Did JR tell us "The Plan"?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I have not posted in quite a while. I just "popped in" so to speak to see what's being discussed. I'd like to leave a few comments.

First, as to Nom's initial post, yes, there must have been a plan to dispose of the body. It comes down to this - they (if it was a joint venture) can stage a "kidnapping gone bad" which no one (other than IDIs believe) and is completely unconvincing or they can stage a "kidnapping gone right" which means the body is disposed of before they call the police. It's quite simple, there was a plan to dump the body because the RN and the kidnapping it is meant to help stage isn't convincing with the body in the basement.

If it was a "kidnapping gone bad" e.g. a kidnapping that morphed into a sex crime the body would have been out in plain sight, not hidden in a storage room.

Second, no one in their right mind could possibly think the police were going to do a quick sweep of the house, then leave.

For one thing, no one could reasonably anticipate that dogs would not be brought to the scene. Had the dogs been used the body would have been found within minutes. This is a reasonable thing to anticipate happening. JR had to have considered this. Thus, there could have been no plan to do anything with the body after the 911 call was made.

Then too, as long as the body remains "missing" it's a kidnapping case, under FBI jurisdiction. No one could possibly believe the FBI was going to make a sweep then leave. With the RN making all LE agencies "hinky" there is simply no way the house would not be under surveillance along with the movement of the parents, JR and PR. This to was a reasonable thing to anticipate and JR could not have failed to consider it.

So,

It's absolutely implausible that there was ever any intent to remove the body from the home after the police were called, or that there was ever a plan to claim the kidnappers "returned" the body, after the police were called.

Next, The RN absolutely could NOT have provided the "rationale" for JBR ending up dead because the warnings were not headed. The reason is straightforward, it's called Time Of Death (TOD)

Rigor allows us to place TOD approx 12hrs before she was carried up from the basement. Combined with the police observation of the odor of decomposition we know that she must have died around midnight. W/o the odor of decomp it would be possible to push the TOD closer to 6am, but since the odor was present we know she must have died well before that.

Even if another scenario was originally planned, the fact remains she was murdered around midnight. Fudge the time a couple hours either side of midnight for temperature and environmental conditions, if you like, you still can't make TOD come after 6am. The first violation of the warnings in the RN occurred with the 911 call at 05:52. With TOD at midnight, give or take a couple hours, there is no way she could have been killed after 6am, in retaliation for the Rs not heading the warnings in the RN. To spell it out as clearly as possible, she could not be killed 6 hours prior to the first instance of ignoring the RN's warnings if ignoring the warnings was the "reason" for her being killed.

Therefore there is no way violation of the warnings can serve as the "rationale" for why she was killed. There are only two ways this could work; 1. The kidnappers murdered her at midnight in anticipation that the warnings would not be headed. Clearly silly. 2. The kidnappers had a time machine and once they "monitored" the 911 call being made they jumped in the time machine, went back to midnight, then killed her in retaliation. Please excuse the sarcasm, but there is no reason after 17 years of study that anyone should be thinking that violation of the warnings in the RN provides the "reason" that JBR was killed. We know she died several hours prior to the 911 call, and the police know it too.

Finally, neither JR nor PR (if she was in on the cover up) were under any pressure to make a 911 call at any specific time. The RN provided them with all the "reason" they needed to cancel their travel plans, and all the reason they needed to delay the 911 call until sometime later, maybe the next day, when it finally became obvious that the kidnappers were not going to return JBR, even though the ransom had been "paid". They absolutely were not running out of time to make the 911 call.
 
Good to see you back Chrishope! Was wondering what happened to you.

I agree, ridiculous to think LE would leave. Also ridiculous to think the SFF would return her dead later. BUT, we're looking at this with "educated" eyes. Did either of them know TOD could be determined that closely? Or did they think by the time she was found elsewhere that it would be a matter of days, weeks, or months since death and not hours?

I do think it's possible JR had a call set up that didn't come. It would have provided him an excuse to get out of the house, with JB in tow, and onto his plane where LE could not follow him (immediately). Now whether this would have worked or not, is not really the point. Could JR, narcissist that he is, have believed it might have worked? I think it's possible. JMO
 
I have not posted in quite a while. I just "popped in" so to speak to see what's being discussed. I'd like to leave a few comments.

First, as to Nom's initial post, yes, there must have been a plan to dispose of the body. It comes down to this - they (if it was a joint venture) can stage a "kidnapping gone bad" which no one (other than IDIs believe) and is completely unconvincing or they can stage a "kidnapping gone right" which means the body is disposed of before they call the police. It's quite simple, there was a plan to dump the body because the RN and the kidnapping it is meant to help stage isn't convincing with the body in the basement.

If it was a "kidnapping gone bad" e.g. a kidnapping that morphed into a sex crime the body would have been out in plain sight, not hidden in a storage room.

Second, no one in their right mind could possibly think the police were going to do a quick sweep of the house, then leave.

For one thing, no one could reasonably anticipate that dogs would not be brought to the scene. Had the dogs been used the body would have been found within minutes. This is a reasonable thing to anticipate happening. JR had to have considered this. Thus, there could have been no plan to do anything with the body after the 911 call was made.

Then too, as long as the body remains "missing" it's a kidnapping case, under FBI jurisdiction. No one could possibly believe the FBI was going to make a sweep then leave. With the RN making all LE agencies "hinky" there is simply no way the house would not be under surveillance along with the movement of the parents, JR and PR. This to was a reasonable thing to anticipate and JR could not have failed to consider it.

So,

It's absolutely implausible that there was ever any intent to remove the body from the home after the police were called, or that there was ever a plan to claim the kidnappers "returned" the body, after the police were called.

Next, The RN absolutely could NOT have provided the "rationale" for JBR ending up dead because the warnings were not headed. The reason is straightforward, it's called Time Of Death (TOD)

Rigor allows us to place TOD approx 12hrs before she was carried up from the basement. Combined with the police observation of the odor of decomposition we know that she must have died around midnight. W/o the odor of decomp it would be possible to push the TOD closer to 6am, but since the odor was present we know she must have died well before that.

Even if another scenario was originally planned, the fact remains she was murdered around midnight. Fudge the time a couple hours either side of midnight for temperature and environmental conditions, if you like, you still can't make TOD come after 6am. The first violation of the warnings in the RN occurred with the 911 call at 05:52. With TOD at midnight, give or take a couple hours, there is no way she could have been killed after 6am, in retaliation for the Rs not heading the warnings in the RN. To spell it out as clearly as possible, she could not be killed 6 hours prior to the first instance of ignoring the RN's warnings if ignoring the warnings was the "reason" for her being killed.

Therefore there is no way violation of the warnings can serve as the "rationale" for why she was killed. There are only two ways this could work; 1. The kidnappers murdered her at midnight in anticipation that the warnings would not be headed. Clearly silly. 2. The kidnappers had a time machine and once they "monitored" the 911 call being made they jumped in the time machine, went back to midnight, then killed her in retaliation. Please excuse the sarcasm, but there is no reason after 17 years of study that anyone should be thinking that violation of the warnings in the RN provides the "reason" that JBR was killed. We know she died several hours prior to the 911 call, and the police know it too.

Finally, neither JR nor PR (if she was in on the cover up) were under any pressure to make a 911 call at any specific time. The RN provided them with all the "reason" they needed to cancel their travel plans, and all the reason they needed to delay the 911 call until sometime later, maybe the next day, when it finally became obvious that the kidnappers were not going to return JBR, even though the ransom had been "paid". They absolutely were not running out of time to make the 911 call.
BBM.

True. Not calling 911, per the RN, would have been an extraordinarily convenient 'excuse' for Patsy, if she'd written the note. Patsy was completely unaware, IMO.
 
Nice to hear from you again, Chrishope. From an RDI perspective, well of course, one can look at it just a little differently: There’s a premeditated homicide, executed by a single perp with perfection , including the disposal of a corpse. Also there are examples of homicides by a single perp with accomplices who are absolutely and perfectly faithful to a plan. (Jimmy Hoffa?) And then there are unplanned “accidental” homicides by one perp or two which are executed and staged without perfect logic.

Unless only one of them knew what was going on, then the following thoughts wouldn't apply. But if both involved: We don’t know who of the adult R’s was trying to call the shots, nor what their thinking was, nor whether someone went rogue in executing the plan. I agree, the R’s could ‘ve done it better or differently. Guess the Title of the Perfect Murder/Perfect Town could have been Perfect Murder in escaping justice, but not so perfect as to convince 100% of the public/ Perfect Town; but it doesn’t have the same ring. JMHO
 
Good to see you back Chrishope! Was wondering what happened to you.

I had a family emergency that kept me away. Had to quit WS cold turkey. I find I don't have the same interest in the case anymore.

I agree, ridiculous to think LE would leave. Also ridiculous to think the SFF would return her dead later. BUT, we're looking at this with "educated" eyes. Did either of them know TOD could be determined that closely? Or did they think by the time she was found elsewhere that it would be a matter of days, weeks, or months since death and not hours?

There's no way to be sure what the Rs "knew" we can only say what a reasonable intelligent person would figure on happening. With the body in the house they'd have to know TOD could be established. If the body had been dumped and not found for weeks it might not be possible to establish TOD.

I do think it's possible JR had a call set up that didn't come. It would have provided him an excuse to get out of the house, with JB in tow, and onto his plane where LE could not follow him (immediately). Now whether this would have worked or not, is not really the point. Could JR, narcissist that he is, have believed it might have worked? I think it's possible. JMO

I can't really see the police allowing him to board his plane to deliver the ransom, but even if they did, I can't see them not examining the suitcase first. It is possible that a 3rd person was to make the 911 call.
 
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?

Hi Nom de plume,

Just wanted to say that I agree with everything you've said. I'm nowhere near as knowledgable about this case as any of the rest of you are, but I couldn't believe it when I came across it, and thought it hadn't been discussed before. Apologies for it being off-topic. It's really interesting to hear everyone's opinions, and I agree that the entire photos issue comes across as highly suspicious, although obviously unproven- at least to me!
 
Good to see you back Chrishope! Was wondering what happened to you.

I agree, ridiculous to think LE would leave. Also ridiculous to think the SFF would return her dead later. BUT, we're looking at this with "educated" eyes. Did either of them know TOD could be determined that closely? Or did they think by the time she was found elsewhere that it would be a matter of days, weeks, or months since death and not hours?

I do think it's possible JR had a call set up that didn't come. It would have provided him an excuse to get out of the house, with JB in tow, and onto his plane where LE could not follow him (immediately). Now whether this would have worked or not, is not really the point. Could JR, narcissist that he is, have believed it might have worked? I think it's possible. JMO

Again, I know it seems unpopular, and also illogical in our eyes, but I have to agree with you that this could be possible. It isn't about whether the police would have allowed John to board the plane, or whether most of us would think this stupid to even consider- what matters is that John himself just might have believed it was possible, and miscalculated the situation.
 
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:


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
I am confused, for the same reasons you are, AK. If the forum is going to be segregated, perhaps the threads should be labeled. ...and what about those who don't exactly fall into either category?
 
Again, I know it seems unpopular, and also illogical in our eyes, but I have to agree with you that this could be possible. It isn't about whether the police would have allowed John to board the plane, or whether most of us would think this stupid to even consider- what matters is that John himself just might have believed it was possible, and miscalculated the situation.

Yes, What's important to remember is the R's were not like you, me and most folks. Their reality was nothing like ours. They were special, had a sense of entitlement, were superior. They expected and received special treatment because of their status in the business world and in the community. Again, the R's reality was nothing like ours. Keeping this fact in mind, I can see JR expecting LE to allow the family to fly away from Boulder on Dec. 26 and I can imagine PR expecting LE to believe the RN. Just look at the hold the family had on AH.
 


(edited to highlight notepad under book on end of table)
 
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:


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

Wow! I'm sorry AK, but this thread is not all about you, nor is a bit of it based on your POV! :facepalm: You are IDI, I am RDI. How does my initial post even remotely come across to you as IDI? Yes, I started it by answering your question. Had I wanted to stop with my brief answer about the body being in the car & garage, I would have done so in the same thread you commented in. The reason I started this thread is because of where my answer to you led me; possibilities for why 911 was called when they were, and what The Plan may have been. You don't think the Rs were involved, so how does any of it revolve around your opinion? You lost me on that one.

TBH, I requested this thread to be RDI only. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, of course, but RDIs get really tired of every thread being "hijacked" by IDIs questioning every single bit of widely accepted evidence, refuting it, arguing about it, or just flat ignoring it. It becomes impossible for us to have any meaningful discussion when all we do is go back over the evidence, and why it's legit, time after time after time. Why is it so important for you IDIs to comment in every single thread? This forum is by far heavily RDI, yet out of all these threads we only have two to ourselves. You're free to comment in all the other 2475 threads. I don't hear a single RDI complaining about not commenting in your IDI thread. Why can't you have the same respect for us?

ITA that the thread should be labeled as RDI, to avoid any confusion, and with mod permission, I'll do just that.
 


(edited to highlight notepad under book on end of table)

This photo is available on ACandyRose as well. I don't see the sheets of paper on the steps. Isn't that what was being alluded to? That a photo of two(?) pages on the steps hours before the actual ransom note was on the steps, but I don't see pages on the steps in this photo.
 
This photo is available on ACandyRose as well. I don't see the sheets of paper on the steps. Isn't that what was being alluded to? That a photo of two(?) pages on the steps hours before the actual ransom note was on the steps, but I don't see pages on the steps in this photo.

I thought that too dazeerae. Here's what KK actually said: BBM & IBM

What is likely the greatest issue for the credibility of the Ramseys has to do with some curious interviews in which they took part and in which it is clear that a prevenient event precluding presumed causality presaged malfeasance. This, in turn, proves beyond little doubt that the crime was pre-meditated by someone with access to the house before 25 December, 1996. What do we mean by all that? Let us make the point with an example. Suppose I find a picture you took showing a particular and unique way in which you placed a notepad unique to its position on the morning of the murder, like, placing it on the last couple of steps on the spiral staircase next to two blank sheets from that notepad, all laid out left to right, essentially identical to the way the ransom note was found. And suppose that the notepad is the same one from which the ransom note was written. We have an obvious problem with the causality of these events. It demonstrates foreknowledge of the positioning of the ransom note itself. The more general statement to which the example conforms is exactly what is being discussed in the interviews that follow

Now his example does not match #52, so I'm a little lost myself now.
 
Thank you, Scandigirl. I spent the day reading the file.

The Kir Komrik text is loaded with interesting information mostly as it pertains to psychology. Several areas will need to be given more thought.

The information he offers about the photo developed from the R's camera is intriguing. KK believes, based on Patsy's interview, that a picture taken Christmas morning shows the RN tablet and 2 blank pages laid out on the iron staircase 24 hours before it was to appear there by the kidnapper.

From Patsy's 1998 interview:

17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right, from Priscilla.
18 That's another one of those legal pads.
19 TOM HANEY: Right.
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that a (inaudible)
21 picture?
22 TOM HANEY: No.
23 PATSY RAMSEY: No.
24 TOM HANEY: But this photo was not taken
25 after, this was on, it's a --
0527
1 PATSY RAMSEY: Right, right.
2 TRIP DeMUTH: -- similar photo to this one
3 here, but we're minus that.
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
5 TOM HANEY: And probably minus the cleaning
6 fluid and we have some bags here.
7 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
8 TOM HANEY: And that's photo 52 that we're
9 comparing it to.
10 PATSY RAMSEY: Is that cleaning stuff over
11 there?
12 TOM HANEY: Hard to see. It could be the
13 same, but I'm not sure. Okay.
14 That photo 52 was taken by the police.
15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
16 TOM HANEY: Well, this photo 12OTET8 was on
17 your roll of file in your camera.
And on the
18 same roll is the next photo, a Christmas morning
19 photo of the kids.

20 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes). Oh, God. [Patsy sees the problem.]
21 TOM HANEY: Before we, before we talk too
22 much about the next photo, if you can --
23 TRIP DeMUTH: You want to just take that
24 out for a minute?
25 TOM HANEY: Let's talk still about the
0528
1 120TET. Like I say, this was on your role of
2 film and it's not exactly the same photograph
3 that was taken by the police.
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh (yes).
5 TOM HANEY: But it's, it's, it shows --
6 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
7 TOM HANEY: -- pretty much, I guess, or can
8 you tell me when that would have been taken?
9 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't have a clue why
10 anybody would take a picture like that. I don't
11 know (inaudible). Who took the picture?
12 TOM HANEY: Well, it's on your roll --
13 PATSY RAMSEY: It's on my --
14 TOM HANEY: -- of film on your camera.
15 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know.
16 TOM HANEY: And this legal pad that you --
17 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
18 TOM HANEY: -- identified --
19 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
20 TOM HANEY: -- do you know when that would
21 have been in that position?
22 PATSY RAMSEY: No. So this, this was taken
23 before photo one was?
24 TOM HANEY: Before the police photos.
25 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, okay. I don't know
0529
1 when this was taken, or why it was taken. I
2 mean, it's nothing.

3 TRIP DeMUTH: Do you recognize that pad, I
4 know it's (inaudible) photo?
5 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but we had a lot of
6 those around. There was a picture in another
7 one. I think.
8 TRIP DeMUTH: Uh-huh (yes)
9 PATSY RAMSEY: I bought like those Office
10 Depot's or Office Max or whatever they are and I
11 usually kept a bunch of them, you know, kept
12 them over here, right around here in the
13 kitchen.
14 TRIP DeMUTH: By the telephone?
15 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah, but, you know, they
16 float all over.

17 TRIP DeMUTH: So it wouldn't have been
18 unusual to be where it is?
19 PATSY RAMSEY: No. No. Gosh.


Rereading I think I see where the confusion lies. Tom Haney was originally talking about police photo 52, then starts discussing Ramsey photo 120TET8 (see above, BBM). The Ramsey photo 120TET8 should/could show the notepad and 2 sheets of paper on the steps, with the photo made prior to JonBenet's murder.

It's difficult to follow the questioning of the photos' contents without having them to view.
 
Rereading I think I see where the confusion lies. Tom Haney was originally talking about police photo 52, then starts discussing Ramsey photo 120TET8 (see above, BBM). The Ramsey photo 120TET8hould/could show the notepad and 2 sheets of paper on the steps, with the photo made prior to JonBenet's murder.

It's difficult to follow the questioning of the photos' contents without having them to view.

I have seen this interview with Patsy where the pics on the R's roll of film are discussed and I have seen the crime scene photos. But I have not seen where the photos show the placement of the sheets of paper from the notepad were place BEFORE the crime photos. It seems as if what is being discussed (and it is very frustrating that police do not come out and just SAY what it is) is that the photos taken with the R's camera show the placement of the RN (or blank pages laid out as if they were the RN) BEFORE the police came to the house. As if the Rs were practicing how they will say the note was placed. Then in the crime photo the note was missing.
I do believe when Officer French arrived the Rs handed him the note- he never saw it in situ[/I on the stairs, it was the Rs who claimed it had been there.
Many cameras put a time/date stamp on photos, so it would be easy enough to prove when it was taken. And I have not read where the R's camera was dusted for prints as she seems to be saying she does not know who took the photo with their camera.
But to me, this was a HUGE red flag as to the parents' involvement and I cannot believe there was so little said about it, as far as LE was concerned. So are we to assume the Rs insinuated there was one MORE thing an "intruder" had the time to do? Find their camera and take pictures with it? Of the longest RN in the history of crime?
 
Wow! I'm sorry AK, but this thread is not all about you, nor is a bit of it based on your POV! :facepalm: You are IDI, I am RDI. How does my initial post even remotely come across to you as IDI? Yes, I started it by answering your question. Had I wanted to stop with my brief answer about the body being in the car & garage, I would have done so in the same thread you commented in. The reason I started this thread is because of where my answer to you led me; possibilities for why 911 was called when they were, and what The Plan may have been. You don't think the Rs were involved, so how does any of it revolve around your opinion? You lost me on that one.

TBH, I requested this thread to be RDI only. Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, of course, but RDIs get really tired of every thread being "hijacked" by IDIs questioning every single bit of widely accepted evidence, refuting it, arguing about it, or just flat ignoring it. It becomes impossible for us to have any meaningful discussion when all we do is go back over the evidence, and why it's legit, time after time after time. Why is it so important for you IDIs to comment in every single thread? This forum is by far heavily RDI, yet out of all these threads we only have two to ourselves. You're free to comment in all the other 2475 threads. I don't hear a single RDI complaining about not commenting in your IDI thread. Why can't you have the same respect for us?

ITA that the thread should be labeled as RDI, to avoid any confusion, and with mod permission, I'll do just that.
It just seems to me that if someone quotes me in an introduction to a topic, and if that quote is the impetus for that topic, than I should be permitted to comment from whatever POV I might have. You used my thoughts, my observations, my questions, my words; and, that’s okay as long as I don’t add anything to them?

Sorry, that’s just wrong.

However, I will do as you ask and stop posting on this thread. I will probably continue to read it, but I won’t post.
...

AK
 
I have seen this interview with Patsy where the pics on the R's roll of film are discussed and I have seen the crime scene photos. But I have not seen where the photos show the placement of the sheets of paper from the notepad were place BEFORE the crime photos. It seems as if what is being discussed (and it is very frustrating that police do not come out and just SAY what it is) is that the photos taken with the R's camera show the placement of the RN (or blank pages laid out as if they were the RN) BEFORE the police came to the house. As if the Rs were practicing how they will say the note was placed. Then in the crime photo the note was missing.
I do believe when Officer French arrived the Rs handed him the note- he never saw it in situ[/I on the stairs, it was the Rs who claimed it had been there.
Many cameras put a time/date stamp on photos, so it would be easy enough to prove when it was taken. And I have not read where the R's camera was dusted for prints as she seems to be saying she does not know who took the photo with their camera.
But to me, this was a HUGE red flag as to the parents' involvement and I cannot believe there was so little said about it, as far as LE was concerned. So are we to assume the Rs insinuated there was one MORE thing an "intruder" had the time to do? Find their camera and take pictures with it? Of the longest RN in the history of crime?


Hi DeeDee249!

Exactly, with regards to everything you just said! Just another thought that's occurred to me... I may be completely wrong, but could it possibly be that the "incriminating" photos that we and the police are talking about here, which appear to show evidence of premeditation, are included in the apparently large amounts of evidence that has been withheld from the public?

It's only my own opinion, but I find it so frustrating that in every interview transcript I've ever read, between the police and the Ramsey's, the police seem to do such a poor job... Poor choice of wording for questions, not following through to force them to answer or elaborate their answers. I'm no genius by any means, but even I could have done a better job in trying harder not to let them off the hook, time and again! Either the police simply weren't very good, or they must have been completely intimidated by the Ramsey's and their lawyers. Or maybe they knew that, like us, they had all the suspicions, but no way of finding absolute proof?

Surely, like you said, though, any photos would show a time and date, which must be proof, unless I'm misunderstanding something and getting confused?
 
This document from Komrik with the premeditation theory and the before Xmas morning photo of the RN placement has generated some discussion. My question is, doesn't it seem odd after all the books and all the other "sources" of information that this is the first time it seems to have come up (at least as far as I know)? Has anyone here heard this before?

Assuming this information on the photo is true, Komrik must have access to information not in the public record and this information would have to come from someone deep inside the investigation. Secondarily, I would think a photo ordered in advance of Xmas morning with this implied content would have been a serious piece of evidence that would have had the attention of LE and the DA's office.

Given the depth of detail in Komrik's document, it seems less likely to me that he would just make this up. If his document and this information was new (his document was from 2010 as I recall), a leap could be made that this was a new evidence leak as part of ongoing investigation activity. All of the above just doesn't seem to make sense to me, but much of this investigation is also the same. My key point is that much of this boards (and others) is about interpretation of information in various ways, but new and "smoking gun" information doesn't seem to show up much based on my experience reading content.

Thoughts?
 
Yes, What's important to remember is the R's were not like you, me and most folks. Their reality was nothing like ours. They were special, had a sense of entitlement, were superior. They expected and received special treatment because of their status in the business world and in the community. Again, the R's reality was nothing like ours. Keeping this fact in mind, I can see JR expecting LE to allow the family to fly away from Boulder on Dec. 26 and I can imagine PR expecting LE to believe the RN. Just look at the hold the family had on AH.

Thank you; youve said it much better than I.

When mentioning the kidnapper breaking back IN to leave the dead body, my intent was sarcastic; the rolleyes should have been used.

However i still think John may have thought (in his arrogance) that BPD would let them leave. Maybe not to go on vacation, but yes to go to his "important business meeting". After getting business of the year awards & publicity/honor in print, why wouldnt he believe himself to be just that important? I still think it's plausible.

At the very least imo he believed that they could leave the house & stay with friends. Maybe that figured into the insane decision to invite their friends over that morning, & why BR got sent away so easily.

For one reason or another they wanted out of that house asap. They did NOT want to be there when JB's body was discovered. Someone put her as far away as possible, hidden in the farthest point. Even if the expectation was just that she'd be found later that day. I dont know the why of it but imo that was the plan until JR changed his mind and decided it best to find her himself.

I believe that patsy threw the REAL plan off with the 911 call and afterwards was scrambling around for Plan B despite his "cordial" greetings at the door. He was already anxious at that point i think, but any successful businessman has that whole cordiality or geniality thing down pat. His anxiety grew as the morning progressed..

Maybe he wanted out of the house because he felt he'd have more control of the situation from a distance? Maybe he was afraid that his acting skills upon JB being found werent up to par & would look condemningly fake- as of course they did.

I dont think he expected to be able to stay once JonBenet was found & the house became a crime scene. I do believe he felt that (without his own assistance) he certainly had a stretch of time to "work" with before she was discovered.

Remember that he'd referred to himself as a fixer, a person who fixed problem situations. Well he had a helll of a situation to fix that morning.

If we call patsy's 911 call a wrench in john's Plan A then he & patsy leaving the house before the body is discovered there becomes Plan B, arrived at in a hurry under much pressure.. Arrived at and discarded, obviously.

Isnt this plausible? I ask as someone new to this whole way of thinking, and still working out my own beliefs on this case.

Thanks in advance.
 
Thank you; youve said it much better than I.

When mentioning the kidnapper breaking back IN to leave the dead body, my intent was sarcastic; the rolleyes should have been used.

However i still think John may have thought (in his arrogance) that BPD would let them leave. Maybe not to go on vacation, but yes to go to his "important business meeting". After getting business of the year awards & publicity/honor in print, why wouldnt he believe himself to be just that important? I still think it's plausible.

At the very least imo he believed that they could leave the house & stay with friends. Maybe that figured into the insane decision to invite their friends over that morning, & why BR got sent away so easily.

For one reason or another they wanted out of that house asap. They did NOT want to be there when JB's body was discovered. Someone put her as far away as possible, hidden in the farthest point. Even if the expectation was just that she'd be found later that day. I dont know the why of it but imo that was the plan until JR changed his mind and decided it best to find her himself.

I believe that patsy threw the REAL plan off with the 911 call and afterwards was scrambling around for Plan B despite his "cordial" greetings at the door. He was already anxious at that point i think, but any successful businessman has that whole cordiality or geniality thing down pat. His anxiety grew as the morning progressed..

Maybe he wanted out of the house because he felt he'd have more control of the situation from a distance? Maybe he was afraid that his acting skills upon JB being found werent up to par & would look condemningly fake- as of course they did.

I dont think he expected to be able to stay once JonBenet was found & the house became a crime scene. I do believe he felt that (without his own assistance) he certainly had a stretch of time to "work" with before she was discovered.

Remember that he'd referred to himself as a fixer, a person who fixed problem situations. Well he had a helll of a situation to fix that morning.

If we call patsy's 911 call a wrench in john's Plan A then he & patsy leaving the house before the body is discovered there becomes Plan B, arrived at in a hurry under much pressure.. Arrived at and discarded, obviously.

Isnt this plausible? I ask as someone new to this whole way of thinking, and still working out my own beliefs on this case.

Thanks in advance.

Good thoughts. You're right, I think JR would have the wits to him to stay calm and cordial if PR calling the police wasn't part of the plan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
75
Guests online
4,190
Total visitors
4,265

Forum statistics

Threads
592,547
Messages
17,970,805
Members
228,806
Latest member
Linnymac68$
Back
Top