The Anatomy of a Motive

[K777angel]

I think the "motive" in the death of JonBenet Ramsey is two-fold: the first was not one of pre-meditation but one of rage. This was not an "organized" crime but was disorganized. No one entered that home with the intention of doing anything to the Ramsey child. Not to kidnap nor to molest. No stranger or person outside of the 3 other Ramseyes who were in the home that night were there. There is absolutely NO evidence to support the "intruder" theory. Yet there IS staging attempting to suggest these motives. The problem is, unbeknownst to the amateur perp(s) - the two (kidnapping for ransom and sexual molestation) do NOT overlap! The experts have made this quite clear. They are two completely different animals. This in itself with the note and the evidence of what really DID occur to JonBenet - was a HUGE red flag that this was a staged homicide. Among many other pieces of evidence.
So there was no pre-meditated "motive" in this case. It was a crime of passion so to speak. Someone lashed out at JonBenet in anger and rage and then horrified at what had occurred - proceeded to cover the crime up and stage it to look like something it was not.

The second "motive" in what we see in the crime is simply diversion. We see this with all the staging that took place. In fact, the FBI after analyzing the case stated that there was actually "staging within staging" in this case.
Things were OVER done. (So Patsy). From the note to the abuse of her body. She was most likely molested, bashed in the head when the molester became enraged, then THINKING she was already "dead" - the stager(s) needed to come up with a VISIBLE indicator of why she was in fact lying there dead. They knew in a matter of hours the police would be called in, the body eventually found and the first obvious question they'd ask is: HOW DID SHE DIE?
Remember that up until they placed an "object" (cord) around her neck - there was NO visible wound. They'd wiped away the evidence best they could of the sexual abuse and put her clothes back on.
But the blow to the head was also HIDDEN. No blood. Nothing. No one even knew she'd been clubbed until the coroner peeled back her scalp during the autopsy. Nor did anyone know she'd been sexually assaulted.
So UP UNTIL THAT POINT - everyone believed she had died from simple strangulation. The fake ransom note ruse worked. For awhile. Long enough to lawyer up. The note kept the authorities at bay as planned, until the lawyers could take over.

I could go on and on listing all the evidence that supports an inside familial homicide cover up. From Patsy's lie about the time-line that morning when she claims to have "gotten up" and all that she did between a little after 5:30am to 5:52am when she called 911 and 6:00am when the first officer arrived at their door and Patsy was fulled dressed (in the SAME exact clothing she had on the night before mind you) and made up, haid done etc.... to their lie about Burke being awake that morning....to John Ramsey's statement that a chair was pushed up against the door IN THE HALLWAY into the room in the basement with the broken window thereby rendering the "intruder coming in or out" that window silly and untrue....on and on.
You must ask yourself WHY - if this crime was committed by some as yet unknown "intruder" - would the Ramseys in even ONE instance LIE????? It makes absolutely no sense. Unless you are continuing to cover up the truth.

So in my opinion there are 2 motives behind this crime. One was not pre-meditated as far as killing JonBenet went - that is the heat of passion "rage" that resulted from frustration when molesting her.
The other WAS premeditated: the cover up and staging.

The bottom-line reason no one was ever charged in this crime is that the authorities could never pinpoint EXACTLY "who did what" enough to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law.
You cannot charge 2 people with the same crime because you know "one of them did it."
Also, if Burke Ramsey was deemed to be the actual perp that originated this crime - he could not be charged in Colorado for ANY crime as he was just under the bar of the age of 10 at the time of the crime.
And because no one would have been charged with the crime - no one else can then be charged with accessory to the crime. Because there was no crime - legally speaking.

If there was any "motive" that started the whole sequence of sad events in this crime it was: sexual abuse.
I don't believe there was ever a motive of death. It was just an unforseen and tragic RESULT of the first motive gone awry.

 

[RedChief]

RedChief: Thanks for the thorough recap. I didn't mean to imply that the L&L note was the only source; it's just that it & the Ramsey note have a strikingly similar overall feel. I also doubt that the writer would associate the description "two gentlemen" with famous movie stars (1 of whom was not known for being a gentleman)--assuming you were serious about that picture(?)--whereas I can understand how the images of L&L could hang in the cobwebs of the brain of someone who perused the case.

I'll let PR's various outbursts & body language as documented since day 1 speak for themselves. As for Betty Baby, spare us. I'm in the habit of feeling sorry for murder victims and not for their killers, but I'm funny that way.

"Though it gets me nowhere, I go there proud . . . "

Sky, I coulda sworn you were placin' a lotta emphasis on the L&L note. I don't see much overall strikingly similar feel, but I'm a tree person, so it's understandable that I'd not have that impression.

I'll tell you this about the term, "gentlemen", for what it's worth. If you've watched many John Wayne films--and you probably haven't--you'll notice that he sometimes refers to low-lifes as gentlemen. Being from the West myself, I'm familiar with that linguistic behavior. I know there is a term for that kind of euphemistic (for lack of a better word) expression, because I once knew it and was mighty proud of myself accordingly. I've long since forgotten it and my self-esteem has plummeted accordingly. At any rate, when one expresses oneself like that--in the John Wayne or Matt Dillon fashion--one is applying a description that is quite a bit opposite to what one really means, but which Westerners understand perfectly well. More proof that it wasn't a Southerner who wrote the note.

My impression of the potential conduct of "two gentlemen", based on the kidnapping circumstance (the context), and the declaration that they don't particularly like John, and the stated intention of the foreign faction to do maximum harm to the child if necessary, and the fact of the vaginal injury, is that the writer is implying that the girl will be hurt in a sexual way if John doesn't knuckle down and comply. Hence the term, "gentlemen", a euphemism for bastards.

Of course, having this understanding and promoting it, still creates some difficulty for me (my analysis), from your point of view, because in so proclaiming, I have done injury to my movie poster hypothesis by demanding that both Sinatra and Tracy be scumbags, which also accommodates your observation--they ain't both "gentlemen" in the John Wayne sense.

Now, you say you doubt that the note writer would associate the description, "two gentlemen", with famous movie stars. What gives rise to that doubt? Consider that the poster is in close proximity to the room in which the child is lying (when the note is written according to some), and one could easily imagine that they are "watching over", whereas the idea of L&L as 'watchers over' is more abstract; and hence, less believable.

PR's various outbursts and body language? They say, I am like Betty Broderick? Speak to me with thine eyes only.

A skunk is a skunk whether dead or alive...

 

[skybluepink]

Tree person: I had never heard tell of this poster, but that part of your hypothesis fits with a part of one of mine awhile back, which is that the writer may have been trying to plant clues to JR about the location of JBR. (1) JR would have known about the poster & might have made the connection, and (2) crossing out "delivery" & replacing it with "pickup" draws attention to the distinction between the 2 acts & foreshadows what will in fact happen.

FYI--I don't have John Wayne's cement footprints under my bed or anything, but the movies have entertainment value sho 'nuf. And I hate to drag the nice man into this revolting case. They don't make Johns like they used to.

 

[RedChief]

Tree person: I had never heard tell of this poster, but that part of your hypothesis fits with a part of one of mine awhile back, which is that the writer may have been trying to plant clues to JR about the location of JBR. (1) JR would have known about the poster & might have made the connection, and (2) crossing out "delivery" & replacing it with "pickup" draws attention to the distinction between the 2 acts & foreshadows what will in fact happen.

FYI--I don't have John Wayne's cement footprints under my bed or anything, but the movies have entertainment value sho 'nuf. And I hate to drag the nice man into this revolting case. They don't make Johns like they used to.

Well, it's good that you haven't done what you hate to do--drag the movie giant into the case. But ya' don't mind draggin' y'self into th' case, under a proper pseudonym, and takin' shots at the Parkersburg Princess. Well, I do declare! Do you consider y'self properly apprised of the significance of the two gentlemen?

The poster is mentioned in PMPT, paperback, page 109, the Ramsey murder case bible.

Crossing out delivery and replacing it with pick-up, is just the writer's way of correcting a mistake made by force of habit, as I have so eloquently explained hereinbefore.

Now why would the writer be trying to plant clues for John concerning the location of JBR? After all, he did request a ransom, no? He wouldn't be leadin' John to the collateral, for gosh sakes!

You're very welcome....

 

[skybluepink]

Dear Mr. Tree Guy:
Point of order: Which one of us dragged the nice man into this thing? Let's think, let's think. Oh yeah: it was you.

"Properly apprised" of the 2 gentlemen or properly anything else I'm usually not. And if the writer of the RN (to whom you amusingly refer as "he" when it's as plain as the nose on your face that it was "she") had been reading Shakespeare, the gentlemen could be FROM VERONA, so let's not rule that out either. OK, we'll rule it out.

I'll serious up here only to reiterate the contention/wild guess that the broad likely wrote that there note before doing anything else connected with the crime. She sprinkled a few private jokes along the stream of consciousness as she poured out her repressed and conflicted emotions.

What IS a tree person anyhow? Are there peoples what DON'T like trees?

(I like trees.)

 

[RedChief]

A tree person is someone who gets bogged down in detail and waits for an alligator to come along and drag him to shore; after which, if he survives the rescue, he fades into the forest.

Yes, the Verona guys; I thought of that two...rrrr...too.

I have a new theory (my theory du jour); it involves Patsy as the intruder, and her being locked out sans key and having to crawl in through the basement window. You're gonna love it.

Do you like dead chickens?

Feeding time!........

 

[Nova]

I think the "motive" in the death of JonBenet Ramsey is two-fold...

Great post, K777. I wish we could have a "forensic roundtable" with the original coroner (Meyer?) and Lee and whomever Thomas consulted, etc. I don't even know whether to accept as fact that JBR was molested. The coroner who wrote the word "chronic" has never elaborated, has he?

 

[skybluepink]

RC:
Gratefully enlightened, and reminded of the apocryphal words of the late Chicago mayor Richard J. Daly--"It's all well and good to repeat allegations, but answer me this: "Where are the alligators?"

 

[RedChief]

RC:
Gratefully enlightened, and reminded of the apocryphal words of the late Chicago mayor Richard J. Daly--"It's all well and good to repeat allegations, but answer me this: "Where are the alligators?"

SBP: Basking in the sun and digesting incautious dingos.

 

[Nova]

SBP: Basking in the sun and digesting incautious dingos.

Those would be crocodiles, Red. Alligators are indigenous only to the Western Hemisphere. (At last! Something I do know!)

 

[RedChief]

Those would be crocodiles, Red. Alligators are indigenous only to the Western Hemisphere. (At last! Something I do know!)

Let's see, Boulder Colorado is in the Western Hemisphere, and Sky's dingo ate the missing evidence, so, Sky, you erred; your dingo is an exotic species. Oh, it was imported? I see.

 

[Nova]

Let's see, Boulder Colorado is in the Western Hemisphere, and Sky's dingo ate the missing evidence, so, Sky, you erred; your dingo is an exotic species. Oh, it was imported? I see.

First eucalyptus tree and now dingos! Damn Aussies! Will the invasion never end!? (But I say we keep Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman.)

 

[RedChief]

First eucalyptus tree and now dingos! Damn Aussies! Will the invasion never end!? (But I say we keep Nicole Kidman and Hugh Jackman.)

Kidman for sure.

Jackman? You've got to be kidding. Crowe, Russell. Now him I wouldn't mind; ain't he beautiful!

over...