Members' Theories

[BBB167893]

This dedicated mother, within hours, would not only murder her child, she would stage the murder scene by strangling the love of her life, leaving her with deep neck wounds, compose a RN describing how Joni would be decapitated, all in order to deceive authorities about her own guilt. For the rest of her life she would adamantly insist she was innocent.

Horrible as it may be to consider, that would seem to be it.

 

[WHITEFANG]

BUT there was no evidence of any kind linking LHP to that body, or that crime scene. Why aren't LHP's fibers there? She was by all accounts a much larger woman than Patsy, so it's not like the jacket would fit her.
For it to be LHP, there would have to be a motive, because I can't imagine what would provoke the head bash. If her motive was to kidnap her for ransom, I can't imagine she actually intended to kill JB. And JB could say who had kidnapped her. I mean, LHP had a daughter herself. She wouldn't risk getting nabbed for kidnapping.

She was familiar with Pat's writing style. Could enter house without triggering an alarm. Considered Joni spoiled. Didn't know the room of death existed, but remembered it was there she saw the cord used to kill Joni.
Did they examine her and take clothing fibers to cross-reference fibers found on Joni? If LHP arrived on the 25th to see if her money had been left out for her and JB unexpectedly caught her in the house, she would not want her to tell her folks about it. Would she?

 

[WHITEFANG]

Horrible as it may be to consider, that would seem to be it.

Doesn't add up. Even if this family was broke, uneducated, unclean misfits, if they showed the same devotion to their kids as the Ramsey's had, it wouldn't be plausible. If they had a history of extreme, bizarre, unpredictable, irrational behavior, it would be different. Just because they appeared "perfect" on the outside, in the view of some who believe that is how others' viewed them or how they wanted to be viewed, it doesn't mean they were horrible parents, either.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Or it indicates post-mortem swelling.

How? If she was dead, how did her body swell?

 

[WHITEFANG]

Given my own experiences, I have my doubts about that.

Fill in the "my own experiences" if you don't mind?

 

[BBB167893]

Doesn't add up.

Adds up fine with me, awful as that is to admit.

If they had a history of extreme, bizarre, unpredictable, irrational behavior, it would be different.

AHEM! Do you really want to go down that path?

No one's saying they were horrible parents, Fang. But what you call "devotion," I call "obsession."

 

[BBB167893]

How? If she was dead, how did her body swell?

Fang, when a person dies, the bacteria that are kept at bay go to work immediately. That produces a build-up of decomposition gases which cause the body to bloat.

But for the sake of argument, let's say you're right and the bulging was caused by the cord. That still does not indicate any of what you say, especially since the autopsy report specifically states that there were no internal injuries to the neck, specifically the strap muscles, the hyoid bone or the trachea.

 

[BBB167893]

Fill in the "my own experiences" if you don't mind?

Ah, I take it then, that you are not familiar with the story of my switch from IDI to RDI? It's true: at one time, I was as convinced of their innocence as you are. But as time went by, the masks started to slip and reveal the true faces. I didn't get there all in one big step; it took a while, but you can only get beaned over the head with the obvious so many times before it sinks in, and that's what happened with me.

So, in that regard, with that wisdom, I can honestly believe that LHP was desperate to believe the Ramseys were innocent but after a while she just couldn't deny what she saw. Because that's what happened to me.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Adds up fine with me, awful as that is to admit.



AHEM! Do you really want to go down that path?

No one's saying they were horrible parents, Fang. But what you call "devotion," I call "obsession."

And away we go. You bet.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Ah, I take it then, that you are not familiar with the story of my switch from IDI to RDI? It's true: at one time, I was as convinced of their innocence as you are. But as time went by, the masks started to slip and reveal the true faces. I didn't get there all in one big step; it took a while, but you can only get beaned over the head with the obvious so many times before it sinks in, and that's what happened with me.

So, in that regard, with that wisdom, I can honestly believe that LHP was desperate to believe the Ramseys were innocent but after a while she just couldn't deny what she saw. Because that's what happened to me.

thanks. let me suggest the same but opposite has happened, too. btw, when was the last time someone immediately agreed to loan you 2 Gs? It is odd that folks would suggest that Pat was willing to throw her friends, like LHP, under the bus so easily. Her daughter was missing. Should she confine the list of potential kidnappers to people she didn't know? I would expect she would be willing to have them search everywhere and everyone. Yet, Patsy can't do the next right thing. If she mentions someone, she is a traitor. If she omits someone, she is a plotting conspirator. If she cries, she's a phony. If John doesn't weep, it's proof he cares more for Beth.

 

[BBB167893]

thanks.

No problem. I get some weird reactions about that.

let me suggest the same but opposite has happened, too.

Meaning, I trust that people have gone from RDI to IDI? I knew that. What's that got to do with me and LHP?

btw, when was the last time someone immediately agreed to loan you 2 Gs?

NEVER!

It is odd that folks would suggest that Pat was willing to throw her friends, like LHP, under the bus so easily.

Fang, anytime anyone of their friends even suggested that they do the things you would expect people in the Rs' position to do, they got the bus treatment. I don't know what else to call it.

Her daughter was missing. Should she confine the list of potential kidnappers to people she didn't know? I would expect she would be willing to have them search everywhere and everyone. Yet, Patsy can't do the next right thing. If she mentions someone, she is a traitor. If she omits someone, she is a plotting conspirator. If she cries, she's a phony. If John doesn't weep, it's proof he cares more for Beth.

ANy order you want those addressed in?

 

[BBB167893]

And away we go. You bet.

Well, let's go with the obvious: the child-pageant angle.

NOW, let's be 100% clear about this. I'm not one of these people who decided that someone who puts their kids in these things is a child-killer in the making. While such an activity seems very weird to a simple country boy such as myself, as I've said, anyone is capable of anything, so everyone's in the same boat right from the get-go.

But we can't ignore the facts, either: you will see some extreme behavior on the part of the parents who put their kids into those things. But it's generally agreed that PR's approach was notable even by those standards. You hear a lot of stories about how PR pushed JB so hard. And even if those stories are false, or exaggerated, the plain truth speaks for itself. Think about all the time and money and effort that went into making JB a star on the circuit. Does anyone honestly think that someone would make that big an investment in their kid's success if they weren't desperately chasing the pot of gold at the end of their own rainbow? It's the classic sign of an obsession.

It doesn't strike me as a healthy basis to build a life on. If something were to happen to derail that effort, I would not be surprised to see the dreamer react in an unpredictable and--to us--irrational manner. I once told someone else that there was and is no doubt in my mind that PR loved JB the very best she could. But did that love have an unhealthy basis? Did it become something twisted and ugly? Those are the questions I'm forced to ask myself.

BTW, I think Jackie Gleason was the greatest.

 

[DeeDee249]

Just a point or 2. About those "fingernail marks" on her neck. That is a bit of misinformation that is still floating around. There were no fingernail marks on her neck, nor was any of JB's skin or tissue found under her nails. Those marks (that to an untrained eye in a photo may look like fingernail marks) were petechial hemorrhages on her neck, usually found in a strangulation when the victim is alive at the time. The autopsy did not indicate any fingernail marks on her neck or anywhere else. She did not struggle against the garrote.
About the swelling in the neck-while it is true that dead bodies swel, it wouldn't happen there first or at that point after deathl- the swelling on JB's neck was really from the garrote being pulled tight enough to dig into her flesh- that, and the angle of her head, cocked to the right, would cause the flesh to fold over the garrote. The swelling that comes from decomposition occurs first in the abdomen, usually over the area of the intestines. That is caused by the bacteria already present in the intestines. That swelling is also pretty substantial and by that time, decomposition is well under way. JB was not quite there yet.

 

[MurriFlower]

Just a point or 2. About those "fingernail marks" on her neck. That is a bit of misinformation that is still floating around. There were no fingernail marks on her neck, nor was any of JB's skin or tissue found under her nails. Those marks (that to an untrained eye in a photo may look like fingernail marks) were petechial hemorrhages on her neck, usually found in a strangulation when the victim is alive at the time. The autopsy did not indicate any fingernail marks on her neck or anywhere else. She did not struggle against the garrote.

I think even if she did struggle, her hands were tied behind her back. She was on her stomach when she was garrotted, probably with the perp holding her down with his own body perhaps even straddling her. The lack of scratch marks on her neck does not automatically lead one to assume that she was unconscious or did not struggle, just that she could not get her hands free.

 

[DeeDee249]

I think even if she did struggle, her hands were tied behind her back. She was on her stomach when she was garrotted, probably with the perp holding her down with his own body perhaps even straddling her. The lack of scratch marks on her neck does not automatically lead one to assume that she was unconscious or did not struggle, just that she could not get her hands free.

Keep in mind that her wrists showed NO evidence of being tied tightly enough to restrain her. There were absolutely no ligature marks on her wrists at all. There wasn't even a ligature at all on one wrist, the loop being so wide and loose it fell right off. There is also nothing to indicate her wrists were ever behind her back. She was found with her arms bent at the elbow and up and out in front of her face. (NOT the way she is shown in that drawing we have all seen but rather the way she appears in the crime photo showing her on the living room rug, with bagged hands).

 

[MurriFlower]

Keep in mind that her wrists showed NO evidence of being tied tightly enough to restrain her. There were absolutely no ligature marks on her wrists at all. There wasn't even a ligature at all on one wrist, the loop being so wide and loose it fell right off. There is also nothing to indicate her wrists were ever behind her back. She was found with her arms bent at the elbow and up and out in front of her face. (NOT the way she is shown in that drawing we have all seen but rather the way she appears in the crime photo showing her on the living room rug, with bagged hands).

When you say they weren't tied tightly, then if so, why did JR have so much trouble untying them? He only managed to get them untied from each other, not from her wrists. They appeared to have been tied OVER the sleeves on her top, so hence, no marks. I think the 'tightly' refers to the fact that they weren't tightly bound together, not that the cord would have slipped off her wrists if she struggled.

 

[DeeDee249]

When you say they weren't tied tightly, then if so, why did JR have so much trouble untying them? He only managed to get them untied from each other, not from her wrists. They appeared to have been tied OVER the sleeves on her top, so hence, no marks. I think the 'tightly' refers to the fact that they weren't tightly bound together, not that the cord would have slipped off her wrists if she struggled.

We really don't know for a fact that JR did have trouble untying them or even if her tried at all. We have only his word that he did. However, FW was right behind him as he went into the wineceller, right there as JR pushed the blanket from her body. He would have certainly seen whether the wrists were tightly bound, as well as whether JR attempted to untie them. It is interesting (and extremely frustrating) that he has not said whether JR is telling the truth.
If they were tight, even over the sleeve of her shirt, there would be a mark. Try tying a piece of cord or string over your own wrist, over a sleeve. Tight. It still makes a mark. It might not dig a furrow (like in her neck) but it still makes a mark.

 

[MurriFlower]

We really don't know for a fact that JR did have trouble untying them or even if her tried at all. We have only his word that he did. However, FW was right behind him as he went into the wineceller, right there as JR pushed the blanket from her body. He would have certainly seen whether the wrists were tightly bound, as well as whether JR attempted to untie them. It is interesting (and extremely frustrating) that he has not said whether JR is telling the truth.
If they were tight, even over the sleeve of her shirt, there would be a mark. Try tying a piece of cord or string over your own wrist, over a sleeve. Tight. It still makes a mark. It might not dig a furrow (like in her neck) but it still makes a mark.

He had no reason to lie about this DD.

"22 LOU SMIT: What else do you remember right

23 at that time?

24 JOHN RAMSEY: I just remember just talking

25 and, (Come on baby.̃ And I tried to untie her

0167

1 arms; they were tied up behind her head.

2 LOU SMIT: Were they tied tight?

3 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah, very tight.

4 LOU SMIT: They were very tight?

5 JOHN RAMSEY: I noticed a spot in her coat,

6 below the surface.

7 LOU SMIT: How do you know they were tied

8 tight?

9 JOHN RAMSEY: Because they were -- you know,

10 her skin was swollen around. And they were not

11 easy to get off. I tried to untie them quickly and

12 I just picked her up carried her upstairs. I was

13 screaming. In fact, I couldn't even scream.

14 And then I brought her upstairs into the

15 living room and later there, at one point, tried

16 to untie the not further, and Linda Arndt stopped

17 me from doing it.

18 LOU SMIT: The knot?

19 JOHN RAMSEY: Right.

20 LOU SMIT: Where?

21 JOHN RAMSEY: Up on her arms. And I didn't

22 notice the -- as I noticed the blood below the

23 surface, but I didn't notice this core around the

24 neck."

 

[DeeDee249]

But again, it can't be proven he did it. If her hands were swollen then, they would have still looked swollen when the coroner arrived and that would have been noted. When Mayer mentions the cord as he is doing the autopsy he makes no note of any swelling or mark at all. And he would have to note it because this is something he actually SEES, and not his opinion about it (as would be the case in his mentioning of what may have caused the blood in the vagina. He must note the blood, but would not be able to say for sure what caused it).
I have never seen where Arndt says she stopped him from untying the wrist cords.

 

[Tadpole12]

When you say they weren't tied tightly, then if so, why did JR have so much trouble untying them? He only managed to get them untied from each other, not from her wrists. They appeared to have been tied OVER the sleeves on her top, so hence, no marks. I think the 'tightly' refers to the fact that they weren't tightly bound together, not that the cord would have slipped off her wrists if she struggled.

Heyya MF.

They appeared to have been tied OVER the sleeves on her top, so hence, no marks. - MF

If the rope was tight, restricting around her wrists, there wound have been a mark on her skin even though the rope was tied over the cuffs of her sleeves.