Housekeeper and more...

[createthis]

Just thinking of basics here. Why is this case so difficult to solve? The killer obviously knew Ramsey's (or it was the Ramsey's), the house., $118. etc. the suspect list shouldn't be long to go through. I believe the killer made the 911 call the night of the Xmas party to get estimate of time for police to arrive etc. So this murder was premeditated. I don't think anyone writes a 3 pg note "after" a killing? Linda P. interests me. (and her spouse) If what was written in "PMPT" was true from Linda...she notes "I have my ladies" if she uses ladies, she would use the word "gentlemen". Get it? She said Patsy has a hard time doing the laundry...I'm just trying to point out what she makes references to...ya know , what's on Linda's P's mind when she is giving a statement. She says "I always came through the side door" through the kitchen. She had a key of course. Easy entry. She knows the alrm wasn't set. Talk about premed- she had Jonbenet's dog stay with her before she took it over to the neighbors..she "knew" the dog would not be there "that night" to make any noise. She says Patsy laid her purses on the "spiral staircase" when she wanted them changed out. Linda had access to anything personal she wanted through Patsy's purses!!! And again..her and Patsy share this "spiral staircase thing". Linda also states (night of Xmas party) the men gathered around the "spiral staircase" she doesn't note what the women were doing or where they "were". She has painting on the brain...she notes about Patsy's painting classes and Johnnie B's coloring, "in the kitchen" She talk about taking the paint tote herself down into the basement the night of the Xmas party! She knew EXACTLY where it was! She knew about the load of laundry upstairs(i think) and the barbie gown could have been attached to the blanket. She asks for $2,000 right before Xmas? Couldn't show up for work because of fight with sister? Strange! Was she trying to see if Patsy would give her large amount of money so for staging reasons? Think about how easliy she could have done this and pulled it off. Only her or the Ramsey's fit the missing pieces to this puzzle. They had the most access to anything that happened that night. It's just that obvious and simple. Why does this have to be so hard, complicated and strewn out? There's so much more about Linda P. I could write, I would suggest reading her statements about Ramsey's and everything. And try to read between the lines about what she says that is key. And that damn "spiral staircase was known to Linda P. and Patsy, wether it was purse changes(Patsy and Linda) or men "gathering" around it(Linda stating). That is where the ransome note was found!!! I don't care about DNA on JB panties! Gosh, it could have come from the manufac. who knows. It shouldn't stop or create progress in the case. I wonder how much "foreign DNA" I have me right now! SBTC-signed by the caretaker? Who knows!

[KingCoyote]

Createthis:

According to PMPT P 634 Paperback edition Linda Hoffman Pugh was cleared by forensics evidence. I am not sure of the specifics but I am quite sure they cooperated fully with the investigation including fingerprinting, physical evidence, handwriting samples, DNA, clothing, duct tape, clothing, maybe even lie detector tests and of course they had an alibi...each other.

Apparently Lou Smit, working for the District Attorneys office reopened the investigation of the Pughs and came up with nothing. In fact Linda Hoffman Pugh testified in the Grand Jury. Apparently the prosecutors thought enough of her to call her as a credible witness.

Another logical reason to clear them: why kidnap the child of someone who just agreed to loan you money? Yes, I know that some people are greedy and diabolical but most of that is in the movies when it comes to kidnapping.

As I said, I do not know all of the police reasoning but apparently the Pughs were investigated thoroughly.

KingCoyote

[createthis]

That's seems plausable to me KingCoyete about them being cleared, but Linda's prints and DNA had to be all over that house too. You asked "why kidnap a child if someone just loaned you money?" that's the perfect strategy to throw off anyone from thinking about them asking for $118,000.00 just so one would ask that very question you just did.
I was also wondering about the check Patsy was supposed to leave Linda, she said she would leave it for her on the table in the butler's kitchen for her to pick up on her next scheuled visit on Dec. 27th. Did she ever leave it? Was she going to write it that morning before they left to Michigan?
I aslo believe Patsy and John lied about not giving her pineapple for fear of being more linked to the murder, maybe that is the only thing they are hiding and it makes them act like they are hiding a little something. Then they couldn't go back and say OK well we did give it to her because then they would look guilty all over again. JMO. Also Linda does refer to Jonbenet as acting like a spoiled brat. But that doesn't necassarily mean anything, but I certainly wouldn't write something like that about the child I was caring for in a book the nation could read. Makes one wonder if Linda could of placed the note on the steps subconsciuosly because that's where Patsy would leave her purses to for Linda to change out. Can't figure out about them clearing her handwriting samples though! Wheh no I see the difficulties of this case! Linda also mentioned somewhere(sorry no link) that PR was ambedextrious, that also seems odd to me she mentioned that. Why I wonder. (maybe to plant in people's heads she wrote note lefthanded?) And do we all at any given time have foreign DNA under our fingernails? Anyone know the answer please!

[shill]

She might have wanted the loan before Christmas to buy gifts, and Patsy ruined their Christmas by waiting to give her the money, so she sought revenge.

[KingCoyote]

Createthis:

I am working on it diligently. See Threads of A Newbie with an Idea, Did the Ransom Note Grow Legs?, and Scarves, Scarves and More Scarves. I am trying to put a scientific/organizational analysis to this case to help solve it.

KingCoyote

[createthis]

Thanks KingCoyete!
Because they make a big deal about JB having foreign DNA under her fingernails when maybe all humans do at any given time, and if she was pawing at her killer or came into contact with the killers skin then if killer was fully dressed or wearing gloves she would have had to touch or scratch the killer's face, maybe? Don't recall any marks on the parents face or hands, but I haven't seen proof of this either. Thanks again KC, let us know what you find.

[KingCoyote]

Shill:

You do have a point there...unfortunately there are a lot of "points" that keep popping up in this case.

KC

[createthis]

She might have wanted the loan before Christmas to buy gifts, and Patsy ruined their Christmas by waiting to give her the money, so she sought revenge.
That and or highly jealous of the Ramseys(or over time came to secretly hate JB because she was so jealous of her) and had ample time to plot and plan this over-exaggerated kidnapping and access to every single thing about this case you could imagine. Maybe she got JB from bed told her she had a "special visit" from Santa and lured her downstairs groggyeyed on her way down grabs a blanket out of the dryer for JB. She gets to basement with her and JB screams when she sees Merv, maybe and he stun guns her? Linda quietly leaves to conduct rest of plan and wait for the time to get ransom money somehow while Merv waits in the secluded room with JB tied up. That's why they threatened so much in note to not call anybody, so Merv could slip out basement window when Linda got money transfer done and then they would tell ramsey's she was in the basement tied up and unharmed if the plan was carried out correctly. Something went wrong with Merv in basement and ended up killing and staging scene? and Linda knew Patsy would be up early. Merv waited at the house while Ramsey's where out visiting Xmas night. Linda made sure everyone at her house was asleep before she left. Maybe it was a joint effort. Maybe they had devices to communicate with each other and Merv herd Patsy make frantic 911 call (he panicks) and knew he had so many minutes to get out from there because Linda made fake call at Xmas party on the 23rd. Ok, could be far fetched and not put together well, but this case is cold and I was just throwing it out there.

[createthis]

Just wanted to also note that the author who wrote in the note "your not the only FATCAT around" is someone who had very little money and jealous of JR's wealth or what they "thought" to be great wealth to them because they are fairly poor.

[thewhitewitch1]

She might have wanted the loan before Christmas to buy gifts, and Patsy ruined their Christmas by waiting to give her the money, so she sought revenge.


She needed the money to pay her rent, if I remember correctly. Besides, killing someones kid because they ruined your Christmas is just a bit extreme, dontcha think?

[createthis]

She needed the money to pay her rent, if I remember correctly. Besides, killing someones kid because they ruined your Christmas is just a bit extreme, dontcha think?

She had just gotten a Xmas bonus from Patsy of $300 or more. She then asks her for $2000 to pay her rent? A housekeeper doesn't have that high of a rent payment.

[Tober]

So this murder was premeditated.

What part of the crime shows premeditation? The killer didn't write the ransom note prior to entering the home and didn't bring with himself or herself the items necessary to perpetrate the crime. Even JonBenet's head injury wouldn't have required premeditation, it could have been done accidentally or purposely in anger. If it was done in anger, you then have motive (anger/rage), but still no premeditation. Entering the home required premeditation, yet none is exhibited in the crime.

[thewhitewitch1]

She had just gotten a Xmas bonus from Patsy of $300 or more. She then asks her for $2000 to pay her rent? A housekeeper doesn't have that high of a rent payment.

And you know this...how?

[createthis]

What part of the crime shows premeditation? The killer didn't write the ransom note prior to entering the home and didn't bring with himself or herself the items necessary to perpetrate the crime. Even JonBenet's head injury wouldn't have required premeditation, it could have been done accidentally or purposely in anger. If it was done in anger, you then have motive (anger/rage), but still no premeditation. Entering the home required premeditation, yet none is exhibited in the crime.

You are right about that and I meant to insinuate premeditation of the kidnapping not of the killing. (fake 911 call) etc. Sorry bout that. I also believe the killer wrote the note inside.

[createthis]

And you know this...how?

I wrote in earlier post I read it in PMPT. And then I wrote "if what Linda wrote is true".... blah blah blah. Then I came up with my opinion from what Lawrence Shiller wrote about what she said.

[shill]

How was she going to pay off $2,000.00 dollars? Seems to me it was as if she felt she deserved a bigger bonus, maybe part of John's big bonus. Since she didn't get but $300, she may have felt slighted having to watch them live their aristocratic lifestyle while she wiped JB's butt.
Besides, everyone knows it's always, "the butler did it".

[thewhitewitch1]

How was she going to pay off $2,000.00 dollars? Seems to me it was as if she felt she deserved a bigger bonus, maybe part of John's big bonus. Since she didn't get but $300, she may have felt slighted having to watch them live their aristocratic lifestyle while she wiped JB's butt.
Besides, everyone knows it's always, "the butler did it".


Shill...you crack me up. LHP was thoroughly investigated and there was no evidence found that she was involved. NONE.

[Tober]

You are right about that and I meant to insinuate premeditation of the kidnapping not of the killing.

IMO. this crime was never about any actual kidnap attempt. The whole kidnap scenario implied by the ransom note was all part of the staging. Think of all the offender did in that home, apparantly at ease, without any fear of detection. The offender was quite comfortable being in that home. And yet, this alleged kidnapping intruder fails to accomplish the very thing he or she went there for in the first place. I find it extremely unlikely that an intruder would risk all that, do all that, and then fail to actually take JonBenet from the home, which he or she could have easily done. This crime wasn't about a kidnap attempt at all, the writer of the ransom note just wanted it to appear like it was.

[shill]

IMO. this crime was never about any actual kidnap attempt. The whole kidnap scenario implied by the ransom note was all part of the staging. Think of all the offender did in that home, apparantly at ease, without any fear of detection. The offender was quite comfortable being in that home. And yet, this alleged kidnapping intruder fails to accomplish the very thing he or she went there for in the first place. I find it extremely unlikely that an intruder would risk all that, do all that, and then fail to actually take JonBenet from the home, which he or she could have easily done. This crime wasn't about a kidnap attempt at all, the writer of the ransom note just wanted it to appear like it was.
If JB's death was not part of the kidnapping plan, then the plan would have to be aborted. The best thing to do at that point is hide her body so they will think she has been kidnapped, giving you time and space from the crime scene.
To presume the intent of the crime was murder, when it may not have been, can lead you down a path of deception.

[KingCoyote]

As far as $2000 being a high amount for rent, LHP's rent could have been in arrears for a couple of months. I am a landlord and depending on your state laws it can take several months to evict someone. Sometimes, although I hate to do it, I will allow a tenant an extra couple of weeks to get rent in, but never more than that. Maybe her landlord was nicer and carrying her for a month or two. Maybe she had her priorites such that Christmas presents came before rent.

Just a few thoughts and opinions

KingCoyote

[Louisadelmar]

As far as $2000 being a high amount for rent, LHP's rent could have been in arrears for a couple of months. I am a landlord and depending on your state laws it can take several months to evict someone. Sometimes, although I hate to do it, I will allow a tenant an extra couple of weeks to get rent in, but never more than that. Maybe her landlord was nicer and carrying her for a month or two. Maybe she had her priorites such that Christmas presents came before rent.

Just a few thoughts and opinions

KingCoyote

DOI p19 ppbk
Linda said her sister, who was alsoher landlord, was going to evict her if she didn't come up with past-due rent. She asked Patsy if she could borrow twenty-five hundred dollars to cover it.

[Louisadelmar]

Interestingly in ST it is $2000 and some was to be used to pay rent, some for truck parts and some for Merv''s teeth.

p 38 ppbk

Wonder what PMPT says?

[createthis]

I thought of rent being backed up also. I just truly believe there is a key connection to what she said about Patsy leaving her purses on the "spiral staircase" for her to change out. Why not the kitchen table? Why not the counter or a desk? Patsy left her purses for LHP to change out "once a week" on the "spiral staircase". Anyone else find this interesting? That is where the RANSOM NOTE WAS LEFT. Patsy or LHP hmmm...I find that key for either party.

[Louisadelmar]

In DOI p 19 it goes on to say the check was supposed to be left on the counter.

[createthis]

I thought of rent being backed up also. I just truly believe there is a key connection to what she said about Patsy leaving her purses on the "spiral staircase" for her to change out. Why not the kitchen table? Why not the counter or a desk? Patsy left her purses for LHP to change out "once a week" on the "spiral staircase". Anyone else find this interesting? That is where the RANSOM NOTE WAS LEFT. Patsy or LHP hmmm...I find that key for either party.

Any opinions on this?

[shill]

Any opinions on this?

What exactly is involved in changing her purse out, I'm clueless?

[createthis]

What exactly is involved in changing her purse out, I'm clueless?

That Patsy (once a week) would leave her purses for Linda on the spiral staircase. The ransom note was left on the spiral staircase.

[shill]

That Patsy (once a week) would leave her purses for Linda on the spiral staircase. The ransom note was left on the spiral staircase.
So would she dump out everything in one purse and put it in another purse? Is that what "changing out" means?
And if so, would she see check stubs of John's showing the $118,000.00 bonus?

[createthis]

So would she dump out everything in one purse and put it in another purse? Is that what "changing out" means?
And if so, would she see check stubs of John's showing the $118,000.00 bonus?
Yes-That is what "changing out" means. Maybe she saw a stub, maybe she didn't. She could have gotten that info. a number of ways. Overhear a conversation or see it written or typed somewhere. Maybe she took one of her credit cards and used it a McGuckin's hardware store, that way the reciept would say Patsy Ramsey...no trace back to her. My roomate is of the opposite sex and I have used their credit card without ID. Scary! But it worked...at Wal-Mart even.
As to spiral staircase, I was giving one up to the RDI's. Making a point that if Patsy put her purses there for Linda "once a week", that she had a habit of putting things there...like...let's say a ransom note?
Or LHP had a habit of picking up her purses from the spiral staircase and new Patsy (would be first one up(she even stated that in PMPT) and knew Patsy would find it there because that is where she left things (purses)obviously. Either way I think it is a coincidence that shouldn't easily be dismissed, whether you are RDI or IDI or neither.

[shill]

The bonus amount of $118K showed up on every pay check John got.

[thewhitewitch1]

Yes-That is what "changing out" means. Maybe she saw a stub, maybe she didn't. She could have gotten that info. a number of ways. Overhear a conversation or see it written or typed somewhere. Maybe she took one of her credit cards and used it a McGuckin's hardware store, that way the reciept would say Patsy Ramsey...no trace back to her. My roomate is of the opposite sex and I have used their credit card without ID. Scary! But it worked...at Wal-Mart even.
As to spiral staircase, I was giving one up to the RDI's. Making a point that if Patsy put her purses there for Linda "once a week", that she had a habit of putting things there...like...let's say a ransom note?
Or LHP had a habit of picking up her purses from the spiral staircase and new Patsy (would be first one up(she even stated that in PMPT) and knew Patsy would find it there because that is where she left things (purses)obviously. Either way I think it is a coincidence that shouldn't easily be dismissed, whether you are RDI or IDI or neither.


Well, we do know that LHP was the first person Patsy tried to implicate.
The idea that the ransom note was placed on the spiral staircase was to give the impression that the killer knew Patsys morning routine of coming down that staircase on her way to the kitchen. LHP, as far as I know, would have no reason to know what Patsys morning routine was. She would not have been there that early in the morning to know such a thing, wouldn't you think? Unless Patsy slept until after 8 or 9 every day. I'm not sure what time housekeepers begin their jobs but I don't think it would be any earlier than 8 or 9. Patsy has said that she was usually the first person up in the morning. Of course, I don't know about what hours housekeepers have, since I have never had one. :( I've been one before but I can't remember the hours. I don't think we came in any earlier than 8, though.

[Louisadelmar]

So, under these circumstances you wouldn't mention your housekeeper?

DOI p 19 "Linda Arndt asks is there is anybody who might be upset with me - personally or otherwise? Anybody who has threatened me." [He mentions thinking of Jeff Merrick and their falling-out. Also calling Gary Merriman (Human Resources at Access) for names of recently fired employees. All very sensible. Then it goes on...] "The police ask Patsy these same questions about who might have been angry or acting strangely, and she begins to think about our cleaning lady. Linda Hoffmann-Pugh had called Patsy a couple of days before Christmas, very distraught and in tears. Linda said her sister, who is also her landlord, was going to evict her if she didn't come up with past-due rent. She asked Patsy if she could borrow twenty-five hundred dollars to cover it. "

PMPT p11. "Det. Arndt began questioning John Ramsey about whether he could think of anyone who might be involved in the kidnapping. Ramsey gave the names of several ex-employees of his company, Access Graphics. Patsy Ramsey, who was sitting with Rev. Hoverstock in a corner was at times confused and dazed. She mentioned to Arndt that her housekeeper, Linda Hoffmann-Pugh had asked to borrow some money just a few days before. Linda had a key to the house and had major money problems."

ST p26 "When detectives asked the parents who might be responsible for the disappearance of JonBenet, Patsy promptly gave the name of her housekeeper for the past two years.

[KingCoyote]

I don't find anything unusual about mentioning a housekeeper who has recently related to me that she has money problems. I find nothing unusual about mentioning anyone that has a key. In fact, I would expect Police to eventually ask me for a list of all my friends and people with whom I have had contact for many previous weeks, months and years. I just don't think I would write a book about it. I would not be happy if the police specifically used my mentioning their name as a way to get people to turn on me. Sometimes its unavoidable that the person whom you name will figure it out that you mentioned them and simply not understand.

I was burglarized once and the first thing the police asked was who has a key besides you. I had a maid at the time and they checked her out and found no reason to suspect her but she did quit on me very shortly after that. Hmmmm... The police did continue a small investigation because others in the apartment complex were also burglarized in a short period of time and found that a new apartment manager fired a maintenance man but forgot to collect his keys first.....(Dummy). They never recovered my stuff though.

Just a few thoughts and a little story

KingCoyote

[bullmoose]

So, under these circumstances you wouldn't mention your housekeeper?

DOI p 19 "Linda Arndt asks is there is anybody who might be upset with me - personally or otherwise? Anybody who has threatened me." [He mentions thinking of Jeff Merrick and their falling-out. Also calling Gary Merriman (Human Resources at Access) for names of recently fired employees. All very sensible. Then it goes on...] "The police ask Patsy these same questions about who might have been angry or acting strangely, and she begins to think about our cleaning lady. Linda Hoffmann-Pugh had called Patsy a couple of days before Christmas, very distraught and in tears. Linda said her sister, who is also her landlord, was going to evict her if she didn't come up with past-due rent. She asked Patsy if she could borrow twenty-five hundred dollars to cover it. "

PMPT p11. "Det. Arndt began questioning John Ramsey about whether he could think of anyone who might be involved in the kidnapping. Ramsey gave the names of several ex-employees of his company, Access Graphics. Patsy Ramsey, who was sitting with Rev. Hoverstock in a corner was at times confused and dazed. She mentioned to Arndt that her housekeeper, Linda Hoffmann-Pugh had asked to borrow some money just a few days before. Linda had a key to the house and had major money problems."

ST p26 "When detectives asked the parents who might be responsible for the disappearance of JonBenet, Patsy promptly gave the name of her housekeeper for the past two years.
Does anybody besides myself see in these quotes from three sources the fact that only the Twister's version seems slanted so as to put Patsy in a negative light? But then its a twisterpiece of investigative literature, isn't it?

[Louisadelmar]

Does anybody besides myself see in these quotes from three sources the fact that only the Twister's version seems slanted so as to put Patsy in a negative light? But then its a twisterpiece of investigative literature, isn't it?


That was the point of the original post when I saved it. The strange sea change the same situation undergoes in its description.

[bullmoose]

:beer: And I couldn't agree more with your point if I tried.

[Tober]

Any theory that proposes a suspect must account for the known evidence (such as the fiber and handwriting evidence) in relation to that proposed suspect. How does LHP perpetrating the crime explain the fiber and handwriting evidence which points away from her?

[bullmoose]

Tober:While I do doubt that LHP was involved beyond being the housekeeper in the house where Jonbenet was murdered, I'm curious as to what handwriting and fiber evidence pointing away from her that you are referring to. I have no idea what you are talking of; please illuminate me.

[Tober]

I'm curious as to what handwriting and fiber evidence pointing away from her that you are referring to.
The handwriting evidence suggests that the ransom note was written by Patsy. Fiber evidence indicates that Patsy was very involved in the staging of the crime. That is what I meant by fiber and handwriting evidence pointing away from LHP, as it doesn't point to her,
it points to Patsy.

[Louisadelmar]

The handwriting evidence suggests that the ransom note was written by Patsy. Fiber evidence indicates that Patsy was very involved in the staging of the crime. That is what I meant by fiber and handwriting evidence pointing away from LHP, as it doesn't point to her,
it points to Patsy.

No the handwriting evidence suggests she didn't write it. Per CBI, Secret Service and a host of others.

[bullmoose]

Tober, If your post had said IMO or JMO or something similar, I wouldn't mind; as we all have opinions as to this case and as to who is responsible. IMO the evidence all points squarely away from the Ramseys; I see nothing in your post indicating anything beyond your opinion to base your statement on.

[Tober]

The fiber and handwriting evidence pointing to Patsy are not my opinion, they are known evidence.

[Louisadelmar]

The fiber and handwriting evidence pointing to Patsy are not my opinion, they are known evidence.

So why do the Secret Service, CBI etc disagree with you re the handwriting?

[Tober]

No the handwriting evidence suggests she didn't write it. Per CBI, Secret Service and a host of others.

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/ram1014k.htm CBI's position is that Patsy cannot be eliminated as having written the note. As noted by Chet Ubowski, one of Patsy's samples indicated that she did write the note and her samples weren't suggestive of the full scope of her handwriting--in layman's terms, she was being deceptive in the handwriting samples she gave.

[LadyFisher]

Yes-That is what "changing out" means. Maybe she saw a stub, maybe she didn't. She could have gotten that info. a number of ways. Overhear a conversation or see it written or typed somewhere. Maybe she took one of her credit cards and used it a McGuckin's hardware store, that way the reciept would say Patsy Ramsey...no trace back to her. My roomate is of the opposite sex and I have used their credit card without ID. Scary! But it worked...at Wal-Mart even.
As to spiral staircase, I was giving one up to the RDI's. Making a point that if Patsy put her purses there for Linda "once a week", that she had a habit of putting things there...like...let's say a ransom note?
Or LHP had a habit of picking up her purses from the spiral staircase and new Patsy (would be first one up(she even stated that in PMPT) and knew Patsy would find it there because that is where she left things (purses)obviously. Either way I think it is a coincidence that shouldn't easily be dismissed, whether you are RDI or IDI or neither.

I've always had ?s about the housekeeper and her family members! I think the perp could have entered the home with a key. We do know the LHP had financial woes.....we know that after work, many of us go home and discuss our employer with our family...did she? Where was her SIL the night of the murder? Was he ever investigated? Did he give DNA or writing samples? imho Someone knew what staircase Patsy would take down, didn't Patsy say her first thought upon seeing the RN on the stairs that LHP had probably left her a note to remind her to leave the check for her? If I was Patsy, I would have mentioned her to LE, too....LHP even asked JBs gramma once, wasn't they afraid she would be kidnapped, her being so pretty and all? Did LHP ever make that statement at home to family members? jmho I would love to know more about this family!

[createthis]

From what I hear there is not much "fiber" evidence to point to LHP, but Patsy did give LHP's daughter Ariana a SWEATER and a VEST to wear the night of the Xmas party(23rd) that belonged to Patsy herself!!! She even lent her a pair of shoes. Did LHP return the clothing items that night? Or did she take them home and somehow the fibers got transferred to Linda the night of the killing? Are there pics showing Ariana the night of the 23rd at Ramsey's and what color the sweater and vest were? I'm not IDI or RDI. Little of both. Linda had motive for money. I think if a 2nd person could have helped her, they didn't tell her they had motive to want to fondle and hurt little girls. (Messy people deal with other low life messy people). IMO. She also worked for a lawyer and a doctor's wife...she could have known the fancy lingo in the ransome note. When you have nothing and are jealous of someone and want to be close to the rich...you will copy cat what they do. Hell, I have. I once convinced a women on a plane that I was a CEO of a major corp when I flew first class (I really wasn't) ( I just knew the lingo) I don't know who the author is. I just know that her and Patsy both knew that things were left on the spiral staircase to be found. That is fact. But I'm curious for opinions on the sweater Ariana wore that night...concerning fiber transfers to LHP family members...(if items traveled home with them...)

[nuisanceposter]

No the handwriting evidence suggests she didn't write it. Per CBI, Secret Service and a host of others.

Chet Ubowski of CBI thinks Patsy was the author.

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/ram1014k.htm

Chet Ubowski of CBI wrote of one of her samples that "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.'' Ubowski told investigators that the samples she gave "do not suggest the full range of her handwriting.''


http://www.acsu.buffalo.edu/~insrisg/bookmarks/bk2000/1109jonbenet.html

Ubowski had moved from examining the tablet to looking at the ransom note itself, comparing its writing with known samples the detectives had gathered from various sources. What the CBI examiner told them, very privately, was astounding: Twenty-four of the alphabet's twenty-six letters looked as if they had been written by Patsy. When taken together, the tablet, the Sharpie pen, and the writing formed a powerful base of evidence. And that evidence pointed directly at Patsy Ramsey....


http://careers.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/1028jonn.shtml

Ubowski, according to search warrants, has determined that Patsy Ramsey could not be excluded as a possible author of the ransom note.


http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-ransomnote.htm

04-10-2000 Good Morning America (Elizabeth Vargas) Interview with former Detective Steve Thomas

Vargas: (VO) "Thomas says investigators interviewed 590 people, investigated and cleared more than 100 suspects and collected 1,058 pieces of evidence. But the trail always led back to one place. That epic ransom note. The note asked for $118,000 and claimed to be from a small foreign faction and was signed by the mysterious S.B.T.C. Three pages of crucial clues. Thomas says they checked handwriting samples from 73 potential suspects, but only one person could not be ruled out as the author."

Thomas: "And that one person happens to be Patsy Ramsey."

Vargas: (VO) "Thomas says there are several reasons why. Among them is handwriting."

Thomas: "And in Patsy's pre-homicide writings, she consistently used what we called the lower-case manuscript a. In the ransom note, almost exclusively, the lower-case manuscript a was used, I think, 98 percent of the time in the ransom note. That � so what, you might say, but what was telling was that after the Ramsey's were given a copy of the ransom note after the killing, Patsy Ramsey stopped using her pre-homicide habit of this lower-case manuscript a, and began a lower-case cursive a."

Vargas: "So you're saying that in the ransom note this style of the letter a was used, and that in all Patsy's writing samples prior to the murder, she used an a like this most of the time when writing?"

Thomas: "Right."

Vargas: "But after the murder she changed her writing style to use this kind of a, so that her writing samples after the murder wouldn't match the ransom note."

Vargas: (VO) "That analysis is from a leading expert used by the FBI."


Here's what Secret Service had to say...I don't see anything that says they didn't think Patsy wrote the note:

http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-ransomnote.htm

"We were then brought up to date on a new discovery. Crime scene techs at the house had recoverd three Sharpie felt-tip pens from on orange metal container on the kitchen counter beneath the telephone from which Patsy had made her 911 call, not far from where the ransom note tablet was found."

"U.S. Secret Service eventually determined that one of those pens, a pre-November 1992 water-based ink Sharpie, was used to write both the practice and actual ransom notes. The Secret Service, which maintains a hugh database on inks because of its federally mandated assignment ot chase forgers, told us, "the ink 'on the note' is unique in the collection of approximately 7,000 standards from the Ink Library."

"That meant that whoever wrote the notes used the exact pen from that cup. They not only left the pad behind but, when they finished, neatly put the felt-tip pen in its container."

[createthis]

To Nuisanceposter

That's great information. Nice work, thanks for taking time to do that. It seems that me and others believe that the ransome note was left on the spiral staircase because Patsy says that is where she found it. Does anyone think that she lied about that? Maybe she wrote the note left handed (as LHP has said she was ambedextrious). Patsy has described in one of her interviews (sorry can't remember which one) that the 3 pages were spread out "neatly" on one of the steps. Who would use the word "neatly" when she said the lights were dim. Maybe she had to say the pages were left "neatly" because they were never left on the staircase in the first place for her to step on or over and remained on the counter where she wrote the note and phoned 911. I mean THINK about it. Is she really going to leave the note there... go up stairs, come back down the stairs and find the note..all while no one is watching ...but herself?! Does that make sense? Anyone think it may not have been found there besides me? I'm sure this is an old idea for the board, but I'm curious. I know this case cannot be solved with theories, but it may just spark the mind of someone who who can combine theories with the right evidence.

[Tober]

It seems that me and others believe that the ransome note was left on the spiral staircase because Patsy says that is where she found it. Does anyone think that she lied about that?

IMO, Patsy wrote the note, so she never "found" it, that was just part of her story so she could account for how she got the note and how she realized JonBenet was missing. For some reason, her plan was to have found the note first, before noticing that JonBenet wasn't in her bed, and not the other way around.

[thewhitewitch1]

To Nuisanceposter

That's great information. Nice work, thanks for taking time to do that. It seems that me and others believe that the ransome note was left on the spiral staircase because Patsy says that is where she found it. Does anyone think that she lied about that? Maybe she wrote the note left handed (as LHP has said she was ambedextrious). Patsy has described in one of her interviews (sorry can't remember which one) that the 3 pages were spread out "neatly" on one of the steps. Who would use the word "neatly" when she said the lights were dim. Maybe she had to say the pages were left "neatly" because they were never left on the staircase in the first place for her to step on or over and remained on the counter where she wrote the note and phoned 911. I mean THINK about it. Is she really going to leave the note there... go up stairs, come back down the stairs and find the note..all while no one is watching ...but herself?! Does that make sense? Anyone think it may not have been found there besides me? I'm sure this is an old idea for the board, but I'm curious. I know this case cannot be solved with theories, but it may just spark the mind of someone who who can combine theories with the right evidence.

Yes, it is very possible that she is lying about where she found the note and may very well have told the LE this just for the intention of implicating the housekeeper.
If you read Patsys account of how exactly she found and read the ransom note, you definately have to question it. She says that she stepped over it and bent over to read it. First of all, I've seen reinactments on tv of the actual staircase and the layout of the note and stepping over it looks like no easy feat without contorting yourself and risk falling down the stairs. The note covered the entire step. Again I question why she "bent over it" to read it and not just pick it up. After reading only the first couple of lines, she says she "ran up the stairs yelling for John." I would like to know how she ran up the stairs without stepping and sliding on the note. Also, irrelevant though it may be, if I had found a ransom note, I would have picked it up and taken it with me as I ran screaming for my husband. I certainly would not have left it there. I contend she gave LE this version to explain why her fingerprints were not on the note.
As I've said before, the story that JR read the note spread out on the floor is questionable too. How did the note get on the floor? Neither Ramsey is clear on who put it there. Is it possible that where the police saw it is where it was placed originally? If so, why?
One or both of the Ramseys have said that they "handed" the note to police officers at the door when they arrived but this is not true. I don't believe either of the Ramseys handled that note at all after they'd written it and the reason is obvious. They didn't want their fingerprints on it. IMO

[Kor]

One or both of the Ramseys have said that they "handed" the note to police officers at the door when they arrived but this is not true. I don't believe either of the Ramseys handled that note at all after they'd written it and the reason is obvious. They didn't want their fingerprints on it. IMO

After the police arrived, didn't they asked one of Ramseys to show him where the note is or was? I am not sure which, but didn't Patsy claimed she had the note with her when she was on the phone making calls to the police?

[shill]

For some reason, her plan was to have found the note first, before noticing that JonBenet wasn't in her bed, and not the other way around.
Maybe her reason for finding the note before noticing JB wasn't in her bed was so she wouldn't look guilty. IMO it worked.

[shill]

Yes, it is very possible that she is lying about where she found the note and may very well have told the LE this just for the intention of implicating the housekeeper.
If you read Patsys account of how exactly she found and read the ransom note, you definately have to question it. She says that she stepped over it and bent over to read it. First of all, I've seen reinactments on tv of the actual staircase and the layout of the note and stepping over it looks like no easy feat without contorting yourself and risk falling down the stairs. The note covered the entire step. Again I question why she "bent over it" to read it and not just pick it up. After reading only the first couple of lines, she says she "ran up the stairs yelling for John." I would like to know how she ran up the stairs without stepping and sliding on the note. Also, irrelevant though it may be, if I had found a ransom note, I would have picked it up and taken it with me as I ran screaming for my husband. I certainly would not have left it there. I contend she gave LE this version to explain why her fingerprints were not on the note.
As I've said before, the story that JR read the note spread out on the floor is questionable too. How did the note get on the floor? Neither Ramsey is clear on who put it there. Is it possible that where the police saw it is where it was placed originally? If so, why?
One or both of the Ramseys have said that they "handed" the note to police officers at the door when they arrived but this is not true. I don't believe either of the Ramseys handled that note at all after they'd written it and the reason is obvious. They didn't want their fingerprints on it. IMO

It sounds like the note was on a step at almost eye level when standing on the floor. It would be easy to read by just bending over a little bit. Why pick it up?
Maybe the note got on the floor when Patsy ran up stairs and possibly stepped on the notes sending them to the floor.
Why would they worry about their prints on the ransom note, that would prove nothing?
I believe their were others who touched the note and their prints didn't show up.

[nuisanceposter]

Patsy also gave two different versions of finding the note to police. She told Officer French that she went down to the second floor and checked JonBenet's room, saw she wasn't in bed, and then went dowstairs and saw the RN, and later that day she told Detective Arndt that she went downstairs, saw the RN, and then went and checked JB's room. Patsy's inconsistent stories were noted in both ST and PMPT as well as police records.

So which one was right, and why did she give two different stories to two different cops, within two hours of each other?

I don't think the RN was ever laid out on the steps, "neatly" or otherwise, and I don't believe Patsy was able to step over it. I also don't believe John, a 53 year old businessman who reads important papers all the time, went and dropped down to his hands and knees on the floor to read the RN. IMO, those two stories are as bogus as the RN itself.

[KingCoyote]

Coupling my thoughts with Nuisance Poster's thoughts I am strongly leaning toward the RN NOT being on the steps of the Spiral Staircase. Going back to my Thread of Did the Ransom Note Grow Legs with the Post of Did a Garbage Bag Grow Legs, I just can't see PR bounding down those steps with a laundry/garbage bag in her hands and skipping over the steps and then reading anything with the sconces dimly lighting the stair area. I also think that since the phone was closer to the patio door, the location of the pad and pen closer to (or in) the kitchen than the staircase and John Fernie claiming he read lines of the RN from outside the patio door, and nobody seeming to remember how the RN got from a staircase to a door some 15-20 feet away from the staircase, that the RN was nowhere near the spiral staircase.

NP makes so much sense in that you don't get down on your knees to improve lighting or read anything especially when there is a kitchen counter just a few feet away which is in a kitchen which can be easily and well lit.

Just a few thoughts and opinions,

KC

[thewhitewitch1]

After the police arrived, didn't they asked one of Ramseys to show him where the note is or was? I am not sure which, but didn't Patsy claimed she had the note with her when she was on the phone making calls to the police?


No, in one of her versions she claims she was leaning over Johns shoulder while he had the note spread out on the floor.

[LadyFisher]

From what I hear there is not much "fiber" evidence to point to LHP, but Patsy did give LHP's daughter Ariana a SWEATER and a VEST to wear the night of the Xmas party(23rd) that belonged to Patsy herself!!! She even lent her a pair of shoes. Did LHP return the clothing items that night? Or did she take them home and somehow the fibers got transferred to Linda the night of the killing? Are there pics showing Ariana the night of the 23rd at Ramsey's and what color the sweater and vest were? I'm not IDI or RDI. Little of both. Linda had motive for money. I think if a 2nd person could have helped her, they didn't tell her they had motive to want to fondle and hurt little girls. (Messy people deal with other low life messy people). IMO. She also worked for a lawyer and a doctor's wife...she could have known the fancy lingo in the ransome note. When you have nothing and are jealous of someone and want to be close to the rich...you will copy cat what they do. Hell, I have. I once convinced a women on a plane that I was a CEO of a major corp when I flew first class (I really wasn't) ( I just knew the lingo) I don't know who the author is. I just know that her and Patsy both knew that things were left on the spiral staircase to be found. That is fact. But I'm curious for opinions on the sweater Ariana wore that night...concerning fiber transfers to LHP family members...(if items traveled home with them...)

Who was Ariana's boyfriend or husband? How many times was he in the Ramsey home? Did he feel JR thought him to be insignificant or below him? Was he an avid movie watcher? Was he involved in medival board games? What exactly do we know about this guy? imho

[nuisanceposter]

Ariana Pugh was 12 years old when JonBenet was murdered.

[LadyFisher]

Ariana Pugh was 12 years old when JonBenet was murdered.

Which daughter was it that had a bf or husband? The same ?s apply to him!

[andU]

Which daughter was it that had a bf or husband? The same ?s apply to him!

Melinda is married, I thought she was a college student at the time of the murder, though... far too much to remember... I seem to recall that she lived/lives in Atlanta? or near there?

[Louisadelmar]

Which daughter was it that had a bf or husband? The same ?s apply to him!

LHP also had a (I think) son-in-law. He helped brng the trees up in November. I have always wondered how deeply he and his friends were investigated.

[nuisanceposter]

Melinda Ramsey was engaged to Stewart Long in 1996, and they have since married. I think neither of them were involved.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Ramsey%20Did%20It%20Theories#MelindaRamseyLong

Alibi. According to Schiller, "Melinda. who had worked at a hosptial in Marietta, Georgia, finished her shift at about 7:00 A.M. on Christmas day. That afternoon, John Andrew, Harry Smiles, Melinda, and her boyfriend, Stewart Long, exchanged gifts at Lucinda's home in Marietta. In the afternoon, they all went across the street to a neighbor's for dinner. Melinda and Stewart Long left the dinner party about 7 P.M., and Melinda started to pack for an early flight the next day. At 9:00 P.M. they went to visit Guy Long, Stewart's uncle, and after visiting other friends, were home by midnight" (Schiller, 1999a:66-67).He later states that police "finished their background checks on John Andrew and Melinda and had verified commercial airline schedules and private flight plans and found no record that either of them had traveled the night of December 25, Their alibis were solid." (Schiller 1999a:257).

The same source says nothing of a person other than LHP and husband being checked but says LHP was cleared. I have to assume that means BPD, BDA, Lou Smit, etc, all checked out anyone associated to LHP and they aren't suspects.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Intruder%20Theories#AcquaintanceIntruderTheories

[Louisadelmar]

[...]
The same source says nothing of a person other than LHP and husband being checked but says LHP was cleared. I have to assume that means BPD, BDA, Lou Smit, etc, all checked out anyone associated to LHP and they aren't suspects.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Intruder%20Theories#AcquaintanceIntruderTheories

How well were they checked out? How wide a net was cast. I'd be curious to know the details...

[LadyFisher]

LHP also had a (I think) son-in-law. He helped brng the trees up in November. I have always wondered how deeply he and his friends were investigated.

This dude has been on my suspect list for a long time, Louisa. He knew that basement, he had access to a key. He could very well have resented JR, and felt he was a "fat cat"....he probably overheard LHP discussing personal info concerning the Ramseys...things such as..that John got a bonus of over $100,000 and all I got was $300! imho He would have been young enough to watch a lot of movies, esp. those that were almost direct quotes in the ransom note...and been interested in board games that were popular at the time of the murder....somehow the perp knew exactly what stairs Patsy would take coming down the next morning...how many folks would have that inside info? How many could have known the Rs would be gone for a few hours Christmas night? If this guy wasn't investigated thoroughly by LE, then imho he certainly should have been! jmho

[Zoey]

This dude has been on my suspect list for a long time, Louisa. He knew that basement, he had access to a key. He could very well have resented JR, and felt he was a "fat cat"....he probably overheard LHP discussing personal info concerning the Ramseys...things such as..that John got a bonus of over $100,000 and all I got was $300! imho He would have been young enough to watch a lot of movies, esp. those that were almost direct quotes in the ransom note...and been interested in board games that were popular at the time of the murder....somehow the perp knew exactly what stairs Patsy would take coming down the next morning...how many folks would have that inside info? How many could have known the Rs would be gone for a few hours Christmas night? If this guy wasn't investigated thoroughly by LE, then imho he certainly should have been! jmho


Linda and Mervin Pugh had 6 kids. I am looking at another site to see if I can get names and ages.

"Perfect Murder, Perfect Town"
by Lawrence Schiller (Pages 198 through 202)

[LadyFisher]

Linda and Mervin Pugh had 6 kids. I am looking at another site to see if I can get names and ages.

"Perfect Murder, Perfect Town"
by Lawrence Schiller (Pages 198 through 202)

Thank you, Zoey! I don't have PMPT, and I don't have the time to research as much as many of you folks....I appreciate all the research done by both sides of the fence on this case, I've learned a lot on this board. I do have DOI and TCTHU!

[Zoey]

I am sure that you are all aware of the AOL search log that is on the internet that shows the searches of one specific individual that has to do with the Ramsey case? I found it interesting that we are discussing Linda Hoffman-Pugh as well as the pineapple per chance being purchased at Safeway. This is part of that person's search:

linda hoffman pugh works at safeway in colorado
did any of the pughs work at the safeway market

[Tober]

The killer of JonBenet required a motive to cause her head injury and another motive to stage the crime scene. I can think of no motive for LHP to have done either.

[Tober]

Patsy also gave two different versions of finding the note to police. She told Officer French that she went down to the second floor and checked JonBenet's room, saw she wasn't in bed, and then went dowstairs and saw the RN, and later that day she told Detective Arndt that she went downstairs, saw the RN, and then went and checked JB's room. Patsy's inconsistent stories were noted in both ST and PMPT as well as police records.

So which one was right, and why did she give two different stories to two different cops, within two hours of each other?

What I find odd about the story Patsy gave Det. Arndt is that they were scheduled to take off at 6:30. I find it strange that she would go downstairs at approximately 5:45 without awakening the kids so they could get ready. She tells Officer French one thing, and then tells Det. Arndt the opposite sequence. Quite odd, but done for a reason no doubt. Something must have bugged her about the sequence she gave Officer French.

[shill]

The killer of JonBenet required a motive to cause her head injury and another motive to stage the crime scene. I can think of no motive for LHP to have done either.
LHP has just as much motive to cause a head injury to this sweet innocent little 6yr old girl as anyone else? If the motive was that obvious, they would have their killer.
I haven't heard a convincing argument of a motive for staging the tying up, strangling and raping of JB that fits the evidence. And there was no staging of any kind to point to how the head wound happened. They don't even know what caused the head wound.

[Zoey]

What I find odd about the story Patsy gave Det. Arndt is that they were scheduled to take off at 6:30. I find it strange that she would go downstairs at approximately 5:45 without awakening the kids so they could get ready. She tells Officer French one thing, and then tells Det. Arndt the opposite sequence. Quite odd, but done for a reason no doubt. Something must have bugged her about the sequence she gave Officer French.

I don't find this strange at all. When I planned an early trip, I would let my kids sleep as late as possible, most of the time carrying them out in their jammies to the vehicle still asleep. It was easier than dealing with them whining and upset because it was so early and they were still tired.

Under the circumstances of finding a ransom note and her precious little daughter missing, I am surprised that she remembered her name, let alone the sequence of what she did that morning. I don't think I would have been able to give any information, I would have been a basket case for sure.

[Kor]

Did the police got warrant to search Linda & Mervin's home to find anything? Or the police prefer to get warrants for only the top suspects, not the listing suspects? How old was Linda's son that time? Since I remember in the note, "Two gentlemen watching over your daughter," as some people said it could mean Linda was the note writer. I don't understand why would Linda lied about wine cellar or didn't knew that Ramseys had a wine cellar, could it be her misterstood if Ramseys didn't have any bottles of wine shelved up in that room?

[Louisadelmar]

Good question about the warrants! I've never seen it asked before.

Miss Marple's pbwiki only has warrants listed for the Ramseys. A google search turned up nothing. How did BPD get hold of things like the White's clothing, LHP's phone records, her SIL's shoes, clothing and assorted records, a search of various friend's houses?

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Legal%20Documents

[bullmoose]

IMO, there was only the Ramseys that were actual suspects in Jonbenet's murder in the eyes of the BPD from about 1:30PM 12/26/96 onward; I do not believe that the BPD ever actually suspected anyone else, why else would they have attempted to illegally hold Jonbenet's body, except to try to pressure the Ramseys into confessing? With that kind of mindset obvious from the get-go, I doubt they ever really investigated anyony else except to try to get them to trash-talk the Ramseys. IMO

[Zoey]

IMO, there was only the Ramseys that were actual suspects in Jonbenet's murder in the eyes of the BPD from about 1:30PM 12/26/96 onward; I do not believe that the BPD ever actually suspected anyone else, why else would they have attempted to illegally hold Jonbenet's body, except to try to pressure the Ramseys into confessing? With that kind of mindset obvious from the get-go, I doubt they ever really investigated anyony else except to try to get them to trash-talk the Ramseys. IMO


They did sort of investigate the Pughs, just not very thorough IMO.


The police ask Patsy these same questions about who might have been angry or acting strangely, and she begins to think about our cleaning lady. Linda Hoffmann-Pugh had called Patsy a couple of days before Christmas, very distraught and in tears. Linda said her sister, who was also her landlord, was going to evict her if she didn't come up with the past- due rent. She asked Patsy if she could borrow twenty-five hundred dollars to cover it. Patsy had consoled Linda and agreed to lend her the money. In fact, Patsy had intended to leave the check for Linda on the kitchen counter before leaving for Michigan; Linda would let herself in the house and pick it up while we were gone for the holidays.

Patsy remembers that her mother, Nedra Paugh, had said that Linda had remarked to her at one time, "JonBenet is so pretty; aren't you afraid that someone might kidnap her?" Now those comments seem strangely menacing.

Finding the phone number in her digital Rolodex, Patsy tells a police officer where Linda lives in Ft. Lupton, Colorado. Patsy later tells me she was thinking, If it's Linda, it's okay, because she is a good, sweet person. She is just upset. She may need the money, but she won't hurt JonBenet.

The police tell us they will arrange for the Ft. Lupton police to drive by Linda's house to see if they notice anything unusual, but they don't want to alert anyone there that they are being watched.

[KingCoyote]

I just want to make a few comments about the issue of "suspects." If I refer to a source that you find lacking credibility then you may, of course, discount or dismiss the information as you see fit. I am violating my own discipline by getting into somewhat collateral issues, as opposed to evidence, statements, official documents, etc. but I maybe I just want to get some things off my chest and my soap box was collecting dust.

In ST Paperback P. 35, ST remarks that the FBI statistics show that in child deaths 54% are committed by family members, 6 % are committed by strangers so I suppose that leaves 40% committed by non family members and non strangers, which probably includes friends, acquaintances, employees, associates, etc. etc.

I know that statistics are sometimes called the field of "those damn lies" and statistics usually present a lot of correlations but do not always address the determinants for cause-effect relationship. I will note that the "determinants" for family members killing their child are not as prevalent in this case as they are in many others.

Things such as illegal drugs, broken families, financial problems and sexual abuse are some of the determinants most frequently present when a family member kills a child. We have no evidence of illegal drugs and the evidence of prescription drugs tends to be minimal (antidepressants and over the counter sleep aids which a lot of people take) or remote (chemotherapy which PR had been off of for quite some time.) LE even tried to discuss the lack of Hormone Replacement Therapy with PR and a hysterectomy at P. 431 of her 1998 Interview but that didn't seem to go far. [I am in no way making any statement or opinions about psychology/psychiatry or gynecology. I am waaaaaaaaaaaay out of my field there. I will stick to Organizational Management and Database Analysis]

We know of no marital strife in the Ramsey relationship unless you want to read something nefarious into Linda Arndt's statements about "secrets" that Patsy had. (See the thread about Linda Arndt and PR). The worst comment I have seen about financial problems was JR comments on Patsy's spending being "mildly sarcastic" that she spent more remodeling the house than I did on buying it. (sorry, can't find that cite right now) Hey, maybe PR ran up the credit card bills a little too much and there was some "spirited discussion" over that. What family, even a wealthy one, might have that occur?

What evidence about prior sexual abuse exists (or doesn't) is not only controvertible but controversial but it really doesn't appear to be a long standing problem unless you believe ST's statement in his paperback about the appearance of JBR's vagina in the presentation BPD made to DA with all the experts such as the FBI, Scheck and Lee present. I render no opinion as to that matter and will let you rely on whatever evidence you have or believe as to prior sexual abuse.

I have read in the Steve Thomas Deposition that there were over 70 handwriting samples taken. I have seen screen captures as to documents with more than just the Ramseys having their DNA tested. I have read about the Pughs and McReynolds being investigated by both ST and Lou Smit. But I specifically note on Pages 98 through 122 of Patsy Ramsey's that LE discussed scuds of people, some close to and some remotely connected to the Rs that they seem to have come up with their names from somewhere!? Lou Smit must have done a lot of stranger and friendly intruder since he was the main proponet of the intruder theory and the stun gun. ST even went to North Carolina to investigate someone. I think it was Jeff Merrick that was traced all the way back to his days with JR at the ATT management program.

I will grant you that I cannot comment as to how thoroughly any particular person has been investigated but I am to the point that rehashing individual people won't get us any closer to the truth than this post of mine. I think we need to dig into the evidence, statements and reports while limiting our use of experts and discussions about inconsistent statements and find that little thing, or big thing, for that matter, that ties the whole sequence of events into a crime. I think it is out there somewhere in the known evidence or within a conclusion from the known evidence. Maybe I am just too much of a firm believer in Database Management and Analysis and way too focused on details myself but even Lou Smit says they need someone else to take a fresh look at this thing.

I won't go so far to say the Rs are, have been, and will be the ONLY suspects but I sure won't go so far as to say the Pughs or the McReynolds don't deserve a long hard look, and I sure won't throw out the stranger idea because it has happened 6% of the time. I just think the Rs are still at the top of a very wide ranging list and I don't find that terribly disturbing, ALL things considered.

Just a few thoughts and opinions and a little getting things off of my chest and using a soap box to do it.

KingCoyote

[nuisanceposter]

I totally agree, KC. It's fine to discuss the Pughs and the Whites, etc, but when you consider people like ST and LS examined these people and have moved on, then it seems redundant and a bit of a waste of time to sit and rehash who was where, when, and all that.

People can sit here and claim LE only focused on the Rs, but that simply isn't true and the proof of that can be found in numerous sources if you but look. Even disregarding who LE checked, think of who the DA's office and Lou Smit checked - all these people who keep being brought up that have been cleared. At what point do people rely on the investigators - all of the investigators, either LE or LS or PIs hired by the Rs or even Michael Tracey - to have done a thorough enough job?

I think you're dead on, KC, when you say the answer is here in the evidence and we just need to sit and examine it all to figure out what's what.

[Zoey]

I totally agree, KC. It's fine to discuss the Pughs and the Whites, etc, but when you consider people like ST and LS examined these people and have moved on, then it seems redundant and a bit of a waste of time to sit and rehash who was where, when, and all that.

People can sit here and claim LE only focused on the Rs, but that simply isn't true and the proof of that can be found in numerous sources if you but look. Even disregarding who LE checked, think of who the DA's office and Lou Smit checked - all these people who keep being brought up that have been cleared. At what point do people rely on the investigators - all of the investigators, either LE or LS or PIs hired by the Rs or even Michael Tracey - to have done a thorough enough job?

I think you're dead on, KC, when you say the answer is here in the evidence and we just need to sit and examine it all to figure out what's what.

Maybe I am not reading this correctly, or maybe I am, but what I am getting out of this NP, is the only people you feel any of us should be discussing at any given time is the Ramseys as the killers, because everyone else has been looked at and dismissed?

[KingCoyote]

Let me quickly reply and state this: I am not going to "pick a suspect" and then go find the evidence that inculpates them; I am going to look at the evidence, (physical, photos, statements, reports, depositions, and maybe a limited amount of circumstantial, expert, or inconsistent statement evidence) and let the evidence "pick" the suspect.

KingCoyote

[nuisanceposter]

Maybe I am not reading this correctly, or maybe I am, but what I am getting out of this NP, is the only people you feel any of us should be discussing at any given time is the Ramseys as the killers, because everyone else has been looked at and dismissed?

Nope, that's not what I was trying to say. I'm saying I think the actual evidence and how it can be applied to *all* suspects should be the focus, and the fact that certain people have been discounted and cleared as suspects by BPD, BDA, LS, RST, etc means to me personally maybe they should be less of the focus than the actual items of evidence themselves.

I think the answer to this crime is already available to us...we just have to eliminate as much as we can and decipher it all to get that answer.

[andU]

Let me quickly reply and state this: I am not going to "pick a suspect" and then go find the evidence that inculpates them; I am going to look at the evidence, (physical, photos, statements, reports, depositions, and maybe a limited amount of circumstantial, expert, or inconsistent statement evidence) and let the evidence "pick" the suspect.


KingCoyote

If the evidence that is used is DNA, there are no suspects, everyone has been cleared

[KingCoyote]

Andu:

Thats the beauty of using a database of information (evidence) that has over 300 entries and still growing. Something like "don't put all your eggs into one basket."

KC

[andU]

Personally, I don't hold much hope for the DNA....

[shill]

OK, so the knot used on the hand restraints is a boating/camping knot.
So we should put Fleet White, John Andrew Ramsey, JAR's friend and his father, Randy Simons, and probably a few other on to the list of suspects.

[Kor]

http://www.greeleytrib.com/article/20030617/NEWS/306170002

Linda had 5 children and Mervin had 4, umm....

[Zoey]

http://www.greeleytrib.com/article/20030617/NEWS/306170002

Linda had 5 children and Mervin had 4, umm....


According to PMPT, Linda had 6 children and 10 grandchildren.

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/02181999lindapughstorypmpt.htm

[Louisadelmar]

I think she had 5 plus Ariana.

[createthis]

Who was Ariana's boyfriend or husband? How many times was he in the Ramsey home? Did he feel JR thought him to be insignificant or below him? Was he an avid movie watcher? Was he involved in medival board games? What exactly do we know about this guy? imho

Ariana was 12 yrs old at the time.

[createthis]

Ariana was 12 yrs old at the time.

Oops, sorry..someone already answered that.

[User615]

What I find odd about the story Patsy gave Det. Arndt is that they were scheduled to take off at 6:30. I find it strange that she would go downstairs at approximately 5:45 without awakening the kids so they could get ready. She tells Officer French one thing, and then tells Det. Arndt the opposite sequence. Quite odd, but done for a reason no doubt. Something must have bugged her about the sequence she gave Officer French.

John said he set the alarm clock for 5:30 AM. I checked flights out of Denver and most every flight leaves at 7:00 AM. Now I wasn't able to check for flights prior to this year. The Ramseys lived 40 minutes from the Denver Airport. To get a shower and dressed, get the kids showered and dressed, and get to the airport on time seems a stretch. I realize they didn't have security as they do now, and I am speculating the flight was a 7:00 AM, but that sure seems to be cutting it close.

[Louisadelmar]

Used their own plane

[User615]

Used their own plane

You got me again. Back to reading......

[createthis]

Let's suppose one or both R's staged this crime. How come they didn't make it look like an intruder came into the house? You know break a door or something way more obvious than a suitcase under the window kind of thing. Why would they use their own pad and paper from their house? That would make them look guilty right? Wouldn't they realize that? Why would Patsy(if she did it) use things from her own paintote? Wouldn't she think that would make her look guilty and be very obvious to LE? She used to paint with JB...how could she bring herself to use the the paintbrush to stage if she accidentally killer her? Wouldn't that be extra painful? Why not use something else from the house?

[Tober]

Let's suppose one or both R's staged this crime. How come they didn't make it look like an intruder came into the house? You know break a door or something way more obvious than a suitcase under the window kind of thing.

Criminally inexperienced. Smart enough to know police could deduce a fake forced entry from the inside. Not willing to risk doing a fake forced entry from the outside out of fear of being observed.

[shill]

Criminally inexperienced. Smart enough to know police could deduce a fake forced entry from the inside. Not willing to risk doing a fake forced entry from the outside out of fear of being observed.

So they didn't think they could make a believable forced entry scene, so they didn't attempt it. That might be believable except that you have to account for why they would think they could write a believable ransom note, and make a believable garrote and ligature, and they do those things but do not stage a break in.

[Tober]

Why would they use their own pad and paper from their house?

Not willing to risk being observed leaving the house to obtain items. Also, they were pressed for time. Take-off was scheduled for 6:30 a.m. They had to set everything up and call 911 before that, as waiting until after that would draw inquiries.

[shill]

Not willing to risk being observed leaving the house to obtain items. Also, they were pressed for time. Take-off was scheduled for 6:30 a.m. They had to set everything up and call 911 before that, as waiting until after that would draw inquiries.
How much time did they need?
You'd think they would grab some single sheets out of the computer printer somewhere, instead of tearing out sheets from a pad that LE would match the tear marks to, or notice Fleet White walking around with the same yellow note pad taking notes.

[Tober]

How much time did they need?

Though it can be inferred that part of the body staging was done within a relatively short time after JonBenet received her head injury, the totality of staging would have taken a significant amount of time (relatively speaking) due largely in part to the tremendous psychological burden faced by the offender. The offender most likely had to psych himself or herself up to be able to pull it all off.

[Jayelles]

Though it can be inferred that part of the body staging was done within a relatively short time after JonBenet received her head injury, the totality of staging would have taken a significant amount of time (relatively speaking) due largely in part to the tremendous psychological burden faced by the offender. The offender most likely had to psych himself or herself up to be able to pull it all off.


Excellent point.

[thewhitewitch1]

So they didn't think they could make a believable forced entry scene, so they didn't attempt it. That might be believable except that you have to account for why they would think they could write a believable ransom note, and make a believable garrote and ligature, and they do those things but do not stage a break in.

What was the broken/open window and suitcase, if not a staged break-in?

[Tober]

That might be believable except that you have to account for why they would think they could write a believable ransom note, and make a believable garrote and ligature, and they do those things but do not stage a break in.
Every contact leaves a trace. A fake forced entry alone would have never cut it. The ransom note writer knew there wouldn't be any contact evidence of an intruder. The note had to be written to "show" that an intruder entered the home and perpetrated the crime against JonBenet. Her dead body in the basement had to be explained in light of the fact that there wouldn't be any trace evidence of an intruder, and so, you have the ransom note.

[nuisanceposter]

Every contact leaves a trace. A fake forced entry alone would have never cut it. The ransom note writer knew there wouldn't be any contact evidence of an intruder. The note had to be written to "show" that an intruder entered the home and perpetrated the crime against JonBenet. Her dead body in the basement had to be explained in light of the fact that there wouldn't be any trace evidence of an intruder, and so, you have the ransom note.

ITA. A pedophile/molester would have no reason whatsoever to leave extra evidence in the form of an RN, and a kidnapper would have been much more brief, would have left with the child immediately, and would have taken the child even dead, because he wants the ransom. The only people who would have needed an RN to explain the dead child would be the parents, needing to direct suspicion away from them. They'd have done better to get the body out of the house, but that was way too risky.

[bullmoose]

Not willing to risk being observed leaving the house to obtain items. Also, they were pressed for time. Take-off was scheduled for 6:30 a.m. They had to set everything up and call 911 before that, as waiting until after that would draw inquiries.But, Tober, don't you see that for John and Patsy to break that basement window they would have had to go outside the house, you know where the BPD saw no footprints in the frost and snow just hours later;taking a huge risk of being seen; but what would also an absolute necessity. No one has ever disputed that the window, whenever it was broken, was broken from outside with the shards landing in the basement. No glass was found outside the window; are you inferring that the Ramseys broke the window from the outside much earlier than Jonbenet's murder so as not to have to go outside that night and leave clues for the BPD? Thats the inferrence I come away with; or are you inferring something else? After all, as you infer, they were pressed for time.
:biggrin:

[sweetcharlotte]

ITA. A pedophile/molester would have no reason whatsoever to leave extra evidence in the form of an RN, and a kidnapper would have been much more brief, would have left with the child immediately, and would have taken the child even dead, because he wants the ransom. The only people who would have needed an RN to explain the dead child would be the parents, needing to direct suspicion away from them. They'd have done better to get the body out of the house, but that was way too risky.

And then there are the pedophiles/molesters/kidnappers who may not be familiar with the "appropriate" Handbook for Dummies.....plus, the other 99.9% of the population that don't fall into these categories.

:read:

[KingCoyote]

Whether I think the Ramseys broke the window or did not break the window that fateful night is somewhat irrelevant to my comment. The window could have been easily broken from the inside. That is because it opened to the inside at about a 70 degree angle from its closed position. It would not open completely due to the structure of the basement. Just look at the pictures of Lou Smit climbing in. I think they are at his website.

Anyway, all you do is open window. Break window. Clean up glass. (There were only four shards of glass taken in the Search Warrant) Grind up glass. Take glass upstairs to a toilet. Flush three to five times. Repeat flushing until you are sure ground up glass ends up in sewer main out in the street. Everytime you flush more evidence goes further and further from the house and eventually your drain trap is emptied as well.

I am not saying this happened or it is anywhere near logical...I am just saying it is possible...of course just about anything is possible in this case.

As to the broken window/suitcase being staged, I think the suitcase could have very well been exactly under the window where it was for months and debris and shard blews in the hole that JR created, from the at least one time he claims he broke in, from the strong winds that Lou Smit refers to in JR 98 Interview Page 227. Note that earlier in the Interview at P 215 JR says that maybe he had broken in the house through a window twice. Do I hear three...three and a half?

Of course JR said he was 99.9% sure he did not put the suitcase under the window. It would have been more helpful if he had been 99.9% sure where he had put it. PR once stated that she thought the suitcase was in the boiler/hot water heater area. (P 413 of her 98 Interview). Of course it is also possible the silly suitcase grew legs and walked over to the window itself to get a breath of fresh air.....I am in a mood people....a definite mood... take cover...lol.

KingCoyote

[Zoey]

And then there are the pedophiles/molesters/kidnappers who may not be familiar with the "appropriate" Handbook for Dummies.....plus, the other 99.9% of the population that don't fall into these categories.

:read:

Or else they tried to check it out at the library and it's like CK's library, someone else always had the book checked out!

[Zoey]

Whether I think the Ramseys broke the window or did not break the window that fateful night is somewhat irrelevant to my comment. The window could have been easily broken from the inside. That is because it opened to the inside at about a 70 degree angle from its closed position. It would not open completely due to the structure of the basement. Just look at the pictures of Lou Smit climbing in. I think they are at his website.

Anyway, all you do is open window. Break window. Clean up glass. (There were only four shards of glass taken in the Search Warrant) Grind up glass. Take glass upstairs to a toilet. Flush three to five times. Repeat flushing until you are sure ground up glass ends up in sewer main out in the street. Everytime you flush more evidence goes further and further from the house and eventually your drain trap is emptied as well.

I am not saying this happened or it is anywhere near logical...I am just saying it is possible...of course just about anything is possible in this case.

As to the broken window/suitcase being staged, I think the suitcase could have very well been exactly under the window where it was for months and debris and shard blews in the hole that JR created, from the at least one time he claims he broke in, from the strong winds that Lou Smit refers to in JR 98 Interview Page 227. Note that earlier in the Interview at P 215 JR says that maybe he had broken in the house through a window twice. Do I hear three...three and a half?

Of course JR said he was 99.9% sure he did not put the suitcase under the window. It would have been more helpful if he had been 99.9% sure where he had put it. PR once stated that she thought the suitcase was in the boiler/hot water heater area. (P 413 of her 98 Interview). Of course it is also possible the silly suitcase grew legs and walked over to the window itself to get a breath of fresh air.....I am in a mood people....a definite mood... take cover...lol.

KingCoyote


And there's always the possibility that when Fleet White "moved it" he moved it from the boiler/hot water heater area when he was down in the basement the first of many times.

[thewhitewitch1]

Or else they tried to check it out at the library and it's like CK's library, someone else always had the book checked out!

Then again,maybe the Ramseys hadn't read the handbook for Dummies on "How to Kill Your Kid Accidentally or Otherwise and Stage a Convincing Crime Scene".

[shill]

Or maybe the real killer is reading all this and laughing at all of us on how wrong we are and he is writing his book right now. "If I Had Killed JB, This Is How And Why I Would Do It".

[thewhitewitch1]

Or maybe the real killer is reading all this and laughing at all of us on how wrong we are and he is writing his book right now. "If I Had Killed JB, This Is How And Why I Would Do It".

:lol: I'll drink to that. (Vodka and OJ, of course)

[Tober]

No glass was found outside the window; are you inferring that the Ramseys broke the window from the outside much earlier than Jonbenet's murder so as not to have to go outside that night and leave clues for the BPD?

No. Here is my opinion of the window issue: The window was broken sometime prior to Dec. 25 (as evidenced by the debris that had blown in) but not for criminal purposes. John did not find the window open approximately 10 a.m. as he would later claim. The window was not opened until after JonBenet's body had been found. Fleet White may have opened the window. The photos of the open window used by Lou Smit weren't time-stamped when taken, therefore they don't accurately represent the condition of the window as it existed upon the finding of JonBenet's body. IMO, the window was not a part of the staging. John simply seized on the opportunity presented by the window issue at a later date (similar to what John and Patsy did with the pineapple/tea bag issue).

[Tober]

She used to paint with JB...how could she bring herself to use the the paintbrush to stage if she accidentally killer her?

That was largely due to "psychological association." During a high-stress crime, an offender is much more likely to use items they are familiar with and are comfortable using.

[elvislives]

Let's suppose one or both R's staged this crime. How come they didn't make it look like an intruder came into the house? You know break a door or something way more obvious than a suitcase under the window kind of thing. Why would they use their own pad and paper from their house? That would make them look guilty right? Wouldn't they realize that? Why would Patsy(if she did it) use things from her own paintote? Wouldn't she think that would make her look guilty and be very obvious to LE? She used to paint with JB...how could she bring herself to use the the paintbrush to stage if she accidentally killer her? Wouldn't that be extra painful? Why not use something else from the house?

Good points. These are some of things with the RDI theory that don't sit well with me. They may in fact have been criminally inexperienced, but they arent morons. The biggest piece of evidence aside from the body would be the ransom note...and Patsy uses a piece of paper from her grocery list and leaves a practice note still in the pad? Considering they thought of everything, including sexually assaulting their daughter's dead body, it seems odd that they missed something as big as this.

[elvislives]

Every contact leaves a trace. A fake forced entry alone would have never cut it. The ransom note writer knew there wouldn't be any contact evidence of an intruder. The note had to be written to "show" that an intruder entered the home and perpetrated the crime against JonBenet. Her dead body in the basement had to be explained in light of the fact that there wouldn't be any trace evidence of an intruder, and so, you have the ransom note.

A ransom note written on Patsy's pad, left on the kitchen counter complete with practice note. I think the Rs behaviour is highly suspicious, but something just doesn't add up here.

[Tober]

That might be believable except that you have to account for why they would think they could write a believable ransom note, and make a believable garrote and ligature, and they do those things but do not stage a break in.
IMO, the staging (which includes the ransom note, the "fake garrote" neck ligature, and the fake "bondage-type" wrist ligature) served a threefold purpose: 1) It focused attention away from JonBenet's head injury, as a child bludgeoned in the head in their own home is usually indicative of parental rage; 2) It "showed" that a sexual pervert did this;
3) It "showed" that an intruder intent on kidnapping JonBenet entered our home and did this.

[elvislives]

But, Tober, don't you see that for John and Patsy to break that basement window they would have had to go outside the house, you know where the BPD saw no footprints in the frost and snow just hours later;taking a huge risk of being seen; but what would also an absolute necessity. No one has ever disputed that the window, whenever it was broken, was broken from outside with the shards landing in the basement. No glass was found outside the window; are you inferring that the Ramseys broke the window from the outside much earlier than Jonbenet's murder so as not to have to go outside that night and leave clues for the BPD? Thats the inferrence I come away with; or are you inferring something else? After all, as you infer, they were pressed for time.
:biggrin:

Actually this is a VERY interesting point....one that hadn't occurred to me before. IF the Rs broke the window as part of the staging, what happened to the footprints?
Is there any way to know for sure that the window was broken from the outside? Or are you just inferring that based on the glass being on the floor?

[Zoey]

IMO, the staging (which includes the ransom note, the "fake garrote" neck ligature, and the fake "bondage-type" wrist ligature) served a threefold purpose: 1) It focused attention away from JonBenet's head injury, as a child bludgeoned in the head in their own home is usually indicative of parental rage; 2) It "showed" that a sexual pervert did this;
3) It "showed" that an intruder intent on kidnapping JonBenet entered our home and did this.


Your home???????

[Tober]

Your home???????

Not my home. The Ramsey home.

[KingCoyote]

I guess nobody reads my posts (sob..boo hoo..sniff)....go back to post #105 where I explain how easy it would be to break the window from the inside.....The window opened to the inside....nobody would have to go outside to break it and worry about footprints....you could break it easily from the inside and still make it look like it was broken from the outside. Of course if you are going to stage a broken window...why clean it all up and only leave 4 shards of glass?....just leave all the broken glass all over the place for obvious forced entry.

IMO....nobody broke the glass on that fateful night....it was broken by JR some months earlier.

KingCoyote

[Zoey]

Not my home, the Ramsey home.


I was just checking. You posted our home in your post.

[thewhitewitch1]

I guess nobody reads my posts (sob..boo hoo..sniff)....go back to post #105 where I explain how easy it would be to break the window from the inside.....The window opened to the inside....nobody would have to go outside to break it and worry about footprints....you could break it easily from the inside and still make it look like it was broken from the outside. Of course if you are going to stage a broken window...why clean it all up and only leave 4 shards of glass?....just leave all the broken glass all over the place for obvious forced entry.

IMO....nobody broke the glass on that fateful night....it was broken by JR some months earlier.

KingCoyote

I read your posts, KC. :)

[elvislives]

I guess nobody reads my posts (sob..boo hoo..sniff)....go back to post #105 where I explain how easy it would be to break the window from the inside.....The window opened to the inside....nobody would have to go outside to break it and worry about footprints....you could break it easily from the inside and still make it look like it was broken from the outside. Of course if you are going to stage a broken window...why clean it all up and only leave 4 shards of glass?....just leave all the broken glass all over the place for obvious forced entry.

IMO....nobody broke the glass on that fateful night....it was broken by JR some months earlier.

KingCoyote

Dry your tears, I read your post. This comment in particular gave me pause:
'Anyway, all you do is open window. Break window. Clean up glass. (There were only four shards of glass taken in the Search Warrant) Grind up glass. Take glass upstairs to a toilet. Flush three to five times. Repeat flushing until you are sure ground up glass ends up in sewer main out in the street. Everytime you flush more evidence goes further and further from the house and eventually your drain trap is emptied as well.'
Don't you think it's peculiar that the Rs thought of ALL this detail....okay, break window to make it look like it was broken from the outside-check; tie JBs hands to make it look like a weird bondage thing-check; dispose of the rest of the duct tape and rope used to strangle her-check; sexually assault JB's corpse to make it look like the a pervert was the culprit-check...But OOPS, left a rough draft of the ransom note on the kitchen counter and double oops, gave that very tablet to the police as a sample of Patsy's handwriting. You'd think that with all the time they had waiting for the body to be found, this oversight might have occurred to them and they would have put the pad in a drawer or something.

[elvislives]

No. Here is my opinion of the window issue: The window was broken sometime prior to Dec. 25 (as evidenced by the debris that had blown in) but not for criminal purposes. John did not find the window open approximately 10 a.m. as he would later claim. The window was not opened until after JonBenet's body had been found. Fleet White may have opened the window. The photos of the open window used by Lou Smit weren't time-stamped when taken, therefore they don't accurately represent the condition of the window as it existed upon the finding of JonBenet's body. IMO, the window was not a part of the staging. John simply seized on the opportunity presented by the window issue at a later date (similar to what John and Patsy did with the pineapple/tea bag issue).

You think with all the staging JR did, it didn't occur to him to stage the breakin?

[shill]

IMO....nobody broke the glass on that fateful night....it was broken by JR some months earlier.

KingCoyote
That can't be true because I read John is a liar and he lied about that window being broken earlier. He lies about everything but you can't tell because he is a Shakespearean trained actor.
So he staged the window like everything else, and lied about it like everything else.
:read:

[bullmoose]

To King Coyote: I too read and enjoy your posts, too.To elvislives: windowglass tends to shatter and send shards away from the point of impact; since glass shards were found only inside the house,it infers that the window was shattered from outside; if the glass had been shattered while the window had been opened the dispersion pattern of the shards would have been in a semicircle from the point of impact and shattering in the room; but they wern't. To Tober: How can you call the cruel strangulation of Jonbenet a fake? As I recall, the cord wrapped twice around her neck was so deeply imbedded so as to only show one wrap above her skin.If Patsy crushed her skull in a rage, as you obviously think happened, how would the 'fake' garotte focus attention away from her fatally fractured skull;? the head injury wasn't evident until the autopsy, which is standard when a child is murdered? IMO, there was certainly staging by the killer/s, but it was designed to throw the BPD onto the Ramseys as the only suspects in the murder. Which, of course is what they were, from about 1:30PM on 12/26/96 on. JMHO

[LindaA]

That was largely due to "psychological association." During a high-stress crime, an offender is much more likely to use items they are familiar with and are comfortable using.

Your source for this, please?

[KingCoyote]

Elvislives:

Bravo!...you seem to have picked up on a little bit of my facetious attitude that had just a dash of sarcasm in it. If the Rs did actually think up that Ransom Note, who knows what else they could think of.

Shill, Shill, Shill:

My sarcasm isn't rubbing off on you now, is it friend?...lol

KC

[nuisanceposter]

I was just checking. You posted our home in your post.

It's pretty obvious to anyone not trying to be a pain that he used the word "our" to indicate he was talking as if he was a Ramsey.

The "practice note" was not left in the pad. CBI discovered the practice note by examining the indentation it left on another piece of paper in the pad. I believe the Ramseys didn't hide the pad because they thought their RN would be believed, and with it, the scenario that the intruder was the one who used the pad.

[sweetcharlotte]

Oh, how petty....first your little dig at CK - who isn't even here anymore, and then your focus on the use of "our". Wasting the board's time pointing it out twice, even. Thanks for adding to the discussion...don't know how we'd get on without your input (there's some sarcasm for you, KC.)

It's pretty obvious to anyone not trying to be a pain that he used the word "our" to indicate he was talking as if he was a Ramsey.

The "practice note" was not left in the pad. CBI discovered the practice note by examining the indentation it left on another piece of paper in the pad. I believe the Ramseys didn't hide the pad because they thought their RN would be believed, and with it, the scenario that the intruder was the one who used the pad.

You said something about "waste" and "adding to the discussion?"

[nuisanceposter]

You said something about "waste" and "adding to the discussion?"

You can apply that however you like, Charlotte, but please note that after I made that comment I added to the discussion how the practice note was not left in the pad, but discovered by CBI during their investigation of the pad. That was something no one else had bothered to note, and elvislives was under the impression the practice note was still on the pad. It wasn't.

[sweetcharlotte]

Actually, I was talking about your first two paragraphs, not the last one.

This might help elvis:

http://www.acandyrose.com/04112000thomas-pg73-74.htm

[Zoey]

Oh, how petty....first your little dig at CK - who isn't even here anymore, and then your focus on the use of "our". Wasting the board's time pointing it out twice, even. Thanks for adding to the discussion...don't know how we'd get on without your input (there's some sarcasm for you, KC.)

It's pretty obvious to anyone not trying to be a pain that he used the word "our" to indicate he was talking as if he was a Ramsey.

The "practice note" was not left in the pad. CBI discovered the practice note by examining the indentation it left on another piece of paper in the pad. I believe the Ramseys didn't hide the pad because they thought their RN would be believed, and with it, the scenario that the intruder was the one who used the pad.

Nuisanceposter:

Not to be rude, but if you look at some of your posts on this board, you have made numerous digs to people that are not on this board, two of which are Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey. CK, albeit is no longer here, when asked for a link or a page number continually stated that she was unable to do so as the books at the library were always checked out. There is nothing wrong with a little humor. I am sure that you carried yourself on over to Websleuths and advised her what had been said.

Also, Tober has been asked repeatedly for his sources and links. He refuses to do so. When someone posts something that catches my eye, I am going to ask about it. It took me by surprise to see that he had posted our home. I was unaware that a rule of this board is to not ask questions when something stands out. Perhaps I beat others to asking, who knows. I am sure it caught other's eyes as well.

[packer48]

Dry your tears, I read your post. This comment in particular gave me pause:
'Anyway, all you do is open window. Break window. Clean up glass. (There were only four shards of glass taken in the Search Warrant) Grind up glass. Take glass upstairs to a toilet. Flush three to five times. Repeat flushing until you are sure ground up glass ends up in sewer main out in the street. Everytime you flush more evidence goes further and further from the house and eventually your drain trap is emptied as well.'
Don't you think it's peculiar that the Rs thought of ALL this detail....okay, break window to make it look like it was broken from the outside-check; tie JBs hands to make it look like a weird bondage thing-check; dispose of the rest of the duct tape and rope used to strangle her-check; sexually assault JB's corpse to make it look like the a pervert was the culprit-check...But OOPS, left a rough draft of the ransom note on the kitchen counter and double oops, gave that very tablet to the police as a sample of Patsy's handwriting. You'd think that with all the time they had waiting for the body to be found, this oversight might have occurred to them and they would have put the pad in a drawer or something.

Quick question.

Can forensics tell if she was sexually assulted before or after death?

packer

[nuisanceposter]

Quick question.

Can forensics tell if she was sexually assulted before or after death?

packer

Yes, before. Her body showed signs of the injured tissues responding to the injury, which indicate she was alive when injured. Dr Wecht goes into a good bit of detail about it in his book.

[sweetcharlotte]

Just keep in mind that Dr. Wecht never actually examined JonBenet.

[nuisanceposter]

No, that's true, but he read Meyer's extensive autopsy and examined slides of JonBenet's tissues that were taken by Meyer at the time of the autopsy. IMO, he'd be able to tell if her body was responding to the injury by looking at slides of the actual tissue.

[LindaA]

Well, since you ask, I noticed Tober's use of "our home" but figured that since he rarely answers questions about his posts other than to repeat what he posted in the first place, I figured it was just a typo and not worth asking.

I think what Zoey finds objectionable, as do most of the IDIs is the constant criticism of everything the Ramseys did before or after JBR's death. It's as if they are saying, they didn't take care of their dog or cat, so they are bad people; they didn't shower often enough, so they must have killed JBR, they had her in pageants so they were obsessesed with sexuality, Patsy didn't dress as I think she should have, so she must have done it; John had a facelift, so he must have done it. If it isn't stated outright, it is implied by the tone of the post and the fact that it is posted at all. When someone posts things like that continually they kind of open themselves up for ridicule, especially if they are unwilling to back up their claim.

The truth is none of us knows the answer, unless someone here is the murderer, and I don't think that is the case. Even the RDIs can't decide if they think it was John, Patsy, or Burke. So let's take it easy on each other, whadda ya' say?

[shill]

You can apply that however you like, Charlotte, but please note that after I made that comment I added to the discussion how the practice note was not left in the pad, but discovered by CBI during their investigation of the pad. That was something no one else had bothered to note, and elvislives was under the impression the practice note was still on the pad. It wasn't.
Surprisingly LE didn't find the pad. John handed it to them.
The page with "Mr. and Mrs. l" is quite often referred to as the Practice Note and was still in the pad.
There are traces of bleed through that I'm assuming the CBI could make out what it said and could show that the pages missing from the pad had been used for a previous draft of the ransom note.

[elvislives]

You can apply that however you like, Charlotte, but please note that after I made that comment I added to the discussion how the practice note was not left in the pad, but discovered by CBI during their investigation of the pad. That was something no one else had bothered to note, and elvislives was under the impression the practice note was still on the pad. It wasn't.

NP, Actually I was under that impression--thanks for clarifying for me. Now I'll have to go the site (thanks sweetcharlotte for the link) and read more, then rethink my position. It definitely makes more sense from an rdi standpoint if the Rs destroyed the original practice note...I still think they were careless to use that pad, then provide it to police...but at least it shows they tried to cover their tracks which an intruder would not do imo.
I'm like a pendulum in this case...I swing from rdi to idi, from idi to rdi...I'm impressed that most of you, regardless of which side you're on, are so certain of your position. The evidence in this case is so confounding...and there is so much misinformation out there...that I'm still baffled.

[elvislives]

Surprisingly LE didn't find the pad. John handed it to them.
The page with "Mr. and Mrs. l" is quite often referred to as the Practice Note and was still in the pad.
There are traces of bleed through that I'm assuming the CBI could make out what it said and could show that the pages missing from the pad had been used for a previous draft of the ransom note.

The "Mr and Mrs" is what I was referring to when I said practice note. Was this in fact in the pad or was it just the impression of "Mr and Mrs" that was discovered by the lab?

[elvislives]

The "Mr and Mrs" is what I was referring to when I said practice note. Was this in fact in the pad or was it just the impression of "Mr and Mrs" that was discovered by the lab?

I just read thru sweetcharlottes link. My understanding from reading that is that the 'practice note' page 26 was a false start (Mr and Mrs) written in ink. Am I misinterpreting this? Was it the actual ink writing or was it just an impression left by a pen? There is a VERY significant difference imo. Can someone set me straight here??

[elvislives]

Yes, before. Her body showed signs of the injured tissues responding to the injury, which indicate she was alive when injured. Dr Wecht goes into a good bit of detail about it in his book.

ANOTHER reason why the 'Patsy did it accidently then staged a cover up' theory doesn't work. Do people really believe that Patsy hit JB by accident, then immediately sexually assaulted and strangled her within a few minutes (or even within 20-60 minutes) after the accident?? That just seems so preposterous to me...it's amazing that anyone believes that theory. Again, I'm not saying Patsy didnt do it, but that theory just doesnt add up imo.

[nuisanceposter]

I just read thru sweetcharlottes link. My understanding from reading that is that the 'practice note' page 26 was a false start (Mr and Mrs) written in ink. Am I misinterpreting this? Was it the actual ink writing or was it just an impression left by a pen? There is a VERY significant difference imo. Can someone set me straight here??

Oh, my fault...it seems to be bleed through. I was thinking I had read that the impression of the pen was seen also, though...I'm going to look for that.

[nuisanceposter]

ANOTHER reason why the 'Patsy did it accidently then staged a cover up' theory doesn't work. Do people really believe that Patsy hit JB by accident, then immediately sexually assaulted and strangled her within a few minutes (or even within 20-60 minutes) after the accident?? That just seems so preposterous to me...it's amazing that anyone believes that theory. Again, I'm not saying Patsy didnt do it, but that theory just doesnt add up imo.

Yes, I do believe it's possible and probable that JB was hit on the head and the decision to stage a strangulation/sex assault scene was made and enacted some 20 - 60 minutes later. I need to go read through Wecht's book again, but IIRC, he said that there wasn't as much response to the vaginal injury as there should have been, indicating the assault occurred very close to the death. I've read in two different sources (including a book by Dr Lee) that the head wound was fully developed, and there is no indication that JonBenet struggled whatsoever with the person who strangled her to death.

Therefore, I believe the head wound came first, followed by the staging of the sexual assault and strangulation - both done while she was unconscious - and I think we'd all be surprised what people are capable of when they feel backed into a corner offering prison and are desperately searching for an escape from that future.

[elvislives]

Yes, I do believe it's possible and probable that JB was hit on the head and the decision to stage a strangulation/sex assault scene was made and enacted some 20 - 60 minutes later. I need to go read through Wecht's book again, but IIRC, he said that there wasn't as much response to the vaginal injury as there should have been, indicating the assault occurred very close to the death. I've read in two different sources (including a book by Dr Lee) that the head wound was fully developed, and there is no indication that JonBenet struggled whatsoever with the person who strangled her to death.

Therefore, I believe the head wound came first, followed by the staging of the sexual assault and strangulation - both done while she was unconscious - and I think we'd all be surprised what people are capable of when they feel backed into a corner offering prison and are desperately searching for an escape from that future.

I haven't read Wechts book, but I do agree based on the autopsy that the vaginal injury happened very close to death. There are some MDs who even think it could have happened AFTER death--that would make so much more sense to me from a Patsy staging standpoint. But the injuries suggest she had bloodpressure when they were inflicted.

Human behaviour never ceases to amaze me, so you may be right. But imo from the rdi side of the fence, vaginal injuries prior to death point to JR as the perp whereas vaginal injuries post mortem point to PR just trying to cover up. JMO

Do me a favor if you could...if find a definition of "fully developed" can you post it? I work in a hospital and no one here has ever heard that term/phrase in relation to a head wound. I also did a medline search as well as checked several medical terms dictionaries and came up with nothing. I assume this is a lay term and I hear it used on this board all the time...just don't know what it means. Can you help define? Thanks!

[sweetcharlotte]

I just read thru sweetcharlottes link. My understanding from reading that is that the 'practice note' page 26 was a false start (Mr and Mrs) written in ink. Am I misinterpreting this? Was it the actual ink writing or was it just an impression left by a pen? There is a VERY significant difference imo. Can someone set me straight here??

My official answer is I don't know, but thinking aloud........

The way things were worded in the link it makes me think page 26 was an actual ink writing.

If I'm not mistaken the link said
-Page 25 was missing
-possible practice note
-bled through to page 26

Page 26 was not listed as missing and was listed as
-practice note

So you wouldn't consider a "bleed through" to be an actual practice note, would you?

[Tober]

You think with all the staging JR did, it didn't occur to him to stage the breakin?

Based on the fiber and handwriting evidence, the majority of the staging can be attributed to Patsy.

[bullmoose]

To elvislives: There was no rough draft of a ransom note;it never existed except in Steve Thomas' mind, all that was found on the pad was the beginning of another note, but no rough draft, no damning evidence, just an assumption by the Twister. Nuisanceposter: WHOOP! WHOOP! Reality alert, Reality Alert; how do you explain that Patsy clubbed her child, leaving no apparent injury, then decided to strangle her in such a cruel way to cover up a crime wound that wasn't visible to the naked eye and do so many strange things in an attempt to throw off an ineffectual police department, albeit led by our own Synthroid Stevie. Yet suspicion immediately fell on her; IMO Patsy would have had to have been one half Cruella DeVille and one half Dopey the Dwarf to concoct such an ridiculous scheme. I don't buy it. I too, have Dr Wecht's book on the case; are you shocked to know I stack it next to the Twister's Tome? Of course, I am an IDI, and all this is IMO.:biggrin:

[shill]

ANOTHER reason why the 'Patsy did it accidently then staged a cover up' theory doesn't work. Do people really believe that Patsy hit JB by accident, then immediately sexually assaulted and strangled her within a few minutes (or even within 20-60 minutes) after the accident?? That just seems so preposterous to me...it's amazing that anyone believes that theory. Again, I'm not saying Patsy didnt do it, but that theory just doesnt add up imo.
I could believe someone was strangling and penetrating JB and at some point JB got an opportunity to scream out, and the perpetrator’s reflex action was to strike her on the head to silence her. But instead of a knock out blow, it was a deathblow.

[andU]

Yes, the force was more than enough to silence her. The force of the blow may not have been intended, but I don't think it was done by either parent. Like Shill, I believe it was meant just to quiet her, not to shut her up forever.

[shill]

- and I think we'd all be surprised what people are capable of when they feel backed into a corner offering prison and are desperately searching for an escape from that future.

I would be surprised that Patsy felt backed into a corner offering prison and was desperately searching for an escape from that future, considering she wasn't even suppose to have been alive and new she still may not have long to live.
Having faced death already and survived, I don't think she would have much to fear.

[shill]

Based on the fiber and handwriting evidence, the majority of the staging can be attributed to Patsy.

Well you don't post it but we have come to know that your statements are just your worthless opinion.
But maybe you should post "IMWO" for those who don't know you.

[andU]

That surprise may come back to bite RDI's in the butt.

[elvislives]

Based on the fiber and handwriting evidence, the majority of the staging can be attributed to Patsy.

Then let me rephrase my question: You think with all the staging PR did, it didn't occur to her to stage the breakin?

[elvislives]

I could believe someone was strangling and penetrating JB and at some point JB got an opportunity to scream out, and the perpetrator’s reflex action was to strike her on the head to silence her. But instead of a knock out blow, it was a deathblow.

That would be consistent with the physical evidence

[bullmoose]

That would be consistent with the physical evidenceThis the scenario that seems the most likely to me, too.:(

[elvislives]

I would be surprised that Patsy felt backed into a corner offering prison and was desperately searching for an escape from that future, considering she wasn't even suppose to have been alive and new she still may not have long to live.
Having faced death already and survived, I don't think she would have much to fear.

People do all sorts of weird things, but what doesn't add up for me is this: Patsy clubs her kid and unintentionally delivers a lethal blow. JB had no external signs of injury (the coroner didnt even notice the head wound until the internal exam). So for all Patsy knows, JB may just be knocked out and may come around in an hour or so. But instead of taking a wait and see approach...or even spending some time planning the cover up, she IMMEDIATELY strangles JB and even sexually assaults her while she is still alive to stage the crime. Why the rush? She couldn't wait to sexually assault her daughter at least until she was dead? I would feel a lot different about this theory if the head wound and sexual assault were inflicted after death.

[bullmoose]

People do all sorts of weird things, but what doesn't add up for me is this: Patsy clubs her kid and unintentionally delivers a lethal blow. JB had no external signs of injury (the coroner didnt even notice the head wound until the internal exam). So for all Patsy knows, JB may just be knocked out and may come around in an hour or so. But instead of taking a wait and see approach...or even spending some time planning the cover up, she IMMEDIATELY strangles JB and even sexually assaults her while she is still alive to stage the crime. Why the rush? She couldn't wait to sexually assault her daughter at least until she was dead? I would feel a lot different about this theory if the head wound and sexual assault were inflicted after death.Be very careful, elvislives. You have stated before that you are a doctor and now you are saying that the Patsy did theory has holes in it. If you aren't careful you may become an IDI, like me, by default. Just kidding, I enjoy your posts and musings.:biggrin:

[elvislives]

Be very careful, elvislives. You have stated before that you are a doctor and now you are saying that the Patsy did theory has holes in it. If you aren't careful you may become an IDI, like me, by default. Just kidding, I enjoy your posts and musings.:biggrin:

I think you are inferring way too much from my posts. I'm still a fence sitter ;)

[Tober]

Then let me rephrase my question: You think with all the staging PR did, it didn't occur to her to stage the breakin?

IMO, she wasn't concerned with staging a break-in. Enough people had keys to her home that she planned on "suggesting" that some of them may have perpetrated the crime against JonBenet. (IMO)

[bullmoose]

Tober: Are you inferring that Patsy planned the crime in advance of cruelly strangling her child, then crushing her skull? Planning clearly infers premeditation, is that the inferrence that you are making? Even for you this is a leap of logic,inferring some kind of inside clairvoyance of Patsy's mind.:eek:

[thewhitewitch1]

I could believe someone was strangling and penetrating JB and at some point JB got an opportunity to scream out, and the perpetrator’s reflex action was to strike her on the head to silence her. But instead of a knock out blow, it was a deathblow.


But why would an intruder do these things to her while her parents were there, in her own home? Why a ransom note?? If it was a real RN, why didn't he just take her out of the house and do these things to her elsewhere where there was no chance of being caught? If it wasn't real, why write it and leave evidence? Where was the duct tape at the time he was strangling her and "penetrating" her? Shouldn't he have used it before he started hurting her? Is it even possible to scream when you are being strangled?

[thewhitewitch1]

I would be surprised that Patsy felt backed into a corner offering prison and was desperately searching for an escape from that future, considering she wasn't even suppose to have been alive and new she still may not have long to live.
Having faced death already and survived, I don't think she would have much to fear.


She thought she was "miraculously" cured. She didn't know she would have a recurrance.

[bullmoose]

Hey there,tww: I know from reading the book DOI that Patsy claimed to be cured of her stage four ovarian cancer; I think that she desperately wanted to be, and believed in thinking positively about it; but the chance of the cancer not eventually reoccurring was very low. I do not believe it was ever an abduction; I think it was someone wanting to hurt and destroy the Ramseys, especially John; the strange staging was IMO to throw permanent suspician on the Ramseys. I think doing all that was done to Jonbenet in the house was done for the extremely sick thrill it gave to the killer/s.But I don't have any solid suspect that I can name.:(

[Tober]

Tober: Are you inferring that Patsy planned the crime in advance of cruelly strangling her child, then crushing her skull?
No. IMO, JonBenet was bludgeoned in the head first and then strangled with a scarf approximately 20-60 minutes after that. Sometime after that, the neck ligature was tied around her neck after which the paint brush handle was added for the "fake garrote" portion of the ligature. (IMO)

[shill]

No. IMO, JonBenet was bludgeoned in the head first and then strangled with a scarf approximately 20-60 minutes after that. Sometime after that, the neck ligature was tied around her neck after which the paint brush handle was added for the "fake garrote" portion of the ligature. (IMO)

Three strikes and she's out?

So was the neck ligature not "fake" looking enough that they added the handle, or was the neck ligature to "real" looking that they added the handle to look fake, or was the neck ligature to "fake" looking they added the handle to try and make it look real?
What happened to the scarf? Was the fake ligature to cover up the use of a scarf? If so, why wouldn't the killer want anyone to know they used a scarf?
And lastly, are you taking your meds?

[bullmoose]

No. IMO, JonBenet was bludgeoned in the head first and then strangled with a scarf approximately 20-60 minutes after that. Sometime after that, the neck ligature was tied around her neck after which the paint brush handle was added for the "fake garrote" portion of the ligature. (IMO)IMO, I think that your scenario is unbelievable.

[createthis]

I partly agree with Tober on this one. (Except I think the head blow came in between a partial scarf strangulation and the ligature). I think the cord was used to cover up that a scarf was used on her first. There was the trianular looking mark left and that had to be covered up, hence the staging of the garrotte. I think she was being yanked or pulled a bit with the scarf and maybe this is when the skull wound was inflicted.

[thewhitewitch1]

Three strikes and she's out?

So was the neck ligature not "fake" looking enough that they added the handle, or was the neck ligature to "real" looking that they added the handle to look fake, or was the neck ligature to "fake" looking they added the handle to try and make it look real?
What happened to the scarf? Was the fake ligature to cover up the use of a scarf? If so, why wouldn't the killer want anyone to know they used a scarf?
And lastly, are you taking your meds?

The scarf used was most likely that mysterious "recently purchased" scarf the JR placed in the casket to be buried forever with JB. Bye bye evidence. IMO
The garrote was constructed to go with the "small foreign faction" theme of the RN. IMO

[createthis]

The scarf used was most likely that mysterious "recently purchased" scarf the JR placed in the casket to be buried forever with JB. Bye bye evidence. IMO
The garrote was constructed to go with the "small foreign faction" theme of the RN. IMO

I can go with John placing the scarf in her casket to get rid of evidence, but how does "small foreing faction" go with a garrotte? How would JR or PR know that info?

[bullmoose]

I can go with John placing the scarf in her casket to get rid of evidence, but how does "small foreing faction" go with a garrotte? How would JR or PR know that info?Don't you see? Its part of the elaborate plan of clever misdirection to throw the Superheros at the BPD off the true trail, somewhere else here I read that the garrotte was used by the Thuggees in India for their ritual murders; since the note said 'small foreign faction, doubtless the fiendishly evil Ramseys wrote the note and fashioned the fake garrotte after bashing her skull a couple hours after coming home from the Christmas party. If not for Colorado's Caped Crusader seeing through the wicked ruse, these Lex Luthor wannabes would have gotten cleanly away with it. Can you hear it; the mantra:Patsy did it, Patsy did it,Patsy did it. OOOPS, it must be that tinnitus again! Of course this is JMHO.:biggrin:

[thewhitewitch1]

I can go with John placing the scarf in her casket to get rid of evidence, but how does "small foreing faction" go with a garrotte? How would JR or PR know that info?


Small foreign faction implies "terrorists". They could have seen something in a movie or read it in a book regarding the use of a garrote. If you want to stage a murder to look horrific and like something a parent wouldn't do, I would think that a garrote would point more away from a parent than a silk scarf would. IMO
At any rate, the LE were very interested in scarves and asked a lot of questions about scarves given away by the Rs and scarves the Rs owned. It made me wonder why. Maybe the fact that she had been strangled with something else first is evidence that the public doesn't have access to. I do find it odd that JR put that "recently purchased" scarf with JB in her casket. Everyone else put something of meaning; of sentiment in with her. I know I am going to get bashed by someone for this too, but Patsys description of JR "tucking it around her like a final blanket of love" just made me flash on JR "tucked in pappoose style" in her blanket in the wine cellar. JR did a lot of "tucking" with JB, right down to when he covered her body on the floor after bringing her upstairs. I could be reading too much into this but it's something that bothers me. IMO

[LindaA]

Hmmm, TWW1, your last post posed an interesting thought.

[Zoey]

Small foreign faction implies "terrorists". They could have seen something in a movie or read it in a book regarding the use of a garrote. If you want to stage a murder to look horrific and like something a parent wouldn't do, I would think that a garrote would point more away from a parent than a silk scarf would. IMO
At any rate, the LE were very interested in scarves and asked a lot of questions about scarves given away by the Rs and scarves the Rs owned. It made me wonder why. Maybe the fact that she had been strangled with something else first is evidence that the public doesn't have access to. I do find it odd that JR put that "recently purchased" scarf with JB in her casket. Everyone else put something of meaning; of sentiment in with her. I know I am going to get bashed by someone for this too, but Patsys description of JR "tucking it around her like a final blanket of love" just made me flash on JR "tucked in pappoose style" in her blanket in the wine cellar. JR did a lot of "tucking" with JB, right down to when he covered her body on the floor after bringing her upstairs. I could be reading too much into this but it's something that bothers me. IMO


I always wondered, since we have never been shown any photos of JB from the waist down, if perhaps there had been a scarf wrapped around her legs? Could this be why the LE was so interested in where the scarves came from and who had one and what they looked like?

I thought JR wanted her covered with a blanket or something so that Patsy did not have to see her looking the way she was. Was there something horrible from the waist down that would have freaked everyone out? Is this also why Arndt threw the Avalanche sweatshirt over her?

[bullmoose]

Small foreign faction implies "terrorists". They could have seen something in a movie or read it in a book regarding the use of a garrote. If you want to stage a murder to look horrific and like something a parent wouldn't do, I would think that a garrote would point more away from a parent than a silk scarf would. IMO
At any rate, the LE were very interested in scarves and asked a lot of questions about scarves given away by the Rs and scarves the Rs owned. It made me wonder why. Maybe the fact that she had been strangled with something else first is evidence that the public doesn't have access to. I do find it odd that JR put that "recently purchased" scarf with JB in her casket. Everyone else put something of meaning; of sentiment in with her. I know I am going to get bashed by someone for this too, but Patsys description of JR "tucking it around her like a final blanket of love" just made me flash on JR "tucked in pappoose style" in her blanket in the wine cellar. JR did a lot of "tucking" with JB, right down to when he covered her body on the floor after bringing her upstairs. I could be reading too much into this but it's something that bothers me. IMOIn Steve Thomas book, on page 31, it states that John Ramsey got a blanket and 'tossed it over the body before Arndt could react.' Arndt, it continues, compounded the error by adjusting the quilt so the body was covered from the neck down. I know I've obviously missed something here; that doesn't sound like he tucked her or was tucking her in papoose style; actually it sounds like Linda Arndt came closest to doing that. It sounds like he just covered her, doesn't it?

[thewhitewitch1]

In Steve Thomas book, on page 31, it states that John Ramsey got a blanket and 'tossed it over the body before Arndt could react.' Arndt, it continues, compounded the error by adjusting the quilt so the body was covered from the neck down. I know I've obviously missed something here; that doesn't sound like he tucked her or was tucking her in papoose style; actually it sounds like Linda Arndt came closest to doing that. It sounds like he just covered her, doesn't it?

I didn't mean to imply that he "tucked her in" literally when he covered her with the blanket after bringing her upstairs. He just "covered her" a lot..and the scarf was tucked in around her and her body was wrapped "pappoose-like" in the cellar. Covering her period is as good as "tucking her in" to me. Just her body being wrapped that way and John and his tucking/covering "instincts" may mean something. Or not. Just thought I'd put it out there.

[createthis]

This is off the subject, but can anyone tell me when Linda's memoirs are coming out? I thought it was supposed to be in November 06?

[Louisadelmar]

This is off the subject, but can anyone tell me when Linda's memoirs are coming out? I thought it was supposed to be in November 06?

I don't recall ever seeing a date. I suspect there won't ever be a book but for this one I keep hoping.

[createthis]

I don't recall ever seeing a date. I suspect there won't ever be a book but for this one I keep hoping.

Thanks for your reply. I would as many others love to hear Linda's take on things. I mean she was there and had gut reactions to things first, before everything got misconstrued.

[nuisanceposter]

She also developed amnesia at one point, and claimed she couldn't remember anything about the Ramsey case, so BPD was going to have to refer to her reports for any info they needed.

[Louisadelmar]

Didn't Fleet White also develop amnesia at some point? Maybe it's contagious...

[nuisanceposter]

I don't recall hearing that, and I haven't heard of FW writing a book about the case, either.

The amnesia is this case is so contagious, they coined a term for it - "Ramnesia." Several people on the case were stricken.

[createthis]

Out of curiousity, does anyone know what color the sweater that Ariana wore(LHP's daughter) was the night of the Xmas party 12-23?

Does anyone know if she wore it home after the party or if Patsy retrieved it? It was Patsy's.

[sweetcharlotte]

Out of curiousity, does anyone know what color the sweater that Ariana wore(LHP's daughter) was the night of the Xmas party 12-23?

Does anyone know if she wore it home after the party or if Patsy retrieved it? It was Patsy's.

I believe I read in PM/PT that is was a Christmas vest but I don't remember a description being offered. If it was a "Christmas" garment I would think it would be traditional colors, red, black, white, green, brown. Would be interesting to know colors and the type of fibers - IMO.

[Louisadelmar]

I don't recall hearing that, and I haven't heard of FW writing a book about the case, either.

The amnesia is this case is so contagious, they coined a term for it - "Ramnesia." Several people on the case were stricken.

Don't have time to see if it's in a 'reliable' source but here's a link to discussion at WS.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-11680

[nuisanceposter]

Don't have time to see if it's in a 'reliable' source but here's a link to discussion at WS.
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-11680

Well, thanks...but the link Jayelles supplied from Candy in her first post of the thread returns with this:

You have requested a topic that does not exist!

so I can't read the letter that is being referred to. In reading Jayelles' two opening posts summarizing the letter (and I consider her to be a solid source for information), it does not sound as if FW is suffering from Ramnesia, and writing a letter is hardly in the same realm of comparison as writing a book.

My point with Arndt is, if she told police she didn't remember a thing and they should just go with what was in her reports, how valid is a book from her going to be? What, she's now remembered everything again?

[Sharon]

[QUOTE=createthis;8796692]Just thinking of basics here. Why is this case so difficult to solve? The killer obviously knew Ramsey's (or it was the Ramsey's), the house., $118. etc. the suspect list shouldn't be long to go through. I believe the killer made the 911 call the night of the Xmas party to get estimate of time for police to arrive etc. So this murder was premeditated. I don't think anyone writes a 3 pg note "after" a killing? Linda P. interests me. (and her spouse)


Your post reflects my thoughts on this. The maid would have known how the household ran better than PR herself.

Is it a stretch to wonder if the maid ever worked for the Whites?:biggrin:

[Sharon]

She might have wanted the loan before Christmas to buy gifts, and Patsy ruined their Christmas by waiting to give her the money, so she sought revenge.

The thing here is that Patsy never wrote the cheque and probably didnt promice to do so in a definate manner. She probably gave one of her answers that is neither here nor there which would have been very upsetting for the maid asking for $.

I read her interview with police about thye cheque & PR seemed slighly non commited about when & whether she was going to write the cheque. It seemed that she was embarrest to not give it, but begrudged giving it all the same.

I have staff work for me & know the dynamics.

[Jayelles]

Well, thanks...but the link Jayelles supplied from Candy in her first post of the thread returns with this:

You have requested a topic that does not exist!

so I can't read the letter that is being referred to. In reading Jayelles' two opening posts summarizing the letter (and I consider her to be a solid source for information), it does not sound as if FW is suffering from Ramnesia, and writing a letter is hardly in the same realm of comparison as writing a book.

My point with Arndt is, if she told police she didn't remember a thing and they should just go with what was in her reports, how valid is a book from her going to be? What, she's now remembered everything again?

This is Fleet White's letter to the People of Boulder:-

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/08171998whitetopeopleco.htm

Now regarding Fleet's "amnesia" ... As I understand it, Fleet White asked to see his previous statements before his deposition and was refused and I believe he either knew or suspected that the Ramseys had been allowed this privilege so he was understandably upset. Therefore, during his deposition, he "did a Ramsey" and responded with "I can't recall" to a number of the questions.

I have to say that if that had been me, I might have done the same. It's a common enough tactic to feign ignorance rather than tell a lie when you don't want to answer a question. Candy says that he could be charged with perjury but I really doubt he could. For example, I have a poor memory for names and numbers (like telephone numbers). I often sit for ages going through the alphabet trying to remember someone's name. Oftimes, I will say "I can't remember his name off the top of my head".... "If you leave it with me, I'll get back to you when I do remember" ..... kind of thing. It would be true to say I didn't remember AT THAT PRECISE MOMENT.

I think the Authorities would have a very difficult job proving that Fleet White was lying/committing perjury when he said he couldn't recall a detail for this precise reason.


IMO, he was simply being unco-operative because of his indignation at what he felt were double standards.

[Athena]

This is Fleet White's letter to the People of Boulder:-

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/08171998whitetopeopleco.htm

Now regarding Fleet's "amnesia" ... As I understand it, Fleet White asked to see his previous statements before his deposition and was refused and I believe he either knew or suspected that the Ramseys had been allowed this privilege so he was understandably upset. Therefore, during his deposition, he "did a Ramsey" and responded with "I can't recall" to a number of the questions.

I have to say that if that had been me, I might have done the same. It's a common enough tactic to feign ignorance rather than tell a lie when you don't want to answer a question. Candy says that he could be charged with perjury but I really doubt he could. For example, I have a poor memory for names and numbers (like telephone numbers). I often sit for ages going through the alphabet trying to remember someone's name. Oftimes, I will say "I can't remember his name off the top of my head".... "If you leave it with me, I'll get back to you when I do remember" ..... kind of thing. It would be true to say I didn't remember AT THAT PRECISE MOMENT.

I think the Authorities would have a very difficult job proving that Fleet White was lying/committing perjury when he said he couldn't recall a detail for this precise reason.


IMO, he was simply being unco-operative because of his indignation at what he felt were double standards.


NP I understand what you are saying however this is a double standard don't you think? When the Ramseys have done exactly what you would excuse FW for doing; it would be said that the Ramseys were lying.

Having been a witness myself usually if you've responded to something before and cannot recall the answer, and there is official documentation of it - the lawyer asks the court's permission to show the witness the document; allow him/her to read it and then ask if it refreshes their memory and then asks the question again. JMO

[Zoey]

NP I understand what you are saying however this is a double standard don't you think? When the Ramseys have done exactly what you would excuse FW for doing; it would be said that the Ramseys were lying.

Having been a witness myself usually if you've responded to something before and cannot recall the answer, and there is official documentation of it - the lawyer asks the court's permission to show the witness the document; allow him/her to read it and then ask if it refreshes their memory and then asks the question again. JMO

Was it NP who said on other forums they say the Ramsey's suffered from Ramnesia? So I guess Fleet suffered from Flemnesia:biggrin:

[bullmoose]

Was it NP who said on other forums they say the Ramsey's suffered from Ramnesia? So I guess Fleet suffered from Flemnesia:biggrin: I don't think it was just Flemnesia that Fleet was suffering from, I think he had a bad case of Whiteout Flemnesia.JMHO:biggrin:

[shill]

IMO, he was simply being unco-operative because of his indignation at what he felt were double standards.


If Fleet White had nothing to hide he would co-operate with LE and do what ever he could to help find the killer of his best friends little girl.
(Dejavu,:shrug: I swear I've read this before but the name was different.)

[Athena]

If Fleet White had nothing to hide he would co-operate with LE and do what ever he could to help find the killer of his best friends little girl.
(Dejavu,:shrug: I swear I've read this before but the name was different.)

I agree shill. For someone to want justice and writes all these letters for a special prosecutor; then be held in contempt of court doesn't say to much for his credibility does it? He certainly created his own double standard.

[Sharon]

If Fleet White had nothing to hide he would co-operate with LE and do what ever he could to help find the killer of his best friends little girl.
(Dejavu,:shrug: I swear I've read this before but the name was different.)

Good call!!!

Have you read the letter Fleet (or his lawyers) wrote. It really is the war & peace of letters...I found it impossible to get through, but I skimmed it. Does anyone else get the impression that this letter was very anti R. It left me thinking that the pupose of the letter was to paint the R in a very bad light because it basically hints at them using corrupt lawyers who were secretly involved in the sale of R. company or some type of conflict of interests existed. It seems to say the R. have caused the corruption due to their contacts with top officials who are all in on it together??? It doesnt say one positive word about the R. throughout.......I wouldnt call him a friend of the R. at this point, more arch enemies.

Does any one else agree?

Also, I find him odd to say the least. He does not act as a friend from the get go imo. Most friends who suspect their good friends of murder might back away, and maybe even try to not get involved. Or they would support their friends till the friends are proven other than innocent. this gut sort of acts like he is in charge of the investigation from the beginning.

To me FW is a definate person of interest as is the maid. Is there any known link between the two. Could have the maid ever worked for the Whites as well as the R?

the above are just my opinions and random thoughts

[thewhitewitch1]

Good call!!!

Have you read the letter Fleet (or his lawyers) wrote. It really is the war & peace of letters...I found it impossible to get through, but I skimmed it. Does anyone else get the impression that this letter was very anti R. It left me thinking that the pupose of the letter was to paint the R in a very bad light because it basically hints at them using corrupt lawyers who were secretly involved in the sale of R. company or some type of conflict of interests existed. It seems to say the R. have caused the corruption due to their contacts with top officials who are all in on it together??? It doesnt say one positive word about the R. throughout.......I wouldnt call him a friend of the R. at this point, more arch enemies.

Does any one else agree?

Also, I find him odd to say the least. He does not act as a friend from the get go imo. Most friends who suspect their good friends of murder might back away, and maybe even try to not get involved. Or they would support their friends till the friends are proven other than innocent. this gut sort of acts like he is in charge of the investigation from the beginning.

To me FW is a definate person of interest as is the maid. Is there any known link between the two. Could have the maid ever worked for the Whites as well as the R?

the above are just my opinions and random thoughts

Sharon, the FW letters were written after the murder (of course). At that time I believe FW believed the Rs were involved in JBs murder. The anger you read into the letters might be because the Ramseys tried to implicate the Whites as the murderers.
I'm pretty sure the housekeeper and her husband were cleared and I don't believe she worked for the Whites.

[Athena]

Out of curiousity, does anyone know what color the sweater that Ariana wore(LHP's daughter) was the night of the Xmas party 12-23?

Does anyone know if she wore it home after the party or if Patsy retrieved it? It was Patsy's.

I haven't the slightest clue what Ariana looks like but here is a picture of the kids from the party of the 23rd:

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doc228.jpg

[Sharon]

Sharon, the FW letters were written after the murder (of course). At that time I believe FW believed the Rs were involved in JBs murder. The anger you read into the letters might be because the Ramseys tried to implicate the Whites as the murderers.
I'm pretty sure the housekeeper and her husband were cleared and I don't believe she worked for the Whites.

Ok, then is it accepted knowledge that the letter was aimed at pointing the finger of guilt away from himself & towards the R. As apposed to just wanting better quality LE involved. What Im trying to say...he wasnt trying to help the R. per say by his letter. (Before reading it) I thought his letter was just a request for more man power or better resources to be put towards the case, but he really digged the dirt on the R. in his letter. He sounded like a real dobber.

[shill]

Fleets is also a big mooch, sticking John with the tab for all their boating get togethers and other expenses.

[bullmoose]

You know, since I've studied this case, I've been puzzled by Fleet White, not just Fleet White's role in finding Jonbenet, but his subsequent and lasting odd behavior; I've read that he was retired and had old oil money,but I don't really know that for sure. Who is he,really? Unless there is somebody on this board knows a whole lot more about him than I do, then maybe I,or somebody should try to figure this guy out better. How old was he in1996? How long had he been retired? Exactly from what, what is Fleet's story? I'd like to know.

[Zoey]

You know, since I've studied this case, I've been puzzled by Fleet White, not just Fleet White's role in finding Jonbenet, but his subsequent and lasting odd behavior; I've read that he was retired and had old oil money,but I don't really know that for sure. Who is he,really? Unless there is somebody on this board knows a whole lot more about him than I do, then maybe I,or somebody should try to figure this guy out better. How old was he in1996? How long had he been retired? Exactly from what, what is Fleet's story? I'd like to know.

FW was approximately 50 years old in 1996. His money came from his dad, Fleet White, Sr., who had oil companies in California. It was not that Fleet was retired, he was just not sure what he wanted to do, so he stayed home with the kids.

I believe I read somewhere that there is a period of time that FW's whereabouts are unknown for a 4-5 year period. This was before the murder of JB, of course. Also something about him having two social security numbers. Now, I don't have the links, I believe I read it on another forum, so take it with a grain of salt.

[aussiesheila]

Does anybody besides myself see in these quotes from three sources the fact that only the Twister's version seems slanted so as to put Patsy in a negative light? But then its a twisterpiece of investigative literature, isn't it?By juxtaposing three supposedly factual records of the same event bullmoose has demonstrated clearly how biases inevitably colour one's perception of events.

I have never read DOI or the ST book, as IMO they would be far too biased to be of any value. I have read PMPT as I think it is a unbiased as you can probably get, seeing as how (as far as we know), Schiller was a disinterested party.


Brilliant effort bullmoose
(IMO)

sorry, I should have said Louisa
(IMO)
(and bullmoose)

wow, just in the nick of time
(wish we could have more than 5 mins for editing)

[aussiesheila]

The fiber and handwriting evidence pointing to Patsy are not my opinion, they are known evidence.Tober, I agree with you that the handwriting evidence points to Patsy having written the ransom note, but I don't see where there is any fibre evidence that necessarily points to Patsy. Can you please point out exactly where you think it does? (Even if you have done so before, can you please repeat it for me.)
Thanks

[thewhitewitch1]

Fleets is also a big mooch, sticking John with the tab for all their boating get togethers and other expenses.

Once again, this is only a Ramsey statement with nothing to back it up. That doesn't mean it's true.

[Tober]

Sheila, in the Atlanta 2000 interviews it was disclosed that fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket that she wore the night JonBenet was killed were found on the blanket her body was wrapped in (body room), on the sticky side of the duct tape that covered her mouth (body room), tied into the ligature that was around her neck (body room), and in the paint tote (outside body room). Patsy denies ever painting in that sweater-jacket or wearing it in the basement, which is why those fibers found in those places are incriminating, as Patsy can't offer a legitimate reason for them to be there. This post is my opinion.

[Athena]

Sheila, in the Atlanta 2000 interviews it was disclosed that fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket that she wore the night JonBenet was killed were found on the blanket her body was wrapped in (body room), on the sticky side of the duct tape that covered her mouth (body room), tied into the ligature that was around her neck (body room), and in the paint tote (outside body room). Patsy denies ever painting in that sweater-jacket or wearing it in the basement, which is why those fibers found in those places are incriminating, as Patsy can't offer a legitimate reason for them to be there. This post is my opinion.

Oh but we know that interrogators don't lie to try to make a suspect think they have more than they have. Funny even ST nor Beckner mention these fibers in their depo and Beckner was specifically questioned about fibers as was ST. This is the only place it appears about the paint tray and ligature and people repeating it doesn't make it true. JMO

[shill]

Sheila, in the Atlanta 2000 interviews it was disclosed that fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket that she wore the night JonBenet was killed were found on the blanket her body was wrapped in (body room), on the sticky side of the duct tape that covered her mouth (body room), tied into the ligature that was around her neck (body room), and in the paint tote (outside body room). Patsy denies ever painting in that sweater-jacket or wearing it in the basement, which is why those fibers found in those places are incriminating, as Patsy can't offer a legitimate reason for them to be there. This post is my opinion.

Had the R's staged everything Patsy could have said, "yes I've worn that jacket downstairs before and around the paint tote" and "JB might have gotten up in the middle of the night for a snack" "Burke might have gotten up some time last night, ask him" "JB wanted to wear those oversize panties to the party so I let her" among many other simple replies they could have made to cover up their ALLEGED staging.

[bullmoose]

Sheila, in the Atlanta 2000 interviews it was disclosed that fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket that she wore the night JonBenet was killed were found on the blanket her body was wrapped in (body room), on the sticky side of the duct tape that covered her mouth (body room), tied into the ligature that was around her neck (body room), and in the paint tote (outside body room). Patsy denies ever painting in that sweater-jacket or wearing it in the basement, which is why those fibers found in those places are incriminating, as Patsy can't offer a legitimate reason for them to be there. This post is my opinion.Tell me Tober, when was Patsy asked to offer a legitimate reason, as to why the fibers were found where they were? You say say its incriminating as Patsy can't offer a legitimate reason for them to be there; tell me why in her own house any fibers from any of her clothes would need specific explanation? Your twisted logic reminds me of an author I've read. HmmJMHO:biggrin:

[Sharon]

Three strikes and she's out?

So was the neck ligature not "fake" looking enough that they added the handle, or was the neck ligature to "real" looking that they added the handle to look fake, or was the neck ligature to "fake" looking they added the handle to try and make it look real?
What happened to the scarf? Was the fake ligature to cover up the use of a scarf? If so, why wouldn't the killer want anyone to know they used a scarf?
And lastly, are you taking your meds?

Well said......I get really confused by all the fake /real stuff & the real/ fake stuff.....

[Sharon]

TE=thewhitewitch1;8813853]Sharon, the FW letters were written after the murder (of course). At that time I believe FW believed the Rs were involved in JBs murder. The anger you read into the letters might be because the Ramseys tried to implicate the Whites as the murderers.
I'm pretty sure the housekeeper and her husband were cleared and I don't believe she worked for the Whites.[/QUOTE]


Ok, I need to get something clarified here. There are many persons of interest who have been cleared in this case. This would have to mean (1)the real murderers are unknown & we cant discuss them because they are unknown or (2) it is someone who was previously cleared.

There are many cases where the murderer got away with it for years despite being a person of interest. And there doesnt even have to be a cover up for the perpetrator to get away with it.

So in that light, I continue to focus on the maid, her relatives, Fleet White and Santa. They are my main persons of interest that I can think of.

Unless I am convinced of sexual abuse from the R. to their daughter, I cant think of a single reason they would go out of their way to kill her, before Christmas & giving her her special present. (I dont know how the head wound could be accidental, and I believe the garret was functional).

Furthermore, I dont read setup in any of the clues. I dont think the R. would write a rn that included stuff like `dont grow a brain`. The first part of the rn that is respectful maybe..... but not the ridiculing part that the rn degenerates into.

But there are two things that bother me about the R (1) they called friends over first thing. Could they have rang FW to see if he knew anything because he was their last person of contact & FW invited himself over, having been waiting for the call knowing what was going to unfold???

(2) why didnt P ever get back to nthat woman who tried to warn her there was alot going on that she didnt know......why would P tell that she always regreted that, but not actually go back & call the woman up on the issue?

[nuisanceposter]

<snip>

This would have to mean (1)the real murderers are unknown & we cant discuss them because they are unknown or (2) it is someone who was previously cleared.

There are many cases where the murderer got away with it for years despite being a person of interest. And there doesnt even have to be a cover up for the perpetrator to get away with it.

<snip>


Or it's someone who was never cleared.

Here's where I'd like to point out that John and Patsy Ramsey both are still prime suspects in their daughter's murder and have never been cleared.

[Athena]

Or it's someone who was never cleared.

Here's where I'd like to point out that John and Patsy Ramsey both are still prime suspects in their daughter's murder and have never been cleared.

Just because some did not match DNA does not mean they were cleared. Other than Chris Wolf we just don't know who they are: (11/01)

15 Q After he was cleared?

16 A You're using the word cleared. We've

17 never cleared Chris Wolf.

18 Q Well, maybe that's -- I meant to go over

19 that with you. To take someone out from under the

20 umbrella of suspicion, does in effect say, as you

21 said in the statement to Chris Anderson, that that

22 person is no longer an active suspect, right?

23 A Correct.

24 Q Without trying to invent a new

25 classification, I think that what you're saying from


131

1 a practical standpoint is that the person is

2 basically until the crime is solved, would remain an

3 inactive suspect?

4 A Not necessarily. You could develop new

5 information all the time.

6 Q That's what I mean until the case is

7 solved they would remain an inactive suspect --

8 A Not necessarily --

9 Q But could they --

10 A -- solve it.

11 Q Well, wait a minute.

12 A Not necessarily solve it.

13 Q But perhaps get information that would put

14 that person back under the umbrella or maybe even

15 make that person a suspect?

16 A Absolutely.

17 Q That possibility still exists today as it

18 pertains to Chris Wolf, doesn't it?

19 A Absolutely.

20 Q I mean, you have not excluded Chris Wolf

21 as being involved in this murder?

22 A As far as clearing him, no, we have not.

23 Q And would I be safe without going into

24 specific names, would I be safe in saying that there

25 are, it's a considerable number of individuals who


132

1 have not been cleared, even though they may not at

2 this moment be under the umbrella of suspicion?

3 A I think that's true any time you have an

4 open case.

5 Q And it's true in this case?

6 A Yes.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/11262001Depo-MarkBeckner.htm

[andU]

Just because some did not match DNA does not mean they were cleared. Other than Chris Wolf we just don't know who they are: (11/01)

15 Q After he was cleared?

16 A You're using the word cleared. We've

17 never cleared Chris Wolf.

18 Q Well, maybe that's -- I meant to go over

19 that with you. To take someone out from under the

20 umbrella of suspicion, does in effect say, as you

21 said in the statement to Chris Anderson, that that

22 person is no longer an active suspect, right?

23 A Correct.

24 Q Without trying to invent a new

25 classification, I think that what you're saying from


131

1 a practical standpoint is that the person is

2 basically until the crime is solved, would remain an

3 inactive suspect?

4 A Not necessarily. You could develop new

5 information all the time.

6 Q That's what I mean until the case is

7 solved they would remain an inactive suspect --

8 A Not necessarily --

9 Q But could they --

10 A -- solve it.

11 Q Well, wait a minute.

12 A Not necessarily solve it.

13 Q But perhaps get information that would put

14 that person back under the umbrella or maybe even

15 make that person a suspect?

16 A Absolutely.

17 Q That possibility still exists today as it

18 pertains to Chris Wolf, doesn't it?

19 A Absolutely.

20 Q I mean, you have not excluded Chris Wolf

21 as being involved in this murder?

22 A As far as clearing him, no, we have not.

23 Q And would I be safe without going into

24 specific names, would I be safe in saying that there

25 are, it's a considerable number of individuals who


132

1 have not been cleared, even though they may not at

2 this moment be under the umbrella of suspicion?

3 A I think that's true any time you have an

4 open case.

5 Q And it's true in this case?

6 A Yes.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/11262001Depo-MarkBeckner.htm

So, from this quote, couldn't we all agree that there are more suspects than the Ramsey's? Isn't there a possibility that they could be not guilty of killing their daughter? From the above quote, I would say, "Yes"...

[bullmoose]

So, from this quote, couldn't we all agree that there are more suspects than the Ramsey's? Isn't there a possibility that they could be not guilty of killing their daughter? From the above quote, I would say, "Yes"... Suspect is a term that fell out of use in copspeak about ten years ago because of the Richard Jewell debacle, when the FBI and various news outlets made fools of themselves. Cops love to be ambiguous and to use terminology that is unintelligable to normal people. I think that it makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside when they can baffle John Q. Public as to what they mean or are referring to. My own experience with Idaho's version of the Colorado Caped Crusaders colors my opinion , of course.In my opinion, a cop could have written the infamous ransom note because of the Dirty Harry terminology in it. Cops, IMO, just love those Dirty Harry movies, IMHO watching them also makes them feel warm and fuzzy inside.:biggrin:

[LindaA]

Bullmoose, do you mean phrases like "you're good for it"?

[Tober]

So, from this quote, couldn't we all agree that there are more suspects than the Ramsey's?

None of the known suspects fit within the "totality of the evidence," as do the Ramseys. Either they are the most unlucky people in the world, or they were involved with JonBenet's death and the cover-up of her death. This post is my opinion.

[LindaA]

None of the known suspects fit within the "totality of the evidence," as do the Ramseys. Either they are the most unlucky people in the world, or they were involved with JonBenet's death and the cover-up of her death. This post is my opinion.


Or they were purposely "framed" to borrow a term from copspeak.

[bullmoose]

None of the known suspects fit within the "totality of the evidence," as do the Ramseys. Either they are the most unlucky people in the world, or they were involved with JonBenet's death and the cover-up of her death. This post is my opinion. We all know that the Ramseys were at their home when Jonbenet was murdered, so naturally the BPD looked at them first. I think the Ramseys are among the unluckiest crime victims in the world, because the murder occurred in the jurisdiction of an arrogant and incompetent police force that was telling the mayor and the press that they had it solved almost immediately. They looked at the Ramseys first and developed terminal tunnel vision; they refused to look away at other scenarios other than the Twisters ludicrous bedwetting theory. I do believe that the Boulder Police Station must have been an eerie place to be until Synthroid Steve resigned in order to tell his story to the world; with the constant mantra of Patsy Did it, Patsy did it, Patsy did it, echoing down the hallways. Of course, this is JMHO:biggrin:

[Sharon]

None of the known suspects fit within the "totality of the evidence," as do the Ramseys. Either they are the most unlucky people in the world, or they were involved with JonBenet's death and the cover-up of her death. This post is my opinion.

Tober, you would have loved the case involving Azaria Chaimberlain. Lindy the mum was as guilty as sin, even convicted in a court of law for killing her baby. The mum was the most hated woman in Australia & she was sent to jail.

Too bad it was proven years later after her life was ruined that she was innocent.

[Athena]

None of the known suspects fit within the "totality of the evidence," as do the Ramseys. Either they are the most unlucky people in the world, or they were involved with JonBenet's death and the cover-up of her death. This post is my opinion.

"Totality of evidence" - In order to cover-up JBR's death first it has to be proven it was accidental or there is no reason for a cover-up. Whoever killed JBR deliberately inflicted that head blow; it was NO accident.

[Sharon]

One last thing, this case involving a murdered baby was also based on a stretch of the imagination. The mum wanted everyone to believe that a wild dingo took her baby while camping. Experts upon experts proved that this was physically impossible & dingos dont act like that etc etc. But, then out of the blue a dingo was caught running off with a todler in the same area.

[nuisanceposter]

Tober, you would have loved the case involving Azaria Chaimberlain. Lindy the mum was as guilty as sin, even convicted in a court of law for killing her baby. The mum was the most hated woman in Australia & she was sent to jail.

Too bad it was proven years later after her life was ruined that she was innocent.

Right, here's a summary:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azaria_Chamberlain_disappearance

[aussiesheila]

Not willing to risk doing a fake forced entry from the outside out of fear of being observed.According to the RDI theory, aren't the Ramsey's purpoted to have gone outside the house to dump the rest of the roll of duct tape and the remaining lengths of cord and the missng paint handle end in that neighbour's trash can?

Couldn't they have staged the forced entry then? Surely if they thought it was safe enough to venture outside to a neighbour's trash can without being observed, they would have felt the same way about faking a forced entry.

[thewhitewitch1]

According to the RDI theory, aren't the Ramsey's purpoted to have gone outside the house to dump the rest of the roll of duct tape and the remaining lengths of cord and the missng paint handle end in that neighbour's trash can?

Couldn't they have staged the forced entry then? Surely if they thought it was safe enough to venture outside to a neighbour's trash can without being observed, they would have felt the same way about faking a forced entry.


According to whose RDI theory? We don't all have the same theory, you know. I've personally never heard the RDI theory you just mentioned.

[aussiesheila]

OK, so the knot used on the hand restraints is a boating/camping knot.
So we should put Fleet White, John Andrew Ramsey, JAR's friend and his father, Randy Simons, and probably a few other on to the list of suspects.According to nuisanceposter, her/his personal view is we should take the actual evidence and apply it to *Fleet White, John Andrew Ramsey, JAR's friend and his father, Randy Simons, and probably a few others* but the fact that certain people have been discounted and cleared as suspects by BPD, BDA, LS, RST, etc means maybe they should be less of the focus than the actual items of evidence themselves.

[Tober]

Couldn't they have staged the forced entry then?

There was no "forced entry staging." That's why police found no forced entry. John's whole "I found the window open" story is just that, a story. This post is my opinion.

[Tober]

According to the RDI theory, aren't the Ramsey's purpoted to have gone outside the house to dump the rest of the roll of duct tape and the remaining lengths of cord and the missng paint handle end in that neighbour's trash can?

As far as I can tell, there is no evidence that John, Patsy, or Burke left the house after their arrival home on the evening of Dec. 25 and before police arrival on the morning of Dec. 26. There may not have been a "rest" of the cord and duct tape. This post is my opinion.

[aussiesheila]

According to whose RDI theory? We don't all have the same theory, you know. I've personally never heard the RDI theory you just mentioned.OK, whitewitch I apologise to you. I'm sorry but that's the only RDI explanation I am aware of (or at least that I remember) for the absence of those items in the house. If you have posted your explanation somewhere on this forum I'm sorry but I don't think I have come across it.

[thewhitewitch1]

OK, whitewitch I apologise to you. I'm sorry but that's the only RDI explanation I am aware of (or at least that I remember) for the absence of those items in the house. If you have posted your explanation somewhere on this forum I'm sorry but I don't think I have come across it.

There are many possibilities of what may have happened to those items. I believe that there was no more of the cord left and there was no more of the duct tape. I think it was reused.
The paintbrush may have had an end already broken off of it prior to the murder. We don't know that it didn't.
If there was any cord or tape left, and there was another end of the paintbrush, any of it could have been taken out of the house and disposed of by John and Patsy even after JBs body was found. Each item would have been small enough to fit in a pocket or a purse. They were not searched.
Also is the possibility that they may have been hidden inside of something that Pam Paugh (unwittingly) removed from the house at their request.

[Athena]

TWW: Re: Pam Pough. Although I lean towards IDI the fact that Pam was allowed to remove ANYTHING from the house is totally incredible. I haven't a clue what the BPD was thinking from the moment they received that 911 call. It almost appears as if the BPD were covering up a crime committed by a fellow PO.....

[thewhitewitch1]

TWW: Re: Pam Pough. Although I lean towards IDI the fact that Pam was allowed to remove ANYTHING from the house is totally incredible. I haven't a clue what the BPD was thinking from the moment they received that 911 call. It almost appears as if the BPD were covering up a crime committed by a fellow PO.....


I think they were just catering to the Ramseys because of their status and wealth but you're right...the BPD sure made themselves look inept.

[shill]

The paintbrush may have had an end already broken off of it prior to the murder. We don't know that it didn't.LE and the autopsy point to JB being penetrated with a paintbrush? Are you saying she was penetrated with a broken end of the paintbrush handle because that would make a bloody mess?

If there was any cord or tape left, and there was another end of the paintbrush, any of it could have been taken out of the house and disposed of by John and Patsy even after JBs body was found.

Why did they get rid of the pointed end of the handle but not the brush end of the handle?

[bullmoose]

There are many possibilities of what may have happened to those items. I believe that there was no more of the cord left and there was no more of the duct tape. I think it was reused.
The paintbrush may have had an end already broken off of it prior to the murder. We don't know that it didn't.
If there was any cord or tape left, and there was another end of the paintbrush, any of it could have been taken out of the house and disposed of by John and Patsy even after JBs body was found. Each item would have been small enough to fit in a pocket or a purse. They were not searched.
Also is the possibility that they may have been hidden inside of something that Pam Paugh (unwittingly) removed from the house at their request.What do you suggest that the duct tape was reused from? What makes you think it was reused? Have you ever used a roll of duct tape up? There is a good three inch cardboard center left when the tape is gone. I don't think it would easily fit into a pocket or purse at all. But I know, you are RDI, so you think they did it no matter what; I think the rest of the roll of tape and the extra cord, if any was taken out by the killer/s; I firmly believe that the end of the paintbrush was taken as a trophy by the killer, I don't think the end was already broken off; as I do not recall reading that any of the other paintbrushes were broken. JMHO

[LindaA]

There was no "forced entry staging." That's why police found no forced entry. John's whole "I found the window open" story is just that, a story. This post is my opinion.

That's the point, Tober. The question is, "If you believe they left the house to dispose of those items, why didn't they stage a forced entry at the same time?" It doesn't make sense that they would have done one of those things and not both. Therefore, if there is no staged forced entry, then it is more likely that they didn't leave the house at all. That begs the question, "What became of the remainder of the tape and cord, and the broken piece of the paintbrush."

[Tober]

The question is, "If you believe they left the house to dispose of those items, why didn't they stage a forced entry at the same time?"

I don't know where the idea that they left the house came from, but I certainly don't believe that. The Ramseys had no need to leave the house prior to police arrival and had no need to stage a forced entry. By the ransom note, they were trying to make it look as though an intruder quite familiar with them perpetrated the crime. I don't think there was a "remainder" of the duct tape and cord. Contrary to Mary Lacy's false claim during her August 2006 press conference (Karr) that there isn't any physical evidence in this case that hasn't been in the public domain, there exists some very important pieces of "hold-back" evidence, of which the general public isn't aware. This post is my opinion.

[Athena]

LE and the autopsy point to JB being penetrated with a paintbrush? Are you saying she was penetrated with a broken end of the paintbrush handle because that would make a bloody mess?

Why did they get rid of the pointed end of the handle but not the brush end of the handle?

One thing is certain -- the paintbrush was broken during the crime scene as shavings from the wood of the paintbrush were found so it was not broken before. JMO

[Zoey]

Contrary to Mary Lacy's false claim during her August 2006 press conference (Karr) that there isn't any physical evidence in this case that hasn't been in the public domain, there exists some very important pieces of "hold-back" evidence, of which the general public isn't aware. This post is my opinion.


Tober, finally something I agree with you on. I too believe there is evidence that has not been released to the public. :)

[bullmoose]

Tober, finally something I agree with you on. I too believe there is evidence that has not been released to the public. :)Is there something Tober is trying to let us know about Tober that Tober won't come out and say, but keeps inferring to???:biggrin:

[andU]

TWW: Re: Pam Pough. Although I lean towards IDI the fact that Pam was allowed to remove ANYTHING from the house is totally incredible. I haven't a clue what the BPD was thinking from the moment they received that 911 call. It almost appears as if the BPD were covering up a crime committed by a fellow PO.....

Oh yeah, wonder if there is/was one with muslum/islamic background? I have long wondered about the possibility of the perp being involved with LE..., they know about knots, too, don't they? And staging? Hmmm, I'm pondering this...

[Zoey]

Is there something Tober is trying to let us know about Tober that Tober won't come out and say, but keeps inferring to???:biggrin:

I think we can infer that!:)

[Kor]

That's the point, Tober. The question is, "If you believe they left the house to dispose of those items, why didn't they stage a forced entry at the same time?" It doesn't make sense that they would have done one of those things and not both. Therefore, if there is no staged forced entry, then it is more likely that they didn't leave the house at all. That begs the question, "What became of the remainder of the tape and cord, and the broken piece of the paintbrush."

And who had the keys to Ramsey's house. I image the killer had access to someone that had Ramsey's keys, either had them copied before the murder or returned them back afterward. Similar to a computer virus or worm that accessed into a system with listing of other email addresses for spamming, spywares, or infecting purposes. JMO

[shill]

Great info NP! Can't argue with all of that!

Not enough butts to kiss at WebSleuths so you have to come here? Make sure your ames is good or your going to end up with a brown nose.

[nuisanceposter]

I don't know who Carnie is, but she's not Ames. Ames doesn't write like Carnie does - she forms her sentences differently, and stresses different points. There's also no way Ames would want to come back to this cesspool of slackass modding and aggressive abuse.

Why do you guys think Carnie is an old person with new name, instead of someone we haven't seen before?

Carnie, Shill makes the IDI look bad. They'd do best to distance themselves from him and his abysmal lack of control and decency. Just because he shares their point of view does not mean he's someone to buddy up with, and based on the way he conducts himself at WS, he has serious problems in general.

Go ahead and report me, Shill, they don't mod this board like they do at WS, and you won't get the same response here that you've seen there.

[Tober]

Tober-great point I never thought of that one!:read:

Thanks, Carnie. The Ramseys offered up many of their friends as suspects. BTW, your name is really neat! This post is my opinion.

[shill]

and based on the way he conducts himself at WS, he has serious problems in general.I don't conduct myself on WS, but I'm laughing my *ss off that you think I'm a memeber there. If they mod that board so well, why would they be letting the same person come back over and over after being banned as you claim?
You prove my point that no one at WS knows what their talking about. It's just a lynch mob of clueless tabloid queens.


Go ahead and report me, Shill, they don't mod this board like they do at WS, and you won't get the same response here that you've seen there.

I did report you.
So I guess we can make up lies about anyone here.

[shill]

You have saved me lots of time Shill. With your one post you have managed to change my mind about you from neutral to dismissed. That is a fantastic feat.

I have never been at WEBSLEUTHS so I have no idea what you are talking about.

If you are the total sum of intregity or credibity on the IDI then I rest my case now.

Very moving speech.

If you are the total lack of intregity or credibity as the usual RDI, then I rest my case now.

[bullmoose]

Thanks, Carnie. The Ramseys offered up many of their friends as suspects. BTW, your name is really neat! This post is my opinion.
I know that it is just flat dumb to have to point out to anyone, and especially Tober, that the BPD did in fact ask for a list of anybody that the Ramseys knew that might possibly under any circumstances, have anything to do with Jonbenet's disappearance, so as to have a point at which to start looking for her. But I guess I'd better do it. :biggrin:

[aussiesheila]

it was disclosed that fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket that she wore the night JonBenet was killed were found on the blanket her body was wrapped in (body room), on the sticky side of the duct tape that covered her mouth (body room), tied into the ligature that was around her neck (body room), and in the paint tote (outside body room).This is a totally misleading statement. A correct statement would be that BPD have EVIDENCE TO SUGGEST THAT fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket that she wore the night JonBenet was killed were found on the blanket her body was wrapped in (body room), on the sticky side of the duct tape that covered her mouth (body room), tied into the ligature that was around her neck (body room), and in the paint tote (outside body room).

Even that does not amount to anything very much. Did BPD go around the house and test other items that might have had fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket that she wore the night JonBenet was killed on them? I don't believe they did. If they had they might very well have found fibers from Patsy's sweater-jacket on practically every item in the house. Without having done that control test their evidence is essentially valueless, given that Patsy lived in the house and fibres from her clothes would be expected to be all around the house. Only if these fibres were on those crime scene items alone would there be any reason to give any weight to the fibre evidence.

If the paint tote was in the butler's kitchen and Patsy wore the coat a lot when she went outside, she might have tossed it on top of the paint tote when she came inside the house one day. If the duct tape was a piece of pre-used tape that came off a package that Patsy had unwrapped while wearing the jacket, that is how they might have gotten there. I imagine Patsy was wearing the jacket when she put JonBenet in bed, and the fibres could have gotten on JonBenet's neck and blanket then. What we don't know and what might put it all in better perspective, is just how many items around the house had fibres consistent with those of Patsy's jacket.

This fibre evidence is just very very weak and really tells us nothing except maybe that Patsy wore the jacket a lot in winter and it shed a lot of fibres.

[aussiesheila]

TWW: Re: Pam Pough. Although I lean towards IDI the fact that Pam was allowed to remove ANYTHING from the house is totally incredible. I haven't a clue what the BPD was thinking from the moment they received that 911 call. It almost appears as if the BPD were covering up a crime committed by a fellow PO.....Athena, IMO you have come very close to hitting the nail right on the head. IMO BPD WAS covering up the crime committed, not by a fellow PO, but by someone Eller was being blackmailed to cover up for. IMO the blackmailer was FW and the ones being covered up for were fellow pedophiles. The way I see it, it wasn't until after the autopsy and the discovery of the sexual assault, that the failed kidnap scenario started to look a bit feeble. It was then, I believe, that Eller was instructed to drop the 'we are treating it as an attempted kidnapping' front and go for the 'John has been having an incestuous relationship with his daughter' line of investigation.

[Athena]

Athena, IMO you have come very close to hitting the nail right on the head. IMO BPD WAS covering up the crime committed, not by a fellow PO, but by someone Eller was being blackmailed to cover up for. IMO the blackmailer was FW and the ones being covered up for were fellow pedophiles. The way I see it, it wasn't until after the autopsy and the discovery of the sexual assault, that the failed kidnap scenario started to look a bit feeble. It was then, I believe, that Eller was instructed to drop the 'we are treating it as an attempted kidnapping' front and go for the 'John has been having an incestuous relationship with his daughter' line of investigation.

I have to admit that I read Stephen Singular's book which speaks about pedophile rings and even certain people that were given a slap on the wrist and allowed to continue to work but seems alot of this was not publicized due to a coverup. I'm not sure though that I would think JR would allow JBR to be exploited. I still do have alot of questions re: FW. It seems Singular also believes that the ads the Ramseys placed also implicated FW or believed him to have something to do with it. The book was interesting to say the least and one thing is for sure if it was pursued by the BPD whatever their investigation revealed, was never leaked. It is not a stretch to believe that alot of government officials within the US are involved in such rings as have been publicized more recently so I won't say it was impossible. However, if this were the case I really do not believe Patsy had anything to do with it JMO