Was the Ramsey house typically a mess?

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I believe it was WS'er Bluecrab who developed the Doug Stine theory, which proposes that Doug accompanied the Ramseys home, and that he and BR played a sex game with JBR that went horribly wrong and then staged the basement scene and wrote the RN. Allegedly, DS borrowed BR's bicycle to ride the six blocks home; and this is why police found a fresh bicycle track across the Ramsey's yard, and why they did not find BR's bicycle at the house. The theory would help explain the sudden close alliance between the Ramseys and the Steins. I have always found the theory intriguing but think it is so unlikely that the parents would agree to have DS stay over when they had to get up at 5:30 AM to meet their flight schedule.

Permissive parenting perhaps?
The missing bike is very odd.
Did we not hear from the Ramseys no he didn't get a bike. It was to be a Bday gift and yet BR said he got a bike for Xmas.... which is it?

 

[Meara]

I wonder what date LHP had last been in the home to clean? Those cans do raise questions. They could indicate 2 children drinking from them either BR/DS or BR/JBR or BR could have been too lazy to throw his cans in the trash or been told to put them in the sink due to say an ant problem.. I'm not sure that that would be better than ants in the wastebasket though.
The longjohns and urine reinforce my thought that she never went to bed or soon got back up. They left the the Stines and made one stop within a very short distance to the Walkers, then home. Did she really fall asleep in that amount of time?

IIRC, Dec. 23rd was Linda Hoffmann-Pugh's last day in, the day of the party. I had forgotten when I posted that neighborhood children came over to play on Christmas Day in the afternoon, so it could be that BR and a friend had the Cokes then. JR says he helped BR get ready for bed on the night of the 25th and mentions both putting on pajamas and brushing teeth, and I do find it strange that he and/or BR would leave the cans in the sink during tooth brushing; plus, they don't show signs of spatter. Maybe JR's story isn't accurate? Maybe he told BR to change and brush his teeth while he (JR) changed into pajamas, and that he'd come back down to tuck him in. So maybe he never saw the Coke cans? So many variables.

 

[Meara]

Permissive parenting perhaps?
The missing bike is very odd.
Did we not hear from the Ramseys no he didn't get a bike. It was to be a Bday gift and yet BR said he got a bike for Xmas.... which is it?

Perhaps. But still it seems to me not to fit, when we know PR was already very stressed about the trip to Charlevoix and having to pack for two trips after a whirlwind of activities throughout December. If she and JR did agree to it, wow, what a recipe for trouble - parents off to bed and unlikely to awaken during the night, leaving two young boys unsupervised.

I don't know how the bike question has been resolved, whether it's been resolved....

So sorry, have to run! Will return to this later.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

IIRC, Dec. 23rd was Linda Hoffmann-Pugh's last day in, the day of the party. I had forgotten when I posted that neighborhood children came over to play on Christmas Day in the afternoon, so it could be that BR and a friend had the Cokes then. JR says he helped BR get ready for bed on the night of the 25th and mentions both putting on pajamas and brushing teeth, and I do find it strange that he and/or BR would leave the cans in the sink during tooth brushing; plus, they don't show signs of spatter. Maybe JR's story isn't accurate? Maybe he told BR to change and brush his teeth while he (JR) changed into pajamas, and that he'd come back down to tuck him in. So maybe he never saw the Coke cans? So many variables.

Great catch on the toothbrushing splatter on the cans. There is also, if I recall correctly BR pj bottoms in JBR bathroom. So maybe the kids moved between bathrooms or did things together. IDK, so many possibilities like you said!

 

[SweetDreamsAreMadeOfCheez]

This was my initial thought until I discovered how close that he lived. He could have been dropped home on the way or ridden his bike home.
I forget the distance to be exact but it was blocks. Another thought, the Ramseys had their own plane and were used to travel. I wonder if that made check in ect easier than commercial flight. Less stress than what we may be used to.

If he did stay the night, when did he leave in the timeline? would be my question. I would think there would be some evidence of him being there..maybe?

 

[SweetDreamsAreMadeOfCheez]

I believe it was WS'er Bluecrab who developed the Doug Stine theory, which proposes that Doug accompanied the Ramseys home, and that he and BR played a sex game with JBR that went horribly wrong and then staged the basement scene and wrote the RN. Allegedly, DS borrowed BR's bicycle to ride the six blocks home; and this is why police found a fresh bicycle track across the Ramsey's yard, and why they did not find BR's bicycle at the house. The theory would help explain the sudden close alliance between the Ramseys and the Steins. I have always found the theory intriguing but think it is so unlikely that the parents would agree to have DS stay over when they had to get up at 5:30 AM to meet their flight schedule.

It is plausible. Maybe he was going to go on the trip with them until this event happened and ended up fleeing home

 

[SweetDreamsAreMadeOfCheez]

The soda cans in the sink are strange, but could have occurred after toothbrushing. BR and JB could have drank some soda after JR and PR went to bed. But I really feel that PR never really went to bed. You know going through all of this stuff I tend forget some details and facts. I cannot remember if they were actually packed to go on a flight. Or did they have everything they needed already in Georgia? Like they didn't need to pack just take the gifts? Like I said above I think if DS stayed over that maybe he was going to accompany the R's to Georgia. I just don't see either set of parents thinking a sleepover that night was a good idea with early travel plans. It is curious on him saying when he snooped in the basement he saw 2 bikes and then his disappears.

As messy as this house was I wouldn't be surprised if the BPD didn't miss some evidence.

Also going to delve back into the scatolia with BR. This is very common with youngsters who are already SO's. I know it is common with other disorders, but is also prominent with SO's. It's still my opinion that BR did the SA and the initial blow to the head. I don't know about everything else. Still leaning JR on everything else except the note. Unless JR and PR were into some really weird stuff. Which is also possible I guess. How do say my weird religious cult sacrificed my daughter to the cops. Especially if some are all sitting there in the house with you (maybe the Stines). I don't really believe they were in a cult but you never know I guess.

 

[Choices]

I was pressed for time yesterday, too. You said you're considering an RDI theory "which I believe somebody similarly and recently posted a thread about," and I wondered, Why the pretense? You're clearly referring to fellow WS'er bugis, who posted the thread M for Murder: The Death of JonBenét Ramsey ReexaminedM for Murder: The Death of JonBenét Ramsey Reexamined detailing a new and intriguing PDI theory he/she's been working on for a year. If you're trying to say you arrived at your PDI theory on your own, fine, but it's best to give credit where it is due. We're all working on this case together.

There is no pretense, only your assumption of one. No, it wasn't clear to me who the user is. I do not know/remember all of the member's names on this site that I just recently joined, nor do I necessarily look at names of who posts or starts threads. I didn't know I was expected to go find the thread and state their username because they worked on it for a year. I didn't actually read the links to their theories, only read a post or posts, I don't remember, other than recalling the similarity of it but don't know if every detail was the same. Its funny, I was just questioning that recently - of working together except it doesn't feel that way looking at some of these responses. Why the grilling?

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

IIRC, Dec. 23rd was Linda Hoffmann-Pugh's last day in, the day of the party. I had forgotten when I posted that neighborhood children came over to play on Christmas Day in the afternoon, so it could be that BR and a friend had the Cokes then. JR says he helped BR get ready for bed on the night of the 25th and mentions both putting on pajamas and brushing teeth, and I do find it strange that he and/or BR would leave the cans in the sink during tooth brushing; plus, they don't show signs of spatter. Maybe JR's story isn't accurate? Maybe he told BR to change and brush his teeth while he (JR) changed into pajamas, and that he'd come back down to tuck him in. So maybe he never saw the Coke cans? So many variables.

On second thought, why do we think they actually brushed their teeth? If I roll with my theory of JBR putting on her own PJs, they may have been only told to brush their teeth. After all, PR was probably too busy that night to put much effort into tooth brushing much like other child rearing duties that were neglected.

 

[Meara]

Do you think Boulder PD personnel who testified before the Grand Jury told them everything they knew?

I feel very strongly that the Boulder PD knows pretty much what happened and who did it. There must be a reason why they are still holding onto evidence and not releasing it to the public. And I think it's probably because it would implicate some heavy hitters who I believe were involved in a cover up. The R's reportedly spent most of their fortune on all the lawyers, investigators, etc., and the business was sold / traded and JR was out of a job. He did go to work for another computer company after having moved back to Atlanta, but certainly did not have the status that he once did, and apparently not the income either. I have no idea what his financial status is now, or whether he could afford an expensive lawsuit if certain information became public. The threat is probably still there though, as long as he is alive.

Hi CloudedTruth. I'm hoping to hear from you. Meanwhile, I came across this comment by BlueCrab from 2004 (#84 on this thread: NE: Forgotten DNA Evidence Clears Key Figures). His summation is very similar to yours.

BlueCrab:
There is no re-investigation; they just want it to look like there's one. There are certain people in authoritative positions in Boulder who know who killed JonBenet. The cops and the D.A. take turns sitting on the egg they know will never hatch. It's been nothing but hocus-pocus and coverup by the authorities since the Ramsey grand jury ended in 1999. IMO that jury solved the case.

The money for an active investigation dried up long ago and they haven't been asking for more money, but Boulder authorities must make it appear as though they're still trying to solve the case, so the case was transferred to the D.A's office. It's just Keenan's turn to sit on the fake egg -- the egg that will never hatch.

The Colorado Childrens' Code (under age 18):

"Persons who have had their juvenile records sealed may lawfully and properly reply that no such record exists. However, the record is still available to the district attorney, law enforcement, the courts, and the department of human services. Government agencies cannot show the records to anyone without an order from the court."

So, IMO, Keenan and Beckner know who killed JonBenet Ramsey. But they gotta take turns clucking on the fake egg until the whole thing blows over some day.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

The soda cans in the sink are strange, but could have occurred after toothbrushing. BR and JB could have drank some soda after JR and PR went to bed. But I really feel that PR never really went to bed. You know going through all of this stuff I tend forget some details and facts. I cannot remember if they were actually packed to go on a flight. Or did they have everything they needed already in Georgia? Like they didn't need to pack just take the gifts? Like I said above I think if DS stayed over that maybe he was going to accompany the R's to Georgia. I just don't see either set of parents thinking a sleepover that night was a good idea with early travel plans. It is curious on him saying when he snooped in the basement he saw 2 bikes and then his disappears.

As messy as this house was I wouldn't be surprised if the BPD didn't miss some evidence.

Also going to delve back into the scatolia with BR. This is very common with youngsters who are already SO's. I know it is common with other disorders, but is also prominent with SO's. It's still my opinion that BR did the SA and the initial blow to the head. I don't know about everything else. Still leaning JR on everything else except the note. Unless JR and PR were into some really weird stuff. Which is also possible I guess. How do say my weird religious cult sacrificed my daughter to the cops. Especially if some are all sitting there in the house with you (maybe the Stines). I don't really believe they were in a cult but you never know I guess.

I agree with your theory because it would be very hard to change what occurred into a milder more acceptable story from a social and perhaps legal standpoint. I understand Colorado law regarding children under 10 but if it was something so horrific and the child was 9y 11m I might not be certain of the longterm outlook. Could he have been committed to a mental facility for many years? I could see where the Ramseys could want to make it all disappear and they had the resources to do just that.
If this was the case, I would have had empathy had they not hurt so many others in the deception.

 

[Choices]

There was no outside debris found inside the house.


I wasn't excusing the police; I was disagreeing with you. In your first statement you said that their main job was to find JBR. You're speaking from the POV of someone who knows the body was in the house all along. On the morning of Dec. 26th, Boulder PD had every reason to believe JBR had been removed from the home by kidnappers, and that led to the actions I've already stated. It sounds like what you really meant was that BPD should have looked inside the wine cellar. I agree; they should have done. However, it's disingenuous of you to fault BPD for not searching one room while you excuse JR and PR for not searching at all.


You’re shifting the ground of the argument. Here you say it doesn’t seem likely one of the parents killed JBR, but there may be unknowns. Your original statement was:

To assert one of the parents, who by all accounts were loving parents, one night took a homicidal turn to finish off JB and with that level of brutality is when plausibility went out the window for me.

In other words, you don't find it believable that either of JBR's parents could have brutally murdered her as part of a cover-up because they were loving parents. Sorry to be tedious but, yes, this is a logical fallacy. It’s called Fallacy of Personal Incredulity, and it means that because you personally don’t think it’s believable that either of the parents strangled JBR, it is therefore not true that one of them did. No need to take my word for it on this, though. Here is (in part) what Logical Fallacies - List of Logical Fallacies with Examples has to say:

The Personal Incredulity Fallacy is a logical fallacy which occurs when someone dismisses a claim without providing evidence or logical reasoning to support their disbelief…..This type of fallacy is often used as a means of avoiding the need to provide evidence or logical reasoning to support one’s own beliefs or opinions…..The fallacy relies on the notion that if something seems too unbelievable to be true, then it must not be true. It is an example of confirmation bias…..The fallacy is a type of Informal Fallacy and it is important to remember that just because something seems unbelievable does not mean that it is false.

Originally, you argued that JR and PR were loving parents. Here you add an appeal to common sense and the supposition that nothing in the parents’ background and past behavior suggests they could have strangled JBR, etc.
Unfortunately, these aren’t logically valid arguments. Loving parents have been known to kill their children. Common sense in this context is confirmation bias. We don’t know enough about either parent’s background to rule out the possibility of filicide; and Linda Hoffmann-Pugh stated that during some of the toileting clean-ups PR took JBR in the bathroom, and Linda could hear JBR screaming behind the closed door. Maybe she was just protesting, the way PR said she did if someone tried to drag her out of bed. But, it's possible PR was punishing her in some cruel way.


So sorry, I don’t know whether other homes in the neighborhood also used the rotating wood block as a latch. We do know the wine cellar was not locked with a conventional lock that morning because Fleet White went to the basement alone as soon as he arrived and opened the wine cellar door, remember?

Your source for no debris in the house?
I will disagree with you on the next points. I was speaking to the point of view of the general role of police who as we all know in this case, were inexperienced. One was an ex narcotics officer I think, the other I forget. From a PD that later on refused homicide detectives help from another jurisdiction.
I won't clog this thread up with further repetition. You want to draw me into a conclusion I will not be drawn to. I even asked ispy to get back to me so I know what exactly happened first.
Of course I was not directly involved in the case but LS was as he was appointed by the DA to investigate it! so would have looked at the Ramsey's background and I heard him talk about it. This is a man, who before he started work on the case, thought it was a slam dunk and the R's were guilty.
I will expound that the RDI in this instance wasn't of sound logic IMO. Nothing to back up the assertions except for most of it being about odd behaviour and assumptions, regarding the Rs. I have, at least, considered both sides. Logical fallacies in general - I've seen appeal to authority about debunkings.
I realized the RDI has a problem with the rope knots. The complexity therein and Patsy's knowledge of is unknown as far as I know. I have said as much before of not having any theory set in concrete. There is a far fetchedness to the resurrection one but I hadn't ruled out possibility, because people do do unfathomable things!
I don't know what the point of your last post was but if insinuating I was trying to claim credit for a theory, it doesn't gel with me saying that somebody else had posted about it. (An aside I'd like to mention, I remember seeing interactions involving mocking of another user and at the same time, the R case). Something else to think of: somebody can have the same theory but not have expressed it anywhere publicly. I don't automatically think when I read a theory, that they are the only person who ever thought of it. So how do you prove who thought of it first (as if it matters). Good for that WSer for taking the time to share theirs by the way.

 

[Choices]

There was no outside debris found inside the house.


I wasn't excusing the police; I was disagreeing with you. In your first statement you said that their main job was to find JBR. You're speaking from the POV of someone who knows the body was in the house all along. On the morning of Dec. 26th, Boulder PD had every reason to believe JBR had been removed from the home by kidnappers, and that led to the actions I've already stated. It sounds like what you really meant was that BPD should have looked inside the wine cellar. I agree; they should have done. However, it's disingenuous of you to fault BPD for not searching one room while you excuse JR and PR for not searching at all.


You’re shifting the ground of the argument. Here you say it doesn’t seem likely one of the parents killed JBR, but there may be unknowns. Your original statement was:

To assert one of the parents, who by all accounts were loving parents, one night took a homicidal turn to finish off JB and with that level of brutality is when plausibility went out the window for me.

In other words, you don't find it believable that either of JBR's parents could have brutally murdered her as part of a cover-up because they were loving parents. Sorry to be tedious but, yes, this is a logical fallacy. It’s called Fallacy of Personal Incredulity, and it means that because you personally don’t think it’s believable that either of the parents strangled JBR, it is therefore not true that one of them did. No need to take my word for it on this, though. Here is (in part) what Logical Fallacies - List of Logical Fallacies with Examples has to say:

The Personal Incredulity Fallacy is a logical fallacy which occurs when someone dismisses a claim without providing evidence or logical reasoning to support their disbelief…..This type of fallacy is often used as a means of avoiding the need to provide evidence or logical reasoning to support one’s own beliefs or opinions…..The fallacy relies on the notion that if something seems too unbelievable to be true, then it must not be true. It is an example of confirmation bias…..The fallacy is a type of Informal Fallacy and it is important to remember that just because something seems unbelievable does not mean that it is false.

Originally, you argued that JR and PR were loving parents. Here you add an appeal to common sense and the supposition that nothing in the parents’ background and past behavior suggests they could have strangled JBR, etc.
Unfortunately, these aren’t logically valid arguments. Loving parents have been known to kill their children. Common sense in this context is confirmation bias. We don’t know enough about either parent’s background to rule out the possibility of filicide; and Linda Hoffmann-Pugh stated that during some of the toileting clean-ups PR took JBR in the bathroom, and Linda could hear JBR screaming behind the closed door. Maybe she was just protesting, the way PR said she did if someone tried to drag her out of bed. But, it's possible PR was punishing her in some cruel way.


So sorry, I don’t know whether other homes in the neighborhood also used the rotating wood block as a latch. We do know the wine cellar was not locked with a conventional lock that morning because Fleet White went to the basement alone as soon as he arrived and opened the wine cellar door, remember?

Your source for no debris in the house?
I will disagree with you on the next points. I was speaking to the point of view of the general role of police who as we all know in this case, were inexperienced. One was an ex narcotics officer I think, the other I forget. From a PD that later on refused homicide detectives help from another jurisdiction.
I won't clog this thread up with further repetition. You want to draw me into a conclusion I will not be drawn to. I even asked ispy to get back to me so I know what exactly happened first.
Of course I was not directly involved in the case but LS was as he was appointed by the DA to investigate it! so would have looked at the Ramsey's background and I heard him talk about it. This is a man, who before he started work on the case, thought it was a slam dunk and the R's were guilty.
I will expound that the RDI in this instance wasn't of sound logic IMO. Nothing to back up the assertions except for most of it being about odd behaviour and assumptions, regarding the Rs. I have, at least, considered both sides. Logical fallacies in general - I've seen appeal to authority about debunkings.
I realized the RDI has a problem with the rope knots and Patsy's knowledge or lack thereof is unknown as far as I know. I have said as much before of not having any theory set in concrete. There is a far fetchedness to the resurrection one but I don't rule out the possibility of it, because people do do unfathomable things!
I don't know what the point of your last post was but if insinuating I was trying to claim credit for a theory, it doesn't gel with me saying that somebody else had posted about it. (I'd like to mention at this point, I remember seeing interactions involving mocking of another user and at the same time, the R case). Something else to think of: somebody can have the same theory but not have expressed it anywhere publicly. I don't automatically think when I read a theory, that they are the only person who ever thought of it. So how do you prove who thought of it first (as if it matters). Good for that WSer for taking the time to share theirs by the way.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Your source for no debris in the house?
I will disagree with you on the next points. I was speaking to the point of view of the general role of police who as we all know in this case, were inexperienced. One was an ex narcotics officer I think, the other I forget. From a PD that later on refused homicide detectives help from another jurisdiction.
I won't clog this thread up with further repetition. You want to draw me into a conclusion I will not be drawn to. I even asked ispy to get back to me so I know what exactly happened first.
Of course I was not directly involved in the case but LS was as he was appointed by the DA to investigate it! so would have looked at the Ramsey's background and I heard him talk about it. This is a man, who before he started work on the case, thought it was a slam dunk and the R's were guilty.
I will expound that the RDI in this instance wasn't of sound logic IMO. Nothing to back up the assertions except for most of it being about odd behaviour and assumptions, regarding the Rs. I have, at least, considered both sides. Logical fallacies in general - I've seen appeal to authority about debunkings.
I realized the RDI has a problem with the rope knots. The complexity therein and Patsy's knowledge of is unknown as far as I know. I have said as much before of not having any theory set in concrete. There is a far fetchedness to the resurrection one but I hadn't ruled out possibility, because people do do unfathomable things!
I don't know what the point of your last post was but if insinuating I was trying to claim credit for a theory, it doesn't gel with me saying that somebody else had posted about it. (An aside I'd like to mention, I remember seeing interactions involving mocking of another user and at the same time, the R case). Something else to think of: somebody can have the same theory but not have expressed it anywhere publicly. I don't automatically think when I read a theory, that they are the only person who ever thought of it. So how do you prove who thought of it first (as if it matters). Good for that WSer for taking the time to share theirs by the way.

Before you dismiss LE skill set because they weren't homicide detectives, I will explain to you how LEs job intersect with each other. My father was an auto theft detective. Car thieves and chop shops usually move narcotics also. Where narcotics are involved, homicides are part of the equation. You may think auto theft sounds pretty benign. It wasn't. It was heavy motorcycle gang, and every other gang you could think of. He was shot a many times. Part of the job was working undercover. My father was not a homicide detective but that doesn't mean he wasn't involved in them or lacked the skill to do so. You seem to rely on their mistakes as the crux of your argument but there is so much more to this case.

 

[Meara]

Your source for no debris in the house?

I had just recently seen the information when I replied to you and now cannot recall exactly where. Let me see whether I bookmarked it or can reconstruct which website I was on. It may take a little time, but I'm happy to make the effort to answer you. The gist of what I read (or saw) was that there was no way an intruder could have entered via the window well without bringing in a significant amount of debris which would have been quite noticeable on the train room floor.

 

[Meara]

Your source for no debris in the house?

Hi again. I was unable to find the earlier source but found something better, which is this video:

It has police crime scene video and photo images showing what was and was not present in the window well and train room. The window well has undisturbed debris and dirt immediately around the window, something not possible if an intruder had entered and exited through that window. Below the window is the blue suitcase, which was originally found against the wall under the window, where dirt and debris would have fallen on it as an intruder entered and exited. The video has some nice clear shots of the suitcase and surrounding train room floor showing them to be free of debris. Close-ups of the suitcase show not even a fine dusting of dirt on the top surface. There's also a helpful sequence in the video that does image comparisons of the window well on Dec. 26th and at the time of Lou Smit's demo. HTH.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Hi CloudedTruth. I'm hoping to hear from you. Meanwhile, I came across this comment by BlueCrab from 2004 (#84 on this thread: NE: Forgotten DNA Evidence Clears Key Figures). His summation is very similar to yours.

BlueCrab:
There is no re-investigation; they just want it to look like there's one. There are certain people in authoritative positions in Boulder who know who killed JonBenet. The cops and the D.A. take turns sitting on the egg they know will never hatch. It's been nothing but hocus-pocus and coverup by the authorities since the Ramsey grand jury ended in 1999. IMO that jury solved the case.

The money for an active investigation dried up long ago and they haven't been asking for more money, but Boulder authorities must make it appear as though they're still trying to solve the case, so the case was transferred to the D.A's office. It's just Keenan's turn to sit on the fake egg -- the egg that will never hatch.

The Colorado Childrens' Code (under age 18):

"Persons who have had their juvenile records sealed may lawfully and properly reply that no such record exists. However, the record is still available to the district attorney, law enforcement, the courts, and the department of human services. Government agencies cannot show the records to anyone without an order from the court."

So, IMO, Keenan and Beckner know who killed JonBenet Ramsey. But they gotta take turns clucking on the fake egg until the whole thing blows over some day.

Hi Meara, I will respond when I return home. Currently on vacation in Italy so not much time for sleuthing!

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Hi Meara, I will respond when I return home. Currently on vacation in Italy so not much time for sleuthing!

Have a fabulous time!

 

[SweetDreamsAreMadeOfCheez]

Hi Meara, I will respond when I return home. Currently on vacation in Italy so not much time for sleuthing!

Oooo fun. Enjoy!

 

[Meara]

Hi Meara, I will respond when I return home. Currently on vacation in Italy so not much time for sleuthing!

Sounds fantastic!! Thanks for letting us know all is well!