Which is strongest RDI evidence?

[Toltec]

I receive my information on A CandyRose site...I am presently reading Johns 1998 interview...found some interesting stuff...will post it later.

 

[Agatha_C]

I receive my information on A CandyRose site...I am presently reading Johns 1998 interview...found some interesting stuff...will post it later.

Toltec me toooooo. Im rereading those 98 interviews (yet again) and I want to scream. The lies and inconstancies are disgusting....GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,
Yes, the pink pajama bottoms are an anomaly. Particularly the fact that they are patently separated from the top. They may have been taken into evidence, but this has been redacted, due to where they were found!

If JonBenet removed the pink bottoms due to bedwetting then where is her size-6 underwear, as worn to the White's? Surely they would local to her bedroom.

Why would Burke not stage JonBenet as lying asleep in her bed? As far as he thinks she is simply unconcious and will come round soon, so he dresses JonBenet in the pink barbie nightgown.

I reckon someone dressed JonBenet in the pink barbie nightgown, which on restaging was replaced with the white gap top. Why else would the pink barbie nightgown make its way into the wine-cellar along with a barbie doll e.g. as components of a secondary crime-scene, which need alike JonBenet to be removed from view to facilitate a bedroom abduction scenario? Not unless you suscribe to a grave goods theory, or in modern parlance undoing, which similar to egyptian mortuary ritual encompassed cleaning the body and filling the tomb with everyday grave goods.

The wine-cellar was a long shot. An attempt to evade detection by claiming JonBenet had been kidnapped. To this end forensic evidence from secondary crime-scenes were placed along with JonBenet into the wine-cellar.

Breaking this down into a crime schema:

Stage 1. Primary crime-scene e.g. Burke's bedroom. She is wearing the pink pajamas.

Stage 2. Secondary crime-scene e.g. JonBenet's bedroom. She is wearing Barbie nightgown

Stage 3. Secondary crime-scene e.g. wine-cellar. She is wearing the white Gap top.

Naturally this could be incorrect and Stage 1. might be the Breakfast Bar or John's bedroom. I'm quite convinced stages 2 and 3 took place, and a change of plan required JonBenet to be secreted away into the wine-cellar, otherwise why not just stage JonBenet's death as being in her bedroom at the hands of an intruder?

.

Good point that the pink bottoms are not mentioned because of WHERE they were found (BR's room) as Colorado law prevents anyone under 10 from even being mentioned in a crime.
I am not sure JB was ever in the pink Barbie nightie. I think, despite the blood, that it came out of the dryer with the white blanket. The blood is harder to explain with that theory, however. Was it a fingerprint smear? A few drops? A splatter? Hard to say. If it had blood on it that the stagers knew about, why leave it there? If the stagers were unaware it was there at all, how did it her the blood on it?
Placing the nightie, doll and white blanket does seem to be tantamount to the ancient Egyptian custom of placing favorite items with the dead (minus the Shawabti (aka Ushabti) figurines to answer to Osiris). Their presence is a mystery that doesn't fit with IDI (why would they care? How would they know what to put?) nor does it fit with RDI (such personal touches fairly scream "parent's touch").
The reason why I would think it unlikely to stage JB's death in her own bedroom at the hands of an intruder is that the death was being purported to be a KIDNAPPING. The RN was written for the sole purpose of explaining why she was dead: the parents called police. Finding her dead in her room eliminated that possibility.
Hiding the body in the innermost recess of the basement was a way to prevent her from being found too quickly. I firmly believe that the Rs thought that the police would take a statement, ask some questions, and LEAVE to find the kidnappers. I truly believe they never expected LE to simply STAY there until the Rs themselves had to leave.
I feel the Rs planned to wait till LE left the house, then they would call LE and say that JB had been "found" and the kidnappers had obviously killed her because they had called police (just as the note said). They may have intended to say she was left on the porch, in the yard, etc. They may have intended to say she was found in the WC. But when JR saw police were NOT going to leave, he had to "find" her himself. But I do not think this was what was originally planned.

 

[Toltec]

Toltec me toooooo. Im rereading those 98 interviews (yet again) and I want to scream. The lies and inconstancies are disgusting....GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!

Took me 5 days to re-read Johns 1998 interview. Will post it on my thread...odd questions.

 

[Peepers]

I totally agree about BDI. If that is the case, i dont think it was premeditated either, some sort of accident, then the cover up. I went back and read the interviews a couple months ago too, and I guess I either forgot or didnt pay attention at the time, but Johns interviews are more odd than Patsys. Personally I dont think John was molesting JB, so to me his odd interviews and answers are just covering and I really think the only person these two would cover for would be their son. Thats what really solidified my opinion. I originally thought maybe PR did something and John really didnt know, but after rereading the interviews, I just dont think thats possible.

 

[joeskidbeck]

Regarding the Barbie nightgown, imo the only time that JR actually sounded surprized in his interviews was when this gown was mentioned. Sure he tried to use that to their advantage by expressing his disgust at what it may have meant, but I really don't think he knew it was there. So, for me, the gown was really there because of static cling OR quite possibly BR did put it on her at one point and it stuck to the blanket after someone other than JR removed it. Hope that made sense!

 

[Toltec]

Regarding the Barbie nightgown, imo the only time that JR actually sounded surprized in his interviews was when this gown was mentioned. Sure he tried to use that to their advantage by expressing his disgust at what it may have meant, but I really don't think he knew it was there. So, for me, the gown was really there because of static cling OR quite possibly BR did put it on her at one point and it stuck to the blanket after someone other than JR removed it. Hope that made sense!

The last time John remembers seeing that nightgown was on JonBenet's life-sized Barbie doll. He said the doll was leaning against a wall in JB's bedroom.

 

[DeeDee249]

The last time John remembers seeing that nightgown was on JonBenet's life-sized Barbie doll. He said the doll was leaning against a wall in JB's bedroom.

JR comes off as not really knowing a lot of details about JB's clothes or dolls, etc. I am very familiar with that life-size Barbie that JB had. JB is seen playing with her in a Christmas photo, and JB looks a few years younger in that photo, maybe 4. Her doll is called a "My Size" Barbie, and she came in a few different outfits, including the white bride dress that JB's doll had. Sometimes the dolls came with a nightie as a special offer, and this nightie would fit the doll, but not a real child. Some outfits were sold as a set, with a nightie for the child and one for the doll. Though the dolls were the HEIGHT of an average 3-year old girl, the proportions of the doll were more of an adolescent- a nipped in waist and prepubescent breasts. No where near the bombshell hourglass figure of the more common 11 inch Barbie doll.
Though the doll was advertised as being able to wear a child's clothing, a child could not always wear all the doll's clothing. If the doll was wearing a nightie, it was probably the doll's own nightie and not JB's.
The exact doll JB had can still be found (and seen) on eBay. Just search "My Size Barbie" and it will pull up any active auction. You need not be a member to view the auctions, you can sign in as a guest.

 

[UKGuy]

Good point that the pink bottoms are not mentioned because of WHERE they were found (BR's room) as Colorado law prevents anyone under 10 from even being mentioned in a crime.
I am not sure JB was ever in the pink Barbie nightie. I think, despite the blood, that it came out of the dryer with the white blanket. The blood is harder to explain with that theory, however. Was it a fingerprint smear? A few drops? A splatter? Hard to say. If it had blood on it that the stagers knew about, why leave it there? If the stagers were unaware it was there at all, how did it her the blood on it?
Placing the nightie, doll and white blanket does seem to be tantamount to the ancient Egyptian custom of placing favorite items with the dead (minus the Shawabti (aka Ushabti) figurines to answer to Osiris). Their presence is a mystery that doesn't fit with IDI (why would they care? How would they know what to put?) nor does it fit with RDI (such personal touches fairly scream "parent's touch").
The reason why I would think it unlikely to stage JB's death in her own bedroom at the hands of an intruder is that the death was being purported to be a KIDNAPPING. The RN was written for the sole purpose of explaining why she was dead: the parents called police. Finding her dead in her room eliminated that possibility.
Hiding the body in the innermost recess of the basement was a way to prevent her from being found too quickly. I firmly believe that the Rs thought that the police would take a statement, ask some questions, and LEAVE to find the kidnappers. I truly believe they never expected LE to simply STAY there until the Rs themselves had to leave.
I feel the Rs planned to wait till LE left the house, then they would call LE and say that JB had been "found" and the kidnappers had obviously killed her because they had called police (just as the note said). They may have intended to say she was left on the porch, in the yard, etc. They may have intended to say she was found in the WC. But when JR saw police were NOT going to leave, he had to "find" her himself. But I do not think this was what was originally planned.

DeeDee249,

I am not sure JB was ever in the pink Barbie nightie. I think, despite the blood, that it came out of the dryer with the white blanket. The blood is harder to explain with that theory, however. Was it a fingerprint smear? A few drops? A splatter? Hard to say. If it had blood on it that the stagers knew about, why leave it there? If the stagers were unaware it was there at all, how did it her the blood on it?

I am not certain either. And ignoring conspiracy theories, a BDI allows both Patsy and John a convoluted rationale to behave as they did, in defense of Burke?

I seriously doubt anything arrived in the wine-cellar by accident, particularly something as large and notable as a barbie nightgown. My explanation for the gown is either it forms part of a prior staging, was intended to supplement an additional staging, that was never completed, or it formed a part of the primary crime-scene?

Regarding the bloodstains on the gown, consider the two other items that were also bloodstained e.g. her shirt and underwear. These are possible sources of cross-contamination.

I find it helpful to think about the crime-scenes as forming a sequence. Where a common demoninator is JonBenet's clothing. So we can assume she is wearing the pink pajamas, then the nightgown, then the longjohns and the gap shirt and/or red turtleneck. Although we do not know the exact role played by each item, we can try combinations for a best fit?

In terms of staging her clothing is applied in each setting then eliminated as a revised staging is planned. So at the primary crime-scene JonBenet is cleaned up, her size-6 underwear is removed along with her pink pajama bottoms.

This requires a substitution , so possibly JonBenet is wearing no underwear and the barbie nightgown, e.g. allowing blood to stain it. Later this is revised using the red turtleneck, longjohns and size-12's.

That is, there is a three stage process until JonBenet arrives at her final resting place. This is why I think it is more likely that, apparently unrelated items, e.g. barbie-nightgown, barbie-doll arrive in the wine-cellar as residue from a prior crime-scene, and we know the wine-cellar has not been staged to represent a stereotypical crime-scene. That is, JonBenet was being hidden from view.


Someone rejected a staged bedroom homicide in favour of an outright abduction scenario, so some artifacts belonging to a prior crime-scene were simply bundled into the wine-cellar. Not unless you wish to posit a considerate abductor who wants JonBenet to have a barbie nightgown and doll along with her size-12 underwear?

The reason why I would think it unlikely to stage JB's death in her own bedroom at the hands of an intruder is that the death was being purported to be a KIDNAPPING. The RN was written for the sole purpose of explaining why she was dead: the parents called police. Finding her dead in her room eliminated that possibility.

The ransom note explains JonBenet's absence. Kidnapping may have been the final plan to be to played out, it need not have been the only one. Why would JonBenet need to be redressed and be accompanied with surplus items, if the sole intent was to convey the impression of an abduction?

I feel the Rs planned to wait till LE left the house, then they would call LE and say that JB had been "found" and the kidnappers had obviously killed her because they had called police (just as the note said). They may have intended to say she was left on the porch, in the yard, etc. They may have intended to say she was found in the WC. But when JR saw police were NOT going to leave, he had to "find" her himself. But I do not think this was what was originally planned.

I agree but I reckon their plan was to leave the house asap, this was what the scheduled flight for that morning was intended to achieve. So unless they were going to take JonBenet's corpse with them, she would have been abandonded in the house, while Patsy and John relocated interstate, probably even leaving Burke behind, more clues there for the conspiracy theorists.


.

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,
Regarding the bloodstains on the gown, consider the two other items that were also bloodstained e.g. her shirt and underwear. These are possible sources of cross-contamination.

The ransom note explains JonBenet's absence. Kidnapping may have been the final plan to be to played out, it need not have been the only one. Why would JonBenet need to be redressed and be accompanied with surplus items, if the sole intent was to convey the impression of an abduction?



I agree but I reckon their plan was to leave the house asap, this was what the scheduled flight for that morning was intended to achieve. So unless they were going to take JonBenet's corpse with them, she would have been abandonded in the house, while Patsy and John relocated interstate, probably even leaving Burke behind, more clues there for the conspiracy theorists.


.

IMO the ransom note explains her absence but also explains her death. The note mentions very specifically that JB will be killed if the parents talk to anyone. They did. She was. As she was already dead when the note was written, those words added to the note offer the perfect reason for her to be dead- her parents called police as well as several friends. The RN was written AFTER the death and was tailored to fit what had already happened, i.e. she was dead and there was NO way to explain it without one of the family present in the home being suspected.
I disagree that the Rs planned to leave EITHER of their children behind. They'd have never left BR. Ever. Nor would they take a dead JB with them. What- sit her in a seat and tell the pilot she was "asleep"? Rigor mortis as well as the gruesome face of death would make that impossible. Put her in a suitcase? No. Rigor makes that impossible. Do what with her? Drop her from the plane? Never happen in a million years.
No- their plan was to leave, yes. And to leave JB behind to be found by LE. She would have been. The odor of death is unmistakable especially to LE and they probably wouldn't have needed cadaver dogs either. Then, they could pretend to be horrified that she'd been in the house all along. "OH but LE searched the house! How did they miss her?" Blah blah.
When LE squashed their "escape plan" there was only one thing to do. "Find" her themselves. They did.

 

[Toltec]

The subject of the baseball bat has been brought up...there being two baseball bats found outside. One on the South side and one on the North side.

My question is, does anyone know which bat had a hair on it?

TRIP DeMUTH: Would you know if those bats,

18 or Burke's bat, or anybody's bat for that

19 matter, would be allowed in the house wherever

20 in the house? Do bats ever come inside?

21 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, I think if they would be

22 in any part of the house, they would be in the

23 garage, you know, in the garage right there

24 before you, you known, leaning up before you

25 come in the door, because they're usually dirty

0503

1 and I can't ever recall them being like up in

2 the play room or anything like that.

3 TRIP DeMUTH: Okay. Did you have a rule

4 against bringing the bats in the house?

5 PATSY RAMSEY: No.

6 TRIP DeMUTH: Okay. So it's possible that

7 one of the boys may have brought it in?

8 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.

9 TRIP DeMUTH: Do you remember any baseball

10 bats ever being in the basement?

11 PATSY RAMSEY: No.

12 TRIP DeMUTH: Okay. Anybody ever store

13 them down in the basement?

14 PATSY RAMSEY: No, they would either be in

15 the garage or out here somewhere more than

16 likely.

17 TRIP DeMUTH: You never stored a baseball

18 bat in the basement?

19 PATSY RAMSEY: I can't say that I never

20 did, I can't remember.

21 TRIP DeMUTH: Okay. Well --

22 PATSY RAMSEY: It would be unusual for me

23 to put a baseball bat or anybody to put a

24 baseball bat in the basement.

25 TRIP DeMUTH: Okay. Do you have a memory

0504

1 of a baseball bat ever being -- I want to

2 know --

3 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I do not have a memory

4 of a baseball bat in the basement.

 

[UKGuy]

IMO the ransom note explains her absence but also explains her death. The note mentions very specifically that JB will be killed if the parents talk to anyone. They did. She was. As she was already dead when the note was written, those words added to the note offer the perfect reason for her to be dead- her parents called police as well as several friends. The RN was written AFTER the death and was tailored to fit what had already happened, i.e. she was dead and there was NO way to explain it without one of the family present in the home being suspected.
I disagree that the Rs planned to leave EITHER of their children behind. They'd have never left BR. Ever. Nor would they take a dead JB with them. What- sit her in a seat and tell the pilot she was "asleep"? Rigor mortis as well as the gruesome face of death would make that impossible. Put her in a suitcase? No. Rigor makes that impossible. Do what with her? Drop her from the plane? Never happen in a million years.
No- their plan was to leave, yes. And to leave JB behind to be found by LE. She would have been. The odor of death is unmistakable especially to LE and they probably wouldn't have needed cadaver dogs either. Then, they could pretend to be horrified that she'd been in the house all along. "OH but LE searched the house! How did they miss her?" Blah blah.
When LE squashed their "escape plan" there was only one thing to do. "Find" her themselves. They did.

DeeDee249,

IMO the ransom note explains her absence but also explains her death. The note mentions very specifically that JB will be killed if the parents talk to anyone. They did. She was.

mmm, the RN is a staged crime-scene artifact. How can it explain JonBenet's death?

Are you suggesting that, as per the RN, the abductor returned JonBenet's corpse to the Ramsey household depositing her body into the wine-cellar, after confirming that the parents communicated with the police?

No- their plan was to leave, yes. And to leave JB behind to be found by LE. She would have been.

So how would the RN explain this set of circumstances?

IMO the RN might offer a reason for JonBenet's absence, but not for her death!

It was her death that was being hidden from public view.

I disagree that the Rs planned to leave EITHER of their children behind.

Maybe I have the timeline wrong but it seemed to me that John was prepared to fly interstate using his private plane until he was told he was going no where. I was assuming, at this point, that Burke had been sent to the White's?


.

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,

mmm, the RN is a staged crime-scene artifact. How can it explain JonBenet's death?

Are you suggesting that, as per the RN, the abductor returned JonBenet's corpse to the Ramsey household depositing her body into the wine-cellar, after confirming that the parents communicated with the police?


So how would the RN explain this set of circumstances?

IMO the RN might offer a reason for JonBenet's absence, but not for her death!

It was her death that was being hidden from public view.


Maybe I have the timeline wrong but it seemed to me that John was prepared to fly interstate using his private plane until he was told he was going no where. I was assuming, at this point, that Burke had been sent to the White's?


.

What I mean is that the Rs were faced with a dead child in the home. To explain it, they wrote the note saying she would be killed if they talk to anyone. They talked, so that "explains" why she was dead. I have no idea how they planned to explain how the "kidnappers" returned the body or knew they'd called police- I suppose they called all their friends over- and the police too- this way they could say the house was being watched - just as the note said- and that's how the kidnappers knew. I have no clue how they planned to explain how she was "returned".
She was really in the house all along, as we know, but I have said before that the Rs never thought LE would stay in the house all day, therefore not giving them the chance to do what they originally planned - to call police later and say "we got her back- but she's dead. They killed her because we called you". Then they would have made up a story about where they found her, sloppy forensic work would have missed the discrepancies. When it became obvious that police were not going to leave, and that they themselves would have to leave, JR "found" her the first chance he got thanks to Det. Arndt.
Her "death" wasn't being hidden from public view- but her BODY was. There is a difference. Her death would be public in a matter of hours and they knew this. Hiding the body prevented her from being found too quickly by the wrong person.
Her body was only being hidden to give them a chance to retrieve her later after everyone else left. It worked- no one else searching the basement found the body. BUT when the R's realized they were not going to be alone after that, they had to find her themselves.
I believe your timeline is correct. BR went to the White's early that morning. JR called for his "getaway" plane after the body was found, hours later.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I believe the calling over of the friends was two-fold. Of course it contanimated the crime scene and made LE's job much harder, but didnt Patsy see to it that she and John made it through another harrowing situation by calling in the troops, so to speak? When Beth died, the R's were going to have to spend the day at Lucinda's amidst her family and friends, that's when Patsy called all their friends over to make things more comfortable for them. I think I read this in DOI. Worked like a charm both times.

 

[DeeDee249]

I believe the calling over of the friends was two-fold. Of course it contanimated the crime scene and made LE's job much harder, but didnt Patsy see to it that she and John made it through another harrowing situation by calling in the troops, so to speak? When Beth died, the R's were going to have to spend the day at Lucinda's amidst her family and friends, that's when Patsy called all their friends over to make things more comfortable for them. I think I read this in DOI. Worked like a charm both times.

And there is no better way to portray yourself as a victim than to call in "victim's advocates". They couldn't have done it better if they'd worn a flashing light over their heads that said "victim".

 

[jaded cat]

I actually chose the RN but the first thing about this case that got my attention was the R's first interview. It sounded so strange. I had nothing to base my opinion on but I definitely got some weird vibrations from the R's. I started looking on the net and found a few forums and began reading. Unfortunately, my father died on January 16, 1997 and I was away for a few months.

When I got back to reading, I came in with a fairly open mind. I knew my emotions were a little out of whack but I wasn't locked in to any scenario. I didn't want to believe the R's killed JB. After a while, I found that nothing else made sense.

An intruder that brought nothing with them? No sign that anyone else was in the house that night? Fibers! PR's paintbrush being used? The longest, most bizarre ransom note ever written? Their actions in finding JB and then PR throwing herself on the body?

I watched interviews, I read articles, I followed Mrs. Brady's page, I followed links to just about everything out there. I joined several forums and tried to listen to the IDIs but ultimately just couldn't buy their defense of the Rs.

In the end, it came down to this: they did it or they know who did. Nothing else makes sense to me.

If I believe that JR loved PR, I can see him doing whatever he had to do to cover for her. He came across as a man with a terrible burden on his shoulders. I can't quite picture a reason PR would cover for JR but I know it could happen. I also held the thought that BR could have been involved. I didn't want to take my brain there, but many things about the BDI theory make perfect sense.

I posted this up thread. I also posted this "All I know for sure is that 4 people were alive in that house on the 25th and one of them was found dead on the 26th. The Rams did it or they know who did, I've never believed anything else. over in the Was BR involved poll.

To elaborate, when I gathered all the information, I became a RDI because nothing else made sense. My first reaction to their interview grabbed me and it didn't make sense. Some information has come out over the years but I don't see how it makes them look any more innocent than it did in 1996.

I'm much better at in person conversations but I'm trying to jump in and speak up, or type up, so to speak. Posting on the fly sometimes causes confusion! :waitasec:

 

[joeskidbeck]

I posted this up thread. I also posted this "All I know for sure is that 4 people were alive in that house on the 25th and one of them was found dead on the 26th. The Rams did it or they know who did, I've never believed anything else. over in the Was BR involved poll.

To elaborate, when I gathered all the information, I became a RDI because nothing else made sense. My first reaction to their interview grabbed me and it didn't make sense. Some information has come out over the years but I don't see how it makes them look any more innocent than it did in 1996.

I'm much better at in person conversations but I'm trying to jump in and speak up, or type up, so to speak. Posting on the fly sometimes causes confusion! :waitasec:

You are making perfect sense, jc. I wish I had been smart enough to see through them in their first interview! I wasted a few years before that ton of bricks fell on my head! hwow:

 

[UKGuy]

I posted this up thread. I also posted this "All I know for sure is that 4 people were alive in that house on the 25th and one of them was found dead on the 26th. The Rams did it or they know who did, I've never believed anything else. over in the Was BR involved poll.

To elaborate, when I gathered all the information, I became a RDI because nothing else made sense. My first reaction to their interview grabbed me and it didn't make sense. Some information has come out over the years but I don't see how it makes them look any more innocent than it did in 1996.

I'm much better at in person conversations but I'm trying to jump in and speak up, or type up, so to speak. Posting on the fly sometimes causes confusion! :waitasec:

jaded cat,

Rams did it or they know who did, I've never believed anything else.

Thats about all that needs to be said!


.

 

[Agatha_C]

jaded cat,

Thats about all that needs to be said!


.

Yeah you're right. JC, couldnt have said it any better than that.

 

[UKGuy]

What I mean is that the Rs were faced with a dead child in the home. To explain it, they wrote the note saying she would be killed if they talk to anyone. They talked, so that "explains" why she was dead. I have no idea how they planned to explain how the "kidnappers" returned the body or knew they'd called police- I suppose they called all their friends over- and the police too- this way they could say the house was being watched - just as the note said- and that's how the kidnappers knew. I have no clue how they planned to explain how she was "returned".
She was really in the house all along, as we know, but I have said before that the Rs never thought LE would stay in the house all day, therefore not giving them the chance to do what they originally planned - to call police later and say "we got her back- but she's dead. They killed her because we called you". Then they would have made up a story about where they found her, sloppy forensic work would have missed the discrepancies. When it became obvious that police were not going to leave, and that they themselves would have to leave, JR "found" her the first chance he got thanks to Det. Arndt.
Her "death" wasn't being hidden from public view- but her BODY was. There is a difference. Her death would be public in a matter of hours and they knew this. Hiding the body prevented her from being found too quickly by the wrong person.
Her body was only being hidden to give them a chance to retrieve her later after everyone else left. It worked- no one else searching the basement found the body. BUT when the R's realized they were not going to be alone after that, they had to find her themselves.
I believe your timeline is correct. BR went to the White's early that morning. JR called for his "getaway" plane after the body was found, hours later.

DeeDee249,

What I mean is that the Rs were faced with a dead child in the home. To explain it, they wrote the note saying she would be killed if they talk to anyone.

But nobody else was supposed to know that she was dead otherwise the ransom note becomes redundant.

Possibly they had some other endgame or conclusion that they were never able to develop, which incorporated JonBenet being discovered dead somewhere, but probably not in their house. Maybe the snowfall caused them to reject placing JonBenet outdoors?


.