Quote:
Originally Posted by Mastermind View Post
Let' say, Jon Benet Ramsey's body was found without the garotte.
Then all you have is a body with a bludgeon to the head.
The police are going to wonder why someone would kill a child with a one stroke hit rather than with a knife or several blows.
The Ramsey's could not simply leave the body this way.
Actually- you wouldn't have even known about the bludgeon to the head. There were no visible indications at all. Even the coroner was surprised to find the skull fracture when he performed the autopsy. He pulled back the scalp for the routine examination of the brain and that's when he saw it.
The police wouldn't even have known about it until the autopsy, so any LE there that day was unaware of the head bash.
Interesting.
So all you would have is a mysteriously dead little girl with prior sexual abuse.
Not exactly an easy thing to explain away by the Ramseys.
Especially considering that they shouldn't know that she was bludgeoned. Her cause of death should be a complete mystery to them.
Which is why the ransom note was important. It gave evidence of an intruder and an explanation of why JonBenet is dead.
Interesting.
So all you would have is a mysteriously dead little girl with prior sexual abuse.
Not exactly an easy thing to explain away by the Ramseys.
Especially considering that they shouldn't know that she was bludgeoned. Her cause of death should be a complete mystery to them.
Which is why the ransom note was important. It gave evidence of an intruder and an explanation of why JonBenet is dead.
Thats funny because for years RDI has been insisting that there is zero evidence of an intruder.
"...and an explanation of why JonBenet is dead."
Is the explanation that a left-leaning (Victory!) anti US (but not the country that it serves), anti-capitalist (fat cat) killed JBR?
That is the most awesome circular reasoning I've ever seen in my life. I am beside myself.
How on Earth can anyone make additional unknown male DNA work to further incriminate the R's; you know they handled the longjohns and you know the same unknown male was found there, so they could have transferred it to the panty crotch. Maybe you should write a book too?
But we know the longjohns were handled by a criminal as well.
Yes, but that was STAGED evidence of an intruder.
We don't KNOW that. We know it is strange male DNA, that's all. We don't know if it belongs to an intruder until the donor is identified.
Pardon me, but how the @#$ do you know?
A real intruder wouldn't stage it. Wouldn't cover her up, wipe her down, probably not even hide the body in the wineceller. It is widely thought she wasn't killed in the wineceller itself. An intruder would have left her where she was killed.
There is no known staging.
Not according to LE and forensics experts.
They have only speculated. Staging isn't a case fact.
Are you?
A real intruder wouldn't stage it. Wouldn't cover her up, wipe her down, probably not even hide the body in the wineceller. It is widely thought she wasn't killed in the wineceller itself. An intruder would have left her where she was killed.
They have only speculated. Staging isn't a case fact.
Staging was only 'introduced' as an explanation for the things that LE could not fit into the RDI theory.
Really? Because that's not the impression I got at ALL. I always thought it had something to do with little things like "evidence" and "crime scene experience." Silly me!
DD's right: forensic and law enforcement experts have weighed in, and they are trained specifically to know these things.
You are assuming the R's hadn't had a chance to pay them off?
Really? Because that's not the impression I got at ALL. I always thought it had something to do with little things like "evidence" and "crime scene experience." Silly me!
DD's right: forensic and law enforcement experts have weighed in, and they are trained specifically to know these things.
Perhaps I misinterpreted (that ole language barrier again) the term 'staging'? I understood it to mean that a killer (murderer really I suppose in this instance) uses items unnecessary to the killing to make it look like something it wasn't. For example in this case, where the ligatures on the hands are supposed not to have been tied until after her death in order to make it look as if she had been restrained. Or the supposedly totally unnecessary sexual abuse, to make it look as if a sex fiend had killed her. Are you saying that this is not correct?
