1144 users online (267 members and 877 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 108
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    537

    Christmas Day Significance

    Although technically JBR was probably killed in the early morning hours of 12-26, for all intents and purposes she was killed on Christmas night. Is this fact significant to understanding the motivations for her murder? I mean, she could have been killed any time during the year, but when is she killed? Christmas night. I cannot help but feel that there is importance to this. Does anyone else here feel the same way?

    If you do think it is significant, then please state why you think it is significant.

    I have my own thoughts on to why the day she was killed was significant but I am going to hold them for now until I hear what others here say about it.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    People do have different theories on that. Some feel the choice of Christmas Day made it seem even more horrible- that a child was murdered on the day of the year that is most special for children. Some feel it was because she may have died just before midnight, so it actually WAS the 25th. This indicates parents who KNEW when she died, because they "found" her on the 26th, but wanted to but the correct date of her death on the grave stone.
    And I believe there is a comment out there somewhere by JR where he was asked about this very thing and said that they chose to put that date on the stone so people could see "what was done to our daughter on Christmas Day".
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    8,769
    Anyhoo: Are you talking about the Dec.25/26 debate or about why she was killed near Christmas, and not say, in October?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    Quote Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye View Post
    Anyhoo: Are you talking about the Dec.25/26 debate or about why she was killed near Christmas, and not say, in October?
    I hadn't considered that, but I think that is probably what anyhoo meant. I don't think there was any special significance because that would mean it was PLANNED in advance and I do not believe it was.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by eileenhawkeye View Post
    Anyhoo: Are you talking about the Dec.25/26 debate or about why she was killed near Christmas, and not say, in October?
    I am talking about the latter.

    Is it just a coincidence that JBR is not just murdered but brutally murdered on Christmas day (or very close to it).

    To me, if the day is significant then it implies a ritualistic component to the murder, and I have always gotten that sense about it. Whoever killed JBR, it is not coincidence of 'when' they did it. This does not necessarily mean her murder was planned in advance. It could mean that "something else" was planned in advance and that something else got out of control, resulting in the death of JBR. In either case, when it took place would be significant.

    Another way of looking at it is this: If the R's were going to do something like this to their daughter, Christmas day, after they had been to a party and the night before they were supposed to go on a long vacation in the morning would probably be one of the least likely times for them to do it unless there was some significance to the day to them, such that it had to be done on that day, around that time.
    Last edited by Anyhoo; 10-27-2012 at 10:11 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Mid-North Coast, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    105
    Quote Originally Posted by Anyhoo View Post
    I am talking about the latter.

    Is it just a coincidence that JBR is not just murdered but brutally murdered on Christmas day (or very close to it).

    To me, if the day is significant then it implies a ritualistic component to the murder, and I have always gotten that sense about it. Whoever killed JBR, it is not coincidence of 'when' they did it. This does not necessarily mean her murder was planned in advance. It could mean that "something else" was planned in advance and that something else got out of control, resulting in the death of JBR. In either case, when it took place would be significant.

    Another way of looking at it is this: If the R's were going to do something like this to their daughter, Christmas day, after they had been to a party and the night before they were supposed to go on a long vacation in the morning would probably be one of the least likely times for them to do it unless there was some significance to the day to them, such that it had to be done on that day, around that time.
    I think the fact she was killed so near (or on) Christmas Day is due to the fact that holidays are an emotionally charged, stressful time for most families, even when not faced with the specific dysfunctional issues displayed by the Ramsey’s. Let us specifically think of what we know about PR and that particular time:
    1) Her obsession with things being or appearing "perfect" (her dress & demeanour, her kids, her lifestyle, etc..
    2) Her fascination with Christmas in general (i.e. the fact she had the house open & overly decorated on a holiday tour circuit).
    3) The emotions and aftermath of having to deal with her battle with cancer & mortality.
    4) The realisation that something was extremely wrong in her family dynamic (e.g. JB being abused by someone).
    5) Overwhelmed by preparation for yet more family travel.
    6) The typical stress that comes with holiday preparations.

    So many factors, and it goes without saying that there might have been other stressors in play AND it didn't have to be Patsy who "snapped" during that emotionally charged, high pressure time of the year. I just used her as she was is the most obvious example of a “Ramsey on edge”. JR and BR would have been reacting to those factors as well, on varying levels, plus dealing with their own issues of which we may or may not be aware. Any of the three Rs in the home that fateful night could have been the initial perpetrator of the murder and/or of the prior sexual abuse. Furthermore, at least two of them are/were actively involved in staging, cover-up and the deliberate obfuscation of the facts in this crime—but no evidence points to a ritualistic (as either a religious or psychologically comforting/compelled) element.

    Trying to pin this up to ritualistic crime is, IMO, fanciful speculation. It wasn't a "Satanic intruder" nor a family member with psychologically-compelled ritualistic habits, it wasn't a random paedophile gang, it wasn't disgruntled former Access Graphics employees trying to pin a crime on such an "upstanding Christian family" (sarcasm intended), it wasn’t a mad, scheming Ramsey awaiting just that date & time to do in JBR for some esoteric reason. Nope-- all available evidence points to a sick, out of control family situation that finally exploded, and a cover-up by Ramsey’s who wanted signs to point at the bogeyman of an outsider/outsiders, but who weren't smart enough or sophisticated enough to make up a plausible scenario.

    (Then again, the Ramsey family got away with their crime, but I chalk that up to dumb luck. societal bias and sloppy DA office machinations rather than any sort of masterful criminal manipulations. I'm sure they were every bit as stunned as most of us are they managed to pull it off.)

    To summarise, I think things likely just reached a breaking point sometime late Christmas Day night. No premeditation, no non-Ramsey outsiders, no pre-designed plots. Frankly, JBRs murder is horrific and pathetic enough without trying to cobble together a ritualistic angle to the crime.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    537
    It has been pointed out in another place that if we accept that only the four members of the R family were in the house that night, that one or more of them must have been involved in the murder of JB. This is purely logical.

    But do we know for a fact that only the four R's were in the house that night? When I ask that question, I want to exclude the possibility of strangers/intruders sneaking in and doing this with the R's unaware. I do want to include in this question one or more other people (not strangers/intruders) who may have been there, besides the R's, that the R's knew about.

    If we answer 'Yes' to this question, then it is undeniable to me that one or more R's killed JB.

    If we answer 'No' to that question, then it means that someone else in the house, that the R's know about, killed JB.

    Those are the only two possibilities, the way I see it.

    When we attempt to answer this important question, we must ignore what the R's tell us because everything they said (and others also) may be nothing more than a cover story to support a false version of events. Unless something can be proven by evidence other than spoken testimony (which may be a lie) it is not evidence. There is no doubt to me that the R's are lying and being deceptive but why are they? Many people assume it is because they are guilty or murdering their daughter but that does not neccessarily follow. They could be lying to cover up another scenario of someone else murdering their daughter, which they know about. Someone else murdering their daughter in their home.
    Last edited by Anyhoo; 10-28-2012 at 09:39 AM.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Anyhoo View Post
    It has been pointed out in another place that if we accept that only the four members of the R family were in the house that night, that one or more of them must have been involved in the murder of JB. This is purely logical.

    But do we know for a fact that only the four R's were in the house that night? When I ask that question, I want to exclude the possibility of strangers/intruders sneaking in and doing this with the R's unaware. I do want to include in this question one or more other people (not strangers/intruders) who may have been there, besides the R's, that the R's knew about.

    If we answer 'Yes' to this question, then it is undeniable to me that one or more R's killed JB.

    If we answer 'No' to that question, then it means that someone else in the house, that the R's know about, killed JB.

    Those are the only two possibilities, the way I see it.

    When we attempt to answer this important question, we must ignore what the R's tell us because everything they said (and others also) may be nothing more than a cover story to support a false version of events. Unless something can be proven by evidence other than spoken testimony (which may be a lie) it is not evidence. There is no doubt to me that the R's are lying and being deceptive but why are they? Many people assume it is because they are guilty or murdering their daughter but that does not neccessarily follow. They could be lying to cover up another scenario of someone else murdering their daughter, which they know about. Someone else murdering their daughter in their home.
    I am not excluding the possibility that someone else was called over that night,maybe dr.Beuf,maybe someone else like Bynum or another family friend?Who knows,a lot of people acted strange after this happened,take FW for example,he knows/suspects something too but maybe not enough or maybe he can't tell,who knows why.(BDI and he wants to protect him even if he disagrees with the R's actions?)
    I asked this before but never got an answer...do we know whether they ever took a DNA sample from dr.Beuf??I would really like to know that,cause if it was just an accident maybe they DID call someone close over but it was too late and then they convinced that person to shut up.
    The rice is already cooked...

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by madeleine View Post
    I am not excluding the possibility that someone else was called over that night,maybe dr.Beuf,maybe someone else like Bynum or another family friend?Who knows,a lot of people acted strange after this happened,take FW for example,he knows/suspects something too but maybe not enough or maybe he can't tell,who knows why.(BDI and he wants to protect him even if he disagrees with the R's actions?)
    I asked this before but never got an answer...do we know whether they ever took a DNA sample from dr.Beuf??I would really like to know that,cause if it was just an accident maybe they DID call someone close over but it was too late and then they convinced that person to shut up.
    I don't know who this Dr. beuf is that you reference.

    Without being able to prove anything, I do (strongly) suspect that more people were involved in this than we know. In other words, people outside of the immediate R family but close to them.

    I raised this point in a pm to someone here, but it is relevant to this question. This concerns the (supposed) stops the R's made on the way back to their house from the White house after the Christmas party. If you will go back, as I did, and read that testimony carefully, from all parties who were involved in it (both the R's and the people at the houses they say they stopped at) you will find key contradictory facts in what is said by the various parties. It is almost as if they have been told that this is the story to be presented but they were not all clear on the details, and so when telling their story, they contradict each other in very telling ways. Why is this important? Because it throws into question the true sequence of events before the R's ever got back to their house on the night of 12-25. It suggests that something happened even before the R's got back to their house that may play a very important part to understanding this mystery.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,871
    Quote Originally Posted by Anyhoo View Post
    It has been pointed out in another place that if we accept that only the four members of the R family were in the house that night, that one or more of them must have been involved in the murder of JB. This is purely logical.

    But do we know for a fact that only the four R's were in the house that night? When I ask that question, I want to exclude the possibility of strangers/intruders sneaking in and doing this with the R's unaware. I do want to include in this question one or more other people (not strangers/intruders) who may have been there, besides the R's, that the R's knew about.

    If we answer 'Yes' to this question, then it is undeniable to me that one or more R's killed JB.

    If we answer 'No' to that question, then it means that someone else in the house, that the R's know about, killed JB.

    Those are the only two possibilities, the way I see it.

    When we attempt to answer this important question, we must ignore what the R's tell us because everything they said (and others also) may be nothing more than a cover story to support a false version of events. Unless something can be proven by evidence other than spoken testimony (which may be a lie) it is not evidence. There is no doubt to me that the R's are lying and being deceptive but why are they? Many people assume it is because they are guilty or murdering their daughter but that does not neccessarily follow. They could be lying to cover up another scenario of someone else murdering their daughter, which they know about. Someone else murdering their daughter in their home.
    Anyhoo,
    There is no forensic evidence to suggest anyone other than the R's were in the house that night.

    Yet that does not exclude the possibility that a family friend returned with them, from one of the house visits on the way home from the White's.

    This might explain why the flashlight was wiped clean precisely because this person used the flashlight.

    The significance of JonBenet's death on Christmas Day, does actually sugggest it might have been premeditated.

    Unless the head bash is staging then it appears premeditated, since it comes after a sexual assault and not before.

    So in theory someone could have decided in a deliberative manner that Christmas Day being part of the vacation season might be a good time to abuse JonBenet. This same person may have in the past thought similarly about the weekend?


    .


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    Anyhoo,
    There is no forensic evidence to suggest anyone other than the R's were in the house that night.

    Yet that does not exclude the possibility that a family friend returned with them, from one of the house visits on the way home from the White's.

    This might explain why the flashlight was wiped clean precisely because this person used the flashlight.

    The significance of JonBenet's death on Christmas Day, does actually sugggest it might have been premeditated.

    Unless the head bash is staging then it appears premeditated, since it comes after a sexual assault and not before.

    So in theory someone could have decided in a deliberative manner that Christmas Day being part of the vacation season might be a good time to abuse JonBenet. This same person may have in the past thought similarly about the weekend?


    .
    I like what you said about the flashlight being wiped clean to conceal the fingerprints of another person (outside the R's) handling it. Notice that they did not wipe down everything, such as the mystery pineapple bowl and the tea glass that have fingerprints of R family members on them, but other things, such as the flashlight, are wiped down. That would suggest that it is very important that the identity of this person (or persons) be concealed so nothing points back to him in connection to the death. I sense that the R's are, for some reason, covering for this person/persons. It is more important to the R's to take the heat for their daughters death themselves than to risk the other person/persons being identified.

    Another related thing is the batteries inside the flashlight being wiped down. Now think about what that means. If one of the R. family members had put the batteries in, there would be no need to wipe down the batteries. The batteries could have been put in at any earlier time by a R member and it would not mean anything. BUT if fingerprints of a non-R were found on the batteries, then it is very significant. This tells me that someone (not a R) put new batteries in that flashlight on the night of 12-25 and they wiped the batteries clean to hide that fact. Now, why do you need a flashlight? To get around in the dark. Why do you need to get around in the dark if the lights are working, even in the basement? You need to use the flashlight to conceal your presence in the basement, without turning on the lights.

    Concerning the above paragraph, it could mean that the R's, being very devious and wanting to give the impression of an intruder, wiped down both the flashlight and the batteries just to leave a false clue. But there would be no need to wipe down the batteries and I just don't think this is what happened.
    Last edited by Anyhoo; 10-28-2012 at 12:50 PM.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,871
    Quote Originally Posted by Anyhoo View Post
    I like what you said about the flashlight being wiped clean to conceal the fingerprints of another person (outside the R's) handling it. Notice that they did not wipe down everything, such as the mystery pineapple bowl and the tea glass that have fingerprints of R family members on them, but other things, such as the flashlight, are wiped down. That would suggest that it is very important that the identity of this person (or persons) be concealed so nothing points back to him in connection to the death. I sense that the R's are, for some reason, covering for this person/persons. It is more important to the R's to take the heat for their daughters death themselves than to risk the other person/persons being identified.

    Another related thing is the batteries inside the flashlight being wiped down. Now think about what that means. If one of the R. family members had put the batteries in, there would be no need to wipe down the batteries. The batteries could have been put in at any earlier time by a R member and it would not mean anything. BUT if fingerprints of a non-R were found on the batteries, then it is very significant. This tells me that someone (not a R) put new batteries in that flashlight on the night of 12-25 and they wiped the batteries clean to hide that fact. Now, why do you need a flashlight? To get around in the dark. Why do you need to get around in the dark if the lights are working, even in the basement? You need to use the flashlight to conceal your presence in the basement, without turning on the lights.
    Anyhoo,
    Notice that they did not wipe down everything, such as the mystery pineapple bowl and the tea glass that have fingerprints of R family members on them, but other things, such as the flashlight, are wiped down.
    Yes, and this must tell you something about the parents knowledge, its not enough to say they forgot or were panicked, since plainly, no such process was applied to the flashlight.

    I sense that the R's are, for some reason, covering for this person/persons. It is more important to the R's to take the heat for their daughters death themselves than to risk the other person/persons being identified.
    Could be, then again there might another explanation for the flashlight, e.g. John took it from the wine-cellar and placed it in the kitchen, he used it in the basement to avoid turning on lights?

    The flashlight may have been cleaned not because it contained fingerprints but other forensic traces i.e. hair, skin etc.


    .

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    Could be, then again there might another explanation for the flashlight, e.g. John took it from the wine-cellar and placed it in the kitchen, he used it in the basement to avoid turning on lights?

    The flashlight may have been cleaned not because it contained fingerprints but other forensic traces i.e. hair, skin etc.
    .
    Ah, but if they were going to go to the trouble of wiping down the flashlight and the batteries inside, then why leave it out in a conspicuous place where it would be sure to be noticed by LE? Why not just put the flashlight back up to where it normally was if you were going to go to all that trouble? It suggests that flashlight was left where it was on purpose so that it would be found and evoke questions in the minds of LE.

    Another possibility is that the flashlight (and batteries) were not wiped down after the crime, but were wiped down before. In other words, someone, knowing they were about to commit a crime, wore gloves and wiped down all evidence of everything they touched before, not after.

    Why would JR or anyone else use a flashlight in the basement to avoid turning on the lights unless they were afraid that someone would see the lights and they wanted to remain hidden/secret/unknown? Turning on the lights to do anything in the basement would be a natural. To not turn them on is significant.

    Is there any evidence at all that the flashlight is what caused the head bash to JB? I hear people keep talking about that, but I do not see any proof of that. For all we know, the murder weapon was removed from the house, along with the rest of the black duct tape and whatever else is unaccounted for.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    8,871
    Quote Originally Posted by Anyhoo View Post
    Ah, but if they were going to go to the trouble of wiping down the flashlight and the batteries inside, then why leave it out in a conspicuous place where it would be sure to be noticed by LE? Why not just put the flashlight back up to where it normally was if you were going to go to all that trouble? It suggests that flashlight was left where it was on purpose so that it would be found and evoke questions in the minds of LE.

    Another possibility is that the flashlight (and batteries) were not wiped down after the crime, but were wiped down before. In other words, someone, knowing they were about to commit a crime, wore gloves and wiped down all evidence of everything they touched before, not after.

    Why would JR or anyone else use a flashlight in the basement to avoid turning on the lights unless they were afraid that someone would see the lights and they wanted to remain hidden/secret/unknown? Turning on the lights to do anything in the basement would be a natural. To not turn them on is significant.

    Is there any evidence at all that the flashlight is what caused the head bash to JB? I hear people keep talking about that, but I do not see any proof of that. For all we know, the murder weapon was removed from the house, along with the rest of the black duct tape and whatever else is unaccounted for.
    Anyhoo,
    Ah, but if they were going to go to the trouble of wiping down the flashlight and the batteries inside, then why leave it out in a conspicuous place where it would be sure to be noticed by LE? Why not just put the flashlight back up to where it normally was if you were going to go to all that trouble? It suggests that flashlight was left where it was on purpose so that it would be found and evoke questions in the minds of LE.
    Absolutely not. Otherwise it would have been left, as other similar stuff was, in the wine-cellar!

    Another possibility is that the flashlight (and batteries) were not wiped down after the crime, but were wiped down before. In other words, someone, knowing they were about to commit a crime, wore gloves and wiped down all evidence of everything they touched before, not after.
    Why bother? Your going to wear gloves.

    Why would JR or anyone else use a flashlight in the basement to avoid turning on the lights unless they were afraid that someone would see the lights and they wanted to remain hidden/secret/unknown? Turning on the lights to do anything in the basement would be a natural. To not turn them on is significant.
    The flashlight might be the object that caused the head bash, but also it was never used as a flashlight.

    Is there any evidence at all that the flashlight is what caused the head bash to JB? I hear people keep talking about that, but I do not see any proof of that. For all we know, the murder weapon was removed from the house, along with the rest of the black duct tape and whatever else is unaccounted for.
    No evidence, maybe it was all wiped away?


    Whatever its function it seems likely the flashlight was employed in the death of JonBenet.


    .

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Posts
    537
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    Anyhoo,
    Absolutely not. Otherwise it would have been left, as other similar stuff was, in the wine-cellar!
    You miss my point. The flashlight, although not in the wine cellar, was left out in a conspicuous place and was not where it was normally kept. This is the reason it became a focus of LE. It was left out in a strange place and yet wiped clean.

    The flashlight might be the object that caused the head bash, but also it was never used as a flashlight.
    Why do you say it was never used as a flashlight?

    No evidence, maybe it was all wiped away?
    Are you making the assumption that the flashlight was used to bash JB's skull in? What is your reasoning?

    Whatever its function it seems likely the flashlight was employed in the death of JonBenet.
    To me the flashlight was used by someone (one or more people) to find their way around in the dark basement without turning on the lights. But I don't think there is any evidence that the flashlight was used beyond this in the death of JB. If there is, then please state it.

Page 1 of 8 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. The Significance of 'BABYLON'
    By Seaslug44 in forum Long Island Serial Killer
    Replies: 39
    Last Post: 11-28-2016, 06:19 PM
  2. Significance of June 15?
    By mom_of_five in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-04-2008, 12:38 PM