"Who Killed Jon-Benet Ramsey?" (Part 2)

“Back in 1999, the grand jury didn’t have DNA findings that emerged in 2008. Over the years, DNA testing improved – and eventually led authorities to clear the Ramseys of suspicion in JonBenét’s death.

Forensic scientist Dr. Angela Williamson said a DNA sample had been taken from the crotch of JonBenét’s panties, where the girl’s blood was found.

The DNA of an unknown male was detected – but the DNA didn’t match anyone who had been near the scene or who had handled her body. The results excluded John, Patsy and Burke Ramsey.

Patsy Ramsey didn’t live to see the 2008 apology from a Boulder County district attorney clearing her and her husband of suspicion in their daughter’s death.

More than a decade after JonBenét’s death, a test using touch DNA – or trace DNA – from JonBenét’s long johns indicated the same unknown male made contact with the young girl’s underwear, Williamson said.

“Whoever committed this offense must have pulled down her long johns – but then they pulled them back up, because she was found dressed,” Williamson told CNN.

Technicians tested DNA on both sides of the long johns’ waist band. “It’s the same DNA,” Williamson said. “It’s the same male that’s in the underpants that’s on the side of the long johns.”

But the identity of that male remains a mystery.”

In 2008 there were new forensic findings. Unknown male DNA had been found on the waistband of JonBenet’s long johns. Earlier tests had found unknown male DNA on the crotch of her underwear. The two samples matched or “were consistent” with each other, according to testing done by forensic scientist Dr. Angela Williamson.

That DNA finding led Mary Lacy, the Boulder district attorney at the time, to make one of the most controversial decisions in the case.

She issued an apology to John and Patsy Ramsey, at the same time saying they were exonerated of any criminal wrongdoing in the death of their daughter.

A girl who attended the same dance school as JonBenet and lived less than 2 miles from her was raped in her home while her mother slept in the next room.

The private investigator hired by the family discovered Camel Blue cigarette butts scattered around the property—the same type of cigarettes found in the alley behind JonBenet’s house.

The father of the 12 year old victim called by the pseudonym “Amy” said the Boulder Police Department were incompetent, lazy, liars who became hostile to him when he asked them about the investigation.

He had to hire his own investigator because the BPD don’t do their jobs.

It was Burke but he didn't realize he killed her. The parents covered it up.

OP, you’re leaving out quite a few critical details. The Grand Jury found these MFers GUILTY!!!!!! But the corrupt DA opted to not indict!

The DNA was touch DNA, which moves easily — it was from the factory as her underwear was taken out of a brand new package. These have been shown to always have some DNA, finding a match is impossible.

OP, are you on a mission to show that John is innocent if something? 😬. He’s not, kid, he’s not, and the Grand Jury knew it too.

What are the chances a child less than 2 miles away from JonBenet, who went to the same dance school and performed at public events, was attacked by the same man who killed JonBenet 9 months earlier? I’d say chances are pretty good.

“By the time Boulder police arrived on scene, the shadowy figure had disappeared into the night.

Amy's attacker was never caught, but her father has never given up hope he will one day be unmasked.

Finally identifying the attacker, he believes, may also finally help to solve who killed JonBenet.

"There are so many similarities between the two cases that I think there's a very good chance it was the same person," Amy's dad, who wished to remain anonymous, told The U.S. Sun.

In both cases, this is someone who was able to get past an alarm, past a dog, and was probably hiding inside the home for some time before attacking.

"It looks like someone who hid in the house while people were out and then came out in the middle of the night after they came home and locked up.

"The only difference is my daughter survived," Amy's dad added.

"But had it not been for my wife being a light sleeper, we may have been in the newspapers for the same reasons as the Ramsey family."

R5, no parent garrotes their 6 year old and shoves a broken paintbrush in her vagina to cover up an accidental killing by another child.

r8 I never heard that was where the paintbrush was

A criminal isn't going to take the time to write that kind of ransom note while inside the house

The Ramseys were exonerated by the Boulder district attorney in 2008 as a result of DNA evidence. The same unknown male’s DNA that was found mixed with blood in the crotch of JonBenet’s underwear was found on the DNA on the waistband of her longjohns.

Touch DNA was new technology at the time and the DA sent the longjohns in for testing after attending a seminar about it in 2007.

The DNA in the underwear was from the same unknown male’s who touched her pajama pants.

R10, the unknown man who raped Amy took the time while her mother was home. He also orally raped the child. Less than 2 miles from JonBenet. Same dance school. Performed in public.

What is the point of the ransom note? To give John or Patsy time to hide the body? Patsy called the police right away.

If John write it without Patsy’s knowing, why include the exact amount of his Christmas bonus? Wouldn’t that direct suspicion toward him—the exact amount $118,000?

The ransom note is part of some sick fantasy. He knew who JonBenet was from seeing her perform in dance recitals and pageants.

maybe he did want to take her initially but then accidentally killed her and decided to leave her.

The Boulder detective in charge of all evidence and forensic testing in the JonBenet Ramsey case—Detective Trujillo—was recommended to be terminated after it was discovered that he hadn’t done ANY investigative work in more than 2 years on ANY of the cases assigned to the department he WAS IN CHARGE OF overseeing. Not that he himself didn’t do any investigation but that no work was done on any cases in his department.

A five person panel unanimously recommended termination but the union interceded and he got by with a job transfer to night shift and a performance improvement plan.

In the book “Perfect Town, Perfect Murder” Lawrence Schiller describes how Detective Trujillo was caught lying to the DA Alex Hunter that he’d submitted evidence for testing 6 months earlier when he still had it in his possession.

Even Steve Thomas, the other detective responsible for the Ramseys being blamed, detailed Trujillo’s incompetence in his book “Inside the Investigation.”

The detective in charge of evidence was a lazy incompetent liar.

The detective Lou Smit who was called out of retirement to help solve the case resigned in protest of BPD handling of the Ramseys being case and single minded focus—ignoring all evidence—on blaming the family.

Interesting note is that he worked on solving Ielsey Grammer’s sister’s murder.

Lou Smit’s resignation letter.

John Douglas, the famous FBI profiler who Mindhunter is based on, wrote two books that included information anbout why he didn’t believe the Ramseys had any involvement.

The first book is called “The Cases that Haunt Us” and the second book is called “Grave Errors.” He cites the fact that all 5 of the FBI’s handwriting analysts excluded John Ramsey as the author of the ransom note and 4 of the 5 excluded Patsy. (The 5th didn’t say Patsy wrote it but couldn’t define timely excluded her.)

Didn’t the housekeeper keep asking to borrow cash from the Ramseys? She’d feel comfortable in the house. And didn’t her husband dress up as Santa for the Ramsey Christmas party before?

Maybe the housekeeper was involved and her compatriot took it too far?

Very odd that this new thread was started well before the other one was time to close (at only 520 out of 600) and is full of all Ramsey's didn't do it bullshit.

Jon-Benet Ramaswamy pretty much settles everything. Vivek can't hide his involvement any longer

Actually, holy shit, I'm so right with what I said at r21. Do yourself a favor and put r19 on ignore then check your ignore list. You will see that the OP and ALMOST ALL of the posts in this thread including that one were written by the same person.

This is someone trying to push a "Ramseys are innocent narrative" trying to mess with the discussion. The only question is WHY you are doing this?

Did the other little girl who survived it have DNA that may have matched the touch DNA found on JonBenet? I suppose not since the cops were fucking incompetent.

Do not be fooled by this thread. John did it. And the other thread agrees. The person who started this one WAY too early and posted a bunch of shit to it in an effort to control the narrative is something truly wild.

Before now, I kind of laughed at people who talked about trolls and bots pushing shit on here. Sure, there are trolls like teacake, but controlling narratives? Who would waste time on that. Now I've seen it first hand. Wow.

R24, the father of the other girl who was attacked said he turned over the cigarette butts his private investigator had found, but the police said they couldn’t extract enough DNA to test. He said they didn’t even try.

He also said they found a handprint on the wall of her room (the only room they dusted for prints) but only used it to exclude the father. He called the BPD bozos and said they lied to him constantly and got hostile and accusatory when he insisted they investigate.

I haven’t watched the Netflix documentary, but this article says John thinks there may be something wrong with the DNA evidence (that exonerated him and Patsy and Burke)?

“The Netflix documentary concludes with John theorizing that something about the DNA evidence may be incorrect. He is asking for those samples to be retested, along with testing other pieces of evidence for the first time. John is hopeful that those results could be crosschecked with other databases to produce the largest list of suspects possible.”

How many posts are you going to make to your own thread, r27. It's so obvious what you are doing.

If this is going to be the new thread, it should at least be filled with real information.

There was no intruder. The guilty party was inside the Ramsey's home.

The D.A probably didn't prosecute the case because it would have showed how inept they were. What the hell did the cops do all day?

It was Christmas day, so I imagine most police were sleeping, hanging with family, eating, etc. But they SAY that Linda Arndt was alone at the scene for hours because they were all at a staff meeting. I don’t blame them for not being on top of it at 530 am Christmas morning. It was wealthy, sleepy, Boulder, Colorado town.

No R30, they should have been on top of it immediately. Linds Arndt should not have been left to handle the whole situation for 6 hours. There's just no excuse for their mishandling everything.

John did it. John did it. John did it.

But there was definitely NO intruder.

At best, OP watched the documentary and doesn't realize he was misled and now thinks he's on some crusade to defend an innocent family. At worst, he's pushing a narrative for some other reason.

Netflix is very good at making people involved in highly profiled murder cases look innocent. They aren't exactly unbiased they know people will watch and that's all they care about.

If I got a ransom note that said if I told anybody my daughter would be killed, my first instinct would not be to call the police.

The FBI have always maintained that the ransom note is fake. From Reddit:

Boulder PD had been in contact with the FBI and their newly formed CASKU [Child Abduction and Serial Killer Unit] almost since the start of the investigation. [District Attorney] Alex Hunter had walked out of a CASKU presentation at Quantico because their analysis pointed the finger firmly at the Ramseys. The ransom note was fake, the crime had been staged, and the killer was someone who was comfortable in the house and familiar with it, they said.

--------

A 1997 Vanity Fair article quotes FBI veteran Gregg McCrary:

On Jan. 4, one of the Ramseys' private investigators left a message on McCrary's answering machine asking him to join their team as a profiler. McCrary had his secretary call to decline, he says, "because on a ratio of 12 to 1, child murders are committed by parents or a family member. In this case, you also have an elaborate staging-- the ransom note, the placement of the child's body-- and I have never in my career seen or heard about a staging where it was not a family member or someone very close to the family. Just the note alone told me the killer was in the family or close to it."

FUN FACT: JonBenet was born the day after HBO aired Madonna's landmark Blond Ambition Tour.

[quote] Grand Jury found these MFers GUILTY!

Grand juries don't find people guilty. A trial jury or a petit jury does that.

A grand jury decides on whether there's probable cause to charge/indict. A grand jury need not be unanimous in its decision, whereas a trial jury does need to be unanimous. (Except in shitty places like Florida.)

In the police interview Burke smiles and looks like he is laughing when he tells them that Jon Benet was dead and in heaven. Very strange behavior.

R38, he was nine years old, his sister had been murdered by one of his ultra-strange parents and he was being interviewed by the police. I’m not sure what would be normal behavior in that situation.

Let’s see… Linda Arndt, Steve Thomas, and Trujillo are convinced the Ramseys are guilty. Lou Smit and John Douglas are certain it was an intruder. Who to trust????

“Detective Smit helped solve several cases that gained national attention, including the killing of Karen Grammer, the sister of the actor Kelsey Grammer, in 1975.

He is also credited with identifying the killer of 13-year-old Heather Dawn Church. She was killed in 1991, and her father was among more than 40 suspects, but in 1995 Detective Smit arrested Robert C. Browne, who confessed to the crime and has since admitted to 47 other murders.

Detective Smit was proud to assert that of the more than 200 murder cases he had investigated and turned over to prosecutors in his 30-year career, all led to convictions. “I’ve never lost a homicide case,” he told The Denver Post.

Three months after the killing [of Ramsey], the district attorney asked Detective Smith to join the investigation. He initially explored the Boulder Police Department’s theory, that JonBenet’s mother, Patsy Ramsey, was the killer and had written the ransom note she said she had found in her home. The department also believed that JonBenet’s father, John, was protecting Mrs. Ramsey.

Eighteen months after joining the investigation, Detective Smit resigned, accusing the police of pursuing the Ramseys as suspects despite substantial evidence to the contrary.

“The Ramseys did not do it,” he wrote in his resignation letter, dated Sept. 20, 1998. “There is substantial, credible evidence of an intruder and a lack of evidence that the parents are involved.”

Burke kept that odd, out of place, not connected to reality laughter his entire life. He did it many times interviewed by Dr. Phil a few years ago.

Must help ease any guilty conscience from clubbing his sister to death.

The article in the link has a photo of Burke also smiling during his mother Patsy's funeral.

Maybe he's just a happy go lucky guy?

Burke Ramsey was 9 when his sister was brutally murdered in their home on Christmas Eve. His mother died a few years later.

Morons whose mothers allowed men to molest them now gather to gleefully accuse him of murder without a shred of evidence. Well he DID smile at his mother’s funeral, where surely no one said anything kind or funny or touching about her. 🙄🤘

R35, oh wow, someone who never investigated the case is sure the family did it? That’s really interesting. Extremely convincing. Thanks for sharing.

The fraus have invaded. Men are not guided by their feelings and fantasies. Are fraus too dumb to read? Why don’t these dummies deal in facts? I’d hate to have to deal with a woman day in and day out.

R35, “from Reddit” isn’t helpful as a citation.

I never believed that Burke did it. No nine year old can do all of that to his sister and have his parents cover it up. Eventually a kid would l say something. The rest of his life this will follow him.

R 44, stfu.

In true Ramsey form, they have started a 2nd thread before the first one was finished, desperately trying to defend themselves.

But in the end, only bringing more attention to themselves again.

R35, yeah , no shit the ransom note is fake. JonBenet was dead, wrapped in a sheet, bound with duct tape in the basement.

Incredible observation by that redditor that the ransom note was fake. I thought there was a small foreign faction kidnapping children for $118,000.

R46, shut the fuck up you dumb cunt.

The Ramseys are here! We are so important that the Ramseys themselves are here to talk to us! Me, me, MEEEEEE! I’m so important and influential! I’m a fat molestation victim!

Why would a "small foreign faction" only ask for $118,000. It's really not that much money from someone whose wealthy and wants their kid back.

r48, r45 and r43 are the same person yet commenting three times in reply to the same comment as if they were the different people. They are also OP and a zillion other posts in this thread.

This thread was created early (way before a new thread was needed) and has been receiving a million posts defending Ramsey by OP. It's a fraud and OP is pushing an agenda.

R49, go to fucking bed so nobody has to deal with your ignorant ass.

Why would the CIA not be concerned about a foreign government abducting US children for small amounts of money?

So what’s your interpretation of the note R34? It sounds like you think Patsy wasn’t involved?

R45, on almost any other subject I would agree with you-- I am not a Redditor and I can't stand the user interface-- but the JBR forum on Reddit has useful content which is tightly moderated and all in one place. That makes it easy to use as a casual reference on a discussion forum such as this. I would never claim that Reddit had any sort of authority or standing as a reference to be cited in a serious context.

r56, please see my comment at r52. You're not talking to someone who is arguing in good faith.

1. Burke could not have written the ransom note. He didn't do it (alone, anyway).

2. If Patsy was involved, she would have tried to get the body out of the house, but instead, she called the police at 6 am. Patsy didn't do it.

3. John did it, it's pretty clear.

Thanks R57.

I believe the redditor cited up thread, the FBI profiler who had his secretary decline the offer to investigate, the internet psychologists who have analyzed Burke’s behavior, the serious “handwriting analysts” and the many women who have seen a lot of forensic files.

What’s DNA? Who cares what a “forensic scientist” with a doctorate thinks? What is forensic evidence? There’s obviously a vast conspiracy to manufacture evidence through both fluid and touch DNA. It’s only a 1 in a billion chance that it’s not the same unknown male’s DNA.

A datalounger on this very thread declared the ransom note was fake and that was VERY convincing to me!

r60 is also the OP/false narrative pusher.

R56, yes, of course Reddit can have reliable information just like any other aggregator. The SOURCE is the factual report from a reliable source.

God, the lack of media literacy is truly scary. We’re all dealing with “alternate facts” and gut feelings of unnamed, non-experts.

To add to my comment at r61, OP /r60 (and a zillion others) is either some Gen Zer who got fooled by the recent doc and thinks he's defending the good name of an innocent family or something more sinister. Haven't decided which yet. But it's extremely pathetic to create a new thread before the old one was done, then create tons of posts, including multiple responses to the same person acting like different people. Get a life, dude.

You're welcome, r56 / r59. It's so obvious what he's doing. And of course he replied to you again at r62. Oh well.

Here’s an example of why this article is a more reliable, trustworthy source: the private investigator is NAMED. He could be made up (Pete Peterson?), but at least an interested party has the opportunity to verify. Was there a private investigator working in CO by that name? Is it possible even to contact him and verify the information?

From a linked article in a national tabloid newspaper:

“Apparently so dismayed with Boulder PD's handling of his daughter's case, Amy's dad hired private investigator Pete Peterson to conduct an investigation of his own.

During Peterson's probe, he discovered a collection of Camel Blue cigarette butts outside of the family's home. Interestingly, stubbings of the same cigarettes were found in an alleyway next to the Ramsey home in the wake of JonBenet's murder.

Peterson and Amy's father tried to get Boulder PD to test the cigarette butts for DNA but they reportedly refused.

"We tried but nobody would test it," he said.

"They told us you'd be very unlikely to have enough DNA on a cigarette butt to get anything from it, but they could've tried.

"Boulder PD just weren't interested in this evidence.

"They were completely uninterested ... they didn't care about my daughter's case and they didn't even really care about the Ramsey case either."

As the investigation into his daughter's attack stalled, Amy's father continued to apply pressure on Boulder PD.

He claims he requested to see mugshots of serial sex offenders in the area to show to Amy and his wife in the event they recognized any of them as the attacker but police refused, apparently insisting "that wouldn't be any good."

OMFG, the sun. And r65 (which is also the OP and the other posts defending the Ramseys) has the nerve to talk about media literacy!

I think my first hunch about a Gen Zer thinking he's telling us something may be right. LOL. Better than a Ramsey shill, but not by much.

Now, to continue the media literacy lesson. Another thing that makes the linked article more trustworthy than summarizing “a redditor” is that the father is quoted.

Quote marks mean that those are the person’s actual words. In journalism, the writer will say whether the speaker was talking to them or to another source.

Now Amy’s father wanted to remain anonymous, so we can’t verify his words. But the writer of the article is named as Luke Kenton. So we can look into him and see how trustworthy we think he is. What’s his training? We could even contact him or his editor.

Good sources are articles in national newspapers or magazines with named writers and an editorial process. Interviews, letters, video, books with dates, names, and details from trustworthy writers.

Mostly think about, can I ask someone else about this? That’s why names are important.

JR obviously. He climbed the corporate ladder probably through blackmail he obtained in Vietnam. Fancied himself a republican superstar. Enough of an attention hog to date the Holloway dame. He's got all the same personality traits as Trump.

OK, is this a troll? r67 (which is also OP and the others) is making me wonder if we aren't being trolled. The use of the Sun by him is almost too on the nose.

It's almost too stupid to be believable now.

But I'm still going with unintentionally dumb.

Why do people hate the parents so much that they’re convinced they murdered their child?

The evidence point to someone inside the house. When the Ramseys (John and Patsy) were doing their initial TV appearances, they were unlikable. The body language was horrible. It seemed like John hated Patsy. Patsy was all drugged-up (large doses of Valium or Xanax) and who could blame her, to some degree. She didn't seem like a killer, but she seemed like someone with a huge secret.

What is the evidence that points to the parents? I’ve heard that the mom couldn’t be ruled out by handwriting analysis. Is that why the police think she did it? And they think John covered for her to avoid humiliation?

Kidnappers demanding ransoms are interested in money, period. They are not motivated by a sexual paraphilia like child molesters are. If there were an intruder/intruders that night who intended to abduct JB for ransom then molesting her, killing her, and leaving the body behind doesn't make any sense. The superimposition of a kidnapping scenario upon the reality of a child sexually abused and murdered in her own home seems like the act of some deranged histrionic person or an amateurish desperate attempt at a cover-up/distraction (or both).

What do the Boulder detectives say? I think they said Patty did it because JB peed her pants and she just flew into a rage? And then John covered it up for her.

R73, so the mom wrote the note to try to cover up the rage killing? Theoretically it doesn’t matter then that she called 911 right away. She wasn’t trying to buy time. She was trying to point the finger somewhere else.

For all the emoting you see Patsy do funny there are no actual tears. She said she got up and put clothes on, she doesn't seem like the type to put on last night's outfit again so I would think she never changed out of it and was up all night.

The thing that gave them away was that ransom note.

John killed her.

There doesn’t seem to be consensus on these threads on who did it.

1) Patsy killed the daughter in a rage and wrote the letter to frame John or at least someone else, maybe one of his employees (the bonus, etc).

2) John was molesting the daughter and went too far that night. He wrote the letter to buy time to hide the body.

3) Burke killed her accidentally by hitting her with a flashlight and one or both parents covered for him by garroting her and staging a sexual assault.

The police believe that Patsy Ramsey killed JonBenet and wrote the ransom note to divert suspicion. I am not sure if they believe that John knew she did it or not? I know they think he helped protect her.

Well, at least you've calmed down a bit OP/r78 and zillion others and started to engage normally.

The district attorney Alex Hunter didn’t provide a suspect. I do believe he didn’t trust the police and suspected the Ramseys were not to blame.

The second district attorney Mary Lacey years later believed an intruder did it based on the matching DNA in the blood on the underwear and touch DNA on the waist of the long johns. She also was very convinced by a butt impression on the carpet outside of the daughters bedroom that she was convinced was the intruder waiting.

I spoke too soon. r81 is OP (and the others) and doing it again.

Didn't they suspect John of making the garotte because he was in the military? But if it was him putting the paint brush inside her is just evil coming from her father.

R70, I think people are repulsed by the pageant stuff and feel almost like they got what was coming to them. But that doesn’t really make logical sense if they think it was someone in the family and not an intruder who saw her in a pageant.

The Ramseys were very wealthy. John had a lawyer on retainer. He wanted to leave the state. Patsy took tranquilizers and wasn’t acting normal. The detective on the scene alone for hours said that she saw something in John’s face that scared her so much she thought he might kill her. They wouldn’t allow Burke to be interviewed without conditions.

R76, a police officer on scene at the Ramseys' house described an apparently distraught Patsy sobbing with her hands over her face but staring at him through her fingers. It's an unsettling image.

Why would a civil engineer in the military know anything about garroting someone? Do you think officers in the navy are taught hand to hand combat skills? Have you ever met a member of the US military? Have you watched too many Steven Seagal movies?

God, people are so dumb. R83

[quote] She said she got up and put clothes on, she doesn't seem like the type to put on last night's outfit again so I would think she never changed out of it and was up all night.

Yeah, Patsy wearing the same outfit the next morning (as she wore the night before) was odd. It does point to her having stayed up all night, cleaning, planning, writing a note, etc.

r86 and r8 is the OP and the others. This is very strange behavior.

And by someone who calls others dumb.

People think it was the parents (John with Patsy’s collusion) because they think JonBenet was hot and believe anyone would molest her if given the chance.

sorry, i meant r86 and r87, not r8.

What is the point of all the conjecture though if they found an unknown male’s DNA in blood and skin cells? I mean, nothing else really matters then, right?

r90 is the OP and the others and is now suggesting that those who accuse the Ramseys are pedophiles. This is really messed up behavior. I think this might be a shill.

And add r92 to the OP and others list. This is very odd and I've never seen anything exactly like this on Datalounge.

R84 💯

People think that the Ramseys deserved to have their daughter killed because they tarted her up and showed her off.

They can’t admit that though - even to themselves - so they blame them more overtly. Thus, they are accused of sadistically killing their daughter directly.

Even the meanest most punitive frau can’t outright say that a 6 year old deserves to be murdered for dancing in public with teased hair and fake eyelashes.

Omg, R96, nobody man or woman should be saying she deserved to be killed.

r95 and r96 (which are OP and others) has a posting history, in addition to this thread, of only a few messages in the other Ramsey thread and one message about how to truly block a thread you need to block the OP in another thread. This suggests this is an alt account of a DLer. Not sure if it's a shill, a troll, or just some messed up Gen Zer on a rampage. But dude, you are beyond pathetic.

Not yet mentioned on any of the JBR threads that I can recall on here is the saga of JonBenét's dog. She had a Bichon named Jacques. Apparently no one in the Ramsey household bothered to train poor Jacques, so the puppy was confined to a small downstairs area. When Jacques became ill Patsy took him to the vet, swapped him out for a new Bichon from a pet shop, and then pretended to everyone that Jacques 2 was the same dog as Jacques 1, which you have to admit is a bizarre thing to do.

Jacques 2 fared somewhat better than his doomed predecessor-- the Ramseys' neighbors across the street, a friendly retired couple named the Barnhills, took a liking to the dog and would pet-sit Jacques 2 whenever the Ramseys went on holiday. After JonBenét's death Jacques 2 lived with the Barnhills permanently. When Jacques 2 died, the Barnhills reached out to the Ramseys to let them know and never got a response.

No shit Einstein R97.

R60 is the fabled “undecided voter” being interviewed on Election Day.

Excerpt from an interview with the Ramseys' former housekeeper Linda Wilcox in which she talks about the dog:

LINDA WILCOX: Well, first of all, Patsy didn't want a dog. And, she didn't want JonBenet to have a dog. This particular dog didn't get the potty training thing down very well, he tended to leave puddles. He was pretty much relegated to the wood floor at the bottom of the spiral staircase and out the side door off the patio. However, they had, John told Patsy to get JonBenet a dog. It was John's decision to get a dog and Patsy chose a Bichon. She got it from a pet store, and I came there one day, his name was Jacques, a little guy, cute little furball. Well, one day the dog went to the vet and came back. But the dog that went to the vet was smaller than the dog that left. I had said something to Patsy, the next week I walked in and I asked Patsy what happened to Jacques. She's like, "What?" And I said, this isn't Jacques. And she's like, SHHHH, don't tell anyone, no one else knows. Turns out the first dog had something wrong like some kind of liver disease or something and it was dying. It was a bad dog, so she called the pet store and made a switch before anyone knew.

One more thing... I think the first summer, the summer of '94, they took the dog with them to Michigan. See Patsy took care of the dog, John took no responsibility for it whatsoever. He tolerated it at best. And, if it got anything of his, heaven forbid. I don't know this, but I think they got rid of the dog because when they were in Michigan, they were busy with pageants. They were doing other things and there was no one to look after the dog. I think they gave it to the neighbors when they left for the summer because they didn't want to hassle with the dog. Life was good for them until it was inconvenient.

Like, JonBenet, for example. She got no affection at all when she was little except maybe from their nanny. Until she started to perform or produce, she was basically ignored. At one point, John was complaining because he had to get her dressed one morning because Suzanne [JonBenét's nanny] had been out of town. He couldn't find any clothes that matched. The reason was, she was wearing cast-offs from Burke because she didn't have any clothes of her own.

The crime scene and autopsy photos of JBR online (don’t search for them if you have a weak stomach) show an enormous crack in her skull.

A fracture that big? Had to be done to her by an adult.

John seems like the kind of guy who could just lose it and hit a kid or family pet. He’s too tightly controlled on the surface and has a very messy dating / marriage history.

He was remarried within 5 years of Patsy’s death, with that high profile Holloway relationship in between. Does he even know the people he’s marrying? He married Patsy immediately after his messy divorce from his first wife. Constant chaos in his adult life.

Why was John's oldest son part of the Netflix show and is now a spokesperson for defending the family?

He wasn't there during the crime. He only knows what his dad told him, so we all know just as much about the murder as he does.

Looks like they've found a way to profit on their crime a family tradition.

R105, John Ramsey is 80 years old and may want to slow down. Apparently his eldest son John Andrew Ramsey is active on social media. I don't know what JAR does for a living, but I vaguely recall that he is an attorney. If that is correct then I can see why his father would want him to represent the Ramsey family, especially as none of the other Ramseys seem to be interested in attracting further media attention (Burke declined to appear in the new Netflix film, for example).

R86, as an engineer in the Navy John was stationed in the Philippines. Like many other former Spanish colonies, the Philippines had once used the garrote as its primary form of execution. You could see old garrote stands and hear stories about executions, so once you had been there you were like to know about how it worked.

R103, the size of the injury and the fact that she was hit only once undercuts the idea that she was hit on impulse or by accident. The wound is much more compatible with premeditation.

R92, but did they? I thought that the DNA that they had allowed for only partial profiles to be created.

John is innocent, innocent [hiccup] I tell ya!

John possesses a mammoth, thick [hiccup] cock swinging between his legs that any one of [hiccup] you disgusting queers would [hiccup] gladly suck!

Don't even get [hiccup] me started [hiccup] on those creamy and tasty loads that [hiccup] he shoots. Tastes as good as Kentucky Bourbon with [hiccup] a shot of Cointreau!

Patsy was trash. Pure, West [hiccup] Virginia trash. John did her a favor marrying her [hiccup] sorry, cancerous ass. And how does [hiccup] she repay him? Shits out that [hiccup] little princess who enticed [hiccup] every man within a 30 [hiccup] miles radius of Boulder!

As for that [hiccup] dumb cooze Beth [hiccup] Holloway, the less [hiccup] said about her the better.

[quote] This is someone trying to push a "Ramseys are innocent narrative" trying to mess with the discussion. The only question is WHY you are doing this?

Don’t look at me. I positively thrive on the suspicion you bitches throw my way.

Judicial ruling clearing Ramseys, from a civil lawsuit.

JonBenet's body was bound with complicated rope slipknots and a garrotte attached to her body. (Defs.' Br. In Supp. Of Summ. J. [67] at 19; SMF ¶ 163; PSMF ¶ 163.)

The slipknots and the garrote are both sophisticated bondage devices designed to give control to the user. (SMF ¶ 161, 164; PSMF ¶ 161, 164.) Evidence from these devices suggests they were made by someone with expertise using rope and cords, which cords could not be found or "sourced" within defendants' home. (SMF ¶ 169; PSMF ¶ 169.)

No evidence exists that either defendant knew how to tie such knots. (SMF ¶ 162; PSMF ¶ 162.) Further, fibers consistent with those of the cord used to make the slip knots and garrote were found on JonBenet's bed. (SMF ¶ 168; PSMF ¶ 168.)

The black duct tape used on JonBenet's mouth has also not been sourced to defendants. (SMF ¶ 170; PSMF ¶ 170.) Both ends of the duct tape found on her were torn, indicating that it came from a roll of tape that had been used before. (SMF ¶ 171; PSMF ¶ 171.) No similar duct tape was found in the house, nor is there evidence that defendants ever used or owned such duct tape. (SMF ¶ 172; PSMF ¶ 172.)

Animal hair, alleged to be from a beaver, was found on the duct tape. (SMF ¶ 183; PSMF ¶ 183.) Nothing in defendants' home matches the hair. (SMF ¶ 183; PSMF ¶ 183.) Dark animal hairs were found on JonBenet's hands that also have not been matched to anything in defendants' home. (SMF ¶ 184; PSMF ¶ 184.)

Several recently-made unidentified shoeprints were found in the basement, imprinted in mold growing on the basement floor. (SMF ¶ 151; PSMF ¶ 151.) In particular, a shoeprint of a "HI-TEC" brand mark on the sole of a shoe was found. (SMF ¶ 152; PSMF ¶ 152.) Defendants do not own any "HI-TEC" brand shoes, and none of the shoes found in their home match the shoeprint marks. (SMF ¶ 153; PSMF ¶ 153.) Another partial shoeprint was found near where JonBenet's body was found. (SMF ¶ 155; PSMF ¶ 155.) This shoeprint left only a partial logo. The owner of the "HI-TEC" shoe that made the shoeprints at the murder scene has never been identified. (SMF ¶ 154, 155; PSMF ¶ 154, 155.)

In addition, on the wine-cellar door, there is a palmprint that does not match either of defendants' palmprints. (SMF ¶ 156; PSMF ¶ 156.) The individual to whom it belongs had not yet been identified. (SMF ¶156; PSMF ¶ 156.)

Finally, items were left behind that defendants assert they did not own. (Defs.' Br. In Supp. Of Summ. J. [67] at 18-19.) A baseball bat not owned by the Ramseys found on the north side of the house has fibers consistent with fibers found in the carpet in the basement where JonBenet's body was found. (SMF ¶ 185; PSMF ¶ 185.) A rope was found inside a brown paper sack in the guest bedroom of defendants' home, neither of which belonged to defendants. (SMF ¶ 181; PSMF ¶ 181.) Small pieces of the brown sack material were found in the "vacuuming" of JonBenet's bed and in the body bag that was used to transport her body. (SMF ¶ 181; PSMF ¶ 181.) Brown cotton fibers on JonBenet's body, the paintbrush, the duct tape and on the ligature were not sourced and do not match anything in the Ramsey home. (SMF ¶ 181; PSMF ¶ 181.)

The coroner took nail clippings from JonBenet. Male DNA was found under JonBenet's right hand fingernail that does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF ¶ 174; PSMF ¶ 174.) Defendants also assert that male DNA was found under Jon-Benet's left hand fingernail, which also does not match that of any Ramsey. (SMF ¶ 173.) In addition, male DNA was found in JonBenet's underwear that does not match that of any Ramsey and has not yet been sourced. (SMF ¶¶ 175, 178; PSMF ¶¶ 75, 178.) The Boulder Police Department has yet to identify the male whose DNA was found at the crime scene. (SMF ¶77; PSMF ¶77.) Finally, a Caucasian "pubic or auxiliary" hair was found on the blanket covering JonBenet's body. (SMF ¶79; PSMF ¶79.) The hair does not match that of any Ramsey and has not been sourced. (SMF ¶ 80; PSMF ¶ 180.)

During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF ¶ 191; PSMF ¶ 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF ¶ 205; PSMF ¶ 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF ¶ 191; PSMF ¶ 191.) All six experts agreed that Mr. Ramsey could be eliminated as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF ¶ 194; PSMF ¶ 194.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF ¶ 195; PSMF ¶ 195.) Rather, the experts' consensus was that she "probably did not" write the Ransom Note. (SMF ¶ 196; PSMF ¶196.)[14] On a scale of one to five, with five being elimination as the author of the Ransom Note, the experts placed Mrs. Ramsey at a 4.5 or a 4.0. (SMF ¶ 203; PSMF ¶ 203.) The experts *1335 described the chance of Mrs. Ramsey being the author of the Ransom Note as "very low." (SMF ¶ 204; PSMF ¶ 204.) The two experts hired by defendants both assert that this evidence strongly suggests that Mrs. Ramsey did not write the Note. (SMF ¶ 254.)

At the time of JonBenet's murder, the Boulder Police Department had limited experience in conducting a murder investigation. (SMF ¶ 70; PSMF ¶ 70.) Commander Jon Eller was primarily responsible for the investigation, which was his first murder investigation. (SMF ¶ 67; PSMF ¶ 67.) One lead detective assigned to the case, Steven Thomas, had no prior experience with a murder investigation and had previously served as an undercover narcotics officer. (SMF ¶ 68; PSMF ¶ 68.) Finally, the officer who took charge of the investigation in October 1997, Mark Beckner, also had limited homicide experience. (SMF ¶ 69; PSMF ¶ 69.)

Pursuant to the FBI's suggestion that the Boulder Police publicly name defendants as subjects and apply intense media pressure to them so that they would confess to the crime, the police released many statements that implied defendants were guilty and were not cooperating with police. (SMF ¶¶ 74-75; PSMF ¶¶ 74-75.) In addition to official police releases, many individual officers also released information about the investigation without official authorization, some of which disclosures were highly confidential and potentially undermined the investigation.

During the course of the investigation, defendants signed over one hundred releases for information requested by the police, and provided all evidence and information requested by the police. (SMF ¶ 61; PSMF 61.) Upon request, within days after the murder and in the months that followed, defendants provided the police with historical handwriting samples and supervised written exemplars. (SMF ¶ 55; PSMF ¶ 55.) Defendants also gave hair, including pubic hair, and DNA samples to the police. (SMF ¶ 56, 60; PSMF ¶ 56, 60.) Despite widespread criticism that defendants failed to cooperate in the murder investigation, defendants note that they agreed, on at least three occasions, to be interviewed separately by representatives of the police or the Boulder County District Attorney's Office. (SMF ¶ 62; PSMF ¶ 62.)

As Andrew Louis Smit, a respected homicide detective hired by the Boulder Police Department to investigate this crime, has noted, there are only two possible solutions to this crime: that is, either someone in the Ramsey household committed the crime or an intruder did it. (Smit Dep. at 54.)

Defendants contend that the weight of the undisputed evidence in the case is consistent with an inference that an intruder killed their child. (Defs.' Br. In Supp. Of Summ. J.[67] at 19-20.)

The first questions then are whether an intruder could have entered the home and, if so, is there evidence that an intruder, in fact, entered the home on the date of the murder. Defendants respond that the undisputed evidence supplies an answer of "yes" to both questions. First, defendants have indicated that their house was not secure during the night of December 25, 1997, and that they had not turned their security alarm on. (SMF ¶ 127; PSMF ¶ 127.) In addition, at least seven windows and one door were found "open"[31] on the morning of December 26, 1997. (SMF ¶ 126; PSMF ¶ 126.) A number of windows were accessible from the ground level, including a window-well, with removable grate, over three windows that opened into a playroom area of the basement. (SMF ¶ 128; PSMF ¶ 128.) This windowwell is located on the back side of the house, hidden from the front of the house and from neighbors. (SMF ¶ 130; PSMF ¶ 130.)

There is likewise undisputed evidence of a disturbance in this window-well area: specifically the leaves and white styrofoam packing peanuts that had pooled in the window-well appeared to have been cleared from, or brushed to either side of, the center window's sill in the well. (SMF ¶ 132; PSMF ¶ 132.) In addition, this center window had a broken pane and was found open on the morning of December 26, with a suitcase and a glass shard from the window pane underneath it. (SMF ¶ 135; PSMF ¶ 135.)[32] Green foliage was also found tucked under the movable grate over the window well, indicating that the grate had been opened and closed recently. (SMF ¶ 131; PSMF ¶ 131.) Further, the Boulder Police conducted experiments that showed a person could enter the basement playroom through the center window. (SMF ¶ 133; PSMF ¶ 133.) Moreover, leaves and debris, consistent with the leaves and debris found in the window well, were found on the floor under the broken window suggesting that someone had actually entered the basement through this window. (SMF ¶ 136; PSMF ¶ 136.) Likewise, a leaf and white styro-foam packing peanuts, consistent with the leaves and packing peanuts found pooled in the window-well, were found in the wine-cellar room of the basement where JonBenet's body was discovered. (SMF ¶ 134; PSMF ¶ 134.) This evidence is consistent with an inference that whoever entered through this window ultimately walked to the winecellar room at some point.

A Redditor from Boulder who attended the same elementary school as JonBenét adds his .02:

My dad is a plumber and did work for the Ramseys. The mother was so fucking rude that he refused to go back the next day, and sent his helper to finish the job. I also went to school with Jon Benet. I was in the fourth grade. Her mother had her perform with full makeup and costume in front of our music class. Afterwards, I had to go to the bathroom, and her mom was out in the hall berating her for not doing good enough. It was crazy shit. She treated her daughter like an accessory. I believe it was Burke.

[quote] It was crazy shit. She treated her daughter like an accessory.

That’s a lie!

You can return a defective accessory.

More like a disappointing pet.

Disappointing pets can be returned too, apparently.

Not returned exactly.

If JonBenet had lived she would have grown up to be Nomi Malone.

Question: If Patsy flew into a murderous rage over bedwetting then why didn't she also kill Burke for shit-smearing?

R121, not true. It is undisputed, everyone says, Patsy and John loved JonBenet and doted on her. She enjoyed the pageant and dancing stuff. Little girls like that stuff.

Most people are in an elated, "festive" mood on Christmas--especially those intoxicated by the Holy Spirit! It's the one day out of the year where everyone tries their best to be nice and get along with their family members regardless of how they feel about them the other 364 days. All of those happy endorphins are not conducive to flying into a murderous rage and garroting your daughter.

R128, pretty droll. Domestic violence usually spikes around Christmas.

Patsy seems like the type to suffer maximum holiday stress because everyone and everything failed to meet her standards.

They were supposed to fly out the next morning so I can see how that could add stress

It must've been awkward to have to return all of JB's Christmas gifts.

OP has returned in posts r112 to r120 and is still pushing the intruder lie.

JonBenet on Netflix. Yawn. Nothing new.

John Ramsey did it, r120/OP (and the others). Definitely an intruder did NOT do it. That part is indisputable to anyone with a working brain who isn't on the Ramsey payroll or trying to sell something. The fact that you started a new thread early, added dozens of posts to it in a frenzy, and keep it up is really sad.

There is no “Ramsey payroll,” r135.

We just have lots of admirers who quite naturally want to defend us.

Don’t be jealous.

Oopsie, the newest documentary let out some things...

Patsy was an early adopter of the stupid name trend with the portmanteau JonBenét. Not technically a ‘tragedeigh’, but it’s definitely in the same vein. She was a known Francophile and as someone else said had the two neglected Bichon dogs both named Jacques. Anyway, her grasp of French was pretty tenuous because Benét doesn’t make sense. The combination of ét at the end isn’t really a thing and should have been a plain Benet or maybe Benée (with a slight vowel shift) to make it more feminine with the added drama of the accent aigu. The funniest part oh her misstep is the word benêt means fool, idiot or dullard in French. To the French ear, the name sounds closest to ‘John Fool’.

[quote]her mom was out in the hall berating her for not doing good enough.

Patsy: Goddammit, you stupid gash. I told you to flash twat at your schoolmates. Twat! TWAT!!! Just wait til your father hears about this!

Something I wasn't aware of until I read an old Vanity Fair article about the case (linked below) was how John Ramsey threw many of his close long-time friends under the bus by naming them as potential suspects. I knew about John's friend Fleet White, but some of the other men whom he implicated worked at Ramsey's company and had known him for decades. It's really shocking. Patsy began to cut close friends off as well:

[quote]Judith Phillips, who last saw Patsy in March, says, "I was still a true-blue supporter of her." According to Phillips, Patsy asked her to contact Leslie Durgin, Boulder's mayor and a pal of Phillips's. Durgin, who describes Patsy as barely an acquaintance, was surprised at the message Phillips conveyed from her: "Why aren't you protecting me?" Durgin tersely replied via Phillips, "We are doing everything we can. I am supporting the police." Weeks later, Phillips says, she learned that she too had flunked the loyalty test. In April, one of Patsy's close friends phoned her to say that the Ramseys never wanted to see me again. I was not their friend." Even [Patsy's friend] Barbara Fernie, according to friends, began to have doubts. For months, she and Patsy had been inseparable-- shopping, lunching, chatting on the phone. By early spring, Fernie began telling people, "I am the one grieving. Something is wrong with Patsy."

R19 Yeah, he sure did, and in doing so, became a bought off fool to me.

R43 Oh wow, someone who's never investigated the case and is easily swayed by a fucking netflix doc thinks an intruder did it? How odd. Watch all the netflix murder docs and you'll notice a common theme; they all say the guilty person is innocent. Now use some critical thinking skills and read up on this case more. But here's a tip; don't read on a totally biased site.

R83 Yes, we can't say who did it, but we can say who didn't, and it wasn't an intruder. And you need to be punched square in the mouth for your bullshit posts R112 to R120.

R140 Yep, and he also threw Burke under the bus.

Everyone needs to read "My sister, My love" by Joyce Carol Oates, it basically says Patsy did it, just like I think, but I could be persuaded to think it was John. The Burke character in the book dates a Sydney Simpson type person later, trauma bonding. Burke had shitty parents and a fucked up life, of course he's emotionally odd.

Shit I meant to reference R78 in my above post, not R83.

Burke didn't do it. He would have cracked almost right away. Or, as someone said in the other thread, else he would have been the most sociopathic 9-year old of all time.

What if it's all the other way around? What if John wasn't the molester, but instead it was Patsy? What if John was simply trying to protect her, all this time?

I don't buy the "outsider living in the basement" theory, or that anyone was in that house that night. It's simply too far-fetched.

No, the neighboring White's had nothing to do with it. They said they encouraged the Ramsey's to cooperate with the Boulder police and felt betrayed by being suspects. Fleet White said it was strange how John turned the light on in the basement and went straight to the body, like he already knew where it was even though the view was obstructed.

That night earlier the Ramsey family had been Christmas decorating at the White's home.

Patsy wouldn't want to kill her perfect living doll prize possession. John was away on business often and too old with ED to abuse his own daughter. Burke was jealous of JB, as his mother doted on her.

When the piece of pineapple was snatched that sealed her fate.

Burke was not strong enough to kill her and knew nothing of garottes. This was a John show from soup to nuts, although he might have tried to make Patsy believe it was Burke

Ooh wow, R147, I never thought of that! He definitely wants Dr. Phil and his audience to believe it's Burke, so why not Patsy? Good call.

Is Burke still into his scat fetish?

If not, I'd totally hit that ass.

Didn't he make several million off the CBS documentary that said he did it?

Why is this coming up again? Does he get paid for each interview?

No r150 they settled for an "undisclosed amount" which likely means that CBS gave the Ramseys a dollar, said they wouldn't air the program again and then told them to go fuck off

“ Nov 28, 2024

Hi everyone, just a quick update as many of our new signers may have heard about this petition via the Netflix docuseries Cold Case: Who Killed Jonbenét Ramsey.

This petition is mentioned in episode three of that docuseries. John talks in detail about the DNA evidence, the lack of transparency from the police, and the apparent unwillingness to engage with a world-class forensics lab like Othram to use genetic genealogy.

Boulder Police, knowing the power of Netflix to move public opinion (see, for example, the impact from Menendez series), issued a video statement recently, but provided absolutely no new information:

Boulder Police Chief Steve Redfearn said the department welcomes news coverage and documentaries about the killing of JonBenet, who would have been 34 this year, as a way to generate possible new leads. He said the department is committed to solving the case but needs to be careful about what it shares about the investigation to protect a possible future prosecution.

After 28 years we all deserve a lot more than a boilerplate statement. It's time for full transparency and beyond time for Colorado Gov. Polis to get fully involved and say enough is enough.

Please, please, please continue to share this petition. Tell your friends and post it on your socials. It's the only chance we have of ensuring the entrenched powers, who seem to just be waiting for Mr. Ramsey to die and stop bothering them, are forced to answer for nearly three decades of incompetence.”

The initial DNA testing done in 1996 found unidentified male DNA mixed with the blood in JonBenet’s underwear.

In 2006, the BPD asked Bode Technology to test JonBenet’s clothing for touch DNA, which was a fairly new technology. Dr. Williamson tested her long johns and found touch DNA from the same unidentified white male whose DNA was found mixed with blood in the underwear.

Howard Safir, the CEO of Bode who processed the touch DNA on JonBenet’s long johns, does a Q&A in this YouTube video.

A very informative post from a scientist about the DNA in this case:

Another good link from Reddit where they discuss similarities with the “Amy” case. (One interesting note is that Camel Lights were called Camel Blues until the 2000s.)

There’s also an interesting long quote/testimony from Lee Klinger who owned Dance West. No street view was available for the tap classes that were the only ones JB took there, but there was a street side view of the studio where “Amy” took classes.

R153, link is broken.

How sure is the DNA match between the fingernails, underwear, and long johns? Why can’t they do the genetic genealogy from the existing DNA report?

R145, if Patsy was the molester and John was covering for her, then why would he keep pushing for DNA tests? Wouldn’t he have covered for Patsy and now be done—since she’s long dead?

Also, I can’t see John asking for $118,000 since that’d look suspicious re: his bonus. And then again, why have Patsy call police right away since the note presumably buys them time. Maybe they didn’t want time, they wanted a witness to finding her body.

R158, the DNA that they have, such that it is, seems to be fragmentary. In that case it would not be possible to develop a true DNA profile from it, or to say that it all came from the same person.

The Ramseys, btw, insisted that JonBenet be buried promptly and refused to have her exhumed.

The Netflix doc says that Mark something something's DNA didn't match the evidence either so he was released. I didn't realize he had no other arrests or convictions. Listening to his taped phone calls he sounds like a fantasist nut bar. Didn't ring true at all. I hope they solve this murder with the DNA.

Martha & The Vandellas

The Ramseys didn't live their lives in a sealed laboratory. Any new unexplained DNA found could have been picked up from thousands of places while they were out in the world living their lives.

New DNA from a possible intruder would also need a lot of other new corroborating physical evidence, which is impossible at this point.

R161, I thought that the DNA was ultimately irrelevant in Karr's case because he wasn't in Boulder at the time of the murder. He was just someone who didn't want to spend years locked up in Thailand on child porn charges and claimed to be guilty of a crime in the U.S. in order to be extradited.

R161 I don't know. But they tested him anyway. Prob to get him in the national pedophilia bank.

There are rumors that Little Miss Valdosta Feed and Grain had her fill with Little Miss Pineapple Princess and finally snapped.

They found DNA under both fingernails, mixed with a drop of her blood in her underwear, and on both sides of the waist of her long johns.

The DNA profile from the sample mixed with JBR’s blood in her underwear likely came from saliva. The fingernail DNA profile wasn’t as strong as the underwear sample, but the alleles were consistent between all 3.

The DNA from the underwear was strong and allowed the lab to create a complete profile that could be entered into CODIS. The UM1 (unidentified male 1) profile has never returned a hit in CODIS.

The touch DNA on her waistband is the “smoking gun” because the underwear DNA could conceivably come from a factory worker coughing while producing or packaging the panties. That the same DNA profile was found on the long johns means that it could not have been a factory worker’s DNA.

Also, against the factory worker idea is that the UM1 DNA wasn’t found in fabric between the dots of blood. So he would’ve had to cough in the precise area where JBR blood later landed.

John Mark Karr didn’t know any details not in the public record. He was also not in Boulder when JBR was murdered. And his DNA wasn’t a match.

What about Gary Oliva? Presumably he doesn’t match the DNA either since he’s in prison and so his DNA must be in CODIS?

Also the Netflix doc says the underwear was manufactured and packaged in China where likelihood of a Caucasian factory worker would be extremely low. The perp DNA is from a Caucasian male.

That Gary guy was not a match according to Netflix doc.

When the long john touch DNA was found, the DA asked the lab to perform a statistical analysis of the long john DNA with the underwear DNA (to understand how likely it was that the DNA from these two sources came from the same person) and they said it was “within an approximate probability of 6,199/6,200” that the DNA came from the same person. That’s a greater than 99.98% likelihood.

That’s not even considering the fingernail DNA. There’s no innocent explanation. The UM1 had to have been there when JBR was murdered. That’s why the Ramseys were exonerated and issued an official apology by the Boulder DA.

R170, thanks, I didn’t know that. I haven’t seen the Netflix doc. Why are people still talking about him then? He could have been an accomplice maybe?

R172 The Netflix doc talks about the possible suspects as it works through the case timeline. Why people generally talk about that Gary guy as the actual killer, I have no idea, since that is categorically untrue.

R163, I guess that’s why they want the untested evidence sent to a lab like Othram: so they can do a family tree to find a suspect that they can then build a case against.

That’s how they found the Golden State Killer. They narrowed it until they had a suspect who was in the right age range who lived in California at that time and then tried to snag a can from his trash, but he never set any out so they took a sample from the handle of his car and it was a match. You have to find the suspect and THEN you can get the confirming DNA match, search warrants, evidence, etc.

Genetic genealogy is also how they found Bryan Kohberger.

Did John Ramsey seem truthful or suspicious in the Netflix doc? Obviously it doesn’t really matter as sociopaths can lie convincingly, but just interested in how he seemed. I haven’t seen any of his interviews.

R152, CBS didn’t even try to defend themselves or respond to the 500+ page lawsuit. They settled out of court without any fight. The Ramsey’s filing against CBS is jaw dropping—no wonder CBS never even tried to stand behind their “journalism.”

Sorry, just cant get over the fact of that LONG ransom note and 118,000 dollars. Only an insider would have though up that number. Like oh, how much is this mess going to cost me, I know don't want to spend any more than my bonus. I just need to explain this in a long, paragraph after paragraph full page note.

I don’t feel like reading both threads all the way through, can someone please give a Crib’s Notes version of who the prime suspects today are? TIA!!

R175 In the Netflix doc John Ramsey seemed truthful and honest about his experience and opinions about the case (incl. media and police and grand jury). He did not come across as lying, manipulative, entitled, mentally ill, etc. At times he relayed his frustration and exasperation, and who can blame him. The doc is a good watch.

Yeah what about the stupid note? The longest ransom note the FBI had ever seen. All the movie references to movies posted right there in the home. The "and, hence" which isn't a common saying and yet the Ramsey's dismissed it in their book as, well maybe we adopted it because they made us rewrite the note so much, or maybe it's because it's actually a saying.

That note writer was genius to cause so much confusion. To know what an attache is, and know what a faction is, but not know how to spell business?

They needed a note. How else would they explain what happened to the body in the basement. If there's just a body there, that would spell guilt. Obviously there would be no cover. A note explains everything.

I think maybe Burke did it, and the parents discovered her body. It was obvious what happened, and they proceeded to cover for him.

I think they never confronted Burke- never actually accused him, asked him, or even talked to him about it. They sent him back to bed and covered for him.

The nervousness of the father when the police could NOT find the body because they didn't bother to check the basement is very reminiscent of the Menendez brothers wondering what was taking so long for the police to show up until they gave up waiting 2 hours later and made a fake phone call.

I was wondering that too R181. His voice was heard on the 911 call ending.

He also sounds like he's lying in the child psychologist interview when he says he just stayed in bed. It sounds like the tone of a lie. Flat.

Lin Wood seems like a real asshole.

Kids are cruel, I could totally see Burke being jealous of his sister getting all that attention with the pageants and all the time dressing her up like a little sex doll. That weird sex look they did to her would explained why she was raped with a paint brush. He sensed that was part of her appeal, something he did not have.

The intruder was in the house alone for several hours on Xmas day and maybe even prior to that. He wrote the note. Had lots of time to do so. The text is something a person would write as a joke on the family. It toys with them and doubtless there are "inside jokes" in it that only the killer understands. That's why it's so bizarre. You can almost hear him laughing and sneering at the same time as you read the words.

R186, why would an intruder kill someone he intended to kidnap? For the sake of argument let's say that the intruder killed JonBenet accidentally that night. Why would he not remove JonBenet's body from the house? If a kidnapper's hostage escapes or dies the kidnapper loses all leverage. Why would an intruder engage in such a high-risk crime only to completely botch it for no apparent gain?

The ransom note itself is ridiculous on its face and no one including the FBI believes that it is legitimate. No actual kidnapper is going to write a rambling multi-page ransom note replete with bizarre irrelevant verbiage and movie dialogue at the scene of the crime using a notepad and pen he found in his victim's home. The intruder must be the most polite and thoughtful kidnapper ever because he put Patsy's Sharpie pen right back where he found it. Oh, he also put JonBenet's favorite nightie next to her and wrapped her dead body in a cozy blanket, as sadistic child rapist/murderers are wont to do.

One theory is that the kidnapping was never a “real” kidnapping. The plan was to leave her in the basement in the wine cellar locked from the outside. Then when they got the money, tell the parents where she was.

This points to someone who knows the family, an employee or worker. Someone who knew the house, needed money, and figured it wouldn’t be too bad for JB since she’d never be removed from the house.

The problem is that they recruited someone as an accomplice who had a dark, sadistic side and he ended up killing her accidentally.

Another theory is that the intruder planned the remove her from the home in the suitcase that was under the broken window. Maybe by pulling it up and out with the rope that was left behind?

The intruder probably used a stun gun to incapacitate her. The garotte could have been to control her screaming until he could stun gun her? She didn’t fit in the suitcase in any event and maybe that’s why he killed her.

The UM1 DNA profile in the underwear, on the long johns, and under the fingernails does NOT match a DNA profile found on the wrist ligature and garrote knot. That means there must have been two people involved.

No Ramsey DNA was found in the garrote knot or wrist ligature. (John’s DNA was found on the left wrist ligature because he tried untying it when he found her body. His DNA wasn’t on the right wrist ligature or the garrote knots.)

R180, retired FBI profilers do an analysis of the ransom note in this 3-part podcast. It seems that criminal profiling has come under scrutiny as not actually that useful, but it’s interesting to hear what they have to say.

[quote]That Gary guy was not a match according to Netflix do

But there is the rub, DNA tech from 30 years ago is nothing like what he have now. It's possable the testing was accurate but the collection of DNA was not. There have been cases where no DNA is found and yet other proof of a murder. Also, kids are dirty, who knows where Jon-Benet was playing earlier in the day and what got under her nails.

R178, there are no good suspects. There is an unidentified white male whose DNA was found in her underwear mixed with her blood droplets, on the waist of her pajama pants, and under her fingernails. His DNA has been in CODIS since 1997 and never returned a hit.

The ransom note is the sticking point amongst all the various theories. It is a bizarre piece of evidence that doesn’t serve its purported purpose—she wasn’t kidnapped and didn’t slow or prevent the family calling the police. It suggests familiarity with the family but gets details wrong. For instance, advises John to use his good Southern common sense, but he was from Michigan. It asks for $118,000 which is the amount of a bonus John received earlier that year (which was listed on paystubs within the home). It is directed at John and seems to indicate a lot of anger towards him. Patsy found an earlier “practice” version of the note indented in the same note pad and that one was addressed to both parents.

The one widely agreed upon facts is that the killing and note were sadistic.

Here’s an interesting psychiatric analysis of their Christmas letter. It makes me realise Patsy was concerned with her family’s status and image above all else. Blaming an intruder would have been better, so she would have circled the wagons to protect their image if it was anyone else in the family. He does a second video about Burke.

This case isn’t as much of a mystery as a botched investigation where the authorities hands were tied to bring charged due to ineptitude. The wealthy get away with it because they had high powered lawyers and a PR machine which would have torn the Boulder PD to shreds.

Patsy spending lavishly on JonBenét’s pageant costumes while not bothering to make sure her daughter had enough everyday clothes for playing and being an ordinary little kid is another indicator that Patsy was more interested in status-seeking and impression management than being a decent person.