The only theory that makes any real sense.

[horatio]

Except JR didn't point to the window and say intruder. He told the police, as well as FW that he himself broke that window months earlier when he supposedly forgot his key and had to break into his own house. He also told the police all the doors and windows were locked. The police report states there was no sign of forced entry.

Who knows when that window was really broken though. It's at least enough for reasonable doubt, regardless of whether JR brought it up or not, it shows that there was indeed a way into the house that night. Moving the body is a huge risk, you only do so if you absolutely have to (eg. If JBR was killed in their master bedroom for example). As long as it's somewhere in the house where the possibility exists that someone could enter and hide, you don't really have to move it.

Just to clear something up - I don't believe anyone is suggesting that JR (and/or PR) would dump the body on the front lawn, or the back lawn, or the alley - IOWs no one is suggesting the body would be dumped near the house. If the plan was to dump the body, then the body would be placed in a car, then the car would be driven to look for a place to dump the body. The RN says the delivery of the ransom will be "exhausting" implying that it will take a long time - e.g. the perfect excuse to be driving around.

If the killer(s) can get JBR secretly into the trunk, why even write the RN? Simply for an excuse to drive out of the driveway? Surely the could have found another way to leave the house without drafting up a massively incriminating piece of evidence. How would the killer know how the person receiving the note would react? They wouldn't. Who's supposed to be making the telephone call to give JR the instructions for the drop? An accomplice would have to be involved. JR can't just up and say "I'm going to make the delivery now" without further instructions. How would he know where to go? There are a lot of issues with constructing this elaborate ruse just to be able to leave his house.

 

[Chrishope]

Who knows when that window was really broken though.

PR/JR/BR and the housekeeper, Linda Hoffman-Pugh (LHP) at an absolute minimum.

PR is dead. LHP says she doesn't know about it being broken and did not recall PR asking her to clean up glass, as PR claimed she did.

That leaves BR/JR.

It's at least enough for reasonable doubt, regardless of whether JR brought it up or not, it shows that there was indeed a way into the house that night.

Whether or not it creates doubt is for the jury. My guess is it does not, as there is the intact spider web, and the grate, as well as the undisturbed window sill. In addition there is the police report which states no sign of forced entry. The fact that JR didn't bring it up immediately, but only several months later would cause the jury to wonder about it, don't you think?

Just the fact that it's broken doesn't prove or even imply there was no intruder. The fact that the grate was in place, the spider web intact, and the dirt on the sill undisturbed strongly suggests no one came through that window. I'd suggest this does not create doubt.

Moving the body is a huge risk,

So is killing. So is staging a coverup. Once the murder has occurred and the decision to cover up with a fake kidnapping has been made, the risk is between not moving the body or moving it. Both highly risky.

you only do so if you absolutely have to (eg. If JBR was killed in their master bedroom for example). As long as it's somewhere in the house where the possibility exists that someone could enter and hide, you don't really have to move it.

You do if you are working a phoney kidnap angle. The kidnapping isn't even minimally plausible if the kidnapping did not happen. With the body in the basement, (or anywhere else in the house) it's obvious there was never a kidnapping. It looks exactly the way any RDI thinks it looks - one of the Rs killed her and cooked up a fake kidnapping scenario.

If the killer(s) can get JBR secretly into the trunk, why even write the RN? Simply for an excuse to drive out of the driveway?

The RN explains why she is missing. She isn't missing yet, but the RN says she is -past tense. The RN says she has already been taken. The RN says she is being held, and will be returned if instructions are followed.

Assuming, as an RDI believer, that the RN is fake and was written by one of the Ramsey family (or any combination of Rs) it's purpose, in part, is to explain why she's missing.

The RN also gives the killer(s) a reason to be driving around looking for a place to dump the body. It says the delivery of the ransom will be exhausting, implying that it will be long and complicated. IOWs that they'll be driving around a lot.

Surely the could have found another way to leave the house without drafting up a massively incriminating piece of evidence.

If it was JR or PR working alone, how could they get the body out w/o alerting the innocent parent? They had to cook up a kidnapping.

If it was JR/PR working together, they still had to explain what happened to JB, thus the RN. She's been kidnapped.

They could have left her out in an open area of the basement, naked, or even put her in her room and claimed an intruder did it. The fact that there is a RN indicates he (they)tried to work the phoney kidnap scenario. Thus the body had to be dumped.

How would the killer know how the person receiving the note would react? They wouldn't.

He wouldn't, right. He'd (they'd) have to hope that the note would be read, and believed.

Who's supposed to be making the telephone call to give JR the instructions for the drop? An accomplice would have to be involved.

No, if police were not called the morning of the 26th, JR could place the call himself. He could stop at a phone booth - lots of those around in '96- and call. The answering machine would pickup. He'd go home and erase the machine, claiming he had been home when the call came. Since the police are not involved yet, there is no tap/trap on the phone, so all the phone co. would have is a record of a call being placed, which would support his story. No need for an accomplice at all.

[qutoe]
JR can't just up and say "I'm going to make the delivery now" without further instructions. How would he know where to go? There are a lot of issues with constructing this elaborate ruse just to be able to leave his house.[/quote]

See above for his excuse to make the delivery. It's no more elaborate than needed. It gets the body out and gives him an excuse for driving in the countryside if he happened to be seen.

His alternative is to leave the body in the house, but then why the RN? The RN only makes sense if there has been a kidnapping (or appears to have been a kidnapping) and with the body there, it's pretty obvious there was no kidnapping.

 

[killarney rose]

I agree with the theory that JR and PR could have acted together to protect BR. However, the thing that casts the most doubt for me in the BDI theory is that he was 9. To be using a garrote to molest his little sister is a bit of a stretch. It's possible, but a stretch.

If he was sexually sophisticated enough to be doing such a thing , what that means to me is that someone had exposed him to this and he too had probably been molested.

 

[deca]

I agree with the theory that JR and PR could have acted together to protect BR. However, the thing that casts the most doubt for me in the BDI theory is that he was 9. To be using a garrote to molest his little sister is a bit of a stretch. It's possible, but a stretch.

If he was sexually sophisticated enough to be doing such a thing , what that means to me is that someone had exposed him to this and he too had probably been molested.

That is why I have always wondered about family members or friends close to the R's when BR was younger. A male friend of mine was molested at age 5 or 6 by a male friend aged 8 or 9. Later it was discovered that this older boy had been a victim himself. I hear that this is common. Anyways- if the Ramsey's KNEW that BR had been molested that would explain some of the actions on their part.

 

[Venom]

They had all night, and several vehicles available. Heck, they could've just walked her out to the yard at 4am, and left her there - wayyyy easier than all the bother of elaborate and time-consuming staging and way less risky than leaving her inside the home where the crime occurred.

A parent who would be capable of a/ covering up and/or b/ committing the crime in total, tying a garrotte around the throat of their own tiny daughter, etc, would be more than capable of dumping her body outside and claiming a failed abduction. The level of callousness is about equal.. and they'd have to be pretty cold and cool-headed to do any of it in the first place... so if Burke did this, why wouldn't the Ramseys have opted for the way easier, way less self-incriminating option?

The BDI theory just doesn't gel with me at all.

If they would have just walked the body out into the backyard, they could have left footprints which could be traced to their shoes. They could have been seen driving somewhere.

I'm not saying BDI. I've come to think that at least one of the Ramsey's may have a hand in it. It doesn't add up.
What could PR's sister have taken out of that house when she was allowed in to get clothes?
Why was the house whitewashed and repainted after it was released as a crime scene?
How about the neighbor that heard the scream, yet no one in the same house heard it.
What kidnapper goes in a home and writes the ransom note there?
Why wouldn't the kidnapper just take her from the home, why kill/abuse her there?

 

[Chrishope]

If they would have just walked the body out into the backyard, they could have left footprints which could be traced to their shoes. They could have been seen driving somewhere.

They (He) would not have walked the body outside. The RN gives them (him) an excuse to be driving around.

I'm not saying BDI. I've come to think that at least one of the Ramsey's may have a hand in it. It doesn't add up.

Sure a Ramsey had a hand in it.

What could PR's sister have taken out of that house when she was allowed in to get clothes?

We can't really know.

Why was the house whitewashed and repainted after it was released as a crime scene?

Because houses sell better if they are renovated and painted. It had been released as a crime scene, meaning police had found everything they were ever going to look for.

How about the neighbor that heard the scream, yet no one in the same house heard it.

Well, the neighbor said the scream might have been "negative energy" whatever that means. Then she settled on hearing an audible scream. What about the neighbor's husband, in bed, right beside the woman who heard the scream. He didn't hear it either.

What kidnapper goes in a home and writes the ransom note there?

The made-up kind. The kind you can only believe in if there appears to have actually been a kidnapping, which only appears to be true if the body isn't in the house.

Why wouldn't the kidnapper just take her from the home, why kill/abuse her there?

A real kidnapper would have taken her from the home.

 

[circe221]

But Burke was too young to be charged with JonBenet's murder. So are you saying that the Ramseys didn't know that at the time of the coverup? Okay, but I would think they would become aware of that very soon after, so then why not admit what happened? Did they not want to be known as the family where one child murdered the other child?

This makes the most sense out of any theory I have read.
They were probably panicking, and then realized the implications of the situation, and concocted the scenario that was presented to law enforcement.
The more I read about this case, the more I lean towards Burke being the perpetrator.

 

[Ausgirl]

This just reminds me so much of the Azaria Chamberlain case, in which both parents and surviving children were overwhelmingly found guilty by 'public trial'. And also, thanks to faulty and circumstantial eveidence, in an actual court of law -- Lindy Chamberlain spent three years in prison.. The case is on Wiki, no need to rehash here. But 32 years after the crime, all of the Chamberlains were exonerated. The end. After 32 years of being blamed, scrutinised, a million convincing arguments for their guilt (and some truly wacky ones as well) -- the highest court in the land found a dingo had actually taken that baby.

Did the Chamberlains LOOK guilty? Heck yes. Guilty as sin.

Were they? --- No.

And I recall, amid all the blah and hype, many people turning to the idea the Chamberlain's oldest son Aiden (then aged 6) had killed his baby sister with a pair of scissors by accident (or as his first Satanic sacrifice, w/e floated their boats) and the Chamberlains were covering it up.

Lots of great arguments, really convincing ones, for that scenario. Problem is, he did no such thing.

Point being, there's as much proof that actually points to Burke's guilt as there was with Aiden Chamberlain. Maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less.. but the impact is the same.

And should Burke, in a decade or three, somehow be conclusively cleared of the crime, it won't give him back his family, or his childhood, or take away the pain of being labelled a sibling-murderer and accused of incest...

Not that having a theory is a bad thing, I love theories. I like to argue both sides of a theory sometimes, when I doubt my own impartiality. Just -- I have watched another little boy with a dead sister and guilty-looking parents struggle through decades of (sometimes really foul) accusations --with next to no real evidence to justify them -- so this is why I am more inclined to pick apart a theory that could potentially cause much more harm than good.

There is IMO actually more physical evidence for IDI (a known one, not a 'random intruder' - someone who to some degree knew or had observed that house, if not the family, quite well or hey, had a key) - than BDI.

So back to the topic properly - if JonBenet was the center of Patsy's world to the point where Burke would murder her in a jealous fit, and Patsy knew it.. would she not have held a deep revulsion for the child who took away her beloved and much doted-on daughter? Would she really have gone to such incredible lengths to protect the son who did that? This is another aspect of BDI-theory that seems to trip over itself.

Good point, re avoiding foot- and tyre-prints, though it could equally apply to why an intruder would choose to kill JonBenet in the house rather than abduct her in a vehicle.

 

[horatio]

No, if police were not called the morning of the 26th, JR could place the call himself. He could stop at a phone booth - lots of those around in '96- and call. The answering machine would pickup. He'd go home and erase the machine, claiming he had been home when the call came. Since the police are not involved yet, there is no tap/trap on the phone, so all the phone co. would have is a record of a call being placed, which would support his story. No need for an accomplice at all.

That's a whole lot of speculation right there. What are you basing this on? How do you prove without a reasonable doubt that that is what he intended to do? You don't, because it's ridiculous and absolute conjecture.

 

[Chrishope]

That's a whole lot of speculation right there. What are you basing this on? How do you prove without a reasonable doubt that that is what he intended to do? You don't, because it's ridiculous and absolute conjecture.

Of course it's speculation. You can't solve the case without inferring actions and intent, there just isn't enough there otherwise.

The actual undisputed facts are that JB is dead. She was bashed in the head. She was strangled. She was molested, both that night and in the past. She bled. She was wiped down. She was "found" in the WC. There is a RN written on PR's notepad with a sharpie pen from the R's house. There are a few other facts, and that's it.

Any theory, IDI, BDI, PDI, JDI requires figuring out what was done, by who, and to the extent possible why. And by "figuring out" I mean speculating, conjecturing, and inferring. What do you think ST was doing? What do you think Kolar is doing?

You suggested there had to be an accomplice to place a ransom call. I showed a way that it could be done w/o an accomplice.

Is it reasonable to think there was a plan to place a ransom call? Yes, because the note says a ransom call will come. As you pointed out yourself, how was JR just going to go out and say he's delivering the ransom? He'd have to pretend to be following instructions. To pretend to follow instructions he'd have to receive a ransom call.

I don't know what JR was thinking, I can only infer what he was thinking from the actions he took, or that I think he took.

I don't believe an intruder came in the house unprepared and wrote a RN on their paper with their pen. I don't believe there ever was an intruder. Therefore one of the Ramseys (or more than one) wrote the RN. Why? To have a kidnapping scenario which would cover the murder.

It's my personal opinion that a kidnapping scenario is a LOT more believable with the body out of the house. Therefore I tend to favor the idea that the plan was to dump the body somewhere. When I look at the RN it clearly says the delivery will be exhausting. That means it will take time - e.g. JR is driving around the countryside. That gives him an excuse to be out there, and a chance to find a dumping spot.

Is that what JR had in mind? Well, it might not be. He might have thought people would actually believe there was an intruder. And a lot of people do believe that (not so much here on Webslueths though). Other than LS it doesn't appear the police believed it.

Why do you think the note is so long and detailed if the body was supposed to be found in the house? Why all the business about an exhausting delivery? What does that accomplish if there will never even be a pretend delivery?

 

[horatio]

Why do you think the note is so long and detailed if the body was supposed to be found in the house?

Describe to me the correlation between the note being long and detailed, and JBR being found in the house, because I'm just not getting it.

 

[Chrishope]

Describe to me the correlation between the note being long and detailed, and JBR being found in the house, because I'm just not getting it.

I'm not claiming there is a correlation between a long detailed RN and the body being found in the house. I'm claiming there is a possible, sensible, correlation between a long detailed RN and a plan to dump the body well away from the house.

If the plan were to have the body found in the basement, yet still blame it on kidnappers (which imo is sensless) then a short simple note should be sufficient. Yet it's not short and simple.

So, here is the correlation that I'm suggesting. The note says (and I'm paraphrasing) that the ransom call will come tomorrow. W/o debating whether tomorrow means the 26th, or 27th, the RN says JR should arrange to get $118K. It says he should have an adequate size attache. It says the delivery will be exhausting and advises him to be well rested.

So, if the plan was to dump the body (and I think that was the plan because I see a kidnapping being a LOT more plausible w/o a dead body in the house) then the body could be dumped while JR is out driving around making the "exhausting" delivery.

If someone is not supposed to dump the body why bother writing that the delivery will be exhausting? What does that accomplish? Why is that language in the RN?

 

[Chrishope]

This just reminds me so much of the Azaria Chamberlain case, in which both parents and surviving children were overwhelmingly found guilty by 'public trial'. And also, thanks to faulty and circumstantial eveidence, in an actual court of law -- Lindy Chamberlain spent three years in prison.. The case is on Wiki, no need to rehash here. But 32 years after the crime, all of the Chamberlains were exonerated. The end. After 32 years of being blamed, scrutinised, a million convincing arguments for their guilt (and some truly wacky ones as well) -- the highest court in the land found a dingo had actually taken that baby.

Did the Chamberlains LOOK guilty? Heck yes. Guilty as sin.

Were they? --- No.

And I recall, amid all the blah and hype, many people turning to the idea the Chamberlain's oldest son Aiden (then aged 6) had killed his baby sister with a pair of scissors by accident (or as his first Satanic sacrifice, w/e floated their boats) and the Chamberlains were covering it up.

Lots of great arguments, really convincing ones, for that scenario. Problem is, he did no such thing.

Point being, there's as much proof that actually points to Burke's guilt as there was with Aiden Chamberlain. Maybe a bit more, maybe a bit less.. but the impact is the same.

And should Burke, in a decade or three, somehow be conclusively cleared of the crime, it won't give him back his family, or his childhood, or take away the pain of being labelled a sibling-murderer and accused of incest...

Not that having a theory is a bad thing, I love theories. I like to argue both sides of a theory sometimes, when I doubt my own impartiality. Just -- I have watched another little boy with a dead sister and guilty-looking parents struggle through decades of (sometimes really foul) accusations --with next to no real evidence to justify them -- so this is why I am more inclined to pick apart a theory that could potentially cause much more harm than good.

There is IMO actually more physical evidence for IDI (a known one, not a 'random intruder' - someone who to some degree knew or had observed that house, if not the family, quite well or hey, had a key) - than BDI.

So back to the topic properly - if JonBenet was the center of Patsy's world to the point where Burke would murder her in a jealous fit, and Patsy knew it.. would she not have held a deep revulsion for the child who took away her beloved and much doted-on daughter? Would she really have gone to such incredible lengths to protect the son who did that? This is another aspect of BDI-theory that seems to trip over itself.

Good point, re avoiding foot- and tyre-prints, though it could equally apply to why an intruder would choose to kill JonBenet in the house rather than abduct her in a vehicle.

There is actually more forensic evidence of IDI than BDI. Not that I believe IDI.

 

[horatio]

If someone is not supposed to dump the body why bother writing that the delivery will be exhausting? What does that accomplish? Why is that language in the RN?

Maybe because the killer thought it sounded like something that would be in a ransom note? Who really knows? You're deriving an entire theory based on a verb.

 

[Chrishope]

Maybe because the killer thought it sounded like something that would be in a ransom note? Who really knows? You're deriving an entire theory based on a verb.

It's possible the killer thought it sounded like something that should be in a RN. Who really knows? No one. If we really knew, we would have solved the case. That it isn't solved is why we are here.

No, my theory isn't based on a verb, we are just talking about one small aspect of my theory.

Actually it's not even my theory. For a more detailed explanation see http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/07/just-facts-maam.html

 

[katilac]

I'm not claiming there is a correlation between a long detailed RN and the body being found in the house. I'm claiming there is a possible, sensible, correlation between a long detailed RN and a plan to dump the body well away from the house. <snip>

going with this theory, why might they have changed their minds and called the police instead?

 

[Chrishope]

going with this theory, why might they have changed their minds and called the police instead?

"They" didn't change their minds. If JR/PR were co-conspirators in the coverup then I see no reason why they wouldn't procede with the plan and dump the body.

So, it seems likely, to me, that they were not co-conspirators. IOWs I don't think PR wrote the RN, I don't think PR is involved in the murder, and I don't think she is involved in the coverup.

So "they" didn't change their mind and go with a plan B. PR called 911 as any parent of a kidnapped child might do, and this destroyed JR's plan to dump the body.

http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/07/just-facts-maam.html

 

[Nom de plume]

There is another possibility to explain a RN and a dead body in the house. First of all, if there's just a dead body, with no evidence of an intruder, no RN, etc. the parents will be arrested within minutes.

If there's a RN, and a missing child, the FBI and the security team from LM would be involved immediately, all having much, much more experience than BPD. Once again, most likely the parents would be arrested within hours.

If there's a RN and a dead body, then inexperienced BPD handles the case. The RN throws just enough doubt in about the parents that they aren't arrested right away. LE has to at least test the RN, compare it to paper and pens in the house, etc. This gives the parents time to lawyer up & shut up.

I used to agree with Chrishope that there was no doubt they (he) planned to dump her somewhere else. Now I'm not so sure they (he) ever really planned to do that. Another thing, JR & PR both say that he was the one that told her to call 911. Why not call LM and get their security team on it? They do have people that "specialize" in this kind of thing. The "kidnappers" wouldn't know about that call. No LE would be involved, and there would be a MUCH better chance of getting her back alive. IMO, they didn't call LM because they knew they'd be found out immediately and didn't want them or the FBI involved. If JB was really "missing" LM & FBI would be the first called in. Neither one work homicide cases, that would fall under BPD. I think JR knew this and wanted to keep both LM & FBI out of it. He just never figured they wouldn't find her right away, but then again, who would? JMO

 

[Chrishope]

There is another possibility to explain a RN and a dead body in the house. First of all, if there's just a dead body, with no evidence of an intruder, no RN, etc. the parents will be arrested within minutes.

If there's a RN, and a missing child, the FBI and the security team from LM would be involved immediately, all having much, much more experience than BPD. Once again, most likely the parents would be arrested within hours.

If there's a RN and a dead body, then inexperienced BPD handles the case. The RN throws just enough doubt in about the parents that they aren't arrested right away. LE has to at least test the RN, compare it to paper and pens in the house, etc. This gives the parents time to lawyer up & shut up.

I used to agree with Chrishope that there was no doubt they (he) planned to dump her somewhere else. Now I'm not so sure they (he) ever really planned to do that. Another thing, JR & PR both say that he was the one that told her to call 911. Why not call LM and get their security team on it? They do have people that "specialize" in this kind of thing. The "kidnappers" wouldn't know about that call. No LE would be involved, and there would be a MUCH better chance of getting her back alive. IMO, they didn't call LM because they knew they'd be found out immediately and didn't want them or the FBI involved. If JB was really "missing" LM & FBI would be the first called in. Neither one work homicide cases, that would fall under BPD. I think JR knew this and wanted to keep both LM & FBI out of it. He just never figured they wouldn't find her right away, but then again, who would? JMO

That's pretty good. The only argument I have is that they could have lawyered up immediately even if arrested immediately. The dead body does get the FBI off the case. I'm not sure why LM couldn't still be involved, they're a private company, with no jurisdiction, or lack of jurisdiction. Since JR was possibly involved, it might still affect the security of the firm?

 

[blefuscu]

There is exactly zero evidence that BDI. Would a 9 year old even know how to garrott another person?