913 users online (167 members and 746 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 150
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    251

    The Perfect Intruder?

    In examining the idea of the IDI theory, and in light of the recent debacle in Boulder, I feel one is forced to assume if it was an "unknown intruder" who did it...they were absolutely perfect.

    It would appear to be clear the DNA in the panties does seem like a red herring, and most likely has no connection to the killer. If the DNA under the nails ever had a use...it appears to be useless now.
    So, this intruder left no DNA, left no prints, and it would also seem left no fibers on Jonbenet's body or the clothes on her.
    He doesn't appear to have left any footprints either, it would seem.

    It also would appear likely this intruder brought no items or tools of his own...it would seem only items in the house were used by him. This is an assumption, to note...but it feels like a likely one.

    As for how he got into the house...I have to come to feel no one came in through the basement window nor did anyone escape through it.
    I found this link very helpful:
    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.php?t=4764

    I do not believe he could have entered through the butler's door either...as I believe when the police first came an officer tried all of the doors outside of the house and found them locked...therefore, the butler's door was most likely left ajar on the 26th.
    Which means of course...either this intruder walked through walls, or was let into and out of the house. Or...had his own key.

    This intruder would certainly be perfect...and such an intruder plainly will never be caught unless he comes forward, confesses, and presents evidence of his own to prove he truly was the perp. Unless he himself presents evidence...there would be no evidence to use against him.

    The snafu in this perfect intruder is that such a perp would not leave his handwriting behind at the crime scene, considering no other trace of himself was left. It doesn't fit.

    The idea of this intruder stretches the imagination...and this is without taking into account the other details of the case.
    While it is possible of course there was such an intruder who was perfect in his ways, I would not know how he got into the house...or why he left his handwriting behind, much less make sense out of the other details of the case.

    On a side note...I seem to remember there being a story that happened in 1997 in Boulder where someone got into a home and sexually assaulted a little girl in her bedroom, and was never caught.
    I remember Lin Wood mentioning it a few days ago on TV, and I have heard of it before...but I can't find info about it now.
    Does anyone know what case that was?

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    1,253
    > On a side note...I seem to remember there being a story that happened in 1997 in Boulder where someone got into a home and sexually assaulted a little girl in her bedroom, and was never caught.
    I remember Lin Wood mentioning it a few days ago on TV, and I have heard of it before...but I can't find info about it now.
    Does anyone know what case that was?

    Are you saying the idea of an intruder only "stretches the imagination" if the victim is killed?
    Please assume anything in my posts that is uncredited is my opinion.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Posts
    27
    I seem to remember there being a story that happened in 1997 in Boulder where someone got into a home and sexually assaulted a little girl in her bedroom, and was never caught.
    I remember Lin Wood mentioning it a few days ago on TV, and I have heard of it before...but I can't find info about it now.
    Does anyone know what case that was?
    It was a girl who had taken dance at the same place JonBenet practiced her pageant routines. The father was away on business and the mother and daughter went to the movies. When they returned home the man sexually assaulted the daughter in her bedroom. Lin Wood ties that case in to JonBenet because it points the finger away from the Ramseys.

    Not that I believe the Ramsey's did it necessarily. I just think it's smart of Wood to keep bringing up that case as a way to say there's a molester/killer still on the loose. I believe that man was caught, but someone else here probably knows for sure and will hopefully provide links.

    My own fascination with this case is that it's the perfect murder. No clear evidence points either way, you have a rich man who can buy protection, stupid, incompetent detectives and police officers, and weird evidence such as the ransom note.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by guppy
    > On a side note...I seem to remember there being a story that happened in 1997 in Boulder where someone got into a home and sexually assaulted a little girl in her bedroom, and was never caught.
    I remember Lin Wood mentioning it a few days ago on TV, and I have heard of it before...but I can't find info about it now.
    Does anyone know what case that was?

    Are you saying the idea of an intruder only "stretches the imagination" if the victim is killed?
    What I'm saying is that the intruder, if there was one, in the Jonbenet case would have to be perfect.
    He left no trace of himself...and it's a mystery how he even got into the house. On top of it the crime was not a smash and grab assault, or kidnapping.

    In comparison to the case I asked for info about...I don't know anything about it.
    However, from the sound of it it appeared to be a break in, assault, get away bit.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    251
    Quote Originally Posted by LoneDuck
    It was a girl who had taken dance at the same place JonBenet practiced her pageant routines. The father was away on business and the mother and daughter went to the movies. When they returned home the man sexually assaulted the daughter in her bedroom. Lin Wood ties that case in to JonBenet because it points the finger away from the Ramseys.

    Not that I believe the Ramsey's did it necessarily. I just think it's smart of Wood to keep bringing up that case as a way to say there's a molester/killer still on the loose. I believe that man was caught, but someone else here probably knows for sure and will hopefully provide links.

    My own fascination with this case is that it's the perfect murder. No clear evidence points either way, you have a rich man who can buy protection, stupid, incompetent detectives and police officers, and weird evidence such as the ransom note.
    Hmm...ahh yes, I remember those parts of the case. I haven't been able to find articles or similar info about it though...as I am curious about its details compared to the JonBenet case...if it was another perfect sort of crime...or not so.

    Will have to wait for others with more info.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    214
    Quote Originally Posted by SleuthingSleuth
    In examining the idea of the IDI theory, and in light of the recent debacle in Boulder, I feel one is forced to assume if it was an "unknown intruder" who did it...they were absolutely perfect.

    It would appear to be clear the DNA in the panties does seem like a red herring, and most likely has no connection to the killer. If the DNA under the nails ever had a use...it appears to be useless now.
    So, this intruder left no DNA, left no prints, and it would also seem left no fibers on Jonbenet's body or the clothes on her.
    He doesn't appear to have left any footprints either, it would seem.

    It also would appear likely this intruder brought no items or tools of his own...it would seem only items in the house were used by him. This is an assumption, to note...but it feels like a likely one.

    As for how he got into the house...I have to come to feel no one came in through the basement window nor did anyone escape through it.
    I found this link very helpful:
    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.php?t=4764

    I do not believe he could have entered through the butler's door either...as I believe when the police first came an officer tried all of the doors outside of the house and found them locked...therefore, the butler's door was most likely left ajar on the 26th.
    Which means of course...either this intruder walked through walls, or was let into and out of the house. Or...had his own key.

    This intruder would certainly be perfect...and such an intruder plainly will never be caught unless he comes forward, confesses, and presents evidence of his own to prove he truly was the perp. Unless he himself presents evidence...there would be no evidence to use against him.

    The snafu in this perfect intruder is that such a perp would not leave his handwriting behind at the crime scene, considering no other trace of himself was left. It doesn't fit.

    The idea of this intruder stretches the imagination...and this is without taking into account the other details of the case.
    While it is possible of course there was such an intruder who was perfect in his ways, I would not know how he got into the house...or why he left his handwriting behind, much less make sense out of the other details of the case.

    On a side note...I seem to remember there being a story that happened in 1997 in Boulder where someone got into a home and sexually assaulted a little girl in her bedroom, and was never caught.
    I remember Lin Wood mentioning it a few days ago on TV, and I have heard of it before...but I can't find info about it now.
    Does anyone know what case that was?
    Karr talks at length about children being drawn to him. He mentions one child of 7 he had assaulted who did not turn him in when the police interviewed her.

    Karr also details in the 420 pages of emails how he got in, what he did and how JBR died. He mentions bringing his own flashlight, which was the only light he used and which was the murder weapon. He had black tape wrapped around it and used one piece of it to put on her mouth after she was dead. He later smashed the flashlight in his grief over killing her. He claims the pen he wrote the note with was his. He claims he took his shoes off almost the whole time he was in the house so as not to leave footprints. He also brought some rope or cord and other accessories which he used for the attack, and took them with him when he left, as well as part of the paintbrush, some hair which he cut off with a knife he brought (he calls it a stiletto), and the panties he took off her. He put them in an ornate box which he buried somewhere.

    Insane tale of a madman, taken from press accounts, or his own memories? I can't even tell. But if you read all the emails, he is a very troubled man who wanted to confess to someone; had been burned when the last person he trusted (Wendy Hutchens) was a police informant; had to flee his country and had been living overseas when he was put in touch with Michael Tracey, whom he somehow felt or hoped he could trust. Over and over he mentions how hard it is not to be able to talk about it. He wanted to talk to John and Patsy Ramsey and apologize and explain...and Michael pretended he was passing on his notes to them. This is a desperate man. It's very hard to imagine that the entire thing was a joke, a prank, or made up in his mind. After all, some people did hire him to teach children. He was not a drooling, raving lunatic. He appeared to be a personable, intelligent man, but underneath he was a cold, calculating pedophile. Killer or not? The dna says no, but what about the handwriting? What about his detailed confession? I don't think it should ALL be discarded like garbage.

    In the emails he talks at length about how and why and where he wrote the ransom note. It was always meant to be a red herring and give him time to escape with the child. He didn't at first intend to kill her. Anyway...read the documents...and see if any of it seems believable to you.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    24,159

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by aspidistra
    Karr talks at length about children being drawn to him. He mentions one child of 7 he had assaulted who did not turn him in when the police interviewed her.

    Karr also details in the 420 pages of emails how he got in, what he did and how JBR died. He mentions bringing his own flashlight, which was the only light he used and which was the murder weapon. He had black tape wrapped around it and used one piece of it to put on her mouth after she was dead. He later smashed the flashlight in his grief over killing her. He claims the pen he wrote the note with was his. He claims he took his shoes off almost the whole time he was in the house so as not to leave footprints. He also brought some rope or cord and other accessories which he used for the attack, and took them with him when he left, as well as part of the paintbrush, some hair which he cut off with a knife he brought (he calls it a stiletto), and the panties he took off her. He put them in an ornate box which he buried somewhere.

    Insane tale of a madman, taken from press accounts, or his own memories? I can't even tell. But if you read all the emails, he is a very troubled man who wanted to confess to someone; had been burned when the last person he trusted (Wendy Hutchens) was a police informant; had to flee his country and had been living overseas when he was put in touch with Michael Tracey, whom he somehow felt or hoped he could trust. Over and over he mentions how hard it is not to be able to talk about it. He wanted to talk to John and Patsy Ramsey and apologize and explain...and Michael pretended he was passing on his notes to them. This is a desperate man. It's very hard to imagine that the entire thing was a joke, a prank, or made up in his mind. After all, some people did hire him to teach children. He was not a drooling, raving lunatic. He appeared to be a personable, intelligent man, but underneath he was a cold, calculating pedophile. Killer or not? The dna says no, but what about the handwriting? What about his detailed confession? I don't think it should ALL be discarded like garbage.

    In the emails he talks at length about how and why and where he wrote the ransom note. It was always meant to be a red herring and give him time to escape with the child. He didn't at first intend to kill her. Anyway...read the documents...and see if any of it seems believable to you.
    I did read it all, and it's not believeable at all to me, it is the ravings of a madman looking for attention now. He makes up answers to fit the theories as Tracey poses him questions, like why the blanket? and his answers are not credible. For example I ask you- if you were the perp and not a Ramsey, would you be stupid enough to write the Ransom note in their bedroom as he claims???
    He wants so badly to be known as JB's lover and/or identify with a women (possibly Patsy- whom he calls Patricia) that he learns to copy her handwriting. He hadn't even seen the movies Speed and Ransom- from which phrases in the note were lifted from- he said those movies weren't his style- that was him telling the truth!
    So what if he was charming enough to manage to get hired?
    This is the year to locate Mark Dribin http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...ht=Mark+Dribin NamUs MP#876 and Ilene Misheloff http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...lene+Misheloff NamUs MP#6410 and bring them home to their families!

    Parents watch your children. Free-range parenting leads to more child victims.

    Cruelty to humans begins with cruelty to animals.

    I believe in closure, not forgiveness. I'm also unapologetically judgemental.

    JeSuisJuif
    JeSuisCharlie


  8. #8
    Elberethe is offline Ignorance is curable. Stupidity is permanent.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    666
    Quote Originally Posted by LinasK
    I did read it all, and it's not believeable at all to me, it is the ravings of a madman looking for attention now. He makes up answers to fit the theories as Tracey poses him questions, like why the blanket? and his answers are not credible. For example I ask you- if you were the perp and not a Ramsey, would you be stupid enough to write the Ransom note in their bedroom as he claims???
    He wants so badly to be known as JB's lover and/or identify with a women (possibly Patsy- whom he calls Patricia) that he learns to copy her handwriting. He hadn't even seen the movies Speed and Ransom- from which phrases in the note were lifted from- he said those movies weren't his style- that was him telling the truth!
    So what if he was charming enough to manage to get hired?
    What?! He didn't see Speed and Ransom cause they aren't his style? Those movies were AWESOME! What is wrong with this guy? Some kinda freak if you ask me.
    Why do I see so many angels everywhere, when I have so little faith in people? How can so much good exist among so much bad? Why don't my 2 angels desert me? There are others who deserve them more.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    So, JMK brought his own flashlight then smashed it later. Yet they found a flashlight in the R's home, so that one must have belonged to the Rs. For some reason the R's take care to wear gloves when putting batteries in the flashlight, and the wipe the prints off the flashlight everytime they handle it.

    I'm not buying it.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    310
    >>>So, JMK brought his own flashlight then smashed it later. Yet they found a flashlight in the R's home, so that one must have belonged to the Rs. For some reason the R's take care to wear gloves when putting batteries in the flashlight, and the wipe the prints off the flashlight everytime they handle it.

    I'm not buying it.<<<<


    Exactly. And no stockinged-footed prints nor bare-footed prints were found so he must have just floated about the house like a ghost or avoided using the floor to walk on like Spiderman.

    This is so ridiculous. The DA had NOTHING on this guy. They can't place him in CO, his handwriting isn't a match, there's no fingerprints, DNA, fibers... there's NOTHING.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    3,374
    yes,all the doors and windows were secure---so we are dealing with a ghost intruder--let's call him Casper--it appears Casper can not only traverse thru walls,he also has the ability to write a 3 page ransom note... but must practice writing it first--but that's ok,he has plenty of time--after all,nobody can see a ghost,so why rush it--but alas it didn't work--The Ghostbusters were called and they caught him outside---Bill murray then interrogated Casper,and Casper denied everthing,said it was his evil ghost twin....the Wraith

  12. #12
    Elberethe is offline Ignorance is curable. Stupidity is permanent.
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    666
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter Hamilton
    yes,all the doors and windows were secure---so we are dealing with a ghost intruder--let's call him Casper--it appears Casper can not only traverse thru walls,he also has the ability to write a 3 page ransom note... but must practice writing it first--but that's ok,he has plenty of time--after all,nobody can see a ghost,so why rush it--but alas it didn't work--The Ghostbusters were called and they caught him outside---Bill murray then interrogated Casper,and Casper denied everthing,said it was his evil ghost twin....the Wraith
    Hey! Let's not bash Casper, please. He is a friendly ghost and there is no way he is involved in this. I'm sure there are more suspicous ghosts you can try to pin this on.
    Why do I see so many angels everywhere, when I have so little faith in people? How can so much good exist among so much bad? Why don't my 2 angels desert me? There are others who deserve them more.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    779
    What puzzles me is why would someone intent on either kidnapping or rape do anything IN the home no matter how secluded a spot? Doesn't make any sense. Certainly it's possible "he/she/they" dropped her causing the skull fracture and at that point whatever was originally planned was no longer possible, but it just seems that an intruder who could be so careful to not leave evidence would also be smart enough to get in, grab her and get as far away as possible with her. I mean had it been me, even if a fall or whatever had rendered her near dead, I'd either get the heck out immediately without all the staging etc or still take the body with me and dump it someplace.

    I have no hard conviction on who did it - I do think you can argue a good case for the Ramsey's guilt but I'm not "convinced" they did it. It just doesn't make much sense. Why would an intruder feel compelled to spend that much time in their home? Hanging around the house doesn't imply to me a crafty criminal - I'd expect sloppiness and evidence by the tons.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,223
    "Lin Wood ties that case in to JonBenet because it points the finger away from the Ramseys."

    My point exactly.

    malapoo, if you examine cases where a kidnapper has done this, you'll find that they ALWAYS take the victim with them to a place the killer feels safe.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oriental, North Carolina
    Posts
    939
    Quote Originally Posted by Malapoo
    What puzzles me is why would someone intent on either kidnapping or rape do anything IN the home no matter how secluded a spot? Doesn't make any sense. Certainly it's possible "he/she/they" dropped her causing the skull fracture and at that point whatever was originally planned was no longer possible, but it just seems that an intruder who could be so careful to not leave evidence would also be smart enough to get in, grab her and get as far away as possible with her. I mean had it been me, even if a fall or whatever had rendered her near dead, I'd either get the heck out immediately without all the staging etc or still take the body with me and dump it someplace.

    I have no hard conviction on who did it - I do think you can argue a good case for the Ramsey's guilt but I'm not "convinced" they did it. It just doesn't make much sense. Why would an intruder feel compelled to spend that much time in their home? Hanging around the house doesn't imply to me a crafty criminal - I'd expect sloppiness and evidence by the tons.
    Malapoo, your post just exemplifies why this was an INSIDE JOB. No intruder, whether in their right mind of not (in my book) would ever risk breaking in and sticking around a home like that while never knowing when or if someone might walk in on him at any moment. It is just plain rediculous to think ANY INTRUDER did this crime.

    SOMETHING REALLY BAD happened in that home that night. We'll probably never know what it was, but the Rams are solely responsible for the death of their daughter (sister) and the coverup. Any other answer is simply rediculous and will never wash. Just investigating this case all over again by plugging in an intruder (who was more than willing to give all sorts of explanations to help show how an intruder could do it) shows ain't no way someone outside this immediate family found his way into that home, killed JB, cleaned up (pristinely), wrote that rediculous note (Patsy wrote it!), and got away WITHOUT TAKING THE CHILD WITH HIM!

    I'm hoping the best thing to come out of all this is the intruder theory will be relegated to the backseat where it belongs and the true investigation of the Rams and their involvement begins anew and with fresh eyes!

    gaia
    Simplicity...patience...compassion

Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Perfect Murder/Perfect Town DVD
    By Solace in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 07-01-2014, 02:00 PM
  2. Replies: 138
    Last Post: 11-01-2013, 09:41 PM
  3. perfect murder perfect town on lifetime
    By srvfan in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 11-07-2005, 07:07 PM
  4. Perfect Murder, Perfect Town.....
    By little1 in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 03-08-2004, 11:13 AM