1454 users online (224 members and 1230 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 91
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053

    Fifth Person In the House?

    Besides John, Patsy, Burke and JonBenet, was there a fifth person in the Ramsey's house on the night of the murder?

    If so, was he an unknown intruder who broke in, or was he a known person let into the house by Burke A/O JonBenet, or was he an overnight guest of the Ramsey family?

    There's evidence that can be interpreted as a fifth person having been in the house. The mysteriously missing crime scene evidence is the one most often cited, such as:

    o the missing roll of black duct tape;

    o the missing 1/4" cord;

    o the missing 9 pages from the notepad;

    o the possible missing murder weapon;

    o the missing tip of the paint brush handle;

    o the missing dark blue wipe-down cloth;

    o the possible missing size 6 panties;

    o the missing red ink pen;

    o the possible missing stun gun;

    And there's other evidence suggesting a fifth person was in the house:

    o Patsy on occasions referred to the perpetrators as "they";

    o Aunt Pam stated there were two perpetrators, and she knows who they are;

    o there was foreign DNA on JonBenet;

    o the handwriting in the ransom note cannot be positively identified;

    o a single earring found at the curbing in front of the house went unclaimed;

    o Burke was 9 and therefore not culpable, so a Ramsey coverup seemed unnecessary unless it was to coverup for someone 10 or older;

    o there was highly unusual behavior by the Stines following the murder.


    JMO

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    487
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCrab
    Besides John, Patsy, Burke and JonBenet, was there a fifth person in the Ramsey's house on the night of the murder?

    If so, was he an unknown intruder who broke in, or was he a known person let into the house by Burke A/O JonBenet, or was he an overnight guest of the Ramsey family?

    There's evidence that can be interpreted as a fifth person having been in the house. The mysteriously missing crime scene evidence is the one most often cited, such as:

    o the missing roll of black duct tape;

    o the missing 1/4" cord;

    o the missing 9 pages from the notepad;

    o the possible missing murder weapon;

    o the missing tip of the paint brush handle;

    o the missing dark blue wipe-down cloth;

    o the possible missing size 6 panties;

    o the missing red ink pen;

    o the possible missing stun gun;

    And there's other evidence suggesting a fifth person was in the house:

    o Patsy on occasions referred to the perpetrators as "they";

    o Aunt Pam stated there were two perpetrators, and she knows who they are;

    o there was foreign DNA on JonBenet;

    o the handwriting in the ransom note cannot be positively identified;

    o a single earring found at the curbing in front of the house went unclaimed;

    o Burke was 9 and therefore not culpable, so a Ramsey coverup seemed unnecessary unless it was to coverup for someone 10 or older;

    o there was highly unusual behavior by the Stines following the murder.


    JMO
    IMO, the intruder would be someone who knew the family well, that is obvious. They would have to know the layout of the home, where things were kept, were everyone slept, the families movements and routines, as well as were they were most likely to find the note.

    1) I agree that the missing cord and duct tape are a red flag. Why go through all the staging to leave the duct tape and cord out? That doesn't make sense.

    2) Does anyone even know what the actual murder weapon was? I know some think the flashlight, I agree that that could be it--but was JBR's hair or skin cells found on the flashlight?

    3) I know this will sound dumb, but there were 9 pages missing? Is that including the "practice" note?

    4) The missing dark blue cloth and paintbrush handle, that is suspicious as well. Why take those things, only to leave everything else? Those also seem to be the things that an offender would bring to the scene with him. (Are we all agreed that WHOEVER this person is, they are an organized offender?)


    I think it is entirely possible that an offender was in the home that night, but I also think it is entirely possible that there was not an offender there.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,199
    BC, the missing pieces of evidence you listed could have been removed from the house by John, Patsy or Burke, or maybe all three of them. LE didn't search any of them when they left the house. That evening, John took a walk alone. Why? Did he dispose of the items? Heck, Auntie Pam, without even realizing it, could have removed the items during her sweep of the house.

    Some of the items you listed may not even exist, such as the roll from which the black duct tape was taken and the remainder of the cord. The tape and cord on JonBenet's body could have been remnants. Their original sources may have been long gone by the time JonBenet died.

    The red ink "heart" on JonBenet's palm could have been drawn at the Whites', or any of a number of places, and was likely drawn by JonBenet herself or one of her friends. No way do I consider the pen used to draw it a missing piece of evidence.

    As for the stun gun...WHAT stun gun? There's no proof that a stun gun was used on JonBenet.

    As for the other "evidence" you listed... so what if Patsy referred to the perps as "they"? Why wouldn't she? It was in keeping with the small foreign faction named in the phony ransom note.

    And so what if Auntie Pam stated there were two perps and she knew who they were? Would she say that if her nephew was one of them and a friend of his the other? I don't think so. I'd like to see Pam's exact quote, in context. Maybe what she said was misconstrued. If not, she was probably pointing the finger at the McSantas or the Barnhills or some other poor souls who knew the Ramseys.

    The extra markers suggesting "foreign" DNA are likely stutter/shadow bands resulting from the amplification process, or lab or panty factory contamination.

    Patsy wrote the note. I don't see how anyone who has seen her exemplars can refute it. (Check Shylock's posts for the document link.)

    Why do you consider the earring found at the curb evidence of a fifth person? Was the earring clearly a woman's earring, or one that a guy too might wear? Regardless, people lose earrings all the time. I know I do. The earring is not evidence, in my opinion.

    Yes, the Stines behaved very strangely after JonBenet's death, which raises my suspicions that their son might have been involved..but I'm not convinced of a LE coverup.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    968
    Okay honey, we've staged this scene, concocted an absurd note, worked the whole night long... what about the tape and cord: should we take them out now when we can do it safely or risk waiting till the police get here where the risk is greater, after all they might search us or take us to police headquarters, perhaps even in handcuffs? Nah, lets just risk it.

    Note: The missing pages do not include the so-called practice note, which I'm sure was intended to be found.

    Note: AuntPam's statements about a couple were based on an immediate and emotionally-based reaction which was later re-inforced by certain statements that were relayed to her which she knew to be either partly or entirely false. Both her immediate emotional conclusion as to the identity of the intruders and her later more analytical conclusion as to their identity is not in any way evidence that they, or either of them, was in the house that night.

    As to 'layout' of the house, etc., there is absolutely no indication that the intruder did know or would have had to know of anything about the house in advance.

    As to Patsy having written the note, you seem very certain: perhaps you should contact the experts at the Secret Service and inform them that they were wrong.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,199
    Toth, for a split-second, I thought you were calling me "honey" again.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    1,911
    Quote Originally Posted by little1
    The missing dark blue cloth and paintbrush handle, that is suspicious as well. Why take those things, only to leave everything else?
    I just want to point out again that we need to keep in mind this was a STAGED crime scene.

    That means that the stuff left at the scene was deliberately left there for staging purposes, and the stuff removed from the scene was removed for the purpose of hiding the truth.

    e.g. The "garrote" and all its elements were deliberately left at the scene for presentation; they were not inadvertently left behind by the perp. Just like the final version of the "ransom note."

    It's like an art project: you present the final work, but you certainly don't include the paint cans, the used brushes, the practice efforts, etc etc, IN the final presentation. (You stuff them in your purse or golf bag or Nintendo bag and sneak them out when the cops aren't looking )

    Ivy - another great post.
    The intruder is innocent! JMO

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by little1
    3) I know this will sound dumb, but there were 9 pages missing? Is that including the "practice" note?
    little1,

    Lab examination of the notepad revealed pages 1 through 12 were missing and probably discarded much earlier by normal family use. Pages 13 through 16 contained miscellaneous writing by Patsy, such as grocery lists and things to do.

    Pages 17 through 25 in the notepad were missing and never found. It's believed by some that the nine missing pages (17 through 25) could have been aborted ransom notes or practice phrases.

    Page 26 contained what appeared to be an aborted start of the ransom note. It said "Mr. and Mrs. I" ... and handwriting stopped before completing what appeared was going to a capital letter "R", as in Ramsey.

    Pages 27, 28, and 29 were the three ransom note pages. The remainder of the pages in the notepad were intact and not written on.

    JMO

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    487
    Quote Originally Posted by Britt
    I just want to point out again that we need to keep in mind this was a STAGED crime scene.

    That means that the stuff left at the scene was deliberately left there for staging purposes, and the stuff removed from the scene was removed for the purpose of hiding the truth.
    So why not leave the duct tape? Why not leave the cord? Those are elements that would help the R's scenario more than hurt it. That is what I was saying makes no sense.

    Why go to all the trouble of an outlandish staging, only to forget or hide some things that were crucial in the actual crime?

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,475
    Quote Originally Posted by BlueCrab
    o Burke was 9 and therefore not culpable, so a Ramsey coverup seemed unnecessary unless it was to coverup for someone 10 or older;
    JMO
    You can't assume the Ramsey's knew he couldn't be held accountable at the time. What if they covered it up because they didn't know he couldn't be held accountable? Or what if they knew but still did it to try and keep their social status...there are many reasons the Ramsey's "may" have covered for Burke.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,199
    Originally posted by little1
    So why not leave the duct tape? Why not leave the cord? Those are elements that would help the R's scenario more than hurt it. That is what I was saying makes no sense.
    As Britt explained, "...the stuff removed from the scene was removed for the purpose of hiding the truth."

    The tape roll and the remainder of the cord, if they still existed when JonBenet died, were removed for the purpose of hiding the truth, which was that the cord and tape on JonBenet's body came from the Ramseys' own house, and were NOT brought by any "intruder."

    imo


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    The Wild West
    Posts
    1,911
    Quote Originally Posted by little1
    So why not leave the duct tape? Why not leave the cord? Those are elements that would help the R's scenario more than hurt it. That is what I was saying makes no sense.
    I'm not following you here, little1. How would leaving any leftover tape or cord help the Ramseys? Finding the source of those items in the house would be very incriminating because it would eliminate the theory that the "intruder" brought them in.

    Incidentally, there is speculation that the piece of duct tape, as well as the unidentified dark fibers, came from JB's "Molly" doll, and that the cord came from a painting.

    The items may have been used in the crime scene exactly as they were found and therefore, there was nothing left over to find or dispose of.

    Why go to all the trouble of an outlandish staging, only to forget or hide some things that were crucial in the actual crime?
    The stagers did the best they could with what they had to work with. The perps (one or more of the Ramseys IMO) had to walk a fine line between inventing an intruder and avoiding incriminating themselves. They were limited to the materials in the house. But still, wherever possible, they had to make it appear there was an intruder. They disposed of whatever wasn't required (to show "Intruder") in the staged scene in order to minimize risk of connecting it to themselves.
    The intruder is innocent! JMO

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Seeker
    You can't assume the Ramsey's knew he couldn't be held accountable at the time. What if they covered it up because they didn't know he couldn't be held accountable? Or what if they knew but still did it to try and keep their social status...there are many reasons the Ramsey's "may" have covered for Burke.
    I agree with you Seeker. But in this thread I was limited to JUST listing some of the evidence and some of the things the Ramseys may have done in a coverup that could have been because of a fifth person in the house. Sorry if I misled you.

    JMO

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    3,475
    Blue, how many times do I have to tell you... Don't confuse the BLOND!!!

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    maryland
    Posts
    1,832
    I have decided,and in my "humble opinion today", I do not believe any longer that the tape was sourced at Mcguckin's. I came to this "conclusion" last night while re-reading St's book. He does have a way of almost telling the truth,ya' kind of have to learn to read between the lie'ns..
    The company that manufactured the tape,never cleared up the little matter of whether or not it was EVER shipped to Colorado. The tape that they confiscated from the photo shop,similar in appearance was indeed manufactured in NC and was admittedly purchased at McGluckin's,however,the tape found on little Jonbenet's mouth,manufactured in the same plant was IMO never matched to the tape found at this same store.
    This could very well lead one to believe it was purchased "anywhere",however since the manufacturing time was so close to the murder,it would be very possible to consider it being purchased in NC.
    This leads me to one questionable guy,the guy who Steve stopped in Atlanta after viewing him on Christmas day taking pictures of the grave,he had Colorado plates,was in Atlanta,and was stationed at Camp Lejeune. ST did a quick search of the guys truck,found blank tapes,and rolls of 35 mm film. IMO the black tape fits in with photography/movies,and this is the kind of guy I expect one day will be found responsible for the murder.
    IMO

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    753
    The end of the paint brush was missing? I bet it is still in the hole it was placed into.
    gibbet -n. 1. a gallows with a projecting arm a the top for suspending and displaying the bodies of criminals after hanging.

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast