1233 users online (209 members and 1024 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 54
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    150

    The Ramseys Were Guilty Of Something

    Hi everyone. I'm a newbie here, but I've been following this case pretty closely for a long time. I find it amazing, and disappointing, that the mainstream media has been pushing the "Ramseys are innocent" line all long, even to the extent of recently trumpeting that they've been "cleared." That flies in the face of all reason, imho.

    As Sherlock Holmes said, "Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." This case exemplifies that credo; since any intruder theory is contradicted by a slew of evidence and all common sense, then someone inside the house must have been responsible for JonBenet's death. I admit that there are problems with any RDI theory, but nothing else is possible, imho.

    I feel that the ransom note is the most crucial piece of evidence in this case. I don't see how anyone can believe it's a legitimate ransom note. What kidnapper would leave a ransom note in the same location where a dead body is? What exactly were they hoping to hold for ransom? What group refers to themselves as "foreign?" The length is absurd- law enforcement officials know from experience that ransom notes are invariably short and to the point. This "War and Peace of ransom notes" is a huge red flag. It caught the police's attention immediately and was the primary reason the parents were viewed with suspicion from the outset. The note has Patsy's personality written all over it. If she didn't write it, then her doppleganger did.

    With the relative certainty that Patsy wrote the ransom note, speculating about what happened to cause JonBenet's death becomes a lot harder. Since Patsy must have been involved, in some way, because she wrote the phony ransom note, what role did she play in the actual death? There is Steve Thomas's accident/rage theory, in which Patsy killed JonBenet in a fit of rage over bed wetting issues. Some believe Patsy may have killed JonBenet in a warped bit of jealousy when she discovered John molesting her or suddenly had an epiphany that her husband had been molesting her. Finally, I suppose those who think John was the murderer feel that it happened in some way through his improper sexual relations with his daughter (Cyril Wecht's "sex game" gone awry theory was proposed early on).

    However, I find it hard to accept that any wife would help cover up her husband's murder of her daughter. Since Patsy wrote the note, imho, I don't think John was the killer. I also have trouble imagining Patsy becoming that angry with her child over what were apparently chronic bed wetting issues that had been going on for some time, to the point of fracturing her skull in some horrible way. So, what could have compelled her to write the ransom note, if neither she nor John was directly involved in JonBenet's death?

    I think the best answer is that Burke, in some improbable way, caused JonBenet's fatal skull fracture, and her parents, in a delusional but somewhat understandable reaction, conspired to cover up the crime. I think that's the only explanation for why they stuck together, if one of them did it. Surely John would have recognized Patsy's characteristic voice, if not her handwriting, all over that ridiculous ransom note. He would never have helped cover up his wife's murder (even though accidental) of his precious daughter.
    As already noted, Patsy would be even less likely to cover up her husband's perverted escapades, resulting in the tragic death of her little beauty queen.

    There are problems even with the Burke did it theory, but it is the only one, I feel, that explains the ransom note (which Patsy wrote) and the elaborate, invented kidnapping scenario. Neither parent wanted to lose their other child, and they justified their actions by reasoning that the death was accidental (whether it was or not, this is undoubtedly what Burke would have claimed). That still leaves the mystery of the strangling with the garotte; I simply can't picture any parents being able to do such a thing to the corspe of their small child, but they must have, unless Burke strangled her in some strange sex game, but then the skull fracture would have been staged. It's even less possible to envision parents smashing the skull of their dead daughter.

    This is the most baffling case I've ever researched. While it seems a certainty that the parents were covering up something, any scenario of JonBenet's death is plagued by the incomprehensible combo of skull fracture/ garotte strangulation. It's overkill of an unimaginable degree, but since the ransom note (combined with the body being left at the same location) excludes any real kidnappers, and bears the unmistakable imprint of Patsy Ramsey, I can come to no other conclusion than that someone in that house was responsible for the death of JonBenet.

    That's my newbie take. All comments are welcome.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Welcome and
    The rice is already cooked...

  3. #3
    What is the point in writing and leaving a ransom note demanding money (as well as all the odd stipulations of how much of it should be in 100's, how much should be in 20's, being in a paper bag) when you're not going to get the money anyways because you've not only killed the person you're claiming to be holding for ransom, but left their body in the very same house that you would've taken them from?

    Spongebob Squarepants can connect the dots on this one as far as I'm concerned.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    Quote Originally Posted by wis_investigator View Post
    What is the point in writing and leaving a ransom note demanding money (as well as all the odd stipulations of how much of it should be in 100's, how much should be in 20's, being in a paper bag) when you're not going to get the money anyways because you've not only killed the person you're claiming to be holding for ransom, but left their body in the very same house that you would've taken them from?

    Spongebob Squarepants can connect the dots on this one as far as I'm concerned.
    Yeah. Like we've been saying...
    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
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    1,296
    Quote Originally Posted by Unreals View Post
    Hi everyone. I'm a newbie here, but I've been following this case pretty closely for a long time. I find it amazing, and disappointing, that the mainstream media has been pushing the "Ramseys are innocent" line all long, even to the extent of recently trumpeting that they've been "cleared." That flies in the face of all reason, imho.

    As Sherlock Holmes said, "Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." This case exemplifies that credo; since any intruder theory is contradicted by a slew of evidence and all common sense, then someone inside the house must have been responsible for JonBenet's death. I admit that there are problems with any RDI theory, but nothing else is possible, imho.

    I feel that the ransom note is the most crucial piece of evidence in this case. I don't see how anyone can believe it's a legitimate ransom note. What kidnapper would leave a ransom note in the same location where a dead body is? What exactly were they hoping to hold for ransom? What group refers to themselves as "foreign?" The length is absurd- law enforcement officials know from experience that ransom notes are invariably short and to the point. This "War and Peace of ransom notes" is a huge red flag. It caught the police's attention immediately and was the primary reason the parents were viewed with suspicion from the outset. The note has Patsy's personality written all over it. If she didn't write it, then her doppleganger did.

    With the relative certainty that Patsy wrote the ransom note, speculating about what happened to cause JonBenet's death becomes a lot harder. Since Patsy must have been involved, in some way, because she wrote the phony ransom note, what role did she play in the actual death? There is Steve Thomas's accident/rage theory, in which Patsy killed JonBenet in a fit of rage over bed wetting issues. Some believe Patsy may have killed JonBenet in a warped bit of jealousy when she discovered John molesting her or suddenly had an epiphany that her husband had been molesting her. Finally, I suppose those who think John was the murderer feel that it happened in some way through his improper sexual relations with his daughter (Cyril Wecht's "sex game" gone awry theory was proposed early on).

    However, I find it hard to accept that any wife would help cover up her husband's murder of her daughter. Since Patsy wrote the note, imho, I don't think John was the killer. I also have trouble imagining Patsy becoming that angry with her child over what were apparently chronic bed wetting issues that had been going on for some time, to the point of fracturing her skull in some horrible way. So, what could have compelled her to write the ransom note, if neither she nor John was directly involved in JonBenet's death?

    I think the best answer is that Burke, in some improbable way, caused JonBenet's fatal skull fracture, and her parents, in a delusional but somewhat understandable reaction, conspired to cover up the crime. I think that's the only explanation for why they stuck together, if one of them did it. Surely John would have recognized Patsy's characteristic voice, if not her handwriting, all over that ridiculous ransom note. He would never have helped cover up his wife's murder (even though accidental) of his precious daughter.
    As already noted, Patsy would be even less likely to cover up her husband's perverted escapades, resulting in the tragic death of her little beauty queen.

    There are problems even with the Burke did it theory, but it is the only one, I feel, that explains the ransom note (which Patsy wrote) and the elaborate, invented kidnapping scenario. Neither parent wanted to lose their other child, and they justified their actions by reasoning that the death was accidental (whether it was or not, this is undoubtedly what Burke would have claimed). That still leaves the mystery of the strangling with the garotte; I simply can't picture any parents being able to do such a thing to the corspe of their small child, but they must have, unless Burke strangled her in some strange sex game, but then the skull fracture would have been staged. It's even less possible to envision parents smashing the skull of their dead daughter.

    This is the most baffling case I've ever researched. While it seems a certainty that the parents were covering up something, any scenario of JonBenet's death is plagued by the incomprehensible combo of skull fracture/ garotte strangulation. It's overkill of an unimaginable degree, but since the ransom note (combined with the body being left at the same location) excludes any real kidnappers, and bears the unmistakable imprint of Patsy Ramsey, I can come to no other conclusion than that someone in that house was responsible for the death of JonBenet.

    That's my newbie take. All comments are welcome.
    Gosh...I was all the way with you until....you launched into the (top 3 favorite) Burke Did It Theory. That is where I bow out. He was how old at the time? 7 or 8? Good lord. My first born was 8 years older than my second/last born. My first born was a cronic bedwetter. The last year of his bedwetting was the year of my pregnancy with his sister. It nearly killed me. I could have killed him! lol. The day I gave birth to his sister was the last day he ever wet the bed. I called it a miracle. It was perhaps was.
    You are SO right. Patsy wrote the RN. To deny this is to deny sanity and logical/common sense reasoning. I find NO reason what-so-ever to support JB being a victim of sexual abuse (by her father or anyone else). I find NO eviedence to support young Burke was a murderous time-bomb threat to his younger sister. I DO KNOW what it is like to be the MOTHER of a cronic bedwetter, and therefore I fully support the acciendental injury , followed by the (misbegotten) cover-up theory. Anyone who has ever walked a mile in my shoes would "get it". jmho
    Credulous at best your desire to believe in Angels in the hearts of men

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    BR was two weeks shy of his 10th birthday. Big difference between a boy of 10 and a boy of 7 or 8. As a matter of fact, had the murder been 2 weeks later, BR COULD have been charged had the police considered him a suspect at the time. Do I think he did it? Not exactly. COULD he have? Not alone. Could he have been having some sort of sexual contact with his sister? Yes. Not unheard of with siblings, and the housekeeper caught them more than once "playing" under a blanket in his room. To me, if BR was involved that night at all, it was in the company of his older half-brother.
    I think he probably knows more than he is saying. I don't think Patsy would cover for her step-son. But she'd do it if her own son was involved.
    I am not committed to the BDI theory. It is just one of a few RDI theories I have. I have NO IDI theories.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    150
    Ripley007,

    I'm not wedded to a BDI theory. I certainly think Patsy, with her unstable personality, is the more likely killer. However, I just can't imagine John covering up for her in such a situation. Since I think it's clear Patsy wrote the note, she obviously was involved. While I admit the idea of a 9 year old killing his sister, in whatever manner, is almost incomprehensible, I think it's the only explanation for John and Patsy launching a joint coverup. I used to be a PDI theorist, and still think it's possible. However, that would mean either John accepted her killing his daughter to such a degree that he participated in a coverup, and is still covering for her, or they jointly killed her (most unlikely), or she covered things up herself and he somehow wasn't clever enough to see through it. Since the ransom note itself is an obvious hoax, this is really hard to believe.

    It's a very, very strange case.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,731
    Quote Originally Posted by Unreals View Post
    Ripley007,

    I'm not wedded to a BDI theory. I certainly think Patsy, with her unstable personality, is the more likely killer. However, I just can't imagine John covering up for her in such a situation. Since I think it's clear Patsy wrote the note, she obviously was involved. While I admit the idea of a 9 year old killing his sister, in whatever manner, is almost incomprehensible, I think it's the only explanation for John and Patsy launching a joint coverup. I used to be a PDI theorist, and still think it's possible. However, that would mean either John accepted her killing his daughter to such a degree that he participated in a coverup, and is still covering for her, or they jointly killed her (most unlikely), or she covered things up herself and he somehow wasn't clever enough to see through it. Since the ransom note itself is an obvious hoax, this is really hard to believe.

    It's a very, very strange case.
    Possibly, John was protecting Patsy from the trauma of a trial and a possible incarceration. She had ovarian cancer and that is a death sentence in itself. If Patsy killed JonBenet accidentally in an act that resulted in the head trauma (assuming the strangulation was staging because JonBenet appeared dead after the accident or because someone couldn't bear the thought of JonBenet living as a brain-damaged child) perhaps John Ramsey believed that living with the thoughts of what had happened was punishment enough.

    Perhaps John couldn't bear the thoughts of his wife living out the remainder of her life in prison dying from cancer.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    South
    Posts
    3,835
    Quote Originally Posted by Ripley007 View Post
    Gosh...I was all the way with you until....you launched into the (top 3 favorite) Burke Did It Theory. That is where I bow out. He was how old at the time? 7 or 8? Good lord. My first born was 8 years older than my second/last born. My first born was a cronic bedwetter. The last year of his bedwetting was the year of my pregnancy with his sister. It nearly killed me. I could have killed him! lol. The day I gave birth to his sister was the last day he ever wet the bed. I called it a miracle. It was perhaps was.
    You are SO right. Patsy wrote the RN. To deny this is to deny sanity and logical/common sense reasoning. I find NO reason what-so-ever to support JB being a victim of sexual abuse (by her father or anyone else). I find NO eviedence to support young Burke was a murderous time-bomb threat to his younger sister. I DO KNOW what it is like to be the MOTHER of a cronic bedwetter, and therefore I fully support the acciendental injury , followed by the (misbegotten) cover-up theory. Anyone who has ever walked a mile in my shoes would "get it". jmho
    Respectfully Quoted Ripley
    BBM

    Ripley! Hello. RE: the sexual abuse. Do you mind letting me pick your brain and ask why you say there was no sexual abuse? (I ask because I am ignorant of what is the truth on this issue and not from a defensive stance of my own opinion )

    This is one of the major confusions for me, and a detail I would like to be solid on is the sexual abuse: and whether there is any true evidence this occurred to JB at any time. Whether it had happened previously and/or only during her murder.

    Do most RDIs and IDIs believe or feel there was sexual abuse?

    Finally. I could have swore I saw there was physical evidence of sexual abuse?

    TIA

    ...JS...
    John 14:6

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Unreals View Post
    Ripley007,

    I'm not wedded to a BDI theory. I certainly think Patsy, with her unstable personality, is the more likely killer. However, I just can't imagine John covering up for her in such a situation. Since I think it's clear Patsy wrote the note, she obviously was involved. While I admit the idea of a 9 year old killing his sister, in whatever manner, is almost incomprehensible, I think it's the only explanation for John and Patsy launching a joint coverup. I used to be a PDI theorist, and still think it's possible. However, that would mean either John accepted her killing his daughter to such a degree that he participated in a coverup, and is still covering for her, or they jointly killed her (most unlikely), or she covered things up herself and he somehow wasn't clever enough to see through it. Since the ransom note itself is an obvious hoax, this is really hard to believe.

    It's a very, very strange case.
    Not that it has anything to do with anything, Unreals, but I have a thread you may want to look at. It's called "No Honor Among Thieves."
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Chiquita71 View Post
    This is one of the major confusions for me, and a detail I would like to be solid on is the sexual abuse: and whether there is any true evidence this occurred to JB at any time. Whether it had happened previously and/or only during her murder.
    Boy, have you got the right man for the job.

    Do most RDIs and IDIs believe or feel there was sexual abuse?
    It varies from person to person.

    Finally. I could have swore I saw there was physical evidence of sexual abuse?
    How much time do you have, Chiquita?
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,731
    The autopsy indicates chronic and acute trauma to JonBenet's vaginal region. Did it come from sexual abuse, corporal punishment, staging or some combination of those three factors? Only the experts know for sure and, as far as I can tell, opinions vary on the cause(s).

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Pittsburgh (of course)
    Posts
    2,490
    Quote Originally Posted by Unreals View Post
    Hi everyone. I'm a newbie here, but I've been following this case pretty closely for a long time. I find it amazing, and disappointing, that the mainstream media has been pushing the "Ramseys are innocent" line all long, even to the extent of recently trumpeting that they've been "cleared." That flies in the face of all reason, imho.
    But they were cleared. The DA announced it publicly. DNA not belonging to members of the Ramsey family was found (either in her underwear or on her body). Now, it seems possible to me that the Ramseys could be involved with the person whose DNA was found, but that isn't what LE said.

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25608543/

    Prosecutors cleared JonBenet Ramsey's parents and brother Wednesday in the 1996 killing of the 6-year-old beauty queen, saying they were "deeply sorry" for putting the family under a cloud of suspicion for more than a decade.
    New DNA tests, which focus on skin cells left behind from a mere touch, point to a mysterious outsider. They came too late to clear the name of JonBenet's mother, Patsy, who died of cancer in 2006.
    "To the extent that we may have contributed in any way to the public perception that you might have been involved in this crime, I am deeply sorry," Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy wrote in a letter to the child's father, John Ramsey. "No innocent person should have to endure such an extensive trial in the court of public opinion."
    That's not just a clearing; that's an apology.
    Last edited by pittsburghgirl; 03-11-2010 at 06:38 PM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    2,731
    "They came too late to clear the name of JonBenet's mother, Patsy, who died of cancer in 2006." (Quoted from message above.)

    That is an interesting way to phrase it.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Welcome, pittsburghgirl!

    Boy, have we got a lot to talk about!
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. GUILTY Bradley Manning guilty on 5 counts of espionage, not guilty of aiding, abetting enemy
    By wfgodot in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 05-17-2017, 08:31 AM
  2. *MERGED THREADS*GUILTY or NOT GUILTY? (Florida jury instructions added)
    By Nali87 in forum Caylee Anthony 2 years old
    Replies: 281
    Last Post: 10-09-2011, 05:54 PM
  3. For those who believe Ramseys guilty....
    By Pepper in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-18-2006, 01:03 PM
  4. For those who think the Ramseys are guilty . .
    By KatherineQ in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 04-09-2005, 04:39 PM