JBR: did she sleep that night at all

[Charlie]

UkGuy, u bring up point i'm ashamed ive allways missed, which is if Patsy killed JBR because of toilet rage, then why would the ramseys clean up everything else and not remove her urine soaked longjohns, i wonder how steve thomas excused this in his theory. We are left with the only possible reason which is JBR soiled herself upon death. Therefore the crime was not commited out of toilet rage, do anyone else agree on this conclusion?

The flashlight has allways been a red flag for me. The flashlight was not only wiped down but so were the batteries inside of it. The ramseys did own a maglite flashlight like the one found on the kitchen countr but claimed that it wasnt "thier" one. We know the flashlight was used in someway during the murder because it was wiped down. Lets assume for a moment an intruder commited the crime. The intruder which we will call x. So x brings in a flashlight in order to navigate around the ramsey house. he commits the crime, takes the duct tape, and remainding rope but forgets the flashlight in the kitchen but makes the effort to wipe down the the exterior and batteries but doeant take it with him..why would he leave it...x was so concerned with his fingerprints to wipe it down in the first place why didnt x just take it, i mean he still needs light to navgiate his exit from the house. doesnt make sense.

Ok so we are left with the ramseys owning the maglite. Firstly why would the ramseys wipe down thier own flashlight inside and out if they owned it and then lie about thier ownership of it. IMo the ramseys used the flashlight in the crime, unlike the duct tape and rope they couldnt smuggle this large and heavy maglite out so they wipe it down inside and out and leave it on the kitchen counter to allow LE to find it and assume the flashlight was brought it by x and he forgot it...again it doesnt make sense for x to leave it behind as theorised above.

Sorry if this theory is badly articulated by have had a hard day at work with customer's being mean to me :boohoo:

 

[UKGuy]

I have a question about that...ST's book says she was manually strangled by someone twisting her shirt collar and their knuckles causing the abrasions found on her neck.If that was the case,and the ligature strangulation was meant to cover that,WHY would the shirt she was strangled in be left on her? The shirt collar would be stretched and twisted,totally giving away what happened.
And then we have the fact JB wasn't in her gown or pj's either...my theory is that she wore the red turtleneck to the party that night,and something happened b/f bed,starting with that shirt,and later it was changed to a fresh one,just like her underwear was.Any opinion on that? JR seems to be wanting to account for the red shirt in DOI, PR originally said she went to bed in it,and she also started to CRY when she saw the photo of the red shirt on the counter and was q'd about it.Is it possible JR lied about which shirt she wore to the party, and even put it in print(in DOI)?

one more thought here..PR had no problem wearing the clothes she had on the previous night at the White's,and then calling them to come over the next morning.BUT,if JB had been found dead in the same clothes SHE wore,wouldn't the R's have been worried that would seem too suspect?So maybe JB's clothes were changed for that reason as well?

JMO8778,
Steve White's version of the strangulation, corresponds with the forensic evidence, but possibly not all of it? How could that be, well at the time of writing his book, the Ramsey case was still open, and there will have been evidence he could not make public, so any theory he publishes will be limited by the evidence.

I think its public knowledge that JonBenet wore her sequined White Gap Top to the White's party that evening, if not we would have heard about it by now.

Everything found at a crime-scene that either looks out of place or should not be there normally ends up having a good reason for being there.

Now you cite another apparent hole in Steve White's Toilet Rage theory, apparently the gap top does not appear to be the initial strangulation object?

How can this be, well alike her urine-soaked longjohns suerly it cannot be.

The answer lies in the staging, including the probability of Patsy lying about her argument with JonBenet e.g. there was no argument!

Think laterally, consider the wine-cellar crime-scene as a revision of a previous one, think carefully about the staging elements, as I have already suggested these were not cobbled together, so if you were going to stage a crime-scene, which elements must you keep and which ones can you discard?

Since we are working backwards, lets start with the garrote, which was intended to mask, her initial asphyxiation, so what could be substituted in its place, voila the Red Turtleneck, in my opinion JonBenet was dressed in this top to hide the fact that she had been violently strangled. The turtleneck rising to cover her neck region.

Also if you consider the size-12's and their role, then it may be a similar thought process at work with the Red Turtleneck?

Now Patsy has a problem, and this displays the forward thinking or premeditation some people think was not evident, she has to 1. Account for any forensic evidence linking the Red Turtleneck to JonBenet, 2. Account for the Red Turtleneck being where it was found.

So Patsy invents this argument with JonBenet regarding the wearing of the Red Turtleneck and secondly she washes it out, to remove any residual forensic evidence.

Nearly everyone comments on JonBenet's bed, new sheets, pijamas still there etc. Why so, well lets assume that the story they told investigators was always going to be part of their defense, why so, because they do not want to be linked to JonBenet after she has arrived home.

So its likely a prior staging included JonBenet lying dead in bed, tied up, wearing her Red Turtleneck, thus hiding the strangulation, but possibly under the covers she had been sexually assaulted, staging a motive for her death?

But this was revised, her Red Turtleneck removed and replaced with the White Gap Top, she was possibly now wiped down, to hide the prior sexual assault, at least its prominence, she was relocated to the basement where further staging took place, with the intention of dumping her outdoors to correspond with the ransom note.



.

 

[UKGuy]

UkGuy, u bring up point i'm ashamed ive allways missed, which is if Patsy killed JBR because of toilet rage, then why would the ramseys clean up everything else and not remove her urine soaked longjohns, i wonder how steve thomas excused this in his theory. We are left with the only possible reason which is JBR soiled herself upon death. Therefore the crime was not commited out of toilet rage, do anyone else agree on this conclusion?

The flashlight has allways been a red flag for me. The flashlight was not only wiped down but so were the batteries inside of it. The ramseys did own a maglite flashlight like the one found on the kitchen countr but claimed that it wasnt "thier" one. We know the flashlight was used in someway during the murder because it was wiped down. Lets assume for a moment an intruder commited the crime. The intruder which we will call x. So x brings in a flashlight in order to navigate around the ramsey house. he commits the crime, takes the duct tape, and remainding rope but forgets the flashlight in the kitchen but makes the effort to wipe down the the exterior and batteries but doeant take it with him..why would he leave it...x was so concerned with his fingerprints to wipe it down in the first place why didnt x just take it, i mean he still needs light to navgiate his exit from the house. doesnt make sense.

Ok so we are left with the ramseys owning the maglite. Firstly why would the ramseys wipe down thier own flashlight inside and out if they owned it and then lie about thier ownership of it. IMo the ramseys used the flashlight in the crime, unlike the duct tape and rope they couldnt smuggle this large and heavy maglite out so they wipe it down inside and out and leave it on the kitchen counter to allow LE to find it and assume the flashlight was brought it by x and he forgot it...again it doesnt make sense for x to leave it behind as theorised above.

Sorry if this theory is badly articulated by have had a hard day at work with customer's being mean to me :boohoo:

Charlie,

Hey there , everything you said is clear and well articulated. I'm ashamed I missed the same feature a long time ago, so dont concern yourself.

I agree 99% with your 1st conclusion, the other 1% is that it could be described as a Toilet Rage motive.

What you say about the maglite I also agree with, particularly the size aspect and smuggling it out, it was wiped clean because it was used in the crime and the Ramsey's do not want to be associated with it.


.

 

[twinkiesmom]

<<I know, JMO, about Thomas and his belief in the toilet rage scene, and I feel compelled to go with his instincts because A. he is a cop and as such would know better than I, and B. he knows this case backwards and forwards and I believe he may know things we've never even heard about.>>

I like ST a great deal, but he is a man and thinks like a man. I think is is easy to become blinded by the obviousness of PR's histrionics and mistake cool composure for innocence. I think it would be ironic if Linda Arndt turned out to be right but no one believed her. JMHO.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Well, I have to agree with that. I wonder why ST seemed convinced JR wasn't involved...I think he'd have to known what was going on when they called 911 or else he would not have allowed Patsy to jeopardize their daughter's head being attached to her body by calling over friends and failing to mention to the operator that threats were made by the kidnapper who said he was watching. I also don't think JR would have allowed Burke to leave the house if he honestly thought JonBenet was being held by kidnappers who would kill her if they saw the Rs disregarding their warnings.

It would be very ironic if Arndt had been right all along...she doesn't sit well with me. She was convinced JR was dangerous on the 26th, but the Rs they buttered her up and sent her flowers and crap and by a year later she claimed she no longer remembered a thing about the Ramsey case. Anxiously awaiting the book I heard she was writing....

 

[coloradokares]

Well, I have to agree with that. I wonder why ST seemed convinced JR wasn't involved...I think he'd have to known what was going on when they called 911 or else he would not have allowed Patsy to jeopardize their daughter's head being attached to her body by calling over friends and failing to mention to the operator that threats were made by the kidnapper who said he was watching. I also don't think JR would have allowed Burke to leave the house if he honestly thought JonBenet was being held by kidnappers who would kill her if they saw the Rs disregarding their warnings.

It would be very ironic if Arndt had been right all along...she doesn't sit well with me. She was convinced JR was dangerous on the 26th, but the Rs they buttered her up and sent her flowers and crap and by a year later she claimed she no longer remembered a thing about the Ramsey case. Anxiously awaiting the book I heard she was writing....

I too am anxiously awaiting the Linda Arndt book. I want to see if how well it lines up to the first interviews done with her.

 

[JMO8778]

Well, I have to agree with that. I wonder why ST seemed convinced JR wasn't involved...I think he'd have to known what was going on when they called 911 or else he would not have allowed Patsy to jeopardize their daughter's head being attached to her body by calling over friends and failing to mention to the operator that threats were made by the kidnapper who said he was watching. I also don't think JR would have allowed Burke to leave the house if he honestly thought JonBenet was being held by kidnappers who would kill her if they saw the Rs disregarding their warnings.

I've thought about that a lot,and one conclusion I've come to is that ST believes the only reason JR didn't turn PR in, is b/c he has to keep his mouth shut due to his prior abuse of JB,or PR will blow the whistle on him.SO,if that's the case,then to give JR a 'pass' so to speak,on the abuse,left him open and free to turn PR in for murder.Any thoughts anyone???

edited to add..since UK's theory sounds very plausable,what if putting ALL the blame on PR was done to try to get her to turn JR in? (I know it didn't work though,if that was the case).She always seemed so worried about what everyone thought of her,and her image,that I wonder if it's a possibility.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,
Steve White's version of the strangulation, corresponds with the forensic evidence, but possibly not all of it? How could that be, well at the time of writing his book, the Ramsey case was still open, and there will have been evidence he could not make public, so any theory he publishes will be limited by the evidence.

I think its public knowledge that JonBenet wore her sequined White Gap Top to the White's party that evening, if not we would have heard about it by now.

Everything found at a crime-scene that either looks out of place or should not be there normally ends up having a good reason for being there.

Now you cite another apparent hole in Steve White's Toilet Rage theory, apparently the gap top does not appear to be the initial strangulation object?

How can this be, well alike her urine-soaked longjohns suerly it cannot be.

The answer lies in the staging, including the probability of Patsy lying about her argument with JonBenet e.g. there was no argument!

Think laterally, consider the wine-cellar crime-scene as a revision of a previous one, think carefully about the staging elements, as I have already suggested these were not cobbled together, so if you were going to stage a crime-scene, which elements must you keep and which ones can you discard?

Since we are working backwards, lets start with the garrote, which was intended to mask, her initial asphyxiation, so what could be substituted in its place, voila the Red Turtleneck, in my opinion JonBenet was dressed in this top to hide the fact that she had been violently strangled. The turtleneck rising to cover her neck region.

Also if you consider the size-12's and their role, then it may be a similar thought process at work with the Red Turtleneck?

Now Patsy has a problem, and this displays the forward thinking or premeditation some people think was not evident, she has to 1. Account for any forensic evidence linking the Red Turtleneck to JonBenet, 2. Account for the Red Turtleneck being where it was found.

So Patsy invents this argument with JonBenet regarding the wearing of the Red Turtleneck and secondly she washes it out, to remove any residual forensic evidence.

Nearly everyone comments on JonBenet's bed, new sheets, pijamas still there etc. Why so, well lets assume that the story they told investigators was always going to be part of their defense, why so, because they do not want to be linked to JonBenet after she has arrived home.

So its likely a prior staging included JonBenet lying dead in bed, tied up, wearing her Red Turtleneck, thus hiding the strangulation, but possibly under the covers she had been sexually assaulted, staging a motive for her death?

But this was revised, her Red Turtleneck removed and replaced with the White Gap Top, she was possibly now wiped down, to hide the prior sexual assault, at least its prominence, she was relocated to the basement where further staging took place, with the intention of dumping her outdoors to correspond with the ransom note.



.

Thanks UK,that makes sense I hadn't thought about it that way,but I did wonder if PR and JB really got into an argument over the shirt b/f they left.It just doesn't sound true,more like JR was looking for a reason for the shirt to be there.SO,according to ST's book,I thought she really wore the red shirt to the party(one reason the pics haven't been released), and was strangled by the collar of it after they got home.
I only have one thought left then....was she likely manually strangled by hand,with no shirt or anything being used?If so,then how did the abrasions from the perp's knuckles get on her neck?(assuming that's what they are).PJ's or a gown or undershirt maybe were used,if this happened when she was getting ready to go to bed ?
And another...since JR's shirt fibers were found in JB's crotch,if his shirt was used to wipe off blood in the first staged (sexual) assault,then wouldn't that still have some residue of JB's blood on it? (or whatever he may have wiped off with it,( washed or not? ).Just thinking maybe they've checked the shirt, and possibly found some evidence on it that's not been released.

 

[JMO8778]

UkGuy, u bring up point i'm ashamed ive allways missed, which is if Patsy killed JBR because of toilet rage, then why would the ramseys clean up everything else and not remove her urine soaked longjohns, i wonder how steve thomas excused this in his theory. We are left with the only possible reason which is JBR soiled herself upon death. Therefore the crime was not commited out of toilet rage, do anyone else agree on this conclusion?

The flashlight has allways been a red flag for me. The flashlight was not only wiped down but so were the batteries inside of it. The ramseys did own a maglite flashlight like the one found on the kitchen countr but claimed that it wasnt "thier" one. We know the flashlight was used in someway during the murder because it was wiped down. Lets assume for a moment an intruder commited the crime. The intruder which we will call x. So x brings in a flashlight in order to navigate around the ramsey house. he commits the crime, takes the duct tape, and remainding rope but forgets the flashlight in the kitchen but makes the effort to wipe down the the exterior and batteries but doeant take it with him..why would he leave it...x was so concerned with his fingerprints to wipe it down in the first place why didnt x just take it, i mean he still needs light to navgiate his exit from the house. doesnt make sense.

Ok so we are left with the ramseys owning the maglite. Firstly why would the ramseys wipe down thier own flashlight inside and out if they owned it and then lie about thier ownership of it. IMo the ramseys used the flashlight in the crime, unlike the duct tape and rope they couldnt smuggle this large and heavy maglite out so they wipe it down inside and out and leave it on the kitchen counter to allow LE to find it and assume the flashlight was brought it by x and he forgot it...again it doesnt make sense for x to leave it behind as theorised above.

Sorry if this theory is badly articulated by have had a hard day at work with customer's being mean to me :boohoo:

I think the flashlight was what caused the devastating head blow on JB.Some have speculated it was the baseball bat,but the top part of the flashlight could be the only thing that would make that huge hole in her skull I beleive.(and per Werner Spitz,he made a very good case that it was caused by the flashlight)

 

[UKGuy]

Thanks UK,that makes sense I hadn't thought about it that way,but I did wonder if PR and JB really got into an argument over the shirt b/f they left.It just doesn't sound true,more like JR was looking for a reason for the shirt to be there.SO,according to ST's book,I thought she really wore the red shirt to the party(one reason the pics haven't been released), and was strangled by the collar of it after they got home.
I only have one thought left then....was she likely manually strangled by hand,with no shirt or anything being used?If so,then how did the abrasions from the perp's knuckles get on her neck?(assuming that's what they are).PJ's or a gown or undershirt maybe were used,if this happened when she was getting ready to go to bed ?
And another...since JR's shirt fibers were found in JB's crotch,if his shirt was used to wipe off blood in the first staged (sexual) assault,then wouldn't that still have some residue of JB's blood on it? (or whatever he may have wiped off with it,( washed or not? ).Just thinking maybe they've checked the shirt, and possibly found some evidence on it that's not been released.

JMO8778,

I just doubt the argument thing altogether, this is Patsy offering an explanation for forensic evidence, which at face value, does not ring true. Patsy is Mother, JonBenet is her 6-year old daughter who has been raised to wear whatever Patsy suggests, pageant oufits etc. For me this is a Patsy falsehood and the motivation lying behind it seems obvious?

I'm certain JonBenet never went to the White's party wearing the red turtleneck, the White's or anyone else attending would have mentioned that by now, the Ramsey's would also have been questioned over it during a police interview.

Manual strangulation is my first option, I dont know what was used, if anything other than a hand?

As per the title of this thread , I dont think JonBenet slept that night, nor do I think she ever went to bed except possibly once she was dead.

We also know she was up snacking pineapple and that for me does not sound to me as if it is a part of any Toilet Rage scenario.

In fact if I was Patsy, and I know this from family experience, since JonBenet was a bedwetter, her fluid intake prior to bedtime should have been monitored, and restricted accordingly.

Now that glass on the table may have contained pineapple juice, Jonbenet would certainly have drank some of the juice, pineapple is favorite of mine, and I like the juice as much as the pineapple solid, she may have drank coke or water, who knows?

So at such a late time of the night or early morning, someone was allowing JonBenet a pinapple snack as a treat, possibly to sweeten her up? If it was Patsy why should she flip out if JonBenet wets the bed, particularly after the White's party and her pineapple snack?


Yes Johns shirt may contain blood residue, but I doubt it, since thats probable cause, and worth a charge.

JonBenet's size-6 underwear may have been used to wipe away semen and/or blood, just why do you need to wipe down a 6-year old, if you eventually leave urine and blood stains on your final staging?

Toilet Rage does not seem an adequate explanation for all the facts, never mind what we reckon are lies and staged items.

Its the prior sexual abuse that is being masked, not any Toilet Rage, evidence of JonBenet's poor hygiene can be found in her underwear drawer, and on the floor of her bathroom, and her longjohns are soaked through with urine.

imo the underlying causal factor in JonBenet's death is sexual!


.

 

[Ames]

Jonbenet slept is Burkes room on Christmas eve so the last time her sheets would have been changed were when the housekeeper said she did it which was the day of the Christmas party, or Dec.23. So if she says the sheets had been changed again since she did it (those sheets were not the ones she put on the bed on the 23rd) then Jonbenet was in that bed at some point after Christmas eve and before the 26th. And for some reason the sheets needed to be changed. This is the first time I've ever thought that thru all the way. I still don't think it looks like anybody slept in her bed that night.And I've always opined that she never made it to bed that night. Is there any other reason why a person would change sheets on a bed even of nobody had slept in it since the last change?

I am thinking that the sheets were changed, because she wet the bed. I believe that is why the bed looks unslept in....because it WASN'T slept in...after the changing of the sheets.

 

[Ames]

Perhaps to provide a clue? Remember, she had coordinating peachy-pink gingham sheets for her bed and now they're in Beauty and the Beast sheets. Beauty and the Beast.


-Tea

Whoa...now THAT is just plain eerie!!!

 

[JMO8778]

I am thinking that the sheets were changed, because she wet the bed. I believe that is why the bed looks unslept in....because it WASN'T slept in...after the changing of the sheets.

I thought it odd that the housekeeper said PR would always have JB's sheets in the wash when she got there...yet it sounds like she never did anything else.LHP says she would even leave out things that are easy to put away,and whatever they had earlier was always out and she had to put it up herself.SO for PR to bother washing the sheets herself,when she ciould have left it to the housekeeper strikes me as something more than urine being washed off the sheets.

 

[JMO8778]

Whoa...now THAT is just plain eerie!!!

that reminds me,JB had 2 beds in her room,per the pics.has anything ever been said about the other bed and sheets? anything found or had it been slept in or laid on recently b/f her death?

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

I just doubt the argument thing altogether, this is Patsy offering an explanation for forensic evidence, which at face value, does not ring true. Patsy is Mother, JonBenet is her 6-year old daughter who has been raised to wear whatever Patsy suggests, pageant oufits etc. For me this is a Patsy falsehood and the motivation lying behind it seems obvious?

indeed.

I'm certain JonBenet never went to the White's party wearing the red turtleneck, the White's or anyone else attending would have mentioned that by now, the Ramsey's would also have been questioned over it during a police interview.

OK,thx,that makes sense.Since the White's and co. have been so quiet,I thought maybe that was one of the things they were saving for later testimony,if they ever get the chance.

Manual strangulation is my first option, I dont know what was used, if anything other than a hand?

I think maybe something else,maybe there is evidence unrevealed?
per ST's 'Jonbenet', p. 228,h.b. :

In a three page report,forensics expert Dr. Werner Spitz furnished a logical sequence of events on the night Jonbenet was killed:

First,there had been the manual strangulation,by twisting the collar of the shirt,with the perpetrator's knuckles causing the neck abrasions.This is consistent with a rage type attack.

Me: there's more,but this is what applies to what we're talking about for now.

As per the title of this thread , I dont think JonBenet slept that night, nor do I think she ever went to bed except possibly once she was dead.

We also know she was up snacking pineapple and that for me does not sound to me as if it is a part of any Toilet Rage scenario.

In fact if I was Patsy, and I know this from family experience, since JonBenet was a bedwetter, her fluid intake prior to bedtime should have been monitored, and restricted accordingly.

Now that glass on the table may have contained pineapple juice, Jonbenet would certainly have drank some of the juice, pineapple is favorite of mine, and I like the juice as much as the pineapple solid, she may have drank coke or water, who knows?

So at such a late time of the night or early morning, someone was allowing JonBenet a pinapple snack as a treat, possibly to sweeten her up? If it was Patsy why should she flip out if JonBenet wets the bed, particularly after the White's party and her pineapple snack?

good thought,seems likely

JonBenet's size-6 underwear may have been used to wipe away semen and/or blood, just why do you need to wipe down a 6-year old, if you eventually leave urine and blood stains on your final staging?

Toilet Rage does not seem an adequate explanation for all the facts, never mind what we reckon are lies and staged items.

Its the prior sexual abuse that is being masked, not any Toilet Rage, evidence of JonBenet's poor hygiene can be found in her underwear drawer, and on the floor of her bathroom, and her longjohns are soaked through with urine.




.

good thoughts again...
so you don't think it was PR that killed her? If not,then the q is,why would she cover for someone else?
At the very least,I do think she wrote the ransom note(likely with help from JR),and was in on the cover-up.

 

[UKGuy]

indeed.

OK,thx,that makes sense.Since the White's and co. have been so quiet,I thought maybe that was one of the things they were saving for later testimony,if they ever get the chance.

I think maybe something else,maybe there is evidence unrevealed?
per ST's 'Jonbenet', p. 228,h.b. :

In a three page report,forensics expert Dr. Werner Spitz furnished a logical sequence of events on the night Jonbenet was killed:

First,there had been the manual strangulation,by twisting the collar of the shirt,with the perpetrator's knuckles causing the neck abrasions.This is consistent with a rage type attack.

Me: there's more,but this is what applies to what we're talking about for now.


good thought,seems likely

good thoughts again...
so you don't think it was PR that killed her? If not,then the q is,why would she cover for someone else?
At the very least,I do think she wrote the ransom note(likely with help from JR),and was in on the cover-up.

JMO8778,

Patsy may not have killed JonBenet, she would cover for another person if they were both involved in some other criminal activity.

Anyway why must it be one person, what if Patsy and John were both present when JonBenet was killed, then the circumstances would be evident to both parents?

I agree it appears the ransom note was a joint effort although Patsy may designed the structure and helped with all those media references.

There are really only Three reasons I can think of, well four, the 4th is extreme.

1st reason: Patsy killed JonBenet then coerced or blackmailed John, because she was either party to, or had knowledge of the prior abuse?

2nd reason: John and Patsy were jointly involved in criminal activity with JonBenet at the time of her death?

3nd reason: Burke killed JonBenet and John and Patsy are covering for him?


Now the point to note is that the 2nd reason includes the 1st reason, that is they must both be involved, otherwise why assist in the viscious murder of your own daughter?


Another thought is what the Ramsey's say occurred after they arrived home may not be entirely correct, I suspect there is another sequence of events leading up to the pineapple snack, which lets face it, may have been an interlude, in otherwise criminal activity, because shortly afterwards someone violently kills JonBenet!


.

 

[Ames]

I've thought about that a lot,and one conclusion I've come to is that ST believes the only reason JR didn't turn PR in, is b/c he has to keep his mouth shut due to his prior abuse of JB,or PR will blow the whistle on him.SO,if that's the case,then to give JR a 'pass' so to speak,on the abuse,left him open and free to turn PR in for murder.Any thoughts anyone???

John could have actually molested JB that very night that she was killed, and maybe didn't have a thing to do with her death. Maybe Patsy told John, "You turn me in, and I will tell them what you did to JB before she died." So I agree with what you think that ST believes.

 

[JMO8778]

John could have actually molested JB that very night that she was killed, and maybe didn't have a thing to do with her death. Maybe Patsy told John, "You turn me in, and I will tell them what you did to JB before she died." So I agree with what you think that ST believes.

I thought about that,JR did originally say he read to JB b/f she went to sleep,so most likely he had some time alone with her.So maybe that's when she got the shirt fibers on her?And he likely would have had the same shirt on.
Then later JR changed his story to JB not waking up at all,so that may be a reason?
PR could have came in after that,and that's when everything started..whether it was soiling her clothes,rebellion, or whatever.I tend to not think JR was there when JB was struck,as I think he would have stopped her at some point.
IMO,the bottom line is that I think PR flipped out that night and once she got angry at JB,she didn't stop until she was dead ..and she did that on purpose.So I don't think it was an accident at all.I think for whatever reason,PR felt she couldn't handle JB anymore and decided to do away with her for good.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Patsy may not have killed JonBenet, she would cover for another person if they were both involved in some other criminal activity.

Anyway why must it be one person, what if Patsy and John were both present when JonBenet was killed, then the circumstances would be evident to both parents?

I agree it appears the ransom note was a joint effort although Patsy may designed the structure and helped with all those media references.

There are really only Three reasons I can think of, well four, the 4th is extreme.

1st reason: Patsy killed JonBenet then coerced or blackmailed John, because she was either party to, or had knowledge of the prior abuse?

2nd reason: John and Patsy were jointly involved in criminal activity with JonBenet at the time of her death?

3nd reason: Burke killed JonBenet and John and Patsy are covering for him?


Now the point to note is that the 2nd reason includes the 1st reason, that is they must both be involved, otherwise why assist in the viscious murder of your own daughter?


Another thought is what the Ramsey's say occurred after they arrived home may not be entirely correct, I suspect there is another sequence of events leading up to the pineapple snack, which lets face it, may have been an interlude, in otherwise criminal activity, because shortly afterwards someone violently kills JonBenet!


.

good thoughts UK.and thanks for taking the time to answer;it definitely makes you think,doesnt it?
I'm not sure what to really think,other than that I think the R's are good for it...esp PR.My gut feeling is that she did it,and JR isn't talking due to sexual abuse of JB..the reason he was so anxious to leave CO. quickly,IMO.

 

[UKGuy]

good thoughts UK.and thanks for taking the time to answer;it definitely makes you think,doesnt it?
I'm not sure what to really think,other than that I think the R's are good for it...esp PR.My gut feeling is that she did it,and JR isn't talking due to sexual abuse of JB..the reason he was so anxious to leave CO. quickly,IMO.

JMO8778,

Hopefully it makes the Ramsey participation less ambiguous, so of course the R's are good for it.

Since everyone knows or it can be demonstrated that John and Patsy either colluded or conspired in the death of JonBenet. Where does that leave Burke?

Well patently he must be colluding because he will know exactly what occurred that night e.g. what the sequence of events were which took place after leaving the White's, even if he cannot remember or does not know all the details, he at least will know if his father or mothers version conflict with what he recalls?

Thats before we consider if Burke has been schooled to agree certain events took place, or if his memory has lapses alike his mothers?

All three Ramsey's have made statements that conflict with another family members version of events, these were all later retracted and revised, so that they became consistent with what we all know as the Returning from the White's legend.

imo at least two of the residents of the Ramsey household conspired in the death of JonBenet, and a third colluded in the cover up, which continues to this day.



.