Clever or Lucky?

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by WHITEFANG

Are you sure they weren't semi-hardened?

How do you mean?

Define the difference.

Okay. To my mind, what separates a hardened criminal from a first-timer is exactly that: experience. A hardened criminal is inured to committing crimes. Very little remorse. No real desire to make an attempt at honest life. Has been in prison at least once before, and has no real desire to go back, yet has no appreciable fear of it.

Contrast that with an amateur, especially one with no real forethought about it. They rush. They make mistakes.

Don't you get it?

Just WHAT am I supposed to get?

How are you qualified to figure out what they should or shouldn't be thinking?

I'm not. I'm just going by what those more qualified have said.

And, BTW, if you look closely, you hand them all kinds of credit with hardened criminal capabilities.

I realize it must seem that way. You're not telling me anything I don't know.

You need to step back and take a good, hard and very long look at what you offer here. If you will, and you won't, you could end up learning some important things.

What makes you think I haven't? I wish other people would take a good look at what I have to offer.

Fang, I'll level with you: I'm well aware the limitations of my theory. I just happen to think that my theory is LESS ridiculous than the alternative. Some time ago, I quoted Arthur Conan-Doyle's Sherlock Holmes. I shall do so again:

"When you eliminate the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

I'd also like to say that when you and MurriFlower decide to get serious, you do very well for yourselves. And if it turns out that I'm wrong, I'd have to say that your ideas seem like the best ones. In fact, let me go a bit further.

My mother, RIP, seemed to think similarly to how you do, to a degree. Except her suspect was someone nobody's thought of: Pam Paugh. Any thoughts?

How did Pat reach the stick that locked the wine-cellar door?

I thought it wasn't that high off the ground. No?

Oh kind lord and Master, thou art full of mercy and knowledge. We thank thee for thine most kind admission of our mere existence and especially for thine kinds words as to our humble strivings to offer something non-offensive to thee, the Great One. Amen and amen.

Come off it, man. Don't embarrass yourself.

[WHITEFANG]

And, BTW, if you look closely, you hand them all kinds of credit with hardened criminal capabilities. WF

I realize it must seem that way. You're not telling me anything I don't know. SD

.

Why do you think it looks that way?

How tall was P?

Standard doors are 6' 8" high.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by WHITEFANG

Why do you think it looks that way?

That's easy: because of my emotional detached approach toward this case. I'm the first one to admit that.

How tall was P?

Standard doors are 6' 8" high.

I'm not sure how tall she was.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by MurriFlower

So far 100% reckon they're just lucky, no one has voted for clever. Let's see, can we make a list of their luck in order of importance? I'll start....

1. Incompetent Cops
2. Corrupt DA
3. Stupid Coroner
4. Superhero Attorney(s)
5. Useless Experts
6. Suspect Collusion (lucky or clever??)
7. No witnesses
8. Using a pen that distorted writing (sharpie) (lucky or clever??)
9. The pediatrician not bothering to conduct a vaginal exam
10.The hardware store losing their sales records.

Ok, this is going real good. Looking forward to the next instalment.

I think this is a fine compilation.

[joeskidbeck]

Hi Dave! Let's look at it the other way for a moment. If IDI, do you think he was lucky or clever? He was extremely clever throughout the whole crime, right up until he took those pesky gloves off in order to touch the long johns. You think he forgot himself for a moment after all those hours in the Ramsey home?

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by joeskidbeck

Hi Dave!

Hey, Beck.

Let's look at it the other way for a moment. If IDI, do you think he was lucky or clever? He was extremely clever throughout the whole crime, right up until he took those pesky gloves off in order to touch the long johns. You think he forgot himself for a moment after all those hours in the Ramsey home?

Well, if it was IDI, then he was either incredibly clever or the gods truly do look out for fools. In order for IDI to have done this, they'd have to know everything there was to know. They'd have to have clothes that didn't shed, and yes, they'd have to wear gloves. That's Break-in 101 right there.

As for forgetting himself for a moment, no I don't buy that for a minute, and let me tell you why: the only motive I can possibly think for doing that, was that the guy was such a monstrous pedophile, he couldn't help but touch her with his naked hands. But IF that were the case, there's no way JB's private area itself would not have been fondled, and there's even less chance that any sexual attack on her would have been anything less than gruesome. That didn't happen. JB's vaginal injury was almost an afterthought.

[joeskidbeck]

Originally Posted by SuperDave

Hey, Beck.



Well, if it was IDI, then he was either incredibly clever or the gods truly do look out for fools. In order for IDI to have done this, they'd have to know everything there was to know. They'd have to have clothes that didn't shed, and yes, they'd have to wear gloves. That's Break-in 101 right there.

As for forgetting himself for a moment, no I don't buy that for a minute, and let me tell you why: the only motive I can possibly think for doing that, was that the guy was such a monstrous pedophile, he couldn't help but touch her with his naked hands. But IF that were the case, there's no way JB's private area itself would not have been fondled, and there's even less chance that any sexual attack on her would have been anything less than gruesome. That didn't happen. JB's vaginal injury was almost an afterthought.

You are exactly right. When I try to think IDI, I can't even come up with a reasonable motive. For those who believe it was to destroy JR, I would have to say "too bad" it didn't work. Yes, JR was devastated by JB's death, but it by no means destroyed him. If someone that devious and clever had been in the house that night they had the power to not only destroy him but to annihilate his whole family!

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by joeskidbeck

You are exactly right. When I try to think IDI, I can't even come up with a reasonable motive.

No single motive explains this crime, IDI-wise.

For those who believe it was to destroy JR, I would have to say "too bad" it didn't work. Yes, JR was devastated by JB's death, but it by no means destroyed him. If someone that devious and clever had been in the house that night they had the power to not only destroy him but to annihilate his whole family!

[madeleine]

Originally Posted by joeskidbeck

You are exactly right. When I try to think IDI, I can't even come up with a reasonable motive. For those who believe it was to destroy JR, I would have to say "too bad" it didn't work. Yes, JR was devastated by JB's death, but it by no means destroyed him. If someone that devious and clever had been in the house that night they had the power to not only destroy him but to annihilate his whole family!

Hi Joe,
this reminded me of a movie I saw recently (Crimes of the past).At the end the russian tells the ex-cia agent "If I kill you,you only die once and that's not enough for me.If I kill your daughter,you'll die every day."


Maybe JR didn't seem destroyed on TV.We don't know how he really took it behind the scenes.

[madeleine]

Originally Posted by joeskidbeck

Hi Dave! Let's look at it the other way for a moment. If IDI, do you think he was lucky or clever? He was extremely clever throughout the whole crime, right up until he took those pesky gloves off in order to touch the long johns. You think he forgot himself for a moment after all those hours in the Ramsey home?

The DNA and WHERE it was found is the ONLY thing that IMO points to a pedo or someone fixated on JB,nothing else does.My only explanation for it is he NEEDED to touch her and didn't care about the risk,the fantasy finally became true.THE moment.

[Linda7NJ]

Originally Posted by madeleine

Hi Joe,
this reminded me of a movie I saw recently (Crimes of the past).At the end the russian tells the ex-cia agent "If I kill you,you only die once and that's not enough for me.If I kill your daughter,you'll die every day."


Maybe JR didn't seem destroyed on TV.We don't know how he really took it behind the scenes.

Well we know he wasn't too worried about intruders after the death of JonBenet.

[madeleine]

Originally Posted by Linda7NJ

Well we know he wasn't too worried about intruders after the death of JonBenet.

You all seem to know him so well.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by Linda7NJ

Well we know he wasn't too worried about intruders after the death of JonBenet.

Originally Posted by madeleine

You all seem to know him so well.

If we could put the sarcasm aside for a moment, all we have to go on is his public behavior. And as far as that goes, he certainly has not ACTED like he was too worried about them. Just to give you a short list:

--going on all of those vacations--some to foreign countries--often leaving BR alone

--And then there's the alleged Atlanta "break-in" I tried to get people to talk about, where JR, by his own admission, claims a thief got into the house through a door that he left WIDE OPEN. (Not that I buy that story for a minute, mind you. For a lot of different reasons.) True or not, it doesn't do much for his claim to be worried about intruders. Especially since in 1998, PR said that if she had it all to do over again, she'd have made the house like a fortress.

I'm sorry, maddy, but from what is out there for us to examine, Linda is right.

And I'm kind of at a loss to figure out where you're coming from. You brought up their seeming lack of feeling yourself.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by madeleine

The DNA and WHERE it was found is the ONLY thing that IMO points to a pedo or someone fixated on JB,nothing else does.

I would agree with that, at least to a point. Indeed, that's one of the big red flags in this case: real crime scenes are not inconsistent.

My only explanation for it is he NEEDED to touch her and didn't care about the risk,the fantasy finally became true.THE moment.

I've heard that argument before, maddy. But as I told joe:

But IF that were the case, there's no way JB's private area itself would not have been fondled, and there's even less chance that any sexual attack on her would have been anything less than gruesome. That didn't happen. JB's vaginal injury was almost an afterthought.

It opens up problems of its own.

[DeeDee249]

Originally Posted by madeleine

You all seem to know him so well.

Do you?

We can only base our opinions on what we see. We saw him (allegedly) leave his Atlanta house unlocked, resulting in an (alleged) break-in. This happened after an (alleged) intruder came into his Boulder house and assaulted and "kidnapped" his daughter to the basement, and killed her.

[MurriFlower]

Hi Guys

While you all have been going about your normal business, I've been using my self imposed 'time out' to work on clues.

I'm not going to debate the pros and cons of this, I haven't either the time or the energy to continue trying to convince any of you who have already know who did it.

So, this is for anyone who still has an open mind about this case.

Take a look at the photo of the blanket in the wine cellar I've been working on. Remember there was a piece of what looked like silver/grey tape stuck on it? Well, in this enhanced photo you can also clearly see some cord that goes around the bottom right corner of the blanket and back to what appears to be something in a fold in the blanket (another stick perhaps?). Although it isn't as clear, there could also be another piece of cord around the other corner (bottom right). Interesting eh?

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/pic...ictureid=10586

If this link is blocked, you can look at the album on my page. So it appears that the blanket may have been tied to JBR with cord? Any ideas??

[DeeDee249]

Originally Posted by MurriFlower

Hi Guys

While you all have been going about your normal business, I've been using my self imposed 'time out' to work on clues.

I'm not going to debate the pros and cons of this, I haven't either the time or the energy to continue trying to convince any of you who have already know who did it.

So, this is for anyone who still has an open mind about this case.

Take a look at the photo of the blanket in the wine cellar I've been working on. Remember there was a piece of what looked like silver/grey tape stuck on it? Well, in this enhanced photo you can also clearly see some cord that goes around the bottom right corner of the blanket and back to what appears to be something in a fold in the blanket (another stick perhaps?). Although it isn't as clear, there could also be another piece of cord around the other corner (bottom right). Interesting eh?

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/pic...ictureid=10586

If this link is blocked, you can look at the album on my page. So it appears that the blanket may have been tied to JBR with cord? Any ideas??

All I see are shadows in the creases of the folds. I do not see any cord. I would hardly call that an enhanced photo. For one, if that cord appears in the crime photo, that meant someone in LE had photographed it, and it would have been taken into evidence with the blanket and tape, and we would know about it. Also, don't forget that JR was not alone in that wineceller with his daughter's body. FW was right behind him. They were in there seconds, not minutes. Don't you think JR would have mentioned if he'd had to unwind cord from her body? And don't you think FW would have seen this? For JR do actually have done everything he said he did (untape her legs, give CPR, try to untie her wrists) to add unwind more cord from the blanket wrapped around her would have taken FAR longer than the time he actually spent down there.

[madeleine]

Originally Posted by SuperDave

If we could put the sarcasm aside for a moment, all we have to go on is his public behavior. And as far as that goes, he certainly has not ACTED like he was too worried about them. Just to give you a short list:

--going on all of those vacations--some to foreign countries--often leaving BR alone

--And then there's the alleged Atlanta "break-in" I tried to get people to talk about, where JR, by his own admission, claims a thief got into the house through a door that he left WIDE OPEN. (Not that I buy that story for a minute, mind you. For a lot of different reasons.) True or not, it doesn't do much for his claim to be worried about intruders. Especially since in 1998, PR said that if she had it all to do over again, she'd have made the house like a fortress.

I'm sorry, maddy, but from what is out there for us to examine, Linda is right.

And I'm kind of at a loss to figure out where you're coming from. You brought up their seeming lack of feeling yourself.

1.It wasn't sarcasm,it's sad actually.
2.Their seeming lack of feeling on tv yes but I have no idea how they reacted in private.Do you?Maybe they cried,maybe they laughed,dunno,at least I don't pretend to know for SURE what happened.
There are indeed some things about their behaviour that make no sense.Does that mean PDI?NO.It could mean JR has a clue re who did it and won't say.Why?Now THAT would be interesting to find out.Maybe it was blackmail,you know I killed her but if you tell I've got some things to tell about you too.
There are two things I find weird.Them calling 911 when the RN clearly said NOT to call LE or she will be executed.And another thing.You guys always blame them for pointing fingers at everybody.This is interesting though,that they actually never said,I FEEL that it was X or it must have been Y BECAUSE...they never had a valid suspect.You will say it's because they did it.But what if you're wrong,what if they didn't but know who.This COULD explain their behaviour.BDI could explain it very well as well.So can JARDI.
Maybe you still don't get it.I don't have a problem with RDI,I have a problem with "PDI is guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT,which is absurd IMO given the (poor) evidence we have,and with people KNOWING FOR SURE that this or that happened.
I don't know whether they were devastated or happy in private,I wasn't there.I can judge what I saw on tv or in the papers,which is maybe not the real thing anyway.

[joeskidbeck]

Madeleine, I agree with what you are saying. I think a lot of RDI's do as well. If there are those that believe with certainty that PDI, well, I'm just not one of them.
I guess I could be called a fence sitter on which "one" I believe it was. That being said, I do believe there are only four choices as to the "who": JR/PR/BR/JAR. I have always believed that there is more to the story of John hiring an attorney for his ex-wife.
You can believe it wasn't to protect her, but himself or JAR.

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by madeleine

1.It wasn't sarcasm,it's sad actually.

Sure sounded like it. But it's neither here nor there, so we'll forget about it. All I'm saying is that, from what is out there for us the public to examine, the rhetoric does not match the reality. One cannot help but be reminded of OJ Simpson promising to track down the real killers, then searching for them on all the golf courses he can find.

Actions speak louder than words, do they not?

2.Their seeming lack of feeling on tv yes but I have no idea how they reacted in private.Do you?Maybe they cried,maybe they laughed,dunno,at least I don't pretend to know for SURE what happened.

Neither do I. You may be right.

There are indeed some things about their behaviour that make no sense.Does that mean PDI?NO.It could mean JR has a clue re who did it and won't say.Why?Now THAT would be interesting to find out.Maybe it was blackmail,you know I killed her but if you tell I've got some things to tell
about you too.

I think there is a lot of merit to what you say. In fact, maybe someone should open a thread on it?

There are two things I find weird.Them calling 911 when the RN clearly said NOT to call LE or she will be executed.

Hear, hear!

And another thing.You guys always blame them for pointing fingers at everybody.This is interesting though,that they actually never said,I FEEL that it was X or it must have been Y BECAUSE...they never had a valid suspect.You will say it's because they did it.But what if you're wrong,what if they didn't but know who.This COULD explain their behaviour.BDI could explain it very well as well.So can JARDI.

Good points.

Maybe you still don't get it.I don't have a problem with RDI,I have a problem with "PDI is guilty BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT,which is absurd IMO given the (poor) evidence we have,and with people KNOWING FOR SURE that this or that happened.

I understand where you're coming from, madeleine; even if it may seem like I don't.

I don't know whether they were devastated or happy in private,I wasn't there.I can judge what I saw on tv or in the papers,which is maybe not the real thing anyway.

I guess that's what I'm saying.

[Linda7NJ]

If I were on a jury, I would have no problem finding Patsy guilty beyond a REASONABLE doubt. Not ALL doubt mind you...REASONABLE. I am 99.9 % certain Patsy was involved in the staging, why stage if you're innocent of any wrong doing?

Did John have anything to do with her actual death? I don't know. I would have more trouble convicting him based on what I THINK I know

[SuperDave]

Originally Posted by MurriFlower

So far 100% reckon they're just lucky, no one has voted for clever. Let's see, can we make a list of their luck in order of importance? I'll start....

1. Incompetent Cops
2. Corrupt DA
3. Stupid Coroner
4. Superhero Attorney(s)
5. Useless Experts
6. Suspect Collusion (lucky or clever??)
7. No witnesses
8. Using a pen that distorted writing (sharpie) (lucky or clever??)
9. The pediatrician not bothering to conduct a vaginal exam
10.The hardware store losing their sales records.


Ok, this is going real good. Looking forward to the next instalment.

Just so nobody forgets what this thread is all about.

[Linda7NJ]

To whoever it was that claimed the Ramseys never came out and named suspects ................




"John appears to have brought with him to the interview a folder containing details of people of interest whom he wanted the investigators to look at.

Much of the interview was spent discussing the contents of the folder. It included Chris Wolf and Flippy Esso and also some guy that a psychic medium described on a tv programme.

TeamRamsey also offered a linguistic analysis which was done on Fleet White using the letters he wrote in newspapers etc and the ransom note.

Lin Wood was reluctant to discuss the findings of the analysis on tape, but if they were offering the police the results of a linguistic analysis, it is doubtful that the analysis was suggesting anything other than a possible match. "

John's interview - Fleet as suspect - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

John's interview - Fleet as suspect - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community

and


"4 MR. WOOD: Before we go there,
5 Bruce, let me say to you, I turned over to
6 Ollie two expandables of stuff that I have
7 gotten for him to look at, including, you
8 may know this, Chief, but I got some really
9 long and detailed analysis of Fleet White's
10 letters compared to the ransom notes from a
11 lawyer in New York. Are you familiar with
12 it? You may not have gotten it yet.
13 MR. BECKNER: I don't believe so.
14 MR. WOOD: He will go through it
15 and get it all to you. I am trying to
16 keep up with it to go to Ollie. It is two
17 expandables of different tips on leads.
18 MR. BECKNER: What type of
19 analysis is it?
20 MR. WOOD: It's a linguistic
21 analysis of the public letters that Fleet
22 White and Priscilla White have written about
23 the case, and they have taken that and done
24 an analysis of the ransom note. So I am
25 not making any suggestions except to describe

25
1 it

****

Q. Was there anybody else besides her
13 who submitted handwriting?
14 MR. WOOD: I told you about the
15 Fleet White package that I received.
16 MR. KANE: Yes. That is right.
17 Fleet White.
18 MR. LEVIN: If I can interrupt
19 for just a second, that's based on
20 linguistics, though, if I understood you?
21 MR. WOOD: To tell you the truth,
22 I haven't, other than to recognize what it
23 was, I did not try to study it. So I
24 wouldn't -- my impression was initially it
25 was linguistics, but it might be, it might

73
1 reference handwriting.
2 MR. KANE: Was that a handwritten
3 note or something of Fleet or --
4 MR. WOOD: No. It's about an
5 inch and a half thick report.
6 MR. KANE: Okay. But it's not
7 handwritten, I was talking about handwriting
8 here, was that in here?
9 MR. WOOD: That is what I was
10 telling Bruce. I didn't study it other than
11 to recognize that it was someone sending me
12 an analysis of Fleet White's writings. And
13 whether it is limited to linguistics or
14 whether it goes into the handwriting issue, I
15 wouldn't state on the record without being
16 certain, but I will get that to you all and
17 you will know exactly what it is. ?


Originally posted by Jayelles!

[joeskidbeck]

I'm sure Patsy considered herself very clever (anyone who wrote that rn had to consider themselves clever) and I'm sure that nobody would argue that John was/is a very shrewd man.

They were both LUCKY that Mary Lacy was in the da's office and that the BPD had virtually no experience with this type of crime.

We need a third option: All of the above.

[DeeDee249]

The Rs also named LHP the very first day. And JR named a former employee, I believe his name was Merrick, wasn't it? And they certainly spoke of the White's in such a way as to case some suspicion on them.