Nedthan Johns
New Member
I actually think we are all closer today to solving this case then we were years ago and heres why:
John Mark Karr may have helped this case more than he knows. To me, the very idea of an intruder now is ridiculous. Too many variables for getting in and out of the house and little to NO evidence to suggest an intruder. Henry Lee PROVED that you CAN get degraded DNA off panties straight from the manufacturer. Thats HUGE folks! The DNA is a mute point. Its basically worthless in this case and NOT conclusive of an intruder. Because of it degraded state, it can NEVER at this point identify anyone. It can only be used to exclude people. But the fact is we dont even know if it had anything to do with the crime, because it could have been there prior to it. I believe JMK has regenerated this case, and that is a good thing. We now have thousands more looking at it with fresh eyes. There were things a lot of us old time posters missed or may have not thought were as important when originally discussed. I think the biggest breakthroughs for me have been the suggestion of Klonopin and the facts surrounding the window. I have come to what I hope is my final and most understandable theory.
The window did three things for me. It made it clear to me that John Ramsey was LYING. That the door according to him was BLOCKED by a chair and other stuff as he put it and that he had to actually MOVE the chair before getting into the train room where the basement window was located when he went down to the basement alone around 10am. He is VERY CLEAR on this. Neither Fleet nor detective French mention having to move items to get into that room, and even if they did WHY would they replace them to re-block the door? Doesnt make sense. It proves to me that John Ramsey was IN the basement prior to the 911 call and to me this implicates him in the crime prior to the 911 call, which I previously did not believe. Also I cant believe a detective would see a window opened an 8th of an inch and not note it or shut the window. It was his JOB to search for a possible way for an intruder to gain entrance in into the house. He wasnt even looking for a child at this point, he was looking for a way in or out. Now I know the Ramseys want us to believe the BPD are nit wits, but this is too far of a stretch for me. This is collaborated by Fleet who also reported the window closed, but that he noticed the latch was unlocked. If he looked at that window to notice if it was unlocked or not, he surely would have noticed if it was open an 8th of an inch. John Ramsey is full of it. And now it makes complete sense why Fleet White no longer speaks to him. This account and the fact that Fleet White heard JR call out for JB before he hit the light switch in the windowless room, make Fleet White a key witness for this case. Fleet knows that Ramsey lied, WHY? Lastly what idiot would find an open window when his daughter is still presumed missing at this point and not only NOT report it, but close it and then return quietly back upstairs flipping through the mail???? Why would ANYONE be looking through their mail when they are supposedly waiting for a call from a kidnapper?? If the window was indeed open as John suggests, that means ALL THREE of them saw it open and didnt report it. Why didnt Lou question him on this in his interview with him? John never even suggested to Linda Ardnt that he was in the basement. If this doesnt shout BS I dont know what does. John Ramsey KNEW he daughter was already dead and KNEW exactly where she was.
I have come to the conclusion based on these FACTS above that John Ramsey was involved in this crime PRIOR to the 911 call. That doesnt mean he killed her at this point, but it does mean he was part of the cover up a lot earlier on. The interview between Lou Smit and John Ramsey PROVE to ME, John was lying. This I am now CERTAIN of.
Now I spoke with a buddy of mine recently that knows nothing about the facts in this case, just so I could get his point of view. He raised more questions but for me started to hone in on WHO actually murdered JB and I think that is where most of us are at now. I think the majority of us have come to the conclusion it was one of the Ramseys, question is, which one? I think we can answer this by process of elimination, due to KNOWN evidence. If we follow the evidence, it will lead us to the killer.
Lets talk cover up for one minute.
My buddy said if his wife had accidentally hurt one of their children, he may help cover for the crime, because (as many have said here before), John had already lost one daughter, Beth, JB was now gone, he wouldnt have wanted to lose Patsy. I also believe that Patsy Ramsey is mentally ill (I will get to this later and John knew it) In fact my buddy said, it would have been the ONLY reason he could think of to help cover, is if he knew his wife was mentally ill and didnt want to lose her too. I have long dismissed the Burke theory not because I dont think he was capable of the blow to her head, but because I for one dont think the Ramseys would have ever of taken the chance of letting him out of their site that morning or soon there after. Burke didnt do it. Its as simple as that. That child was ushered out of that house as quickly as possible. The Ramseys would have kept him close.
I explained to my friend the garrote handle and he brought up an important observation. First of all he felt as I did that a woman would be much more likely to have used a handle for more leverage to strangle a child. A man would not have needed to tie on a piece of wood for that. I know Lous theory is that this was done as some sort of sex toy. But again with lack of evidence of an intruder that would leave the parents to employ the sex play and I just dont see them doing that. We know for a fact that JB was strangled from behind and that there appeared to be a foot print on her back. Again something a woman would need to do or someone with less strength. John Ramsey would not have needed to do this. Not under any circumstances. Therefore in my book, it rules out the possibility that John Ramsey strangled JB. So we are either left with a weak intruder (JMK) would have fit the bill but we all know he wasnt there, or a woman. Patsy is already implicated in the crime given the evidence as we know it:
Patsys fibers are found on the garrote
Patsys fibers on the sticky side of the duct tape
Patsys fibers are found on JB
Patsys fibers are found in the paint tote
It was Patsys paintbrush used for the handle
Patsy was the only one in the home that could not be excluded as the author of the note
Patsy was dressed in the same outfit as she had on the evening before
Patsy claimed she had never gone down in the basement that morning, yet her fibers were everywhere
Patsys prints were found on the pineapple bowl
Patsy purchased items that matched the same amount as the rope and tape (this is important to my theory later on)
There is NO evidence that John Ramsey was anywhere near the rope, tape or crime scene.
We only have ONE thing that may link John to JB and that is the suggestion that his shirt fibers from his collar were found on JBs vagina. Was this ever confirmed as a fact? Or a ploy by detectives to get him to confess to the murder?
Now lets discuss the rope marks found on JB. Obviously she had to be alive when they occurred. Lou believes the garrote was fashioned for sexual reasons and that the rope was tightened and loosened on her as a form of sex play. We dont know that for certain. What we do see and know for certain is that there is a lower red mark on her neck and then what appears to be red marks riding up higher until the rope finally is embedded in the neck in its final resting place once she was strangled. Again consistent with someone strangling her from behind indicative of the rope riding up on her neck as she is being pulled backward. I dont agree with Smit that the marks on JBs neck are from her scratching at the rope. I believe as the coroner stated these are small hemorrhages caused by the constriction of the rope. I believe the stun gun theory is a long shot, considering the manufacturer didnt think they were produced by them and the Ramseys refusal to exhume the body to prove otherwise. I dismiss it as a non issue. Its like taking any of the marks on JBs body and coming up with other options as to how they got there. Fact is fact, the Ramseys REFUSED to exhume, and without the skin tissue samples, we will never know for sure.
So the biggest question in this crime second to who actually murdered her, would be, was this a sexual crime or an accident followed by a cover up, or both?
Here is what we know from her vaginal injuries and a question I raise.
Her hymen was torn but in tact.
There was no penile penetration
There was little blood (only 2 drops) or trauma to her vagina
There was a splinter found lodged in her vaginal wall
There was no semen found on her body
Now it was said that JB was molested with the BROKEN END of the paintbrush. Where was this stated as fact? Can someone help me here? Is this certain? Reason is my buddy brought up a good point, that wouldnt there have been more bleeding from a jagged paintbrush stuck up in such a small area? So if someone was for instance simulating rape as in staged, even if the child was already dead, there would have been more damage to her vagina. And if they were simulating rape as a form to cover for the head trauma, why then wipe the child down and re-dress her? So this was NO staging. Whoever was molesting her, didnt want others to know. Wouldnt a paintbrush have made a perfect simulation of a penis on a child that age? That due to the fact that we all know this childs vagina opening was 2 times larger than that of a normal child, we know for CERTAIN that this child was definitely being sexually abused prior in some fashion. Thats even confirmed in Thomas book by experts. Question now is, by whom? We all know that Patsy brought JB to the Doctors office an unusual amount of times prior to her murder. WHY? Was she covering her tracks? Back to my buddys theory that he believes someone was molesting the child with the paintbrush prior to it being broken. That the rope may or may not have been used as some sort of sexual play, but obviously used in ending her life. Perhaps JB was tired of playing or threatened to tell, or was being punished for wetting the bed. Either way she WAS molested and she WAS strangled and she WAS cracked in the skull. Who ever did this to JB was angry and lost control. Now given that information and all the KNOWN facts that link Patsy to the crime, is it conceivable that Patsy was sexually abusing JB for wetting the bed, lost her temper cracked her in the skull then used that same paint brush as a handle to strangle her child? When she pulled the rope, the paintbrush broke on the one end where the brush was attached. Look again at the autopsy photos and notice how both ends of the paint brush are jagged. There has been the assumption that a piece is missing. But this was an old brush and to me it just looks like the one end is worn down. Its even cut at an angle like a lot of wood brushes are. I dont think there ever was a missing piece, as the brush end was found back in Patsys tote. I think the whole missing piece is wishful thinking on the intruder theory. Also, what intruder cleans up after themselves? Why would he care to return the brush end to the paint tote? Again all of this to me implies only ONE person, Patsy.
Then you have the fact that she was wiped down.-Again to cover the real crime here, SEXUAL ABUSE. A sexual predator wouldnt care to cover that crime. Thats WHY he commits it, hes a sexual predator. Most sexual predators even pose their victims after the fact. But this child was wiped down and re-dressed and then covered up (indicative of showing love for the child). If it was a true kidnapping, why was there a sexual crime? The note makes NO mention of sexual abuse. Its all about a kidnapping. Therefore whoever molested JB was trying to HIDE IT. Then she was re-dressed. Here is where I think John may have come in to play. I once had thought that Patsy struck JB in the skull then panicked and either strangled JB to put her out of her misery or didnt realize she was dead at the time she tried to make it look like something it wasnt perhaps with the intent to fool John as well. But what we do now know for sure is John knew JB was dead before 911 was called. This child did not slowly asphyxiate in a sex game, IMO. I also once thought that John strangled JB, but Patsys fibers and the fact that a handle was constructed along with a foot print on JBs back clearly implement Patsy. If John was the molester, he wouldnt have needed the garrote handle or used his foot for leverage. This is huge because to me it means JR couldnt have been the molester. Because look at it this way, if he was and Patsy came in and caught them, and struck at John but missed and hit JB as many here once believed, he would have had to of made Patsy finish off JB off by strangling her instead of doing it himself because all the evidence found on the cord, tape and paint tote only point to Patsy. Therefore due to the evidence that we know, JR has been excluded as the sexual predator and the person who strangled JB IMO.
continued...
John Mark Karr may have helped this case more than he knows. To me, the very idea of an intruder now is ridiculous. Too many variables for getting in and out of the house and little to NO evidence to suggest an intruder. Henry Lee PROVED that you CAN get degraded DNA off panties straight from the manufacturer. Thats HUGE folks! The DNA is a mute point. Its basically worthless in this case and NOT conclusive of an intruder. Because of it degraded state, it can NEVER at this point identify anyone. It can only be used to exclude people. But the fact is we dont even know if it had anything to do with the crime, because it could have been there prior to it. I believe JMK has regenerated this case, and that is a good thing. We now have thousands more looking at it with fresh eyes. There were things a lot of us old time posters missed or may have not thought were as important when originally discussed. I think the biggest breakthroughs for me have been the suggestion of Klonopin and the facts surrounding the window. I have come to what I hope is my final and most understandable theory.
The window did three things for me. It made it clear to me that John Ramsey was LYING. That the door according to him was BLOCKED by a chair and other stuff as he put it and that he had to actually MOVE the chair before getting into the train room where the basement window was located when he went down to the basement alone around 10am. He is VERY CLEAR on this. Neither Fleet nor detective French mention having to move items to get into that room, and even if they did WHY would they replace them to re-block the door? Doesnt make sense. It proves to me that John Ramsey was IN the basement prior to the 911 call and to me this implicates him in the crime prior to the 911 call, which I previously did not believe. Also I cant believe a detective would see a window opened an 8th of an inch and not note it or shut the window. It was his JOB to search for a possible way for an intruder to gain entrance in into the house. He wasnt even looking for a child at this point, he was looking for a way in or out. Now I know the Ramseys want us to believe the BPD are nit wits, but this is too far of a stretch for me. This is collaborated by Fleet who also reported the window closed, but that he noticed the latch was unlocked. If he looked at that window to notice if it was unlocked or not, he surely would have noticed if it was open an 8th of an inch. John Ramsey is full of it. And now it makes complete sense why Fleet White no longer speaks to him. This account and the fact that Fleet White heard JR call out for JB before he hit the light switch in the windowless room, make Fleet White a key witness for this case. Fleet knows that Ramsey lied, WHY? Lastly what idiot would find an open window when his daughter is still presumed missing at this point and not only NOT report it, but close it and then return quietly back upstairs flipping through the mail???? Why would ANYONE be looking through their mail when they are supposedly waiting for a call from a kidnapper?? If the window was indeed open as John suggests, that means ALL THREE of them saw it open and didnt report it. Why didnt Lou question him on this in his interview with him? John never even suggested to Linda Ardnt that he was in the basement. If this doesnt shout BS I dont know what does. John Ramsey KNEW he daughter was already dead and KNEW exactly where she was.
I have come to the conclusion based on these FACTS above that John Ramsey was involved in this crime PRIOR to the 911 call. That doesnt mean he killed her at this point, but it does mean he was part of the cover up a lot earlier on. The interview between Lou Smit and John Ramsey PROVE to ME, John was lying. This I am now CERTAIN of.
Now I spoke with a buddy of mine recently that knows nothing about the facts in this case, just so I could get his point of view. He raised more questions but for me started to hone in on WHO actually murdered JB and I think that is where most of us are at now. I think the majority of us have come to the conclusion it was one of the Ramseys, question is, which one? I think we can answer this by process of elimination, due to KNOWN evidence. If we follow the evidence, it will lead us to the killer.
Lets talk cover up for one minute.
My buddy said if his wife had accidentally hurt one of their children, he may help cover for the crime, because (as many have said here before), John had already lost one daughter, Beth, JB was now gone, he wouldnt have wanted to lose Patsy. I also believe that Patsy Ramsey is mentally ill (I will get to this later and John knew it) In fact my buddy said, it would have been the ONLY reason he could think of to help cover, is if he knew his wife was mentally ill and didnt want to lose her too. I have long dismissed the Burke theory not because I dont think he was capable of the blow to her head, but because I for one dont think the Ramseys would have ever of taken the chance of letting him out of their site that morning or soon there after. Burke didnt do it. Its as simple as that. That child was ushered out of that house as quickly as possible. The Ramseys would have kept him close.
I explained to my friend the garrote handle and he brought up an important observation. First of all he felt as I did that a woman would be much more likely to have used a handle for more leverage to strangle a child. A man would not have needed to tie on a piece of wood for that. I know Lous theory is that this was done as some sort of sex toy. But again with lack of evidence of an intruder that would leave the parents to employ the sex play and I just dont see them doing that. We know for a fact that JB was strangled from behind and that there appeared to be a foot print on her back. Again something a woman would need to do or someone with less strength. John Ramsey would not have needed to do this. Not under any circumstances. Therefore in my book, it rules out the possibility that John Ramsey strangled JB. So we are either left with a weak intruder (JMK) would have fit the bill but we all know he wasnt there, or a woman. Patsy is already implicated in the crime given the evidence as we know it:
Patsys fibers are found on the garrote
Patsys fibers on the sticky side of the duct tape
Patsys fibers are found on JB
Patsys fibers are found in the paint tote
It was Patsys paintbrush used for the handle
Patsy was the only one in the home that could not be excluded as the author of the note
Patsy was dressed in the same outfit as she had on the evening before
Patsy claimed she had never gone down in the basement that morning, yet her fibers were everywhere
Patsys prints were found on the pineapple bowl
Patsy purchased items that matched the same amount as the rope and tape (this is important to my theory later on)
There is NO evidence that John Ramsey was anywhere near the rope, tape or crime scene.
We only have ONE thing that may link John to JB and that is the suggestion that his shirt fibers from his collar were found on JBs vagina. Was this ever confirmed as a fact? Or a ploy by detectives to get him to confess to the murder?
Now lets discuss the rope marks found on JB. Obviously she had to be alive when they occurred. Lou believes the garrote was fashioned for sexual reasons and that the rope was tightened and loosened on her as a form of sex play. We dont know that for certain. What we do see and know for certain is that there is a lower red mark on her neck and then what appears to be red marks riding up higher until the rope finally is embedded in the neck in its final resting place once she was strangled. Again consistent with someone strangling her from behind indicative of the rope riding up on her neck as she is being pulled backward. I dont agree with Smit that the marks on JBs neck are from her scratching at the rope. I believe as the coroner stated these are small hemorrhages caused by the constriction of the rope. I believe the stun gun theory is a long shot, considering the manufacturer didnt think they were produced by them and the Ramseys refusal to exhume the body to prove otherwise. I dismiss it as a non issue. Its like taking any of the marks on JBs body and coming up with other options as to how they got there. Fact is fact, the Ramseys REFUSED to exhume, and without the skin tissue samples, we will never know for sure.
So the biggest question in this crime second to who actually murdered her, would be, was this a sexual crime or an accident followed by a cover up, or both?
Here is what we know from her vaginal injuries and a question I raise.
Her hymen was torn but in tact.
There was no penile penetration
There was little blood (only 2 drops) or trauma to her vagina
There was a splinter found lodged in her vaginal wall
There was no semen found on her body
Now it was said that JB was molested with the BROKEN END of the paintbrush. Where was this stated as fact? Can someone help me here? Is this certain? Reason is my buddy brought up a good point, that wouldnt there have been more bleeding from a jagged paintbrush stuck up in such a small area? So if someone was for instance simulating rape as in staged, even if the child was already dead, there would have been more damage to her vagina. And if they were simulating rape as a form to cover for the head trauma, why then wipe the child down and re-dress her? So this was NO staging. Whoever was molesting her, didnt want others to know. Wouldnt a paintbrush have made a perfect simulation of a penis on a child that age? That due to the fact that we all know this childs vagina opening was 2 times larger than that of a normal child, we know for CERTAIN that this child was definitely being sexually abused prior in some fashion. Thats even confirmed in Thomas book by experts. Question now is, by whom? We all know that Patsy brought JB to the Doctors office an unusual amount of times prior to her murder. WHY? Was she covering her tracks? Back to my buddys theory that he believes someone was molesting the child with the paintbrush prior to it being broken. That the rope may or may not have been used as some sort of sexual play, but obviously used in ending her life. Perhaps JB was tired of playing or threatened to tell, or was being punished for wetting the bed. Either way she WAS molested and she WAS strangled and she WAS cracked in the skull. Who ever did this to JB was angry and lost control. Now given that information and all the KNOWN facts that link Patsy to the crime, is it conceivable that Patsy was sexually abusing JB for wetting the bed, lost her temper cracked her in the skull then used that same paint brush as a handle to strangle her child? When she pulled the rope, the paintbrush broke on the one end where the brush was attached. Look again at the autopsy photos and notice how both ends of the paint brush are jagged. There has been the assumption that a piece is missing. But this was an old brush and to me it just looks like the one end is worn down. Its even cut at an angle like a lot of wood brushes are. I dont think there ever was a missing piece, as the brush end was found back in Patsys tote. I think the whole missing piece is wishful thinking on the intruder theory. Also, what intruder cleans up after themselves? Why would he care to return the brush end to the paint tote? Again all of this to me implies only ONE person, Patsy.
Then you have the fact that she was wiped down.-Again to cover the real crime here, SEXUAL ABUSE. A sexual predator wouldnt care to cover that crime. Thats WHY he commits it, hes a sexual predator. Most sexual predators even pose their victims after the fact. But this child was wiped down and re-dressed and then covered up (indicative of showing love for the child). If it was a true kidnapping, why was there a sexual crime? The note makes NO mention of sexual abuse. Its all about a kidnapping. Therefore whoever molested JB was trying to HIDE IT. Then she was re-dressed. Here is where I think John may have come in to play. I once had thought that Patsy struck JB in the skull then panicked and either strangled JB to put her out of her misery or didnt realize she was dead at the time she tried to make it look like something it wasnt perhaps with the intent to fool John as well. But what we do now know for sure is John knew JB was dead before 911 was called. This child did not slowly asphyxiate in a sex game, IMO. I also once thought that John strangled JB, but Patsys fibers and the fact that a handle was constructed along with a foot print on JBs back clearly implement Patsy. If John was the molester, he wouldnt have needed the garrote handle or used his foot for leverage. This is huge because to me it means JR couldnt have been the molester. Because look at it this way, if he was and Patsy came in and caught them, and struck at John but missed and hit JB as many here once believed, he would have had to of made Patsy finish off JB off by strangling her instead of doing it himself because all the evidence found on the cord, tape and paint tote only point to Patsy. Therefore due to the evidence that we know, JR has been excluded as the sexual predator and the person who strangled JB IMO.
continued...