What do the profilers say?

According to FBI profiler Gregg McCrary:
For instance, McCrary said evidence at the scene strongly disputes any theory that the killer may have been a disgruntled employee of Ramsey. "This crime was not about getting back at the father," said McCrary, who couldn't recall a case of "someone killing a kid to get back at a parent." He said the sexual assault of JonBenet "was a deviant, psychopathic sexual behavior, not an expression of anger at the father."

If revenge on the father had been a motive, McCrary said, "the killer would have displayed the body; he wouldn't have hidden it in the basement."

The profiler said the body would have been placed in a manner "to shock and offend" John Ramsey if anger or hate or revenge had been the motive.

Additionally, he said that by assaulting JonBenet, killing her, taking her from an upper-floor bedroom to a far corner of the basement and writing a lengthy ransom note - all negated a revenge killing.

"If that had been the reason for a killer being in the house that night," McCrary said, "they would have killed the little girl and gotten out as fast as possible."

http://www.corpus-delicti.com/mccrary_jbr.html

Let's discuss criminal profiling and what the experts have said about the murder of JBR.

Nehemiah , now you're gonna' make me drag out the books that live under my bed with the dust bunnies.
I won't say "much" until I re-read, however, I do believe Douglas felt that it was "the other" who erred when commenting on a case he had not been briefed on. The "heart" felt statement, came after interviews and a degree of investigative coverage. No other profilers had direct "dealings" with this case.

I found this of interest from the article:
"McCrary said the parents should have been interviewed separately, not jointly, for the profiling work to be valid. "That's always the correct way to do this. It's fundamental," McCrary said. "You separate the people, you interview them independently, you lock them into statements and then you compare." To do otherwise virtually invalidates the effort, he said. And he wasn't impressed with Douglas' conclusion that John Ramsey is telling the truth. "I've talked to guilty offenders in the penitentiary, and some of them are so manipulative and persuasive that they almost have you believing they didn't do it," he told me yesterday."

Sissi, get those books out! This is a good excuse to clean. LOL

Same here Sissi...tee hee!

WHERE was Mr Joseph Duncan when this happened????

The FBI's Child Serial Killer Unit that was consulted on this case said, among many things, there was "staging within staging" in this crime and that the perp's actions (including the note) were a desperate attempt to answer the question of "HOW DO I EXPLAIN THIS (death)".

Robert Ressler and Greg McCrary, both emminent and well respected profilers, both have said the FAMILY needs to be looked at very closely. The evidence simply points that way.

K777angel said:

The FBI's Child Serial Killer Unit that was consulted on this case said, among many things, there was "staging within staging" in this crime and that the perp's actions (including the note) were a desperate attempt to answer the question of "HOW DO I EXPLAIN THIS (death)".

Robert Ressler and Greg McCrary, both emminent and well respected profilers, both have said the FAMILY needs to be looked at very closely. The evidence simply points that way.

Click to expand...

"It is highly, highly unusual. I mean, the whole thing is totally bizarre. I've never, in my 35-year career, seen anything like this."

--Robert Ressler, 1997

Holdontoyourhat said:

"It is highly, highly unusual. I mean, the whole thing is totally bizarre. I've never, in my 35-year career, seen anything like this."

--Robert Ressler, 1997

Click to expand...

Next to hand writting expert I think profiler is probably the most worthless, money stealing waste of time. They are not far above and may be below psychics on the crime fighting food chain.

Zman said:

Next to hand writting expert I think profiler is probably the most worthless, money stealing waste of time. They are not far above and may be below psychics on the crime fighting food chain.

Click to expand...

Zman,

What do you think happened that night?

Zman said:

Next to hand writting expert I think profiler is probably the most worthless, money stealing waste of time. They are not far above and may be below psychics on the crime fighting food chain.

Click to expand...

I dont know how you expect this case to be solved with any outside professional help. Must be up to you to work out the RN and profile the killer.

I don't know, do profilers rely heavily on statistics, if so , maybe they can be replaced by computers? Psychics on the other hand, ( I don't believe are psychic) I believe , organize knowledge and experiences better than the rest of us.
The statistics are flawed, when ya' take out the variables, poverty, substance abuse, and mental illness, they are worthless in suggesting parents as perps. The neighborhood was upscale, soooooo the bpd did the same, they dismissed the neighbors. That's where we have found the last round of child killers, right there "on the block". Maybe someone should go back and look!

This is from June 1997 and has some errors. It still mentions the "no footprints in the snow" nonsense. However, I thought the quote from Keppel was interesting.

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0608jon.htm

[...]

Relinquishing the scene

Boulder police simply didn't have the experience to handle the case, says a national expert in homicide investigations.
"It's not unusual for a department to find itself in unprecedented ground,'' Robert Keppel said. "They don't have many murders in Boulder, let alone murders of this consequence.''
Keppel is the lead criminal investigator for the attorney general's office in the state of Washington. He wrote the just-completed national study "Case Management for Missing-Children Homicide Investigations.'' As a former police detective, he spent 15 years on the trail of Ted Bundy.
In cities where there are few homicides, Keppel said, "Not only are detectives inexperienced, but their supervisors are inexperienced. They don't know how to tell people what to do. They don't know how to structure an investigation.''
Tom Wickman, now the lead investigator on the case, has been a detective for only a year, and this is his first murder case. Eller, his boss, has never led a homicide investigation. Neither has Koby, the department's chief.
"If you don't have the experiential background, and if you don't request someone who does have it to come in, you are steps behind the killer,'' Keppel said. "You cannot even expect, from a rational perspective, that they would know some of the proper procedures to utilize.''
For example, the Boulder Police Department was fully prepared to turn the Ramseys' home back over to them the night of Dec. 26, hours after JonBenet's body was wheeled out of the residence, sources say.
It was only after firm orders to the contrary from Hunter's office that police abandoned plans to relinquish the crime scene.
Eight more days of searching, with help from the CBI and the Boulder County Sheriff's Department, would follow before the Ramseys got their house back.
Boulder police can't be faulted for lacking experience in homicide investigations, but observers say they should have conceded that they couldn't cover every base alone.
The News has learned that while the FBI's help was accepted on a limited basis, even that assistance was not entirely welcomed.
Boulder detectives followed the Ramseys in the final days of 1996 to Georgia, where JonBenet was buried, and the FBI had offered to put as many agents on the ground as needed to trace the movements of anyone associated with the Ramseys, who were clearly the detectives' prime suspects.
No thanks, Boulder police said.
"That's a tragedy,'' Keppel said. "If they haven't done a good job of investigating the case, that's a real tragedy.''
[...]

Also, there is a quote from Ressler in which he seems to have changed his stance somewhat on the Ramseys. He allows that the murderer could be someone from their circle of friends, acquaintances, and employees but I can't find it. I posted it sometime last year on Jayelles site.

sissi said:

I don't know, do profilers rely heavily on statistics, if so , maybe they can be replaced by computers? Psychics on the other hand, ( I don't believe are psychic) I believe , organize knowledge and experiences better than the rest of us.
The statistics are flawed, when ya' take out the variables, poverty, substance abuse, and mental illness, they are worthless in suggesting parents as perps. The neighborhood was upscale, soooooo the bpd did the same, they dismissed the neighbors. That's where we have found the last round of child killers, right there "on the block". Maybe someone should go back and look!

Click to expand...

"Profiling is not just a personality assessment of the UNSUB, but includes other types of data. Noting an UNSUB’s age, race, sex, occupation, educational level, social support system, type of employment, and other sociological factors are just as important as evidence of a character disorder. Added to that is the significance of the type of place a killer chooses as a body dump site, such as Ted Bundy’s preference for the heavily wooded mountains outside Seattle. That's where a wholly different type of analysis comes in..." http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/profiling/geographic/2.html?sect=20

"A good psychological profile is an educated attempt to provide parameters about the type of person who committed a certain crime, based on the idea that people tend to be slaves to their psychology and will inevitably leave clues. The kinds of information sought include:

the offender's gender
the MO
any evidence of an organized or disorganized personality
geographic stability vs. transience
evidence of being impulsive or compulsive
the type of "personation" or signature at the scene
the type of fantasy that seems to be involved
evidence of ritual
whether a "trophy" was taken

A profile is most easily developed if the offender displays some evidence of psychopathology, such as sadistic torture, postmortem mutilation, or pedophilia. Some killers leave a “signature”— a behavioral manifestation of a personality quirk, such as staging the corpse for the most humiliating exposure or tying ligatures with a complicated bow. This helps to link crime scenes and alert law enforcement officers to the presence of a serial rapist or killer. If a pattern is detected, it may also help to predict future possible attacks or the most probable encounter sites. According to Douglas, the "signature," or behavior done for emotional satisfaction, is key: "I've found that signature is a more reliable guide to the behavior of serial offenders than an MO. That's because the MO evolves, while the emotional reasoning that triggers the signature doesn't."

http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/profiling/geographic/2.html?sect=20

Nehemiah,

Maybe what is making it difficult for the profilers is that there were a number of people present at JonBenet's murder and involved in the crime scene stageing.

Maybe the actual murderer left the scene immediately.

Maybe the others were just plain ordinary paedophiles who normally did not kill the children they abused and the subsequent hiding of JonBenet's body was done by them.

The first thing a profiler - or any good investigator - is going to do is look at the basic facts of the crime. Forget for the time being this was a "wealthy" family. A "good looking family." Like it or not it can cloud your objectivity. As it did the police in the beginning who treated the Ramseys with kid gloves, neglecting to separate them and interview them that day (police 101!) thereby forever affecting the prosecution of the case.

Ok. BASIC facts of the case:

*Parents claim child was kidnapped for ransom on Christmas night but child was discovered DEAD in the family home. No ransom was ever sought by any kidnapper. Child was never abducted. Child had been beaten and sexually molested. Ransom note is bogus.* (and there are actually people who wonder why the Ramseys were SUSPECTS??)


Now, a few more pertinent facts of the case profilers look carefully at:

1. Parents call 911 the early morning hours the morning after Christmas.

2. Parents claim their 6 yr. old daughter was kidnapped and the kidnapper
left a kidnap note behind.

3. "Ransom" note claims kidnapper(s) will call with instructions.

4. Kidnappers never call.

5. FBI looks at the so-called "ransom" note during this time and are very
suspicious. Red flags are raised with the note for a number of reasons.

6. Hours after police arrive the child claimed to have been kidnapped for
ransom by her parents - is found DEAD in the home.

7. Child is HIDDEN in a small room in the basement.

8. Child is laid on blankets and wrapped in a blanket.

9. Child's favorite nightie is lying nearby.

10. This crime occured on the MOST unlikely night of any during the year
for a crime like this to occur - Christmas night. A night when guests are
not unlikely to be present in a mansion like the Ramsey's.

11. No forced entry point was found.

12. Child was eventually, through autopsy, discovered to have been beaten
and sexually molested.

13. There was obvious staging in the crime. In fact, the FBI said there was
even "staging within staging".

14. Perp would have to have known the maze of a layout of the home to
have done what was done - undetected.

15. Paper and pen used to write the note was discovered to have come
right from within the home itself. The pen was even placed BACK in the
pen cup. There were "practice" pages perp wrote before her/his final
copy.

16. Perp would have to know dog was not in home that night and that the
Ramseys WERE going to be home - even though they were leaving
very early the next morning for a vacation.

17. Mrs. Ramsey greeted the first responding officer that morning dressed
in the same clothes she'd been wearing the night before. Being a
multi-millionaire beauty queen known to be very conscientious about
her appearance - and in her own words - because she was to meet
Melinda's fiance that day - wanted to "make a good impression" - this
fact of wearing the same clothes the night before is highly suspect.
Suspicion that she never went to bed that night.

18. Patsy's claim of time-line that morning does not fit. Time she claims
to have rolled out of bed and done all the things she claims she did
before making the 911 call at 5:52am is not believable.

19. Lies Ramseys eventually got caught in regarding Burke being "awake" or
"asleep" that morning. No need to lie AT ALL if they are all innocent.

20. Police officer's observations of the Ramsey's those crucial hours that
morning from the 911 call till the discovery of the dead body. Police
felt something was hinky. Police noted in their police reports that the
Ramseys acted more as if a "death" had occured than the claimed
kidnapping by them. (Schiller states there IS validity to this....)

This was a familial homicide. The fact that the Ramseys were wealthy and beautiful and well-connected - kept them out of the clinker.
And a little girls brutal death goes unavenged. :furious:

I dont have any real indepth knowledge of the case but I would love to hear what the brother has to say, I know he was young at the time but he maybe remembers something

K777angel said:

The first thing a profiler - or any good investigator - is going to do is look at the basic facts of the crime. Forget for the time being this was a "wealthy" family. A "good looking family." Like it or not it can cloud your objectivity. As it did the police in the beginning who treated the Ramseys with kid gloves, neglecting to separate them and interview them that day (police 101!) thereby forever affecting the prosecution of the case.

Ok. BASIC facts of the case:

*Parents claim child was kidnapped for ransom on Christmas night but child was discovered DEAD in the family home. No ransom was ever sought by any kidnapper. Child was never abducted. Child had been beaten and sexually molested. Ransom note is bogus.* (and there are actually people who wonder why the Ramseys were SUSPECTS??)


Now, a few more pertinent facts of the case profilers look carefully at:

1. Parents call 911 the early morning hours the morning after Christmas.

2. Parents claim their 6 yr. old daughter was kidnapped and the kidnapper
left a kidnap note behind.

3. "Ransom" note claims kidnapper(s) will call with instructions.

4. Kidnappers never call.

5. FBI looks at the so-called "ransom" note during this time and are very
suspicious. Red flags are raised with the note for a number of reasons.

6. Hours after police arrive the child claimed to have been kidnapped for
ransom by her parents - is found DEAD in the home.

7. Child is HIDDEN in a small room in the basement.

8. Child is laid on blankets and wrapped in a blanket.

9. Child's favorite nightie is lying nearby.

10. This crime occured on the MOST unlikely night of any during the year
for a crime like this to occur - Christmas night. A night when guests are
not unlikely to be present in a mansion like the Ramsey's.

11. No forced entry point was found.

12. Child was eventually, through autopsy, discovered to have been beaten
and sexually molested.

13. There was obvious staging in the crime. In fact, the FBI said there was
even "staging within staging".

14. Perp would have to have known the maze of a layout of the home to
have done what was done - undetected.

15. Paper and pen used to write the note was discovered to have come
right from within the home itself. The pen was even placed BACK in the
pen cup. There were "practice" pages perp wrote before her/his final
copy.

16. Perp would have to know dog was not in home that night and that the
Ramseys WERE going to be home - even though they were leaving
very early the next morning for a vacation.

17. Mrs. Ramsey greeted the first responding officer that morning dressed
in the same clothes she'd been wearing the night before. Being a
multi-millionaire beauty queen known to be very conscientious about
her appearance - and in her own words - because she was to meet
Melinda's fiance that day - wanted to "make a good impression" - this
fact of wearing the same clothes the night before is highly suspect.
Suspicion that she never went to bed that night.

18. Patsy's claim of time-line that morning does not fit. Time she claims
to have rolled out of bed and done all the things she claims she did
before making the 911 call at 5:52am is not believable.

19. Lies Ramseys eventually got caught in regarding Burke being "awake" or
"asleep" that morning. No need to lie AT ALL if they are all innocent.

20. Police officer's observations of the Ramsey's those crucial hours that
morning from the 911 call till the discovery of the dead body. Police
felt something was hinky. Police noted in their police reports that the
Ramseys acted more as if a "death" had occured than the claimed
kidnapping by them. (Schiller states there IS validity to this....)

This was a familial homicide. The fact that the Ramseys were wealthy and beautiful and well-connected - kept them out of the clinker.
And a little girls brutal death goes unavenged. :furious:

Click to expand...

I want to add another point about the night this crime occured.
Of ANY night of the year, Christmas night is the ONE night that family and friends will KNOW where a loved one is for the day/night.
It's the one night that people are very aware and concious of where those close to them are and what they are doing that day/night. Church, family gatherings, opening gifts, Christmas dinner etc.
This cannot be overlooked.
It is just another point that makes the "intruder" theory ridiculous.

Excellent post Angel....the fact that this murder occured Christmas night makes it extremely hard for me to believe that an intruder broke in and killed JonBenet. Christmas is a day where families gather from out-of-town and spend the night.

John's flashlight was used to hit JonBenet over the head with.

The cord came from the home.

The tape came from something in the home.

The pineapple was eaten by JonBenet.

The notepad and pen came from the home.

No doubt in my mind the killer was a Ramsey.

JUST MY OPINION

Toltec said:

Excellent post Angel....the fact that this murder occured Christmas night makes it extremely hard for me to believe that an intruder broke in and killed JonBenet. Christmas is a day where families gather from out-of-town and spend the night.

John's flashlight was used to hit JonBenet over the head with.

The cord came from the home.

The tape came from something in the home.

The pineapple was eaten by JonBenet.

The notepad and pen came from the home.

No doubt in my mind the killer was a Ramsey.

JUST MY OPINION

Click to expand...

The main problem with RDI is that it completely defies logic. I mean, a family member is simply not going to leave three pages of handwriting at a capital murder scene. Period.