We are only dealing in facts and reasonable scenarios from now on

[Fides]

Just a note to say that if my scenario is correct, and all family members acted out of love and fear, that is not to excuse the circus of finger-pointing that followed. The adults doubled down on their bets and imo their behavior in subsequent months and years was inexcusable, not once they had all the legal facts they needed to proceed ethically.

 

[inspector rex]

UK guy,

Thanks for your response. Your theory of of all three family members involved in assaulting JonBenet is interesting but for me does not fit with the evidence. If two educated, successful adults were collaborating, there would not be pineapple of unknown origin, a flashlight left lying around, or size 12 underwear. It would not take months for a guilty Mr. Ramsey to mention an open window; he would be primed to discuss unlocked doors and windows the minute police arrived. Instead, he told them he was pretty sure the house was secure. He and Patsy knew nothing about the pineapple or the flashlight and made no effort to create a back story for them until after they were revealed.

I think they did not know about these things because their son shared the pineapple with his sister, used the flashlight to peek at presents or play a sex game or both, and then to hit his sister, too hard. He created the crime scene to hide the accident from his parents, and once they became aware of it they never discussed it with him. His mother probably discovered what he did, sent him to bed and wrote the crazy ransom note to explain the fake murder. Had his father been awake, he probably would have called lawyers and tried to fix the problem another way, but he was not. Instead, John was left to try to support them after the fact, with lawyers and psychiatrists and media consultants.

My theory supposes that everyone in the family was acting out of a combination of love and fear, and that the initial injury was an accident of force. I might be wrong, but I agree with the IDI folks who say that there is no evidence that any of these people was the crazed psychopathic killer the garrote implies.

I'm not sure the above (BBM) is an appropriate comment on this thread? It seems like a theory without basis in evidence.

The forum owner has stated "We are only dealing in facts and reasonable scenarios from now on", so this should not only be applicable to intruder theories.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I'm not sure the above (BBM) is an appropriate comment on this thread? It seems like a theory without basis in evidence.

The forum owner has stated "We are only dealing in facts and reasonable scenarios from now on", so this should not only be applicable to intruder theories.

Right.. and the fact that it was Christmas night and there were not presents to peek at...

 

[OliviaG1996]

Right.. and the fact that it was Christmas night and there were not presents to peek at...

Fides didn't say Christmas presents. Burke's birthday was in a month, what makes you think he wasn't curious as to what/where his birthday presents were?

 

[CorallaroC]

To stick up for Fides, IMO the two posts above #242 and #243. waste of posting space and obviously meant to be argumentative.

Fides shared his/her opinions and theory based on the interpretation of known FACTS.

It appears to me that some posters are trying to twist Tricia's admonitions - to make others think they can no longer express their opinions or reasoning about this case.

One thing I pay attention to (on any JBR thread) is when things (facts as well as well thought out opinions) get TWISTED around, under the definition of SPIN. And the SPIN I observe on these threads is staunch IDI's who want to discredit any post, any fact, and argue to death any archived info that doesn't quite suit their agenda. Very tiresome.

Why would IDI proponents feel such a need to make this case more confusing than it already is? Why not keep it simple?

ALL JMO

 

[Fides]

Thank-you for all the comments. I will await further developments before posting again. New to the club and all that. I will say that I was referring to the birthday presents and gifts for others still in the basement; am aware that Christmas was over.

 

[BoldBear]

The ignore option will help you maintain your sanity (if any of us are still sane kuz we obsess over a 19 year old cold case). I think I read the crazy theory that Tricia pulled-down before she put her foot down. There was no evidence or even logic to it. It was clear that the writer didn't know anything about this case and made no effort to try to get the details down.

Fides, you're sticking to the facts as you know them. It looks good.

I'm working on a theory of my own, but this whole thread gave me cold feet. I really didn't know if I could post it on WS or if I had to take it somewhere else. And after all of that research, it would have been a shame not to watch that theory go down in flames anywhere else.

This theory is the slowest write. I'm losing patience with myself--write a little and spend an hour researching some obscure detail that I'll probably never use. And then there's the writers block that I haven't had a problem with in years. At least when I get it done, I can post it here (I hope).

 

[CorallaroC]

Thank-you for all the comments. I will await further developments before posting again. New to the club and all that. I will say that I was referring to the birthday presents and gifts for others still in the basement; am aware that Christmas was over.

Hi Fides,
I enjoyed reading your posts, particularly your theory about people possibly acting out of both Love and Fear. It makes sense, imo.

I also admire that you have a good working knowledge of the case. I hope you will feel comfortable continuing to post.

You are correct about unopened presents still in the home after Christmas morning. In their book, during interviews with BPD and various media, JR claimed that on the afternoon of the 25th he took a few gifts out of the wine cellar and to the airport to do some pre-packing of the plane for the for an extended Christmas celebration with their two older children in Charlevoix on the 26th. PR said she also had a few gifts in the house intended for others after Christmas. And it only makes sense there would or could be gifts hidden away for BR's upcoming birthday in January.

In fact, I have felt all along that the children would have been highly curious about any gifts still hidden in the basement. When JR mentioned the odd placement of a chair in front of the door leading to the room where the suitcase and broken window were discovered - my first thought was that a child might have used the chair sometime earlier over at the wine cellar door to reach up and turn the wood block to get in. Any smart little kid would have moved the chair somewhere else after they were done peeking, I should think. Those pieces of the puzzle couple possibly fit together.

It's good to keep an open mind, your theory is good food for thought, Fides.

 

[InstantProof]

Hi Fides,
I enjoyed reading your posts, particularly your theory about people possibly acting out of both Love and Fear. It makes sense, imo.

I also admire that you have a good working knowledge of the case. I hope you will feel comfortable continuing to post.

You are correct about unopened presents still in the home after Christmas morning. In their book, during interviews with BPD and various media, JR claimed that on the afternoon of the 25th he took a few gifts out of the wine cellar and to the airport to do some pre-packing of the plane for the for an extended Christmas celebration with their two older children in Charlevoix on the 26th. PR said she also had a few gifts in the house intended for others after Christmas. And it only makes sense there would or could be gifts hidden away for BR's upcoming birthday in January.

In fact, I have felt all along that the children would have been highly curious about any gifts still hidden in the basement. When JR mentioned the odd placement of a chair in front of the door leading to the room where the suitcase and broken window were discovered - my first thought was that a child might have used the chair sometime earlier over at the wine cellar door to reach up and turn the wood block to get in. Any smart little kid would have moved the chair somewhere else after they were done peeking, I should think. Those pieces of the puzzle couple possibly fit together.

It's good to keep an open mind, your theory is good food for thought, Fides.

It makes perfect sense that kids would be curious even after Christmas morning. I can remember a Christmas or two where I did not get everything I wanted so I went looking at the gifts still in the house to see if my parents forgot one of mine.

 

[tovarisch]

With closing our tiny corner IDI for cleaning and maintenance, I , after some time, realized - this forum is not public, it is a private property!, and the management has a right to clean and sort our little brain product. Though RDI have a special treatment.
My friends IDI-sts seams vanishing somewhere , it` s sad.
And still I can see posts complaining how annoying that IDI are STILL here. It`s unfair, considering what we dealing with, what have to read on RDI. To understand it better, if somebody care for JonBenet here, I, for example, care for the whole family as a victimized unfortunate people, and you can understand my feeling when I read your posts, not shy of language and wild theories.

With this said, with partial regret, but with the sureness it`s a right thing to do, I decided stop posting.

My believe remains unshakable so far, and nobody can clean it out.
--------------------------------------------------------------

To JonBenet and Burke Ramsey:
Dostoevsky once said that the all treasures of the whole world costs less than one tear of a child. (He was childless).

 

[BoldBear]

I didn't know the IDI thread went down for maintenance. I'm also not unsympathetic to the Ramseys, but we're here to examine the case. We need to discuss the theories including IDI.

When I came here, I was nothing but IDI. I believed that the intruder probably came in through the grate, but that was with the limited information that the media and the Ramseys fed to me about the case. I also thought it was a sex crime because they led me to believe it was. I believed that she was found in a room that was impossible to find. Why? Because they told me it was an obscure, hard to find room. From the bottom of the stairs in the basement, you follow the hallway all the way to the end. That's where the room is. It's not obscure. It's not hidden. It was just hardly used.

I was told about the grate, but I had no idea that there was an easier exit from the basement. The basement stairs didn't go directly up to the first floor. No. They go up part of the way and then you can turn left to get to the main hallway or turn right to head to the butler's pantry. What intruder would take the risk of getting caught in a grate, a grate that was surrounded by windows and was so close to a windowed door?

We are here to discuss theories and details about the case. From there is up to each one of us to assess the strengths and weaknesses of what we learn and decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong. Most of those theories will portray the Ramseys in a negative light. You cannot have a forum like this, discuss a monstrous unsolved crime, and not expect to have horrible theories about the family members. You cannot put "an island of protection" around the Ramseys while telling everyone to exclusively consider one theory. We have to discuss all possibilities and some of those possibilities are very ugly.

 

[DeeDee249]

I didn't know the IDI thread went down for maintenance. I'm also not unsympathetic to the Ramseys, but we're here to examine the case. We need to discuss the theories including IDI.

When I came here, I was nothing but IDI. I believed that the intruder probably came in through the grate, but that was with the limited information that the media and the Ramseys fed to me about the case. I also thought it was a sex crime because they led me to believe it was. I believed that she was found in a room that was impossible to find. Why? Because they told me it was an obscure, hard to find room. From the bottom of the stairs in the basement, you follow the hallway all the way to the end. That's where the room is. It's not obscure. It's not hidden. It was just hardly used.

I was told about the grate, but I had no idea that there was an easier exit from the basement. The basement stairs didn't go directly up to the first floor. No. They go up part of the way and then you can turn left to get to the main hallway or turn right to head to the butler's pantry. What intruder would take the risk of getting caught in a grate, a grate that was surrounded by windows and was so close to a windowed door?

We are here to discuss theories and details about the case. From there is up to each one of us to assess the strengths and weaknesses of what we learn and decide for ourselves what is right and what is wrong. Most of those theories will portray the Ramseys in a negative light. You cannot have a forum like this, discuss a monstrous unsolved crime, and not expect to have horrible theories about the family members. You cannot put "an island of protection" around the Ramseys while telling everyone to exclusively consider one theory. We have to discuss all possibilities and some of those possibilities are very ugly.

Very well said.

 

[questfortrue]

Thank-you for all the comments. I will await further developments before posting again. New to the club and all that. I will say that I was referring to the birthday presents and gifts for others still in the basement; am aware that Christmas was over.

Whether some think your theory a little inconsistent with some evidence or not, you possess some insights about this crime. I’m not sure any of us have gotten the scenario totally right, and how would we know for certain, but you identified two emotions which gripped the adults that night – the horror of losing a child you love and the fear of the many repercussions for the family. Unfortunately, and it’s just my opinion, I believe they made a “left turn”, i.e., choosing what they perceived to be the “quickest fix”: Just pretend someone else did this. I doubt they considered that the case would grow into one of the world’s biggest homicide mysteries.

FW made a comment in the most recent Prendergast column about the ensuing aftermath of those decisions that night. "What happens is that evil comes in," Fleet says. "If you don't have truth, all you have are lies, then what comes in is evil. And evil just does its thing. In the Ramsey case, it just did its thing, and it's eaten up so many people."

And FW’s insight goes towards explaining the guidance on the forum to avoid finger-pointing towards those who’ve been cleared by the BPD. Take the accusations against the person Helgoth as one example. In the case of Helgoth, who committed suicide, imagine the family’s broken heart over their son’s death and then add an accusation that he murdered a little girl on top of it. (They were devastated.) The Rs went so far as to have their investigator retrieve a Hi-Tec shoe of Helgoth’s, so as to help prove he did it. The Rs never considered what kind of sorrow they were heaping on the family of Helgoth.

 

[UKGuy]

With closing our tiny corner IDI for cleaning and maintenance, I , after some time, realized - this forum is not public, it is a private property!, and the management has a right to clean and sort our little brain product. Though RDI have a special treatment.
My friends IDI-sts seams vanishing somewhere , it` s sad.
And still I can see posts complaining how annoying that IDI are STILL here. It`s unfair, considering what we dealing with, what have to read on RDI. To understand it better, if somebody care for JonBenet here, I, for example, care for the whole family as a victimized unfortunate people, and you can understand my feeling when I read your posts, not shy of language and wild theories.

With this said, with partial regret, but with the sureness it`s a right thing to do, I decided stop posting.

My believe remains unshakable so far, and nobody can clean it out.
--------------------------------------------------------------

To JonBenet and Burke Ramsey:
Dostoevsky once said that the all treasures of the whole world costs less than one tear of a child. (He was childless).

tovarisch,
IDI has brought this situation upon themselves. Websleuths does not exist for interlopers to indiscriminately question settled fact and fill threads with patent nonsense querying the validity of past judgements.

The simplest solution is to split the JonBenet forum into IDI and RDI threads, and mandate the mods to delete speculation with no foundation or evidence to back it up, particulary if its a known RDI proponent posting in an IDI thread.

The IDI threads should really be small, since they only have one theory, e.g. an intruder did it, but there is zero evidence to support this view, still they should have the right to publish their views.

It is not the purpose of RDI threads that they be made available to IDI proponents to critique RDI theories thereby filling the threads with speculation and arbitrary opinion, particularly when IDI have no coherent theories of their own!

Anyone who fails to play by the rules should be subject to a three strikes and your out rule.

.

 

[cynic]

Websleuths does not exist for interlopers to indiscriminately question settled fact and fill threads with patent nonsense querying the validity of past judgements.

Absolutely