Questions you'd like answers to... #2

[icedtea4me]

Mimsy2,
Sure, I agree with what you post. The thing is there is/was proof of who did what, e.g. dna test results, all of which have not been published, there is other forensic evidence yet to see daylight which would likely incriminate one of the R's.

You can also eliminate suspects by comparing and contrasting their statements and forensic evidence, an example of this might be PDI:

So if the case is PDI, how come Patsy left forensic evidence linked to her, e.g. hairs, dna, etc all over the wine-cellar, e.g. sticky side of the duct-tape on JonBenet's mouth.

Why did Patsy not anticipate questions regarding the size-12 Bloomingdale's underwear, she had no credible explanation, on this topic it was checkmate for the BPD.

Basically after the wine-cellar staging Patsy is in a worse position than if she had just left JonBenet in her bedroom, because none of Patsy's forensic markers should have been found in the wine-cellar as Patsy said she was never in this remote location.

Conclusion: Patsy was staging for someone else, on this the GJ seem to agree.

Similarly for John with fibers from his Israeli manufactured shirt being found on JonBenet's thighs, etc. Again the GJ appear to agree hitting JR with COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime), did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.

Here the referenced person cannot be John otherwise he would be hit with a Homicide In The First Degree True Bill, and Count VII might look like this:
COUNT 7-MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (F1)


Which might include redressing JonBenet in Burke Ramsey's long johns, all to lay a trail of confusing forensic evidence?

Which leaves the one person both parents are more likely to cover for than each other: Burke Ramsey.

So there is no smoking gun simply circumstantial evidence which appears to point in one direction?

.

Are Counts I, II, III, IV, and IV-a/b known?

 

[UKGuy]

Are Counts I, II, III, IV, and IV-a/b known?

icedtea4me,
nope. So what do we learn?


There is the possibility that Patsy and John were hit with the same True Bills and Counts?

e.g.
COUNT I (Murder in the First Degree)
On or about December 25, and December 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colorado, John Bennet Ramsey did unlawfully kill JonBenet Ramsey, a child under the age of sixteen.

COUNT I (Murder in the First Degree)
On or about December 25, and December 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colorado, Patricia Paugh Ramsey did unlawfully kill JonBenet Ramsey, a child under the age of sixteen.


Count 2 .... etc.

Else how can you resolve the reference to the person? As COUNT VII(Accessory to a Crime), actually states knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.

How can both parents be an accessory to the person yet be that person in an allegeged COUNT I (Murder in the First Degree)?


.

 

[Mimsy2]

Mimsy2,
Sure, I agree with what you post. The thing is there is/was proof of who did what, e.g. dna test results, all of which have not been published, there is other forensic evidence yet to see daylight which would likely incriminate one of the R's.

You can also eliminate suspects by comparing and contrasting their statements and forensic evidence, an example of this might be PDI:

So if the case is PDI, how come Patsy left forensic evidence linked to her, e.g. hairs, dna, etc all over the wine-cellar, e.g. sticky side of the duct-tape on JonBenet's mouth.

Why did Patsy not anticipate questions regarding the size-12 Bloomingdale's underwear, she had no credible explanation, on this topic it was checkmate for the BPD.

Basically after the wine-cellar staging Patsy is in a worse position than if she had just left JonBenet in her bedroom, because none of Patsy's forensic markers should have been found in the wine-cellar as Patsy said she was never in this remote location.

Conclusion: Patsy was staging for someone else, on this the GJ seem to agree.

Similarly for John with fibers from his Israeli manufactured shirt being found on JonBenet's thighs, etc. Again the GJ appear to agree hitting JR with COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime), did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.

Here the referenced person cannot be John otherwise he would be hit with a Homicide In The First Degree True Bill, and Count VII might look like this:
COUNT 7-MURDER IN THE FIRST DEGREE (F1)


Which might include redressing JonBenet in Burke Ramsey's long johns, all to lay a trail of confusing forensic evidence?

Which leaves the one person both parents are more likely to cover for than each other: Burke Ramsey.

So there is no smoking gun simply circumstantial evidence which appears to point in one direction?

.

I have came to pretty much the same conclusion. It is the only thing that fits everything that we know. On the flip side of that coin I have tried working a theory in which JR could be the main one. The fact that he always tries to stay in the spotlight with the case really bothers me for a few or more reasons. I think mainly its a narcissistic type of nan-nana-boo -boo thing (IMO, knowing his plans for staging worked as noone has been officially charged and/or incarcerated to date), a need for attention, and it doesn't hurt that he may be compensated for some of his appearances. Those and other narcissistic behaviors just chap my hind end and lead me to believe he is guilty. As for BR, the fact that he has stated how much he liked to practice tying knots and the main use of his Swiss Army Knife was for tying those knots, is something that has stood out for me. I could see him being the one who tied her up for whatever intentions he had and knocking her on the head when she screamed or called out for help. The redressing and other staging I believe is all of the parents. All of this of course is IMO and nothing but MOO.

 

[UKGuy]

I have came to pretty much the same conclusion. It is the only thing that fits everything that we know. On the flip side of that coin I have tried working a theory in which JR could be the main one. The fact that he always tries to stay in the spotlight with the case really bothers me for a few or more reasons. I think mainly its a narcissistic type of nan-nana-boo -boo thing (IMO, knowing his plans for staging worked as noone has been officially charged and/or incarcerated to date), a need for attention, and it doesn't hurt that he may be compensated for some of his appearances. Those and other narcissistic behaviors just chap my hind end and lead me to believe he is guilty. As for BR, the fact that he has stated how much he liked to practice tying knots and the main use of his Swiss Army Knife was for tying those knots, is something that has stood out for me. I could see him being the one who tied her up for whatever intentions he had and knocking her on the head when she screamed or called out for help. The redressing and other staging I believe is all of the parents. All of this of course is IMO and nothing but MOO.

Mimsy2,
The forensic statistics say that the person who finds the body is the person most likely to have murdered the deceased.

In this case JR was always going to be the prime suspect. His only Get Out Of Jail Card is he was staging for another family member?

I reckon one relatively independent person who will have a good idea if the case could be BDI is Douglas Stine.

IMO BR was too young to planning night time abuse, killing JonBenet then staging her death.

None of the Ramsey's in the house that night needed to use violence to have their way with JonBenet, so there must have been something else going on?

Not mentioned often is the possible presence of water found internally in JonBenet, cited by Coroner Meyer, which suggests someone used water or a water based agent to cleanup JonBenet, remember Coroner Meyer opined that JonBenet had been wiped down, so it was likely
part of this process.

.

 

[David Rogers]

Blue Crab seemed to think Doug was there. Maybe one of the phone calls at 3 am was to the Steins to come get him.

 

[UKGuy]

Blue Crab seemed to think Doug was there. Maybe one of the phone calls at 3 am was to the Steins to come get him.

David Rogers,
Its possible, also DS might have bicycled back home on BR's missing bike, a Christmas Gift the same day!

What was Susan Stine doing when she phoned BPD to report overhearing BR and DS talking over JonBenet's death with Burke giving a running commentary, getting most of the largely then unknown details correct?

Later the parents stated in interview we never discussed the case details with Burke, e.g. we protected him, and BR was whisked out of the house long before JonBenet was found?

.

 

[BoldBear]

I have two questions that absolutely nobody but the experts/investigators can answer:

1) The security light quoted as being "in the sunroom." Was it in the sunroom or was it the light outside--just outside the sunroom.

2) Patsy said all the doors on the 2nd floor had locks so that's an easy answer to the question. Normally, all outside doors will have locks. But what about the bedrooms? Did these have bathroom style privacy locks.

Bonus points if you know why I'm asking the question; otherwise, you don't know the details of this case enough to ask the question.

 

[UKGuy]

I have two questions that absolutely nobody but the experts/investigators can answer:

1) The security light quoted as being "in the sunroom." Was it in the sunroom or was it the light outside--just outside the sunroom.

2) Patsy said all the doors on the 2nd floor had locks so that's an easy answer to the question. Normally, all outside doors will have locks. But what about the bedrooms? Did these have bathroom style privacy locks.

Bonus points if you know why I'm asking the question; otherwise, you don't know the details of this case enough to ask the question.

BoldBear,
BPD 1997 Patsy Ramsey Interview, Excerpt

PR: I mean typically leave some lights on, but I don’t, I couldn’t tell you exactly.

TT: Okay. Any, any lights specifically that you normally light, leave on. The same light all the time?

PR: Well, we usually leave a light on in the TV room. That little den.

TT: At the back of the house.

PR: Right.

TT: Okay.

PR: And typically we leave on, you know the lamppost and maybe a lamp in the sunroom or something.

TT: Okay.

BPD 1998 Patsy Ramsey Interview, Excerpt

22 PATSY RAMSEY: That is JonBenet's room.

23 TRIP DEMUTH: 115, is that the same.

24 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. This is the paint thing

25 we went over. This is the (inaudible). That looks

0372

1 like little scrapes.

2 TRIP DEMUTH: Which door?

3 PATSY RAMSEY: The bedroom door.

4 TOM HANEY: Does it lock?

5 PATSY RAMSEY: I think so. I mean, all of

6 them with the button, the buttons.

7 TOM HANEY: Okay.

 

[icedtea4me]

David Rogers,
Its possible, also DS might have bicycled back home on BR's missing bike, a Christmas Gift the same day!

What was Susan Stine doing when she phoned BPD to report overhearing BR and DS talking over JonBenet's death with Burke giving a running commentary, getting most of the largely then unknown details correct?

Later the parents stated in interview we never discussed the case details with Burke, e.g. we protected him, and BR was whisked out of the house long before JonBenet was found?

.

Isn't there the possibility that Burke, unbeknownst to Patsy and/or John, may have seen or heard something that night? The staircase that leads down to the 1st/ground floor and to the basement are near his bedroom door.

 

[UKGuy]

Isn't there the possibility that Burke, unbeknownst to Patsy and/or John, may have seen or heard something that night? The staircase that leads down to the 1st/ground floor and to the basement are near his bedroom door.

icedtea4me,
Yes, definitely. In an interview Burke Ramsey said words to the effect that he could hear the fridge running downstairs.

If you rule out BDI then he does know who assaulted JonBenet. He can work it all out by what he is being asked to say and what he is told to keep silent about.

One of the parents is high on the suspect list, particularly JR, when you consider his continued media appearances. You might be forgiven for thinking any sane family might wish to put such traumatic events behind them and move on.

Yet JR is still out there popping up in documentaries pushing the IDI line, and making sure the Ramsey version of events is fresh in the viewers mind.

Is this because he needs the money, hopes the publicity might help solve the case, or some other ulterior motive?

I was thinking about the staging phase of JonBenet's death and wondered if one parent might surely be hit with a Second Degree Murder True Bill to describe JonBenet being asphyxiated?

.

 

[LietKynes]

Anyone have any idea what Carol McKinley/ABC News has, that's new ?
Apologies if I'm asking in the wrong thread.
Just re-direct me.
Tia.

 

[Tadpole12]

IDK about new
But
20/20 Special - The List: Who Killed Jonbenet? on 15 Jan 2021

She will be on WS youtube tonight.
https://m.youtube.com/channel/UCSiqBuCJlK1uQqE_nV6ehfQ
10pmish ET

 

[Rain on my Parade]

I was thinking about the staging phase of JonBenet's death and wondered if one parent might surely be hit with a Second Degree Murder True Bill to describe JonBenet being asphyxiated?

UKGuy,

I believe those wires found near the basement scene would help in this matter:

“Burke is quite the sailor”

There’s an old boatswain mate’s trick used in the Navy and in sailing for learning to tie knots. A wire, such as a copper wire, is formed into a loose exemplar of a particular style of knot, which can later be used as a guide when tying rope. Boatswain mates are known to carry around these wires for that purpose. It seems, these same type of wires were found at the crime scene in at least two places: the boiler room wire tied in knot (5BAH) and the wine cellar wire near body (7KKY). Did the intruder, in the pitch dark of the Ramsey basement, forget how to tie the knot he wanted and leave his exemplars behind?

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

I believe those wires found near the basement scene would help in this matter:

“Burke is quite the sailor”

There’s an old boatswain mate’s trick used in the Navy and in sailing for learning to tie knots. A wire, such as a copper wire, is formed into a loose exemplar of a particular style of knot, which can later be used as a guide when tying rope. Boatswain mates are known to carry around these wires for that purpose. It seems, these same type of wires were found at the crime scene in at least two places: the boiler room wire tied in knot (5BAH) and the wine cellar wire near body (7KKY). Did the intruder, in the pitch dark of the Ramsey basement, forget how to tie the knot he wanted and leave his exemplars behind?

Rain on my Parade,
The same knots would implicate John Ramsey more than Burke.

Ostensibly the case appears to be JDI. After all he finds the body, most killers do, so on that front he looks a dead cert?

IMO Patsy asphyxiated JonBenet using the ligaure, so why is she doing that if JR started it all?

Why leave JonBenet wearing Burke's long johns and your niece's size-12 underwear, where is the percentage, especially when you go to the bother of wiping JonBenet down.

December 29, 1996, BPD Search Warrant for Boulder, Colorado 15th Street, Excerpt

Det. Arndt informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that he observed red stains in the crotch area of the panties that the child was wearing at the time that the child's body was subjected to the external visual examination. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that the red stain appeared to be consistent with blood. Det. Arndt further informed the Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that after examining the panties (as described above), he observed the exterior pubic area of the child's body located next to the areas of the panties containing the red stains and found no visible reddish stains in that area. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that his opinion is that the evidence observed is consistent with the child's pubic area having been wiped by a cloth.

Why move JonBenet down to the basement, only means folks will think it all took place down there. Really in a windy, e.g. broken window, dusty, damp, dark basement?

Is that the best the parents could come up with despite having hours after JonBenet's death, or were they tweaking someone elses basement staging?

.

 

[otg]

David Rogers,
Its possible, also DS might have bicycled back home on BR's missing bike, a Christmas Gift the same day!

What was Susan Stine doing when she phoned BPD to report overhearing BR and DS talking over JonBenet's death with Burke giving a running commentary, getting most of the largely then unknown details correct?

Later the parents stated in interview we never discussed the case details with Burke, e.g. we protected him, and BR was whisked out of the house long before JonBenet was found?

.

I think a lot of posters have over the years misconstrued this incident and how it originated. I have no idea where to find the information today as so many articles that were written over the years have since disappeared, but I'm certain of what was written.

Susan Stine did not volunteer this information to BPD. She didn't phone them. She didn't volunteer the info in an interview. Instead she told a friend (Barbara Kostanick maybe?) that she had overheard the conversation between Burke, Doug, and (I think) another boy. This person (whoever it was) then told BPD and they questioned Stine about it. We don't know what she told investigators when confronted with it -- only that she had told someone else about having heard it.

Understand that by the time this information came out, the story of exactly what was said, the tone of the conversation, and Burke's demeanor while telling it had all been passed on between at least four people.

This all happened early on after JonBenet's death. In the context of how close and loyal to the Ramseys she later became, even this seems contradictory. But again, she never reported it directly to investigators.


As a side note, it was Barbara Kostanick (according to DOI) who JonBenet told about the second “secret visit” that she was expecting from Santa Claus. From DOI:

“After the murder occurred, Barbara Kostanick called the police, trying to get them to listen to her story about what JonBenet had said. The police wouldn't pay any attention to Barbara; apparently they were already focused on their theory that 'the parents did it.' As a trained engineer and highly educated person, Barbara knew that the comment JonBenet had made to her was possibly of critical importance. She finally called Susan Stine, expressing her frustrations with the lack of response from the police. Susan in turn called our investigators, who encouraged the police to take a second, more careful, look.”​

(Again, this was according to the Ramseys in their book.)

 

[UKGuy]

I think a lot of posters have over the years misconstrued this incident and how it originated. I have no idea where to find the information today as so many articles that were written over the years have since disappeared, but I'm certain of what was written.

Susan Stine did not volunteer this information to BPD. She didn't phone them. She didn't volunteer the info in an interview. Instead she told a friend (Barbara Kostanick maybe?) that she had overheard the conversation between Burke, Doug, and (I think) another boy. This person (whoever it was) then told BPD and they questioned Stine about it. We don't know what she told investigators when confronted with it -- only that she had told someone else about having heard it.

Understand that by the time this information came out, the story of exactly what was said, the tone of the conversation, and Burke's demeanor while telling it had all been passed on between at least four people.

This all happened early on after JonBenet's death. In the context of how close and loyal to the Ramseys she later became, even this seems contradictory. But again, she never reported it directly to investigators.


As a side note, it was Barbara Kostanick (according to DOI) who JonBenet told about the second “secret visit” that she was expecting from Santa Claus. From DOI:

“After the murder occurred, Barbara Kostanick called the police, trying to get them to listen to her story about what JonBenet had said. The police wouldn't pay any attention to Barbara; apparently they were already focused on their theory that 'the parents did it.' As a trained engineer and highly educated person, Barbara knew that the comment JonBenet had made to her was possibly of critical importance. She finally called Susan Stine, expressing her frustrations with the lack of response from the police. Susan in turn called our investigators, who encouraged the police to take a second, more careful, look.”​

(Again, this was according to the Ramseys in their book.)

otg,
Well observed, I know I mixed up Burke's filmed interview with some of the alleged Stine details, but Kolar tells us what matters is what Burke never told his interviewer, read on:


James Kolar, Foreign Faction, p30, Excerpt

There was one other troubling aspect to Burke’s DSS interview that bears mention, but I need to provide another piece of information to place it into proper perspective.


During my review of police reports, I came across a transcript of an interview conducted with Mary Ann Kaempfer,66 whose son Anthony Pecchio was a classmate and friend of Burke. Anthony and his mother had been invited to accompany the Ramsey family to Atlanta for JonBenét’s funeral services, Anthony to be a playmate for Burke. Kaempfer, not knowing anyone in attendance, assumed the duty of being a nanny to the boys throughout the course of their stay in Georgia.

Boulder Police investigators, interested in a first-person account of what had transpired in Atlanta, interviewed Kaempfer on the evening of her return from Georgia.

She described Burke as being a “very withdrawn little boy”, who didn’t care much for hugs and would “rather you leave him alone.”

While attending the memorial services in Boulder, and while playing with Anthony in Atlanta, Burke was described by Anthony as acting like “he kind of knew what happened and trusted that people would find out.”

Anthony indicated that Burke may have appeared “confused” at times, but was not acting upset and indicated that he was not scared. When asked how he was doing, Burke said he was “fine.” Anthony told investigators that he never saw Burke cry during their stay in Atlanta.

Kaempfer advised that the only time she had seen him display some emotion and sadness was at the cemetery after the graveside services. He had left a group of people and went to the side of JonBenét’s casket, patting it gently.

After that brief display of caring, Burke and Anthony went exploring, skipping through the headstones in the cemetery.

Upon returning from Atlanta on January 2, 1997, Kaempfer spoke to fellow parent Susan Stine and was told about a conversation Stine had overheard taking place between Burke and her son, Doug. This was reported to have taken place on the afternoon following the grief counseling session that had been hosted at JonBenét’s school on the morning of Saturday, December 28, 1996.

Stine appeared to Kaempfer to have been disturbed by the conversation and had listened to Burke and Doug talk about how JonBenét had been strangled. Based upon Kaempfer’s statement, it appeared that Stine had over overheard the boys discussing whether or not manual strangulation had been involved in JonBenét’s death.

Stine described the conversation as being “very impersonal,” and it struck her that the discussion about the details of JonBenét’s death was like the boys were “talking about a TV show.” This discourse between Burke and Doug had taken place no more than two days following JonBenét’s murder and apparently had such an impact upon Stine that she brought it up in conversation with Mary Kaempfer at the first opportunity.

James Kolar, Foreign Faction, p30, Excerpt

I leaned back in my chair and contemplated the scenes I had just witnessed on the DSS video. There were red flags popping up all over the place, and I wondered why, assuming Burke had not been misled himself, he apparently would feel it necessary to mislead Dr. Bernhard about his knowledge of the circumstances surrounding the death of his sister and the possibility that a stabbing was involved.

As I reviewed the video time and again, I found it noteworthy that Burke never once mentioned the fact that he knew that JonBenét had been strangled during this conversation with Dr. Bernhard.

Big red flag here!

Paraphrasing Kolar: Although it was in the public domain that JonBenet had been asphyxiated the method or means was not released.

James Kolar, Foreign Faction, p30, Excerpt

I thought it noteworthy that neither one of these first two newspaper articles mentioned any blow to JonBenét’s head, and I wondered how Burke could have known about that injury.

I would later find through research of the news media coverage that the Boulder Daily Camera would make passing comment about a head injury a few days later, but full details of the depressed skull fracture wouldn’t be revealed to the public by the Boulder County Coroner until July 1997.67

The first public mention of any type of head injury appeared to have been reported by the Daily Camera in an article published on January 6, 1997, and read as follows:

So really BDP found out about the conversation via Mary Ann Kaempfer and not directly from Susan Stine who I assume was interviewed?

.