I'm always glad to take your questions, Holdon.
If there was a 'staged' crime scene in the basement, then why didn't anyone even notice it?
I think it would help if you knew what to look for.
{QUOTE]Wasn't JR the third person to go down there? Right away, the 'staged' crime scene idea contradicts itself by being too obscure, too 'unstaged' to be 'staged'.[/QUOTE]
Are you serious? The whole point at first, I believe, was for him not to find it. He was shining Fleet White on the whole time. Indeed, as I told ShesElectric, when the police did not find it, John had no real choice. He was probably thinking "Oh, God, I should have done such-and-such." Like I've said before, we're not talking crime scene experts trying to pull off this flim-flam. And he didn't waste time that second trip, did he? In truth, as Plan Bs go, it wasn't that bad. He's got Fleet White to say he handled the body. He's got witnesses upstairs to say he and Patsy contaminated the crime scene. Crazy like a fox.
ShesElectric points out that there is no good reason for JR to carry JBR away from the staging. I will second that one, because JR would add even more fiber, hair, or even DNA evidence of his own on the tape, blanket, cord, etc.
Yes, and as I explained to ShesElectric, that's an excellent way to explain any of the things you just mentioned. I really don't know what he thinks about it. He's never told me, other than to say I was smart.
Let me ask you folks something: have you ever left anything somewhere and not thought of it until later on? That's what I mean.
Every iota of evidence on JBR has been discussed, and any more evidence on JBR would require explanation. Lets face it, nobody wants their DNA or fibers mixed in with a capital crime scene. They become more incriminating depending on where they are found. The 'contamination' argument only goes so far to explain fibers or DNA. It would've been safer for a guilty JR to leave JBR in the basement, in the scene they presumably 'staged'.
Holdon, as is often the case, you make some good points. And I don't doubt that the police asked themselves these questions many times. As have I. What you say is true, in conventional cases. Nobody DOES want their DNA or fibers at a crime scene. BUT, and this is the part you seem to be overlooking, if you had a doubt in your mind as to how careful you were, if you started worrying as to whether or not you had left something crucial behind, wouldn't it then make the most sense to purposely contaminate the crime scene in front of witnesses and in a way that would appear innocent and natural on the face of it?
Holdon, you sometimes accuse the RDI side of whipping up explanations out of thin air with no real reasoning behind it. Well, I can
assure you that I did not simply "whip" this explanation out of thin air. I thought about it for a long time.
Would it have been safer to just leave her in the basement? I'm sure that was the intent at first. But think about it: the police search and don't find it. They're almost ready to give up and search elsewhere. Okay, let's try this:
The police leave. They didn't find the body. What are you supposed to do with it NOW? If everyone leaves the house, then you call and say you've found her, that looks pretty bad. You can't pack her in the car and dump her, because the cops will most likely be monitoring you, if for no other reason than to find out if the "kidnappers" have contacted you. That doesn't sound very safe to me. It's not like they had a heck of a lot of options.
JR did not have to handle JBR.
That's easy to say. Who knows what he "had to do" in his mind?
What sense does it make for JR to tear off the tape, move JBR, fight with the cord, etc. if he's guilty?
I hope I've done my best to answer that question. And do you know what the really gut-wrenching part is? It makes sense to me.
Why criminalize the scene in the first place? And not just any crime, but a capital crime. Why not call it an accident? Certainly her head injury was enough to kill her. The RN, the kidnapping 911 call, the cord, and the tape would all be unnecessary.
Why does anyone do anything, Holdon? That's not a cop-out, that's an honest question. Moreover, follow me on this. Michael Kane apparently asked himself these questions, and reminded us that "it was a very theatrical production and Patsy [was] a very theatrical person.
She loves being known as the mother of a dead beauty queen." Now, I thought about that for a while, and I added a number of factors: the child pageants, Patsy's relationship with her own mother, the whole ball of wax. And I expanded on what Kane said. This is what I came up with:
a child beauty queen, so destined for greatness killed in a common, garden-variety, run-of-the-mill, humdrum domestic incident? That would NEVER do! She was so spectacular in life. She HAD to be spectacular in death. Nothing but the best (or worst, depending on how you see it) for JonBenet. And she IS spectacular in death! Her death made her more well-known to more people than all of her performances put together.
Also, I think one should remember that it wasn't even necessarily the police and FBI that the stager(s) was/were trying to fool.
According to RDI, not only did the R's invite their friends over, they also willingly invited the FBI when they decided to call 911 and report a kidnapping. Why didn't they instead call 911 claiming their daughter fell down the stairs?
That's what they ALL say, Holdon.
That would be far safer than willingly putting pen to paper, willingly inviting the FBI over to check out a capital crime scene that they willingly staged, doncha think?
Safer? Maybe. But how clearly do you think they were thinking, anyway?
Its too self-defeating to be plausible.
That's really easy to say, Holdon, sitting at a computer thinking perfectly logically and calmly. But you're not really putting yourself in the killer's shoes. We're NOT talking about someone who would have been thinking perfectly logically and calmly. That's the key.
