, 2022 1:10 AM

R305 That poor little girl! Jesus! I'm clearing my YouTube history if not my entire Google history after viewing that and maybe up and praying after for good measure.

I never thought Burke did anything which led to his sister's passing. It's physically impossible. He was apparently an odd kid but not like the spawn of Satan or something, man. Come on! Poor Burke looks just like Patsy.

I think whoever was molesting her murdered her. That'd be John, eh? But what did Patsy know?

What a mystery. Poor little girl. My God.

by Anonymousreply 314July 26, 2022 1:17 AM

R310 Housekeeoer, Linds Hoffman Pugh, was at the Ramsey home 3 days a week. According to Linda, Nedra would scold Patsy because Linda spent most of her time picking up after the family. “Linda’s here to clean, not pick up” said Nedra

by Anonymousreply 315July 26, 2022 1:28 AM

What about the dictionary ?

Dictionary in the Den

Opened to Word "Incest." "When we checked the photos from a big manila envelope marked as evidence item #85KKY, I almost fell out of my chair, and Peck inhaled in sharp surprise. A picture showed Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary on a coffee table in the first floor study, the corner of the lower left-hand page sharply creased and pointing like an arrow to the word incest. Somebody had apparently been looking for a definition of sexual contact between family members" (Thomas 2000:293; quote and source provided by Internet poster tylin.

by Anonymousreply 316July 26, 2022 1:37 AM

R314- I believe John Ramsey started sexually abusing her when Patsy went out of town for chemo treatments. PR had cancer and was suffering from the effects of chemo. She was heavily medicated as well. Idk how much she knew, but I believe she suspected something was wrong. Patsy lived in denial and hid behind religion until her death. She stayed numb with prescription drugs. It is my personal belief that Patsy suspected John almost immediately and that is why she called the police despite the ransom note threat to kill JonBenet and despite John telling her not to. I believe she was afraid of him that morning.

by Anonymousreply 317July 26, 2022 1:50 AM

R317 I agree. I think Patsy was incredibly moody and often sick due to cancer treatment, while still having to keep up her social image. I'm sure it was exhausting. JR probably started molesting JB as a way to get relief, instead of having an affair like most sane people. Then one night things went too far. I think JR has engineered a wide belief that Burke is responsible. He knows BR is on the spectrum and incredibly awkward, so he set up an interview with Dr. Phil to really bring it all home. He's a monster.

by Anonymousreply 318July 26, 2022 2:15 AM

R305- Looking at that poor baby's body and what her own father did to her is both horrific and infuriating that he will never be punished for the diabolically evil murderer that he is. That poor little girl was sexually assaulted and brutally murdered by the person who should have protected her. I loathe him.

by Anonymousreply 319July 26, 2022 2:21 AM

It could make sense that since Patsy's puss was out-of-service, John was fingering JB. It would also make sense that a man in his position would want one last night of action before they were in Michigan with family and he couldn't do it for a while. Something happened where she wasn't going along with it and he crossed a line.

by Anonymousreply 320July 26, 2022 3:10 AM

Has it been confirmed by anyone that JR had a temper? I don’t recall ever hearing anyone making accusations that he had a temper.

by Anonymousreply 321July 26, 2022 4:03 AM

Not really, R321. I remembervreading somewhere that he was known for exploding at work from time to time, but I can’t remember where so don’t know if that information was credible.

This is part of the reason that John is rarely seen as a viable suspect - because nothing in his background (that has come to light) would suggest he was capable of this.

But I still believe he was.

by Anonymousreply 322July 26, 2022 5:39 AM

^remember reading

by Anonymousreply 323July 26, 2022 5:40 AM

One piece of evidence that I find extremely significant, and is inevitably ignored - just as the sex abuse evidence is - is that fibres from the shirt John was wearing on Christmas day was found in JB’s vagina and her underwear.

Clothing fibres can be transferred innocently in a million ways, but she was dressed in those particular underpants during/after the assault so innocent transference seems impossible.

by Anonymousreply 324July 26, 2022 5:48 AM

So, maybe John had been diddling JB for a long time, but Burke killed her. J knew the sexual assault would be uncovered so he tried diversion.

by Anonymousreply 325July 26, 2022 6:46 AM

How could a piece of toy train track fell a 300 lb man?

by Anonymousreply 326July 26, 2022 6:57 AM

I remember as a toddler in 1964 we were at a neighbors family party and I went to the bathroom. There was longest, biggest unbroken poo in the toilet. It was so remarkable I went and got my mom to look at it. I don’t remember many specific things from that age but I always remembered that.

by Anonymousreply 327July 26, 2022 7:25 AM

If John was trying to delay discovery so he could get rid of the body, why did he get impatient and run down to the basement to “find” her after police had already missed the body?

by Anonymousreply 328July 26, 2022 7:30 AM

[quote]It is my personal belief that Patsy suspected John almost immediately and that is why she called the police despite the ransom note threat to kill JonBenet and despite John telling her not to. I believe she was afraid of him that morning.

I absolutely believe this as well. Even if Patsy at first went along with John and thought Burke was responsible, then started to help John with his plan, at some point she wised up and realized what was happening, then called the police.

by Anonymousreply 329July 26, 2022 7:38 AM

Is that a serious question, R328?

Erm….he was trying to delay the police getting there before he had a chance to get the body out of the house.

So, he wrote a ransom letter FOR PATSY TO READ which included many threats to kill JonBenet if the police were called. He banked on her being willing to delay calling for help so that her daughter wouldn’t be “beheaded”.

I remain genuinely stunned that everyone is trying to shoe horn Burke in when there is not the tiniest shred of evidence he had anything to do with.

by Anonymousreply 330July 26, 2022 7:59 AM

Your answer has nothing to do with my question.

by Anonymousreply 331July 26, 2022 8:31 AM

Burke is hot

by Anonymousreply 332July 26, 2022 8:33 AM

You asked…if John was trying to delay discovery so he could get rid of the body, why did he get impatient and run down to the basement to “fimd” her after the police had already missed the body”.

Which, excuse me, is the daftest question I have ever been asked about this.

He was trying to delay the police being called.

I repeat…he was trying to delay the police being called. The reason for that, you see, is that the strangled body of his dead daughter was hidden in his basement. Any half competent police force would have searched that house top to bottom the moment they arrived and John would have supposed that this would happen.

So, he wanted to put off the police coming for as long as possible in order to remove the strangled body of his dead daughter from his house.

That was the purpose of the ransom letter. When he wrote it in the middle of the night it was in an effort to fool Patsy. If she could be led to believe not only that JB had been kidnapped but that she’d be beheaded if the kidnappers (who claimed to be watching) sw the police arriving then she’d probably agree to leave the house with Burke and let John get on with giving the kidnappers what they wanted. This would have given him time to get rid of the body.

Once the police were there (and it wasn’t a squad, it was a couple of officers) his plan had failed. Presumably he “found” her body because he couldn’t handle the stress of knowing she was there. Who knows.

by Anonymousreply 333July 26, 2022 8:43 AM

[quote]There was longest, biggest unbroken poo in the toilet. It was so remarkable I went and got my mom to look at it.

Was she as equally impressed?

Did she call for your father to get a gander?

by Anonymousreply 334July 26, 2022 9:20 AM

Apologies for the Faux News link but the info provided is valuable.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 335July 26, 2022 2:05 PM

If the neighbor is correct about the scream at approx 1 am, he had four hours to remove the body from the house, drive to nearby wilderness and dump it.

Why didn't he?

Why stage the house for an elaborate scenario instead of just staging a smash and grab of the child? Abduction is much easier to stage and quicker and has the bonus of obscuring whatever other crime occurred long enough for decomposition and animal interference to help hide what happened.

Did he want Patsy to find the body, or was it because a lengthy media campaign to "find my daughter, please" would fuck up his business plans? Or he realized he wasn't a good enough actor and would give the game away with his lack of emotional involvement in that sort of thing?

Why was it better that she be found that way instead of three days later by hikers?

by Anonymousreply 336July 26, 2022 2:29 PM

R336 Presumably because he was worried the noise of the garage opening and the car driving off would alert the neighbours and possibly Patsy. She could also have come downstairs and found him gone. Pretty hard to explain.

You seem to think we ought to be able to come up with some intricate explanation for what happened and why. We can’t. We weren’t there….and neither were you.

Just look at the evidence. Read that ransom note and ask yourself what the point of it was.

If it wasn’t attached to an actual kidnapping - which it wasn’t as nobody was kidnapped - then it was a piece of misdirection.

Who would have been misdirected by it? The police? Not for long. If they’d been competent JB’s body would have been found five minutes after the police showed up.

The ONLY person who could have been fooled by it was Patsy. If she’d been willing to take Burke to safety so John could collect the ransom and meet the kidnappers, then he’d have had hours to remove JB and do whatever staging he needed to before calling the police.

This is by far the simplest explanation that takes account of all the evidence. I am continually stunned by the number of people trying to complicate it with absurd twaddle about psychopathic child killers, shit in the toilet, a mother raping her child with a paintbrush to save the family honour or a mad paedophile with an ability to walk through locked doors who left a long letter on the stairs about a kidnapping that never happened just because.

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

by Anonymousreply 337July 26, 2022 2:49 PM

R337 what needs to be cleared up is who wrote the note, and with what intention.

Unless Patsy was really dumb, she would have finished reading the note before popping off and calling the cops.

It's been theorized that he wrote the note for her "benefit". It's also been theorized that she wrote the note for the world at large, to cover for herself or Burke.

Why the note was written is important. If you are trying to fool the world or only trying to fool your wife is important. Her calling the cops has been suggested to exonerate her. I don't think that necessarily follows. She may have indeed been involved.

To what degree then becomes important. Why also is somewhat important.

by Anonymousreply 338July 26, 2022 3:05 PM

The idea that Patsy would sit and read to the end of the letter is ridiculous under the circumstances.

We have no reason to beleive that she didn’t love her child. She reads the first line which says JB has been kidnapped. Most normal people would lose their shit right there. It’s not about being “dumb”. What happened to her in that moment is just about the worst thing that can happen to a mother and you think she should have had her wits about her enough to,properly read the letter? If anything’s dumb, that is. She panicked…most,people would.

Yes, it’s been theorised that she wrote the letter to cover for Burke. Because that’s normal. A child gets a head injury so the best thing to do is rape her with a paintbrush, tie her up and strangle her to death. Very sensible to disguise an accidental injury as a paedophilic murder. Don’t you think if they really wanted to protect Burke they wouldn’t just say she fell down the stairs? Come the fuck on.

Ramsey wasn’t trying to fool the world with the note. He was trying to fool Patsy so he had enough time to set things up in order to fool the world. All he needed was her and Burke out the way, and no police just yet. It’s that simple.

by Anonymousreply 339July 26, 2022 3:37 PM

I think the head wound came before strangulation. If she didn’t die by the head wound, they couldn’t hit her again to kill her because that would screw up the possibility of an accidental fall or hit on the head as an excuse if needed. But she had to be killed so she wouldn’t talk, hence the strangulation without putting fingerprints on her neck or on her face to smother her.

by Anonymousreply 340July 26, 2022 3:46 PM

R336 Because John nor Patsy killed her. They did pony her around and put her in harms way of pedophiles, but they did not kill her. Children don’t scream when their parents walk in their room at night. This is the most non-scensical, bizarre case in history and people want so badly for it to be the parents but it wasn’t. Someone had been stalking the Ramsays and were in the house long before they came back to do whatever they planned to do with Jon Benet.

by Anonymousreply 341July 26, 2022 4:03 PM

R55 Absolutely. I have lost count of the number of Podcasts I have turned off because of the banter, giggling and talking over each other that some presenters think constitutes a good presentation. If you are interested in a well presented one which has finally got an old case back into the spotlight, and has seen the likely perpetrator now awaiting the verdict on a murder charge - it is ‘The Teacher’s Pet’. Riveting stuff.

by Anonymousreply 342July 26, 2022 4:04 PM

R335 John and other unrelated outside sources have been trying to get to that dna for years. The Boulder police dept painted the Ramsays as killers when it happened and it became front page tabloid fodder ever since, even still. They do not want the world to know the truth which is why they will not give up evidence. At this point in history the world deserves to know what happened to JB.

by Anonymousreply 343July 26, 2022 4:07 PM

Joyce Carol Oates

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 344July 26, 2022 4:09 PM

Regarding the amount of force used to cause the head wound.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 345July 26, 2022 4:13 PM

[R341] A child who is being sexually molested by her father might scream when he hurt her, which he did. The autopsy showed that she had internal vaginal injuries from previous encounters. Did the kidnappers come back frequently, unknown?

There's no pretending she fell downstairs, there's no pretending the brother did it, there's no pretending, full stop!..because the minute there is an autopsy, the sexual abuse is uncovered. That is the base issue. The fact that she was then deliberately defiled with a paintbrush only further emphasises someone's desperate attempt at hiding the previous vaginal injuries. This was at the forefront of the "kidnaper's" mind. Not the ransom and not the abduction? That's really where your "John didn't do it" falls apart.

by Anonymousreply 346July 26, 2022 4:26 PM

From what I remember reading in the autopsy reports, there was NO evidence of any previous vaginal injuries or evidence of sexual abuse. I recall JB had a medical history of yeast infections which were likely caused by bubble baths/soaps that were more commonly marketed to children in the 1980s/1990s.

I don’t recall any reports of John R’s shirt fibers being found in JBR’s vagina.

Weren’t footprints found near the body that were never linked to the family?

by Anonymousreply 347July 26, 2022 4:51 PM

Anyone who buys into the notion that an intruder did it must have a very low IQ. I mean, zero critical thinking skills. I'd have to assume they were also a Trump supporter.

by Anonymousreply 348July 26, 2022 5:25 PM

R347 I've seen the reports. There was prior vaginal trauma found by multiple doctors.

by Anonymousreply 349July 26, 2022 5:27 PM

R348, anyone who thinks Burke did it must have a low IQ and be a Trump supporter

by Anonymousreply 350July 26, 2022 6:46 PM

Perhaps Burke was aware of the molestation and that was the root of his scatalogical proclivities?

by Anonymousreply 351July 26, 2022 7:28 PM

R346 At the risk of being seriously rude, you are stunningly dense.

You point out (correctly) that her body couldn’t be left at the bottom of the stairs with a head injury because an autopsy would reveal her internal injuries.

YES. That’s EXACTLY why John needed her body to disappear. He knew what an autopsy would find. Hence his fake kidnapping. Far from making the John theory collapse, that’s the very crux of it.

Have you read this thread? Go back to the top and read it. I lay out what I think happened and why. I just can’t be bothered answering any more of your points. They are too stupid.

by Anonymousreply 352July 26, 2022 7:56 PM

R347 Then you don’t know what you’re talking about.

Her autopsy detailed internal vaginal injuries. A panel of paediatric experts (about 10 of them) all concluded sexual abuse that night AND previously.

Fibres from John’s black shirt were found in her vagina and underwear. Ramsey was even asked about this in his police interview.

by Anonymousreply 353July 26, 2022 7:59 PM

To me, the real mystery will always be: What the hell kind of idiotic name is "Jon Benet"???

by Anonymousreply 354July 26, 2022 8:10 PM

352 LOL. Yes, I'm the dense one. Yet, you're making the same point I made about John being the culprit and needing her to disappear or the sexual abuse would be discovered. Poor reading comprehension. Foolish you.

Also, as you are replying to my very first comment on Data Lounge, there's no chance that you're tired of replying to any of my points, as I haven't made any (unless you're stupid enough to think all "Anonymous" posters are me?)

by Anonymousreply 355July 26, 2022 8:41 PM

[352] I really do love it when people get a twist in their knickers and completely overreact to a point they've misunderstood.

I hope you're blushing.

by Anonymousreply 356July 26, 2022 8:45 PM

Just one thing that has always sort of fascinated me about this family. The child pageant circuit is so trashy. See Honey Boo Boo. I can't believe that someone like Patsy would want to be involved in it. Everything about it is cheesy and sleazy. I had the impression Miss Patsy thought herself a sophisticate.

by Anonymousreply 357July 26, 2022 8:49 PM

I agree that John wanted to remove JonBenet's body from the house right away but the sound of the garage door and his car leaving could've awoken Patsy, and the neighbors could've seen his car. He would've had no plausible explanation for what he was doing going out driving in the middle of the night. It was way too risky. Also, even if the noise hadn't awoken Patsy she still could've gotten up in the middle of the night and seen that John wasn't home. He would have no explanation when he got back.

by Anonymousreply 358July 26, 2022 9:00 PM

[quote]Also, as you are replying to my very first comment on Data Lounge

Are you some Frau who just got to DL from a Google search?

by Anonymousreply 359July 26, 2022 9:00 PM

R359 LOL, no. I just prefer reading and don't often feel the need to share an opinion, especially as this place often seems strung-out and OTT hostile (my one comment's response is a case in point.)

I was a teenager when JBR was murdered and I wasn't particularly interested in it. I found this thread very interesting and informative but also felt a little annoyed at people being stupid enough to make excuses for John Ramsay. That prompted me to respond. I should have known better. Ha!

by Anonymousreply 360July 26, 2022 9:36 PM

how would Pats not have noticed John missing from bed all night? did they really sleep in the same bed? was there a 4th bedroom? wasn't the scream a woman, not lil Jon?

by Anonymousreply 361July 26, 2022 11:30 PM

Did Patsy take sleeping pills? If so, what time did she take it and how would it have been affecting her when she woke up and found the ransom note?

Good points , [R361].

by Anonymousreply 362July 27, 2022 12:25 AM

Patsy was apparently in her makeup and clothes from the night before, so if she wasn't up all night murdering her daughter, it's a safe bet she was zonked out in bed from booze/pills.

by Anonymousreply 363July 27, 2022 12:45 AM

I never found it particularly odd she was in clothes from the previous evening. I’ve slept in clothes before. Or she could have put them on quickly knowing the police were on their way.

by Anonymousreply 364July 27, 2022 1:04 AM

JonBenét (not Jon Benet) is a crude portmanteau of her father's first and middle names, John Bennett. JonBenét's middle name was Patricia, after her mother.

by Anonymousreply 365July 27, 2022 1:04 AM

The Boulder police were stupendous in their incompetence. They allowed John and Patsy to just walk around the house, then let the Ramseys' friends into the house, which was supposed to be a sealed crime scene, and trample all over the place. Then of course no real interrogation, just softball questions.

When you're white and rich in this country there are a different set of rules.

by Anonymousreply 366July 27, 2022 1:12 AM

I think some of the Ramsey's family and friends were already there when the police arrived. At one point, a cop walked into the kitchen to find several "helpful friends" scrubbing it down. I think they had to be threatened with arrest for interfering with a crime scene before they would stop. They were just "helping" you know.

by Anonymousreply 367July 27, 2022 1:21 AM

They also carried many items out of the house (including, possibly, the murder weapon)

by Anonymousreply 368July 27, 2022 1:34 AM

John asked his sister to go back in and get his golf clubs from the basement, which the police allowed her to do without examining the clubs or the bag.

by Anonymousreply 369July 27, 2022 1:38 AM

[quote]I think some of the Ramsey's family and friends were already there when the police arrived.

Correct. I mean, the first thing I would do when I discovered my daughter was kidnapped by a small foreign faction would be to ask my friends the Whites and the Fernies to come over.

by Anonymousreply 370July 27, 2022 2:10 AM

I don't why but this case makes me think of the Lizzie Borden murder trial.

I guess because the murderer was obviously a family member and they got away with it. The police bungled the case. The murderer benefitted from stereotypes that assumed they couldn't have possible done such a thing to family.

by Anonymousreply 371July 27, 2022 2:26 AM

Odd about the golf clubs.

by Anonymousreply 372July 27, 2022 2:41 AM

Wouldn't that be the first thing any of us would do if our daughter was raped and murdered? A good round of golf is so healing. Especially in Michigan in December.

by Anonymousreply 373July 27, 2022 3:11 AM

Too many dumb conspiracy fraus on here with the same female rigid consensus thinking. Thought an anonymous gay men’s message board would reflect more logic. Obviously an intruder did it you dumb bitches! Go to Reddit.

by Anonymousreply 374July 27, 2022 3:32 AM

R374, the call is coming from inside the house.

by Anonymousreply 375July 27, 2022 3:36 AM

Just curious - do any of you have an item in your home wiped clean of fingerprints? Especially one sitting on your kitchen counter. I know I don't. That just seems kind of...odd.

by Anonymousreply 376July 27, 2022 3:41 AM

Fingerprints aren't guaranteed to be found everywhere on all items all of the time.

Logic says you read the fucking note if your kid is gone and all that remains is a note. She would have to be dumb or doped up or both to not immediately wake up and sober up and pay attention to what it says.

This isn't crisis of missing mcnuggets at McDonald's. This is your fucking kid and they have her. You read the note. You may well eventually call the cops, but you read the note.

No one cared that the time of the phone call came and went either. If this is your kid, you are sitting in front of the phone watching the clock and sweating.

If Patsy was not doing that, it suggests she knew no call would come. She may well have been in on a cover-up of some kind. The question then becomes why.

Even if she didn't commit the murder, she may have helped cover it up. Why? Did the husband convince her that the son was involved when it was really him?

Think about the things going on. The business deal (was that already being arranged/pending?), her cancer, their expensive maintenance of at least three houses, if not also helping the adult children from the previous marriage.

She may have gone along with hiding it, considering the position she was then in--unemployed aging woman with few saleable skills and a child, facing cancer and trying to pay for that alone. Imagine accusing him (if she knew it was him, which is still under question) and seeing more money go out for lawyer's fees and divorce.

I say there are reasons that she may have allowed him to tell her what he wanted her to think so she wouldn't blame him and she had reasons to pretend that was the truth and go along with it, perhaps even help him hide the crime.

You will not believe the number of times women relay as adults that they had been molested as a child by a male relative or friend of the family, tried to tell their mothers who then immediately deny it and vouch for the moral character of the accused man instead of believing their own kid. You may not understand that the last thing any woman wants to contemplate is that their husband prefers his own child sexually to his wife.

Many women will do dastardly and nefarious things to cover up for their man, and they have lots of reasons to do so.

by Anonymousreply 377July 27, 2022 4:26 AM

Quite right Patsy is the guilty party, as sure as if she'd trussed her daughter up and porked her with a paintbrush herself.

by Anonymousreply 378July 27, 2022 4:35 AM

Why JonBenét Ramsey's father has 'forgiven' her killer | 60 Minutes Australia

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 379July 27, 2022 4:49 AM

He forgave himself?

by Anonymousreply 380July 27, 2022 5:25 AM

Was any DNA or fibers found on the rope tied around JB’s wrists? Was similar the rope found in the home? Did the killer bring rope and zip ties with him?

His neighbor/friend was with him when he found the body. What has he reported to the investigators? Would Santa have known about the basement layout?

by Anonymousreply 381July 27, 2022 5:25 AM

I think this is actually a pretty solid indication of the "John did it without Patsy knowing" theory.

Early on, Steve Thomas asks each parent, out of ear shot of each other, about taking a polygraph test.

Here is how Patsy answered:

"I'm telling the truth so I would. I mean, I don't know how those things work, but if they tell the truth, I'm telling the truth, I want to find out who did this, period. I'd pass it. I'll take ten of them. I don't care, you know. Do whatever you want!"

Basically, she's saying "Hells yeah, hook my ass up! Lets get all lie detectory up in this biotch!"

And, here's what John had to say:

"Well, what I've been told is that, and I felt tremendous guilt after we lost JonBenet, because we hadn't protected her. Like, I failed as a parent. And... with that kind of emotion, you shouldn't take a lie detector... I would be insulted if you asked me to take a polygraph, frankly."

I think this FOR SURE lends some circumstantial credibility to "John did it alone."

by Anonymousreply 382July 27, 2022 6:52 AM

Patsy was convicted in the court of public opinion because of all that creepy-ass pageant shit, which was not familiar to the public at the time.

by Anonymousreply 383July 27, 2022 6:55 AM

[383] So true. I think people were more scandalised by the pageantry than the murder.

by Anonymousreply 384July 27, 2022 9:07 AM

The podcast was from December 2019. I listened to the more recent two-parter on The Bakersfield 3, which I didn't think was that good. But, I'm into the third episode of the Ramsey case (they go deep with the ransom letter), and I'm pretty impressed. Good radio voices and insight. They're taking an apolitical exhaustive chronological approach from a "real time" POV.

The Santa portion is Episode 5 of 6.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 385July 27, 2022 10:36 AM

[R382], it’s fairly common knowledge that lie detector tests are fallible and lawyers tell clients not to agree to them. I’m sure John knew this and was trying to gracefully decline and perhaps paraphrase what his lawyers had advised him. John was a wealthy business man with a good legal team. Prior to this horrific tragedy, I’m sure he’d learned along the way to never speak to cops without a lawyer present and decline taking polygraph tests.

by Anonymousreply 386July 27, 2022 11:00 AM

If it was John, once he realized he hit her so hard she was dead (or nearly so), he had two problems. The first was how to get her out of there without Patsy and Burke hearing him leave, and without the neighbors hearing him. The second was how to explain evidence of prior sexual abuse.

John had time to realize that taking her out of the house and dumping her would be very risky unless there was a reason for him to leave. A note saying she'd been kidnapped and he had to deliver a ransom would give him that reason.

However, dumping her body would still leave the problem of prior damage done from previous sexual abuse. He must have known there was no semen to worry about and so was more focused on staging it to look like an intruder. If he could leave with her body, he would, but if Patsy insisted on calling the police, he could deal with that. He probably decided to damage the body more in an effort to potentially cover up prior abuse, let Patsy call the police, and then lawyer up and hope for the best.

by Anonymousreply 387July 27, 2022 11:22 AM

[quote]A good round of golf is so healing

I quite agree.

by Anonymousreply 388July 27, 2022 11:31 AM

Are there theories floating around as to why there was no semen left at the crime scene?

by Anonymousreply 389July 27, 2022 11:33 AM

[quote]Was any DNA or fibers found on the rope tied around JB’s wrists?

Similar fibers were found upstairs in her bed. There is some argument about this, though, as sources go back and forth as to whether the cord was nylon or olefin. You will find a lot of people saying that the cord was nylon, the fibers in her bed were olefin, therefore the cord was never in her bed.

As far as I know, no DNA was found on the cord.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 390July 27, 2022 11:41 AM

I am sure an older man that wrote this of her is innocent:

"The star dust was all I took with me for good luck when I had heart surgery (last summer)... Her murder was harder on me than my operation. She made a profound change in me. I felt very close to that little girl. I don't really have other children that I have this special relationship with — not even my own children or my own grandchildren... When I die, I'm going to be cremated. I've asked my wife to mix the star dust JonBenét gave me with my ashes. We're going to go up behind the cabin here and have it blow away in the wind." t seems likely that McReynolds was questioned because, like many others, he had been in the Ramsey home and interacted with JonBenét in the days leading up to her death. An Associated Press report from March 1997 stated that McReynolds and his wife, Janet, were initially questioned less than six weeks after the murder. The outlet reported that on Dec. 26, 1974, the couple's 9-year-old daughter had been kidnapped along with her friend and she witnessed the sexual abuse of her friend during the trauma. No one was ever arrested for the crime. The McReynolds vehemently denied any involvement in JonBenét's murder and Janet stated that the couple felt "sensitive to the horror" due to what had happened to their own child.

According to CNN, an original prosecutor on the Ramsey case claimed that Bill had given JonBenét a card with the message: "You will receive a special gift after Christmas." The outlet also reported that Janet had penned a play with a few eery similarities to the case — the plot revolved around a girl who was molested and murdered in her basement. However, the connections turned out to be purely coincidental, as both Bill and Janet submitted hair, handwriting, and blood samples and were cleared of any involvement in the crime.

When Bill died in 2002, The Daily Camera emphasized that police sources never considered he or Janet "serious" suspects. However, John and Patsy Ramsey referred to him as a suspect in their book The Death of Innocence, and Janet stated that her husband was deeply affected by the suspicion: "He was scarred. He was just so devastated by the mere idea anyone would think he did it"

I mean, it is VERY possible he left no blood. So, of course he would be cleared.

I think McReynolds did it. Watch some of him on YT. He was a freak.

by Anonymousreply 391July 27, 2022 11:57 AM

Have we never considered this could be a case of simple suicide?

by Anonymousreply 392July 27, 2022 12:02 PM

John Ramsey is guilty of child molestation and murder. He killed his daughter.

by Anonymousreply 393July 27, 2022 12:08 PM

John is a POS and has spent the past 25 years throwing other people under the bus for a crime he committed. Including his own wife and son.

by Anonymousreply 394July 27, 2022 12:35 PM

There was no semen found because John took a shower that morning and he also changed JB’s clothing. The underwear she had on was a larger size.

by Anonymousreply 395July 27, 2022 12:37 PM

The whole point of the ransom note was to give John time to get rid of her body. Once Patsy called the cops, John’s goose was cooked. And that’s why he “found” the body.

by Anonymousreply 396July 27, 2022 12:42 PM

[quote]I think McReynolds did it. Watch some of him on YT. He was a freak.

The guy was so weak he couldn't keep his job as a mall Santa, but sure, he was capable of lurking in the Ramsey home long enough to leave a tell-tale butt print, violently fracture JonBenet's skull, garrot her, and take her body down multiple flights of stairs, as stealthy as a ninja.

by Anonymousreply 397July 27, 2022 12:53 PM

John loves when y’all assume everyone but him did it.

by Anonymousreply 398July 27, 2022 1:03 PM

A mother who named her child Jon Benet? And pimped out the tiny trollop she pushed through her own loins into the world of pageantry...she could kill a little bitch without a second thought.

What's the mystery?

by Anonymousreply 399July 27, 2022 1:43 PM

I was about to joke that maybe John is posting here, but then I remembered that one of the EAR-ONS boards had a user who they suspected was the actual murderer, and then I got creeped out.

by Anonymousreply 400July 27, 2022 1:49 PM

Polygraphs are completely phony. They cannot reveal a lie.

by Anonymousreply 401July 27, 2022 2:11 PM

R401, polygraphs aren’t admissible in court. The point R382 is making is that both Ramseys assumed that the polygraph machine would reveal their true feelings: Patsy said that if it was accurate it would show that she was telling the truth; John said that he wouldn’t take it because it would show his feelings of guilt. He was trying to explain why he would “fail.”

by Anonymousreply 402July 27, 2022 2:29 PM

R389, I'm just guessing but maybe the reason for the absence of semen is that - assuming JR killed her - he didn't get the chance to abuse her to that extent that night because she kicked up a fuss when he tried to. The vaginal damage sustained around the time of her death could just have been from the paintbrush or from an interrupted (i.e. no semen) sexual assault at the hands of her father.

by Anonymousreply 403July 27, 2022 2:38 PM

The onlly reason JR cultivated the McReynolds was to throw suspicion on them.

by Anonymousreply 404July 27, 2022 2:54 PM

[quote]I was about to joke that maybe John is posting here, but then I remembered that one of the EAR-ONS boards had a user who they suspected was the actual murderer, and then I got creeped out.

Gay cannibal killer Luka Magnotta was discovered posting here in a thread about him. Muriel not only closed the thread but deleted it from the archive.

by Anonymousreply 405July 27, 2022 3:12 PM

R347 Is right.

by Anonymousreply 406July 27, 2022 3:36 PM

To the “Intruder theorists are low IQ” troll, explain why the Boulder police wont allow further testing. Why they wont give up evidence. Wouldn’t they be willing to cooperate if it would prove their accusation of it being a family member? What are they hiding?

by Anonymousreply 407July 27, 2022 3:41 PM

R406 Is incorrect

by Anonymousreply 408July 27, 2022 3:42 PM

R408, the case is still open. The police aren’t obligated to cooperate with outside investigators or hand over evidence to other people.

by Anonymousreply 409July 27, 2022 4:12 PM

[quote]A mother who named her child Jon Benet?

r399, see r365.

by Anonymousreply 410July 27, 2022 4:30 PM

There were no unaccounted for footprints. The Hi-Tech boot print belonged to Burke. Why do people make shit up in aid of a ridiculous theory that makes zero sense. Look at the ransom note. It wasn't an intruder, you fucking moron.

by Anonymousreply 411July 27, 2022 5:37 PM

John Ramsey hurt her that night. The neighbors heard a scream. He killed her to quiet her so he wouldn't get caught molesting her. That butt print is probably his. He probably sat there and wrote the ransom note to frighten Patsty with. He is a decrepit, deviant child molester and murderer.

by Anonymousreply 412July 27, 2022 7:01 PM

Don't know what you read, r317, but experts disagree with you.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 413July 27, 2022 7:59 PM

That just confirms chronic abuse according to their conclusions.

by Anonymousreply 414July 27, 2022 8:04 PM

The only outsider involved theory I'd even entertain was one where John was pimping her out or something, something happened during it, and they freaked and decided to cover it up. An unexpected intruder makes NO sense with that ransom note. NONE. Stop it!

by Anonymousreply 415July 27, 2022 8:08 PM

R366, I am constantly amazed at how big (i.e., news-making) murders are fouled up by the investigating cops!

by Anonymousreply 416July 27, 2022 11:34 PM

Ofc John Ramsey did it. They interviewed the housekeeper who talked about finding all kinds of questionable undergarments of the little girl, absolutely heartbreaking to read about. Ramsey was abusing her and the housekeeper found the evidence.

by Anonymousreply 417July 27, 2022 11:39 PM

It's common for predators to not ejaculate in or near their victims, so the lack of semen is kind of a nothingburger

by Anonymousreply 418July 27, 2022 11:39 PM

John Ramsey is an old man now. Maybe Burke will tell what happened after John croaks and the inheritance is secured.

by Anonymousreply 419July 27, 2022 11:41 PM

I don't think there's an inheritance. John is broke.

by Anonymousreply 420July 27, 2022 11:44 PM

R420- God I hope so.

by Anonymousreply 421July 28, 2022 12:59 AM

R417 this is interesting, is there a link?

by Anonymousreply 422July 28, 2022 3:03 AM

John is not broke, you idiot. His house in the recent 60 Minutes piece is huge and remote.

by Anonymousreply 423July 28, 2022 3:16 AM

And heavily mortgaged. Lin Wood ha ended up with John's money. John doesn't dare say no to the Trumpster.

by Anonymousreply 424July 28, 2022 3:34 AM

I imagine his whole career was based on blackmail, things he had evidence of from his Vietnam service

by Anonymousreply 425July 28, 2022 9:11 AM

So, I listened to all six episodes of the True Crime Garage series.

Most people--including myself--find the ransom letter damning against the Ramseys (it was on Patsy's pad of paper; the practice note was in the bin, etc). And, for years, I thought the Ramseys were guilty af.

The TCG guys suggest that the letter was a ruse to buy more time by an intruder/kidnapper who wanted to abscond with JBR in a suitcase, but couldn't negotiate that basement window. And they explain that the $118k figure doesn't exclusively point to John Ramsey, as there were other people (like a coworker) who had an association with that exact figure as well.

I didn't realise that the ligature marks (with JBR's fingernail imprints suggesting she was alive when she tried to pull the strangulation device off her) came before the crushing blow to the skull. That is a vital piece of information.

I can't believe I'm writing this, but I think that maybe the Ramseys weren't involved and that perhaps it was an intruder who may have been lying in wait when the Ramseys got back home. JBR could have eaten the pineapple in the presence of the intruder--someone she may have felt comfortable around. They go hard on Santa Bill. I agree there are some oddities with him. But, some of the details they impress upon (the kidnapping of his daughter and her friend 22 years previously to the day; the wife writing a story about it a few years later; the fact that his wife didn't know he would go to an adult store; even the glitter JBR gave him when he had his surgery) don't really mean that much, even together, IMO. With Santa Bill, I do think it's odd that JBR told the friend and her mother that she was getting a special visit the day after Christmas, and perhaps it's strange that he mentioned what a special attachment he had to JBR.

I dunno. I don't think it was Bourke. I don't think it was Patsy. The blow to the head after the strangulation rule those two out IMO. There was also no evidence of long-term sexual abuse. The girl had gone to the doctor almost 30 times in the last three years. I'm now oscillating between John Ramsey and an intruder familiar to JBR.

Good listen. It's long (over six hours I think), but I recommend it. I dare you to get through and still insist it was the Ramseys.

by Anonymousreply 426July 28, 2022 11:09 AM

After all I've read and listened to objectively, I'd still bet it was John - allegedly. That's just if I had to guess.

by Anonymousreply 427July 28, 2022 11:46 AM

This person Cliff Truxton really lays it out that it's John. Good read.

But, he asserts the complete opposite to the True Crime Garage guys (ligature marks came after the blow to the head).

Anyway, it's a good read. And just like that, I think it's John again. I'm so impressionable.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 428July 28, 2022 11:49 AM

Patsy and Burke theories are dumb and foolish.

That leaves Johnny. And only Johnny. Has always been Johnny. No one else but him!

by Anonymousreply 429July 28, 2022 12:11 PM

The extreme level of sadism and violent manner of death rules out the family for me. I would like to see an updated FBI profile of the killer based on evidence. When was the last time an expert profiled the killer?

I don’t think any family member would fit the profile of the killer based on the sadistic nature of the crime.

by Anonymousreply 430July 28, 2022 1:14 PM

R426 The True Crime Garage podcast was honestly appalling in terms of misinformation.

Firstly, they completely dismissed the overwhelming evidence that JB was a victim of chronic sexual abuse. They suggest the changes within her vagina was down to bubble bath &/or scratching.

FACT: The Boulder Police convened a panel of pediatric experts from all over the country - doctors, pathologists, experts in child abuse. One of them was Dr John McCann, America’s foremost expert in child sex abuse. All of them - without exception - were adamant that JB’s body showed signs of previous sexual abuse (as well as the acute injury she sustained that night).

This evidence is routinely ignored by people who can’t fit it into their preferred theory. Like the TCG two.

Head injury or strangulation first? Of the nine pathologists (again, experts) who have reviewed the findings, 6 say the head injury came first while 3 say it was the strangulation. So there is not absolutely conclusive determination one way or the other - but most say it was the head injury. Not least because she bled into her brain, and dead bodies don’t bleed.

The marks on her neck are not from her fingernails as TCG claim. None of her skin was found under her fingernails. This is normal petachiae from strangulation.

Nick’s theory is that the kidnapper wrote a letter elsewhere, dropped it on the way so had to write it out again when he got there. He doesn’t actually explain why someone so intent on a kidnapping that they’d hang around in the home long enough to write a note changes their mind & becomes a rapist instead. And if he’s saying that the intruder couldn’t get the suitcase out the window, has he explained why the intruder took the trouble to clean up all the glass from the window he broke?

The “Captain” claims it was a sex game gone wrong. Again, why would a “kidnapper’ risk playing sex games in the victim’s own home with her parents asleep upstairs? And what kind of sex game was that anyway? JB was facing downwards when she was strangled and nobody playing a game would allow the rope to cut so deeply into her neck. It was a ferocious act of violence - not a game.

True Crime Garage has fallen into the trap nearly everyone discussing this does…they are so keen to support whatever a priori theory they’ve chosen that they end up dumping logic, reason and any evidence that doesn’t fit.

That link you provided to the Reddit theory - thank you. I am certain John did it - following the evidence leads nowhere else - but I don’t really buy what that guy is suggesting. JB ended up dead…I don’t think she had been manipulated into being quite the willing participant that he suggests. I do know that small children can be fooled into believing they are in a relationship with their abuser but he (the Redditor) over eggs the pudding, I think.

I also don’t believe that Ramsey planned to murder JB. She was so little and could (unfortunately) still have been manipulated into keeping the secret with threats &/or promises. I think he smashed her over the head in panic because she became hysterical.

Below is a link to a table for what the real experts (not TCG) have to say about the physical evidence.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 431July 28, 2022 1:38 PM

Thank you R431. I appreciate your comments. I look forward to future posts of yours (I'd be interested if you had opinions on the Madeleine McCann case, for instance). Please remind me of our interaction here if you remember to. Thanks. :)

by Anonymousreply 432July 28, 2022 1:51 PM

The thing about autistic boys.

I could see Burke doing it out of anger with the heavy flashlight. There's some hatred there, to smear his own shit on his sister's stuff.

Only he seems so well adjusted now so it could not be him.

by Anonymousreply 433July 28, 2022 2:09 PM

Little Burke did it, sick of JB getting attention. He wrote the note, staged it all. Parents had no idea.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 434July 28, 2022 2:14 PM

R433 Smearing shit over his sister’s stuff is a complete myth.

Nothing like that is detailed in any police report. No mention of fecal atter anywhere, let alone any candy box. It’s not true.

And have you ever seen the picture of JB’s skull? It’s almost split in half. No 9 year old boy could do that.

by Anonymousreply 435July 28, 2022 2:18 PM

^matter

by Anonymousreply 436July 28, 2022 2:19 PM

R434 Not a chance. Clearly, you've never raised a nine-year-old.

He didn't have the strength to crack her skull like that and what nine-year-old could have composed that letter and disguised their hand while doing it? How many kids that age know what an "attaché case" is, never mind putting the correct grave accent on it?

by Anonymousreply 437July 28, 2022 2:56 PM

The prior sexual molesting could have come from pageant judges that Patsy pimped her out to in order to win big.

by Anonymousreply 438July 28, 2022 3:44 PM

There's zero evidence Patsy was pimping her out. Talk about inventing your own facts

by Anonymousreply 439July 28, 2022 3:52 PM

The police initially suspected John of doing it. Once they became fixated on Patsy supposedly being the letter writer, they lost all thought and reasoning.

In a way, the bastard John hasn’t gotten away with it. He only gets money from lawsuits and he has to live with his decrepit self every day. He killed a six year old and blames everyone else. What a sad pitiful human being.

by Anonymousreply 440July 28, 2022 3:53 PM

[quote]There's zero evidence Patsy was pimping her out.

Some of the other pageant mothers described JonBenet as having exhibited "cocktease" behavior towards male judges.

by Anonymousreply 441July 28, 2022 4:18 PM

Because anonymous gossip you heard is super reliable

by Anonymousreply 442July 28, 2022 5:50 PM

R442 Especially when it comes from the jealous mothers of competing children. I can just hear them "That little whore keeps winning everything! She must be sleeping with the judges."

by Anonymousreply 443July 28, 2022 6:07 PM

R428 think about it. Some intruder is going to fucking make her a bowl of pineapple and sit there while she eats it? Makes ZERO fucking sense. You have to jump through hoops, and willfully ignore evidence to believe an intruder did it. Not so, at all, with John Ramsay.

by Anonymousreply 444July 28, 2022 6:24 PM

R428 Cliff Truxton is good at laying out the evidence, and I think his general conclusion is sound, that John is the killer. But, he makes too many leaps and assumptions when theorizing the specifics of what happened.

And, he goes WAY wrong in his analysis of the Chris Watts case. He's come to the conclusion that the wife murdered the two children, and then Chris murdered the wife. I never got that sense at all when reading about, or seeing video, of the case.

by Anonymousreply 445July 28, 2022 6:31 PM

I always remember the first Police officer on the scene said John freaked her out.

by Anonymousreply 446July 28, 2022 6:37 PM

R446 Yes - and what she says has a ring of truth. She doesn’t go overboard claiming he had an “evil look” or anything ridiculous - she says it was an overwhelming look of panic.

That makes sense to me. I think that’s how someone in Ramsey’s position would look.

Also Fleet White, Ramsey’s friend who was there when he “found” JB, came to believe he did it.

by Anonymousreply 447July 28, 2022 6:42 PM

Was there DNA on the pineapple bowl/spoon? Was it canned pineapple? An adult would have had to open the can. Were there fingerprints on the can? Had the bowl of pineapple previously been leftovers taken out of the fridge? What do we know about the pineapple?

Could the murderer have been a phrogger? Maybe he’d been hiding out in the basement for a while. Maybe weeks. Maybe months. Watching the family. Listening to conversations. Eating their food when they were out of the house. Learning the layout of the home. Did the family go down to the basement very often?

by Anonymousreply 448July 28, 2022 7:15 PM

R446 is taking the cops at their word. LOL.

by Anonymousreply 449July 28, 2022 8:39 PM

Thanks R445. That is a weird conclusion to come to, especially for someone who does a lot of research and is very detailed (RE: Chris Watts).

Back to the Ramseys, I find how John held JBR after "discovering" her particularly damning. I realise rigor mortis had set in, she's stiff, and she's dead, etc. But that's his daughter. It's kind of shocking that he was holding her close to his body.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 450July 28, 2022 10:17 PM

*wasn't

by Anonymousreply 451July 28, 2022 10:28 PM

R450 That is painfully hideous.

by Anonymousreply 452July 28, 2022 10:48 PM

Are there transcripts of Fleet’s testimony on what he witnessed when her body was found and the aftermath following the discovery of JB. He is a key witness who may hold answers.

by Anonymousreply 453July 28, 2022 11:11 PM

Kindly note the fact that there is no space between the "n" and the "B" in my first name. Thank you.

by Anonymousreply 454July 28, 2022 11:14 PM

Why don't people think John did it?

by Anonymousreply 455July 28, 2022 11:47 PM

[R455], because the crime is so horrific it’s unimaginable that a parent could do that to their child. JR has no violent or criminal history. I don’t think he fits the profile of a profile of a child murderer. Plus, the Ramsey’s hired investigators who publicly defended them and made tv specials “proving’ an intruder was responsible for the crime.

I am not saying he is innocent, just answering your question.

by Anonymousreply 456July 28, 2022 11:55 PM

R455, there are several reasons. People have certain fixed ideas about human psychology: to some, no parent could have committed this crime; to others, parents are capable of absolutely anything. There’s also the fact that Patsy is dead, therefore easy to blame. Finally, people like the idea of complex solutions to crimes, when usually they’re not complicated at all.

by Anonymousreply 457July 29, 2022 12:04 AM

[quote]Kindly note the fact that there is no space between the "n" and the "B" in my first name. Thank you.

r454, I've pointed that out two or three times over the course of the thread but I don't think people bother to read threads anymore before injecting their most important but very uninformed thoughts.

by Anonymousreply 458July 29, 2022 12:07 AM

Also, some people have a hard time believing that a rich white male who's a successful businessman and prominent in his community could be a psycho child molester/murderer. Rich white guys are just like everybody else, they can be hideous human beings, but there is this magical way of thinking about them that they're upstanding and beyond reproach.

It's really weird, but there you have it.

by Anonymousreply 459July 29, 2022 12:18 AM

r459. by starting your post "Also" you deliberately or not implied that you are me at r458, which you are not. And with add due respect I don't agree with you.

by Anonymousreply 460July 29, 2022 12:23 AM

^ with all due respect, not add.

by Anonymousreply 461July 29, 2022 12:25 AM

One of the reasons the TCG guys use to try to take John off the table is the advocacy for him as a good father from the older children. They assert that his lack of history with previous children diminishes his likelihood of being a paedophile. I don't know where the science stands on this. But, when it comes to the pageants (with the makeup and suggestive outfits) wasn't JBR sexualised in a way that his previous daughters were not? I feel that was not a point that also should have been made. They claim to go at things "without bias" to reach a more informed conclusion. Whilst on the surface they really did make an effort to follow the facts (but as has been pointed out, they didn't always whether intentionally or not), I do wonder if there was a subconscious bias on their part (i.e. a successful middle-aged white guy could suddenly become a child molester).

But, I also feel I have biases against people who make ridiculous amounts of money and live (what I feel are) absurd lifestyles, if I'm being honest. So, there is a part of me deep down who probably "wants" to believe John is guilty (if that makes sense).

I will say that I struggled with Episode 5 and felt bad about how hard they went on Santa Bill. I've been following the William Tyrrell case. It looks like it was his foster parents this whole time (the investigation is still underway), and it appears the foster mother somehow manipulated the police and the media (and perhaps her family members). She helped perpetuate the "paedophile circle" narrative and ruined the lives of two older men in the process (Bill Spedding the washing machine guy, and neighbour Paul Savage). Savage made seemingly odd, but innocent comments that were used against him as well (like Santa Bill).

by Anonymousreply 462July 29, 2022 12:28 AM

r460 it doesn't matter if you don't agree with me but a lot of people didn't think John Ramsey could've done it because he's a rich white successful male. Sorry, but that's life in America.

by Anonymousreply 463July 29, 2022 12:37 AM

I think the gross sadism was intended to throw the cops offtrack. "We loved her. We couldn't commit such a heinous act." Not saying I'm right or wrong, just my thought.

by Anonymousreply 464July 29, 2022 12:43 AM

R463, well it's a fact that rich people are FAR less likely to kill their kids. People who kill their kids are usually poor people who see the kids as a financial burden or people who got knocked up (or knocked someone up) unintentionally. The Ramseys wanted to have kids and had no problems providing for them

by Anonymousreply 465July 29, 2022 12:45 AM

Yeah, but rich people are far less likely to get away with crimes, because they have the means to get away with it, which feeds into what R463 is talking about.

by Anonymousreply 466July 29, 2022 12:48 AM

The vast majority of criminals are poor. Yeah, rich people sometimes get away with shit. But to pretend millionaires are killing their kids enough masse is to deny reality. Rich people who don't like their kids can just dump them with a nanny

by Anonymousreply 467July 29, 2022 12:51 AM

Nobody said that rich people kill their kids en masse, just that it does happen.

by Anonymousreply 468July 29, 2022 12:52 AM

R468, yeah, maybe 1 in 100000000 cases...

by Anonymousreply 469July 29, 2022 1:08 AM

You are missing the point here, R467/R469

Plenty - PLENTY - of rich white men sexually abuse their daughters. You wouldn’t disagree with that, surely?

Nobody (sensible) has suggested that Ramsey intentionally murdered JB. I don’t believe that happened. I think he panicked and hit her. Since anyone can do that, his whiteness and richness is irrelevant.

by Anonymousreply 470July 29, 2022 1:16 AM

Except "anyone" doesn't do that. When did a millionaire panic and accidentally kill his little daughter? Is there a documented case of that happening?

by Anonymousreply 471July 29, 2022 1:24 AM

R462 I am far from an expert, but psychologists are clear that not all sexual abuse of children is committed by people who would be classified as paedophiles in the psychiatric sense of the word.

Sometimes it is “situational”. If John was responsbile for abusing JB he probably fits that category. The fact that he’d never (as far as we know) done it before would therefore be irrelevant.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 472July 29, 2022 1:26 AM

One of the points made about John possibly being an abuser was the fact that the Ramseys were about to go on holiday, and the opportunities for John to be alone with Jonbenet in familiar surroundings was about to evaporate for a few weeks. This means nothing on its own, but makes sense if John was an abuser.

I think it's weird that he pointed the finger at his friend Fleet White. I wish White would write a book or do an in-depth interview along with his wife. After everything they've been through, it's probably furthest from anything they'd ever want to do. They've probably resigned themselves to believing that it's enough that John is stewing in his own filth, despite them wanting justice for JBR.

Separate note, do we know for a fact that Charles Lindbergh wasn't responsible for the disappearance/death of his baby?

And, thanks for that link R472.

by Anonymousreply 473July 29, 2022 1:28 AM

R471 I have absolutely no idea.

Is there a documented case of an intruder gaining entry to a home without breaking in, writing a massive two page ransom note using paper and pen found in the house then trussing up the “kidnap” victim, raping her with a paintbrush and hiding hiding her in the most remote room in the house before leaving and magically as he appeared?

Whatever happened that night is so unsual as to be unique…so your “rich white men never accidentally kill their children” is irrelevant.

Whatever the explanation, it was a very, very unusual event.

by Anonymousreply 474July 29, 2022 1:32 AM

[quote]a summary of the two main theories of why child abuse in affluent families may be underreported: [b]affluent families have more privacy and affluent abusers have more power to fight government interventions.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 475July 29, 2022 1:33 AM

How many football players have stabbed their ex-wives to death? Well, we know of one instance. Sometimes unusual shit happens.

by Anonymousreply 476July 29, 2022 1:43 AM

FWIW, I think the broken window in the basement is very strong evidence against John. The police questioned him at length about it, so they cleary think so too.

The small window in the basement was broken, but no one came in or out of it (undisturbed dust & cobwebs etc). This would imply staging. There was a suitcase underneath it which John said was not usually there.

John claimed he broke the window months earlier after forgetting his key. Neither the housekeeper nor Patsy knew anything about the window being broken.

Problem is, a piece of glass was found on the suitcase that’s not normally there.

That’s very difficult to explain away. I think he broke that window while he was still intending to stage the “pervert broke in and raped her” scenario.

by Anonymousreply 477July 29, 2022 1:43 AM

mmmm....okay. But homicide in affluent families is not common.

by Anonymousreply 478July 29, 2022 1:47 AM

No, it isn’t. That’s why this case has provoked the amount of discussion it has over the years. All possible explanations seem to be so unlikely as to be impossible. But one of them must be correct.

by Anonymousreply 479July 29, 2022 1:52 AM

[quote]This would imply staging ... I think he broke that window while he was still intending to stage the “pervert broke in and raped her” scenario.

I agree, R477.

How is anyone supposed to climb through this?

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 480July 29, 2022 1:56 AM

Because he states over and over again he didn't do it. It's the first thing he says in his first interview.

It's part of why people thought there was actually an intruder.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 481July 29, 2022 1:57 AM

Just like Casey Anthony and OJ stating they didn't do it.

by Anonymousreply 482July 29, 2022 1:59 AM

R481 most guilty people insist they didn't do it until there's proof.

by Anonymousreply 483July 29, 2022 1:59 AM

Forgive & forget.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 484July 29, 2022 2:44 AM

Clip at [R484] is the perfect example of why people don’t believe JR is guilty of the crime. He is a well spoken and a sympathetic man.

by Anonymousreply 485July 29, 2022 2:54 AM

Misogyny is another reason why Patsy got the blame while John hides behind his son and late wife.

John lied about the broken window cause he knew his goose was about to be cooked.

The cops had it right at first but their mistakes lead to justice not being served.

by Anonymousreply 486July 29, 2022 3:12 AM

My father was a well-spoken and prominent citizen and also an asshole abuser. No one will ever know because this class of people go to extraordinary lengths to cover it up. "Telling" is considered worse than the abuse. It simply isn't done.

John gives me the willies.

by Anonymousreply 487July 29, 2022 3:33 AM

You are adamant John did it. It's so sad to think her dad did that to her and Patsy was in the dark. Parents protecting the other child is less evil.

What about all the foreign DNA found?

His other adult children support him.

by Anonymousreply 488July 29, 2022 4:03 AM

Foreign DNA? Um, that “touch dna” was there because John used gloves. That were used by someone else, who put the gloves in the package.

by Anonymousreply 489July 29, 2022 4:10 AM

John keeps Burke close because he knows that Burke saw him up that night. Burke seeing him up dispels John’s claim that he was asleep.

by Anonymousreply 490July 29, 2022 4:12 AM

The small broken window in the basement was covered with undisturbed dust and cobwebs and was filmed in that condition by the Boulder police the day or night of the murder. Proof that no one had used it as an entrance or exit when JB was killed.

by Anonymousreply 491July 29, 2022 4:16 AM

If John did it, how can Patsy's initial words to the police when they arrived be explained? She said to the officers at her house, "We didn't mean for this to happen." That's an odd thing to say if she wasn't involved and didn't know her daughter was dead. Why did she say that?

by Anonymousreply 492July 29, 2022 6:02 AM

No, she said it later to a friend (Kristine Griffin) who was helping her with a cool washcloth. She'd been taking a shit ton of Valium, and made other statements that seemingly made no sense in context.

by Anonymousreply 493July 29, 2022 6:53 AM

One explanation could be that Patsy had been previously warned by friends/family that her pageant activities could draw the wrong kind of attention to Jonbenet, and now (in Patsy's mind) an intruder has just come in the house and murdered her.

by Anonymousreply 494July 29, 2022 7:02 AM

In the Dr. Phil interview with Burke, he reveals something about that night that had not been revealed in 20 years. Burke says he got up in the middle of the night, snuck downstairs, and played with a toy. It is CRAZY that that was the very first time that info had come to light.

Not so surprising- Dr. Phil askes no follow up questions. At all. "How long were you up?" "Did you see or hear anything out of the ordinary when you were up?" "Did anyone in the family come downstairs." No, Phil LEAVES THE SUBJECT. Unless he did ask a follow up and it was edited out.

He will likely never do an interview again, so it's really a lost opportunity.

by Anonymousreply 495July 29, 2022 7:46 AM

So it’s reasonable that Burke ate some pineapple around the time he snuck downstairs.

by Anonymousreply 496July 29, 2022 8:00 AM

[quote] She said to the officers at her house, "We didn't mean for this to happen." That's an odd thing to say if she wasn't involved and didn't know her daughter was dead. Why did she say that?

Someone has just handed you the War and Peace of ransom notes, with plenty of information in it to make it look like they knew personal information about you, such as the amount of your husband's year-end bonus. You're going to immediately start thinking that you or your husband did something to someone close to you, and now they want to hurt you or get revenge.

by Anonymousreply 497July 29, 2022 9:27 AM

[quote]well it's a fact that rich people are FAR less likely to kill their kids. People who kill their kids are usually poor people who see the kids as a financial burden or people who got knocked up (or knocked someone up) unintentionally.

This isn't even true. The stubborn refusal of anyone on Datalounge to actually LOOK SOMETHING UP before pronouncing it to be true is astonishing to me.

This researcher has indicated there are five common reasons for parents to kill their children. One is an unwanted pregnancy, but there are plenty of other reasons. Wikipedia has links to studies in several countries indicating it's usually mental illness that leads to murder. In the US, most children who are murdered were victims of abuse prior to their deaths.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 498July 29, 2022 9:37 AM

R496 no idea. What we DO know is that Jon Benet had pineapple in her stomach, and Patsy says she never gave her pineapple that day.

by Anonymousreply 499July 29, 2022 9:41 AM

JR and wife were officially cleared when an unknown male DNA was found in and on her underwear. The DA apologized to them.

To this day, they have not matched the DNA to perpetrator.

by Anonymousreply 500July 29, 2022 10:19 AM

R500 The current DA has walked back that “apology”.

This is not a DNA case & it’s too simplistic to declare “male DNA was found in her underwear”.

Multiple tiny, tiny traces of DNA were found on her. The traces are too small for a full profile and too small to even determine if they all come from the same source.

So what you’re saying is highly misleading.

by Anonymousreply 501July 29, 2022 10:33 AM

Wrong R500. They never "walked back" the apology.

And, yes...they found a MANS DNA on JBR. This is NOT misleading AT ALL.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 502July 29, 2022 10:47 AM

The Boulder Police Department said “it was actively reviewing genetic DNA testing processes to see if those can be applied to this case moving forward.,” KDVR reported. BPD said nearly 1,000 DNA samples have been analyzed.

by Anonymousreply 503July 29, 2022 10:48 AM

Boulder District Attorney Mary T. Lacy wrote the letter and posted it to the department's website in July 2008. There had long been a piece of DNA that threw a wrench in any attempt to prosecute a member of the family — or anyone connected to the crime until that point. It was found in JonBenét's underwear and under her fingernails. And there was no match from any known person. Then in 2008, another technical advancement allowed them to check for more DNA evidence through a new technique called "touch DNA."

Using this new technology, the police were able to find two other samples on the sides of JonBenét's long johns; they matched the sample taken from her underwear. As Lacy explains in the letter, this cleared the Ramseys — and everyone they had previously considered connected to the case — and left only one possibility: an unknown killer. The only thing they know for sure is that it was a man because the DNA points to that.

by Anonymousreply 504July 29, 2022 10:50 AM

Stan Garnett is the current DA and yes, he has walked back Lacy’s apology. He said it was “premature” and an example of how the previous investigation “wandered”.

Also:

[quote] Asked if he thought he knew who killed JonBenet, Mr Garnett replied, “I do.” He added: “If we can ever file a case in open court, I’ll tell the world.”

This cannot be down to DNA since that has not produced a full profile.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 505July 29, 2022 11:04 AM

A full explanation of the DNA “evidence” in the case.

It is NOT what you are trying to claim.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 506July 29, 2022 11:07 AM

My apologies, R505, I thought you meant Lacy walked it back. The apology that she made was not seen as wise only because she was essentially allowing the public to think that never can they be arrested if more evidence were found to the contrary of her statement. So, the walk back is a lot more political than anything else. The DNA most definitely seems to be an exoneration. People want this to stay unsolved bc they LOVE to keep guessing. I was not even 2 years old when this case emerged, and it is VERY strange that I know about it. I mean, how many kids have been killed in this way and yet this case is so well known to generations. Odd. But, the cops did a LOUSY job. LOUSY. And, the DA is also pretty dsyfunctional so they want to point to the easiest target (the new guy) in order to remain exempt from scrutiny, and blaming the Ramseys with an excuse that they just don't have enough evidence. DESPITE DNA of a stranger on her underwear. They are all idiots.

by Anonymousreply 507July 29, 2022 11:12 AM

Also from Stan Garnett (in case you can’t be arsed to click that link)

[quote] This [exoneration] letter is not legally binding. It's a good-faith opinion and has no legal importance but the opinion of the person who had the job before I did, whom I respect.

[quote] Dan Caplis: And Stan, so it would be fair to say then that Mary Lacy’s clearing of the Ramseys is no longer in effect, you’re not bound by that, you’re just going to follow the evidence wherever it leads [quote] [quote] Stan Garnett: Well, what I’ve always said about Mary Lacy’s exoneration that was issued in June of 2008, or July, I guess -- a few months before I took over -- is that it speaks for itself. I’ve made it clear that any decisions made going forward about the Ramsey case will be made based off of evidence...[quote] [quote] Dan Caplis: Stan...when you say that the exoneration speaks for itself, are you saying that it’s Mary Lacy taking action, and that action doesn’t have any particular legally binding effect, it may cause complications if there is ever a prosecution of a Ramsey down the road, but it doesn’t have a legally binding effect on you, is that accurate? [quote] [quote] Stan Garnett: That is accurate, I think that is what most of the press related about the exoneration at the time that it was issued.[quote]

So yes, he absolutely has walked it back.

by Anonymousreply 508July 29, 2022 11:16 AM

R508. yes, I see that. But it is entirely political. It does not at all have anything to do with the elements of the case. It merely attempts to save face.

by Anonymousreply 509July 29, 2022 11:19 AM

R507 You are still missing rhe point (and I cross posted my 508 comment with yours) - the DNA, such as it is, in no way, shape or form proves that a strange male was with JonBenet that night. It simply doesn’t. That’s not how DNA works.

If they’d found a profile of a male in sweat, semen, saliva or touch DNA on her that would be stunning. They didn’t find that. The traces were far too small to know what they did find. This is why Garnett won’t support the Ramsey’s exoneration by Lacy.

by Anonymousreply 510July 29, 2022 11:20 AM

Maybe it’s political, or maybe it’s that Ramsey can’t be eliminated by DNA.

by Anonymousreply 511July 29, 2022 11:21 AM

R510 I just find that the DNA found on her which has NEVER been solved plays a large role in this. The DA and LE had a very contentious relationship, which seems to have played a role in this. The BPD never had a case like this and they were, essentially, the keystone cops. That said, I respect your position. It is a mystery and nobody is right about it till its solved. I guess it is interesting to speculate.

by Anonymousreply 512July 29, 2022 11:49 AM

It’s definitely interesting to,speculate.

The thing is, if it’s ever solved it’s highly unlikely to be through DNA. What was found was trace amounts, not even enough for a full profile.

DNA can be the magic evidence that solves a cold case - and frequently is - but not here. Frustratingly.

I do find it significant that Garnett feels he knows the culprit - which we know can’t be because of DNA analysis. He could be wrong, of course, but he obviously does not share the previous DA’s opinion about the Ramsey exoneration 🤷‍♂️

by Anonymousreply 513July 29, 2022 11:56 AM

Maybe the intruder disapparated like Harry Potter and that’s why there is no evidence whatsoever of them coming or going

by Anonymousreply 514July 29, 2022 12:03 PM

R435 Finally someone weighs in logically who is following the case. An intruder did it, period. People forget; this was the nineties, the creepiest decade ever. The family had been stalked and the intruder was believed to have been in their home before. Its not far-fetched. Its less far-fetched than an autistic 9 year old cracking her skull or Jon molesting her then sadistically torturing and killing her.

by Anonymousreply 515July 29, 2022 12:59 PM

R499 That was dispelled. It was proven in the autopsy what was thought to have been pineapple were grapes and cherries, fruit she had eaten at the Christmas party the night before. Again, you don’t hear this type of information because the BPD goes out of its way to see it doesn’t make news.

by Anonymousreply 516July 29, 2022 1:09 PM

Stomach contents of Jon Benet

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 517July 29, 2022 1:13 PM

Um … isn’t the entire point that contents were found in JBR’s duodenum which suggests she was killed shortly after she had something to eat?

JFC.

by Anonymousreply 518July 29, 2022 1:33 PM

R515 You think it’s “logical” to buy into a theory which is unsupported by any evidence whatsoever. The “90s were creepy”? I’m embarrassed for you if you think you”re “logical”.

R518 £ Cinesnatch - Yes. It’s when she ate rather than what she ate that’s significant.

by Anonymousreply 519July 29, 2022 1:42 PM

R518 Yes, that would play into the James Kolar/ CBS theory that Burke did it after JB took a piece of his bowl of pineapple. They say he hit her on the head and parents didn't want him to be a criminal, aka social life tarnished forever, so Patsy made up the note while John staged it.

That's an insane thing for any parent.

He admitted on Dr. Phil he was down there with a flashlight looking at Christmas presents. If he really murdered her with a flashlight he wouldn't be so careless to mention this.

by Anonymousreply 520July 29, 2022 1:48 PM

My point is that John had her have a snack before he abused her in the basement and she began to resist to the point where he decided he had to kill her before his indiscretions would be exposed.

When it comes to strangulation AND blunt force trauma to the head, Burke makes little sense.

What makes more sense is an abuser who decides to strangle the girl to shut her up and when that doesn’t work, he whacks her with a hard object.

Occam’s Razor. Always Occam’s Razor.

by Anonymousreply 521July 29, 2022 1:57 PM

R521 I have always thought that he took her down to the kitchen to try and calm her when she became noisily upset in the bedroom. He fixed her some pineapple & himself some tea as an alibi for being down there if Patsy came looking.

When JB began to scream (this was heard by two neighbours) he panicked and smashed her in the head with the torch. This was a massive and unsurvivable head injury and he thought she was dead.

Everything he did from then on was about staging.

Firstly, he wanted to stage an accident so changed her underwear and cleaned her up (there’s evidence of her pubic region being wiped). He then realised that there may be internal signs of his abuse so changed his plan to “a pervert broke in and raped her”. The trussing up, rape with a paintbrush and strangulation were all to make it look like a sex crime.

Then he worried about DNA so settled on a kidnapping as this was the only plan that would make her body disappear altogether.

To me, looking at the evidence, it’s the only scenario that makes sense.

by Anonymousreply 522July 29, 2022 2:07 PM

No suspect can be "exonerated" by a cop or D.A. They can be said to be at the time "eliminated" as a suspect, but usually that's due to an iron-clad alibi, which the Ramsey parents definitely did and do not have.

There was no intruder. Santa didn't do it (BTW, wouldn't "Santa" have to have shown up AS Santa in order to calm and silence JB?). Hippies didn't do it. A one-armed man didn't do it.

ONLY someone who knew the quirky house layout; who knew John's bonus amount; who felt confident that the family would fall asleep and soundly; who had a means of arrival and departure that would remain unnoticed by neighbors; who had the brass to look for a tablet and pen to write not only the "'War and Peace' of ransom notes" but also a rough draft, taking his sweet old time; who used more of his sweet old time making JB's corpse a horror scene; and who never called.

In short, nobody. Nobody but a member of the family.

by Anonymousreply 523July 29, 2022 4:35 PM

To the person trying to argue intruder: stop. You sound like a fucking idiot. Go look at, and read the ransom note again. Jesus Christ, some people are too dumb to live.

by Anonymousreply 524July 29, 2022 4:38 PM

I mean, I've seen someone argue that the Hi-Tek boot prints didn't being to Burke, because he'd gotten "High tech" boots, which are completely different.

by Anonymousreply 525July 29, 2022 4:40 PM

"People forget; this was the nineties, the creepiest decade ever."

You are a retard.

by Anonymousreply 526July 29, 2022 4:44 PM

R498, you're the one who didn't look shit up. Where are all the rich people killing their kids? There aren't any. Love it when people who don't know anything act like know-it-alls.

by Anonymousreply 527July 29, 2022 5:15 PM

R527, Murdaugh.

But even if the Ramseys were a unique example, sui generis, in the demographics of offspring-killers, uniqueness doesn't equate to innocence.

by Anonymousreply 528July 29, 2022 9:27 PM

He killed his adult son. Not exactly the same thing as garroting a five-year-old

by Anonymousreply 529July 29, 2022 9:53 PM

What was used to “clean up” the body? A shirt, rag, paper towel? Were fibers found?

What was being cleaned up? Urine? Semen?

Were her dirty clothes discovered in the home? Did the perpetrators take anything with them from the crime scene? Violent criminals often do.

What stuck with me from seeing the crime scene photos was the thin gold ring on her finger. It seemed like something a pedophile would have taken as a souvenir.

by Anonymousreply 530July 30, 2022 12:08 AM

R526 Jesus calm down

by Anonymousreply 531July 30, 2022 5:19 AM

R526 Let me guess, you believe 9 year old Burke cracked her skull in half with a toy train? I know it seems obvious one of the family members did it but I don’t think it is far fetched for someone to have been waiting in their home who had been in there before. Before, I was 100% convinced John had done it but now I am not so sure.

by Anonymousreply 532July 30, 2022 5:24 AM

She ate the cherries and grapes the same night of her murder, not the night before.

by Anonymousreply 533July 30, 2022 5:29 AM

Climbing rope

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 534July 30, 2022 5:56 AM

R532 But how do you explain the ransom note? The complete lack of evidence that anyone else was in the home? The fact that any intruder would have had to leave and lock a door or window behind them? No sign of anyone being in the basement, sleeping or eating while there. You need to resort to complete speculation to answer these questions and that’s just storytelling.

R530 The autopsy determined that her pubic region was “wiped”. With what, no one knows. Fibres from John’s black shirt were found in her vagina. So, there’s that.

by Anonymousreply 535July 30, 2022 6:06 AM

R533 She died in the early hours of 26 Dec. So, yes, the fruit salad was the evening before.

by Anonymousreply 536July 30, 2022 6:08 AM

A 9 year old girl who went to JB’s dance studio was attacked in her bedroom shortly after the murder. Police said nothing about it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 537July 30, 2022 6:12 AM

What is “retarded” is to blindly and faithfully put trust in police and the selective evidence they present.

by Anonymousreply 538July 30, 2022 6:13 AM

Charles Brennan

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 539July 30, 2022 6:14 AM

R532 The entire case is speculation. The ransom note is bizarre but its not impossible to have been written by someone or a group who was closely stalking the Ramsays. I recommend browsing reddit threads on the subject. Actual people who have worked on the case have weighed in on there.

by Anonymousreply 540July 30, 2022 6:29 AM

Regarding the fibers found near JB’s vagina

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 541July 30, 2022 6:32 AM

R540 I’ve browsed Reddit. What makes you think I haven’t.

No, the entire case is not speculation. For people capable of rational thinking, there’s no need to speculate.

by Anonymousreply 542July 30, 2022 7:08 AM

The thing that’s most frustrating about this case is that it’ll never be solved. It’s a bit like a murder mystery novel that’s missing the final chapter.

I’m positive the murderer was a Ramsey. I’ve gone backwards and forwards between Burke and John being the culprit, but ultimately I can’t make my mind up.

It must be one of the most bizarre murders that exists. A 999 call reporting a kidnapping, a ridiculously long ransom note with bizarre language and then John finding JonBenet dead in the basement, hours after she was reported missing. No outside murderer would have risked writing such a long ransom note while still in the house.

by Anonymousreply 543July 30, 2022 7:36 AM

R532, It is totally, unequivocally "far-fetched."

You seem to think that anyone can simply enter another's house at will. Have you ever tried it? Without being seen?

Where do you suppose the "get-away" vehicle was parked in this residential neighborhood, where the kidnapper could lug a child?

Why Christmas night? A night often filled with excitement, with children all wound up? There ARE 364 other nights. Why not choose one when at least one adult Ramsey isn't home?

So---Do you think it was a kidnapping that made a wrong turn to murder? Or a murder planned to look like a kidnapping? Was the planning so incredibly poor as to have overlooked the ransom note until the intruder was on scene? Quite the "Oops!"

Bah.

Finally, forget physical evidence. Look only at the psychology of the aftermath. Your precious child has been hideously slain IN HER HOME, YOUR HOME. A HOME THAT WAS UNTHINKABLY INVADED, with ANOTHER CHILD there who might ALSO have been slain.

Neither John nor Patsy acted horrified or terrified ABOUT THE ABOVE. Nobody has reported any frantic talk between them about "HOW?! When?! Were they lurking all day?! OMG! Why didn't we HEAR anything?! We might ALL have been murdered! How did they get away?!"

Nothing like that. Because John and Patsy knew there was no Intruder, no "small foreign faction," but with the police now there the Ramseys had more to think about than faking a conversation.

by Anonymousreply 544July 30, 2022 11:13 AM

The ransom note was written by the family. The exact amount of John's bonus. The fucking thing was written IN THE HOUSE. There were discarded practice notes. From a pad that was in the house. Do you really think an intruder is going to say "I'll just wrote the note once I get there. I'm sure I can find a pad and pen somewhere." And to top it off, they put the pen back into cup where they got it (instead of taking it with them) and put the pad back in the drawer where it belonged. While being sure to discard the practice notes.

You are an idiot if you believe it was an intruder. I love the "evidence" for it. Some vague, unspecific story that another child was attacked in their home close by 9 month later. Give it a fucking rest. Or "well, John SAYS he didn't do it!" Dummies.

by Anonymousreply 545July 30, 2022 2:52 PM

John is clearly the only one in the house who knew how to make a garotte.

by Anonymousreply 546July 30, 2022 4:09 PM

If there was an uncertainty of a family member committing the crime, I don’t believe JR would be petitioning for another DNA analysis.

John carried her body contaminating it with his shirt fibers. I think there was a lot of human error in every step of the investigation including the autopsy.

The Boulder police lost credibility and I don’t trust their eyewitness accounts of the Ramsey’s behaviors that morning. Who was in the house when the kidnappers were supposed to be calling? I’d like to hear what others witnessed that day, not the Boulder police. I question if we ever heard the real story.

by Anonymousreply 547July 30, 2022 4:10 PM

About the skull fracture, wasn't there some evidence that she had been strung up? Couldn't she have fallen on her head, on a concrete floor, creating the fracture?

by Anonymousreply 548July 30, 2022 5:14 PM

[quote]The Boulder police lost credibility and I don’t trust their eyewitness accounts of the Ramsey’s behaviors that morning. Who was in the house when the kidnappers were supposed to be calling? I’d like to hear what others witnessed that day, not the Boulder police. I question if we ever heard the real story.

Fleet White, who was there for almost all of it, came to suspect the family.

by Anonymousreply 549July 30, 2022 5:16 PM

R547 Jesus Christ, you're stupid. Even if his DNA is found on her, he can always say OF COURSE, I WAS IN THE HOUSE WITH HER. All they may find is further evidence of "touch" DNA which likely came from the person who packaged her clothes.

The ransom note tells the whole tale. It cannot be ignored. Ot points square in the direction of the Family, you goddamned idiot.

by Anonymousreply 550July 30, 2022 6:11 PM

Nobody in the history of the fucking world has written a ransom note as the kidnapping was in progress. They pre-write the note and take it with them to the crime scene. The note was three pages long, which is unheard of. There were practice notes written first. It was written on a pad of paper and a pen from the Ramsey's own kitchen. The pad and pen were returned to the drawer after the note was written. If you think an "intruder" did this crime, you're an idiot.

BTW, if it was an "intruder," then why did they leave JonBenet's body in the house? She was a tiny 6 year-old child, any adult could've carried her body out of the house with them.

by Anonymousreply 551July 30, 2022 6:27 PM

R548, no and no. The blow was to the top of her head, and had been hit with tremendous force.

by Anonymousreply 552July 30, 2022 6:31 PM

R551, if it was John or Patay why didn't they just drive off and dump her body somewhere in the woods?

by Anonymousreply 553July 30, 2022 6:48 PM

Because John did it. He didn't want to risk the chance of Patsy waking up and finding out he was gone, and his car was gone too. Also, the neighbors could've seen him driving off and then coming back to the house in the middle of the night. It was much too risky, he would've had no plausible explanation as to why he went out driving at such an ungodly hour.

by Anonymousreply 554July 30, 2022 6:54 PM

R553, I’m not R551, but I think there are straightforward answers to that. Even if you assume that John and Patsy were acting together and wouldn’t have had to explain their sudden disappearance, they would have had to risk drawing the attention of the neighbors. They lived on a very short street; anyone could have heard something or recognized their car going by at an odd hour. Then there is is bigger question of explaining to everyone what had happened to JonBenet. They would have to had to stage a break-in at the very least. The ransom note, as many have observed, was intended to allow John—it specified John—to leave the house with a large case ostensibly carrying the ransom money.

by Anonymousreply 555July 30, 2022 8:05 PM

The ransom note was written in the house and it was long. Either one alone could be explained away, possibly, but not together. An intruder would have his own note, and in the unlikely event he didn't or it was a last minute change of plans, it would be short. The only reasonable explanation is the author(s) knew there was significant amount of time available.

by Anonymousreply 556July 30, 2022 9:06 PM

Except they didn't have tons of time available, they had to catch an early plane the next morning

It makes no sense that the Ramseys would waste so much time writing such a long note

by Anonymousreply 557July 31, 2022 1:00 AM

If JBR is assaulted and killed sometime after Patsy goes to bed at 10 - 10:30 PM, and the 9-1-1 call was made at 5:52 AM, that's roughly probably five - six hours to coverup a crime. That's a lot of time. They would have needed an hour or so to do the practice note(s) and the "final" copy (if that).

You know who doesn't have an hour or so to write the War & Peace of ransom notes (as well as do practice run(s))?

An intruder.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 558July 31, 2022 1:32 AM

What would experts deduce from the ransom note if they were handed that ransom note not knowing anything else about the crime or key players. I’d like to know what specialists in the field think about the note, the writing style, organization, voice, etc.

by Anonymousreply 559July 31, 2022 2:03 AM

Interesting discussion re Fleet White.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 560July 31, 2022 2:18 AM

"If JBR is assaulted and killed sometime after Patsy goes to bed at 10 - 10:30 PM, and the 9-1-1 call was made at 5:52 AM, that's roughly probably five - six hours to coverup a crime."

She was most likely killed at 1am or later. So less than 5 hours. Who would waste any time writing such a long note? Doesn't make sense for them OR for an intruder, in my opinion

by Anonymousreply 561July 31, 2022 2:27 AM

No, you're right R561. The ransom letter is nonsensical in any context. But, someone wrote it. And it makes more "sense" that someone with five hours in their own home wrote it verses an intruder. Also, the ransom note serves the Ramsey's more than anyone. For the Ramsey's, the ransom letter points to someone outside of the home. What does it do for an intruder?

Wasn't Fleet and his wife the ones who had 5 people supporting their alibi, R560? And, considering how passionate Fleet was about getting to the bottom of this and how he has sued for release of the Grand Jury details, it's kind of gross to suggest today he could have been the one who did it.

I was just reading up on the Grand Jury. Now, the threshold for charging is lower than the threshold for conviction. The Grand Jury recommended charging both parents with two charges each: (to put it crudely) placing JBR in harm's way and then covering up a crime. Obviously, the Grand Jury will see more than we ever will, and their recommendations suggest they thought Burke was the assaulter/killer, no?

by Anonymousreply 562July 31, 2022 2:34 AM

Oh please, what an injustice that the Ramsey’s have not only had their daughter violently murdered, but they are assumed by every moron on the street to be guilty. It is absurd but not worth trying to change minds. It will be solved soon enough once the BPD is forced by a lawsuit to allow genealogical dna testing on all evidence. Jennifer Kesse’s family just successfully sued to get her files from the Orlando PD.

by Anonymousreply 563July 31, 2022 2:58 AM

It was a strangely disorganized household. The architecture was crazy--3 or more stories and a TON of add-ons. It was described as rambling and maze-like. It would be quite possible for a sneaky person or persons to hide in that house--or for someone who lived in the house to do things at night without the others knowing. Investigators tested for sounds and found they often couldn't hear screams from one part of the house to another. Also, Patsy was on heavy meds for chemo and sleeping pills. And, the family was messy and didn't pick up after themselves but left all messes for the maids--likely because Patsy had been ill for so long--so they wouldn't likely notice if food or other items were missing or out of place. Also, they house tours that brought strangers and friends into the house. There were multiple points of possible entry--including the exterior door off of JonBenet's balcony directly into her room. I've always thought a family member likely did it, but I need to point out these architectural facts could also allow an intruder to have done it and to have taken his time.

by Anonymousreply 564July 31, 2022 3:09 AM

I think most who have been following this case accept that she had the pineapple and milk (or whatever) in the presence of someone she was familiar to (considering she was murdered shortly thereafter), R563. That leaves four possibilities: John, Burke, Patsy, or an intruder (familiar to her). Either she stole the pineapple from Burke who fatally lashed out at her; Patsy fatally reprimanded her for getting up in the middle-of-the-night for getting a snack; John gave her pineapple to calm her down mid-assault; or an intruder/John was warming her up with a snack.

Why would an intruder who has a preexisting relationship to JBR break into their home (perhaps lie in wait), sexually assault her (forget that most experts agree that this assault wasn't the first time), kill her in very complex manner, and then write a ransom letter before departing? The only way an intruder wrote a ransom letter before her death is she's hanging around with him at the dining table eating pineapple for 45 or so minutes; he takes her to the basement to assault her BEFORE taking her from the home (huh?); she screams and becomes too much of a "nuisance" and he kills her. But, then that begs the question: if you're going to kidnap a child, why bother with the sexual assault before they're "safely" in your captivity?

The ransom letter makes no sense for an intruder because there is no indication that the ransom letter was ever serious. Why would an intruder write the ransom letter if the intent was never to kidnap the child?

by Anonymousreply 565July 31, 2022 3:13 AM

If the intruder existed, the intruder is someone who is privy to financial details of John's recent bonus (or very specifically those two former Access Graphics employees who accused John of owing him near or that exact amount). The intruder is also someone familiar enough to JBR that she would trust them and feel comfortable enough eating pineapple and milk (or whatever) in front of them and not scream in their presence when they appear in her room. Keep in mind, the intruder's intent was to kidnap JBR for money. They sexually assault and kill her when she becomes uncooperative, before fleeing. Sure, Jan.

One can only conclude the ransom note was a ruse. Yet, what motivation would an intruder have to create a ruse? There was none. If JBR is dead, there is no point to writing the letter. Just leave like you came in. If she's alive, why did you not bring a sedative? They thought she would leave willingly?

What motivation would the Ramseys have to create a ruse? Well, it would deflect from them if one of them murdered that child, and said child is still in their home, by creating the illusion of a botched kidnapping.

Anyway, John completely forgets that the kidnappers never call when they say they will that morning (from 8 - 10 AM), before the discovery of JBR's body at 1:05 PM. If your daughter was just kidnapped and the ransom letter says to expect a call from 8 - 10 AM, do you not wait by the phone from 8 - 10 AM?

Please, by all means, challenge this logic.

by Anonymousreply 566July 31, 2022 3:44 AM

R563 For fuck’s,sake - how many more times?

There was NOT ENOUGH DNA TO COMPILE A PROFILE. Do you need me to,repeat it? THERE WAS NOT ENOUGH DNA TO COMPILE A PROFILE.

This is not a DNA case. It will not be solved by DNA. You cannot do genealogical testing when you DON’T HAVE ENOUGH DNA TO COMPILE A PROFILE.

You really just see those three letters - DNA - and think, “Oh case closed. It worked for the Golden State Killer & all those other cold cases”. Of course you do…every idiot does.

They have trace amounts of DNA - and they can’t even tell if they all come from the same source or not.

Check your facts before you start calling other people “morons”, you arrogant, uneducated cunt.

by Anonymousreply 567July 31, 2022 4:48 AM

The only person that “ransom note” could usefully serve is John Ramsey. Precisely no one else.

It explains to JB’s mother why her little girl is not tucked up in bed (“She’s been kidnapped!”) and it attempts to create time before the police are called (“Call the police and we’ll behead her”).

Who needs time? An intruder who’s already gone? An intruder claiming he’s kidnapped someone who wasn’t actually kidnapped?

Patsy? Who didn’t use that time but instead called the police immediately?

No. The murderer needed time to get rid of the body. This can only be John Ramsey. No one else.

This is such inescapable logic that I wonder at the thinking capacity of anyone who can’t see it.

by Anonymousreply 568July 31, 2022 4:59 AM

R369, John told investigators that he had no conversation about his golf clubs.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 569July 31, 2022 10:12 AM

R564, Were all those "multiple points of entry" unlocked?

Where/when did the hiding Intruder go to the bathroom? Was he super-human?!

by Anonymousreply 570July 31, 2022 10:16 AM

The ransom note was more about John than JB. It was full of hatred spewed at John. The crime was against John. Not JB.

The murder of JB was violent and torturous. Vengeful. Full of rage. One could argue the murder was not sexual in nature and the assault with the paintbrush handle was done to torture the child eliciting no sexual gratification.

One suspect had a key to the Ramsey’s house, would have JB’s trust, and knew the floor plan - he probably knew of John’s bonus too if it was casually discussed in a social setting. The same suspect was with John when the body was found and acted very strangely the morning of the murder - his DNA was everywhere and he contaminated the crime scene after the body was found. Read the reports about his actions. This same person was so full of anger and emotion multiple times in Georgia when hosted by friends and family of the Ramsey’s that police had to be called to intervene. Multiple friends and family members of the Ramseys have described his and his wife’s disturbing behaviors.

People with obsessive, vengeful thinking often write lengthy, rambling narratives. This person also has written multi page letters to LE re the Ramsey case and obsess over maintaining the reputation of Boulder, Co - which is an unusual passion/cause. The same person reportedly took obsessive notes on the Ramsey’s yellow steno pad when first called to the home the morning of the murder. This person likes to write and express himself.

It’s not an unreasonable conclusion that this person would have the opportunity and motive to commit this crime. He allegedly has an alibi, but I’m always skeptical of alibi’s provided by loved ones/family members. His rage and need to express himself explain the rambling ransom note. I think JB became the victim because the perpetrator was fueled with jealousy and hatred and JB represented (in the perpetrator’s mind) perfection that he wanted to take away from the Ramseys. She was his outlet to hurt John.

I’m not convinced it was determined that evidence pointed to a history of sexual abuse. If there was any sexual motive or details I’m overlooking, this man would have had the opportunity to have a history of sexually abusing JB.

If Burke snuck downstairs to play with toys that night, maybe JB did too. Maybe she wasn’t taken from her bedroom. Maybe she was seen through the kitchen window and the perp just let himself in with the key.

by Anonymousreply 571July 31, 2022 4:15 PM

R571 = John Ramsey. No, your "friend" didn't do it.

by Anonymousreply 572July 31, 2022 4:53 PM

Total rubbish, R571 Half the ransom letter was threats against JB’s life if the police were called. No genuine “hatred” spewed at John, just a lame pretence at it.

“One could argue that the crime was not sexual”? Who would argue that? Unqualified you? Certainly not the entire panel of extremely qualified experts in pathology and child sexual abuse.

The rest of your post = illogical, unevidenced twaddle.

by Anonymousreply 573July 31, 2022 4:59 PM

Yeah, the friend broke into the house on fucking Christmas night. Right. His family didn't notice he was gone for hours.

by Anonymousreply 574July 31, 2022 5:05 PM

Is Fleet White heir to the Fleet's Enema fortune?

by Anonymousreply 575July 31, 2022 5:46 PM

[R574], it was the middle of the night so no, they wouldn't notice him missing, and he didn't have to break in since he had a key to their house. Further, many crimes happen on Christmas. If he was wanting some sort of revenge on JR, then he had to do it before they left town the following morning. It's not any more improbable than any of the other theories.

by Anonymousreply 576July 31, 2022 7:25 PM

They wanted to exhume JonBenet's body, to get answers that may have helped them catch the killer. Scumbag refused.

John did it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 577July 31, 2022 8:14 PM

R576, You have not addressed many, many details.

How did this Friend With a Key stay so utterly silent, before, during, and after the murder?

Addendum: How did he keep JB quiet?

And yes, crimes occur on Christmas. But you have not thought beyond that as to WHY THEN AND THERE? An FWaK would know when, say, John was out of town, or Patsy was away for treatments. After all, the fewer adults at home, the better for the criminal, no?

This was the wee hours of December 26. No one at the home of FWaK noticed he and his car were absent? Or when FWaK returned?

Why did FWaK linger over the "ransom note," even making a rough draft like it was a class assignment? And why hadn't FWaK visited days or weeks earlier to grab some of Patsy's tablet paper, to save himself some time later?

Lastly, a man doesn't suddenly become a child molester and brutal murderer, let alone simply for some "revenge" against the father. Did FWaK also give JB all her genital injuries over the years? (Her family pediatrician must have gone to Quack Med School, Guadalajara, for not wondering why JB required an inordinate number of visits to him.)

Whether an FWaK Theory or a Hidden Stranger Theory, proponents tend to gloss over actual details and pertinent questions.

by Anonymousreply 578July 31, 2022 10:38 PM

I'm starting to think that it was John Ramsey, the father, who killed JB. I'm basing this on the labyrinth nature of the house and the extensive cover-up (location of body, long ransom note written inside the house, location of body, garrotte).

I think if Burke accidentally killed JB, the cover-up would have been simpler. (E.g., JB's body placed at bottom of stairs.)

I don't think Patsy did it. If she did do it, I think John would have left her (Patsy) out to dry. I.e., no or minimal coverup.

by Anonymousreply 579July 31, 2022 10:52 PM

How did this Friend With a Key stay so utterly silent, before, during, and after the murder? - Whoever did it was able to stay silent before, after, and during the murder. It’s already been said that the house was so winding with all of the additions that things could not be heard from different rooms/areas of the home.

Addendum: How did he keep JB quiet? - When he initially came in, JB would have recognized him and been welcoming. He likely built rapport with JB over the years. He likely killed her within minutes of arriving. He wouldn’t have had to keep her quiet for long. He may have lured her to the basement with the promise of another Christmas gift. Killed her, wrote the note, and left, locking the door behind him.

And yes, crimes occur on Christmas. But you have not thought beyond that as to WHY THEN AND THERE? An FWaK would know when, say, John was out of town, or Patsy was away for treatments. After all, the fewer adults at home, the better for the criminal, no? - the crime may not have been planned. It is possible something happened or was said at the party that set FWaK off. His rage took over that night and took a walk to the Ramsey home. Maybe he’d planned something different, but found JB in the kitchen and she became the victim of his rage. If it was indeed planned, maybe he chose Christmas intentionally to psychologically ruin all future Christmases for the family, maybe it was the best time in his eyes because he wanted it done before they left town. Leading up to Christmas there were festivities and visitors coming and going. He knew Christmas would be a quiet night without interruptions.

This was the wee hours of December 26. No one at the home of FWaK noticed he and his car were absent? Or when FWaK returned?

- he could have walked to the Ramsey home. No vehicle needed. If his family was asleep and if he did use a vehicle they wouldn’t have noticed it missing because it was the middle of the night. He returned before they even woke up.

Why did FWaK linger over the "ransom note," even making a rough draft like it was a class assignment? And why hadn't FWaK visited days or weeks earlier to grab some of Patsy's tablet paper, to save himself some time later?

- I wouldn’t rule out that he didn’t visit days or weeks before the crime. People are odd and do creepy things. He may have frequently roamed around their home when they were gone, or even there. He may have peeped in their windows for years. Who knows. The ransom note was written by someone who was trying to communicate a message who needed to express pent up anger. He didn’t have to write a note, he chose to - he was impulsive and uninhabited. He wanted to throw more hate at John through his words. One needs to accept that the letter was likely written by someone mentally ill, delusional/narcissistic, whatever. Someone not in their right mind. FWaK has a history of writing overly long letters and documents. If he’s used to roaming around their house, he may have felt fairly comfortable sticking around to write a ransom note. Think of phrogger and stalker behaviors and personalities. Very similar M.O.s.

Lastly, a man doesn't suddenly become a child molester and brutal murderer, let alone simply for some "revenge" against the father. Did FWaK also give JB all her genital injuries over the years? (Her family pediatrician must have gone to Quack Med School, Guadalajara, for not wondering why JB required an inordinate number of visits to him.)

- maybe he did molest JB for years. The families were Bffs and spent a lot of time together - traveled together. Maybe he did have a violent past Was he military? Military are trained to kill. FWaK showed his volatile temper in Georgia. Furthermore, people do suddenly murder, especially emotional killings. Look at Chris Watts. I imagine the resentment and disdain for jR/the family had been brewing within this individual for a long time. If, as you wrote, a man doesn’t suddenly become a “brutal murderer”, then that would rule out JR as the killer too.

by Anonymousreply 580August 1, 2022 12:15 AM

John Ramsey did it. The friend theory is bullshit.

by Anonymousreply 581August 1, 2022 12:28 AM

Nobody leaves a fucking ransom note for a dead body. John, leave your ex-BFF alone.

by Anonymousreply 582August 1, 2022 12:44 AM

R267, I don’t blindly rely on the word and competence of the Boulder police.

by Anonymousreply 583August 1, 2022 1:14 AM

You don’t have to R583. The DNA results are available for anyone to look at, and plenty of experts have.

Of course the BPD were incompetent. John Ramsey would be in prison if they weren’t.

by Anonymousreply 584August 1, 2022 5:00 AM

The police removed the suitcase they had found beneath the three side-by-side windows at the rear of Burke’s train room. They also removed the windows themselves and the exterior window grate. The suitcase had no dust on it, yet a few pieces of broken glass lay on top of it. Inside, they found a blanket with what turned out to be John Andrew’s semen on it.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 585August 1, 2022 5:51 AM

Fortunately Colorado still had a “needed killing” law on the books at the time.

by Anonymousreply 586August 1, 2022 1:59 PM

R257 Someone was in their home while they were away and wrote it there with the Ramsays pen and pad to cause confusion, perplexity and to throw them off his scent. Why is this hard to believe? “Its never happened before in history” And? Its still possible.

by Anonymousreply 587August 1, 2022 2:53 PM

The fact people think John would convict himself by claiming the exact number of his work bonus as the exact number of the ransom money is more confusing than the ransom note. It is too obvious. The Intruder did these things purposefully and effectively, because he caused great confusion about the case we are still discussing today. Its so obvious an Intruder did it!

by Anonymousreply 588August 1, 2022 2:58 PM

The way things were done its as if Jon and Patsy killed Jon Benet and then looked at one another and said “Okay, what are the most obvious things we can do to make it clear to everyone we did it”. Its absurd! Why would they so clearly implicate themselves if they did it? The fact it seems so obvious they did it indicates an Intruder.

by Anonymousreply 589August 1, 2022 3:02 PM

I agree Jon’s behavior and character doesn’t do him any favors but have you met CEO types? Especially ultra-religious ones? It explains his actions a bit more in my opinion. I have no emotional attachment to anyone in this case but it is pretty clear an Intruder did it. Yes, its confusing. No, it doesn’t make any sense. But did the Zodiac killer make any sense? Did the Unibomber? There are zealots out there who are off their rocker and capable of pulling something like this off.

by Anonymousreply 590August 1, 2022 3:09 PM

Garrote and ligatures were tested in 2018. The findings have never been made public.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 591August 1, 2022 3:51 PM

To think some of you cretins could end up on a jury some day.

If you’re ever called, find an excuse and decline. Please.

by Anonymousreply 592August 1, 2022 4:14 PM

Christ, John!

You make me so fucking wet.

Pound me, Daddy! POUND MY ASS!!!

by Anonymousreply 593August 1, 2022 5:07 PM

[quote]But did the Zodiac killer make any sense? Did the Unibomber?

Those cases are in no way related to this case. Totally different circumstances. If you don't think John Ramsey did it you're an idiot.

by Anonymousreply 594August 1, 2022 6:17 PM

R587, And his preternatural ability to commit the crime in total silence?

Yeah, right. No floorboard squeak, no JB scream, no bump into a wall, no nothing. GTHOOH.

by Anonymousreply 595August 1, 2022 8:30 PM

R590, You make the weakest argument yet! "It doesn't make any sense"---well, DUH!

P S. The Unibomber was caught.

P.P.S. Not being caught is NOT THE EQUIVALENT OF not making sense.

by Anonymousreply 596August 1, 2022 8:33 PM

R577 I did not know that about John refusing to exhume her body. What the hell.

by Anonymousreply 597August 1, 2022 8:47 PM

I think it's bizarre anyone thinks an intruder wrote that long rambling note while in the house.

The note didn't need to say anything more than: "We have your daughter. We want $X delivered to location by time. If you contact the police, we'll kill her".

Why write a long note filled with clues about your identity?

by Anonymousreply 598August 1, 2022 8:59 PM

If the friend did it, he could've removed the body from the house. John did it. Period. He couldn't remove the body from the house because Patsy may have woken him up and noticed he (and his car) were gone, and the neighbors could've seen John's car leaving/returning to the house in the middle of the night. He would've had no excuse as to why he was out at that hour.

by Anonymousreply 599August 1, 2022 11:22 PM

R598, I think it's bizarre that people think the parents wasted so much time writing an unnecessarily long letter in the middle of the night

by Anonymousreply 600August 2, 2022 1:19 AM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!