Did JR tell us "The Plan"?

[Nom de plume]

I've never heard about this picture on their roll of film before. How did I miss that? :waitasec: Now how in the world did LE just let that go? A picture taken before the Christmas morning photos, of a 3 page "mock" ransom note, on the spiral stairs no less. WOW!

Sure makes this look premeditated, which I've never really bought into 100%. What possible purpose could there have been for that picture to be taken? It wouldn't be developed before the murder, so no one could study it. Just about the most bizarre thing I've heard of in this case.

And how could any IDI possibly still be IDI after hearing of this? Oh I know, the boogie man did it when he was there before. (Except JR admitted taking it but said it was after the murder, which it wasn't.)

 

[Nom de plume]

Secondly, his analysis of the attack scene in the basement seems very interesting. He estimates the height of the low basement ceiling, and the angle that the weapon would have had to be swung, in order to strike JonBenet on the head with enough force to inflict the damage that it did. He estimates that the attacker must have been no more than 5 ft 7 ins in height, to have physically managed this. So much of the details in this crime are open to interpretation, and it got me thinking that maybe this is one aspect that you could either definitely pin on one particular person, or at least definately use to eliminate someone, from inflicting the head blow?

RSBM
I appreciate you bringing this analysis to the table Scandi! I find this part of his "theory" troubling because he seems sure a bat was the head bash weapon. Take a ball bat, go to your basement (if you have one), swing that bat overhead and see what happens. Doesn't work. I couldn't even get it completely vertical before hitting the joists, it was still behind my head. I'm about 5'3" and it didn't even work for me. Your arms naturally extend upward when making an overhead swing. I don't know his exact height at the time, but from pictures I'd say BR was about 4'6"-4'9". Don't think it would work for him either. Now I could do that with a 4 cell Maglite, but not a baseball bat.

 

[Scandigirl]

first impressions after reading the KK thesis:

I'm good with the personality disorder(s) thought processes/motivations. not so much with the death being planned weeks in advance, or that it was planned for December 26 to set up Santa McReynolds. I think the cord/duct tape were used because they were available and if they were purchased a month earlier it was not done in preparation for the event

I'm very uncomfortable with the aspersions re FW. and the college student NI, based on an unidentified pubic hair found on the blanket JB was wrapped in. that hair was eventually ID'd by the FBI as an ancillary hair (chest, arm, underarm, leg - not pubic) from which PR could not be eliminated, nor her matrilineal relatives

wondering how many google/other search engine hits will be tabulated re King Air Transportation Pods this weekend

like DeDee posted above, questioning re photo of the RN pad/stair positioning on Christmas morning is verrrry interesting

it's late/early, so that's all I have for now

I agree with you on those points, too. This could offer an intriguing explanation for Fleet White's falling out with John Ramsey, but at the same time, I don't know about making the leap to say that he was a possible accessory in the crime.

Also, I'm not convinced about Nathan I being JonBenet's molester. I always keep coming back to having a gut instinct that it was either John or Burke (or even both), but again, I'm just not sure.

 

[ZBob]

RSBM
I appreciate you bringing this analysis to the table Scandi! I find this part of his "theory" troubling because he seems sure a bat was the head bash weapon. Take a ball bat, go to your basement (if you have one), swing that bat overhead and see what happens. Doesn't work. I couldn't even get it completely vertical before hitting the joists, it was still behind my head. I'm about 5'3" and it didn't even work for me. Your arms naturally extend upward when making an overhead swing. I don't know his exact height at the time, but from pictures I'd say BR was about 4'6"-4'9". Don't think it would work for him either. Now I could do that with a 4 cell Maglite, but not a baseball bat.

I agree. I felt all the exact measurements to the height of both the person and the room to be thorough but also presumptuous that the person was standing up (plus in that room). I could see a person easily kneeling or bending over and not necessarily swinging from over the top to be very possible. I did think his thoughts on the position of JBR's head being down on her chin during the blow to be thoughtful but I can't judge this against the autopsy and injury report myself. I expect others with a better understanding of these type of injuries to have a perspective on that.

Now, the door to the outside being ajar (not sure I recalled hearing that before) and the bat outside did make me wonder if there was a connection, assuming the door was actually open. I also thought his comments on the lights being off in the kitchen might have supported why the pineapple bowl and flashlight were placed where they were (they got overlooked in the rush once the lights were out) and not cleaned up or removed.

 

[Scandigirl]

RSBM
I appreciate you bringing this analysis to the table Scandi! I find this part of his "theory" troubling because he seems sure a bat was the head bash weapon. Take a ball bat, go to your basement (if you have one), swing that bat overhead and see what happens. Doesn't work. I couldn't even get it completely vertical before hitting the joists, it was still behind my head. I'm about 5'3" and it didn't even work for me. Your arms naturally extend upward when making an overhead swing. I don't know his exact height at the time, but from pictures I'd say BR was about 4'6"-4'9". Don't think it would work for him either. Now I could do that with a 4 cell Maglite, but not a baseball bat.

Thanks for taking the time to actually try this out in your basement! I live in the uk, and we don't have basements in the same way here. Unfortunately I can't try this out, as our house doesn't have a cellar, which is our nearest equivalent!

Maybe KK is wrong about the weapon being a baseball bat? That's one of the problems, not knowing for sure what the weapon was. Assuming that JonBenet was either kneeling or sitting on a chair when she was struck (although we don't know for sure that she could also have been lying down), could the attacker have struck from a kneeling or sitting position themselves when striking the blow? Would it even be possible to get enough swing momentum, and why would they do it from that position?? So many questions!

I'm not sure how to find the answers, but I just keep thinking that there are so many issues in this case that are inconclusive. What if we could somehow determine the physical requirements or measurements etc needed to execute some portions of the attack, such as the head blow? Maybe then we could finally have some hard facts to go on, that could actually either tie or eliminate one Ramsey or another to aspects of the crime?

It also got me wondering about KK's suggestion that maybe there was both a strangulation and a head bash, because the perpetrator didn't have enough physical strength, and struggled to complete the strangulation? (Horrible thought, I know)

I've no idea how to measure any of this- just putting it out there for anyone to ponder! Sorry if I'm talking rubbish!

 

[Darlene733510]

If JB was laying down, could that have given the person more room for the head bash?
I believe the results of the head bash could have also been done if she was thrown or pushed against a hard surface.

 

[Mama2JML]

I've never heard about this picture on their roll of film before. How did I miss that? :waitasec: Now how in the world did LE just let that go? A picture taken before the Christmas morning photos, of a 3 page "mock" ransom note, on the spiral stairs no less. WOW!

Sure makes this look premeditated, which I've never really bought into 100%. What possible purpose could there have been for that picture to be taken? It wouldn't be developed before the murder, so no one could study it. Just about the most bizarre thing I've heard of in this case.

And how could any IDI possibly still be IDI after hearing of this? Oh I know, the boogie man did it when he was there before. (Except JR admitted taking it but said it was after the murder, which it wasn't.)

It's a supposition used as an example to explain foreknowledge. Doesn't work out though. See post 38.

 

[Scandigirl]

It's a supposition used as an example to explain foreknowledge. Doesn't work out though. See post 38.

Hi Mama2JML,

Please forgive me if I'm wrong, but I think I understand what you're saying, and if so, you're right. That foreknowledge or premeditation wasn't actually proven, with regard to the camera photos?

I think this is why KK was careful to say that it is a supposition, not a fact- in other words, the existence of the photos hints at or suggests the possibility of premeditation- very suspicious?

Unfortunately, it seems to be yet another example in this case of something being strongly suspicious in a certain direction, but it's never been able to prove it? The police were obviously highly suspicious, and we're questioning Patsy in their interview about the photos indicating premeditation, but they didn't manage to find actual proof, and seemed to let it go. It seems like this was a combination of maybe not questioning her hard enough, or in the right way, and Patsy as usual giving vague answers and simply not giving anything away.

I know there's no concrete proof of premeditation, as I think KK is saying, but it just, yet again, looks very suspicious, drops hints and makes you think about it. I've no real idea at all, but just feel suspicious! How many credible explanations can there be, for the existence of those photos, 24 hrs earlier? In her interview, Patsy couldn't even seem to offer a decent explanation for it (unless maybe, she genuinely hadn't been aware they existed herself?)

That's the best that can be said about it, but it's just a bit frustrating that the police seemed to let her off on it, a bit too easily. Unless that's being unfair on them!

 

[gramcracker]

Kir Komrik asks the reader to "suppose" the photo in question depicted the notepad and two blank pages laid out on the stairs, in an effort to establish "a causal inconsistency requiring foreknowledge." Later he acknowledges "we can't say the particular example above is what happened." Komrik is unsuccessful in his attempt to establish "a causal inconsistency requiring foreknowledge" as the photo in question depicts the notepad on the hall table.

It's a supposition used as an example to explain foreknowledge. Doesn't work out though. See post 38.

is there a link for the photo?

 

[Salem]

Hey Everybody - we are going to do something a bit different here. This case has been debated for the past 17 years or so. Lines have been drawn and at this point, that's okay. There appear to be 2 main camps, the "Ramseys did it" (RDIs) and "an intruder did it" (IDIs).

This thread is going to the RDIs. They have established their camp and now they would like to discuss this particular aspect of the case without having to review all the evidence. Because it is difficult to focus on the singular aspect when others refute evidence that RDIs accept (or vice versa), and it distracts from the singular intent of this thread, postings in this thread are limited to an RDI viewpoint.

NonRDIs can post here, but posts must be consistent with the viewpoint of RDIs. If you can't do that, then please don't post in this thread. Having to go back through all the evidence disrupts the conversation and derails the thread. So, please just move to another thread if you can't try on the shoes of RDIs.

Thanks,

Salem

 

[otg]

I think there are too many variables in possible body positions of both an assailant and a victim to determine the height of the person delivering the head blow. For instance, was the victim standing, sitting, on "all-fours", supine, or prone. (We can eliminate supine because of where we know the skull was hit.) If we assume one of the remaining body positions, we would have to know how her head was positioned. Was it tilted to one side, looking straight ahead, facing down? How was the assailant positioned in relation to the victim? How far away was he (or she)? Then too, we'd have to know the weapon used as well. How long was it, how was it held, how much arm-swing was necessary, how much were the elbows bent when it was swung?

But for the sake of argument considering Kir Komrik's theories and the speculation of someone's height, below are a couple of photos taken prior to her death with estimated measurements. They were taken when the kids were younger (and presumably shorter), so JonBenet's 47" height (just an inch shy of four feet tall) is not a true representation when compared to the others in the photos. IOW, the kids continued to grow taller (how much we don't know) while the adults did not. So the measurements shown in the photos are only for comparing the height of one child to the other. (I hope that makes sense.)

 

[Venom]

Somehow I just don't think that JB was laying down when the head blow was delivered. The position of where the fracture is leads me to believe it was more hit from the top. I could be wrong. Jmo

 

[Salem]

Looking at the measurements on the photos, are they right? Burke was 5 foot something?

Just an observation,

Salem

 

[Nom de plume]

Ok, if I'm reading KK correctly, there's no question that "this" photo exists, or that it was taken before the Christmas morning photos. Is that correct?

The transcripts are a little hard to follow (at least for me). In the PR interview it looks like they're saying the picture depicts 2 blank pages, plus the pad laid out on the spiral stair case. Then in JR's interview, it looks like they're saying the picture is of the pad actually on the desk.

Either way, this is just too bizarre! No way in the world do you lay out those pages, on that spiral staircase to test your camera, then the boogie man does the same thing with the ransom note. Same goes for taking a picture of the pad on the desk. Why not take one of the sink? Your foot? And who "burns up" film just to get it developed? They used to charge by the picture, not the roll, so that makes no sense either. It's just paying for a picture you'd never want anyway.

I still cannot believe I've never heard this discussed before! Am I just clueless or is this news to anyone else?

 

[DeDee]

I've never heard about this picture on their roll of film before. How did I miss that? :waitasec: Now how in the world did LE just let that go? A picture taken before the Christmas morning photos, of a 3 page "mock" ransom note, on the spiral stairs no less. WOW!

Sure makes this look premeditated, which I've never really bought into 100%. What possible purpose could there have been for that picture to be taken? It wouldn't be developed before the murder, so no one could study it. Just about the most bizarre thing I've heard of in this case.

And how could any IDI possibly still be IDI after hearing of this? Oh I know, the boogie man did it when he was there before. (Except JR admitted taking it but said it was after the murder, which it wasn't.)

My apologies if my post misled anyone as it is only, KK's, one person's suppositions. Thank you, Mama, for clarifying. I have never seen the picture in question.

His theory also included the piece of tape. He does not believe it was on JonBenet's mouth when John opened the door to find his daughter but, he opines, that it was used, possibly on her ankles, to bind JonBenet to the chair. Thus, she was seated when the head injury occured.

 

[Mama2JML]

is there a link for the photo?

Crime scene photo #52 is online.

 

[Nom de plume]

My apologies if my post misled anyone as it is only, KK's, one person's suppositions. Thank you, Mama, for clarifying. I have never seen the picture in question.

His theory also included the piece of tape. He does not believe it was on JonBenet's mouth when John opened the door to find his daughter but, he opines, that it was used, possibly on her ankles, to bind JonBenet to the chair. Thus, she was seated when the head injury occured.

No, you didn't mislead me anyway. I was reading directly from KK. I see now what (I think) he's saying. He's giving an example of what the picture may have been.

So let's think about this for a second. It's just common sense that LE would take a picture of the RN. Why would they take a picture of the pad on the desk, before JR gave them the "sample" pads from he & PR? I suppose it's possible, but not as likely. (Especially not in this case, with this PD.)

PR's reaction, "Oh God!" shows that she knows it's a problem for that picture (whatever it's of) to be on their roll of film. JR gives 2 different excuses. First he was testing his camera, then he was using up film.

Something's up with this picture.

 

[questfortrue]

No, you didn't mislead me anyway. I was reading directly from KK. I see now what (I think) he's saying. He's giving an example of what the picture may have been.

So let's think about this for a second. It's just common sense that LE would take a picture of the RN. Why would they take a picture of the pad on the desk, before JR gave them the "sample" pads from he & PR? I suppose it's possible, but not as likely. (Especially not in this case, with this PD.)

PR's reaction, "Oh God!" shows that she knows it's a problem for that picture (whatever it's of) to be on their roll of film. JR gives 2 different excuses. First he was testing his camera, then he was using up film.

Something's up with this picture.

Photo 52, taken by the police, is on ACR. (http://www.acandyrose.com/s-evidence-crime-photos.htm). Unfortunately, there's only a discussion about the photo from JR's camera (no photo). The differences pointed out, between the two photos, include a missing daytimer, and bags which have been moved. The way I read it, within the photo taken by JR's camera Christmas morning is a writing pad, but it is not listed as being on the stairs in the interview. Here's the dialogue: LOU SMIT: Does that look like the spot where you would -- that you picked it up from? JOHN RAMSEY: Yes, my recollection, yeah. LOU SMIT: So that could be the actual pad of a picture taken prior to what happened? JOHN RAMSEY: That's possible.

I agree, there was something they wanted to get at in the photo taken by JR.
moo

 

[Anti-K]

Hey Everybody - we are going to do something a bit different here. This case has been debated for the past 17 years or so. Lines have been drawn and at this point, that's okay. There appear to be 2 main camps, the "Ramseys did it" (RDIs) and "an intruder did it" (IDIs).

This thread is going to the RDIs. They have established their camp and now they would like to discuss this particular aspect of the case without having to review all the evidence. Because it is difficult to focus on the singular aspect when others refute evidence that RDIs accept (or vice versa), and it distracts from the singular intent of this thread, postings in this thread are limited to an RDI viewpoint.

NonRDIs can post here, but posts must be consistent with the viewpoint of RDIs. If you can't do that, then please don't post in this thread. Having to go back through all the evidence disrupts the conversation and derails the thread. So, please just move to another thread if you can't try on the shoes of RDIs.

Thanks,

Salem

I’m very confused. I don’t mind playing by your rules, but that’s hard to do when I don’t understand them. All the KK discussion on this thread is off-topic (I’m okay with that). However, this thread was started, as the OP states, to address questions I – an IDI - was raising on another thread. In the OP, Nom de plume wrote:

Anti-K asked: BBM & RSBM
Quote:
The Ramsey case is somewhat unique, regardless of RDI or IDI.
If john thought he could leave in the morning and board their plane and dispose of the body at that time, than why would the body be in the basement. Why not in the garage or in the trunk of the car, ready to go?

And, the first few posts followed that discussion. A discussion essentially based on my thoughts, my observations, my questions, my words. IDI thoughts, IDI observations, IDI questions, IDI words. But, my viewpoint is not allowed? The IDI viewpoint is not allowed?

Your house. Your rules. I’ll do my best to follow them, but, I’m sorry, and I hope this doesn’t get me banned or result in this post being deleted, but I really don’t understand this. I have to adopt an RDI viewpoint to be permitted to discuss a topic based on an IDI – MY – viewpoint?

"If everybody is thinking alike, then somebody isn't thinking." George S. Patton, Jr.
...

AK

 

[Nom de plume]

Photo 52, taken by the police, is on ACR. (http://www.acandyrose.com/s-evidence-crime-photos.htm). Unfortunately, there's only a discussion about the photo from JR's camera (no photo). The differences pointed out, between the two photos, include a missing daytimer, and bags which have been moved. The way I read it, within the photo taken by JR's camera Christmas morning is a writing pad, but it is not listed as being on the stairs in the interview. Here's the dialogue: LOU SMIT: Does that look like the spot where you would -- that you picked it up from? JOHN RAMSEY: Yes, my recollection, yeah. LOU SMIT: So that could be the actual pad of a picture taken prior to what happened? JOHN RAMSEY: That's possible.

I agree, there was something they wanted to get at in the photo taken by JR.
moo

I just saw that on ACR. They were trying to get something out of PR, but LS just seemed to forget it (what ever it was) was the 1st pic on the roll, not one of the last. Typical.

Personally, I hate reading the transcripts of the interviews. They're all talking over each other, you never know for sure what they're looking at, and you can't get a feel for the "tone" of things as well. Oh how I wish for video of these interviews and all the photos they have!