Evidence you can't explain

[Linda7NJ]

I think B could have been the abuser BUT I don't think if he killed her he realized what he did. I don't know if a youngish kid could really lie that well. Unless he feels no emotions whatsoever...

Ever see the "confession" video of that 8 year old AZ kid that killed two grown men?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

What has always seemed "off" to me was when JR brought the body of JBR up from the basement and LA put her under the Christmas tree, PR starts her religious type of mumbo-jumbo. Like she already resigned herself to JBR's death.

I think that most mother's would be in shock and start to scream "Who did this to my baby"??? Or something to that effect.

 

[Steely Dan]

What has always seemed "off" to me was when JR brought the body of JBR up from the basement and LA put her under the Christmas tree, PR starts her religious type of mumbo-jumbo. Like she already resigned herself to JBR's death.

I think that most mother's would be in shock and start to scream "Who did this to my baby"??? Or something to that effect.

Everybody grieves differently. So I don't think that's a big deal. I'm still reading the book and I have to say that there are some things that bother me. I'm very sure the Ramsey's know who did this and are covering up, but where did the three different sets of DNA come from?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Everybody grieves differently. So I don't think that's a big deal. I'm still reading the book and I have to say that there are some things that bother me. I'm very sure the Ramsey's know who did this and are covering up, but where did the three different sets of DNA come from?

Who knows? JonBenet wasn't bathed for days! It was the holidays, party, people people people...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Steely Dan]

Who knows? JonBenet wasn't bathed for days! It was the holidays, party, people people people...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

I missed the part where she hadn't been bathed in days, but Kolar does say they took DNA samples from people who would have come in contact with her. This part just really makes me wonder. It's about the 911 call and the voices heard by, several different technicians, and they all heard the same thing;

Male (angry): "We're not speaking to you!"

Female: Help me Jesus. Help me Jesus"

Young male: "Well what did you find?"

I'm assuming that's JR, PR and maybe BR, but I'm not sure.

I don't think that has anything to do with the DNA, it's just a really interesting part of the book.

 

[dodie20]

Right. If a child merely had an accident it would be normal to call for medical aid i.e an ambulance.

So, assuming the head blow came first and was an accident and the fact no emergency services were called could/would imply that 'something' prevented them from doing so. And that 'something' is most probably the sexual abuse which would send to jail whichever adult was doing it.

Thus, at the core of the decision making processes that night was a survival instinct born from the fact that if the truth be known they were in serious doggy-doo-da.

I'm on the fence with the head bash being accidental, (and I include a rage attack semi accidental). IMO, it could have been a deliberate, vicious attack meant to kill. When it didn't, maybe the perp then opted for the strangulation. We've heard every theory from rage, accident, her falling on the tub, her being hit instead of the intended target, etc. etc, This blow was so forceful that it left a gaping hole in JB's skull. It took me years to work up the nerve to look at the pictures of her skull, but when I finally did, it was hard for me to imagine anything but intent to kill as the motive. It looks like someone meant to kill and obliterate. An attack like that required murderous hatred, IMO.

 

[Linda7NJ]

I'm on the fence with the head bash being accidental, (and I include a rage attack semi accidental). IMO, it could have been a deliberate, vicious attack meant to kill. When it didn't, maybe the perp then opted for the strangulation. We've heard every theory from rage, accident, her falling on the tub, her being hit instead of the intended target, etc. etc, This blow was so forceful that it left a gaping hole in JB's skull. It took me years to work up the nerve to look at the pictures of her skull, but when I finally did, it was hard for me to imagine anything but intent to kill as the motive. It looks like someone meant to kill and obliterate. An attack like that required murderous hatred, IMO.

Which IMO fits with it being Burke.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[dodie20]

Which IMO fits with it being Burke.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

When I was writing that post, BR did come into my mind. IMO, a child would resent a sibling more than parent would...but, this wasn't a normal family dynamic. JB was the star now, not PR, and PR's psyche would determine how she accepted this. IDK, I go back and forth on who resented JB and why. BR, because he was in JB's shadow? or PR, because she had been dethroned as the young beauty queen?

 

[Linda7NJ]

When I was writing that post, BR did come into my mind. IMO, a child would resent a sibling more than parent would...but, this wasn't a normal family dynamic. JB was the star now, not PR, and PR's psyche would determine how she accepted this. IDK, I go back and forth on who resented JB and why. BR, because he was in JB's shadow? or PR, because she had been dethroned as the young beauty queen?

IMO Patsy was enmeshed with JonBenet. She viewed her as an extension of herself. Not as an individual with thoughts and opinions of her own. I think Patsy could have had great difficultly with the fact that JonBenet was really starting to assert herself.

Burke, IMO had a reason to hate her. Seems to me he was pushed aside and the world revolved around JonBenet. His father was always working or away. He appears to have been very disconnected. He whacked her in the face before with a golf club. He certainly didn't seem to care much she was gone.

Dunno....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[questfortrue]

When I was writing that post, BR did come into my mind. IMO, a child would resent a sibling more than parent would...but, this wasn't a normal family dynamic. JB was the star now, not PR, and PR's psyche would determine how she accepted this. IDK, I go back and forth on who resented JB and why. BR, because he was in JB's shadow? or PR, because she had been dethroned as the young beauty queen?

In terms of motive, perhaps, like many encountering an abuse situation in the home, PR blamed the victim; or another possibility she was devastated that JB had replaced her somehow in JR’s affections? moo

 

[Let_Forever_Be]

I'm on the fence with the head bash being accidental, (and I include a rage attack semi accidental). IMO, it could have been a deliberate, vicious attack meant to kill. When it didn't, maybe the perp then opted for the strangulation. We've heard every theory from rage, accident, her falling on the tub, her being hit instead of the intended target, etc. etc, This blow was so forceful that it left a gaping hole in JB's skull. It took me years to work up the nerve to look at the pictures of her skull, but when I finally did, it was hard for me to imagine anything but intent to kill as the motive. It looks like someone meant to kill and obliterate. An attack like that required murderous hatred, IMO.

All of those things you mention absolutely could have happened.

But for me personally, I just try to remove as much speculation as possible. To entertain the 'bed wetting' theory means I have to invent the idea that one of the parents, probably Patsy, would indeed go into a rage over such an issue -- a rage that would then result in JonBenet sustaining a 8 1/2 inch skull fracture. And from that would then go to such incredible lengths to cover it up. I just personally don't believe that happened.

Regarding the skull fracture: I agree it was deliberate. But I think it was deliberately done AFTER neck trauma.

For me, the evidence points to a sex game of sorts which went wrong. But ofocurse, I can't say with absolute certainty that is the case.

 

[gramcracker]

re rage:

serious illnesses and frequent soiling/toileting/bedwetting accidents cause levels of stress unimaginable to those who don't have those issues. friends described JR letting PR fly across the country alone for her chemo and not being supportive in many ways. his lifelong friend said he never once saw JR give PR a kiss or a hug or even hold her hand. in addition to that, there was a more traditional and old-fashioned division of labor in the home. on the 25th PR was packing for four people going to two locations (her words) and watching after her kids and their playmates and feeding her kids and coloring her hair and wrapping enough gifts to fill two shopping bags, while JR's contribution was going to the airport. although you want your kids and their friends to have fun and enjoy their new toys it can be a lot closer to chaotic than calming for the adults. rush, rush, rush. JR had wanted to spend Xmas in MI but PR didn't so they compromised by squeezing in a quick trip there before returning to CO to leave for the cruise. when questioned by LE they both said that she was "OK" with that, but I wonder if that was true. it's not like they could say: yes, she was ticked and it was an issue. after a day like the 25th was, they had dinner with friends which required planning and effort on PR's part, and then they came home and she had to finish whatever she hadn't gotten done during the day. JR wasn't running around that night getting things done, but she was. rush, rush, rush. LE, EMTs and hospital staffs know that suicides and incidents of domestic abuse skyrocket during the holiday season. I think there was a perfect storm of stress, expectations, deadlines and chaos added to underlying anger and resentment

 

[chlban]

gramcracker;9901698]re rage:

serious illnesses and frequent soiling/toileting/bedwetting accidents cause levels of stress unimaginable to those who don't have those issues. friends described JR letting PR fly across the country alone for her chemo and not being supportive in many ways. his lifelong friend said he never once saw JR give PR a kiss or a hug or even hold her hand. in addition to that, there was a more traditional and old-fashioned division of labor in the home. on the 25th PR was packing for four people going to two locations (her words) and watching after her kids and their playmates and feeding her kids and coloring her hair and wrapping enough gifts to fill two shopping bags, while JR's contribution was going to the airport. although you want your kids and their friends to have fun and enjoy their new toys it can be a lot closer to chaotic than calming for the adults. rush, rush, rush. JR had wanted to spend Xmas in MI but PR didn't so they compromised by squeezing in a quick trip there before returning to CO to leave for the cruise. when questioned by LE they both said that she was "OK" with that, but I wonder if that was true. it's not like they could say: yes, she was ticked and it was an issue. after a day like the 25th was, they had dinner with friends which required planning and effort on PR's part, and then they came home and she had to finish whatever she hadn't gotten done during the day. JR wasn't running around that night getting things done, but she was. rush, rush, rush. LE, EMTs and hospital staffs know that suicides and incidents of domestic abuse skyrocket during the holiday season. I think there was a perfect storm of stress, expectations, deadlines and chaos added to underlying anger and resentment.

ITA. Add to that the fact that the woman was wound waaaay tight in the best of times. Projecting perfection is tough. Especially when things are far from perfect.

 

[BBB167893]

Hi guys.

I am a long time lurker here and have a topic that I have wanted to start for a while but never have. This case is pretty convoluted with real evidence, staging and incompetent police work all muddying the waters. Is there anything about this case that doesn't make sense to you, that you just can't fit no matter how you look at it? I thought it may help if we hash it out and someone else may have a way of looking at it you haven't considered before.

For example, the ransom note troubled me for a long time. I am RDI but I couldn't understand why they would write it. Why not just ring the police saying "We woke up and our daughter is missing"? Surely that would have the same effect without the possibilty of the RN being traced back to them? I read other people's ideas on it but nothing clicked for me. Then I read something and it fell into place - the RN points outside the house (I think it was SuperDave but not 100% sure). If you call the police with a missing child, they search the house, they investigate the family. If you call with a ransom note, they start looking outside the house, outside the family.

I'd like RDI, IDI and fence-sitters to post. It would be great if we could work on this together.

Just in case anybody wants to read what I said, here it is:

without the RN, there's no explanation for WHY JB was killed and WHO did it. Without it, all you have is a dead girl in her own house with sexual injuries. Ask Ron Walker sometime who LE would have looked at first. The RN gives the Rs any number of wildcard explanations AND the ability to claim victimhood. "Why are you cops bothering us. THIS person said they did it. Why aren't you looking for them?"

 

[Let_Forever_Be]

Just in case anybody wants to read what I said, here it is:

without the RN, there's no explanation for WHY JB was killed and WHO did it. Without it, all you have is a dead girl in her own house with sexual injuries. Ask Ron Walker sometime who LE would have looked at first. The RN gives the Rs any number of wildcard explanations AND the ability to claim victimhood. "Why are you cops bothering us. THIS person said they did it. Why aren't you looking for them?"

This is all true.

But what if the ransom note was only meant to be seen/used for the benefit of one of the parents and convincing them? What if the police call by Patsy was never meant to happen?

The ransom note says "tomorrow" in reference to when the 'kidnappers' would call. Because this note could only have been read on the 26th, a logical assumption would be that tomorrow referenced the 27th December. If that was the case, it meant whoever did this (family member) had enough time to get the body out etc and then call the police. By calling the police when the body was still in the house it seemed to contradict the ransom note. Why call the police when the ransom note says they will be calling tomorrow. If Patsy wrote the note (I don't think she did anymore) then why would she do this?

Recently I've just began to question my earlier assumption that the 911 call was totally planned. I'm now starting to think Patsy called and was totally innocent of what had happened -- that is, she did it not knowing what had happened to JonBenet.

 

[UKGuy]

This is all true.

But what if the ransom note was only meant to be seen/used for the benefit of one of the parents and convincing them? What if the police call by Patsy was never meant to happen?

The ransom note says "tomorrow" in reference to when the 'kidnappers' would call. Because this note could only have been read on the 26th, a logical assumption would be that tomorrow referenced the 27th December. If that was the case, it meant whoever did this (family member) had enough time to get the body out etc and then call the police. By calling the police when the body was still in the house it seemed to contradict the ransom note. Why call the police when the ransom note says they will be calling tomorrow. If Patsy wrote the note (I don't think she did anymore) then why would she do this?

Recently I've just began to question my earlier assumption that the 911 call was totally planned. I'm now starting to think Patsy called and was totally innocent of what had happened -- that is, she did it not knowing what had happened to JonBenet.

Let_Forever_Be,
Your "tomorrow" assumption works backwards also. It could be an attempt to suggest JonBenet was abducted and killed prior to midnight on the 25th.

JonBenet's deceased date on her tombstone is 12/25/1996!

To use the ransom note as the center piece of any theory simply invalidates it. The ransom note is staged forensic evidence, and as such renders any theory employing it inconsistent.

I reckon all three R's were involved in the staging and death of JonBenet. Patsy did most of the staging, not John, it is likely that Patsy vetoed JR's intended dumping of JonBenet and came up with the idea of the ransom note?

That the R's voices can be heard talking camly on the 911 call demonstrate they were all colluding in the staging, i.e. BR: What will I do?.

This should allow any thought of a lone BDI, PDI or JDI to abandonded!

the case is slightly more convoluted and complicated than that of a simple linear narrative.

The evidence yet unexplained is JonBenet's head injury, nobody has yet offered any compelling account that fits any one particular theory.


.

 

[gramcracker]

we who examine and analyze this have the luxury of having (more than) sufficient time to do so, and the benefit of not being involved. distance often improves perspective. the pressure of the early morning deadline and their close involvement caused them to wear blinders and not fully consider how the stage(d) play would be perceived by the intended audience. the better wording re the ransom call would have been to name the day rather than saying "tomorrow". I don't think they took the time to consider that saying "tomorrow" revealed what they knew: that the event took place (began) before midnight

 

[lawstudent]

I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, but the touch DNA thing still bothers me. I understand that it's easy to get touch DNA on things, but was the clothing not packaged? Then it could be a factory worker I guess, but it still seems a little odd to me. All the evidence tells me the Ramseys did it, but when people say "well what about the DNA?" I feel like "touch DNA is everywhere" is not the best response. It does look suspicious. I also don't understand why Patsy would go grab that underwear and not a pair of JonBenet's own.

 

[Linda7NJ]

we who examine and analyze this have the luxury of having (more than) sufficient time to do so, and the benefit of not being involved. distance often improves perspective. the pressure of the early morning deadline and their close involvement caused them to wear blinders and not fully consider how the stage(d) play would be perceived by the intended audience. the better wording re the ransom call would have been to name the day rather than saying "tomorrow". I don't think they took the time to consider that saying "tomorrow" revealed what they knew: that the event took place (began) before midnight

Excellent! I agree




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free

 

[Linda7NJ]

I know this has been discussed ad nauseum, but the touch DNA thing still bothers me. I understand that it's easy to get touch DNA on things, but was the clothing not packaged? Then it could be a factory worker I guess, but it still seems a little odd to me. All the evidence tells me the Ramseys did it, but when people say "well what about the DNA?" I feel like "touch DNA is everywhere" is not the best response. It does look suspicious. I also don't understand why Patsy would go grab that underwear and not a pair of JonBenet's own.

I think those panties were wrapped up in the basement and handy.

I have always imagined the unsourced touch DNA came from the manufacturing process. (Sewing of all the seams while handling the fabric)

I really want to see if those panties and long johns have Ramsey TDNA on them as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk - now Free