Overkill - Overkill in a homicide refers to the use of excessive force or brutality beyond what is necessary to cause death.

[GRT]

Excellent list. Very interesting take on the 911 call.

I do have to add a fifth item to my list.

The Blue Suitcase
If an intruder had come in and scoped out the house, he would have realized that the butler pantry door was the one closest to the basement and led to the quickest cover under the trees. Even if he had exited through the train room window, it is not credible that he would have stood on the suitcase when there was a small chair in the train room, and a stepping stool, and a higher chair near the stairs, any of which would have provided more stable footing, and all three of which he would have passed at least twice (crime scene video, beginning at 00.51).

Who knows what killers think? If the suitcase was close to the window, it might have seemed like the quickest way to abscond.

What always struck me about that crime scene footage was that they took much of it using only a flashlight, which resulted in inferior resolution. Was there no overhead light in those rooms?

 

[GRT]

It also bears remembering the old saying in law school that "...a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich."

 

[GRT]

A couple more ponders on previous points...

• The Stun Gun: The absence of a perfect match among manufactured stun guns does not rule out the possibility of a stun gun being used. It's possible that an improvised or modified device was used, or that the marks were caused by something else entirely. The absence of a perfect match does not definitively rule out the stun gun theory.
• Claims that the December phone records were wiped clean are unsubstantiated and appear based on speculation. Without concrete evidence to support this claim, it's impossible to draw any conclusions about the motives or actions of those involved.

 

[GRT]

PR was notably upset on the 911 call. It's clear to anyone who listens to that call that she's trying her hardest to light a fire under LE and get them to hurry to her house.

Expecting PR to mention details from the ransom note is unrealistic in my opinion. She was in a state of shock and extreme distress. It's not unusual for people in that heightened emotional state to have difficulty articulating specific details.

Her primary concern was to convey a sense of urgency. Plus, the ransom note contained threats and demands that must have alarmed her, and, given the context of the note, most parents might be fearful of elaborating.

 

[GRT]

The other thing about the ransom note -- MOO -- I think it was written before the killer entered the house and that he intended to get JBR out of the house, but things went south--maybe she woke up and struggled or something, and he killed her.

But, I don't think the killer stuck around to write the note--I think the killer just placed it on the stairs (and that might have even happened earlier before going up to her room). After he killed her--he probably just got out the basement window as quickly as possible.

I think it was an intended kidnapping that inadvertently turned into a murder.

 

[Gunther Toody]

I grew up in Craig, so I can verify the quick-melting phenomenon--especially on the south side of a building. However, wasn't that window on the house's north side?

It's true Smit's observations came from photos, but that's also true for most of the detectives who've worked that case for the past few decades.

The difference, in MOO, is that Smit was more experienced than most PD detectives, and he had a very high success rate in finding perps that others couldn't. He was called in specifically for his high-level of expertise, and he only resigned in frustration when the PD didn't seem interested in looking at the evidence he'd collected.

Smit suffered from tunnel vision in the case, imo.
Once he hypothesized that an intruder committed the crime, I believe it skewed his thought process to the exclusion of other potential evidence as we have discussed here, often.

He should have known better.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Alex Hunter didn't hide the indictments -- there were no indictments. There was only a True Bill, and GJ proceedings are typically sealed.

A True Bill is the same thing as an indictment. Often called a "bill of indictment" or just a "true bill" or just an "indictment". The fact remains that the Grand Jury did in fact vote to indict each parent in this case. Alex Hunter refused to sign the indictments. You can say he did not hide that the jury voted to indict, but he by purposeful omission of revealing that information he allowed the public to believe that indictments were not returned, which of course we were to later learn was not true. DA Hunter exhibited a lot of shady behavior and questionable decisions during the investigation.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Alex Hunter didn't hide the indictments -- there were no indictments. There was only a True Bill, and GJ proceedings are typically sealed.

A True Bill is the same thing as an indictment. Often called a "bill of indictment" or just a "true bill" or just an "indictment". The fact remains that the Grand Jury did in fact vote to indict each parent in this case.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Smit suffered from tunnel vision in the case, imo.
Once he hypothesized that an intruder committed the crime, I believe it skewed his thought process to the exclusion of other potential evidence as we have discussed here, often.

He should have known better.

Agree. Smit decided very early on that the R's were innocent and developed a very close relationship with them which I agree skewed his vision. He then went about making the evidence he saw fit his theory. Much of what he came up with has since been debunked. Both he and John Douglas presented the intruder theory to the Grand Jury and the jury found their evidence to not be sufficient.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Excellent list. Very interesting take on the 911 call.

I do have to add a fifth item to my list.

The Blue Suitcase
If an intruder had come in and scoped out the house, he would have realized that the butler pantry door was the one closest to the basement and led to the quickest cover under the trees. Even if he had exited through the train room window, it is not credible that he would have stood on the suitcase when there was a small chair in the train room, and a stepping stool, and a higher chair near the stairs, any of which would have provided more stable footing, and all three of which he would have passed at least twice (crime scene video, beginning at 00.51).

Excellent list. Very interesting take on the 911 call.

I do have to add a fifth item to my list.

The Blue Suitcase
If an intruder had come in and scoped out the house, he would have realized that the butler pantry door was the one closest to the basement and led to the quickest cover under the trees. Even if he had exited through the train room window, it is not credible that he would have stood on the suitcase when there was a small chair in the train room, and a stepping stool, and a higher chair near the stairs, any of which would have provided more stable footing, and all three of which he would have passed at least twice (crime scene video, beginning at 00.51).

Right there! 3 strikes for the basement window and no logical reason not to to use the chair or stool.. Logic meaning utilizing the most efficient, stable, and expedient means to get out and to not get caught because criminals typically want to avoid this.
Why was she taken to the basement to begin with? The kidnapper went upstairs , scoped her out of bed, and quietly brought her downstairs. He is within feet of an egress, home free with his ticket to $118,000, and a child to act out his perversions as much as he wants but he decides to risk discovery, getting caught, and hang out in the basement for some pre- party fun. Nevermind the fact that he had already hung out for a good long while writing the longest RN in the history of ransom notes. This defies the actions of anyone committing any criminal act unless they wanted to get caught.
I'm honestly surprised he didn't fix a high ball and make some appetizers because he obviously had all the time in the world.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Right there! 3 strikes for the basement window and no logical reason not to to use the chair or stool.. Logic meaning utilizing the most efficient, stable, and expedient means to get out and to not get caught because criminals typically want to avoid this.
Why was she taken to the basement to begin with? The kidnapper went upstairs , scoped her out of bed, and quietly brought her downstairs. He is within feet of an egress, home free with his ticket to $118,000, and a child to act out his perversions as much as he wants but he decides to risk discovery, getting caught, and hang out in the basement for some pre- party fun. Nevermind the fact that he had already hung out for a good long while writing the longest RN in the history of ransom notes. This defies the actions of anyone committing any criminal act unless they wanted to get caught.
I'm honestly surprised he didn't fix a high ball and make some appetizers because he obviously had all the time in the world.

Another thought about the placement of the suitcase. For stability, wouldn’t you want to place it closer to the wall and width-wise so you can put both feet on it next to each other while climbing out? Even then, it defies logic to use the suitcase when a chair and stool were nearby. After all, he had all this time to plan his escape.

There just isn’t anything about the intruder theory that makes any sense.

 

[CloudedTruth]

The other thing about the ransom note -- MOO -- I think it was written before the killer entered the house and that he intended to get JBR out of the house, but things went south--maybe she woke up and struggled or something, and he killed her.

But, I don't think the killer stuck around to write the note--I think the killer just placed it on the stairs (and that might have even happened earlier before going up to her room). After he killed her--he probably just got out the basement window as quickly as possible.

I think it was an intended kidnapping that inadvertently turned into a murder.

So he stole the note pad and pen at some earlier time and then returned everything to the house that night?

He intended to kidnap her, but she struggled and he was afraid someone would hear, so he bonks her over the head, then takes extra time to garrote and strangle her, sexually assault her, run back upstairs to get other clothing, wipe down her body and put different clothes on her but leave what she was wearing before at the scene, then wrap her in her favorite blanket and place her favorite Barbie nightie next to her, and then he suddenly was in a hurry to exit out the window?

That makes zero sense to me.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Another thought about the placement of the suitcase. For stability, wouldn’t you want to place it closer to the wall and width-wise so you can put both feet on it next to each other while climbing out? Even then, it defies logic to use the suitcase when a chair and stool were nearby. After all, he had all this time to plan his escape.

There just isn’t anything about the intruder theory that makes any sense.

What would this tell us about the killer? I would venture to say they were lower IQ , lacked planning, or disorganized mental function but how can that be true if he managed to not leave a single fingerprint , meaningful DNA, and doesn't make a sound in the home despite being in the home for a very extended amount of time.

So do we have an experienced brazen killer or one that lacks the mental ability to make the most basic logical choice but is bright enough to not incriminate himself. Neither have merit when you look at what is factually known to have transpired.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I was going to mention it but decided that what I'd written was long enough! It's good you included this detail.

From the time I began following the case online, I realized the house is the key to everything. It holds so much information. If you don't know the house, you don't get the case.

I feel the same. The first sign to me was the sheer number of doors available to exit.
A real head scratcher.

 

[Meara]

I grew up in Craig, so I can verify the quick-melting phenomenon--especially on the south side of a building. However, wasn't that window on the house's north side?

South. Butler's Pantry is the north side.

https://rkodiva80.files.wordpress.com/2022/10/main-floor-floor-plan-1.jpg

 

[TizerisT]

Another thought about the placement of the suitcase. For stability, wouldn’t you want to place it closer to the wall and width-wise so you can put both feet on it next to each other while climbing out? Even then, it defies logic to use the suitcase when a chair and stool were nearby. After all, he had all this time to plan his escape.

There just isn’t anything about the intruder theory that makes any sense.

It was originally placed flush against the wall. It was inexplicably moved by BPD, specifically Arndt if I remember correctly.

 

[Gunther Toody]

It was originally placed flush against the wall. It was inexplicably moved by BPD, specifically Arndt if I remember correctly.

04-14-2000 Larry King Live with former Detective Steve Thomas

Larry King: "What about the suitcase under the bedroom window?"

Steve Thomas: "Well, I think that's easily explained -- under the basement window."

Larry King: "Basement window."

Steve Thomas: "One, a witness in the house that day moved the suitcase, but I don't think these crime scene photos that some are relying upon are necessarily indicative of what a true pristine crime scene was that day."

Larry King: "Meaning?"

Steve Thomas: "Meaning, the suitcase was moved at one point during the day before that photograph was taken."

 

[GRT]

It was originally placed flush against the wall. It was inexplicably moved by BPD, specifically Arndt if I remember correctly.

It seems as though there were a lot of crime scene mistakes. Maybe that was partly due to friends of the Ramsey's coming to the home, but LE was at fault, too.

I hadn't previously known about the suitcase being flush with the wall, but I wondered if it hadn't scooted somehow when the intruder climbed on it.

Thanks for that.

 

[CloudedTruth]

04-14-2000 Larry King Live with former Detective Steve Thomas

Larry King: "What about the suitcase under the bedroom window?"

Steve Thomas: "Well, I think that's easily explained -- under the basement window."

Larry King: "Basement window."

Steve Thomas: "One, a witness in the house that day moved the suitcase, but I don't think these crime scene photos that some are relying upon are necessarily indicative of what a true pristine crime scene was that day."

Larry King: "Meaning?"

Steve Thomas: "Meaning, the suitcase was moved at one point during the day before that photograph was taken."

I did a little digging about this, and it seems that it was Fleet White who moved the suitcase.

 

[CloudedTruth]

What I read was that Boulder PD withheld some of the DNA because it gets used up in testing, they didn't have a lot of it to start with, and they wanted to reserve some until the technology improved. I'd have to look for the source on that, but I'm pretty sure that's what was reported. It's credible but may or may be true. Have you ever come across that explanation for the withheld DNA?

Yes, this has been reported locally as what Boulder PD and the DA have indicated. There is such a small amount left at this point, as they have tested 3 times already. I've also read that apparently the labs that LE uses are not quite as up to date with the latest technology as some private labs are. I would imagine that the cost for the latest technology at a private lab might not be in the budget.