Barnhill's Young Man

[Louisadelmar]

I've always found it odd that Barnhill's seeing a young man (he incorrectly thought it was JAR) walking towards the house around 5 pm has always gotten short shrift.

In any other case it would be a huge indicator that someone entered the house while the occupants were away.

[Kor]

Let assume this young man Barnhill saw is the killer or an accessory to murder, who else would look alike to John Andrew? Assuming the killer was young, in 20s, white, brown hair, what else? Did Barnhill see which car he got out to walk toward Ramsey's house or his car parked out of Barnhill's sight? I wonder how many young suspects the police have on their list.

[bullmoose]

I'll bet that the BPD have no young suspects on their list; remember, they had their theory early on; once John Andrew proved his alibi; it was just John and Patsy on their list. Square peg, round hole.

[thewhitewitch1]

I've always found it odd that Barnhill's seeing a young man (he incorrectly thought it was JAR) walking towards the house around 5 pm has always gotten short shrift.

In any other case it would be a huge indicator that someone entered the house while the occupants were away.

But this young man was so clever that he left not a clue of himself but let himself be seen walking up to the house? :shrug:

[thewhitewitch1]

I'll bet that the BPD have no young suspects on their list; remember, they had their theory early on; once John Andrew proved his alibi; it was just John and Patsy on their list. Square peg, round hole.


Perhaps if the Ramseys had just submitted themselves to interviews when they were asked to, they would not have been "the only" persons on that list.

[Kor]

From what I read on one of site, I think this one but I am not sure,
http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/
that the police interviewed, talked, and questioned over 500 people, then had 140 potential suspects. Of course, these 140 suspects aren't focused enough except the Ramseys. I would like to know if any young men on that list are similar to John Andrew's sizes or appearances. I remember reading somewhere that Linda had a son similar to John Andrew's age or size, but I don't have any information about him.

[Louisadelmar]

Perhaps if the Ramseys had just submitted themselves to interviews when they were asked to, they would not have been "the only" persons on that list.

From PMPT pb page 499 (The Quantico Presentation)

The police then mentioned the Ramseys' behavior immediately after the body was found: the fact that John Ramsey was ready to fly to Atlanta with his wife and son and leave his daughter's body - and the investigation into her murder - behind; the refusal to cooperate with the police; and the hiring of criminal attorneys. In reply, the FBI pointed out that no two people respond to trauma and grief the same way, and that the police should not overanalyze what they had observed. Most of the time, the parents of a victim are all over the police. "Why the hell haven't you caught my child's killer?" "What's going on? I want to know everything." In this case, the police had to acknowledge that it was their own commander's actions that led to the long postponement of the parents' interviews.

[shill]

But this young man was so clever that he left not a clue of himself but let himself be seen walking up to the house? :shrug:
If they didn't have PR and JR to get fiber, hand writing, DNA samples from, then it to would appear as if they didn't leave a clue. The fibers would just be unknown.
I don't think LE is going to start collecting every suspects wardrobe to do fiber comparisons to all the unknown fibers, let alone be able to get search warrants to do it, but PR and JR is possible.
Several suspects fit the evidence left behind. McSanta was very close to being arrested and charged. So the evidence is clues.
No one is invisible, if you enter and leave a home, you risk being seen. There is a far smaller chance of being seen at 5am. Ask any paperboy with a morning route.

[andU]

Hmmm, if there is an eyewitness to an unidentified person entering the house, would that not lead one to believe there was an intruder? .... Someone who does not live there and is univited that enters would qualify as an intruder, agreed? So, if this young man who has not been identified entered the house (either he had a key or the door was unlocked), then I would be forced to say that there was an intruder. He was seen walking toward the house, wonder if he was seen leaving? If I were that neighbor and IF I knew my neighbors were gone, I would watch to see if the person entered or left right away. I think that is part of being a good neighbor.

[thewhitewitch1]

If they didn't have PR and JR to get fiber, hand writing, DNA samples from, then it to would appear as if they didn't leave a clue. The fibers would just be unknown.
I don't think LE is going to start collecting every suspects wardrobe to do fiber comparisons to all the unknown fibers, let alone be able to get search warrants to do it, but PR and JR is possible.
Several suspects fit the evidence left behind. McSanta was very close to being arrested and charged. So the evidence is clues.
No one is invisible, if you enter and leave a home, you risk being seen. There is a far smaller chance of being seen at 5am. Ask any paperboy with a morning route.


If it matters at all, it was 5 PM.

[Zoey]

If it matters at all, it was 5 PM.


Are you saying it was 5 pm on the 26th that he was seen or the 25th?

[Tober]

In any other case it would be a huge indicator that someone entered the house while the occupants were away.
Eyewitness accounts by laypersons (non-law enforcement) are notoriously unreliable. If this young man was seen walking toward the Ramsey home (if that even happened), that certainly doesn't qualify him as having entered it. It's pretty hard to square an intruder with the known evidence, especially considering that only someone residing in the home would need to stage the crime scene.

[Louisadelmar]

Eyewitness accounts by laypersons (non-law enforcement) are notoriously unreliable. If this young man was seen walking toward the Ramsey home (if that even happened), that certainly doesn't qualify him as having entered it. It's pretty hard to square an intruder with the known evidence, especially considering that only someone residing in the home would need to stage the crime scene.

I agree with you re eyewitness accounts. But this was not a man witnessing a crime and therefore under stress. He just happened to notice a young man wakling towards his neighbors house in the late afternoon and thought it was his neighbor's older son. It wasn't and no one else has come forward.

Are you suggesting all crimes with staging committed in a residence are committed by the people who live there?

[bullmoose]

It is an interesting conjecture to state as fact that only someone residing in a home would need to stage a crime scene.IMHO it is the height of sophistry, to to make such a silly statement and try to pass it off as fact. I am just a layperson[noncop] but it seems to me that if a perp was trying to cast suspicion on somebody else for a crime such as this, then of course the perp/s would stage the crime scene; to confuse and confound the well-meaning but totally ineffective police force. IMHO the inexperienced local police took the bait, hook, line and sinker.

[Tober]

Are you suggesting all crimes with staging committed in a residence are committed by the people who live there?

No. I don't like to generalize because every crime is unique in and of itself. I was referring specifically to the Ramsey case.

[Eagle1]

Evidently John Andrew wasn't in the habit of waving or yelling hello to the Barnhills, so they thought nothing of it that he didn't, just assumed it was JAR entering the house, had no reason to watch.

This must have been the evening of the 25th. The R's had just left to go to the Whites' for the evening. I don't remember any mention of the walker having parked any car, which if he had the Barnhills might have recognized as JAR's or not. There was no car?

[KingCoyote]

I remember the statement about a young man appearing to be JAR walking "towards" the house but I would like a little better definition of the word "towards." Was he actually approaching the front door while on Ramsey property? Was he on a public sidewalk or street walking north when the house was south of him or vice-versa? Was he crossing the street towards the Ramsey house just to get to the other side where his car might have been parked in front of the wrong house when he was visiting someone else in the neighborhood? I don't disagree that attention should have been paid to anyone walking towards the Ramsey house at 5 PM on the 25th and I do agree that since it was shown not to be JAR, the matter seemed to have been dropped quickly but there could be a lot of innocent reasons why someone is walking "towards" a house.

Was this in PMPT,DOI or ST?

Thanks

KingCoyote

[Louisadelmar]

I found this but the page # is apparently for the HB edition. I would like to read a complete version. In this it is not clear whether the mistake means it wasn't JAR or that he didn't see anyone. That he (Barnhill) further mentions not being able to recogize JAR in a crowd makes me think it's the former.

04-18-2000 Steve Thomas, "JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation"

Page 71:

"Another reason to interview the Barnhills, however, was that Joe had told the police he had seen JonBenet's older half-brother, John Andrew, in Boulder on the evening of December 25. John Andrew claimed to have been in Atlanta at the time. During the interview Barnhill sheepishly told us he had made a mistake and apologized, saying that he probably would not even recognize the young man in a crowd. That went a long way toward firming up John Andrew's alibi."
http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-discovery.htm

Added: Found it. p. 78 ppbk. Nothing new