JonBenet's Dream Team

[Ravyn]

Alright then did he not know that there was a blanket with JB, and rubbing the body that's a new one for me..That sounds like the R's placed her under the Christmas tree..So he just talked to them..And about contaminated the scene I feel they done a bang up job...

 

[madeleine]

I don't know how these things work but I guess you as a suspect would never ever hire an expert that says you did it,right,so I guess you show him what you got and he decides whether he can spin it in your favour or not.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Douglas: When parents kill, there’s generally a softening of the crime scene. Where they take a blanket, cover up the child, roll the child over, face down or something like that. The child was found, JonBenet was face up. Her hands were tied together. Her head was off to the side. She had a piece of duct tape over her mouth.

In order for RDI to 'make it look like' RDI, there is a constant softening of the crime scene.

According to RDI, many conclusions are drawn that soften the crime scene. The garrote is concluded to be a mere prop. The headblow concluded to be an unintentional 'accident'. The RN concluded to be 'bogus'. Beheading and executions are concluded to be 'for dramatic effect only' and in no way represent the personality of the killer. JBR is 'lovingly wrapped as only a parent would do'. Many criminal acts are concluded to be a non-criminal novice trying to appear as a real criminal, doing what they think 'a real criminal would do'.

RDI makes it look like RDI by drawing conclusions and presenting as facts things we really don't know yet. We don't know the headblow was an accident at all. We also don't know what other crimes the killer has gotten away with (besides this one).

In some cases, RDI draws conclusions that are opposite prima facie evidence, e.g. autopsy report states JBR asphyxiated and garrote was found tight, indicating the opposite from garrote as a prop.

 

[Mysteeri]

Thinking about the possible staging operation by the R`s, including the garrote, psyhical injuries, signs of sexual assault, the RN..I wonder why they didn`t leave a door unlocked, and said themselves initially, that no doors were unlocked. John didn`t even make a big deal about the basement window when he first saw it and closed it. I would think that signs of forced entry or an open door would be very important in staging a crime that involves intrusion into a house.

 

[BBB167893]

Also strange that the R's hired John Douglas the Mindhunter author to profile their case and in his book he writes about people staging crimes to lead LE away from the actual killer(s)..Now of course JD said the R's didn't do this crime..

NOW he says, he never did any such thing! He sure has a bad memory for a lawman!

 

[BBB167893]

Douglas: And here is a young child,...is own writings the give the Ramseys a pass."

 

[BBB167893]

John Douglas, former FBI profiler: ... know, madeleine? Everyone was wrong but him!

 

[BBB167893]

Thinking about the possible staging operation by the R`s, including the garrote, physical injuries, signs of sexual assault, the RN..I wonder why they didn`t leave a door unlocked, and said themselves initially, that no doors were unlocked. John didn`t even make a big deal about the basement window when he first saw it and closed it. I would think that signs of forced entry or an open door would be very important in staging a crime that involves intrusion into a house.

Mysteeri, if I had a nickel for every time I've been asked that, I'd be a wealthy man.

1) I admit, on the face of it, you'd think that. But what you have to remember is that in order for the Rs' story to work, they HAD (HAD, HAD, HAD) to find the RN FIRST before they knew that anything else was wrong. Nothing could seem out of place at first. They couldn't claim that JR woke up and said," Gosh, it's cold in here."

2) The Rs had to give the impression that they were being completely responsible in terms of personal safety, or as responsible as they could be. Claiming that you'd left the door unlocked would, in retrospect, strike most police as stupid, which would take away from the sheer tragedy of this killing. And that's the key. It had to look like their best efforts to protect their children were not enough.

3) Just as an add-on, it's worth mentioning that the Rs initially tried to direct the police toward people who would not have needed to break in because they had easy access. LHP for one.

You folks still with me?

 

[Ravyn]

And I also believe that the amount of the RN was in fact the R's already had it in their minds about blaming LHP cause being the maid she could had came across one of the paystubs of JR and see the bonus..Cause we all know PR wouldn't know this cause JR handle all the money..

 

[Mysteeri]

Mysteeri, if I had a nickel for every time I've been asked that, I'd be a wealthy man.

1) I admit, on the face of it, you'd think that. But what you have to remember is that in order for the Rs' story to work, they HAD (HAD, HAD, HAD) to find the RN FIRST before they knew that anything else was wrong. Nothing could seem out of place at first. They couldn't claim that JR woke up and said," Gosh, it's cold in here."

2) The Rs had to give the impression that they were being completely responsible in terms of personal safety, or as responsible as they could be. Claiming that you'd left the door unlocked would, in retrospect, strike most police as stupid, which would take away from the sheer tragedy of this killing. And that's the key. It had to look like their best efforts to protect their children were not enough.

3) Just as an add-on, it's worth mentioning that the Rs initially tried to direct the police toward people who would not have needed to break in because they had easy access. LHP for one.

You folks still with me?

1) Maybe, but leaving a door unlocked and finding the RN first are easily combined. The three storey house was big, and there could have been "something wrong" downstairs without them first noticing. I`m not sure though, why they had to find the RN first. Actually now that I think about it, finding JB missing and a door open first would explain a quick call to the police and going against the instructions in the RN, which would be found later.

2) There`s a thought, that they had to make it look like their best efforts were not enough. But they didn`t have the alarm system on and John said he broke the basement window himself, stupid to leave it broken? The house had many doors and windows and they felt safe in Boulder, so I don`t know if it would have been a disaster if they had left a door unlocked- it happens.

3) I would say that the attention of the police and R`s was naturally directed towards people who had easy access to the house, since there were no signs of forced entry, and that the police also asked the R`s, who had access to the house. I think it`s a bit misleading to say they tried to direct the attention of the police (if I don`t know about their innocence). It actually bothers me, that the R´s said (correct me if I`m wrong), that only a few people had access to the house, was LHP even the only one with a key? Naturally the police and the R`s would think about her. Patsy said on the other hand, that the writing in the RN didn`t look like LHP`s when she looked at it more closely, and that LHP was a nice person. Anyway, to focus on people who had access to the house narrows down the possible suspects- not good for the R´s so for me, it`s an indication of innocence.

Ok, what`s the deal with Lou Smit? Why do you think he handled the case so badly? He was an experienced and effective homicide detective, right?

 

[JMO8778]

the R's admitted having a private meeting with LS in their attorney's office bf he agreed to take on the case.and they even asked him if what they had to say would remain confidential.(it's in their book).
LS was recruited to play on the R's side,no matter what,right from the start.who knows what he was told..maybe lies about LE,and IMO..and this is a big one..I think he had a lot of sympathy and empathy for Patsy having had cancer,just like his own wife did.
So then start the ridiculous theories,like the stun gun,and other scenarios that don't even fit the evidence..like when he said JB was struck with the flashlight in the basement,(yet the FL was found upstairs).and that the intruder stood on the suitcase (FW admitted moving it).or left via that tiny window,(which he never did give an illustration of).I could go on...

 

[Sophie]

Thinking about the possible staging operation by the R`s, including the garrote, psyhical injuries, signs of sexual assault, the RN..I wonder why they didn`t leave a door unlocked, and said themselves initially, that no doors were unlocked. John didn`t even make a big deal about the basement window when he first saw it and closed it. I would think that signs of forced entry or an open door would be very important in staging a crime that involves intrusion into a house.

Problem is, you have to leave the house to do it half-plausibly. For example, making sure that the glass in a window falls inwards or that locks are broken from the outside. To someone like John, this would have been Crime Scene 101 and explaining why you were spotted outside dunching* in your own door might be tough. Not to mention the frost and snow which show your trails even if no one saw you.

Equally, Burke stated that John always checked the doors and windows while John claimed not to remember doing so. Why did they go on at such length about John getting locked out? To explain any of John's own fibres on the window? So many mysteries.

If (and I know it is 'if' ) RDI, then I believe the plans for disposal of JBR occurred at some point during the night and that they decided to give with what they had with the crime scene, imperfect as it might be.


* Dunch - to clout, bump into, hit, knock. Unashamed attempt to get a bit of local dialect into international usage

 

[Mysteeri]

the R's admitted having a private meeting with LS in their attorney's office bf he agreed to take on the case.and they even asked him if what they had to say would remain confidential.(it's in their book).
LS was recruited to play on the R's side,no matter what,right from the start.who knows what he was told..maybe lies about LE,and IMO..and this is a big one..I think he had a lot of sympathy and empathy for Patsy having had cancer,just like his own wife did.
So then start the ridiculous theories,like the stun gun,and other scenarios that don't even fit the evidence..like when he said JB was struck with the flashlight in the basement,(yet the FL was found upstairs).and that the intruder stood on the suitcase (FW admitted moving it).or left via that tiny window,(which he never did give an illustration of).I could go on...

Ok, I thought the DA`s office wanted LS, an experienced homicide detective on the case. The R`s did talk to LS privately, and he went with the IDI theory. There is reason to believe he was symphatetic towards the R`s (but was that after he interviewed them- that they did not fit the picture that the media and police had portrayed). LS tactic was to become friendly with people who he suspected I believe, and at least he got the R`s to talk to him.

The stun gun theory, I don`t find it ridiculous to think about that possibility and find out if the marks could be from a stun gun. It seems many say it can`t, I`m not sure if it is impossible.

If the intruder wrote the RN after killing JB, he came to the kitchen and therefore the flaslight would be there, or if he just came up from the basement and left the house from the 1st floor, for example. About the suitcase moved, is it said somewhere that the suitcase was not initially under the window? It was moved, but from where? Edit. From the BP:"Fleet also noticed a blue suitcase was sitting underneath the window."

If you put Lou Smit on youtube, you`ll get this video where he illustrates entering through the window:

Edit. Sorry, you meant leaving via the window- well, he didn`t illustrate that, just said the intruder would find a safe way out.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KkcRBbTpmM"]YouTube - JonBenet - Lou Smit and the window[/ame]

The problem for me is who to trust? There seems to be conflicting and misleading info depending on the source. I`m really not sure, why I should think that Steve Thomas and the inexperienced BPD are more reliable than Lou Smit, John Douglas or the DA`s office. The outside experts I`m willing to believe.

 

[Mysteeri]

Problem is, you have to leave the house to do it half-plausibly. For example, making sure that the glass in a window falls inwards or that locks are broken from the outside. To someone like John, this would have been Crime Scene 101 and explaining why you were spotted outside dunching* in your own door might be tough. Not to mention the frost and snow which show your trails even if no one saw you.

Equally, Burke stated that John always checked the doors and windows while John claimed not to remember doing so. Why did they go on at such length about John getting locked out? To explain any of John's own fibres on the window? So many mysteries.

If (and I know it is 'if' ) RDI, then I believe the plans for disposal of JBR occurred at some point during the night and that they decided to give with what they had with the crime scene, imperfect as it might be.


* Dunch - to clout, bump into, hit, knock. Unashamed attempt to get a bit of local dialect into international usage

Yes, I thought that it might have been too risky to stage a forged entry, but an open door would have been a possibility. When did John say that he doesn`t remember checking the doors and windows? Or did he mean he`s not sure if he checked all the doors and windows? Umm, so far I`ve just read that John said he broke the basenent window last summer when he got locked out, I didn`t think much about it but yes, there could be something behind that story.

 

[Sophie]

Ok, I thought the DA`s office wanted LS, an experienced homicide detective on the case. The R`s did talk to LS privately, and he went with the IDI theory. There is reason to believe he was symphatetic towards the R`s (but was that after he interviewed them- that they did not fit the picture that the media and police had portrayed). LS tactic was to become friendly with people who he suspected I believe, and at least he got the R`s to talk to him.

The stun gun theory, I don`t find it ridiculous to think about that possibility and find out if the marks could be from a stun gun. It seems many say it can`t, I`m not sure if it is impossible.

If the intruder wrote the RN after killing JB, he came to the kitchen and therefore the flaslight would be there, or if he just came up from the basement and left the house from the 1st floor, for example. About the suitcase moved, is it said somewhere that the suitcase was not initially under the window? It was moved, but from where? Edit. From the BP:"Fleet also noticed a blue suitcase was sitting underneath the window."

If you put Lou Smit on youtube, you`ll get this video where he illustrates entering through the window:

Edit. Sorry, you meant leaving via the window- well, he didn`t illustrate that, just said the intruder would find a safe way out.

YouTube - JonBenet - Lou Smit and the window

The problem for me is who to trust? There seems to be conflicting and misleading info depending on the source. I`m really not sure, why I should think that Steve Thomas and the inexperienced BPD are more reliable than Lou Smit, John Douglas or the DA`s office. The outside experts I`m willing to believe.

Thing is, all of those people have been wrong on some cases* and there were as many outside experts who agreed with the BPD as with those three, in fact far more (eg. Robert Ressler, Mark Fuhrman and, in fact, some people within the DA's office - Hunter thought that PDI).

Similarly, you have to bear in mind that the crime scene photos and videos used by Smit were not proper crime scene photos - they were all taken hours after the crime, when things had been moved etc. If you do a Google on Steve Thomas and JonBenet on Youtube, you'll find him discussing this in a TV interview. Smit in fact did something incredibly damaging to the investigation when he inserted hypotheses based on these photos into the case files.

* John Douglas was wrong on BTK, very possibly the Atlanta child murderers, certainly the Yorkshire Ripper hoaxer. Any more?

There's a list on Forums for Justice, I think, of Lou Smit's failed cases.

 

[DeeDee249]

We need Allison DuBois (the Medium) on the case. She hasn't been wrong yet (at least on TV).

 

[Ravyn]

Lou Smit must had known the intruder theory wouldn't fly cause JR shot the basement window theory down..And did Fleet White or Officer French report that the window was open or closed...

 

[BBB167893]

1) Maybe, but leaving a door unlocked and finding the RN first are easily combined. The three story house was big, and there could have been "something wrong" downstairs without them first noticing.

Again, it helps to remember who the Rs' first targets were, and why they were so eager at first to name people who had keys.

I`m not sure though, why they had to find the RN first.

Because it explains why they didn't search the house for JB's body at first. It explains WHY JB wound up dead: because they went against the writer's instructions.

Actually now that I think about it, finding JB missing and a door open first would explain a quick call to the police and going against the instructions in the RN, which would be found later.

That's my point: they didn't find JB missing first; they found the RN first.

2) There`s a thought, that they had to make it look like their best efforts were not enough.

I like it.

But they didn`t have the alarm system on and John said he broke the basement window himself, stupid to leave it broken?

The front door is one thing. A well-hidden, cramped window well is something else.

The house had many doors and windows and they felt safe in Boulder, so I don`t know if it would have been a disaster if they had left a door unlocked- it happens.

Well, that's interesting, because in 2000, the Rs claimed that their Atlanta home was broken into. JR claims he came home and caught the thief in the act. (His description is nothing less than hilarious.) His explanation? He left the door unlocked. Quite a tale, that.

I think it`s a bit misleading to say they tried to direct the attention of the police (if I don`t know about their innocence).

Misleading? You have my interest.

It actually bothers me, that the R´s said (correct me if I`m wrong), that only a few people had access to the house, was LHP even the only one with a key?

Quite a few were named, as I recall it.

Naturally the police and the R`s would think about her. Patsy said on the other hand, that the writing in the RN didn`t look like LHP`s when she looked at it more closely, and that LHP was a nice person. Anyway, to focus on people who had access to the house narrows down the possible suspects- not good for the R´s so for me, it`s an indication of innocence.

I guess they realized that, because they switched to the "window" story.

Ok, what`s the deal with Lou Smit?

How much time have you got?

Why do you think he handled the case so badly?

Where would you like me to start? His use of religion as a barometer to determine innocence? His stated insistence that he knew more than the experts? Or the times when he made up evidence out of thin air? And that's just for openers.

He was an experienced and effective homicide detective, right?

You wouldn't know it looking at this case. Seriously, his record consists mostly of nabbing criminals who could be generously described as uneducated, rural *advertiser censored*. He never faced a case like this one.

 

[Ravyn]

So basically Lou Smit didn't look at the evidence just his belief in religion...But in the same breath this is the same religion that some parents that killed thier children says God told them to...

 

[BBB167893]

Ok, I thought the DA`s office wanted LS, an experienced homicide detective on the case.

I helps to remember that the ADAs had their minds made up the first week that the Rs were innocent. So you have to wonder who got to him first.

If you put Lou Smit on youtube, you`ll get this video where he illustrates entering through the window:YouTube - JonBenet - Lou Smit and the window

That little performance is a big reason why I switched sides.

The problem for me is who to trust?

I sympathize, Mysteeri. It's tough.

I`m really not sure, why I should think that Steve Thomas and the inexperienced BPD are more reliable than Lou Smit, John Douglas or the DA`s office.

It's a question of ego, I guess you could say.

The outside experts I`m willing to believe.

Plenty of them on our side.