Some questions and What Next?

New Posts

Camper

Camper

New Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2003
Messages
9,061
Reaction score
21
Website
Visit site
IF as many suspect that LE covered up the true identity of an underage perpetrator of an accidental death.

A. How were LE told the actual information, and who told them?

B. What happens to the writer of the note covering up the same?

C. What happens to the young person in the way of continuing therapy?

D. What happens to the family who continued to sue on behalf of their childs innocence and took money damages from various publications who inferred that their child murdered one of their other children?

E. What about the person who identified themselves as JAR, and offered $10,000 to a man in Michigan to have an accident with their 'later' murdered little girl, murdered the same year. Yet no active participation by the Ramseys 'in the media' in trying to find the 'person who posed as their son'?

F. What happens to a 'friendship' with the Whites, after the death of JonBenet, that made a gulf between that friendship that lasts nearly 10 years later?

G. What happened to 'The Fox', Lou Smit? Did Lou finally see the light? How could he just drop the tall standard and doggedness that he held for so many years? Did he ever check out 'boatman'? Did LE tell him to go quietly into that good night?

H. Does JAR still go to the movies with his other two friends? The same two friends who went to a movie with him the 'night' JonBenet died, in another state?


.
 
Lots of good questions, Camper. I am not well versed in Colorado law to know how to answer anything about LE. We never hear anything about JAR. From the beginning, he was distanced, lawyered up, and vanished from the limelight. Our only hope in finding out anything about him is for someone here to have a personal contact with him or one of his friends. Boatman disappeared into that good night, also. So many questions left unanswered...
 
Camper said:
IF as many suspect that LE covered up the true identity of an underage perpetrator of an accidental death.

A. How were LE told the actual information, and who told them?

B. What happens to the writer of the note covering up the same?

C. What happens to the young person in the way of continuing therapy?

D. What happens to the family who continued to sue on behalf of their childs innocence and took money damages from various publications who inferred that their child murdered one of their other children?

E. What about the person who identified themselves as JAR, and offered $10,000 to a man in Michigan to have an accident with their 'later' murdered little girl, murdered the same year. Yet no active participation by the Ramseys 'in the media' in trying to find the 'person who posed as their son'?

F. What happens to a 'friendship' with the Whites, after the death of JonBenet, that made a gulf between that friendship that lasts nearly 10 years later?

G. What happened to 'The Fox', Lou Smit? Did Lou finally see the light? How could he just drop the tall standard and doggedness that he held for so many years? Did he ever check out 'boatman'? Did LE tell him to go quietly into that good night?

H. Does JAR still go to the movies with his other two friends? The same two friends who went to a movie with him the 'night' JonBenet died, in another state?


.
Click to expand...



Camper,

Here's how I would answer your hypothetical questions (all of my answers strictly my personal opinion):

A. The grand jury solved the case in late 1999 and the details of who did it leaked out.

B. The statute of limitations have passed to prosecute anyone except for the murder itself.

C. It would be up to the court.

D. I doubt if any significant amounts of monies were awarded, if any at all; the Ramseys are close to being broke.

E. The case was solved and "Boatman" was a hoax.

F. The Whites know who likely killed JonBenet and resent their family being unnecessarily dragged through the mud by the Ramseys; the friendship is permanently ended.

G. LE knows Lou Smit was biased in favor of the Ramseys because of religious beliefs.

H. JAR is likely a family man by now and not too interested in going to the movies with his buddies.

BlueCrab
 
Uh oh .... no doubt,we will soon be seeing a reply to the above post shortly from Zman ... or possibly Brother Moon....
 
BlueCrab, I so admire your info on the GJ.

BC, do you recall, ST was there was he not? How soon after the GJ quit, did he leave the force? WAs ST there for every witness testimony?

I still feel that LE had their hands tied behind their backs with built in 'legal reps, for the GA branch of the family and GA ticket stubs.

capps, I hope not. My hed is giving me wonderment about the number of years some have been on 'our' planet and 'who' they know personally. More I will not say.


:croc:


.
 
Camper said:
BlueCrab, I so admire your info on the GJ.

BC, do you recall, ST was there was he not? How soon after the GJ quit, did he leave the force? WAs ST there for every witness testimony?

I still feel that LE had their hands tied behind their backs with built in 'legal reps, for the GA branch of the family and GA ticket stubs.

capps, I hope not. My hed is giving me wonderment about the number of years some have been on 'our' planet and 'who' they know personally. More I will not say.


:croc:


.
Click to expand...
Thomas quit before the Grand Jury convened
 
tipper said:
Thomas quit before the Grand Jury convened
Click to expand...


Correct. Steve Thomas resigned on August 6, 1998 -- which was JonBenet's birthday. The grand jury was convened in September.

However, I don't think Thomas resigned willingly. IMO he was given the option of resigning or being fired.

Just two months earlier, Thomas' presentation of the "evidence" against Patsy Ramsey during the June 1 and 2, 1998 VIP meeting was embarrassing to the BPD. The district attorney, Henry Lee, Barry Scheck, the FBI, and a host of other dignitaries were present to listen to the case against Patsy Ramsey and hopefully grounds for an indictment -- and all they heard from Steve thomas was a PDI theory and convoluted handwriting statistics. Thomas had tortured the handwriting analyses from the CBI in an attempt to make it appear as though Patsy wrote the ransom note, and he presented it to the VIPs as fact.

Incidentally, it was reportedly at the end of this BPD two-day VIP presentation of the evidence (which turned out to be non-existant evidence) that Dr. Henry Lee was overheard to say, (paraphrased) "Well, I guess it will have to come down to the pineapple."

BlueCrab
 
I was in California last week and met a guy who lived in Denver for nine years ('93-'02) and we talked a lot about this case. Although he had no inside knowledge, I asked him what was the talk that he heard about the case, esp after the GJ was dismissed. He said that the "talk" was the BDI theory--that he had supposedly received some type toy for Christmas like a weapon-type toy (sling shot, pop gun, etc..) and had accidentally killed JB through a head injury. I asked him did he ever hear that it was the Ninetendo 64 cord and he did not hear that at all.

Granted, this was just talk around Denver/Boulder area but I thought it interesting in light of the BDI theories on this forum.
 
Nehemiah said:
I was in California last week and met a guy who lived in Denver for nine years ('93-'02) and we talked a lot about this case. Although he had no inside knowledge, I asked him what was the talk that he heard about the case, esp after the GJ was dismissed. He said that the "talk" was the BDI theory--that he had supposedly received some type toy for Christmas like a weapon-type toy (sling shot, pop gun, etc..) and had accidentally killed JB through a head injury. I asked him did he ever hear that it was the Ninetendo 64 cord and he did not hear that at all.

Granted, this was just talk around Denver/Boulder area but I thought it interesting in light of the BDI theories on this forum.
Click to expand...
That must be a hell of a pop gun... :)

Anyway, we know from when Burke accidently hit her with the golf club that she was instantly whisked off to medical care.
 
That story doesn't cut it.
If that were the case,JonBenets'death would have been a small blurb in the local newspaper."Young Girl Accidentally Killed By Young Brothers'Christmas Toy."

No ... there's more to JonBenet's murder than meets the eye. It's our job to figure out what that is.
 
He didn't specifically say it was a "pop gun". He said "weapon-type toy". I listed those out as examples. Actually, a few years ago on this forum there was talk about a sling shot and some pretty good/believable info about that being the weapon that was received as a Christmas gift. As the mom of three sons, I could certainly see that possibility. Again, it wasn't his theory, but what was going around in the neighborhood. Just street talk, and he lived near there.

Could be why there is "no" Christmas video, Camper.
 
I was just pondering Camper's thread title "Some Questions and What's Next."

Try as I might ... I could not think of any questions,or at least any questions that haven't been asked before;and mulled over and over again. As far as what's next ... what IS next? As far as I can tell,there is no next. Not even to the point of at one time letting the public know the case is now closed.

That's very frustrating and unfair.
 
Christmas toy/weapon/game/no video of Christmas morning. Charlie Chan would be scratching his head over that. What games were popular Christmas of 1996? Blind mans bluff kit, nah probably not.

I went down another mental trail after reading the posts just now that I missed yesterday.

Just doing a 'what if' here, what if JonBenets head injury came first, major big time head bash, just convulsions, no death. The maneuver I have described about pressure on the carotid artery to 'stop' convulsions in children, thus leaving the HUGE bruise on one side of her neck. And then, and then, the staged murder.

Now then, thinking this and saying it in print, sounds so outrageous meaning that someone had death in mind for her PERIOD. Suppose that 'they' the perp/s had death in mind for her, and wrapped her head with 'the' scarf, then dealt the blow with 'a' golf club. Did not work. Go to an alternate plan, the 'proposed' victim is still breathing, but NOT dead YET.

IF IF a child did the initial damage with a childish 'game of sorts' wrapping her head with a scarf, then hitting her, perhaps even thinking that it would not do fatal damage just a get even with a 'favored sister'. Then the child went to the parents with the tale.

This is even off the wall for me.

Betcha there is dna on 'the scarf' that would tell a tale. Lets not forget that 'the scarf' appeared to be a NEW one. Wonder if any of the threads of the fabric show evidence of being distorted as in a heavy blow?


.

.
 
Camper said:
Just doing a 'what if' here, what if JonBenets head injury came first, major big time head bash, just convulsions, no death. The maneuver I have described about pressure on the carotid artery to 'stop' convulsions in children, thus leaving the HUGE bruise on one side of her neck. And then, and then, the staged murder.



.

.
Click to expand...
I thought that there were what appeared to be self inflicted scratch marks around the garrotte that showed that JB was fighting to rip it off. I thought I read that somewhere, I could be wrong. But wouldn't that show that the she was well enough to fight and that she was in fact killed by aspyshiation?
 
My belief is that the head blow came first because of the fact that the cord is wrapped around too perfectly around her neck. There is no deviation except a slight lift from the back of the neck. The fibers in the cord also suggest that the cord was placed while JonBenet was unconcious. It is my belief that the swelling caused by the head blow was cause for the cord to burrow around her neck.

We have to ask ourselves why the blow to the head? Who was angry enough to strike JonBenet with such force? That person must have been in a rage.

So we start with the head blow from a person who temporarily lost it and then the cover-up after that.
 
Toltec said:
My belief is that the head blow came first because of the fact that the cord is wrapped around too perfectly around her neck. There is no deviation except a slight lift from the back of the neck. The fibers in the cord also suggest that the cord was placed while JonBenet was unconcious. It is my belief that the swelling caused by the head blow was cause for the cord to burrow around her neck.

We have to ask ourselves why the blow to the head? Who was angry enough to strike JonBenet with such force? That person must have been in a rage.

So we start with the head blow from a person who temporarily lost it and then the cover-up after that.
Click to expand...
Tis the nature of this beast. "So we start with the head blow from a person who temporarily lost it......" But then where is the blood? Only less than a teaspoon in the brain according to the autopsy. And how could a parent go so far to stage the garrote? And how could they be so cool to write the note? And how could they know so much about kidnap movie crimes?

Well, apparently there have been head injuries resulting in little loss of blood. But, tis the nature of this beast. It is difficult to imagine parents going this extent of gruesome staging, capable of writing a cold and well structured ransom note, and obsessed about these movies. But, then again the Charlevoix connection and Leopold and Loeb and The Crime of The Century.

I am reading Patricia Cornwall's new book on Jack the Ripper, Case Solved. Her conclusion (like some others) is that it's the well known English artist, Walter Sickert. In just comparing the writing, I noticed his crazy "S"s which are just the same as in the Ripper notes. What I learned from that well written book is that there are people very cunning and capable to pull off a JonBenet IDI. If any perp was so obsessed about the kidnap crime movies, then he could have gone all the way and studied other real life crimes. I would like to see Patricia Cornwell take on this mystery. It's right down her alley.

Like I said before, if I could find those crazy "F"s printed anywhere by someone close to this crime that would make it case closed.
 
capps said:
Uh oh .... no doubt,we will soon be seeing a reply to the above post shortly from Zman ... or possibly Brother Moon....
Click to expand...
Hate to disappoint but I have no need for such questions as A,B,C,D. because I see no "cover up" of a crime. I don't see any evidence that a R family member is covering up for anyone. Now if you elimanate the "cover up" and look at the crime scene that was presented to you then your left with only one conclusion. The brutal torture and murder of JBR as a message of hate to JR.

As for E maybe someone's first plan was to frame JAR for the murder and for what ever reason the plan fell through. I sure don't think for even a second that JAR walked up to someone and said "Hi, Im JAR want to kill my sister for me?" Then agian maybe the whole thing is fake. Which is my lead theory on the subject.

As for question F I'm pretty sure FW is one of JR's main suspects and that could put a strain on the relationship.
Not to mention he's one of my main suspects.
He is the only known liar from what I have read about that morning.

I don't see any relevance in questions G or H.
 
Zman said:
Hate to disappoint but I have no need for such questions as A,B,C,D. because I see no "cover up" of a crime. I don't see any evidence that a R family member is covering up for anyone. Now if you elimanate the "cover up" and look at the crime scene that was presented to you then your left with only one conclusion. The brutal torture and murder of JBR as a message of hate to JR.

As for E maybe someone's first plan was to frame JAR for the murder and for what ever reason the plan fell through. I sure don't think for even a second that JAR walked up to someone and said "Hi, Im JAR want to kill my sister for me?" Then agian maybe the whole thing is fake. Which is my lead theory on the subject.

As for question F I'm pretty sure FW is one of JR's main suspects and that could put a strain on the relationship.
Not to mention he's one of my main suspects.
He is the only known liar from what I have read about that morning.

I don't see any relevance in questions G or H.
Click to expand...

JOHN RAMSEY: "...If I narrowed that box down any further I would pick Priscilla...only because it would be very hard for me to believe that Fleet would do such a thing."
 
QUOTE>>And how could a parent go so far to stage the garrote? And how could they be so cool to write the note? And how could they know so much about kidnap movie crimes?<<

1. Because they thought they had no choice.
2. Because they thought they had no choice.
3. From watching them. Despite saying they dont watch movies, there were at least two tv's in the house....one for Patsy and John and one for JonBenet...I cant recall reading if Burke had his own tv or not.
Then there's the framed movie posters found in the basement. Someone in that house liked movies, enough to have framed posters of their favourites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 155 more.
Total: 4,395 (members: 156, guests: 4,239)

Online statistics

Members online
156
Guests online
4,239
Total visitors
4,395
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,846
Messages
17,959,942
Members
228,622
Latest member
crimedeepdives23
Back
Top