No staging

douce40

New Member
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Steve's book did not come out until August 2000. I'm guessing the loud speculation about Patsy started in March 1997 when the report about her handwriting came out. I wonder...who was the main suspect prior to that? Like who did the media and public lean towards? I think "Patsy did it" theory (in the 90s) was also fueled by the recent Susan Smith case, and the whole beauty pageant footage, so like the stage mom thing. And also Patsy's dramatics during the CNN interview.

The original cnn interview was very damaging to the Ramsey's public image. They both said the interview was to thank family, friends, and strangers for their support. However it seemed they used the interview to declare they were innocent Christians and there was an unknown dangerous individual still out there. The press and public weren't fooled and could see right through their intentions.
Patsy's image took worse damage than John's because she seemed to be trying harder (with tears,emotion) than John to convince the public of a dangerous unknown murderer.

Genuine emotion usually wins over the public but Ramsey's came across as salespeople.
Just down the road from me in Ancaster, the recent Tim Bosma murder definitely has caught my attention.
When Sharlene Bosma(wife) talked to the public it was next to impossible to not feel absolutely heartbroken along side her. Patsy seemed to lack that wide open emotion and didn't connect well. Whether she, was coached and scripted, had suspected John, had been drugged up, was guilty, for whatever reason she seemed to lack credibility in that interview.
 

douce40

New Member
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
First, I didn't say anyone was a "strong PDI." Trujillo, and apparently Alex Hunter, plus some FBI investigators believed Patsy was the most likely suspect. Patsy also agreed via public television that whoever wrote the note was the killer. I could probably think of others but listing the names you gave does not prove Thomas's theory as invalid. It just proves there was more than one opinion. In my opinion, Steve Thomas had access to evidence the public knows nothing about and the things he stated in his book make more sense to me than any other I've heard.

Steve Thomas seems to be very well respected by JB internet sleuthers. Whether you agree with him or not, his dedication and intensity to solve the case was highly commendable. The public was able to learn integral pieces about the case through his book. His intensity combined with the pressure of this case may have caused him to rush to a resolute theory. Maybe deep down, he just knows PDI and couldn't come up with anything better than a bed wetting accidental homicide.

An "explosive encounter" is quite a vague description. The edge of the bath tub as the weapon??? The damage of the skull fracture was very severe. A wealthy non-working mother does not typically have violent pent up rage. Was there a crescendo of stress that PR was living. Holiday stress for people with significant wealth is less likely. Patsy has been described as a very active person who wouldn't mind a busy schedule and seemed to like all the pageantry of Christmas. A motive more serious than bed wetting may explain better the head trauma and use of a garrote.

ST surely knows more than most the public about the case. His support of some experts saying PR wrote the RN is understandable. There was other evidence he used to support PDI, which also seemed reasonable. Yet the bed wetting motive was probably the least believable portion to his LE cohorts and the public.

So if internet 'sleuthers' focus more on motive, they may lean towards JDI and sexual abuse or maybe BDI with jealousy involved.
 

BOESP

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,777
Reaction score
167
Fwiw, bedwetting is one of the most common causes of parental rage attacks toward a child.

Douce said: "Yet the bed wetting motive was probably the least believable portion to his LE cohorts and the public."

Interesting comment. Respectfully, I've not read anything about that line of thinking. Is that a personal opinion or is there a statement somewhere that supports your comment?

In my opinion, it was an accidental death without motive.
 

douce40

New Member
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Fwiw, bedwetting is one of the most common causes of parental rage attacks toward a child.

Douce said: "Yet the bed wetting motive was probably the least believable portion to his LE cohorts and the public."

Interesting comment. Respectfully, I've not read anything about that line of thinking. Is that a personal opinion or is there a statement somewhere that supports your comment?

In my opinion, it was an accidental death without motive.


I solely meant in this particular case. Not bed-wetting in general. I understand very well that bed-wetting can cause parental rage. I'm just trying to say that LE and ALex Hunter all seemed to have similar feelings about the Ramsey's guilt, specifically Patsy's, but were not publicly backing his bed-wetting motive. The bed-wetting "explosive encounter" was not publicly supported by LE compared to other parts of his theory ie; authoring the RN, PR staged or help staged, etc.

I'm not saying it's unbelievable but lacks definitive evidence that he used in other parts of his respected book. In his interview vs Patsy and John on Larry KIng, he seems to pull back a bit and say, "Patsy, I think you're good for it".
This was after given the floor to talk about the "explosive encounter".

The public I was referring to was the JB internet sleuthers, not the general public. Now I haven't read all the JB case opinions around, and am no expert by any stretch, so I used the word "probably". Many ST theory supporters, I've read, use excellent reasoning about PR being involved in all aspects on the staging that supports ST's book. However his vagueness about how(weapon), where, and why was JB's head bashed is the least explained by ST theory supporters.

So my opinion was based on not witnessing support from Boulder LE enforcement about his theory's motive. This combined with internet sleuthers not doing as well with the PR rage head bash as they did with supporting the other ST theory attributes, led me to the opinion that yes many people who believe PDI have their best evidence in the staging and not the actual murder blow and motive.
 

midwest mama

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
1,303
Reaction score
36
douce40 - If Patsy did wield the blow to JB's head, IMHO, she did it because she caught JB doing something sexual that made her see red - probably with JR, but even possibly with Burke. And Patsy would have had to believe JB was a willing participant in the activity, to develop that degree of rage, making her helpless against ratting out JR once the blow was delivered. If it was Burke, she would have been even more protective, probably knowing he had emotional/psychological problems which compounded his sexual behavior with his sister. I recall reading somewhere that though Patsy championed JB publicly, she really coddled Burke even more. And I think Patsy would have risked taking the fall if she thought she was protecting her child.
 

madeleine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
4,973
Reaction score
82
douce40 - If Patsy did wield the blow to JB's head, IMHO, she did it because she caught JB doing something sexual that made her see red - probably with JR, but even possibly with Burke. And Patsy would have had to believe JB was a willing participant in the activity, to develop that degree of rage, making her helpless against ratting out JR once the blow was delivered. If it was Burke, she would have been even more protective, probably knowing he had emotional/psychological problems which compounded his sexual behavior with his sister. I recall reading somewhere that though Patsy championed JB publicly, she really coddled Burke even more. And I think Patsy would have risked taking the fall if she thought she was protecting her child.

IMO she would have been angry with BOTH participants...it's usually the molester (not the bystander,partner,etc) who blames it on the victim and uses this as an excuse "she flirted,she made me do it,etc"....if she didn't do it but was part of the cover-up she got involved AFTER it happened and it was too late to save JB anyway IMO

I can see her covering for BR and even for JR (many wives do it,sadly)
I CAN'T see JR though covering for her and allowing her to be close to BR if she was an angry abusive mother who killed her child outta RAGE,especially since this was the second daughter he lost.He would have been DEVASTATED.But he wasn't...
 

madeleine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
4,973
Reaction score
82
I was thinking of the blanket...we always assumed that it was used to wrap her body in it AFTER she died...what if it served for another purpose though...someone was thinking of fooling around a bit down there,it's not like they had beds or couches down there...it would explain the presence of the nightgown?she was wearing it,the abuser undressed her while she was lying on the blanket and this is how it started?
 

DeeDee249

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
8,053
Reaction score
306
I was thinking of the blanket...we always assumed that it was used to wrap her body in it AFTER she died...what if it served for another purpose though...someone was thinking of fooling around a bit down there,it's not like they had beds or couches down there...it would explain the presence of the nightgown?she was wearing it,the abuser undressed her while she was lying on the blanket and this is how it started?

Possibly. We'll never know. Remember there is also the dark cotton duvet/comforter in the suitcase, along with a children's Dr. Seuss book. Like a portable molestation kit.
 

BOESP

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,777
Reaction score
167
I solely meant in this particular case. Not bed-wetting in general. I understand very well that bed-wetting can cause parental rage. I'm just trying to say that LE and ALex Hunter all seemed to have similar feelings about the Ramsey's guilt, specifically Patsy's, but were not publicly backing his bed-wetting motive. The bed-wetting "explosive encounter" was not publicly supported by LE compared to other parts of his theory ie; authoring the RN, PR staged or help staged, etc.

I'm not saying it's unbelievable but lacks definitive evidence that he used in other parts of his respected book. In his interview vs Patsy and John on Larry KIng, he seems to pull back a bit and say, "Patsy, I think you're good for it".
This was after given the floor to talk about the "explosive encounter".

The public I was referring to was the JB internet sleuthers, not the general public. Now I haven't read all the JB case opinions around, and am no expert by any stretch, so I used the word "probably". Many ST theory supporters, I've read, use excellent reasoning about PR being involved in all aspects on the staging that supports ST's book. However his vagueness about how(weapon), where, and why was JB's head bashed is the least explained by ST theory supporters.

So my opinion was based on not witnessing support from Boulder LE enforcement about his theory's motive. This combined with internet sleuthers not doing as well with the PR rage head bash as they did with supporting the other ST theory attributes, led me to the opinion that yes many people who believe PDI have their best evidence in the staging and not the actual murder blow and motive.

BBM: Thomas was very clear that he thought JonBenet's head injury occurred in the bathroom near her bedroom and the injury was caused by some action that caused her head to hit a hard object and/or protrusion in that bathroom. He was clear about the "why" being rage.
 

douce40

New Member
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
BBM: Thomas was very clear that he thought JonBenet's head injury occurred in the bathroom near her bedroom and the injury was caused by some action that caused her head to hit a hard object and/or protrusion in that bathroom. He was clear about the "why" being rage.

Very true, he absolutely stated his opinion in his book and publicly about bed-wetting. However, don't you think he lacked concrete evidence in the bed-wetting motive aspect of his theory? Can you think of any other LE who support the bed-wetting aspect? Does Kolar blame bed-wetting?
 

madeleine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
4,973
Reaction score
82
Mr. Thomas, were

22 the sheets on JonBenet's bed collected on the

23 26th of December for forensic testing?

24 A. I was told they were.

25 Q. And what tests were performed on



273



1 them?

2 A. I don't know. Detective Trujillo

3 had that assignment.


4 Q. Was there any test that you're

5 aware of that indicated the presence of urine

6 on those sheets?

7 A. Detective Trujillo imparted to me

8 that he had learned or believed that there

9 was not a presumptive test for urine

10 according to the CBI.

11 Q. Were they wet?

12 A. When?

13 Q. That morning. Did --

14 A. Unknown.

15 Q. -- you ask? Did you ask any of

16 the officers there, hey, by the way, were the

17 sheets on JonBenet's bed wet? Did you ask

18 that question of anybody?

19 A. I did not.
20 Q. Do you know if anybody else did?

21 A. I don't know.

22 Q. You don't know the answer to

23 whether they were wet or not?

24 A. I have been told that they were

25 urine stained.



274



1 Q. Who told you they were urine

2 stained?

3 A. Detective Trujillo, Detective

4 Wickman. doesn't mean they were stained THAT night

5 Q. Have you seen the photographs of

6 the sheets?

7 A. It depends on which photographs

8 you're talking about.

9 Q. Of her sheets, of the bed.

10 MR. DIAMOND: Have you seen any.

11 A. Crime scene photographs, yes.

12 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did they say they

13 could smell urine?

14 A. I have been told that CBI says,

15 yes, those sheets which are still in evidence

16 smell urine stained.

17 Q. And did they stain because --

18 well, you don't have kids, but I don't know

19 if you've ever had a bed-wetting accident but

20 when you have children one day you'll

21 probably know this to be true, urine stained

22 sheets, were these stained, have you seen

23 them?

24 A. I have not seen the sheets.
25 Q. I mean, you write -- you have



275



1 written in your book that JonBenet wet the

2 bed. What I want to know is what evidence

3 supports that statement that you are aware of

4 and that you found out about?

5 A. Urine stained sheets, the plastic

6 bed fitting and the diapers halfway out of

7 the cabinet.
8 Q. The diapers had urine on them?

9 A. That's not what I said.

10 Q. Well, I'm -- diaper halfway out of

11 the cabinet shows that the sheets were wet or

12 that she wet the bed?

13 A. No, I think you asked me what led

14 me to believe that she may have wet the bed.

15 Q. Well, I mean it seems to me that

16 the answer is pretty simple. Did you ever

17 go look at the sheets? They were there for

18 your viewing if you wanted to, weren't they?

19 A. No, they were at CBI.

20 Q. You could have picked up the phone

21 and asked somebody at CBI about the test on

22 them, couldn't you?

23 A. No, Detective Trujillo told us.

24 Q. Did you ever see the written

25 report on that finding by CBI?



276



1 A. I don't know that CBI did a

2 report on whether or not the sheets were

3 urine stained.

4 Q. Surely you're not telling me that

5 the CBI's forensic testers performed, the only

6 test was to smell and look at the sheets?

7 A. As I said, I have been told that

8 there is not a presumptive test for urine.


9 Q. How about for the substances that

10 make up or are found in urine?

11 A. I have no training or knowledge of

12 that.

13 Q. How big was the area of the

14 sheets where they were urine stained or wet?

15 A. I don't know.

16 Q. Isn't there something that

17 describes that, a report?

18 A. Urine stained sheets according to

19 Trujillo.
20 Q. Take a look at page 146 of your

21 book, please. Down at the paragraph that

22 starts "John Meyer." Do you follow me?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. "John Meyer, the Boulder County

25 coroner, had barely begun his autopsy findings



277



1 before Lee questioned the urine stains found

2 on the crotch of the long-john pants and the

3 panties beneath them." Have I read that

4 correctly?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. To put this into context, this

7 would have been during the VIP explanation or

8 conference, right?

9 A. No, I don't believe so.

10 Q. I'm sorry, when do you believe

11 this event took place where Meyer was going

12 through the autopsy findings where Henry Lee

13 was present?

14 A. I believe this was in 1997 at the

15 Boulder Police Department.

16 Q. Do you know when in 1997?

17 A. My best guess would be maybe

18 March, February.

19 Q. Reading on. "Were there

20 corresponding stains on the bed sheets? We

21 didn't know,
although when the crime became a

22 murder instead of a kidnapping, those sheets

23 should have been promptly collected for

24 testing." Have I read that correctly?

25 A. Yes.



278



1 Q. Well, you didn't know in February,

2 are you telling me that you found out

3 subsequent in time that the sheets were wet?

4 When did you find out,

5 Mr. Thomas --

6 MR. DIAMOND: Go ahead.

7 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Let me -- why

8 don't you just tell me, when did you first

9 find out that the sheets were wet?

10 A. I do not think the sheets were

11 collected promptly.
I think it was after the

12 fact. And one of the questions of this

13 investigation was that no one had checked the

14 bed on the morning of the 26th prior to a

15 wet bed possibly drying whether or not the

16 bed was wet. But the sheets nonetheless were

17 collected and described to me as being urine

18 stained and just recently saw something

19 corroborating that when Mr. Smit appeared on

20 the Today Show and there was a comment from

21 the CBI about that.

22 Q. Traces of creatinine were found;

23 is that what you're talking about?

24 A. I don't think that is what they

25 said on the NBC show.



279



1 Q. What did they say?

2 A. I think it said a CBI source said

3 the sheets were or appeared to be urine

4 stained.

5 Q. Let's go back and find out not so

6 much what NBC was talking about. Let's find

7 out what the police knew. Were the sheets

8 collected on December 26th, 1996 or not?

9 A. They were -- I don't know. I

10 wasn't there.

11 Q. What did you find out about it?

12 A. That at some point during the ten

13 days subsequent to December 26, 1996, when

14 the house was a crime scene, those sheets

15 were collected.

16 Q. At such time as they would have,

17 if wet, been dry; is that what you're telling

18 me?

19 A. Possibly.
 

Chrishope

New Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
1,878
Reaction score
26
Possibly. We'll never know. Remember there is also the dark cotton duvet/comforter in the suitcase, along with a children's Dr. Seuss book. Like a portable molestation kit.


"portable molestation kit"

People keep saying this but it strikes me as very odd. Just what is supposed to be in the pedophile's official portable molestation kit? Have authorities found that large numbers of sexual predators operate with a "portable molestation kit"? Do bedding and books always signify a "portable molestation kit"? Are there other items that belong in a PMK that were not found in the suitcase?

It sounds to me like something said to add an air of credence to an idea -specifically that the suitcase/sham/duvet/book played a role- when that is far from certain.

The suitcase contained some bedding, and a book. How does that add up to a "portable molestation kit"? Possibly the bedding was carelessly placed in the suitcase and the book was in the bedding? Possibly this was done by children? Possibly it was done to transport the bedding to the basement laundry?
 

UKGuy

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 8, 2004
Messages
10,956
Reaction score
3,437
Mr. Thomas, were

22 the sheets on JonBenet's bed collected on the

23 26th of December for forensic testing?

24 A. I was told they were.

25 Q. And what tests were performed on



273



1 them?

2 A. I don't know. Detective Trujillo

3 had that assignment.


4 Q. Was there any test that you're

5 aware of that indicated the presence of urine

6 on those sheets?

7 A. Detective Trujillo imparted to me

8 that he had learned or believed that there

9 was not a presumptive test for urine

10 according to the CBI.

11 Q. Were they wet?

12 A. When?

13 Q. That morning. Did --

14 A. Unknown.

15 Q. -- you ask? Did you ask any of

16 the officers there, hey, by the way, were the

17 sheets on JonBenet's bed wet? Did you ask

18 that question of anybody?

19 A. I did not.
20 Q. Do you know if anybody else did?

21 A. I don't know.

22 Q. You don't know the answer to

23 whether they were wet or not?

24 A. I have been told that they were

25 urine stained.



274



1 Q. Who told you they were urine

2 stained?

3 A. Detective Trujillo, Detective

4 Wickman. doesn't mean they were stained THAT night

5 Q. Have you seen the photographs of

6 the sheets?

7 A. It depends on which photographs

8 you're talking about.

9 Q. Of her sheets, of the bed.

10 MR. DIAMOND: Have you seen any.

11 A. Crime scene photographs, yes.

12 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Did they say they

13 could smell urine?

14 A. I have been told that CBI says,

15 yes, those sheets which are still in evidence

16 smell urine stained.

17 Q. And did they stain because --

18 well, you don't have kids, but I don't know

19 if you've ever had a bed-wetting accident but

20 when you have children one day you'll

21 probably know this to be true, urine stained

22 sheets, were these stained, have you seen

23 them?

24 A. I have not seen the sheets.
25 Q. I mean, you write -- you have



275



1 written in your book that JonBenet wet the

2 bed. What I want to know is what evidence

3 supports that statement that you are aware of

4 and that you found out about?

5 A. Urine stained sheets, the plastic

6 bed fitting and the diapers halfway out of

7 the cabinet.
8 Q. The diapers had urine on them?

9 A. That's not what I said.

10 Q. Well, I'm -- diaper halfway out of

11 the cabinet shows that the sheets were wet or

12 that she wet the bed?

13 A. No, I think you asked me what led

14 me to believe that she may have wet the bed.

15 Q. Well, I mean it seems to me that

16 the answer is pretty simple. Did you ever

17 go look at the sheets? They were there for

18 your viewing if you wanted to, weren't they?

19 A. No, they were at CBI.

20 Q. You could have picked up the phone

21 and asked somebody at CBI about the test on

22 them, couldn't you?

23 A. No, Detective Trujillo told us.

24 Q. Did you ever see the written

25 report on that finding by CBI?



276



1 A. I don't know that CBI did a

2 report on whether or not the sheets were

3 urine stained.

4 Q. Surely you're not telling me that

5 the CBI's forensic testers performed, the only

6 test was to smell and look at the sheets?

7 A. As I said, I have been told that

8 there is not a presumptive test for urine.


9 Q. How about for the substances that

10 make up or are found in urine?

11 A. I have no training or knowledge of

12 that.

13 Q. How big was the area of the

14 sheets where they were urine stained or wet?

15 A. I don't know.

16 Q. Isn't there something that

17 describes that, a report?

18 A. Urine stained sheets according to

19 Trujillo.
20 Q. Take a look at page 146 of your

21 book, please. Down at the paragraph that

22 starts "John Meyer." Do you follow me?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. "John Meyer, the Boulder County

25 coroner, had barely begun his autopsy findings



277



1 before Lee questioned the urine stains found

2 on the crotch of the long-john pants and the

3 panties beneath them." Have I read that

4 correctly?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. To put this into context, this

7 would have been during the VIP explanation or

8 conference, right?

9 A. No, I don't believe so.

10 Q. I'm sorry, when do you believe

11 this event took place where Meyer was going

12 through the autopsy findings where Henry Lee

13 was present?

14 A. I believe this was in 1997 at the

15 Boulder Police Department.

16 Q. Do you know when in 1997?

17 A. My best guess would be maybe

18 March, February.

19 Q. Reading on. "Were there

20 corresponding stains on the bed sheets? We

21 didn't know,
although when the crime became a

22 murder instead of a kidnapping, those sheets

23 should have been promptly collected for

24 testing." Have I read that correctly?

25 A. Yes.



278



1 Q. Well, you didn't know in February,

2 are you telling me that you found out

3 subsequent in time that the sheets were wet?

4 When did you find out,

5 Mr. Thomas --

6 MR. DIAMOND: Go ahead.

7 Q. (BY MR. WOOD) Let me -- why

8 don't you just tell me, when did you first

9 find out that the sheets were wet?

10 A. I do not think the sheets were

11 collected promptly.
I think it was after the

12 fact. And one of the questions of this

13 investigation was that no one had checked the

14 bed on the morning of the 26th prior to a

15 wet bed possibly drying whether or not the

16 bed was wet. But the sheets nonetheless were

17 collected and described to me as being urine

18 stained and just recently saw something

19 corroborating that when Mr. Smit appeared on

20 the Today Show and there was a comment from

21 the CBI about that.

22 Q. Traces of creatinine were found;

23 is that what you're talking about?

24 A. I don't think that is what they

25 said on the NBC show.



279



1 Q. What did they say?

2 A. I think it said a CBI source said

3 the sheets were or appeared to be urine

4 stained.

5 Q. Let's go back and find out not so

6 much what NBC was talking about. Let's find

7 out what the police knew. Were the sheets

8 collected on December 26th, 1996 or not?

9 A. They were -- I don't know. I

10 wasn't there.

11 Q. What did you find out about it?

12 A. That at some point during the ten

13 days subsequent to December 26, 1996, when

14 the house was a crime scene, those sheets

15 were collected.

16 Q. At such time as they would have,

17 if wet, been dry; is that what you're telling

18 me?

19 A. Possibly.

madeleine,
The above replies by ST make you wonder what he was up to? So he has no direct evidence or confirmation of bedwetting on the night JonBenet was killed.

Yet he promotes his bedwetting theory via PDI, and ignores the sexual component, despite his colleagues offering their advice etc.

Effectively inventing his own forensic evidence and downgrading that which was staring him in the face.

I hope one day he explains his rationale behind all this. Maybe this is why he does not do media interviews and prefers to stay private, viewing the world through his polaroid sunglasses, beloved of all sting personnel!





.
 

BOESP

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2007
Messages
2,777
Reaction score
167
Very true, he absolutely stated his opinion in his book and publicly about bed-wetting. However, don't you think he lacked concrete evidence in the bed-wetting motive aspect of his theory? Can you think of any other LE who support the bed-wetting aspect? Does Kolar blame bed-wetting?

I wish I had access to all the evidence and an hour to bend Steve Thomas's ear, but I don't. There's no way for me to know what other officers thought other than reading the various books about JonBenet's death and/or their public statements. I truly have not decided exactly what Kolar believes or suspects.

Linda Arndt, at least at the time, believed John Ramsey did it. When Patsy was on her near death-bed, Arndt visited her and commented that Patsy gave Arndt the keys that would unlock the mystery if the information came to the right hands (my paraphrasing -- see youtube.com and search for Arndt's various televised interviews).

What I've seen and read of Alex Hunter's opinion is I think he believed/s Patsy was good for it but why spend time and money prosecuting a dying women who was no threat to society when doing so was futile. She was going to die shortly anyway and living a charade for ten years after the fact was a far greater punishment.

JonBenet's bed sheets were tested for urine and creatinine was found. That's proof urine was on those sheets.

I'm not against Burke being involved in some way, perhaps he or his father instigated an event that caused Patsy to want to cleanse JonBenet. Maybe it was just Patsy losing her temper because JonBenet didn't get up at midnight and potty as usual (Patsy stated this was JonBenet's habit and that Patsy would often check at midnight to make sure JonBenet went to the bathroom ... that looks incriminating to me in that it coincides with the estimated time of death).

One thing I am sure of based on what is public knowledge is that no Intruder killed JonBenet. The Grand Jury believed Patsy and John both were responsible. I believe Patsy wrote the note and I know beyond doubt Patsy stated she agreed that whoever wrote that note was the killer.
 

Charterhouse

New Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
908
Reaction score
3
JR says in one of the interviews that it might not be a T but a J....could this mean anything?after all,he is the one enjoying all those "little,funny clues" and seems so proud of how clever the killer was.

http://books.google.com/books?id=da...d=0CEgQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=SBJC ramsey&f=false

SBJC= Santa Bill & Janet Clause
From the book: Jon Benet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation by Steve Thomas and Donald A. Davis Page 285

This was from a letter that JR wrote to DA investigator Lou Smit on Dec 18. JR spent almost one whole single spaced page telling how it was Bill McReynolds who was the one who killed JB.
 

DeeDee249

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
8,053
Reaction score
306
"portable molestation kit"

People keep saying this but it strikes me as very odd. Just what is supposed to be in the pedophile's official portable molestation kit? Have authorities found that large numbers of sexual predators operate with a "portable molestation kit"? Do bedding and books always signify a "portable molestation kit"? Are there other items that belong in a PMK that were not found in the suitcase?

It sounds to me like something said to add an air of credence to an idea -specifically that the suitcase/sham/duvet/book played a role- when that is far from certain.

The suitcase contained some bedding, and a book. How does that add up to a "portable molestation kit"? Possibly the bedding was carelessly placed in the suitcase and the book was in the bedding? Possibly this was done by children? Possibly it was done to transport the bedding to the basement laundry?

Well, THIS particular kit had a blanket to lay her down on and a children's book to read to her while she was being molested. There was also dried semen- PROOF that sexual activity had taken place on that blanket- though of course it cannot prove when. But it did prove WHO (JAR). This in no way means that I believe it WAS such a "kit". I am not sure what, if any, part the suitcase and/or its contents played in the crime.
 

douce40

New Member
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
douce40 - If Patsy did wield the blow to JB's head, IMHO, she did it because she caught JB doing something sexual that made her see red - probably with JR, but even possibly with Burke. And Patsy would have had to believe JB was a willing participant in the activity, to develop that degree of rage, making her helpless against ratting out JR once the blow was delivered. If it was Burke, she would have been even more protective, probably knowing he had emotional/psychological problems which compounded his sexual behavior with his sister. I recall reading somewhere that though Patsy championed JB publicly, she really coddled Burke even more. And I think Patsy would have risked taking the fall if she thought she was protecting her child.

A grown man would be held responsible for any sexual act that occurs with a person under the age of consent. I would think Patsy's rage would be towards her husband.
I don't see why you think Patsy would be helpless. Catching you're spouse having sex with your daughter of 6 years old and not rat is unforgivable. After separating such a disgusting act, causing the girl's accidental fatal head blow, should make her absolutely despise her husband.

With Burke it is much more reasonable she would keep quiet and protect.
 

madeleine

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2008
Messages
4,973
Reaction score
82
madeleine,
The above replies by ST make you wonder what he was up to? So he has no direct evidence or confirmation of bedwetting on the night JonBenet was killed.

Yet he promotes his bedwetting theory via PDI, and ignores the sexual component, despite his colleagues offering their advice etc.

Effectively inventing his own forensic evidence and downgrading that which was staring him in the face.

I hope one day he explains his rationale behind all this. Maybe this is why he does not do media interviews and prefers to stay private, viewing the world through his polaroid sunglasses, beloved of all sting personnel!





.

and this is only one example,I didn't have time to go through his entire deposition again...and I still don't get why he had to go on national tv and basically exonerate JR "you can't know what happened,you weren't there" or something to that effect...
 

douce40

New Member
Joined
May 7, 2013
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
I wish I had access to all the evidence and an hour to bend Steve Thomas's ear, but I don't. There's no way for me to know what other officers thought other than reading the various books about JonBenet's death and/or their public statements.

I believe when ST wrote his book he didn't pull any punches. I don't think he was too concerned about being sued and included all he could in the book. He was pissed off and needed to vent. However it would be interesting to see if he's still pro-bed-wetting theory. I heard the interview with Kolar, Thomas, and Tricia on 'Tricia's True Crime Radio' and was entertained but he did not discuss too many case details.

Linda Arndt, at least at the time, believed John Ramsey did it. When Patsy was on her near death-bed, Arndt visited her and commented that Patsy gave Arndt the keys that would unlock the mystery if the information came to the right hands (my paraphrasing -- see youtube.com and search for Arndt's various televised interviews).

We shouldn't discount or undervalue the behavioral stuff she observed and noted about John and the surroundings on Dec 26,1996. Other than that I don't know how reliable she can be considered. She should have just kept a professional relationship with Patsy and the case in general. It hurt her reputation.

What I've seen and read of Alex Hunter's opinion is I think he believed/s Patsy was good for it but why spend time and money prosecuting a dying women who was no threat to society when doing so was futile. She was going to die shortly anyway and living a charade for ten years after the fact was a far greater punishment.
There's a movie on the net I think it's called "JonBenet Investigation" . In parts 3 and 5 Hunter made it clear he wasn't going to process the case until he absolutely had a slam dunk. Essentially he either wimped out or was Ramsey coerced to wimp out.


I believe Patsy wrote the note and I know beyond doubt Patsy stated she agreed that whoever wrote that note was the killer.

Yeah I saw a poll on this site somewhere about Patsy being the author. It was something like 200 for her authorship and 20 against. Around 10-1. I know it's a small sample set, but I've learned much from the posters on this site so I figure that signifies I should look at Patsy's writing very closely. The DocG theory is also something I look at closely and he has JR writing the RN. I'm confused because I've always thought Patsy authored RN but a male more likely abused JB.
 

Chrishope

New Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
1,878
Reaction score
26
Well, THIS particular kit had a blanket to lay her down on and a children's book to read to her while she was being molested. There was also dried semen- PROOF that sexual activity had taken place on that blanket- though of course it cannot prove when. But it did prove WHO (JAR). This in no way means that I believe it WAS such a "kit". I am not sure what, if any, part the suitcase and/or its contents played in the crime.


You seriously believe she was being read to while being molested?

Does this mean any bed in the house becomes a "molestation center" if there is a book on the bed? After all, you have a place to lay down, and a book to read while the molestation takes place.
 
Top