Newcomers to this blog are advised to begin with the first two posts, Just the Facts, Ma'am and Case Solved, which explain in very general terms why I believe I've solved this case. Some important questions are answered in the following post, Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, Misdirections. After that feel free to browse whatever topics might interest you (see blog archive).

NB: If anyone has trouble posting a comment, email it to doktorgosh (at) live.com, and I'll post it for you.

Notice to readers of my Kindle book: I recently noticed that, on certain devices (though not all), the Table of Contents begins with Chapter One and omits the Introduction and Preface. Since the Introduction is especially important, I urge everyone to make sure to begin reading at the very beginning of the book, not the first chapter in the Table of Contents. Thank you.

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey - Part 2 continued

It's now tomorrow -- and I've decided to start over on a new page.

While the investigators heading up the CBS team make much of their decision to make a fresh start, they fall into many of the same old traps. First, they accept many of the same assumptions that have led everyone else astray. Second, they overestimate their ability to interpret the evidence, which remains elusive, ambiguous, and -- to use that magic word we see so often: inconclusive. Third, they tend to neglect or downplay the logic of the case, which, for me, is of the greatest significance. And the profiling to which they attach so much importance is rife with confirmation bias.


The readiness with which they are willing to uncritically embrace confirmation bias is seen in their reaction to the enhanced 911 tape, where they hear the phrases they've already been programmed to hear, ever since Steve Thomas originally quoted from the "enhanced" version of the tape in his book. Note how one hears "help me Jesus" while another hears "what did you do?", two completely different interpretations of the exact same sounds. And of course, since "what did you do" fits the agenda much better, they all agree yes, that must be it. And from then on "what did you do," as uttered by Patsy, becomes, for them, a fact. As does Burke's voice on that tape, which forgive me but I recognize not at all. What I hear is pure garble that could mean anything and could have been uttered by anyone via crosstalk.

While it's certainly within the realm of possibility that sibling rivalry could lead to murder, it's a huge stretch to go from there to the conclusion that Burke must be responsible for the blow that felled his sister. It's all too tempting to connect that odd bowl of pineapple to a fanciful scenario in which JonBenet grabs a piece, swallows it, runs away, to be followed by an enraged Burke carrying the Maglite, with which he slams her on the head. Yes, it's a possibility. It could have happened that way. But once that narrative is proposed, it's immediately accepted by them as the only possible explanation for what happened. Once again we see confirmation bias hard at work.

Unstated assumption: John Ramsey could not have written the note because he was "ruled out" by a panel of experts.

Logic: An opinion, no matter how "expert," is not the same as a fact. Forensic handwriting analysis is not science, and the methods used to rule John out seem to have been based on methods developed to detect forgery rather than expose deliberate deception. No matter how different someone's normal writing might be from a deliberately deceptive text, that is no reason to rule him or her out -- deception involves just that: deception. There is no reason not to rule John back IN.

Unstated assumption: John Ramsey can safely be ruled out as the killer of his daughter.

Logic: wha??????? Where is THAT coming from?

Unstated assumption: "the Ramseys," at the very least, collaborated on the staging of an intruder breakin and the writing of the patently phony ransom note.

Logic: If the Ramseys were in this together, then

  • the 911 call would not have been made while the victim's body remained in the house. The note is clearly intended to stage a kidnapping, and the warnings in the note are clearly intended to provide the writer with a reason for not calling the police until he's had a chance to get rid of the body. By calling the police at that time, Patsy completely destroyed the plan implicit in that note. If they were in it together they would have agreed to wait until the body was out of the house before notifying the police.
  • "the Ramseys" would have prepared their story in advance and would therefore have had no problem "fully cooperating" with the police from the start. And by the way, it was John and his lawyers who stalled the investigation, while Patsy lay in a drug induced stupor for weeks.
  • "the Ramseys" would have had no reason to lie about the pineapple. If both were aware that JonBenet had had some pineapple, either with or without Burke, there would have been no reason to claim they knew nothing about it. It's only if one knew and the other did not, that both would deny that knowledge -- only for two very different reasons.
Unstated assumption: either an intruder was responsible for JonBenet's death or "the Ramseys" were involved in an elaborate coverup.

Logic: there was never any such animal as "the Ramseys." It's perfectly possible that one was responsible for both the murder and the coverup and the other is innocent.

Unstated assumption: the scene greeting the police when they arrived was the scene "the Ramseys" intended for them to find, as part of their plan to stage a phony kidnapping.

Logic: the ransom note makes no sense if the plan was to call the police on the morning of the 26th, with the body still in the house. The only reasonable explanation for both the note and the body is that something went wrong with the original plan.

Unstated assumption: fingerprints on the pineapple bowl and tea glass tell us that the persons whose prints were found must have been present when the pineapple was consumed.

Logic: fingerprints can be deposited on an object for all sorts of reasons and at any time. Since Patsy and Burke were living in that house there is no reason to assume their prints could not have gotten there prior to JonBenet's consumption of some pineapple.

Misreading of the evidence: according to the investigative team, there was no evidence of sexual assault.

Fact: then how do you explain the blood emanating from her vagina, the traces of "birefringent material" in her vagina and the damage to her hymen?

Misreading of the evidence: there was bad blood between Burke and his sister, as evidenced by the fact that Burke once struck her on the head with a golf club.

Correction: as described by Burke, the blow was inflicted as he raised his club, preparing to swing, not realizing that JonBenet was directly behind him. There is no reason to doubt his version of what happened since it's never been contradicted by anyone present at the time. And none of the reports I've ever seen mentioned any incidents where Burke showed any animosity toward his sister or vice-versa.

As I see it, the CBS investigators were led down the garden path by James Kolar, whose bizarre theory of the case was initially rejected by just about all his colleagues, but does seem to make sense as a motive for why two parents would want to collaborate on a coverup. Once we realize that "the Ramseys" could not have cooperated in the writing of the note or any other aspect of the coverup (see above), it becomes clear that Kolar's theory explains nothing. It's just one other hypothetical, among the many dozens proposed over the years. All sorts of suspects have been considered in all that time, and when we look closely at any of them the certainly grows that "this MUST be the one." Burke is no exception.


363 comments:

  1. JBR taking a piece of pineapple from Burke actually is a good explanation. According to your theory JR was bringing his daughter to her death and said "hey JB, lets get some pineapple in you for one last meal before I bludgeon your head."
    Watching BR's interview with his therapist and showing her how she was probably hit over the head was very telling. Never looked at the RN was baffling.....admitting he snuck downstairs after he was put to bed puts him right near the crime scene around the time she was killed. I know you have put a lot of time into this case, but you really need to take a step back and realize that BR most likely accidentally killed his sister and might have blocked it out of his mind.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, if we put blinders on, it might seem as though BDI is the only reasonable explanation. But in the light of all the evidence, all the facts and the logic, that theory seems extremely unlikely.

      I can see parents lying to protect a child, and maybe staging a fall down the stairs, or a fall in the bathroom -- but penetrating their daughter's vagina? strangling her with a garotte? staging a kidnapping, complete with a 2 1/2 page ransom note? No, I'm sorry, that is simply beyond bizarre.

      Delete
    2. I am not convinced that there is evidence of sexual abuse prior to the staging. Without this it makes no sense why JR would kill her. Maybe BR was messing around with her body and JR built on that once the kidnapping plan fell apart (by PR discovering the note and calling 911.)
      KP

      Delete
    3. If there was prior molestation, it seems likely that it was BR and NOT JR. Therefore the staging had to include that part to protect BR.
      I dont know that its really putting blinders on. This just doesn't seem premeditated and you have zero evidence to suggest that it was. In order for your theory to be true, it HAS to be premeditated by JR to shut her up.

      Delete
    4. In response to anon @ 7:51--

      What you are saying makes sense. BR could have been abusing her in some manner. He wouldn't need to be sexually mature. Just very psychologically troubled.
      KP

      Delete
    5. That was me and thanks. All along it felt like the ONLY reason it couldn't have been BR was because "a 9 year old couldn't have inflicted the blow to the head that she had." Now that we know that was definitely possible, everything else has fallen into place. It still means JR could have authored the note, tied the garrotte, lied about the window, etc. The difference is that he did all of that to cover for BR.
      This is a an assumption, but we have heard a whole lot about PR doing all of the pageants with JBR, but I've never heard of evidence that PR or JR did any activities with BR. Its very easy to see that he could have resented JBR and been jealous of JBR.

      -J

      Delete
    6. I like this blog and find it thoughtful. I think one can swap out JR abused her and JR did it with BR abused her and BR did it and keep all the aftermath the same and it makes better sense to me.
      KP

      Delete
    7. John himself said to Lou Smit that the pineapple only makes sense as a way to lure her out by saying she has a surprise downstairs. It was Christmas. That's the essence of the "Santa did it" intruder theory. With this case as with the presents under the tree, John is Santa.

      Delete
    8. This theory is plausible. I just can't believe Burke is a sociopath. Even though that's what his smiling face on Dr Phil is evidence of.

      Delete
  2. I agree completely. I don't think BR even knows what he did and the parents covered it up so as to keep BR thinking it was an intruder and not him who was responsible.
    The parents fail on all counts. First off, they knew they had a disturbed son, and yet allowed him to have access to JBR by sleeping on the same floor with her. Leaving feces in her bed, on her candy, etc is a huge red flag. Hitting her with a golf club, etc another red flag.

    The other thing that wasn't addressed. I had read somewhere that a 911 call was placed from that house a couple of days prior to that night. Was that proven? Was it true? Surely that can be checked out. I wonder what that means, if anything, in all of this.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no reason to assume the feces in her bed came from Burke and not JonBenet herself. Same with the other feces found in her room. More confirmation bias. The golf club incident has been explained as an accident. She was struck because she was standing behind him. He never saw her.

      That other 911 call has been investigated and explained and does not seem relevant to the case.

      Delete
    2. Patsy herself explained the golf club incident as Burke being angry and clobbering JonBenet. She cared about appearances and she let that detail slip. That suggests she was telling the truth, no way would she fabricate a kid with anger issues clobbering the younger kid hard enough to cause facial scars.

      Delete
  3. Nothing makes sense in this case. EXCEPT the scenario explained in this blog. As far as BR is concerned... I'm sure it is possible he secretly witnessed the entire crime and has kept it a secret to honor his father's wishes.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If there was no sexual abuse prior to the staging, why would JR kill her?
      KP

      Delete
    2. There is strong evidence of prior abuse. See Cyril Wecht's book. A panel of pediatric physicians agreed with that conclusion. See Steve Thomas's book.

      Delete
    3. There is not STRONG evidence. If there was the CBS team would not have found otherwise. We are talking about some really qualified people here.

      Delete
  4. Doc,

    PR/JR might have run out of time, therefore were unable to get rid of the body. It was close to 6AM, daylight was approaching and how could John explain leaving the house at that point if someone had seen him? They might not have discovered JBR's body until 4AM, we just don't know. That RN took awhile to put together, the staging, etc. They simply ran out of time which explains PR's frantic call to 911.
    I disagree with you regarding BR not exhibiting animosity towards JBR. The smearing of his feces is one, and a family friend in one of the interviews said BR was jealous of JBR and had acted aggressively towards her on several occasions. (Wish I could remember which show that was in)

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You don't understand my interpretation of this case. I urge you to read the first 6 or 7 posts. I never claimed John would have wanted to get rid of the body on the night of the crime -- that would have been much too dangerous. And if they ran out of time they would not have tried to stage a kidnapping with the body still in the house.

      There is no evidence that feces was Burke's, that's just another of a long list of unwarranted assumptions.

      Delete
    2. EG, John ran out of time because Patsy's made the 911 call. "They" didn't run out of time.

      Delete
    3. Here's the issue I'm having trouble with.

      The family was flying on a plane early the next morning. If they never made the trip because JR was covering things up or disposing of the body that morning/day, that's a huge problem with the cops. "Why didn't you get on the plane?"

      So time was of the essence and JR needed to get rid of the body that night. If you believe his plan was to wait to get rid of the body later in the day was disrupted by the 911 call, it would have been disrupted by a cancellation of a planned trip when Patsy woke up and JBR was gone.

      Delete
    4. No, they would have had all the time in the world. A couple phone calls calling off the trip due to illness would have been all that was necessary. They could even have told the truth: that JBR had been "kidnapped" and they needed to pay the ransom.

      Delete
  5. Doc, you say "Misreading of the evidence: there was bad blood between Burke and his sister, as evidenced by the fact that Burke once struck her on the head with a golf club.

    Correction: as described by Burke, the blow was inflicted as he raised his club, preparing to swing, not realizing that JonBenet was directly behind him. There is no reason to doubt his version of what happened since it's never been contradicted by anyone present at the time. And none of the reports I've ever seen mentioned any incidents where Burke showed any animosity toward his sister or vice-versa."
    But Burke pooped in her bed/spread poop in her bathroom according to the housekeeper. That's pretty clear evidence of some mixed feelings towards the sister. And there were conflicting stories about the golf swing/injury. Accidental, because he was behind her, or intentional, per Patsy's recounting to a friend.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The housekeeper simply described the feces, she didn't say who produce it. How could she possibly know? There's no reason to assume this came from Burke. It was in her room and it was most likely her product.

      What exactly did Patsy say to her friend? Can you supply a reference?

      Delete
    2. The female neighbor who was interviewed on the CBS special stated Patsy told her it was intentional.

      Delete
    3. Also, I would hope they would have DNA tested the feces to prove it was from Burke, although I've never actually heard they did. They'd have to ensure the 'intruder' didn't leave it.

      Delete
    4. (I think it was mentioned in the CBS special that there was newly placed feces on JonBenet's recently received Christmas candy.)

      Delete
    5. We're getting scatological now. It makes more sense that it would be JB's feces, her bedwetting had returned, all signs of anger expressed by one who is being sexually molested.

      Delete
    6. Yes, it was mentioned that the feces was found on her candy and that it had been an ongoing thing. The housekeeper spoke to an investigator about his odd behavior and that PR was concerned

      Delete
    7. Doc - the lady they interviewed in the CBS interview (I think it was the photographer?) said that Patsy told her Burke hit JBR with the golf club in a fit of rage.

      Delete
  6. Trying to remember the facts of the case. What was JB's approximate time of death?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The time of death could never be determined as the ME arrived far too late.

      Delete
    2. Still not understanding why it took SO long to get there. Her gravestone says Dec 25 but how would they know that!? They didn't find her until after 1 pm Dec 26.

      Delete
    3. Time of death was at 1 am.

      Delete
    4. She was apparently very obviously dead for a while when she was carried up a bit after 1 pm. It seems unlikely she was killed before the family was all asleep. So, after say 10 pm, and some time well before 1 pm the next day.

      911 was called before 6 am. It makes sense to assume JonBenet was already dead. Indeed, it seems (though I would not say I am certain) the note was composed after her death. If not for the note, for all the staging and the garrote and etc, I think one can assume someone was up for hours by the time of the 911 call. The early hours after midnight, say about 1 am, seems a safe guess.

      Delete
  7. Is it possible that the Ramsey's wanted to keep the body for burial and therefore did not want to, nor plan to, dispose it. This would especially make sense if this was all an accident, probably done by BR. I also very clearly hear a young boys voice which seems to be saying, "[are they] going to arrest me?" at the VERY end of the 911 call. Also just before this Patsy seems to be saying, "Sweetie..." and then it does sound like "what did you do". I can easily see this being the first thing a young kid would say after doing something incredibly stupid and beginning to understand the seriousness of what he'd done.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's possible to read all sorts of things into the garbled sounds at the end of the 911 call. If you listen to a clock ticking and think of a certain word then sooner or later you'll hear the clock "saying" that word. It's an auditory illusion.

      And if the parents wanted to keep the body instead of dumping it they would not have staged a kidnapping or handed over a note that could serve as evidence against them.

      Delete
    2. The fact that they all deny that BR was UP but yet his voice is on the 911 tape....clue enough that they had something to hide!

      Delete
    3. Denying that Burke was up could have been because one or both of the parents didn't want him to be questioned. I can think of several reasons for that: 1-to protect him from knowing the more horrific details of his sister's death, 2- in case he had overhead them arguing before the 911 call, 3- in case he said something generally about one or both of them. E.g. like, my dad goes in my sister's room at night, I have seen or heard him do that. Net, it doesn't mean they are hiding something that Burke did.

      Delete
    4. Sorry, but I heard the same enhanced recording everyone else heard, and I heard nothing that sounded remotely like Burke -- or what he was supposed to have said. It's all too easy to see what one expects to see and hear what one expects to hear. One of them heard Patsy say "Help me Jesus," but another one heard her say something totally different. Go figure. This aspect of the investigation was extremely sloppy.

      Delete
    5. However at a minimum you must agree that there was at least another voice type even if you cannot understand the words.

      Delete
    6. It's not "auditory illusion." Just because YOU can't hear it, doesn't mean no one else can.

      "the Aerospace Corporation, who in 1997, at the request of the Boulder Police Department, conducted a test of the 911 tape ... enhancement of the tape reveals Burke's voice in the background, asking his parents 'What did you find?'," the paper writes. "John Ramsey allegedly can be heard shouting to Burke, 'We are not talking to you,' and Patsy shouts 'Oh my Jesus, oh my Jesus.'"

      Delete
    7. I have heard the aerospace enhancement as have many others. The 911 operator backs up the same thing, it was played for Burke during the grand jury and he had to admit that it sounded like himself and at aerospace the first person who heard it wrote down what they heard, it was then played for a second person who then replied what they heard. The note was then passed to the second person and it was exactly the same which is then when police were called in to listen of which they heard the same. I can tell you I can hear John word for word in an angry voice. It has nothing to do with "hearing what you are programmed to hear" as it is loud and clear. That is more than enough evidence to prove that it exists and can be heard. Doc has this attitude that it is only evidence if he decides it is or if it fits his theory, so it doesnt really matter if he has heard the right version or heard it at all.

      Delete
  8. They led us to believe that the evidence (specifically flashlight and garotte) were going to be re-tested by Dr. Lee. So why wasn't it? Also, did they never do an interview with Fleet White since he refused to be on camera? Seems like they would have still talked to him especially since he said he had info that could help them. Maybe Doc's right and it didn't fit their theory of BDI so didn't present it. He took pages and pages of notes the day of the murder. Were those ever given to the police?

    Also, it would seem that the grand jury thought Burke did it based on how the investigators interpreted their indictment counts. The Grand Jury heard all the evidence from the Boulder PD as well as witness interviews. So apparently Kolar's theory went from bizarre to logical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the GJ thought Burke did it, they would have indicted both Ramseys for conspiracy. Instead they indicted each one separately -- telling me they suspected that one of them did it and the other helped -- but they couldn't tell which was which so had no choice but to indict them as they did.

      Delete
    2. Also in that Daily Beast article I mentioned several blogs ago in 2008 JR is reminiscing (since he's always so calm and logical) that they, he and Patsy, were full prepared to turn themselves in had the Grand Jury handed down a recommendation for indictment. He actually said that. So isn't that telling. Without even knowing how the Grand Jury would go or Alex Hunter, and going on record saying he thought it was an intruder, he was fully prepared to turn themselves in!

      Delete
    3. The fleets were also exonerated for 3 times. In the CBS special as I understand they did speak but it was later cut out. What was the reason? Did the fleets testify at the GJ trial? what became of fleets notes from that morning? I believe I read somewhere on this blog that he took notes

      Delete
    4. "If the GJ thought Burke did it, they would have indicted both Ramseys for conspiracy."

      This is not the question that was posed to the GJ and this shows a gross misunderstanding of the role of a GJ.

      Delete
  9. The only possible BDI is still with Patsy not involved. Still gives John potential motive to write note. It is either JDI or BDI but Patsy not involved. The BDI with John only involved still does not explain the garrote. So he tries to stage a possible pedophile at first then changes his mind and stages a kidnapping? Why stage a pedophile knowing her skull is cracked? That still would not get Patsy out of the house. Scenario of BDI with John complicit is not logical.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe a disturbed and traumatized Burke was messing with her body after the accidental head trauma, or the family knew about prior abuse on Burke's part. JR tried to make it a kidnapping but then Patsy woke up and found the note and called 911 (like Doc said) so JR had to switch his plan.
      KP

      Delete
    2. Yes, BDI is the last gasp of PDI. I can't get over why John would place a garrote around her neck, or how to make her transport look like money without dismemberment. All explanations aside from preparing her for a beheading - as the note mentions, disposing of the evidence of the skull crack by getting her head off, seem to smell like PDI theories of "maybe John just felt in his bones like that was the best way to creep out the cops and make them thing an intruder was loose". He could then possibly get her in the suitcase, which could be discovered with her headless body, proving that John deviated from the instructions and the foreign faction followed through on its threat. John Walsh of "America's Most Wanted" had his son go missing and seemingly pinned on a patsy with little suspicion his way after they found only his head. I wonder if the image in John's mind was that but the other way around, with the body found and head never found. There is much talk in this case of the maglite attack, the garrote, and his actions in bringing her body from the basement suggesting John didn't want to look her in the face.

      Delete
  10. The Grand Jury proposed 2 indictments. JR murderer with PR as an accessory and PR murderer with JR as an accessory. Very interesting! I'm convinced JDI secretly behind PR's back. What's so SAD is PR became an accessory to the crime by lying to support her husband. The Grand Jury was certainly on to something and the DA simply did not have the heart to prosecute an innocent mother.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't have the exact wording but that is not at all what the Grand Jury indictments indicated. The CBS special had the 2 indictments reviewed by an expert who said that the specific wording of the indictments - and that neither was accused of murder - would suggest that there was a 3rd party. The Grand Jury was BDI.

      Delete
    2. Hunter's dilemma was clear, to me at least. John had been "ruled out." There was no case to be made against Patsy. How could he possibly have prosecuted a case like that? He made the right call. What was NOT right was the assumption that John could not have written the note. But no one saw that possibility. And hence: 20 years of nothing.

      Delete
  11. If you are that confident that JDI, you are taking a tremendous leap that this was premeditated and that he had a motive of covering up molestation that is unsubstantiated.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So no one can imagine that he was molesting her at the time, it hurt, she screamed, she tried to run and he stopped her by hitting her with a blunt object?

      Delete
    2. Sure premeditation is possible if JR had been molesting his daughter initially with her consent. And a contingency plan worked out if JBR changed her mind about allowing her father to abuse her.

      Delete
    3. You don't have to believe prior molestation to believe JDI or premeditated. The amateurish note indicates not premeditated.

      Delete
    4. It's not necessary to establish a motive to prosecute. All that's needed is probable cause. And to convict all that's needed is proof of guilt, NOT proof of motive. As I see it there is more than enough reason to assume the motive was linked with prior molestation. But there might have been some other motive. Mabye she overheard something she wasn't supposed to hear. Some shady business deal, a shakedown of some kind, or evidence that John was unfaithful. One can only speculate. But if you read carefully on this blog, or in my book, you'll see that, regardless of whether or not he was molesting his daughter, John is the guilty part in this case and should be prosecuted.

      Delete
    5. Forget about this. No one ever came out to say that JR had touched them or whatever and there was no porn on his computer or such.

      Delete
  12. What do you want to bet that Fleet White's comments were not incorporated into this CBS presentation because they would have been inflammatory toward John. Don't forget, they cut two hours out of this CBS special. There was supposed to be another night of it. Perhaps Lin Wood came down on them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I totally agree with you on that!!

      Delete
  13. There isn't definitive evidence saying she was molested prior to that night!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Concur and it isn't necessary for JDI.

      Delete
    2. Nor is it necessary for prosecution. Motive need not be proven and in many cases there is no way to prove it. What's crucial is evidence of guilt.

      Delete
    3. ok whats the evidence of johns guilt. Finger prints on the ransom note the pen the pinapple bowl? No all PR.

      Delete
  14. There is no evidence that JR was molesting his daughter. Or did I miss something?
    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ding ding...correct!

      Delete
    2. read the autopsy report. But as far as eye witnesses, or JB saying something to someone else, or PR saying something to someone else, no, there is no evidence of that. I think one can infer certain things from that autopsy report.

      Delete
  15. John and Patsy were under extreme durress. Their initial instinct is to write a ransom note that threatens numerous times to kill Jonbenet if they don't adhere to demands. This gives them an excuse not to call authorities and allows John to take Jonbenet body out to the car (perhpas in suitcase) so that he can 1) gather ransom money 2) drop body off in remote location. When John gets home with money they can call authorities after the kidnappers time frame has passed. Of course when authorities find JB's body it will appear as though the kidnapper did what he threatened to do. Not sure if garrote staging was part of plan A (taking body out) or plan B (leaving body at house). (Perhaps the garrote staging was meant to demonstrate kidnappers control of JB and certainly direct attention away from family members doing such a thing. A family member might hit JB with flashlight but not strangle her could have been the reasoning). The initial plan may have been scrapped for the following reasons...
    1) too risky in being seen dumping body
    2) fear that staging intruder entrance be discovered
    3) Burke's emotional state of mind
    4) Patsy unable to allow her daughters body to be dumped out in the woods etc (Remember, she is horrified that her daughter is dead. She loves her and cannot allow another unimaginable thing to happen to her outside of her control and protection of her son).
    Patsy makes a last minute decision to not allow John to get rid of JB's body. John is trying to convince her that removing body is still the best plan but she wins argument and calls 9-1-1. But in the panic they forgot to discuss how to fully undue plan A which would have included getting rid of ransom note and Patsy mentions note in 9-1-1 call. Remember that John tells authorities that JB's body is wrapped up like a pappose in the blanket. Somebody lovingly wrapped JB's body up. John tells authorities this because Fleet White would have witnessed the way JB's body was discovered as well.

    ReplyDelete
  16. It really all come down to previous molestation. If yes... John has a motive.... if no... John absolutely has no reason to commit the murder.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Completely agree.
      KP

      Delete
    2. Not really. The crime could have been committed without previous molestation. Under stress, kids, frustration, for whatever just snaps and accidentally kills her-freak accident. Sees life, business, marriage evaporating and quickly concocts plan that Patsy spoils.

      Delete
    3. Okay. I concede that it could be JDI horrifically snapping. I also think it could be Burke snapping and dad covering up for him with Patsy in the dark.
      KP

      Delete
    4. After seeing the CBS demo of the kid with the flashlight, I'm certain that if John had snapped & clocked her with that flashlight there would have been a LOT more damage, significantly so.

      For an angry grown man to modulate his force is contradictory - if he's angry enough to "snap", he doesn't have enough presence of mind to control his swing. There's also the issue of trajectory, a grown man is swinging from a different height and angle.

      And, there's the videos of interviews of young BR. He was asked what he thought happened to his sister and instead of just using his words - he's old enough and articulate - he demonstrates what he thinks happened, showing someone swinging a knife..."or maybe a hammer" and acting it out again. It was unsettling to see how exactly his motions would match the injury to her skull. That he was even physically acting out the possible crime that killed his sister was very disturbing to the profile experts.

      Delete
  17. The information given -20 years later has shed some light on pieces missing and confirmed my own suspicions that her brother BR accidentally killed her and due to his behavior in the past they tried to cover it up to protect not only him but the fact that they were aware he had issues and did not protect JB. The housekeeper confirmed that the feces was his and others had witnessed bizarre behavior.
    Why PR and JR felt the need to go so far to cover it up....well, I have mixed feeling on that.I have never felt it was an outside/intruder and the police department dropped the ball from the start.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You need to go back and read some of the conclusions based on logic in the comments. Virtually impossible for Burke to have killed her.

      Delete
    2. Impossible? Howso?

      EG

      Delete
    3. If BDI and John is complicit then why the note? There is only one reason for the note. To get Patsy out of the house. John and Patsy can't both be complicit or they would not have called the police before getting rid of the body. BDI virtually impossible.

      Delete
    4. This wasn't a premeditated murder where all the pieces were figured out way ahead of time. This was trying to think on their feet as they were staging and covering things up. The RN was to steer police towards the intruder theory. A kidnapping gone wrong, etc. When PR couldn't recognize her own handwriting in a scrapbook that she placed pictures in, you had to know she wrote it. She was denying the obvious similarities. PR wanted a proper burial for her daughter. She didn't want her dumped somewhere.
      EG

      Delete
    5. agree anonymous that Patsy decided not to let John get JB's body out of house. Original plan to have note would have gone along with JB's body being outside of house. We overthink the clarity in which John and Patsy are acting after a night of no sleep and a daughter killed by emotionally disturbed son.

      Delete
    6. Exactly, Dan. We can only imagine what they were going through in that house that night.

      EG

      Delete
    7. I'm sorry, but that note tells us there was a plan. A very coolly and carefully thought out plan: to stage a kidnapping and dump the body while claiming to be delivering a ransom. You don't work out a plan like that, write a long note like that, with every i dotted and t crossed, and then decide at the last minute to change your plan -- but keep the note in play.

      We know that someone in that house was not in a state of panic -- because that note could not have been written by someone in a state of panic. And if there had been a change of plan, then that note would not have been handed over to the police for no reason, so it could be used as evidence against Patsy Ramsey. They could easily have come up with another note, suggesting a pedophile attack rather than kidnapping. A kidnap scenario with the body of the victim in the house is bound to backfire -- which it certainly did. Without that note an intruder scenario is a distinct possibility. With the note it's not.

      Delete
    8. Not necessarily.

      Delete
    9. I think saying they wouldn't have logically called 911 after writing the note could be wrong. They could've changed mid way through as they talked through it that morning after the note, after the plan. Logic to one person is not necessarily logic to another. In my opinion. The scenario that BDI and JR & PR covered it together in my mind is logical.

      Delete
    10. It seems to me that DocG has the purpose of the note right: to create a false narrative but also to deter Patsy from calling the police before John had a chance to complete staging and hide the body. But given how much time and effort he put into the note (which took the CBS team 21 minutes just to copy as fast as they could) and its repeated threats of death if they poke to anyone, is it really credible that JR simply stands by and lets his wife call the police anyway? And then they invite friends around?! He had a decent plan, and he just stood by and let her ruin it, and potentially the rest of his life?

      Delete
  18. Another thing with the CBS thing is how they came up with a female writing note shows prejudicial. Male obviously wrote the note.

    ReplyDelete
  19. You seem so utterly brilliant and confident in your intellect Sandman. You might embrace some curiosity.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I wonder if John's new wife watched the CBS special?

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Not really. The crime could have been committed without previous molestation. Under stress, kids, frustration, for whatever just snaps and accidentally kills her-freak accident. Sees life, business, marriage evaporating and quickly concocts plan that Patsy spoils"

    Highly unlikely. Why the staging in the manner that was done. If this would have been the case there would have been no penetration and no garrote. These would be done to cover up molestation not an accident.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No doesn't logically follow. You could still have no prior molestation and then staging with the garrote and penetration. Although penetration is not a fact.

      Delete
  22. I came across your blog this morning and read the first two posts. After being unsure all these years, I now absolutely believe you are right. Looking forward to reading the rest of your blog posts and catching up. Thank you for publishing this, and I hope that one day soon, law enforcement catches up to JR and holds him accountable for his crimes (and prevents him from hurting or killing anyone else).

    ReplyDelete
  23. John is brilliant. He defended Patsy all these years and now he gets to be seen as defending Burke. What a hero.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Makes perfect sense to me! As in those novel's and movie's he seemed to enjoy. I think he is a narcissist who thought he could get away with it all..and he did. On the Dr.phil show some of his last statements proved it. He stated that the real story wasn't her murder but the way he was treated after! Says everything about him and who he really is.

      Delete
  24. Make no mistake: It is virtually impossible for two grieving parents to create such a lengthy ransom note that is full of researched films. Movie lines would've been the furthest thing from the minds of devasted parents. This note was carefully crafted days or weeks in advance. How could two loving parents garrote their most precious child and sexually violate her body because of an accident? For one parent to suggest it would be bizarre. For both to comply to that plan is absolutely ludicrous. The only person capable of committing this crime is John Ramsey. His quote from "Dr. Phil" tells you exactly what kind of person he is. John said: "The real story here is not that a child was murdered. The real story is what was done to us by [the system]." I was absolutely disgusted by that remark! Something has to be done.

    Gumshoe

    ReplyDelete
  25. I'm assuming no one thus far can explain why Dr. Lee didn't retest the evidence. The case is still an ongoing investigation. Hunter is no longer DA. So what gives?

    As far as prior sexual abuse, let's not forget there was another male who stayed in the home periodically. The older half-brother. He may have been abusing Burke as well. Interesting that the suitcase in the basement was his and no one seemed to know why or how it got in that location. They also said a footprint was found on it. Was that new info?

    Speaking of footprints, when Dr. Phil was interviewing Burke, he said that the BPD said the Hi-Tec boot print was his. Burke admitted he had hiking boots, but didn't know brand. Then we cut to Lin Wood saying BR had no Hi-Tec boots. Obviously, the print would have been very small if it were Burke's. So was this a child-size print? Why would the BPD think it was Burke's if it wasn't? Burke said it was "his" house and he played in the basement. Yeah, but in the wine cellar?? Plus I would assume Burke would have already been in pajamas that night, so why would he be wearing hiking boots anyway?

    So many questions!!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There was actually no footprint in the usual sense. All there was was an imprint made by the "poon" of the boot, consisting solely of the Hi-Tec logo - which would probably have been more or less the same size regardless of the foot size of the person who made it.

      The fact that only the logo and nothing else was visible in the photo found by Smit, strongly suggests that it was an old print made prior to the night of the murder. But Smit was determined to turn it into a red herring, and as usual with his dubious efforts, succeeded. It could have been from Burke's boot, it could have been from a workman, as many had been in and out of the house in the last few weeks.

      Delete
  26. Gumshoe,

    I do not believe the RN was written quickly. I believe that note took some time to write. In fact, I believe they were up most of the night dealing with all of this. The garotte was staged, they thought she was already dead and I think JR did the staging, not PR.

    I agree with you that JR's comment on Dr Phil was disgusting. But then again, I would've called 911 and gotten some help for my son, because he obviously had been crying out for help for a long time. Too bad, it ended so tragically for JBR.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
  27. If there was a way to tie the Victory SBTC to John. That could be a game changer. I'm thinking the "Victory" might be reference to MSU fight song.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And every other university fight song in the country.

      Delete
    2. It's just that Victory SBTC and Victory for MSU has the same number of words and in same order and is the last line of the note and the last line of the fight song.

      Delete
    3. I think it's more likely that 'victory' was used along with the bizarre anagram to hammer home the conceit of the "small foreign faction". In other words, both the word victory and SBTC are utterly meaningless. Virtually every word of the ransom note is meaningless. The note is essentially a sick game the killer is playing.

      Delete
  28. Since I now agree with CBS regarding their BR theory, did they mention in the show that BR possibly wrote the note? By wrote I really mean transcribed. Was he ambidextrous?

    -J

    ReplyDelete
  29. CBS's theory has already been completely blown apart.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. False

      how has it been blown apart? JDI has as many holes as swiss cheese.

      -J

      Delete
    2. Honestly, for me the JDI is based on it being premeditated with the motive being that he wanted to silence her.
      -For one thing, there is absolutely no definitive proof she was molested prior to that night. We have no proof from any witnesses or evidence that he ever molested her. If you want to argue that JR snapped in a moment of rage and hit her over the head, that can be debated.
      The problem is if you take the premeditation and motive off the table regarding molestation, then what is more likely. JR hit her over the head in a moment of rage because she got out of bed OR BR gets her to come downstairs looking for Christmas gifts or have a snack with him and then he gets mad and hits her over the head?

      -J

      Delete
    3. It's actually been completely bolstered through prior accounts of people who actually worked on the matter. Poor A&E though - their show really went to hell.

      Delete
    4. From Steve Thomas's book:

      "In mid-September, a panel of pediatric experts from around the country reached one of the major conclusions of the investigation— that JonBenét had suffered vaginal trauma prior to the day she was killed. There were no dissenting opinions among them on the issue, and they firmly rejected any possibility that the trauma to the hymen and chronic vaginal inflammation were caused by urination issues or masturbation."

      Thomas, Steve; Davis, Donald A.. JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation (p. 227). St. Martin's Press. Kindle Edition.

      Delete
    5. Yes, and there are numerous experts who disagree based on the same evidence. There is simply no decisive evidence one way or another since her pediatrician doesn't seem to have noticed or noted anything definitive in her records.

      Delete
  30. I just wanted to personally thank Doc G for his interpretation of the facts, for this logical inferences, and also for starting a blog site that has allowed all of us to keep thinking, keep the case alive, and keep looking for answers and being able to discuss what we think and feel about it. Also want to thank Doc G for taking an unpopular stance - that JR did this and then misdirected the case from the beginning to throw suspicion off himself and any one else in his family. This is not a popular opinion, Doc G has not jumped on the popular bandwagon of opinion. To me this family was handled with kid gloves due to their position in the community and wealth. Justice for some for not for all. That is what is so frustrating to me. And we see it time and time again. We see it with celebrities, we see it in government. Sure, there are a few things that still bother me - why Patsy would have had on the same clothing plus makeup from the night before, why a fiber from her jacket was found on the sticky part of the duct tape but those things alone do not rule out JR, or rule in PR as being a part of the staging. That no one thus far has gone with the possibility that JR could have done this is appalling to me. Why wasn't he ruled in as Doc G said. We've had fresh ears and eyes look at this case multiple times over. And yet - fresh eyes have not taken a hard look at JR.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. In interviews I've read, Patsy said she applied fresh makeup that morning. Doc has addressed the fibers - transfer of fibers inside a home among people who live in the home is common.

      Delete
  31. John said on the Dr. Phil show: "In retrospect, I could have done two things differently. One is to be sure that we lived in a very secure house. We thought we lived in a very safe community. It was an old house, had lots of windows and doors." The second thing? "It's a good idea to be as anonymous as you can," John said. "Don't let your head rise up above the crowd, because there are people that will target you."

    There he goes again, using the word "that" instead of "who" as in "...people who will target you." Doc's analysis of the ransom note is brilliant. Its a big reason for me to believe JR authored that note.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If JR wrote the note, then why are Patsy's fingerprints the only ones found on the notepad? The guy never touched the notepad in his entire time living in the house, but he suddenly did that night with a pair of gloves on? LOL to that.

      From the Boulder Chief of Police: "On the notepad from which the note came from, the only fingerprints on the pad belonged to the CBI agent, the sergeant with the police department who took the pad into custody, and Patsy Ramsey. No, we do not believe a someone wrote the note prior to attempting to kidnap JonBenet. Neither the PD or the FBI believe this was ever a kidnapping. It was a murder that someone tried to stage as a kidnapping."

      Delete
    2. Your question regarding fingerprints has been addressed on this blog, but I will replay for you: the absence of fingerprints tells us nothing other than a person handling the item could have had on gloves, could have wiped the item down, or simply could have had dry hands and not transferred any prints. The presence of prints of anyone living inside that home, on any item, is not in and of itself suspicious, because we don't know when the person handled the item. We can totally expect that just about anything in the kitchen has been touched or handled by Patsy at some point in time. However, if John wrote the note, of course he would use gloves. We know someone wiped down the body and wiped down the flashlight. That same person is going to be smart enough not to leave their prints on the notepad. As Doc has stated, fingerprints on common items in the house really tell us nothing.

      Delete
    3. Like I said, to suggest that the ONLY time JR used the pad was the night of issuing the ransom note, but he did it with gloves, is just absolutely preposterous. It's not likely that he even knew that notepad existed. The theory he wrote the note is laughable.

      Not to mention all of this: "While handwriting analysis at the time couldn’t definitively prove Patsy had written the note, of all the people police interviewed, she was the only one who could not be eliminated. A forensic document examiner named Gideon Epstein later examined the note and concluded that there was “no doubt” it was Patsy. Most agreed. Donald Foster, an expert who performed comparisons of phraseology and punctuation at the time, concluded that Patsy was likely to have “written and may have composed the note.”"

      Delete
    4. And also " The presence of prints of anyone living inside that home, on any item, is not in and of itself suspicious, because we don't know when the person handled the item." This is 100% accurate.

      What is suspicious is the ABSENCE of prints for anyone living inside that home.

      Delete
    5. Dog, these are your opinions, based on your experience. I am a female. I keep notepads and all kinds of things in my kitchen desk, and my husband never touches them. He uses the paper in his home office. He knows better than to mess with my tidy stuff! There are post-it notes by the phone, and that's all he ever needs; otherwise he uses his own desk supplies. For all we know, he purposely used Patsy's pad for the express reason that he knew he had never touched it before.

      Delete
  32. DocG you claim you're unbiased, by you cannot wrap your mind around the evidence that Burke is responsible for gravely injuring his sister. I do believe that John staged the cover up..as a parent the lengths you will go to to protect your child are great..IMO, john didn't want to have their last name tarnished..he took control of the media, law enforcement, and almost every aspect of the case to "prove" they were innocent. BUT watch burkes interviews because they are very telling...he is neither concerned now does he fear for his safety because he knows he is safe...because he did it. It's all pretty simple..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why stage a pedophile knowing her skull is cracked? Not logical. Also, if BDI then John would almost certainly have gotten Patsy involved and convinced her it is best. Doesn't fit the facts.

      Delete
    2. Yup, very simple. Burke did it. They both covered it up.

      Delete
    3. There IS no evidence pointing to Burke. None. All there is is a set of assumptions, based on dubious profiling methods. Sure, it looks like Burke was not telling the whole truth when interviewed as a child. But all that tells us is that he may be hiding something. It's a huge stretch to go from that point to murder. As I see this case, Burke most likely saw and/or heard some things his father did not want him to discuss. That explains his behavior just as well as guilt -- but the CBS investigators are too dense to get it.

      Delete
  33. The preview for the CBS special showed them approaching Burke, we never saw that. I wish they aired the stuff they didn't show.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I saw someone asked if it was ever determined what SBTC stood for in an earlier post but don’t see it was responded to. According to the Rocky Mountain News, investigators think it is a reference to a now-defunct U.S. naval training center at Subic Bay, just west of Manila in the Philippines. John Ramsey, 53, spent March 1968 through November 1969 assigned to the Navy Public Works Center at Subic Bay Training Center, according to the Bureau of Navy Personnel in Washington.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Correction: JR was 53 at the time the RMN published this story. I realize he is older than that now.

      Delete
  35. Your basis for refuting the CBS show really flies in the face of the Reddit interview with Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner. This interview was last year and completely bolsters everything shown last night. Since you've never actually had access to anything, it's worth your time and effort to actually read: http://extras.denverpost.com/jonbenetAMA.html.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I read it some time ago and have no idea what you're referring to. Can you be more specific? And what makes you think I've never had access to anything. I've had access to lots of information regarding this case, as should be obvious.

      Delete
    2. You had access to the same things as the Boulder Police Chief? Really?

      Delete
  36. No one has considered that (at least I don't think so) that the chord around the neck, the stick tied into it, and tying up her wrists may have been the beginning of the abuse that night. When she tried to wriggle free or was making too much noise he could have hit her with the flashlight - or whatever was handy in the basement (later disposed of), then gone back to the strangling a little later. This would go to an erotic component to the sexual abuse. All that was theorized was that the blow came first, strangling second. But not that the chord business may have started it off. That could then lead to the only staging that was done was breaking the window moving the suitcase over, and writing the note.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The evidence points to her being sexually assaulted prior to the day of her death, not on the actual day itself.

      From the former Boulder Police Chief: "While the head wound would have eventually killed her, the strangulation actually did kill her. The rest of the scene we believe was staged, including the vaginal trauma, to make it look like a kidnapping/assault gone bad."

      Delete
    2. True.
      And some poster said that it had to be BR who hit JBR with the flashlight because if JR had hit JBR with the flashlight he would have done much more damage, but if it happened the way you describe JR probably tried to hit her just hard enough to make her go quiet and didn't mean to crack her skull.

      Delete
    3. Yup. And that's not my description, that's the description of the Boulder Police Chief. He's the true authority.

      Delete
    4. "The rest of the scene we believe was staged, including the vaginal trauma, to make it look like a kidnapping/assault gone bad."

      Yes, this is the standard BPD interpretation, as presented by Steve Thomas as well. NOT fact, by the way, but interpretation. And I must say I could not believe my eyes when I read that.

      The implication is that loving parents, covering for one another or for their son, would actually penetrate the vagina of their daughter, to the point of drawing blood, and then strangle her (while her heart was still beating) with such a satanic device, to stage a pedophile attack? How utterly bizarre! And then go to all that trouble to write a note staging a kidnapping???? Sorry, but to me this is beyond belief.

      The sexual assault and the strangulation were part of a very real attack, NOT staging -- no way.

      Delete
    5. Satanic device to stage an attack? The wood inside JBR was found to be the same wood as that from the garrote.

      Also, who said the parents were loving? That is one heck of a leap. There's rumor that JR was pedophile; the mother was constantly making JBR perform in beauty competitions and trying to exploit her. Those are NOT loving parents.

      Finally, there was NO sexual assault on the night of the murder.

      Delete
    6. Inquisitive: did you watch the CBS special? They covered the tying of her wrists, which showed just how useless/bizarre that detail was. There was 18 inches of cord between her wrists, and the cord was gently placed on top of her sleeves instead of right next to her skin. As a small child, her arms were essentially free/loose, she was not bound tight by any means - it was useless, ineffective, and part of staging.

      I don't know that i'm on board with the idea that the parents staged a sexual assault...I would not be surprised if BR had been assaulting her prior to that day and that day as well. If so, then it's not just her parents covering for him killing her, but also covering his serious issues and abuse of her, and their possible prior knowledge/failure to protect JBR.

      Somewhere in coverage of the case it's written that a dictionary left out in the house had a page fold-over at the entry for "incest". That's something a 9-10 year old would look up, if the word had come up in reprimands from his parents.

      Delete
    7. Yes, the tying of her wrists and the tape over her mouth was probably staging. But not the vaginal penetration or garotte strangulation, no. It's ludicrous to assume that perfectly innocent parents would do that to the body of their child. For any reason.

      The ONLY reason for taking BDI seriously was their inability or refusal to consider the possibility of an assault by the father. Once John is ruled out, then it becomes possible to consider Burke. The question is: why wasn't John even considered as the source of the prior molestation, the fatal assault and the staging? Maybe that was considered in the two episodes that were cut. If so, I'd love to know what they were thinking.

      Delete
  37. Just take a look at this timing

    -BR has NEVER spoken publicly about this case
    -CBS announces they are forming 7 experts to re-create the house, look at all the evidence with a completely fresh look and SAY who they believe did it.

    THEN all of a sudden Burke decides he is going to speak to "honor his sisters memory" and just for kicks, John will be there with their attorney. OH and they choose the show that shares the same attorney as them. Does anybody find this to be very obvious what happened? BR and JR had to know that if people actually take a look at the evidence of the case, it will lead them down a path that leads directly to Burke and John.

    -J

    ReplyDelete
  38. How is it possible that they can ignore JR? Statistically he is the most likely suspect, he is the adult male in the house! They should have to give very good reasons for dismissing him, but instead they basically ignore him
    Even if PR wrote the RN that does not make JR innocent. Often women (and men) stand by their guilty partner either because they believe their partner's lies or because they don't care the partner is guilty.

    Also I think the dismissal of sexual abuse evidence is unprofessional, if they think it is inconclusive or not very strong, fine. But to dismiss the possibility of abuse entirely?
    Especially because JBR had bed wetting issues.
    And also not all abuse leaves physical evidence.
    He may be voyeuristic and prefer to force the victim to touch herself, undress, act sexy etc. Or the abuser may find dominating sexually gratifying (scaring her, humiliating her, locking her up, tying her etc). These things can be done without leaving physical evidence.

    And all these things need to be addressed because, like I said, JR IS statistically the most likely suspect, and abuse is the most likely reason for a murder like this, and the most likely reason for lawyering up and staging.

    And seriously if BR killed JBR in an accident there would have been no need for this bizarre cover up, even if there were strange things going on with BR, BR was too young to be prosecuted, and JR has shown he has influence money and power enough to pull stings. He could have managed to avoid a public scandal in that situation, a quiet promise to seek intensive therapy for BR and pulling some strings would have been enough. It happens.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JR wasn't a lawyer, how would he know that BR was too young to be prosecuted? I'm a lawyer admitted in two states. I couldn't even begin to tell you whether a 10 y/o could be prosecuted for murder in either of those two states. You'd only know if you were a prosecutor and had dealt with that type of thing before.

      Delete
    2. I don't think you need to be a lawyer to realise it is highly unlikely a 9 year old would get prosecuted for a deadly accident, and if there were things JR was not sure about he could call his lawyer.

      Delete
    3. Sorry, but now you're just completely reaching. A quick google search reveals that 23 states don't have a minimum age to be tried as an adult. That quickly shoots down your theory of "it is highly unlikely a 9 year old would get prosecuted for a deadly accident." In fact, it's actually about just as likely that they would.

      Delete
    4. You think it is just as likely a child is prosecuted for a deadly accident? Even when children shoot somebody by accident I have never heard of the child being prosecuted, sometimes a parent is prosecuted for negligence but not the child.

      Delete
    5. In 23 states, there is no minimum age to be prosecuted for murder and tried as an adult. With all due respect, what does it have to do with anything that you "have never heard of the child being prosecuted"? Are you in law enforcement? Are you an officer of the court? Exactly what would you be hearing?

      Delete
    6. Accidental death is the same as murder to you?

      Delete
  39. I have one big problem with the part of the setup that involves John having been molesting her for some period of time before the murder: It is VERY unusual for a pedophile to have one victim. We just don't hardly ever see this happen. The idea that in his life before the murder and in the 20 years since no one else has ever come forward saying that he molested them makes it difficult for me to imagine a scenario where the FIRST and ONLY child that he molested was his biological daughter and that it ended with her murder. I'm not saying that he didn't kill her, as I agree that he is the only reasonable suspect, and I agree with 99% of the content on your blog, but I just have a hard time with that part. You would think that if any other parent out there had even the tiniest ounce of suspicion that JR had been inappropriate with their child, they would have started making waves when the Ramsey's were suspects in the media.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thing are more complicated than people generally realise. Not all child abusers start at a young age and abuse hundreds of victims. Smallbone & Worsley"s research show for example that 37% started at age 31 to 40 years. And not all abusers abuse many victims. There can also be a difference between the incestious and the non-incestious abuser. An abuser who abuses a child in his own family often has fewer victims but abuses that victim more often. Some abusers abuse their own children and also
      children outside their family, some don't. Some incestious abusers focus on one child in the family some abuse all their children.

      Delete
    2. I have wondered that, but then I can't help thinking there is a first time for everything. Perhaps Patsy unavailable with her cancer treatments and JB being so heavily sexualized, he couldn't resist? I don't think that him never having done it before means it's out of the question.

      Delete
    3. We don't know enough about John to determine that he had no other victims. John was away "on business" MUCH of the time. Including time spent in Amsterdam, notorious for its legalized prostitution. I'm not saying John did anything inappropriate during these trips. But the fact remains: he could have. We just don't know all that much about him.

      Delete
  40. Interesting idea, Inquisitive. Everybody keeps saying it was staged but it is such a bizarre and gruesome thing to do just for staging, so maybe he was abusing her and hit her to hard. And he may have untied her after the blow and the strangulation because he intended to get her body out of the house. When that became impossible he may have tied her up again.

    ReplyDelete
  41. I am curious about a comment made during one of the specials....it was said that John was gone for approx 1 1/2 hours that morning before the body was discovered, while there was only the one police officer left at the residence. Any ideas about that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That would have been the perfect opportunity for John to get rid of incriminating evidence. I see no other reason for his absence during such a long period of time.

      Delete
    2. He was in the house the entire time - reportedly in the den.

      Delete
  42. The CBS Special...

    Let me see if I have this straight.

    Burke killed his sister. His parents panicked and moved to cover it up.

    They went to the lengths of garroting her neck (possibly while she was still breathing, I guess) and tramatizing her vagina to make it look like a sex crime. Is that correct?

    I'm imagining John and Patsy concoting this bizarre scheme. "Okay, which one of us is going to penetrate her? Any volunteers?"

    "Well, you strangled her, Patsy. So, I guess I'll have to do it." A loving parents work is never done. What we do for our kids.

    Or, are they saying JonBenet was NOT penetrated that night (I didn't get to watch Part 2)?

    Did this team of investigators really look into this crime, or where they there to promote Kolar's theory?

    I do think one of the most confusing parts of this crime is John Ramsey mixing his guilt in with Patsy's innocense every chance he had. He killed his daughter and then used his wife and her remaining years on this earth to cover it up. Patsy was the perfect shield and another victim.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I absolutely agree with you. And I guess Burke was convinced with the aid of some benedryl, that he did nothing wrong to JB which resulted in her just happening to go missing and then turn up dead, as JR is also good at hypnosis. Yep. Not Burke, not Patsy. Just because it's on television don't make it so! To have discounted the blood in the panties as nothing more than transference is just pure blarney.

      Delete
    2. If you believe the blood on the panties as something more than transfer, then you have to believe that neither JR nor anyone else in the family did it. That's what exonerated the parents. Sorry.

      Delete
    3. I do not believe the blood on her panties were transfer at all. Transfer? From where? The flashlight didn't break the skin, the garroting didn't produce any blood, the blood in the panties had to come from vaginal penetration. The blood in the panties did not exonerate the parents. You have it twisted. Foreign DNA was found on the panties but it was determined it could have come from handling at the factory. The blood was most definitely hers.

      Delete
  43. To Anon at 2:20pm and to EG's post at 9:32am and Sandman at 11:52am

    JR as the perp is VERY difficult to imagine or even prove, here’s why:

    1. there is no known evidence that JR ever exhibited paraphilia

    2. no one has ever publicly linked JR to a crime

    3. no one has publicly ever linked JR's youth with the MacDonald triad

    4. the cops never found a single bit of porn, on John's laptop, or his Mac computers, or anywhere in the house
    5. the police never found a BTK style cache (crime photos, wigs, nylons, ropes, cuffs, crime scene “trophies”) that could be linked to JR
    6. renowned FBI profiler John Douglas found NO physical evidence tying John and Patsy to the homicide (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)
    7. there WAS physical evidence near JonBenét's body suggesting an unidentified person had broken into the home (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)
    8. there was no reasonable motive for the Ramseys to kill their daughter. The bed-wetting hypothesis was so outlandish as to be an absurdity – it flew in the face of historically established conduct by Patsy (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)
    9. prior to the murder there was a total lack of evidence so far as physical abuse, neglect, sexual molestation, or serious personality disorders among the Ramseys was concerned – in contrast to what investigators almost invariably find in cases of children killed by their parents. (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)
    10. John and Patsy Ramsey after the crime acted in a manner consistent with that of innocent parents of murdered children (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas
    11. nobody yet known in American society, having achieved the rank of CEO, with the intellectual and physical demands this type of work would typically require, has ever been documented to also exhibit paraphilia





    Disclaimer: I'm absolutely not defending JR. If he did it, he deserves the most severe legally obtainable punishment available. I want justice just as much as anyone here on this blog !

    from:
    http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/09/29-4.html

    Laptop computer (7 BAH)
    Two video cassettes (15 BAH)
    One audio tape (16 BAH)
    One video cassette (19 BAH)
    Two computer discs (20 BAH)
    Christmas card (21 BAH)
    One VHS video tape (22 BAH)
    One computer disc (23 BAH)
    One Betamax video tape (24 BAH)
    One video tape (25 BAH)
    One VHS tape (26 BAH)
    One NEC computer disc (27 BAH)
    One Macintosh computer disc (28 BAH)
    One Macintosh McWrite computer disc (29 BAH)
    One Betamax video tape (30 BAH)
    One Compuserve book (31 BAH)
    One "I didn't know" Compuserve book (32 BAH)
    Dave Berry Cyberspace book (33 BAH)
    VHS videotape (2 JRB) (12-31-96)
    VHS videotape (3 JRB) 12-31-96
    Outer disc users guide and papers (4 JRB) 12-31-96
    VHS video tapes (5 JRB) 12-31-96
    VHS videotapes (6 JRB) 12-31-96
    Fifteen VHS tapes (9 JRB)

    CC2

    ReplyDelete
  44. Dear DocG, I find your analysis to be the most logical, thank you for your persistent efforts. I am confused about why Dr. Lee and Dr. Spitz both stated emphatically that there is no evidence of sexual abuse, past abuse and on the night of her murder. Any thoughts on this?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems clear that this investigation had an agenda behind it, and vaginal trauma did not fit that agenda. I'm ashamed for Dr. Spitz that he went along with this absurd idea, which blatantly contradicts the evidence.

      Delete
    2. Why would two well known forensic pathologists stake their good names and reputations by ignoring evidence. Maybe it just wasn't there?

      There is absolutely no evidence that JR molested his daughter or any other child.

      EG

      Delete
    3. We're talking about two different things: 1. penetration of the vagina on the night of the crime, associated with the assault; 2. signs of chronic sexual abuse.

      The CBS team apparently had nothing to say about the latter, which is admittedly controversial. But denied the former, which is abundantly documented. What else could have caused bleeding from the vagina? What else could have produced traces of birefringent material inside the vaginal wall? And if the damage to the hymen wasn't produced during the fatal assault, then it must have been produced earlier, as part of the chronic abuse.

      I was completely taken aback by their decision to rule out sexual assault on the night of the murder. And if they know something no one else knows they should have shared that info. As it stands, I have question their knowledge of the evidence.

      Delete
    4. The Boulder Police Chief said there is absolutely no way to determine the sexual assault was "chronic." You're really editorializing.

      Delete
  45. There were extra beds in JBR and BR's bedrooms so they could sleep in the same room? If that is true they must have liked each other.

    ReplyDelete
  46. I read somewhere they when Fleet ran up the basement stairs and shouted for an ambulance, everyone but Patsy jumped up and ran over to him. I can't imagine Patsy not jumping up and wanting to see her child too. I wonder if John staged the gruesome scene alone in the basement and told her she wouldn't want to know what he did, so she didn't dare get up to see her. I also think John might have dictated most of the ransom note to her--while he was in the basement staging the body, he was noticing the movie posters hanging in the basement, which gave him the movie quote ideas for the ransom note. Patsy added some of her phrasing as well, so the ransom note was perhaps a mutual effort. I read somewhere I think, that the visual shaping of the note was similar to Patsy's characteristic style--where the salutation and the closing was placed, for example. Perhaps John went over the note and added additional disguise elements to the letters as well. And this happened after John ordered Burke to go to bed after he hit her, and Burke had no idea she was mortally wounded.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Makes sense that Patsy wouldn't stand up and rush over. She was supposedly heavily sedated from medication by the doctor that JR called to tend to her.

      Delete
  47. Didn't the CBS special say that JBR did not bleed when she was poked with the train track because her heart was no longer beating? So she was strangled before being poked. If BR poked her with the train track, he was with the body after JBR was strangled.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Maybe John--alone in the basement with JonBenet--used the train track to assess for any response to pain stimuli before applying the garrote. Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  49. IT IS AN ABSOLUTE DISGRACE AND TESTIMONY TO THE WRETCHEDNESS OF THIS COUNTRY, IT'S CULTURE & FREE SPEECH... to actually have the AUDACITY... and BLAME THE MOTHER of her own child... of sexually abusing & murdering her offspring. ~CG

    ReplyDelete
  50. Does anyone know if patriarch Ramsey is left handed? The fatal blow delivered to crush his daughter's head was delivered by the left hand if she was facing the rat bastard. ~CG

    ReplyDelete
  51. These are red flags that indicate deceit:

    1. When PR was asked who wrote the words beneath pictures in her family photo album, she couldn't say if it was her or not? Who doesn't know that answer? When she was asked to find similarities in her letters to those found in the RN, she couldn't find any. The similarities were there, for anyone to clearly see. Yet she denied seeing any similarities.

    2. Not wanting to speak to the police when your child is murdered.

    3. Telling friends and family to remain quiet and not cooperate with the police.

    4. Finding out your daughter's been kidnapped and you're not concerned for your other child who is alone in a bedroom upstairs. You had no idea if the intruder was still in your house and yet you don't stay on the phone with the 911 operator and you don't keep your remaining child "close to you"? Her words. At that point you know your house is not safe and was able to be broken into by an intruder.

    None of these things make sense to me. When someone can explain these I might believe the intruder theory. Until then, too much just doesn't fit.

    IMNO someone in the house did it...BR is my guess. He wasn't then, and isn't now, what I'd call normal. He has issues and always has. Instead of getting him help, they hid the truth.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
  52. EVERY SINGLE POST THAT DOES NOT AGREE with the ASTONISHING detective work done here on this blog... is an ACCESSORY TO THE CRIME. ~CG

    ReplyDelete
  53. These are all fantastic questions. By far, the most logical explanation is that BR did it (likely on accident). The family panicked figuring they'd lose both their kids at the same time and tried to cover it up. An intruder just doesn't work. Nothing indicates that JR or PR actually committed the act.

    ReplyDelete
  54. EXTREMELY HEARTLESS and typical American DYSFUNCTION to think a 9 year old child can rule & dictate a very wealthy family's behavior. ~CG

    ReplyDelete
  55. When I read the RN I expected it to be ridiculous like everybody said, but to me it was chilling it seemed so clearly written by JR for PR, with threads, demands and soothing reassurances all to make sure he would have plenty of time to get rid of the body. Of course it went wrong, PR didn't read the whole RN, he should have started the RN with "don't call the police".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. At worst, the two of them were together when the police were called. There are numerous people opining that her 911 call seems completely staged. Moreover, despite the author of this blog's opinion, every single handwriting expert who has analyzed the RN has reached the conclusion, with nearly 100% certainty, that it was written by PR.

      Delete
    2. I completely agree with the 911 call, It is without a doubt staged. PR seems to be genuine with her emotion but she almost asked for an ambulance rather than the police. There is alot of distancing and alibi setting in the 911 call as well, very similar wording to other 911 calls which have been staged.

      Delete
    3. You think PRs ambulance call is staged. You have the right to your own interpretations but they are just that: interpretations. To think that they amount to something that is without a doubt is confusing facts with interpretations.
      And no not all handwriting experts were nearly 100% sure that it was PR who wrote the note. That is disinformation.

      Delete
    4. Please show me one handwriting expert to determine otherwise.

      Delete
  56. I have been following this blog for almost 2 weeks and I have to say that some of the blog owners claims are very far fetched assumptions. Whether JR did it or not there is no evidence whatsoever against him. I would really like to see or hear what all this nonexistant evidence Doc claims he has against JR. If all you have is PR calling 911 with the body in the house then it must be JR , then you are bordering on pyschosis. THe window is NOT even evidence and experts are split on sexual abuse. Even IF there was sexual abuse it is more probable to be Burke. As far as your claim of JR not being a suspect because of the ransom note handwriting not being linked to him, that is false as well. John Ramsey was investigated more deeply than anyone in this case, well after his bought off handwriting analysis. We will use the Grand Jury as evidence. You use the 911 call with body in the house, the sexual abuse and the window to build this theory. The fact is we do not know the truth about any of these things, so you drawing conclusions and logical inferences off of what are not even known facts and claiming you have solved the case without a doubt is dangerous. Even worse you have convinced quite a few people on here that you have a solid, evidence based theory when in reality what you have is fantasy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    2. You should read the blog better.

      Delete
    3. "You should read the blog better."

      Or you should learn to question things better. Which is it?

      Delete
    4. He should learn to question things better. No point in him/her even posting. He should just say Yes, whatever Doc said to everything.

      Delete
  57. BR's pajamas that had feces in them are propf that BR was in JBR's room at sometime late that night. I feel this is a valuable clue that is overlooked. If he was up playing with toys and eating pineapple and with JBR that night, it appears he was up very late.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Evidence lines up to indicate JR is a very charming man. So charming his daughter at a very young age becomes enthralled with him. She longs for when he will return home. See interviews. She knows all the Cinderella stories. And when the adoring father of her dreams returns, he senses her vibes, manipulates her feelings and uses his 6 yr old daughter for his extreme pleasure. ~CG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm thinking she consented for a very, very long time. ~CG

      Delete
  59. Question for some of you on here. After JBR's body is found, JR calls his pilot like he is going to try an escape to get out of dodge. Now PR is there and knows that John is all of a sudden going on an unplanned business meeting that she knows does not exist being as they were going to Charlevoix that morning. So is this a dead giveaway that either A) PR knows what is going on and is at least compliant at this point or that B) She would have no choice but to know that JR has killed her daughter and is going to take off on an OJ like chase. She knows he made this call so PR has to think or know something about why JR all of a sudden decides to take off. Opinions please !

    ReplyDelete
  60. During the Reddit interview with the Boulder Police Chief, this blog's theory on who did it is suggested to him. In so few words, the BPC calls BS. Link: http://extras.denverpost.com/jonbenetAMA.html ... look for question by "jaleach"

    ReplyDelete
  61. BTW readers of this blog - "doktorgosh" is also a username on reddit that espoused theories in the Steven Avery case of how Branden Dassey must have been an accomplice to the crime and that he only confessed because he was guilty. "Doktorgosh", as we now all know, could not have been more wrong about that. It only makes sense that he HAS to be right about it being JR murdering JBR then. Oh wait ...

    ReplyDelete
  62. PR I'm sure had serious woman's intuition. She probably suspected immediately what happened. She was heavily sedated for weeks. Mind numbed into submission & realized her life had no where else to go? ~CG

    ReplyDelete
  63. 1. It was BR, not JR, who had been molesting her previously. Makes perfect sense. He hit her with the flashlight because she was going to tell, or because he got angry, or because he is crazy as hell.
    2. It's very interesting that they put 12/25 on the gravestone. They KNEW the correct date of death.
    David

    ReplyDelete
  64. To Anon at 2:20pm and to EG's post at 9:32am and Sandman at 11:52am

    1. JR as the perp is VERY difficult to imagine or even prove:

    2. there is no known evidence that JR ever exhibited paraphilia

    3. no one has ever publicly linked JR to a crime

    4. no one has publicly ever linked JR's youth with the MacDonald triad

    5. the cops never found a single bit of porn, on John's laptop, or his Apple computers, or anywhere in the house

    6. the police never found a BTK style cache (crime photos, wigs, nylons, ropes, cuffs, crime scene “trophies”) that could be linked to JR

    7. renowned FBI profiler John Douglas found NO physical evidence tying John and Patsy to the homicide (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    8. there WAS physical evidence near JonBenét's body suggesting an unidentified person had broken into the home (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    9. there was no reasonable motive for the Ramseys to kill their daughter. The bed-wetting hypothesis was so outlandish as to be an absurdity – it flew in the face of historically established conduct by Patsy (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    10. prior to the murder there was a total lack of evidence so far as physical abuse, neglect, sexual molestation, or serious personality disorders among the Ramseys was concerned – in contrast to what investigators almost invariably find in cases of children killed by their parents. (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    11. John and Patsy Ramsey after the crime acted in a manner consistent with that of innocent parents of murdered children (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas

    12. nobody yet known in American society, having achieved the rank of CEO, with the intellectual and physical demands this type of work would typically require, has ever been documented to also exhibit paraphilia



    Disclaimer: I'm absolutely not defending JR. If he did it, he deserves the most severe legally obtainable punishment available. I want justice just as much as anyone here on this blog !

    from:
    http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/09/29-4.html

    List of magnetic media assets inventoried by LE:

    Laptop computer (7 BAH)
    Two video cassettes (15 BAH)
    One audio tape (16 BAH)
    One video cassette (19 BAH)
    Two computer discs (20 BAH)
    Christmas card (21 BAH)
    One VHS video tape (22 BAH)
    One computer disc (23 BAH)
    One Betamax video tape (24 BAH)
    One video tape (25 BAH)
    One VHS tape (26 BAH)
    One NEC computer disc (27 BAH)
    One Macintosh computer disc (28 BAH)
    One Macintosh McWrite computer disc (29 BAH)
    One Betamax video tape (30 BAH)
    One Compuserve book (31 BAH)
    One "I didn't know" Compuserve book (32 BAH)
    Dave Berry Cyberspace book (33 BAH)
    VHS videotape (2 JRB) (12-31-96)
    VHS videotape (3 JRB) 12-31-96
    Outer disc users guide and papers (4 JRB) 12-31-96
    VHS video tapes (5 JRB) 12-31-96
    VHS videotapes (6 JRB) 12-31-96
    Fifteen VHS tapes (9 JRB)

    CC2

    ReplyDelete
  65. Consider this. If some think Burke did it (BDI) and one of the parents covered up for him,either JR, PR, or JR and PR) how would either of them know he had sexually assaulted her enough to then wipe her down? Some of you think BR did this, including sexually assaulting her. It is a fact that her crotch area had been wiped down - and that there was a fiber from JR's clothing found in there.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Burkes pajamas were found with feces in them pn the night of the murder. Glass is the best source for leaving fingerprints that there is. Unless a dirty bowl was used it is pretty likely that Burke touched that bowl after it was cleaned, meaning he most likely was eating the pineapple. PR's prints could possibly be because she put away the dishes. As far as both PR and JR lying about the pineapple, it could be that they had never discussed it because they did not think the pineapple would be evidence so they both just denied or could have heard about the pineapple ahead of time and decided it would be much less to explain away and answer for if they denied. Its that simple. It surely does not mean that 1 was lying and 1 was not, especially not when BR was most likely up and eating it.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Who gave JBR box of candy as a gift (candy that allegedly had fecal matter on it?) Would luggage by window in basement fit through window, would it conceal JBR if someone wanted to get JBR out through window? When did JR call to make travel arrangements? What time was the family supposed to leave for trip in the morning? Did any one in house shower between evening of 12/25 and 12/16 before police arrived? Just additional comment on the Ransom note, it seems like person was writing to themselves, like both a confession and alibi ie Victory...because victory in deflecting the investigation away from molesting/murdering JBR and perp thought they could outsmart police. I don't think BR hit his sister and don't think if he did knock her out that any loving parents would decide to stage assault/strangle daughter instead of calling ambulance immediately. It's seems more sadistic, like covering up sexual assault of child/pedophilia (who maybe screamed), not wanting to be caught. RIP JonBenet

    ReplyDelete
  68. To Anon at 2:20pm and to EG's post at 9:32am and Sandman at 11:52am

    JR as the perp is VERY difficult to imagine or even prove:

    1. there is no known evidence that JR ever exhibited paraphilia

    2. no one has ever publicly linked JR to a crime

    3. no one has publicly ever linked JR's youth with the MacDonald triad

    4. the cops never found a single bit of porn, on John's laptop, or his Apple computers, or anywhere in the house

    5. the police never found a BTK style cache (crime photos, wigs, nylons, ropes, cuffs, crime scene “trophies”) that could be linked to JR

    6. renowned FBI profiler John Douglas found NO physical evidence tying John and Patsy to the homicide (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    7. there WAS physical evidence near JonBenét's body suggesting an unidentified person had broken into the home (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    8. there was no reasonable motive for the Ramseys to kill their daughter. The bed-wetting hypothesis was so outlandish as to be an absurdity – it flew in the face of historically established conduct by Patsy (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    9. prior to the murder there was a total lack of evidence so far as physical abuse, neglect, sexual molestation, or serious personality disorders among the Ramseys was concerned – in contrast to what investigators almost invariably find in cases of children killed by their parents. (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas)

    10. John and Patsy Ramsey after the crime acted in a manner consistent with that of innocent parents of murdered children (from The Cases That Haunt Us, John Douglas

    11. nobody yet known in American society, having achieved the rank of CEO, with the intellectual and physical demands this type of work would typically require, has ever been documented to also exhibit paraphilia



    Disclaimer: I'm absolutely not defending JR. If he did it, he deserves the most severe legally obtainable punishment available. I want justice just as much as anyone here on this blog !

    from:
    http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/09/29-4.html

    Laptop computer (7 BAH)
    Two video cassettes (15 BAH)
    One audio tape (16 BAH)
    One video cassette (19 BAH)
    Two computer discs (20 BAH)
    Christmas card (21 BAH)
    One VHS video tape (22 BAH)
    One computer disc (23 BAH)
    One Betamax video tape (24 BAH)
    One video tape (25 BAH)
    One VHS tape (26 BAH)
    One NEC computer disc (27 BAH)
    One Macintosh computer disc (28 BAH)
    One Macintosh McWrite computer disc (29 BAH)
    One Betamax video tape (30 BAH)
    One Compuserve book (31 BAH)
    One "I didn't know" Compuserve book (32 BAH)
    Dave Berry Cyberspace book (33 BAH)
    VHS videotape (2 JRB) (12-31-96)
    VHS videotape (3 JRB) 12-31-96
    Outer disc users guide and papers (4 JRB) 12-31-96
    VHS video tapes (5 JRB) 12-31-96
    VHS videotapes (6 JRB) 12-31-96
    Fifteen VHS tapes (9 JRB)

    CC2

    ReplyDelete