Why did IDI experts focus on JDI?

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by madeleine, Sep 22, 2009.

  1. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Hmmm,dunno about that.

    1.JR :
    "The investigators were retained by our attorneys, and they stated to me that the principal purpose of those investigators was to prepare a defense in the case that the police might bring a charge against me."


    2.PMPT/pg 312:
    "In answer to reporters questions,he(John Douglas) said he had been hired to determine whether John Ramsey was capable of killing Jonbenet,at time when,according to Douglas,Ramsey's attorney's weren't sure if their client was innocent."


    3.They came along with "innocent" explanations for PR's red fibers but they did everything they could to deny the existence of JR's fibers found on JB.


    Makes you wonder...............
    Maybe LE WAS wrong all along about PR............seems that behind the scenes experts were focusing on John.Their OWN IDI experts.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Dunno,as far as I am concerned there is no evidence that can show exactly which one of them it was so I gotta wonder why everybody was focusing on defending and protecting JOHN and not Patsy,BEHIND the scenes.

    Maybe it's true indeed that at some point they would have been prepared to pin it on PR.But did SHE know?Not so sure anymore.
     
  4. Tadpole12

    Tadpole12 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    5,479
    Likes Received:
    188
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Hi Madeleine.

    I go back to those points, suspicions about JR: and I wonder how he could have so closely approximated PR's writing style and how could the tear pattern of the rn pages be indentical to that seen in the notepad? of PR.

    When did CW first go public with his AEA theory?
     
  5. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    January of 1997, if memory serves.
     
  6. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And all the time after the murder....she seemed to be a mess ,NOT him,he was alwayyyyyyyyys in control of everything,especially Patsy.
    Just speculating here but maybe she didn't even know lots of the things that were going on........it's in her interviews,ask John,John would know,ask John he knows........
     
  7. JMO8778

    JMO8778 ..at the beach!

    Messages:
    5,554
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I get the feeling they had decided the night of the murder that if all else fails,Patsy would take the blame 100%.(ppl would sympathize with her having cancer,and John would be on the outside,helping to get her out).I don't think John thought they would get away with it at all though,and I don't think Patsy realized to what extent he was throwing all the evidence her way...things like handing LE her notepad,telling her to leave the same clothes on while he went and showered and changed,having her write the RN in the first place...
     
  8. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    He always seems SO detached!Sometimes I get the feeling he's trying to look like someone who is helping the OTHER one out.( all the time he knew exactly what he's doing and how to protect his own @$$)But all he does is keeping eye on everything.I just don't think that such a man would go through all this just to protect his guilty wife who lost it and killed HIS beloved daughter accidentally.He was involved.Big time.IMO
     
  9. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Agree with that, JMO. It would fit in with what Patsy tells us in DoI about John managing things in the family as efficiently as he did Access, too.
     
  10. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You know Madeleine, I was always PDI or PKWDI but I am slowly starting to question whether I may not have over-stated her involvement.

    For me, a big question mark surrounded the Ramsey pattern of litigation. The worst thing Steve Thomas did was say that he believed PDI accidentally. He had no truck with the notion that JR was harming JBR sexually yet they want after him like pitbulls. Wendy Murphy and many others have accused John of the vilest things possible yet they do nothing other than wave their fists at them through Lin Wood. Fox essentially just questioned how much evidence existed of an intruder and they went after them. Dr Hodges made all manner of statement about John, yet he has been thoroughly ignored.

    Money is one motive. The other would fit in perfectly with your analysis.
     
  11. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    @bold
    I totally agree!

    The only way you can call this an accident followed by staging is the scenario in which the head blow was first,someone thought she's already dead and strangled her in order to cover up the accident.

    I don't think this happened.


    After an accident,you WOULD check her pulse,you would check if she's breathing,you would call someone to help you figure out what happened.You wouldn't just put a cord around her neck,using YOUR OWN paintbrush,without being 100% sure she's DEAD just in order to make it look like..........what exactly anyway?


    Also...............accidental head bash + post mortem assault to cover prior abuse + strangulation...........don't think so!

    Sadly,I think most of the violence in this case was REAL.Yep,the note was part of the staging and maybe the wrists ligature as well and everything that happened after the murder,911 call,etc.


    But I really don't think this murder was just about one moment of anger/accident.Would be a way too big coincidence since we're dealing with prior abuse.
     
  12. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I guess we can all agree that whoever abuses a 6years old has some severe mental problems and control issues.Now why wouldn't I believe that such a person is able to commit cold blooded murder?Why wouldn't I believe that such a person can be violent in such moments?Why wouldn't I believe that such a person just lost it when the victim started to complain,cry,scream,whatever and felt the need to hurt her,make her shut up?
     
  13. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I just wish I knew what JR did while he was gone for so long that morning and what he did during his trips to the basement.
     
  14. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    That is one of the most frustrating aspects of this case - that spell where Linda Arndt had lost him very possibly holds the key to this case. Am I imagining this, or did John ask LE for 24 hours to clear the house etc before Forensics came in?

    On your orginal point about IDI really working most to excuplate John, it's an interesting question. It's probably safe to assume that they knew early on that LE suspected that the mark on JBR's leg was semen and if PMPT is to be believed, Hofstrom was telling anyone who'd listen that LE thought they had a slam dunk to arrest John. So Team Ramsey probably assumed that JR was the more vulnerable and concentrated mostly on him.

    I do think it's a shame that John's possible involvement appears to have been minimised by LE as soon as it was established that the mark wasn't semen and that there was no evidence of JR having abused children. I honestly don't think that he did but molesters always start somewhere (often in middle age) and the fact that no one had claimed abuse is not the same as knowing for a fact that it hadn't happened. Molested children often adore their molester and never tell a soul about it. On this, I think LE may have been a bit naive and should have dug deeper - if only to lay to rest forever the suspicion that has followed John. In his interview with John, ST also professed his personal affinity with John and was at pains to point out that the interview wasn't adversarial. Even the length of his interview was dramatically shorter than Patsy's. Of course, this was very probably just a strategy to get JR to relax a bit but it is sadly all ammunition for those who think LE focused on Patsy alone.
     
  15. Sophie

    Sophie New Member

    Messages:
    1,019
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You've had some top signatures this week, Madeleine!
     
  16. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0

    I don't know but I think the nr.1 mistake was "PR wrote the note so she must have done it".....why?To me PR being the author shows exactly the oposite.JR needed to distance himself from the murder but they needed a note.....so she wrote it.

    Same with the fibers.......to me JR's fibers in JB's panties say a lot more than PR's fibers on the duct tape.

    And the list goes on............
     
  17. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    What's the old saying? Choose your battles carefully?
     
  18. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Who says that didn't happen? The problem is: 1) most people don't know the proper way to look for a pulse, 2) pulse and breathing can be very hard for a layperson to detect in someone who is in shock, especially if they're not thinking very rationally at the time.

    I don't know, madeleine. I can see how it would fit together. It's over on the "Ask Super Part 2" thread.
     
  19. SuperDave

    SuperDave Active Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    16
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ah, excellent! And that fits in well with the "pedophile vs. situational molester" dynamic.

    Sadly.

    Either way, it would have been worth it.
     
  20. BOESP

    BOESP Active Member

    Messages:
    2,745
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    38
    If I remember correctly, in the video interview of John and Patsy with Steve Thomas, Thomas asks, "Would you agree that whoever wrote the note killed JonBenet?" (or words to that effect). Patsy replied by nodding her head and saying yes (she agreed).

    Sorry, I can't remember which program this was but I believe it was the Larry King Live show.
     
  21. madeleine

    madeleine New Member

    Messages:
    4,970
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Yes she agrees because she means the "intruder".
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice