Possible NEW Suspects In JonBenet Ramsey Case?

Chris - You raise good points, let me consider them.

Twinkiesmom - Read the Barzee Mitchell journal, they have the langauge background to have done the RN. It also shares certain stylistic similarities, I outline them in my first or second post.

IF Mitchell (and maybe Barzee) wrote the RN, it would have been for much the same purpose as if Patsy did it - to deflect blame. They would not have held JonBenet for ransom, but kept her as "wife", i.e., child sex slave, as they did Elizabeth. So the ransom note would be designed to deflect blame and perhaps delay authorities. So they would not have used religious langauge in it.

Mitchell told Barzee and Smart he was doing an abduction (of Elizabeht's cousin) on a HOLIDAY, because thats when police response time would be slower. We might consider that when asking why the attacker of JonBenet struck on Christmas night. Smart also said Mitchell told her is she screamed he would "duct tape my mouth shut." JonBenet had duct tape on her mouth.

Under my scenario, something went wrong, as murder was not the likely intent.
 
Chris - You raise good points, let me consider them.

Twinkiesmom - Read the Barzee Mitchell journal, they have the langauge background to have done the RN. It also shares certain stylistic similarities, I outline them in my first or second post.

IF Mitchell (and maybe Barzee) wrote the RN, it would have been for much the same purpose as if Patsy did it - to deflect blame. They would not have held JonBenet for ransom, but kept her as "wife", i.e., child sex slave, as they did Elizabeth. So the ransom note would be designed to deflect blame and perhaps delay authorities. So they would not have used religious langauge in it.

Mitchell told Barzee and Smart he was doing an abduction (of Elizabeht's cousin) on a HOLIDAY, because thats when police response time would be slower. We might consider that when asking why the attacker of JonBenet struck on Christmas night. Smart also said Mitchell told her is she screamed he would "duct tape my mouth shut." JonBenet had duct tape on her mouth.

Under my scenario, something went wrong, as murder was not the likely intent.


I don't want to seem like I'm spoiling for fight here - I'm not. I respect you contributions to the topic. That said, I think "something went wrong" is one of the weakest parts of IDI theory.

What could go wrong? If we're supposing an IDI scenario, they got her out of bed (IDI means the R's are -mostly- telling the truth) then got her to the first floor w/o trouble. That much we can assume because if there were trouble upstairs it likely would have woke the parents, and even if not, why go into the basement? If the "trouble" starts on the first floor, why go into the basement? If there was no trouble on the first floor, why go into the basement? Basically, why go into the basement is a huge question in an IDI scenario. If she's to be kept as a sex slave/child wife, why kill her -it spoils all the future "fun". If it really started as a kidnapping, why leave the body behind? Ransom won't get paid if the body is discovered. I've yet to hear a plausible "gone wrong" theory. Perhaps you have one to share with us? So far you have two intruders, a male and a female. The female is apparently a willing accomplice and goes along with the male. Two adults have unspecified "trouble" subduing a 6 year old girl, and their solution to solving the trouble is to take her into the basement, sexually assault her, strangle her, and bash her in the head, rather than quickly get out of the house.

I'm not trying to put you on the spot, or act like I know better - I don't know who killed JBR. But if you are going to posit a "gone wrong" theory, you have to come up with a scenario that explains what went wrong, (or at least list some things that could have gone wrong) and why taking her into the basement and doing time consuming stuff to her was the solution.
 
Two adults have unspecified "trouble" subduing a 6 year old girl, and their solution to solving the trouble is to take her into the basement, sexually assault her, strangle her, and bash her in the head, rather than quickly get out of the house.


not only that but go to the trouble of wiping the body off and REDRESSING her.
wasting time&risk of being caught,why on earth would they do that?makes NO sense IMO.
(re "IDI,something went wrong" scenario,I'd rather believe it happened like in JMK's fantasy,they wanted just to have fun but in the end they killed her outta mercy or something.)but again,it DOESN'T make any sense why they would risk being caught while redressing the body.I can understand why they would wipe the body off-getting rid of evidence,but why redress her?WHY write a RN note (in that house) and leave it behind if your goal is just pleasure.
 
You are asking me to explain the unexplainable. I can't.

Can you explain why Patsy Ramsey, who seemingly loved her daughter and had no prior history of violence or abuse, bashed her child's skull in, and then tied a rope around her neck? Can you explain why John Ramsey, with no prior history of child abuse, molested and killed his daughter?

I think it is POSSIBLE that the parents were involved. I am presenting information on a possible suspect who has never before been mentioned in connection to the case.

Elizabeth awoke with a knife against her throat. Had she jumped up or resisted, she may have died of a cut throat. Smart testified Mitchell told her if she made noise, he would "duct tape my mouth shut". Could an intruder have duct taped the mouth of JonBenet to silence her, and unintentionally suffocated her? Or used the neck rope to silence her, unintentionally killing her?

The night of her abduction, they dressed Elizabeth in white, washed her body, bound her with rope cord, and "consumated" the "marriage" (i.e., raped her) so that she would be Mitchell's eternal wife in this life and after death.

The journal of Mitchell and Barzee indicates prior "failed attempts" to get a "wife", i.e., child sex slave, prior to the Smart kidnapping and Wright/Kemp attempted kidnappings. What were these "failed attempts"? Why do they document where they were and what they did for almost every single Christmas in the covered years except for Christmas 1996? Do you believe what they say, that in the winter of 1996 a "black homeless man named Phil" gave them $300 and they went to Alaska?

I have started the process to do what I can to get the DNA of Mitchell compared to the suspect DNA.
 
You are asking me to explain the unexplainable. I can't.

Can you explain why Patsy Ramsey, who seemingly loved her daughter and had no prior history of violence or abuse, bashed her child's skull in, and then tied a rope around her neck? Can you explain why John Ramsey, with no prior history of child abuse, molested and killed his daughter?

I think it is POSSIBLE that the parents were involved. I am presenting information on a possible suspect who has never before been mentioned in connection to the case.

Elizabeth awoke with a knife against her throat. Had she jumped up or resisted, she may have died of a cut throat. Smart testified Mitchell told her if she made noise, he would "duct tape my mouth shut". Could an intruder have duct taped the mouth of JonBenet to silence her, and unintentionally suffocated her? Or used the neck rope to silence her, unintentionally killing her?

The night of her abduction, they dressed Elizabeth in white, washed her body, bound her with rope cord, and "consumated" the "marriage" (i.e., raped her) so that she would be Mitchell's eternal wife in this life and after death.

The journal of Mitchell and Barzee indicates prior "failed attempts" to get a "wife", i.e., child sex slave, prior to the Smart kidnapping and Wright/Kemp attempted kidnappings. What were these "failed attempts"? Why do they document where they were and what they did for almost every single Christmas in the covered years except for Christmas 1996? Do you believe what they say, that in the winter of 1996 a "black homeless man named Phil" gave them $300 and they went to Alaska?

I have started the process to do what I can to get the DNA of Mitchell compared to the suspect DNA.


Fair enough - I can't explain the Rs motives, in a RDI theory.

But you've theorized that intruders started out to do one thing but something went wrong to transform it into a murder. I'm not asking for motive, just a theory of what went wrong (or could have gone wrong) and why all that stuff in the basement was the response to the thing going wrong. That doesn't seem unfair, or even unexplainable, if in fact there is any merit at all to the "gone wrong" theory.

Let me be more specific. Suppose it started as a kidnapping, and the real intent was to take JBR to be Mithcel's "wife". What could have gone wrong to prevent a kidnapping? The parents woke up? JBR screamed? They couldn't figure out how to get the body out of the house? What can you come up with to explain why the kidnapping couldn't be completed, especially when considering that they had already taken her from her bed and got her at least to the first floor.

After having come up with a theory of what went wrong to prevent the kidnapping from taking place, I would also ask for a theory as to why taking her into the basement, assaulting her, strangling her, bludgeoning her and redressing her was the response chosen - as opposed to simply leaving the house.

These questions do not seem unreasonable to me. I appreciate not everything in the case can be explained, but I think you'd have to admit that if a reasonable theory can't be developed, it casts doubt on the whole "gone wrong" theory.

My problem with the "gone wrong" theory isn't specific to Mitchell and Barzee, it applies to any intruder/gone wrong theory.

It's not likely she was suffocated by the duct tape. There were no tongue impressions on the tape, as would be expected if she were struggling for breath. It's likely the tape was placed on her mouth (if it ever actually was on her mouth) after death.

The rope could have been used to silence her, but wouldn't it be more effective to place a hand over her mouth, or duct tape (while she was alive)? If the intruder(s) had accidentally killed her in this way, why bash her in the head?

... Why do they document where they were and what they did for almost every single Christmas in the covered years except for Christmas 1996? ...

I couldn't help focusing on the word "almost". IOW, there are other Christmases unaccounted for, as well as Christmas '96. It's probably because they are the type of people who can't always document where they are.

No, I don't believe a homeless man gave them $300.

The DNA comparison will be great. If it's a match, it will go a long way towards wrapping up the case. If it's not a match, nothing has been lost.
 
What is interesting here is TWO tracks of evidence, one showing brutal disregard for JonBenet and lustful intent, the other showing some degree of caring. Also, a track of evidence showing intent to transport off site. The skull fracture may have been to silence, as may have been too much pressure on the neck rope.

As to why the basement, if that was the entry point, it might have been thought the safest exit point.

Doug Oswell = "Having found a convenient means of entry he might have spent considerable time alone in the dwelling prior to that date, even on the 25th itself while the Ramseys were away. He might even have been lurking in the house when they arrived home!"

AK = Apparently that is what investigators think probably happened in the 9/14/97 attempted abduction of "Amy", JonBenet's dance school classmate.

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-september97-intruder.htm

2000-04-04: Webbsleuths Forum (http://www.webbsleuths.org)

"More on 1997 Boulder intruder"

Posted by MaskedMan on Apr-04-00 at 03:43 PM (EST)

I obtained the Boulder Police report on the intruder who sexually assaulted a girl in her bedroom in the middle of the night while her mother was asleep in the next room. To preserve their privacy, I won't use their names.

On Sept. 13-14, 1997, an intruder got into a Boulder home occupied by a mother and daugher. The father was out of town when the crime occurred. The girl was 14 years old. There was no sign of a forcible break-in. It's unclear how the intruder got in, but he may have entered through a back door that was unlocked before the mother went to bed that night.

The intruder apparently snuck in and hid in the house for several hours, waiting until 3:00 a.m. before going to the girl's bedroom. He wore black clothing, knew the girl's name and knew his way around the house in the dark. The house had motion detectors and an alarm system which were set at 11:00 p.m., but he didn't set off the alarm.


AK = The Ramsey attacker, who may or may not be Amy's attacker, could have done the same thing while the Ramsey's were at the Christmas Party. Giving him/her plenty of time to write the ransom note, even time to look at Patsy's writing.



DESCRIPTION OF AMY'S ATTACKER

First, she thought she saw blonde hair from underneath a backwards cap.

The blonde hair would rule out BDM, unless he dyed it or was wearing a wig.

Other aspects match him. A black "ninja" out fit sounds similar to robe clothes he wore.

"The victim 'did not recognize the voice of the suspect.' She said the suspect had a "deep voice....his jaw line stood out," his throat was real "thin," and the suspect's face was "very angular."

The mother described the assailant as about 5 feet 7 inches tall, 20 to 30 years old, with blond hair.

She noted that he had an angular, thin face, with a jaw line that "really stood out."

AK - A sketch was done with input by psychic Dorothy Allison. I don't know if other sources were used, but the Ramsey family had private investigators and put out the sketch as a "man who may have been in the Boulder area in December 1996." There were numerous burglaries in the usually low crime area, CBS News 48 Hours says about 100 burglaries in the area. Also, about a dozen different internet posters noted the sketch had many similarities to the descriptions of the attacker in the Amy case - thin, angular face, strong jaw, pointed chin.

I don't believe in psychics. No scientific evidence to prove they are real, and a lot to prove they are NOT real.

But this Dorothy Allison said the killer in another case was named "brown" but not spelled like the color. His name was "Browne". I do think some people may have intuitive gifts we don't fully understand. This was one of the very few cases of a psychic proving useful, I have read hundreds were they were not. But even if we totally dismiss her, the Ramsey family investigators may have used other sources for the sketch, and pure coincidence or not, it appears to be somewhat similar to Amy's attacker, and as Boulder Police never bothered to do a sketch, its all we have.

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-sketchman.htm

August 6, 1995: Colorado Springs Gazette - Tracking Heather's KILLER:

In 1992, Dorothy Allison, a noted New Jersey psychic who has worked with police across the country, called the Friends of Heather Dawn Church Foundation."

`I can tell you the killer's name right now,' "Allison remembered saying. " `His name is Brown.'"But not like the color brown; not spelled that way.

********[Edited]

On March 24, someone from the Louisiana prison system called to report a match between the prints from the Church home and prints in its data base. The prints belonged to Robert Charles Browne. He had spent time in Louisiana prisons for various crimes, including auto theft, in the early and mid-1980s. He moved to Colorado in 1987 and, after living at several addresses, settled into a home just down the road from the Church residence.

"Considering all the publicity, detectives figured they'd hear from psychics. Some detectives scoff at psychics; others are skeptical but willing to listen.

"I'm not going to disregard them," said Capt. Lou Smit, now head of investigations for the Sheriff's Office. "Sometimes, psychics come up with things you can't explain. And sometimes they come up with things almost too hard to believe."

April 27, 1998: Dorothy Allison descibed JonBenet's killer on the Leeza Gibbon's Show:

"He's probably 5'7" to 5'9". He's got thin, brown hair that he wears over to the side, perhaps a little bit balding underneath. He has a very wide cranium on top and a real small chin, very thin lips and a pointed nose, very light eyes -- kind of Germanic descent, and a very slender build throughout the body, a little bit wide through the hips, high pitched voice and soft spoken."

Amy's attacker described as: "She noted that he had an angular, thin face, with a jaw line that 'really stood out.' "

brian_10.jpg
sketch10.jpg
brian_11.jpg


sketch11.jpg
brian_14.jpg




http://dallasnews.com/national/129104_ramsey_01nat.html
08/01/2000

Police chief doubts same person killed Ramsey, attacked teen girl
By Charlie Brennan / Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News

BOULDER, Colo. – Nine months after the slaying of JonBenet Ramsey, a girl who attended the same dance studio as the young beauty queen and lived just two miles away was assaulted in her bed by an intruder while her mother slept nearby.

That crime, detailed in Boulder police reports, has common threads with the Ramseys' theory that their 6-year-old daughter was attacked by someone who hid in their home on Christmas night 1996.

Key players in the Ramsey drama – including the prosecutors who led a fruitless grand jury probe into JonBenet's slaying – learned of the September 1997 incident only last week.

Police Chief Mark Beckner said he doesn't see strong similarities between the cases, primarily because JonBenet was killed while the other girl, a 14-year-old, escaped serious injury. But last week, he ordered comparisons of partial palm prints found at both scenes.

Chief Beckner said the prints appear to be from different parts of the hand, but he assigned a detective to re-examine that issue "to see if there is something there that we missed." He said he did not know when the results would be available.

The Ramseys, who plan to meet with Boulder police late this month, were told about the second case on Monday. Police said they consider the couple suspects in their daughter's slaying. The Ramseys maintain that they are innocent.

"The fact than an assault was made in a home of a young girl in Boulder within nine months of JonBenet's assault is hugely significant," Mr. Ramsey said. "Fortunately, there are not that many creatures like this out there, so this is very significant."

He said he was eager to learn more details about the other assault.

The Ramseys' attorney, Lin Wood, and investigators who reviewed the police reports last week, said the assault on the 14-year-old and the Ramseys' version of JonBenet's final night have similar elements.

Mr. Ramsey confirmed Monday that JonBenet took lessons at Dance West, a studio where the second victim had performed. The studio owner, Lee Klinger, said he has never been contacted by police investigating either case.

Both girls performed at public functions in Boulder not long before being victimized: The 14-year-old girl danced in several public performances in the year before her assault. JonBenet, the reigning Little Miss Christmas, was featured in a holiday parade shortly before she was killed.


Investigators surprised

Investigators who worked on the Ramsey case for Boulder District Attorney Alex Hunter said they were surprised last week to learn about the second attack.

"I'm shocked," said Steve Ainsworth, a Boulder County sheriff's detective who spent a year as a consultant on the case to Mr. Hunter. "I think this is something that definitely should have been brought up. I was pretty amazed at the similarities."

According to Boulder police reports, there was no sign of forced entry in either incident. The 14-year-old's attacker knew her by name, while a ransom note in the Ramsey case suggested JonBenet's killer somehow knew her family. And in both cases, the sexual assault was penetration by a finger or an object, police reports said.

Mr. Ainsworth, who has never ruled out an intruder in the Ramsey slaying, said the second case shows that the Ramseys' theory is plausible.

"One of the things that people are saying is, 'Well, what did the guy do? Go in there and hide for a couple of hours until they came home?' Like, as if that's something that would never happen, that it's so stupid, no one would ever consider it," Mr. Ainsworth said. "Well, that's what happened in this case."

AK - Also, male DNA perhaps from saliva was found in a blood drop on JonBenet's panties, perhaps indicating the attacker placed his mouth on or near her vagina. Amy's attacker did put his mouth on her vagina.


Amy was the dance school classmate of JonBenet's who was attacked on 9/14/97. The Mitchell Barzee journal indicates they returned to Utah on 9/21/97.

DESCRIPTION OF AMY'S ATTACKER

First, she thought she saw blonde hair from underneath a backwards cap. The blonde hair would rule out BDM, unless he dyed it or was wearing a wig.

Other aspects match him. A black "ninja" out fit sounds similar to robe clothes he wore.

"The victim 'did not recognize the voice of the suspect.' She said the suspect had a "deep voice....his jaw line stood out," his throat was real "thin," and the suspect's face was "very angular."

The mother described the assailant as about 5 feet 7 inches tall, 20 to 30 years old, with blond hair.

She noted that he had an angular, thin face, with a jaw line that "really stood out."

In pictures Brian David Mitchell, here on the far left, appears 2 to 3 inches shorter than other men. It appears he may well be about 5' 7" tall.

Little Amy said the attacker 'had a voice like an older man but looked like a young man'. I wonder if in the dark, BDM's 5'7" very thin body looked like a "young man" to her, but he had the voice of a man in his 40's (which BDM was).



brian_15.jpg


Found this on page 9 of the Barzee Mitchell journal. The ransom note also starts a sentence by using "At this time" and there is also use of an editors caret.

barzee12.jpg


jonben14.jpg
jonben15.jpg


Some people found it suspect that the Ramseys used the very dated and odd word "hence" in a card. The ransom note uses "hence".

Doug Oswell notes that there is one use of the word "hence" in Brian David Mitchell's own "Book of Immanuel."

Some percentage of the population, probably fairly large, uses editors carets. Some percentage starts sentences by saying "At this time" or "At the time". And some percentage of the population, probably pretty small, uses the very dated and odd word hence. Presumably, a fairly small percentage of the population would do all three.
 
This all sounds a little out there for me. But i do find it interesting that this guy being so poor and living in the woods has been all over the world traveling and has more milage on his feet then i do on my car.
 
When Mitchell kidnapped Elizabeth, he left a witness behind. Her little sister. He did not take Elizabeth to a far off room in the family's house and assault her. He carried out the plan he began and took her away to become his 'wife' or sex slave, whichever you prefer.

Were they both blond? Yes, they are both female. This and the fact that both families were 'comfortable', is where the differences end.

They are of different religions. They are very far apart in age. There were NO witnesses to JonBenet being removed from her bed, yet her body was left behind, swaddled in her favorite blanket..

If Mitchell had shimmied through that tiny window, without moving away any of the debris or breaking the spider web, he knew there was no alarm system on, he could have walked right out the door with his 'prize'.

If Mitchell did this, why were Patsy's sweater fibers found so many places, in the garrotte and the duct tape? Why were fibers that match Johns Israeli sweater found in JonBenets vaginal area?

If he took the time to write a 'gone with the wind' ransom note, why didn't he at least remove her from the home to stall for time, instead of wrapping her in her favorite blanket? How could he know for sure that someone hadn't seen him in the area?

I just worked for 13 hours and had a patient code on me, so I may be a little jaded this morning, and at least this is somewhat more realistic than a MAAM, but sheesh, how about trying to find an explanation for the evidence that exists against the Ramseys, who were KNOWN to be in the house FIRST!!
 
That's a lot to digest and I'll take it into consideration but it seems too far too late, imo. In my mind it still points to the parents.
 
CanMan - I wonder the same thing, and wonder did they support themselves with burglaries, or other illegal activities? Or did "a homeless blackman named Phil" really walk up and hand them $300???

Sunnie - There are dozens of threads dealing with evidence against the Ramseys, which is ample, I just wanted one thread dealing with a NEW suspect as an intruder.

Q: "why didn't he at least remove her from the home to stall for time"

A: From what I understand, he did not own a car. When he took Elizabeth he walked with her several miles to his camp. If JonBenet was non-compliant, he may well have thought carrying a struggling little girl through the streets would attract notice.

Mitchell did night time home invasion abductions of girls from their beds, in large homes in nice areas, and came equipped with duct tape for the mouth and rope cords for arms and legs.

He had a knife against the throat of Elizabeth. Had she moved an inch, her throat would have been cut. Setting aside the unproven chloroform aspect, the prosecutions theory in the Anthony case is that she was killed by duct tape over the mouth and nose suffocating her. Elizabeth testified Mitchell told her is she made noise he would "DUCT TAPE MY MOUTH SHUT."

As it was removed by John, we don't know for sure if the DUCT TAPE OVER THE MOUTH OF JONBENET WAS ALSO OVER HER NOSE.
 
Does anyone really believe that CODIS didnt check Mitchell and Barzees dna against that found on JonBenet? Sorry but there are so many holes in this theory which make it very implausible for me.
 
Chris - You raise good points, let me consider them.

Twinkiesmom - Read the Barzee Mitchell journal, they have the langauge background to have done the RN. It also shares certain stylistic similarities, I outline them in my first or second post.
.

The writing style is not the same at all. Skipping past verbatim scripture to the narrative portion....The writer of the journal prefers the use of the passive voice in many sentences...In others, she inserts long phrases at the beginning of sentences before the subject and the verb.
 
The similarities just show that there's some kind of contact with the victims....a mentally unbalanced person gets and idea.....and they luck out that they get away with it. I don't think the Ramsey case is so complicated. There was the article in the paper a few days before on the lst page of the business section touting the success of Access Graphics......and protraying John Ramsey as a billionaire. "Ransom" was playing at the time, and the note is full of movie lines. The Ramseys came in contact with a lot of people. But just the article alone could have triggered an idea...perhaps robbery. It's not unusual for criminals to look through the paper for victims. The Ramseys address was publicly listed...their address easy to obtain. There was a healthy drug subculture in Boulder....a lot of transcients. Everything about the crime smacks of a kidnapping gone bad by an amateur, to me....and the only reason the police turned on the Ramseys were because they hired attorneys, the media early-on criticized the police, and were made to look like fools.
 
Does anyone really believe that CODIS didnt check Mitchell and Barzees dna against that found on JonBenet? Sorry but there are so many holes in this theory which make it very implausible for me.

It just doesn't work that way. Theodore Kaczynski was convicted on federal charges in 1998. You may seen the headlines in May 2011, some 13 years later, that based on information given to them by myself and Doug Oswell the FBI is seeking a court order to get the DNA of Kaczynski. He has never had DNA drawn from his body and put into CODIS. It might well be years before a DNA draw and inclusion in CODIS is done for Mitchell.

I also have specific reason to believe that Mitchell was never considered a suspect in the Ramsey case until Doug Oswell and I proposed this theory two weeks ago. I have started the process to do what I can to spur the DNA comparison between the Mitchell DNA and the Ramsey suspect DNA.
 
Lets talk about one thing you said concerning Mitchell. He had a knife to Elizabeths throat. She felt she was in eminent danger of him slicing her throat if she didn't cooperate.

There was a knife found at JonBenets side. A swiss army knife owned by her brother Burke. If JonBenet was 'too much to handle', why would he not have just cut her throat? Why the sexual abuse, bash on the head, strangulation and staging of the scene? Seems awfully brazen and the acts of someone comfortable enough to feel safe in the environment for a prolonged amount of time, to stage the scene.

There was also care given in the staging. JonBenet was wrapped in her favorite blanket. Why would Mitchell ever do such a thing? He certainly wasn't caring about Elizabeths comfort.

You also have not explained away the evidence that exists against the Ramseys.
 
It just doesn't work that way. Theodore Kaczynski was convicted on federal charges in 1998. You may seen the headlines in May 2011, some 13 years later, that based on information given to them by myself and Doug Oswell the FBI is seeking a court order to get the DNA of Kaczynski. He has never had DNA drawn from his body and put into CODIS. It might well be years before a DNA draw and inclusion in CODIS is done for Mitchell.

I also have specific reason to believe that Mitchell was never considered a suspect in the Ramsey case until Doug Oswell and I proposed this theory two weeks ago. I have started the process to do what I can to spur the DNA comparison between the Mitchell DNA and the Ramsey suspect DNA.



I have always thought Mitchell was a good suspect for this. And I am certain that the FBI did too. I highly doubt that his DNA wasn't tested with the intruders. I think your line that this hasn't been thought of is in error but I credit you for seeing how he would be a great suspect.
 
You are asking me to explain the unexplainable. I can't.

Can you explain why Patsy Ramsey, who seemingly loved her daughter and had no prior history of violence or abuse, bashed her child's skull in, and then tied a rope around her neck? Can you explain why John Ramsey, with no prior history of child abuse, molested and killed his daughter?

I think it is POSSIBLE that the parents were involved. I am presenting information on a possible suspect who has never before been mentioned in connection to the case.

Elizabeth awoke with a knife against her throat. Had she jumped up or resisted, she may have died of a cut throat. Smart testified Mitchell told her if she made noise, he would "duct tape my mouth shut". Could an intruder have duct taped the mouth of JonBenet to silence her, and unintentionally suffocated her? Or used the neck rope to silence her, unintentionally killing her?

The night of her abduction, they dressed Elizabeth in white, washed her body, bound her with rope cord, and "consumated" the "marriage" (i.e., raped her) so that she would be Mitchell's eternal wife in this life and after death.

The journal of Mitchell and Barzee indicates prior "failed attempts" to get a "wife", i.e., child sex slave, prior to the Smart kidnapping and Wright/Kemp attempted kidnappings. What were these "failed attempts"? Why do they document where they were and what they did for almost every single Christmas in the covered years except for Christmas 1996? Do you believe what they say, that in the winter of 1996 a "black homeless man named Phil" gave them $300 and they went to Alaska?

I have started the process to do what I can to get the DNA of Mitchell compared to the suspect DNA.


AK,

I can see that you have put a lot of time and thought into your theory and I respect that even if I dont agree and I dont.

Just because we haven't heard about prior molestation or abuse does not mean it wasnt happening or had never happened. Family secrets, are not new. Many, many cases of abuse are never reported. Every single abused child I have taken into my home has a mother that claims to love them.

Diane Downs had never been reported for abuse and yet she was able to shoot all three of her children, killing one and handicapping the other two. Susan Smith also had no prior abuse charges or suspicions, in fact it was reported that she had been a good and loving mother. Just because we havent heard about their family secrets does not mean that there werent any, we just simply dont know.

Unlike ES, Jonbenet was garotted and the binding on her hands was so loose that a six year old child could have escaped if she had wanted too. Ask yourself this, why werent her feet bound? JB was raped with her own mother paintbrush not an intruder/kidnappers penis. JB's body was washed after the crime and not before.

Its quite possible that JB death was an accident and not an act of premeditated murder leaving this RDI to wonder what secrets did the Rs need to hide by staging the kidnapping. Sexual abuse would be my answer. Or mabe, just maybe a mentally unstable mother.
 
Lots of good posts by all. Thanks. Lots to think about.

Roy - Until recently Mitchell was held in a mental hospital, convicted of no crime, and no legal basis to compel a DNA draw. I can also tell you I have specific reason to think he has NOT been considered a suspect in the case until now and he has NOT been cleared by DNA.
 
AK,

I can see that you have put a lot of time and thought into your theory and I respect that even if I dont agree and I dont.

Just because we haven't heard about prior molestation or abuse does not mean it wasnt happening or had never happened. Family secrets, are not new. Many, many cases of abuse are never reported. Every single abused child I have taken into my home has a mother that claims to love them.

Diane Downs had never been reported for abuse and yet she was able to shoot all three of her children, killing one and handicapping the other two. Susan Smith also had no prior abuse charges or suspicions, in fact it was reported that she had been a good and loving mother. Just because we havent heard about their family secrets does not mean that there werent any, we just simply dont know.

Unlike ES, Jonbenet was garotted and the binding on her hands was so loose that a six year old child could have escaped if she had wanted too. Ask yourself this, why werent her feet bound? JB was raped with her own mother paintbrush not an intruder/kidnappers penis. JB's body was washed after the crime and not before.

Its quite possible that JB death was an accident and not an act of premeditated murder leaving this RDI to wonder what secrets did the Rs need to hide by staging the kidnapping. Sexual abuse would be my answer. Or mabe, just maybe a mentally unstable mother.

Welcome Back my friend!! I have missed you greatly!!:woohoo::great:
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
3,915
Total visitors
4,006

Forum statistics

Threads
591,663
Messages
17,957,209
Members
228,583
Latest member
Vjeanine
Back
Top