View Poll Results: Who do you believe killed JonBenet?

Voters
672. You may not vote on this poll
  • Patsy

    168 25.00%
  • John

    44 6.55%
  • Burke

    108 16.07%
  • an unknown intruder

    86 12.80%
  • BR (head bash), then JR

    4 0.60%
  • BR (head bash); then JR & PR (strangled/coverup)

    113 16.82%
  • Knowing all I know, still on the fence.

    55 8.18%
  • John, with an 'inside' accomplice

    11 1.64%
  • I think John and Patsy caught him and he made her cover up

    17 2.53%
  • I still have no idea

    57 8.48%
  • patsy and john helped cover it up

    9 1.34%
Page 56 of 113 FirstFirst ... 6464748495051525354555657585960616263646566106 ... LastLast
Results 1,376 to 1,400 of 2802

Thread: Knowing all you know today about this case who do you think really killed JonBenet?

  1. #1376
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris_Texas View Post
    If I were to speculate (my opinion only, etc)...

    Theory: Burke got JB some pinapple from the kitchen, and perhaps got out the flashlight at this time to look in the basement for presents. The two got into an argument over something and Burke decided to whack her with the flashlight (this seems all too possible to me, as my brother once whacked me in the head with a baseball bat). Dad and mom, for various reasons, and seeing how injured JB was, decided to cover it up. I suspect that Dad came up with the fake abduction and ordered Patsy to write the note while he took care of JB.

    Why the cover up?

    Dad: I suspect that dad had been sexually abusing JB for some time. He would have known that JBs abuse would be discovered in an autopsy, and I believe he hoped that the violent vaginal trama inflicted on the body would conceal this ongoing abuse from investigators. Dad clearly was the one who dressed JB, as mom never would have put her in these ridiculously oversized panties. Mom, after writing the note, probably brought her some of her favorite things.

    Mom: would have been easy enough to convince. She obviously would not have wanted to lose both children, and quite possibly believed that Burkes behavior was linked to her own illness. Mom seems the obvious author of the note, not only because the writing and wording match well enough, but because John never would have written anything that ludicrous.

    Burke: under this scenario Burke's behavior was more childhood idiocy than sociopathic and evil.
    Chris_Texas,
    Whatever happened that night. We now have forensic evidence that links all three Ramseys with the wine-cellar, i.e. Burke and Patsy Ramsey's touch dna was found on the Pink Barbie Nightgown.

    The most important aspect is that staging was required. Also that the staging was more or less consistent with the Ramsey version of events.

    Kolar thinks that things started in the Breakfast Bar, so where and how was JonBenet abused?

    It now seems obvious that someone in that house, in the course of molesting JonBenet, either deliberately or accidentally whacked JonBenet on the head. This same person then initiated a cleanup of sorts and reported that JonBenet had had an accident.

    I suspect JonBenet's molestation took place in her bedroom, and that she was originally wearing her Pink Barbie Nightgown. The interesting question is who redressed JonBenet in the longjohns, was it really Patsy? If so she would have known JonBenet was wearing size-12 Bloomingdales.

    The partially opened Christmas Gifts are a clue. Some think they were opened to fetch the size-12 Bloomingdales, but why do this when there might be other underwear in the dryer or upstairs in JonBenet's bedroom. Where did the longjohns originate from?

    Those partially opened gifts might be part of the original crime-scene and this is why they were placed into the wine-cellar, else why bother, or just blame it on the intruder?

    On the pineapple snack I reckon that passed off without incident, with everyone involved going their own way, forgetting about its significance entirely?

    Then we have, allegedly, Burke Ramsey's fecally stained pajama bottoms found lying on JonBenet's bedroom floor? Along with fecal deposits elsewhere on some object?

    Which suggests to me that JonBenet's bedroom was the primary crime-scene, which must have been cleaned up to some extent afterwards. Notwithstanding a bloodstain from JonBenet on her pillow.

    You could really make a case against any one of the R's. But BDI is the most consistent, including Burke Ramsey's refusal to answer any further Cold Case queries.

    So it appears the staging was employed to hide JonBenet's molestation, and promote the claim JonBenet was placed straight to bed on 12/25. This suggests the R's were adopting a twin strategy of hoping she might not be found, then they could fly off into the sunset, or if found they would invoke what became their second response, i.e. IDI.

    Otherwise why bother hiding her internal injuries from view, since if IDI was to be their principal explanation, just leave her semi-naked with obvious injuries and blame it all on IDI?

    On BDI there is the possibility that the Grand Jury knew BR was involved in the staging sense, but not culpable in any other context. So decided he would be given blanket state protection? If there is no record of a vote, this would be consistent with someone arguing, no vote required, since state protection is mandatory?


    .

  2. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  3. #1377
    Quote Originally Posted by deca View Post
    So why do you think he is writing books, giving interviews, etc.?
    I think John does it for John.

    John knows Pasty did it, but blamed Burke, and he has to deal with the situation she put them in.

    I pick Pasty as the one leaving bruises on JonBenet before she died,and John knew, but overlooked it.
    So did Pasty throw Burke under the bus? To save herself?

    But John does it for John.

    All opinions expressed by me on Websleuths are my very own thoughts, not yours, and are to stay on this website

  4. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ILikeToBendPages For This Useful Post:


  5. #1378
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,570
    Quote Originally Posted by ILikeToBendPages View Post
    I think John does it for John.

    John knows Pasty did it, but blamed Burke, and he has to deal with the situation she put them in.

    I pick Pasty as the one leaving bruises on JonBenet before she died,and John knew, but overlooked it.
    So did Pasty throw Burke under the bus? To save herself?

    But John does it for John.
    ILikeToBendPages,
    Bear in mind that JonBenet was molested just before she was hit on the head.

    I do not think Patsy was responsible for that. I reckon it was either BR or JR, wih Patsy assisting with the staging?

    As many have asked before, who would both parents cover for, and the obvious answer seems to be Burke Ramsey, who was shuffled out of the house early that morning, despite being a witness to prior events, and really out of the case, to all intents and purposes.

    For years it was really only PR or JR who were considered as lead suspects, these days, Burke Ramsey's distinct lack of engagement, on both a personal and legal level, with the case, has many considering BDI as a more consistent theory.

    Its the staging that indirectly offers clues. Since if it was PDI, then how come Patsy is ignorant about the location of the size-12's, or forgets to undo the remains of the pineapple snack?

    I appreciate nobody is perfect, and criminals make mistakes, and if its PDI, then Patsy made some major errors, i.e. leaving her touch-dna and fibers all over the wine-cellar artifacts.

    Even the white blanket wrapped around JonBenet was factored into the staging since Patsy said it had been on JonBenet's bed, yet BPD suggested otherwise.

    Patsy had no such reply regarding the size-12's. They were in JonBenet's underwear drawer, she said. BPD checked and none were found, how so, if its PDI?

    With Burke Ramsey's touch-dna along with that of his mother's being found on the Pink Barbie Nightgown, this links him directly to JonBenet. That the Gown was also dumped into the wine-cellar suggests that it was part of the primary crime-scene.

    .

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  7. #1379
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    ILikeToBendPages,
    Bear in mind that JonBenet was molested just before she was hit on the head.

    I do not think Patsy was responsible for that. I reckon it was either BR or JR, wih Patsy assisting with the staging?

    As many have asked before, who would both parents cover for, and the obvious answer seems to be Burke Ramsey, who was shuffled out of the house early that morning, despite being a witness to prior events, and really out of the case, to all intents and purposes.

    For years it was really only PR or JR who were considered as lead suspects, these days, Burke Ramsey's distinct lack of engagement, on both a personal and legal level, with the case, has many considering BDI as a more consistent theory.

    Its the staging that indirectly offers clues. Since if it was PDI, then how come Patsy is ignorant about the location of the size-12's, or forgets to undo the remains of the pineapple snack?

    I appreciate nobody is perfect, and criminals make mistakes, and if its PDI, then Patsy made some major errors, i.e. leaving her touch-dna and fibers all over the wine-cellar artifacts.

    Even the white blanket wrapped around JonBenet was factored into the staging since Patsy said it had been on JonBenet's bed, yet BPD suggested otherwise.

    Patsy had no such reply regarding the size-12's. They were in JonBenet's underwear drawer, she said. BPD checked and none were found, how so, if its PDI?

    With Burke Ramsey's touch-dna along with that of his mother's being found on the Pink Barbie Nightgown, this links him directly to JonBenet. That the Gown was also dumped into the wine-cellar suggests that it was part of the primary crime-scene.

    .
    BBM Not necessarily. This touch DNA could link BR, BUT most of us here, including you if I'm not mistaken, don't believe the touch DNA present from an unknown donor proves IDI. So how does BR's touch DNA have any more significance? His DNA could have been passed to the nightgown by PR just as easily. We can't ignore unknown touch DNA when it suits us, yet claim known touch DNA is proof when it backs up our theories.

    Just my

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Nom de plume For This Useful Post:


  9. #1380
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Nom de plume View Post
    BBM Not necessarily. This touch DNA could link BR, BUT most of us here, including you if I'm not mistaken, don't believe the touch DNA present from an unknown donor proves IDI. So how does BR's touch DNA have any more significance? His DNA could have been passed to the nightgown by PR just as easily. We can't ignore unknown touch DNA when it suits us, yet claim known touch DNA is proof when it backs up our theories.

    Just my
    Nom de plume,
    Nobody can claim that the touch-dna found on JonBenet's underwear proves that there was an intruder!

    If a match with the underwear touch-dna is ever made then the identified person can be eliminated or factored into the case.

    This is same procedure for the touch-dna found on the Barbie Nightgown, the difference, we have a match , i.e. Burke and Patsy Ramsey!

    To date Burke Ramsey has never been linked with the contents of the wine-cellar, given the nature of the case and that IDI, has more or less been ruled out. The presence of Burke Ramsey's dna on any wine-cellar artifact is significant.

    It does not prove anything, or even implicate BR. But assuming that the Pink Barbie Nightgown was dumped into the wine-cellar, precisely because it formed part of the primary crime-scene. Then Burke Ramsey's touch-dna might link him directly with JonBenet, on the night of her death. Also what you say about PR applies to BR as well.

    So in summary, it has more significance:

    1. It has been matched and identified.

    2. It was found on wine-cellar artifact.

    3. The Pink Barbie Nightgown was bloodstained.

    4. Patsy Ramsey claimed never to have physically visited the basement 12/25 or 12/26.

    Prima facie, it appears the probability of an innocent explanation for the touch-dna is low.


    .

  10. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  11. #1381
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    2,213
    I've always thought that Patsy killed her accidentally in a rage, then John helped to stage the scene. However, it's always in the back of my mind that:
    In a 2001 interview with grand jury specialist Michael Kane, who led the 13-month grand jury probe, it has been reported "There remain 'dozens' of secrets, he said. 'Absolutely. Dozens. And a lot of what the public thinks is fact is simply not fact.'"
    I think important details have been deliberately kept quiet.

  12. The Following 12 Users Say Thank You to fruity For This Useful Post:


  13. #1382
    ScarlettScarpetta's Avatar
    ScarlettScarpetta is offline I stand behind SoSueMe &all the A.D.M.I.N. / Mods working for the good of WS.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    10,414
    I know I'm the minority but I will never believe that John and patsy killed jon benet. I don't believe Burke had anything to do with it either.

    To me the more " evidence" I see the more convoluted it becomes. I think that there was such a mess made so early that there was so much real evidence lost and the first cops on scene were too inexperienced to handle such a crime.

    I believe a stranger did this. I think it's completely possible a stranger did this. I do not find it at all plausible that anyone in the family did it.
    Juror #8: "It's always difficult to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And wherever you run into it, prejudice always obscures the truth. I don't really know what the truth is. I don't suppose anybody will ever really know. Nine of us now seem to feel that the defendant is innocent, but we're just gambling on probabilities - we may be wrong. We may be trying to let a guilty man go free, I don't know. Nobody really can. But we have a reasonable doubt, and that's something that's very valuable in our system. No jury can declare a man guilty unless it's sure." -12 Angry Men 1957

    All my posts are my opinion only.

  14. The Following User Says Thank You to ScarlettScarpetta For This Useful Post:


  15. #1383
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    14,239
    I don't get why it would be thought that Jonbenet was molested before being hit in the head. The autopsy report says it was just before or actually at death. Even after Kolar's book I still can't get past thinking that Patsy did it all, even the prior trauma due to crazed cleaning of Jonbenet when she soiled or wet. One thing is for sure though, whoever strangled Jonbenet knew there had been prior vaginal trauma. I also think it happened while wearing the pink nightgown and it was going to be hidden with the body while John was out of the house on a wild goose chase.

  16. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to txsvicki For This Useful Post:


  17. #1384
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    30,860
    Quote Originally Posted by Pirplegrl View Post
    I know I'm the minority but I will never believe that John and patsy killed jon benet. I don't believe Burke had anything to do with it either.

    To me the more " evidence" I see the more convoluted it becomes. I think that there was such a mess made so early that there was so much real evidence lost and the first cops on scene were too inexperienced to handle such a crime.

    I believe a stranger did this. I think it's completely possible a stranger did this. I do not find it at all plausible that anyone in the family did it.
    With all due respect, if you've come to that conclusion you are unfamiliar with the totality of evidence.

    There is not a single shred of real evidence of an intruder. IMO


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


    Nosy by Nature and a Websleuther by choice

  18. The Following 13 Users Say Thank You to Linda7NJ For This Useful Post:


  19. #1385
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Mid-North Coast, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    93
    Quote Originally Posted by Pirplegrl View Post
    I know I'm the minority but I will never believe that John and patsy killed jon benet. I don't believe Burke had anything to do with it either.

    To me the more " evidence" I see the more convoluted it becomes. I think that there was such a mess made so early that there was so much real evidence lost and the first cops on scene were too inexperienced to handle such a crime.

    I believe a stranger did this. I think it's completely possible a stranger did this. I do not find it at all plausible that anyone in the family did it.
    Hi Pirplegrl! Yes, you are in the minority of opinion on this case, but you know what? That's alright. Discussion of any and all angles can be useful.

    So may I ask you: what specific pieces of evidence lead you away from suspecting one or more Ramsey's as the perps to a complete stranger doing all this? Did the intruder also commit the previous sexual abuse on JB? What was the purpose of the ransom note? Do you feel the R's know/knew the idenity of the alleged intruder? Do you feel the R's are fully inncoent, or might have been involved in some way?

    I hope this doesn't sound like an attack with so many questions, I am genuinely interested in what you think.

  20. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to SunVenus For This Useful Post:


  21. #1386
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    3,131
    The spot of blood on the pillow - was it from the head wound? I would think that with a head wound as bad as JB's that there would be a lot of blood. Perhaps the bash was done in the bathroom, or the kitchen, which would be easier to clean up. Somebody must have been very busy getting rid of evidence, probably in the neighbors trash cans.
    If the head bash was done in the basement, or the wine cellar wouldn't there have been a stain on the concrete floor?
    Last edited by Darlene733510; 02-02-2013 at 03:10 PM.

  22. #1387
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    NY
    Posts
    4,493
    Quote Originally Posted by Darlene733510 View Post
    The spot of blood on the pillow - was it from the head wound? I would think that with a head wound as bad as JB's that there would be a lot of blood. Perhaps the bash was done in the bathroom, or the kitchen, which would be easier to clean up. Somebody must have been very busy getting rid of evidence, probably in the neighbors trash cans.
    If the head bash was done in the basement, or the wine cellar wouldn't there have been a stain on the concrete floor?
    Her head wound never bled-it was an internal wound..there are other posters here who can explain way better than me

  23. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to SyraKelly For This Useful Post:


  24. #1388
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Darlene733510 View Post
    The spot of blood on the pillow - was it from the head wound? I would think that with a head wound as bad as JB's that there would be a lot of blood. Perhaps the bash was done in the bathroom, or the kitchen, which would be easier to clean up. Somebody must have been very busy getting rid of evidence, probably in the neighbors trash cans.
    If the head bash was done in the basement, or the wine cellar wouldn't there have been a stain on the concrete floor?
    Darlene733510,
    Indirectly, yes, it likely resulted from residue issuing from JonBenet's nose.


    .

  25. The Following User Says Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  26. #1389
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,368
    Is Colorado one of the states in which one spouse can not be compelled to testify against the other?

  27. #1390
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    725
    Quote Originally Posted by BOESP View Post
    Is Colorado one of the states in which one spouse can not be compelled to testify against the other?
    If I'm not mistaken I believe that holds true in all states.

  28. The Following User Says Thank You to Nom de plume For This Useful Post:

    otg

  29. #1391
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,368
    Quote Originally Posted by Nom de plume View Post
    If I'm not mistaken I believe that holds true in all states.
    Spousal privilege comes under Federal rules for Federal cases but each state has their own set of statutes. There seems to be a lot of variables at the state level. I know next to nothing about Colorado statutes and even less about interpreting them.

    I was thinking about how spousal privilege and the cross-fingerpointing defense might have worked if the Ramseys had gone to court before Patsy died.
    Last edited by BOESP; 02-02-2013 at 11:08 PM.

  30. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to BOESP For This Useful Post:


  31. #1392
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,707
    Quote Originally Posted by SyraKelly View Post
    Her head wound never bled-it was an internal wound..there are other posters here who can explain way better than me
    JB's head injury is a closed-scalp injury. Obviously if you look at the skull you can see just what a horrible injury it was- her head was cracked nearly in half- AND there was a large piece punched inward towards the brain. This part is a depressed fracture, and the crack is a linear fracture. One of the reasons why it is so important to LOOK at the autopsy photos is because it makes it very clear that this severe head injury could not have come from her falling, being dropped, or pushed into something (even a door knob).
    In a closed-scalp injury, the skin has not been broken and the blood (and there WAS blood) remains under the skin. There was blood in the skull case, and around the brain. Some of this could have seeped from her nose, but the coroner did not note blood there. Her mouth was swabbed as were her nostrils, and no specific mention of blood was noted. The mucus that was mentioned was described as "tan"- to me, that means it could have been slightly blood-tinged, as blood turns rusty-brown as oxygen hits it.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  32. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  33. #1393
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,971
    Is there an account somewhere of the Ws party? Was anything ever said about the way PR and JR interacted with each other? I've read a few things about the kids at the party, but I'm curious as to what the other guests said about the Rs.

  34. #1394
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,570
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrishope View Post
    JR is the strongest suspect. No other theory really makes any sense. PR can be ruled out completely, both as the killer and as a co-conspirator in the cover up. BDI is just complete nonsense.

    docG solved it years ago, but we've all been caught up in over-analyzing the case. I've recently seen that his theory makes the most sense.

    If both JR/PR were in on it, even if they just worked jointly on the coverup, then the police would not have been called shortly before 6am with the body in the basement.

    The staging does not fit with the RN. If there is a RN there should be no body. If they had staged it as an intruder murderer then they'd have left the body out in plain view, and naked - just the way a real intruder would do.

    But we have a RN, and a body hidden in the WC, redressed, and wrapped in a blanket. That doesn't make sense.

    It would be a lot safer for the Rs if the body were not in the house. Any plausible plan where the Rs acted as co-conspirators would include dumping the body. Yet the 911 call was placed with the body in the house and with staging that didn't fit with the RN.

    So, the RN wasn't meant to fool the police at 6am. It was meant to fool PR. It fooled her so well that she didn't read it carefully and went off and made a 911 call.

    Over and over the RN warns not to call the police or JB will be killed. I won't bother with quoting the movie lines, but the emphasis of the note is don't call the police if you want your daughter back alive.

    Many of us have figured that the original plan was to dump the body. That makes sense. But we figured that the plan was aborted for some reason. We figured what actually happened was plan B. But we failed to realize that the plan to dump the body had not been abandoned. It simply had not been implemented yet. It would have been implemented later, but PR called 911 and screwed-up the plan.

    Notice that the note gives JR until the morning of the 27th to come up with the money. Meanwhile, he has the perfect excuse for not calling the police. He can send PR and BR off to stay with friends, and then dump the body. After that he gets the money from the bank, phones in the ransom call, then makes the drop off. He looses $118K, but he can afford it.

    PR didn't cooperate in the coverup, because if she did, she'd never have made the 911 call. It would have been easy for them to run the above scenario working together. And it's plain silly to let the police have a chance to find the body in the house. Anywhere but Boulder that would be an automatic arrest.

    PR didn't write the note. I don't have time to go into all the details of that right now, but suffice to say that handwriting analysis is not a science. It's a pseudo science. It's opinion masquerading as science. Many "experts" thought JMK wrote the note when they compared his writing, that tells you how useful handwriting analysis is. Take a look at http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/ and you'll see that JR could easily have been the author.

    PR didn't help with the staging. Again, if she had been in on the coverup why not get rid of the body before calling 911. Also her fibers are not inside the size 12 bloomies. Hers are only on the outside of things, and she hugged JB's lifeless body when it was brought upstairs, so we really don't know whether fiber transfer happened downstairs or upstairs.

    Sure, her fibers are in the basement too, and she probably lied about wearing the red jacket (or was it a sweater) down there. Or there could have simply been fiber transfer that explains her red fibers in the basement.

    I'm going to write up my theory of the case for the members theories thread, but that will have to wait a while, when I'm not as busy. It's not that I can improve on docG's write up, but it might help if there were 2 people writing from the same perspective.

    Shake off your conviction that PR wrote the note. She didn't. It makes no sense for her to have called 911 when she did if she was in on it. It's that simple. Spending a couple more years analyzing the word "hence" or pondering why the Paughs bought 3 books as gifts, or trying to decide who also ate pineapple with JB is not going to solve the case. Step back, stop examining the bark on a particular tree, and notice that in front of you is a forest.

    The answer is plain as day if you can stop getting lost in the minutiae.

    The RN doesn't jibe with a body in the house. The RN was meant to buy time to dispose of the body. PR would know this if she were in on it. The fact that she called 911 shows us she wasn't in on it. The RN is consistent with stalling for time to get rid of the body. That's the whole case in a nutshell.

    Oh, and BDI is nonsese because in that scenario no one is going to jail, so there is no need for a coverup. BDIs love the theory because it seems to explain PR/JR pulling in team. But the 911 call with the body in the house makes no sense, so we know PR wasn't part of the team.

    We can't say anyone killed JB w/o a conviction. We can say who we think is the strongest suspect. IMO JDI is the strongest case theory.
    Chrishope,
    Oh, and BDI is nonsese because in that scenario no one is going to jail, so there is no need for a coverup. BDIs love the theory because it seems to explain PR/JR pulling in team. But the 911 call with the body in the house makes no sense, so we know PR wasn't part of the team.
    mmm, your ex post explanation is seriously intellectually deficient. We now know the R's were indicted, that does not preclude BDI, it only assumes the GJ knew more or less what we now know.

    The 911 call with the body in the house makes no sense so we can allow any conclusion we wish, is straight out of some logic 101 textbook i.e. from any inconsistency you may derive a truth. Lookup Godel he made constant use of this principle then ended up paranoid unable to eat, in case someone poisoned him, including Albert Einstein a friend.


    PR's forensic evidence is all over the wine-cellar, despite her denial of ever visiting the location 12/24 or 12/25, so your claim that the staging is for PR is plainly inconsistent.

    I rest my case.

  35. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  36. #1395
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,707
    Quote Originally Posted by dodie20 View Post
    Is there an account somewhere of the Ws party? Was anything ever said about the way PR and JR interacted with each other? I've read a few things about the kids at the party, but I'm curious as to what the other guests said about the Rs.
    There has been very little said about that party on the 23rd. We know that LHP was there earlier that day cleaning and helping Patsy prep, and SHE was the one who took the paint tote to the basement at Patsy's request. It had previously been in the Butler's Pantry, and Patsy planned to put a coat rack in there for her guests. What we DON'T know is whether that paint tote as found by police and photographed in situ just outside the wine cellar door is in the SAME spot that LHP put it on the 23rd. Since Patsy's fibers were found in that tray, and since Patsy denied ever wearing the jacket those fibers came from while in the basement or painting, that would be something that I'd like to know. The party on the 23rd also had something happen which caused JB to cry and say that she "didn't feel pretty". And there was a 911 call made which caused police to come to the house but they were turned away. (Is that even legal?- Where I live police MUST enter a house even when the person answering the door says that they were called by mistake).
    As far as the parents' interaction- nothing was said about the 23rd as far as I know, but there WAS plenty said about the 26th after police and others were at the house. It was said that they had virtually no communication between them- that they were in separate rooms. LE has mentioned that this is SO UNLIKE other kidnapping or child injury-type situations. In a REAL kidnapping, the parents would be expected to comfort each other, or at least be in the same ROOM interacting- there would be some communication between them. Not so with the Rs that day.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  37. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  38. #1396
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,971
    Quote Originally Posted by txsvicki View Post
    I don't get why it would be thought that Jonbenet was molested before being hit in the head. The autopsy report says it was just before or actually at death. Even after Kolar's book I still can't get past thinking that Patsy did it all, even the prior trauma due to crazed cleaning of Jonbenet when she soiled or wet. One thing is for sure though, whoever strangled Jonbenet knew there had been prior vaginal trauma. I also think it happened while wearing the pink nightgown and it was going to be hidden with the body while John was out of the house on a wild goose chase.
    This reminds me of something that bothers me. It has been reported that there were signs of 'undoing', which is a sign of remorse. IMO, if someone felt remorse, he would have undone a few other things, like the garotte, tape, etc. So, I accept LE's 'undoing' theory a little cautiously. What it looks like to me, is that once someone realized that cops would see the body, he went and did and undid a few things to make the body more presentable. Not out of remorse, but necessity... just an opinion, and I don't see much evidence to back it up, but I also don't see much evidence of remorse. There have been varying reports of when JR found JB and also some controversy over him being accounted for during the day, so IMO, who did the 'undoing' and when and why he/she did it, is up in the air. IMO, PR committed the murder, and I believe that it was probably her intention to get rid of the body. So, it's possible that the condition she left JB's body in, is not the same condition that LE saw. IMO, this may be where the 'staging within staging', that LE reportedly suspected, came into play. Anyway, I'm not 100% set on the PR theory, and now that we've learned that the grand jury voted to indict JR also, I'm rethinking a few things. He DID 'find' the body, afterall, and if that isn't a red flag, I don't know what is. But like you, I don't see evidence that points to BR, and the idea of parents finishing off one child in order to protect their other child, is insane, IMO. And I don't think either of the Rs was insane. moo.

  39. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to dodie20 For This Useful Post:


  40. #1397
    ScarlettScarpetta's Avatar
    ScarlettScarpetta is offline I stand behind SoSueMe &all the A.D.M.I.N. / Mods working for the good of WS.
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    10,414
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda7NJ View Post
    With all due respect, if you've come to that conclusion you are unfamiliar with the totality of evidence.

    There is not a single shred of real evidence of an intruder. IMO


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    But the thing is that I am not unfamiliar with it. I see it all and still see an intruder. I think some of the evidence is definitely up to interpretation.

    It is your opinion, that there is no intruder, It is my my opinion that it was an intruder. I believe that completely. Not just with blind faith or trust in a report, But reading the facts and interpretations of facts or evidence it still sits with me that there was someone other than the family that committed this crime.

    I've looked at the other side and it just does not sit well with my soul.
    Juror #8: "It's always difficult to keep personal prejudice out of a thing like this. And wherever you run into it, prejudice always obscures the truth. I don't really know what the truth is. I don't suppose anybody will ever really know. Nine of us now seem to feel that the defendant is innocent, but we're just gambling on probabilities - we may be wrong. We may be trying to let a guilty man go free, I don't know. Nobody really can. But we have a reasonable doubt, and that's something that's very valuable in our system. No jury can declare a man guilty unless it's sure." -12 Angry Men 1957

    All my posts are my opinion only.

  41. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to ScarlettScarpetta For This Useful Post:


  42. #1398
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,707
    Quote Originally Posted by dodie20 View Post
    This reminds me of something that bothers me. It has been reported that there were signs of 'undoing', which is a sign of remorse. IMO, if someone felt remorse, he would have undone a few other things, like the garotte, tape, etc. So, I accept LE's 'undoing' theory a little cautiously. What it looks like to me, is that once someone realized that cops would see the body, he went and did and undid a few things to make the body more presentable. Not out of remorse, but necessity... just an opinion, and I don't see much evidence to back it up, but I also don't see much evidence of remorse. There have been varying reports of when JR found JB and also some controversy over him being accounted for during the day, so IMO, who did the 'undoing' and when and why he/she did it, is up in the air. IMO, PR committed the murder, and I believe that it was probably her intention to get rid of the body. So, it's possible that the condition she left JB's body in, is not the same condition that LE saw. IMO, this may be where the 'staging within staging', that LE reportedly suspected, came into play. Anyway, I'm not 100% set on the PR theory, and now that we've learned that the grand jury voted to indict JR also, I'm rethinking a few things. He DID 'find' the body, afterall, and if that isn't a red flag, I don't know what is. But like you, I don't see evidence that points to BR, and the idea of parents finishing off one child in order to protect their other child, is insane, IMO. And I don't think either of the Rs was insane. moo.
    No they wouldn't remove the garrote and tape, etc. Those are the very things that were ADDED to the scene (especially the tape- she was already dead/dying when that was applied). They NEEDED her to appear to have been kidnapped, bound , and strangled. This made the "kidnapping" believable. (so they thought). The head bash was "secret" at this point- there was no evidence of the event that put JB instantly unconscious and possibly comatose. Even the coroner was surprised to see that fracture. This is also another indication that there was no obvious swelling of her head, face, tongue. If there had been, the coroner would be looking for why. As awful as that strangulation looks to us when we see the photos, it has been described as "gentle" in the sense that the force was not as extreme as you would see in other cases of ligature strangulation.
    The Rs could have been "temporarily" insane- it does happen. Never underestimate what adrenaline can do when a person is in a situation of EXTREME fear and stress.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  43. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  44. #1399
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,570
    Quote Originally Posted by dodie20 View Post
    This reminds me of something that bothers me. It has been reported that there were signs of 'undoing', which is a sign of remorse. IMO, if someone felt remorse, he would have undone a few other things, like the garotte, tape, etc. So, I accept LE's 'undoing' theory a little cautiously. What it looks like to me, is that once someone realized that cops would see the body, he went and did and undid a few things to make the body more presentable. Not out of remorse, but necessity... just an opinion, and I don't see much evidence to back it up, but I also don't see much evidence of remorse. There have been varying reports of when JR found JB and also some controversy over him being accounted for during the day, so IMO, who did the 'undoing' and when and why he/she did it, is up in the air. IMO, PR committed the murder, and I believe that it was probably her intention to get rid of the body. So, it's possible that the condition she left JB's body in, is not the same condition that LE saw. IMO, this may be where the 'staging within staging', that LE reportedly suspected, came into play. Anyway, I'm not 100% set on the PR theory, and now that we've learned that the grand jury voted to indict JR also, I'm rethinking a few things. He DID 'find' the body, afterall, and if that isn't a red flag, I don't know what is. But like you, I don't see evidence that points to BR, and the idea of parents finishing off one child in order to protect their other child, is insane, IMO. And I don't think either of the Rs was insane. moo.
    dodie20,
    Is insanity a defense? there is patently staging within staging, which is why it might actually be BDI but amended by JR because he knew signs of sexual assault might lead straight to his front door?

    if you now include Patsy then here the undoing aspect comes into play and you might get the results you noted.


    .

  45. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  46. #1400
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,971
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    There has been very little said about that party on the 23rd. We know that LHP was there earlier that day cleaning and helping Patsy prep, and SHE was the one who took the paint tote to the basement at Patsy's request. It had previously been in the Butler's Pantry, and Patsy planned to put a coat rack in there for her guests. What we DON'T know is whether that paint tote as found by police and photographed in situ just outside the wine cellar door is in the SAME spot that LHP put it on the 23rd. Since Patsy's fibers were found in that tray, and since Patsy denied ever wearing the jacket those fibers came from while in the basement or painting, that would be something that I'd like to know. The party on the 23rd also had something happen which caused JB to cry and say that she "didn't feel pretty". And there was a 911 call made which caused police to come to the house but they were turned away. (Is that even legal?- Where I live police MUST enter a house even when the person answering the door says that they were called by mistake).
    As far as the parents' interaction- nothing was said about the 23rd as far as I know, but there WAS plenty said about the 26th after police and others were at the house. It was said that they had virtually no communication between them- that they were in separate rooms. LE has mentioned that this is SO UNLIKE other kidnapping or child injury-type situations. In a REAL kidnapping, the parents would be expected to comfort each other, or at least be in the same ROOM interacting- there would be some communication between them. Not so with the Rs that day.
    I remember reading from an observer after JB was reported kidnapped, that the Rs had very little interaction, that they seemed angry with each other, and they seemed more like a couple who were divorcing, than the parents of a kidnapped child. I don't remember if the observer was a part of LE or someone else. I was wondering if this lack of interaction started that day, or if someone at F and PW's party, (the night before), noticed it. Were they already at odds with each other or did they act like a happy couple?

  47. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to dodie20 For This Useful Post:


Page 56 of 113 FirstFirst ... 6464748495051525354555657585960616263646566106 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 48
    Last Post: 07-21-2008, 05:01 AM
  2. Ex-Housekeeper Say Patsy Ramsey Killed JonBenet.
    By Ames in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 212
    Last Post: 04-21-2008, 11:56 PM
  3. WHY was JonBenet really killed - Motive?
    By Camper in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 110
    Last Post: 07-21-2006, 11:37 AM
  4. Reasons why I believe a Ramsey killed Jonbenet
    By Keona in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 07-10-2005, 12:48 AM
  5. Crier on JonBenet case today
    By candy in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 01-08-2004, 05:11 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •