Day Number 1 What Convinces You There Was No Intruder/12 Days of JonBenet

[passionflower]

Thanks for the welcome & for your reply, Kadoober! Yes, I totally agree -- innocent parents (or at least the first parent to find the note) would have had their fingerprints on that note!

and teardrops!

 

[passionflower]

The 3 page ransom 'note' with extravagant wording.......... I think PR wrote it with JR dictating it.
How could a mother even think at a time like that?
20 years ago we didn't have the DNA etc............like we do now.
Hinky about John finding JBR when no one else could.
Moving JBR and making a huge scene.............I would of hoped a father would of sobbed and called the LE down to the cellar.
Lies, contamination...........they called every friend into the house
the fact they never hugged each other, cried together in greif.
They wanted BR out of the house..........REALLY? when a "foreign faction" has your other child? He would never be out of my sight!
IMOO I think they were in this together, both to blame, both covered up.
Both murdered her?, PR had a rage?, John finished everything? so JBR wouldn't tell or did they think she was brain damaged?
2 separate lawyers............
PR collapses in church helped out by preacher and not husband........that picture is embeded in my brain.............

 

[Shanna]

All of the above. Also, the date of JB's death on her headstone has always bothered me. How did they know for sure she died before midnight? Also, the fact there is NO WAY in the world any parent of a murdered child would not spend every waking moment looking for the killer. Instead they wrote a book to claim their innocence and John still does to this day.

 

[BBB167893]

Hi All,

I'm a long-time lurker & first-time poster. I agree with all of the excellent points already brought up by everyone here. These are some of the many reasons I'm convinced there was no intruder:

1. Evidence of prior sexual abuse based on the autopsy. This one is HUGE for me. It points to someone close to JonBenet and who had easy and *repeated* access to JonBenet -- NOT a one-time intruder. Here's one of the many areas where I believe the A&E documentary that aired earlier this week got it wrong. They had a medical expert on camera saying that he didn't believe there was any credible evidence of prior sexual abuse based on the autopsy report. He chalked it up to "vaginitis." But I’ve never heard of vaginitis leaving damage to the *hymen*, and that is what was found during the autopsy. So I guess it's a matter of which expert you want to believe. However, if I’m recalling correctly, I think more than 1 medical examiner has reached the conclusion that prior sexual abuse had occurred based on the autopsy findings.


2. As Tricia & others have stated, the ransom note is a huge indicator of no intruder for me. Not only because of the many similarities in the letter formations themselves, but also in the linguistics/language mechanics ("And hence" for example), formatting (indented paragraphs), and use of the acronym ("S.B.T.C") with periods at the end. (Patsy loved inventing/using private acronyms in her letters & there are multiple examples of this from her previous correspondence with friends/loved ones). Here’s another area where the A&E documentary got it wrong when they said no experts were able to conclude that Patsy wrote the note -- that is completely not true. There were multiple experts who DID conclude Patsy wrote it. They differed in their degree of certainty that she was the writer, but more than 1 nationally recognized expert opined that PR was the author.

3. The length of the ransom note -- it seems highly unlikely to me that an intruder would take the time to write a practice note, and then write out the multi-page "manifesto" left on the stairs -- AND DO ALL OF THIS INSIDE THE HOME when they could be discovered at any time. If this was an intruder, a short note would have been prepared ahead of time, not written at the scene with paper and pen from the home.

4. The fact that the ransom note was left at all -- if this note was written by an intruder who had originally intended to kidnap JonBenet and then somehow got "carried away" with his gruesome torture of her in the basement resulting in her murder, why would the intruder leave a note at all?? An intruder would want to get the heck out, as others on this thread have already noted. They wouldn't leave this long rambling note behind (in their own handwriting, no less) as a key piece of evidence for police to find.

5. No Ramsey fingerprints on the note. PR said she "couldn't remember" if she handled the note or not when she found it on the stairs. But wouldn't this be the logical thing anyone would do? You come downstairs at 6 in the morning and see a multi-page note laying on the stairs that wasn't there when you went you to bed. At this point, you have no idea what it says or who wrote it. Wouldn't the natural thing be to bend over, pick it up, and look at it to see what it was? JR said he *did* move the note "from the stairs to the floor," and then knelt down and read it from the floor. Neither of their stories ring true for me. Their fingerprints *should* have been on the note if they were innocently stumbling on this for the first time. The fact that they weren't on the note suggests to me that they purposefully didn't handle it because they already knew what it said, and the author had worn gloves while writing it so that they *wouldn't* leave their fingerprints on it. But IMO, they forgot about that one small detail that this was one area of the crime scene where their fingerprints *should* have been if they were, in fact, innocent.

6. No plausible point of entry for an intruder. Kolar effectively debunked the Lou Smit basement window theory with the cobweb and glass shard. And JR himself said all other doors/windows were locked. So if it was an intruder, the only way for them to get in would be if they had a key. Of course, this is possible, but then I guess you have to assume that this “intruder” was also using this key to gain entry into the house and repeatedly abuse JonBenet in the weeks/months preceding her murder. And to that I say “hogwash.”

7. Parent lies & behaviors on Dec. 26: As others have noted, if you found a note saying your daughter had been kidnapped, wouldn’t you be frantically running all over the house yelling her name over and over and searching desperately for her? Wouldn’t you wake her supposedly sleeping brother to make sure he was okay and then find out if he had seen/heard anything?? Yet PR & JR both said BR slept through all of this. (Did anyone else catch that BR himself debunked this statement on the A&E documentary when he said that PR *did* come into his room that morning and flipped on the lights?) In their initial police statements, they both said BR “was sleeping.” Why lie about this unless you are hiding something?

Same goes for the 911 call – if other voices are on that tape and those voices include BR, he wasn’t sleeping. Again – why lie unless you have a reason to do so?

Then there’s the passing of the 11 a.m. deadline given in the ransom note for a phone call – and neither parent comments to police or to each other about this?? Wouldn’t you be going nuts if it was you in this situation, asking the cops what it meant that the kidnappers hadn’t called by the 11 a.m. deadline?

Then there’s the pineapple. PR and JR say JonBenet was “zonked out” and already asleep when they got home from the White’s party and from dropping off a gift at a friend’s house. They say they put her straight to bed. But the autopsy suggests that she had a late-night fruit snack based on raw pineapple found in digestive track. There’s a bowl of pineapple found in the Ramsey kitchen with BR’s fingerprints on it. So again – why lie about this unless you are hiding something?

8. PR’s timeline for morning of Dec. 26: I’ve never seen this posted anywhere else, so maybe I’m the only one bothered by PR’s stated timeline of what happened the morning of Dec. 26 and maybe I’m just overthinking this, but here goes…

PR told police that she woke up around 5:30 a.m. on Dec. 26. This is confirmed by JR, who says that when he woke up before the alarm went off (at 5:25 a.m.), PR was still in bed. PR then says she got dressed/ready for the upcoming trip to MI, and went to the next floor down (the kids’ bedroom level), where she stopped by JonBenet’s bedroom at about 5:45 a.m. and noted that her daughter was not in her room. (She later changed this story, telling a different version.) She messes with some laundry/clothes for the trip, and then proceeds down the spiral stairs, where she finds the 3-page ransom note. She quickly skims the note, screams for JR, shows JR the note, and then calls 911 at 5:52 a.m. This was what she originally told Officer French (the first officer to arrive on the scene at 5:56 a.m.).

In a later version told to police during the April 30 1997 interview, she said she found the note FIRST, and then rushed up to JonBenet’s room to find her missing.

But whichever version you want to go with, the timeline strikes me as a bit hard to believe. If PR really was sleeping and only woke up at 5:30 a.m., this gives her just 15 minutes to get dressed and do her whole morning grooming routine before stopping on the next floor down to mess with some laundry at 5:45 and then discover the ransom note shortly thereafter. Folks, this is PR we are talking about here – an ex-beauty queen who prided herself on her appearance and who, according to police reports, was freshly groomed and in full makeup when they arrived on the scene. I tend to doubt that her morning beauty routine was just a low-maintenance 15-minute thing. She’d have had to wash her face, moisturize her face and let that dry, get dressed (in the prior night’s clothes – which I also find very unusual), heat up the curling iron, fix/curl her hair, and then apply her makeup (which for PR, wasn’t just a quick dab of chapstick and swipe of mascara and call it good.)

I guess what I’m saying is, I don’t buy the timeframe. I don’t think PR could’ve gotten all of this done in just 15 minutes (by her own reported timeline) – I think she’d been up a lot longer than that. Of course, I could be wrong. And I’m not saying this is one of the main reasons I don’t buy the intruder theory, but it’s always bothered me and I guess I’m just wondering if anyone else has thought about this timeline as well?

I’m sorry about the length of this post! I admire all of the work you all have done on this case and I hope those responsible who remain alive can be brought to justice some day!

Welcome, rojamom. Boy, you came out swinging!

 

[Cranberry]

No Intruder: Patsy never looked for evidence of an intruder in the house before or after JBR was found: from PR's 1st Interview 4/97

TT: Okay. From the time you made the 911 call to the police, John’s on the floor reading the note, till the time the officer, the first officer gets there, other than call the Fernies and the Whites, what else did you do in that, that amount of time? Do you recall doing any other items.
PR: I just prayed. I just prayed and prayed and prayed.
TT: Okay. Do you know where John, John went through his movements throughout the house?
PR: Well, I, I mean, he went back upstairs I presume, and then he came down dressed.
TT: Uh huh.
PR: So, I didn’t really . . .
TT: And, the house is kind of, it’s spread out. I mean . . .
PR: Um huim.
TT: Are you guys using the back part of the house to go up and down . . .
PR: Yeah.
TT: . . .for the most part?
PR: Um hum.
TT: Okay. And the note was on, the note was on the floor and John was reading it when you called the police. Is that right?
PR: When I was calling the police. Yeah, he, it was on the floor there in that back hall.
TT: Okay. And you don’t recall who laid the note down there.
PR: Right.
TT: Okay. Before the police arrived and after you guys checked of Burke did either one of you run through the house and check the house at all?
PR: John, I remember him running, going like to the doors, various doors, cause I kept saying how did they get in, how did they get in? And he uh, checked some of the doors I remember. The door to the garage, you know, from the coat room there.
TT: Um hum.
PR: I don’t you know, I just remember him kind of going around checking. I think he went down to the butler kitchen there. Checked, I don’t, you know, I wasn’t watching he did.
TT: Did he ever make a comment about being, any of the doors being unlocked to you? Did he find any doors unlocked that you recall?
PR: He didn’t say that he did.
TT: Okay.
PR: I don’t remember him saying, you know, he didn’t say Oh I found it or something. I don’t remember him . . .
TT: Okay. Do you remember if John ever went down to the basement to check any of the windows down there before the police arrived?
PR: You know I, you’re just going to ask him I don’t . . .
TT: Okay.
PR: . . .I was just, you know . . .
TT: Okay. Patsy, after the 26th have you guys been able to do any type of inventory of the house. Have you come u with anything missing at all?
PR: No, I haven’t been back.
TT: Okay. Has John done anything like that? Any type of inventories to see if anything is missing?
PR: I don’t, not to my knowledge.
TT: Look at it like big jewelry items, anything like that something that . . .
PR: Yeah.
TT: . . .you guys might see as obvious that was missing.
PR: No.

 

[rojamom]

LOL!!! Thanks for the welcome and for the laugh, SuperDave!!

 

[BBB167893]

LOL!!! Thanks for the welcome and for the laugh, SuperDave!!

Welcome, rojamom. Though I'm not usually too funny on this case.

 

[Riversinthedesert]

Dear Websleuths Members and Visitors,

As we wait for the debut of the JonBenet Ramsey Docu-Series on CBS September 18th I thought we should take some time to look at the evidence in the case.

Each day we will feature a new piece of evidence.

However, on our first day I think it is important to get an idea of what evidence strikes you as the best evidence that points away from an intruder and points to someone in the house that night.

In my opinion the ransom note is the main piece of evidence that points to the Ramsey's.

There are so many reasons why and later in the week we will focus strictly on the ransom note but for today I will leave you with one example of why I believe Patsy wrote the note.

The letter "q". The ransom note "q" is on the left and Patsy's "q" on the right.

I could fill up this forum with the reasons why the ransom note was written by Patsy but we'll save some of the great examples for later in the week.

What one piece of evidence points to someone in the house that night as the killer or someone who helped cover up the killing of JonBenet Ramsey?

Thank you for your participation.

Tricia

Definitely the ransom note, never seen before or since where the alleged victim was subsequently found deceased inside the home. The "q"'s & "and hence" are most incriminating.

 

[CMNorthToSouth]

The ransom note is very bothersome, but I have wondered before if someone (a housekeeper, etc) could have easily removed the stationary from the house and written the note outside the house, then returned the materials. This would allow an intruder to spend less time in the house, because the complexity of them note and the "do-overs" imply that it took quite a while to write. The paintbrush coming from inside the house actually bothers me more than the note. Because the paintbrush was probably used in the killing itself, I think it makes it more likely that the killer had to spend time inside the house (going through Patsy's paint supplies, etc) to look for and prepare the garrote. To me this is more bothersome than the note, because I see that sort of thing as less likely to be planned by an outsider beforehand (or removed from the house beforehand and then returned).

I am very on the fence between RDI and IDI and have been for YEARS. Every time I feel confident in a conclusion, I think of another piece of evidence that makes me uncertain again. So frustrating!

 

[BBB167893]

The ransom note is very bothersome, but I have wondered before if someone (a housekeeper, etc) could have easily removed the stationary from the house and written the note outside the house, then returned the materials. This would allow an intruder to spend less time in the house, because the complexity of them note and the "do-overs" imply that it took quite a while to write. The paintbrush coming from inside the house actually bothers me more than the note. Because the paintbrush was probably used in the killing itself, I think it makes it more likely that the killer had to spend time inside the house (going through Patsy's paint supplies, etc) to look for and prepare the garrote. To me this is more bothersome than the note, because I see that sort of thing as less likely to be planned by an outsider beforehand (or removed from the house beforehand and then returned).

I am very on the fence between RDI and IDI and have been for YEARS. Every time I feel confident in a conclusion, I think of another piece of evidence that makes me uncertain again. So frustrating!

Hi, CMNorthtoSouth. I just like to remind people that there's a lot more to handwriting than just letter formation. There's indentation, spacing, word choices, and numerous other factors. Your point about the paintbrush is a good one.

 

[DatelineFan]

The ransom note is very bothersome, but I have wondered before if someone (a housekeeper, etc) could have easily removed the stationary from the house and written the note outside the house, then returned the materials. This would allow an intruder to spend less time in the house, because the complexity of them note and the "do-overs" imply that it took quite a while to write. The paintbrush coming from inside the house actually bothers me more than the note. Because the paintbrush was probably used in the killing itself, I think it makes it more likely that the killer had to spend time inside the house (going through Patsy's paint supplies, etc) to look for and prepare the garrote. To me this is more bothersome than the note, because I see that sort of thing as less likely to be planned by an outsider beforehand (or removed from the house beforehand and then returned).

I am very on the fence between RDI and IDI and have been for YEARS. Every time I feel confident in a conclusion, I think of another piece of evidence that makes me uncertain again. So frustrating!

It sounds a little complicated for someone to steal the notebook and take it back. I think it's much more likely that someone who lived in the house, wrote it. It also makes sense that this person was able to hide the other piece of the paintbrush.

 

[Riversinthedesert]

Thanks for the welcome & for your reply, Kadoober! Yes, I totally agree -- innocent parents (or at least the first parent to find the note) would have had their fingerprints on that note!

Great first post above! With regard to the ransom note, and the phrases which appear to be from several different films, such as, "Don't try to grow a brain, John," does anyone know if either JR or PR were film buffs? I agree with your analysis of the linguistics/phraseology, etc. in that it suggests an educated author despite a few intentional spelling/grammar errors.

 

[Hatfield]

The fact that a group of kidnappers was on the loose and had taken one of their two children but the other child was left sleeping and then quickly sent away to someone else's home. NO WAY- never gonna happen.

Once it was known that the foreign faction had actually murdered their child in THEIR home, during the night but their remaining child was kept at bay from detectives and questions? Are you kidding me?

I would NOT let my living child out of my sight if my other child was kidnapped by a foreign faction that did not care for my husbands business practices. I would be demanding police protection for an indefinite amount of time.

Also, the fact that neither parent went absolutely nuts when the ransom time came and went without a phone call. Come on.

Simply amazing everyone.

I had no idea there were so many perfect examples of why the R's had to be the ones involved with writing that RN.

I picked these 2 bolded examples above as a couple of my favorites.

If a stranger had left the RN then there is no way the Rs would brush off the other child the way they did so shortly after they found the note and called LE. By forgetting to fake their worry about him that right there gives away that they were not worried about any intruder at all.

And with a house so large with all the closets and cubby holes that an intruder could be hiding in, then here is what I would have immediately done the minute I found the note. In this order:

-Scream at the top of my lungs JBR's name over and over again
-Run and grab my other boy all the while screaming for JR to come to me
-Call 911
-Grab a gun, knife, or other weapon because the intruder could still be in the house for all I know
-Run outside screaming and then try to convince either a neighbor or JR to go back in the house and search for JBR while LE is on the way.

The Rs showed no real sense of worry about the intruder that could have still been in the house and showed no real worry about their other son being kidnapped too.

Rhetorical question:
How did they know there was no danger the minute they first found the note?
Answer: They knew the whole thing had been staged

 

[DrollForeignFaction]

The bogus note implicates Patsy and the lack of a realistic point of entry seems to exclude anyone outside the house unless they had a key. The police video of the window from that morning has me convinced no one came in through that window, but who outside the Ramsey family would have a key who hasn't been investigated?

Overall, it's the sheer implausibility of everything this intruder must have done that gets me. Talk about an idiot savant. He commits the crime of the century without leaving a trace besides one of six highly degraded incomplete touch DNA samples on her clothing, gets in and out like a ghost...but does every convoluted unnecessary thing he can think of during the hours spent in the house. After loosely binding her, putting tape over her mouth and stun gunning her he feeds his victim pineapple from a bowl that somehow already has her brother and mother's fingerprints on it. He sits down to read their bible and circle a certain passage and moves some Kleenex boxes and whatever else the Ramseys accused him of messing with. Like the flashlight: he takes it from the drawer in the hall where it was kept and moves it a few feet over to the kitchen table, wiping it for prints inside and outside (because he had to remove the batteries with his bare hands that night?) - except wasn't most of his crime committed in the dark basement anyway? If you believe Patsy's initial statement that she changed JB into her red turtleneck before bed, he must have changed her back into the shirt she wore to the Whites' and left the old one on the bathroom sink. Of course Patsy changed her story later. When does he leave his entirely useless ransom note on the spiral stairs? Not before he abducts JB from her bed. He would have to hop over it in the middle of the night holding a child. The police questioned if Patsy could hop over the note unencumbered in daylight! If he did it after killing JB, does that mean he murdered her in the basement, ran upstairs to place the note, then went back down to the basement to climb out the window (without disturbing any spiderwebs)? And for that matter, we know he replaced her underwear. Did he grab a pair of underwear from her drawer, hide the rest of the package somewhere in the house for some reason, then abduct JB? Or does he get down the basement, murder her, decide he wants to clean her up and replace her underwear, and run back upstairs to find a pair. At some point he stops to get JB's blanket out of the dryer. Why bother to do any of that? I could expound on this subject for days but you get the picture.

And then there's the issue of motive. We have a kidnapper who doesn't kidnap but does murder and molest. He leaves a ransom note threatening to withhold her body for "proper burial" and then leaves her body in the basement! Never tries to collect and barely asked for anything anyway. We have a murderous pedophile who gets his jollies with a paintbrush (seriously?) and cares for the victim after she dies, cleaning and redressing her and wrapping her up in a blanket to look like she's sleeping when she's found. And we have a murderer who murders twice: first with a blow to the head and then when that didn't finish her off (or produce any visible damage) he takes the time to seek out materials to stage a bizarre, amateurish & highly visible secondary mode of death with the "garrote" instead of just bopping her on the head again and getting it over with. If a kidnapping gone wrong scenario, she had to have died accidentally, and you don't get garroted accidentally, so why take the time to throw that in? If it's a pedophile, why do both when either one would be sufficient? And if it's a pedophile, why go through the elaborate kidnapping ruse? Strangers don't stage, people close to the victim stage to deflect attention. And that has been the Ramseys' MO since day one: deflect, distance themselves, obfuscate.

 

[DrollForeignFaction]

The ransom note is very bothersome, but I have wondered before if someone (a housekeeper, etc) could have easily removed the stationary from the house and written the note outside the house, then returned the materials. This would allow an intruder to spend less time in the house, because the complexity of them note and the "do-overs" imply that it took quite a while to write. The paintbrush coming from inside the house actually bothers me more than the note. Because the paintbrush was probably used in the killing itself, I think it makes it more likely that the killer had to spend time inside the house (going through Patsy's paint supplies, etc) to look for and prepare the garrote. To me this is more bothersome than the note, because I see that sort of thing as less likely to be planned by an outsider beforehand (or removed from the house beforehand and then returned).

I am very on the fence between RDI and IDI and have been for YEARS. Every time I feel confident in a conclusion, I think of another piece of evidence that makes me uncertain again. So frustrating!

My problem with the stolen pages theory is that they found the practice note ("Dear Mr. and Mrs. I") still attached to the pad, indicating it was most likely written at the same time the ransom note was.

Riversinthedesert, I don't know if they're film buffs but they had framed movie posters in their basement. They had An Officer and a Gentleman and another one I couldn't identify. In Pam Archuleta's book she mentions that the Ramseys had a tv coming out of the ceiling to watch movies in bed, and when Patsy was going through chemo and couldn't get out of bed much the family would gather on the bed to watch movies with Patsy.

 

[DatelineFan]

The fact that the Ramsey's let 10am go by without a comment, has always rubbed me the wrong way. I would be LOSING MY MIND all morning! I think at 10, without a phone call, I would have been hysterical. Who wouldn't? This is a huge red flag. I'm not even a parent, and I get nervous just trying to imagine being in that situation.

Sent from my SM-G928T using Tapatalk

 

[madeleine]

just a reminder, this thread is the place for it

[video=youtube;-IZRZZ-DqFc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-IZRZZ-DqFc[/video]

@min 10,03

JR admits that the investigators were hired to prepare his defence, not to look for the intruder
watch body language


========



2000 March 27 Larry King Live
Interview with John and Patsy Ramsey

Larry King: If it was a pedophile, was your daughter sexually abused?

Patsy Ramsey: I don't believe there is conclusive evidence of that.

John Ramsey: We don't know.

KING: Have you talked to them about -- do they send you the autopsy reports?

John Ramsey: No, no.

Patsy Ramsey: No.

John Ramsey: We've -- the police have not talked to us at all. We don't know what's been done.

Larry King: Well, they have questioned you, right?

John Ramsey: They have questioned us extensively.

Larry King: But they haven't told you anything about -- you have not seen the death certificate?

John Ramsey: No.

Patsy Ramsey: No.

Larry King: You don't know how your daughter died?

Patsy Ramsey: Well, we do.

John Ramsey: We do.

Patsy Ramsey: From what we...

John Ramsey: She was strangled.

Larry King: That's the cause of death, strangulation?

John Ramsey: That's the cause of death.

Larry King: But you don't know if any sexual activity took place?

John Ramsey: It's not clear to me that there was. We don't know. It's one of those questions you don't want to know the answer to, frankly.

 

[Tricia]

The ransom note is very bothersome, but I have wondered before if someone (a housekeeper, etc) could have easily removed the stationary from the house and written the note outside the house, then returned the materials. This would allow an intruder to spend less time in the house, because the complexity of them note and the "do-overs" imply that it took quite a while to write. The paintbrush coming from inside the house actually bothers me more than the note. Because the paintbrush was probably used in the killing itself, I think it makes it more likely that the killer had to spend time inside the house (going through Patsy's paint supplies, etc) to look for and prepare the garrote. To me this is more bothersome than the note, because I see that sort of thing as less likely to be planned by an outsider beforehand (or removed from the house beforehand and then returned).

I am very on the fence between RDI and IDI and have been for YEARS. Every time I feel confident in a conclusion, I think of another piece of evidence that makes me uncertain again. So frustrating!

After Watching the CBS special I don't think you will have any doubt whatsoever other than who in the house did what that night.

 

[BoldBear]

Is there a theory about the room she was found in and the door with the latch? Like why there would be a latch on the top like thaT and on that side...what did they need to lock INSIDE that room? Is there a thread for this?

I always assumed that the latch was from the previous owners and had possibly been there for many years. I read that the door wouldn't open on its own, but this was after Ramseys installed carpet in the basement. The carpet outside the door had been removed for the investigation and the tile underneath was visible.

The wooden block is an old time carpenter's trick. It was cheap. My grandfather used a wooden block on the door to the outhouse of his fishing cabin--it was a two seater. Just run a stick around to chase away any spiders. Those were the days.

The block actually fits the time-frame of the house as do the windows in the basement.

 

[madeleine]

http://www.people.com/article/jonbenet-ramsey-cbs-docuseries-clip

In the clip, the team also spends time actually writing out the ransom note – coming to the conclusion that it would have taken the killer at least 21 minutes.
"That is 21-and-a-half minutes they could have been caught," Clemente says. "Twenty-one-and-a-half minutes that they stayed in the house longer than they needed to."

That would have been "high-risk behavior," according to Laura Richards, the ex-Scotland Yard behavioral analyst.

"I think we can all agree this letter is clearly staged," Clemente alleges.

"What we have to decide through our investigation," he says, "is whether it was staged by somebody in the family or somebody who came into this home.