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.

Monday, October 31, 2016

More comments, anyone?

Anyone at all? Comments?

301 comments:

  1. Before finally settling onto a theory, I went from IDI to JDI where I sat for a while before landing on BDI. Reading thru a lot of the comments on here it’s easy to see where people stand, so just like a jury will take an initial vote, Im curious if everybody would answer these 3 questions to gauge where everybody is at. For each answer, make them short as we don’t need full blown theories

    1. Who delivered the head blow to JBR?
    2. Who applied and used the garrote?
    3. Name all the Ramsey’s you believe were involved in either the murder or cover up

    I’ll start

    1. Burke Ramsey
    2. Most likely John
    3. John, Patsy, Burke

    Look forward to seeing everybody’s answers

    -J

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm a believer that the tying up was done by BR during a playing, role playing game with his sister, as common in that age group. I think she was tied, maybe fell or most likely hit in the head with the hammer that BR admitted to. For what reason, could be several. Maybe he was playing Dr and something happened from there. I believe the marks on her neck is from being dragged, possibly to the wine cellar, i believe she was choked during the dragging as the urine near the wine cellar would suggest. The rope indentation from the bottom of the neck, burning the side and indenting the top. This is why I believe the parents couldn't call 911. They had no choice but to cover up. MH

      Delete
    2. Burke, Burke, Burke and John (later Patsy)
      Thanks, E

      Delete
    3. 1. Burke
      2.BR or JR
      3. all 3, Burke, John, and Patsy

      Delete
    4. -J, these are my votes:

      Hope this is brief enough as I can buy two scenarios right now-

      1. John
      2. John
      3. John

      Or

      1. Burke
      2. Burke
      3. Burke, John, Patsy

      I currently believe John did it all, but I could accept a scenario where Burke killed Jon Benet and the parents tried to cover it up and stage an intruder/kidnapping/sexual assault crime scene. If Burke only hit Jon Benet over the head and that blow did not kill her, then I just can’t accept parents covering up an accident with a murder.

      -GEH

      Delete
  2. Waste of time and space.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, I appreciate that very much. Actually writing "waste of time and space" is in fact a waste of your time and the space of this blog, but nonetheless I think your post shed some real light on this case!

      -J

      Delete
    2. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    3. No worries J, that is all the above commenter has had to add to this blog in well over a year. He posts that same thing over and over and has pissed off about half of the people who have ever posted on this blog, yet wastes HIS TIME repititively reading and posting about it. Who is really the waste of time and space ?

      Delete
  3. 1. Burke
    2. Burke
    3. Patsy, John, Burke

    ReplyDelete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Leigh/Melinda - following from our previous exchange, in which you refused to acknowledge the faintest possibility that the RN even COULD BE evidence of the killing being an insider job:

    I invite you; either find us another ransom note remotely like that one - three pages long, full of movie cliche, detailing a kidnapping that has not taken place, and written *entirely using materials found in the victim's home* - or else, please, have the honesty to admit that this note is unlike anything any intruder or abductor has *ever* left in any home, and is therefore more likely to be an example of staging than an artifact left by any intruder. If you won't concede that even as a possibility, well, we'll be perfectly entitled to draw our own conclusions as to your integrity and honesty on these boards.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Attache is proof enough that PR wrote that note. 75% of the population don't know what that would be and 95% wouldn't know how to spell it right. Why would an intruder put a word like that in there if they are demanding money. PR had a journalist degree and the sophistication to use that word in normal language. MH

      Delete
    2. Attache is proof that Patsy wrote the note? Well shit. Case closed.

      Delete
    3. The RN has several references / text from thriller type movies..

      Delete
    4. Being unique doesnt mean the RN is fake.. or written by a Ramsey.. As I have said before.. He may have been in the home..alone.. no cell phone.. no radio..no TV.. He was bored and ruminating for hours.. Getting more and more psychotic..

      Delete
    5. Leigh - it's a simple yes or no: can you concede that the unique (your word) nature of this bogus ransom note COULD BE construed as being evidence that it is staging? Yes or no? If you can't say yes, you are not being honest, plain and simple, but if I read you right you actually think it WAS staging - by a psychopathic intruder.

      And can you further concede what all law enforcement experts and the FBI would tell you, and what they thought from the start: a stranger who breaks into a home and commits a crime does not resort to staging because there is no need. It is simply not done. It doesn't happen. Yes, on rare occasions a serial psychopath has been known to use a victim's cell phone to later call and taunt the victim's parents, but writing and leaving fake ransom notes in the home three pages long? Leigh, get real. If a crime scene in a family home shows evidence of staging, people more qualified than you or I tell us one thing and one thing only: someone in the family did it. Intruders don't do staging in victims' homes.

      With respect, you're living in fantasy land. So far you have LHP hiring Helgoth and his hispanic ninja accomplice to enter the Ramsey house taking a stun gun and a book on serial killers with them, and a ransom note, which they decide to rewrite using Patsy's pen and pad just to kill some time. They plant the book in John's room. They decide that instead of kidnapping her they will sexually assault her, smash her over the head and garotte her, tie her hands together in such a way as not to restrain their movement at all, tape her dead or unconscious mouth with tape from the back of a toy in her room, then redress her (leaving some of John's shirt fibers in her crotch area) before wrapping her lovingly in her favourite blanket and hiding her body in the most inaccessible room in the basement.

      How much improbability do you want to pile on before you admit that there is a compelling and legitimate case that can be made for this being an inside job?

      And please think: you say there's no evidence against anyone in the family, but you must see that it's so much easier to say that because it was their own home. Of course their fingerprints are everywhere, of course their fiber evidence and DNA is all over the place - they lived there! What evidence COULD they leave? Whether the brush handle or the torch or the tape had their fingerprints or touch DNA on them, they can say yeah of course it does, we lived there and handled these things regularly. JBR's blood or urine in the basement? Yup, that's where the killer left her body? They lived there, JBR lived there, her body was found there, and so unless you think someone would be dumb enough to leave a trail of bloody footprints leading from the basement up to one of the bedrooms, or semen inside her, then the evidence that is usually conclusive in these cases - fibers, blood, DNA etc - is all rendered powerless.

      So the point becomes: is there clear evidence of an intruder?

      And there just isn't.

      The more telling fact is the bogus nature of the RN, their numerous lies throughout the years, and the lack of any any meaningful evidence that there was any intruder at all.

      Delete
    6. Nicely done, MHN. Your problem is expecting L2 to apply logic - she does not. Her arguments are all emotionally based, and boil down to "nice people like the Ramseys don't do things like this". Facts don't matter. There's no reasoning with her; many have tried.
      CC

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    8. Thank you CC - as far as I can tell most of Lied-To's arguments aren't really based on anything other than unsupported hypotheticals about other (very different) intruder cases, or various family friends etc. Unsupported scattergun accusations and water-muddying, Which is why, I guess, some people think she is here with an agenda - family honor, for example.

      I mainly wanted to see if she would have the honesty to admit that the family-member-did-it scenario is at least a possibility. But she replies only that she sees 'no evidence' for that, before she goes on to propose, *with even less evidence*, anyone and everyone the family ever knew, and some they didn't. She has an open mind. Everyone is in the frame for her - except John, Patsy, Burke.

      Now why would she do that?

      Delete
    9. MHN- No. Because if it were most peole they would write a 3 line rn, not a 3 pager. Then, I thought, maybe it was to convince police of a motive... But, no, thats not it.. The motive is established with the demand for money. So, why do 3 pages. Because he is a psychopath.. proud of himself.. The entire note is about him.. He cant help it.. I am in control here.. you do what I tell you to.. I will kill if you dont.. see how smart I am..I have you by the balls.. ha ha..I know about your bonus because I am just that cleaver and so on..

      Staging? Like what? Be sensible here..John broke the window long before.. Full stop.. Thats a red herring.. Its you that add meaning to these things.

      Evidence of family...Yes it would be hard to connect the family since they live there.. THats why they were harassed so much.. The police even wanted to arrest them, just to threaten them and manipulate them to go against each other,, to confess.. to break.. That never happened. They searched their entire lives and childhood friend etc to find something...anything.. any previous behavior linking them but... nothing..The intruder theory is based on the crime, in its entirety.. The family has no motive,,until you fabricate one.. like sex abuse or Patsy was jealous of JB etc.. The brutal nature if the murder... the garrote..the scream.. the sex abuse.. the suitcase. Even the glove found in the neighbors trash.. Then you have a guy.. breaking into homes and not stealing anything.. sexually abused the 12 year old.. the sudden ending to that after JB murder. And more

      Delete
    10. Emotionally based,, CC? Full logic only.. cold hard logic.. Im not the one adding fanciful data where there is none.

      Delete
    11. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    12. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    13. Yes we can, INQ ! Being right is on our side, after all.. :)

      Delete
    14. Yeah, Zach, but its quite expensive :)))))

      Delete
    15. Leigh, "I'm not the one adding fanciful data where there is none"?

      Oh really?

      "So, why do 3 pages. Because he is a psychopath.. proud of himself.. The entire note is about him.. He cant help it.. I am in control here.. you do what I tell you to.. I will kill if you dont.. see how smart I am..I have you by the balls.. ha ha..I know about your bonus because I am just that cleaver and so on.."

      Pure, unadulterated, 100% fanciful speculation, nothing more nothing less. Speculation that suits your argument but that has no evidence whatsoever to support it.

      Hypocrite.

      "Staging? Like what? Be sensible here..John broke the window long before.. Full stop.. Thats a red herring.. Its you that add meaning to these things."

      Didn't mention the window, Leigh. Didn't say one word about it. Interesting that you mention that and that alone when you could've mentioned:

      - Tape (from the home) needlessly placed over her mouth when she was already either dead or lifelessly unconscious.

      - The binding on her wrists, that had so much cord between the wrist loops it literally served no purpose whatsoever, one loop of which was so loose it simply fell off her wrist. The only thing that binding would've stopped her doing that she could normally have done was impersonating an airplane. No purpose, therefore staging.

      - the suitcase moved to beneath the window, when the debris and spiderwebs prove beyond doubt no entrance or exit was made through that window. Staging.

      Nice of the vicious psychopathic intruder to bundle the body carefully (and caringly) up in her blanket, wasn't it, Lie Too?

      Your approach to the evidence is so selective, so cherry-picked, so wilfully one-sided no objective observer could possibly think you are reliable or trustworthy on this issue. You invent a psychopath and indeed claim to be able to read his mind, and then claim that you are not the one inventing fanciful claims where there is no evidence.

      And you reply finally - "no" - you will not concede even the slightest possibility that the unique, contrived, artificial, movie-quoting, overlong and unnecessary ransom letter written using paper and pen found in the house, after one or two false starts on the same pad, could be evidence of staging by someone in the family. You refuse to concede that this is even a slight possibility.

      Then you are either irredeemably stupid, willfully and embarrassingly biased, or simply a liar.

      I don't mind debating different points of view, but not with someone who cannot be reasoned with.


      Delete
    16. Whew boy...OK

      RN- Everyone has a theory on the RN..
      Tape- she woke up once and screamed.. he couldnt have that happen again.
      Suitcase- He never had time to get her out...because of the scream.
      The blanket- Murderers often cover their victims..like a cat covers its poo..
      Psychopath- I didnt invent one.. anyone who could do this to a little girl, is psycho.
      Conceding- Why dont YOU concede to MY theory.
      Reasoning- Again, why cant you be reasoned with

      Delete
    17. JBR wrists tied- Does this look loose to you?

      http://www.acandyrose.com/AnatomyColdCase031.jpg

      Delete
    18. Leigh Too ...I have to agree with MHK on this one. Again you pick and choose. You are the ONLY one that has said or thinks (including the ME) that the wrist bindings were tight.

      Delete
    19. RN- Everyone has a theory on the RN..

      - Yes, and your point is? My point is you are just plain lying or just plain dumb if, given that it's unlike anything ever written and left by any child murderer or kidnapper, you won't concede even one tiny iota of possibility that no child killer or kidnapper wrote it. Just stupid.

      Tape - she woke up once and screamed.. he couldn't have that happen again.

      - Ah. He was so spooked by the scream he immediately fled? Oh, no, he examined all of her toys to see which, if any of them, had tape on the rear, got lucky, and placed the tape over her mouth. Yeah! What a joke.

      Suitcase- He never had time to get her out...because of the scream.

      - Never had time to get her out because he had spent too long searching around for tape for her mouth? He had time to do THAT, Leigh. You can't even believe this nonsense yourself, surely.

      The blanket- Murderers often cover their victims..like a cat covers its poo..

      - This isn't catshit, it's bullshit.

      Psychopath- I didnt invent one.. anyone who could do this to a little girl, is psycho.

      - Hang on. Is he a psycho killer? Because a moment ago you were claiming he might have been an opportunistic kidnapper. So he was a psychopath when he entered, with the intention of killing her, but then he opportunistically decided he was a kidnapper and wrote a ransom note, but then this genius forgot to stop her screaming so he smashed her skull, garotted her, and killed her. After the scream he *doesn't have time* to abduct the body, he only has time to find some tape for her mouth, tie a garotte around her neck, catching some of her hair in the knot, got hold of her blanket, wrapped her up, placed her in the wine room, left her there on the floor, carefully latching the door closed after himself, before making good his escape through some door or window, but not the basement window. Yeah, that scream really panicked him! Leigh, you're beclowning yourself.

      Conceding- Why dont YOU concede to MY theory.

      - Your theory changes constantly Leigh. Scattergun. Anyone and everyone, except a Ramsey. I've explored some elements of your 'theories' above, Leigh, and if they had any credibility at all I would have no qualms about accepting that.

      But let me tell you something: I cannot be 100% certain there was no intruder, none of us can. But you, if you had ANY honesty, would have to say likewise, you cannot be as certain as you claim to be that no-one in that family did that to the girl. Your certainty is what makes a fool of you, especially because your alternative theories are so scattergun, so unfounded, and so speculative that you should have the honesty to say YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED. I'm happy to admit that. When it comes to the Ramseys, however, you won't let go of this absolute certainty that makes a dishonest fool of you.

      Reasoning- Again, why cant you be reasoned with?

      - Whoa yeah! Great comeback Leigh! SO clever.

      JBR wrists tied- Does this look loose to you?

      - Your favourite pic. What about the OTHER wrist, Leigh? What about the length of cord between the wrists that makes the binding redundant in the first place? SELECTIVE, BIASED, DISHONEST, EVASIVE.

      Delete
    20. (Geez..what a long winded SOB)

      Ok let go..

      RN- I dont think that JR or PR have the mindset of a psychopath that t would take to write the note..on.maybe but below his intelligence level.

      Tape- I believe that it was shown that the tape did NOT come from a doll

      Blanket- Yes, sorry they do cover them sometime.. its psychological.. covering what they did..

      Certainty- I never said that anyone was innocent.. I said there is no evidence against a Ramsey..

      Wrist ties- I understand only one was tied and that made it very unusual.. I think that also came from a movie..or a book..




      Delete
    21. Suitcase- He planned on taking her out in it as he couldnt walk around carrying a dead body .. But his plan aborted when she screamed..

      Delete
    22. EDIT_ write the note..John, maybe but below his intelligence level

      Delete
    23. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
    24. "Suitcase- He planned on taking her out in it as he couldnt walk around carrying a dead body .. But his plan aborted when she screamed.."

      WHY?

      You see? You evade the issue, always. She screamed. He then, by your account, cuts some tape, tapes her mouth, kills her, gets a blanket, wraps her, deposits her in the wine room, latches the door, and makes his way up and out through a door or window.

      He had time to do all that, but not to stuff her in a suitcase and run out? It would've been quicker, Leigh!

      You say things as though they are answers to questions when they simply aren't. WHY would her scream cause him to abort his plan? He spent plenty of time arranging things after that scream, it's not as though he panicked and fled. Your reasoning is totally flawed, as usual.

      "RN- I dont think that JR or PR have the mindset of a psychopath that t would take to write the note..on.maybe but below his intelligence level."

      The RN displays a movie cliche idea of the mind of a psychopath, nothing more. Fake. Show me a real note, comparable to that one, written by a psychopath; and if you can't, then admit that this argument is complete balls that you plucked from the air. Get real: REAL PSYCHOPATHS DON'T HAVE TO BORROW LINES FROM MOVIE PSYCHOPATHS! D'uh!

      "Certainty- I never said that anyone was innocent.. I said there is no evidence against a Ramsey.."

      Everything you say about the Ramseys implies an absolute certainty of their innocence, and an absolutely dogmatically closed mind on that score.

      Sorry Leigh, better a long-winded SOB than a half-baked POS.

      Delete
    25. lol

      I have no idea what the sequence was.. But he could have been caught getting her out the widow.. Someone said the suitcase wouldnt fit out the window.. maybe thats why.

      RN/psychopath - Helter Skelter.. Are you old enough to know what that was..?

      Ramseys- There is nothing in my mind that leads to them being murderers..so I dont think of them in those terms.

      Delete
    26. Oh, "someone said"? Well I concede!

      But why wouldn't he just take the suitcase out the way he entered, rather than trying to heave it up to the most difficult exit point in perhaps the entire house? All those easier unlocked windows and doors, and all those unaccounted-for keys...

      As you say, 'lol'!

      Of course I know what Helter Skelter was. What's the connection?

      "Nothing in my mind that leads to them being murderers so I don't think of them in those terms."

      Wow. I'm happy to rest my case there. You've said everything I needed to say for me.

      Thank you!

      (lol)

      Just try to remember, Leigh: real psychopaths don't need to borrow lines from movie psychopaths!

      If that truth ever starts to percolate in your mind, your next question could be, "So who does?"

      Delete
    27. Well, maybe he came in a second floor window.. cant exactly go out that way after a scream, can he..

      They quote movies do if they see themselves as some kind of mercenary/spy/ninja dude

      Helter Skelter.. a psychopath, Manson.. used that as an excuse for murder.. He was trying for Doris Days son who had rejected his music.. turns out he had moved out of that house and Sharon Tate had moved in.. oopsie!

      Delete
  6. John
    John
    And John.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Not an intruder.

    Which means the family - all or some - or involved. Which makes the family a bunch of lying, immoral snakes.

    ReplyDelete
  8. 1. Burke
    2. John
    3. Burke, John, Patsy

    ReplyDelete
  9. I'm pretty sure Mary Lacy killed Jonbenet. This is why she hates the intruder theory.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Mrs D wrote:
    "So you don't believe Burke did the strangulation? I thought you had said somewhere that you believed Burke made the garrote in advance? If he did, that does actually make him a psychotic killer and there is nothing accidental about JB's death at all.
    So which camp are you in - "Burke did it all" or "Burke only struck the blow, the parents did the rest?"

    Mrs D, you are putting words in my mouth. I said its quite possible that Burke made the garotte earlier. And if he did, it was practicing his knots and that was a cool little thing to make. But if he did, it wasnt made as a weapon with any instinct to kill. I think thats ludicrous. I still think John most likely did the garotte but I'm not willing to rule Burke out. Im thoroughly in the Burke camp because that's the only rationale scenario. But we will never know exactly what Burke did that night and how John/Patsy covered for him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Zed - one of the housekeepers, maybe Pugh said she had seen something similar to the ligature already in the basement room, it was how a package was tied. Of course, taking what anyone says as being credible or not.

      Delete
    2. I'm not putting words in your mouth, Zed, hence why I asked you where you stood with regards to how much of the crime was committed by Burke, and how much was staged by John/Patsy. I asked you because it makes a huge difference. One scenario has Burke as an absolute psychotic murderer - yet he doesn't fit the profile of one - and the other scenario has his parents willing to finish off one of their children in order to protect the other, which doesn't make a lot of sense either, as if Patsy and John were so protective of Burke, they would have been equally as protective of JB, thus would have called for help when they discovered her unconscious - they couldn't have known the head wound was fatal.

      Delete
  11. 1. Patsy
    2. John
    3. John/Patsy

    Why on earth are people saying Leigh is Melinda Ramsey? Dear lord. You really think a Ramsey is going to troll a Ramsey blog and take the gamble of being identified? Not sure how much ability Doc has 'behind the scenes' on this blog but as an administrator of a music forum, its easy for me to trace their IP info practically to their doorstep even if a proxy is being used.

    On that note, if anyone ever gives you problems here Doc and you are having difficulty tracing them, send me an email. My tech guy can do wonders in that department.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As far as I can tell, there is no way I can trace any info regarding anyone posting here, including their email address, server or whatever. And I'm happy to keep it that way. In the extremely rare case of a persistent spammer or troll, with nothing of interest to contribute but insults, I do have the ability to identify that source as spam, and stop the nuisance in its tracks. I've done that maybe twice since the blog started.

      I could care less whether Melinda or even John is reading, or posting, here. Unless it's to confess. :-)

      Delete
    2. Why would she care if she is found out?

      Delete
    3. Exactly. For once, I agree with Leigh.....if Melinda Ramsey were posting here, a. it isn't to troll, she genuinely believes in her father's innocence, no doubt and b. why the heck would it matter if she was discovered? It's not against the law.....

      Delete
    4. "Not today, Doc".
      Hmmm.....the plot thickens....to be a Ramsey or not to be a Ramsey?! THAT is the question!

      Delete
  12. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No question Thomas was biased. But he was far from the only detective working the case.

      Delete
    2. Let me add that Lou Smit relentlessly investigated just about anyone he could think of that might be suspicious, and you can be sure Linda was near the top of his list. Lou was just as motivated to pin this thing on an intruder as Steve was to pin it on Patsy. And if he had seen any reason to go after her, he certainly would have.

      Moreover,

      "While the press was chasing Hunter and Koby for sound bites, at police headquarters Detectives Jane Harmer and Melissa Hickman were interviewing Linda Hoffmann-Pugh and her husband, Merv, for a third time. The detectives went over the housekeeper’s story again and collected additional blood, hair, and saliva samples. . . After two hours of intense questioning, she was so upset that for a moment she couldn’t find her own key."

      Schiller, Lawrence. Perfect Murder, Perfect Town (p. 233). HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.

      Delete
    3. But you said yourself this is not a DNA case. Linda was eventually cleared, and Merv, but her two son in laws - no evidence they were tested or interviewed or her two daughters. Yes Lou too went in the wrong direction, hoping and praying that the intruder came through that small window and did he once consider that the intruder had her own key?

      Delete
  13. Leigh Too being Melinda Ramsey is a joke. Leigh is excellent at deflection and ignoring evidence so she's similar to a Ramsey.

    ReplyDelete
  14. In fact Steve Thomas doesn't even know if JB wet her bed or not that night. He wanted to put together a case against Patsy plain and simple. He never even called CSI to find out if she had or not. And why did he believe Patsy had done it? Because several of the other detectives thought so and leaked information to him which he used in his book. He did not do a thorough investigation, he did not interview several people who had been close to the Ramsey's who might have pertinent information.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is the least credible person in the case..

      Delete
  15. John, John,and John

    ReplyDelete
  16. John.
    John.
    John.

    It's all John. It makes the most sense.

    ReplyDelete
  17. The review of the Lifetime film by Variety makes me not want to watch the film and the special afterwards focuses on Patsy. The case will not be solved until law enforcement opens up their minds to the idea that John acted alone!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Intruder
    Intruder
    Intruder

    Melinda...oops! Leigh Too :)

    ReplyDelete
  19. I wanted to comment on a couple of Inquisitive's statements, then I realized by the time I was done typing, he would have already changed who he thought did it and had a new theory before I could get it posted, so I passed. I have a new theory myself, it is LTDI.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "He"? I'm an old woman from Hoboken :)

      Delete
    2. Yes, yes... it's me.. I am Ninja guy.. girl.. the lesbian, sex abusing, RN writing psycho..

      Delete
  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol. Who is LT?

      Delete
    2. Leigh Too...I guess...lol

      Delete
    3. I assumed it was..but what the hell do I know.. I am an IDI :)

      Delete
  21. Twas the night of the murder, when all through the house,
    The killer was lurking, asleep was his spouse.
    The garrot was tied round her neck with great care,
    The stage it was set, her body prepared.

    Her brother was nestled all snug in his bed,
    While downstairs his sister assuredly dead.
    And Papa in kitchen, gave start to his craft,
    The note it was written, he could not turn back.

    As days turned to months, and months turned to years,
    The theories abounded, while hope turned to tears.
    Now Pasty, Now Ramseys, Intruders alert,
    Now Santa, Now Helgoth, now popular---Burke.

    While the killer at large he alters perceptions,
    Uncannily deft at lies and deception.
    Justice evades the events of that night,
    Til someday all see, it was Doc who was right,

    Mike G.






    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. :-)

      Darn tootin Doc was right!!!!

      Delete
    2. I'm very impressed with your poem, Mike G.!
      Minnesota Linda

      Delete
  22. Still think its Patsy.

    I've read of only one other place where a poster speculated that Patsy might have Histrionic Personality Disorder.

    I have personal knowledge about this disorder that some psychiatrists say is the female version of psychopathy.

    The woman I knew was all sweetness to everyone, but there was always a motive behind it, what's in it "for me". Sweetness until she did not get her own way. This included rolling up an automatic car window on her granddaughter's arm, so she could run dramatically into a doctor's office carrying the child. And everyone would "look". You won't figure this out, unless you know them very well, observe them for a long time. See a pattern.

    Attention seeking. Staging things to make someone else look culpable. Dramatic. Such an accomplished liar because they have no personality of their own and adopt what thinks might appeal "to you". Exaggerated emotions, because they have none of their own, so act the way they think such an emotion should be shown.

    The reason the body was wiped down - because Jon Benet had wet the bed again, so had been bathed. Then down to the basement to the heavy duty washing machine.

    I'm close to Patsy's age, and one of the well-known punishments I'd heard of to break a child of wetting the bed was to make them wash their own bedding, instead of waking mother to do it for you.

    A smart mouthed child might get a rap to the top of the head with a wooden spoon. I am of the generation where children were disciplined, and quickly learned not to "sass".

    Patsy was not well. Chemotherapy, and the knowledge that you have a disease that may kill you, affect brain function and thinking.

    Histrionics love to "act", think they are excellent actors, turn on the tears at will. Who was really getting all the attention from the pageants - Patsy or Jon Benet? Who got all the praise?

    They are subject to think they have special relationships with important people, or even God. Patsy had already exhibited a little psychosis with her "healing" from God, who would also forgive her for this terrible deed.

    Patsy would have known how to make a garrote from sailing with John.

    John may have figured out from the note that it was Patsy at some point when it was too late to turn back. She was ill. He chose to back her and save both himself and his wife the negative publicity, knowing very well that "being in remission" is not being cured, and that she probably would not live long. Even less if forced to face a trial and possible prison time.

    I notice in interviews that Burke seems to have considerably more respect for John than he does Patsy.

    My opinions only.

    GS



    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GS - the bedwetting I'm almost certain did not happen that night due to the urine stains on her underwear and long johns as well as the urine outside the wine closet. Pictures of the clothing can be found on the Daily Camera link. Also Burke was a bed wetter as well. No reports that she ever flipped a nutty with all the years of his bedwetting.

      Delete
    2. Interesting post, Anonymous. One quibble: In recent interviews the only time Burke got emotional was when remembering his mom's death. He told the therapist, in the interview following JBR's death, that Patsy hugged him and JBR equally and showed them equal affection. I don't think he had more respect for John than he had for Patsy.

      Delete
    3. diamondlil16 - I thought the urine outside the wine cellar happened when she died, although I read one commentor wrote she had not been changed at all from that night, and the stained clothing was proof. And who would be around if she ever did flip-out? Only her and the kids.

      Anonymous, its a subjective judgment as to how he really felt about his mother and dad. He described Patsy as "psycho" and John as "calm". It struck me that he saw his mother as a "psycho".

      GS

      Delete
    4. You misconstrued Burke's statement re: "psycho." He said his mom was acting all psycho when she ran into his room that morning, terrified her daughter was missing, scared, etc. As in "acting all psycho". I'd be screaming and running around too. He also heard his father say call the police, in a calm voice.

      Delete
  23. 1/2/3 : John.

    I agree 100 % with Doc's theory, except that I also believe the murder was planned. He might have foreseen his future if truth was found out and chose to eliminate the evidence of any wrongdoing. Plan was not perfect and he had to improvise but I agree with someone that said that he might be still pinching himself in unbelief.An imperfect plan with a good dose of good luck and here we are, 20 years later, still discussing about the pineapple and the guy is free, he moved on with his life and probably will never be prosecuted. The blood of an innocent child is still speaking and will keep doing so until justice is served. I hope we can all see that day but if we keep talking about details and speculating we will not be strong enough so as to help JB's voice be heard. In a way, she is still hurting in that basement and we need to stop going in circles about things we dont know and start focusing on those facts that we all agree on and know that really happened and start from there again.
    I was living overseas when this murder took place, I was a child myself actually when it happened so I didnt know much about it until this year. I read and saw and analyzed it and believe me, if you approach it with cold eyes you will see it. You will understand the who and the why.

    btw. Great poem by Mike G.

    Med





    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, premeditation makes no sense. Why go thru alllllllllllllllll the effort of the 3 page Ransom Note, planning, etc to allow Patsy to call 911? I have said this before, at 5:52 am a 911 call with the body in the house would have meant arrest immediately for John. That's what he would have thought, so I don't believe for 1 second that if this was premeditated to cover up his being a pedophile, he would leave it to chance.

      -J

      Delete
    2. Premeditation makes sense, imho.
      Premeditation as opposite of an accident. I did not mean he planned it for a long time or days before but maybe for a few hours prior to the killing on that night. The book by his bedside table, the carefully written note. That is curious, at least.
      He let Patsy make the call? I don't know if he did, i dont think so, but that was the only moment when he could not and was not in control of the whole situation. He was probably still in the bathroom or getting dressed. He didnt leave it to chance, he just could not be in the shower and the kitchen at the same time. He trusted the warnings on the RN would do the job of convincing Patsy not to call the police.
      About immediate arrest...I'm not so sure either. Police came to take care of a kidnapping case, mainly to monitor the call. They didn't search the house, just the doors. They gave away 7 hours to John before they suggested that he should search the house again from top to bottom. By that time he must have decided on a change of plans. After all, the call made at 5:52 did alter the original idea.
      JMO. I would like to know Doc's opinion on premeditation.

      Med

      Delete
  24. On the subject of DNA, Doc; if JBR had been found buried in a shallow grave in some local woodland, and the only fiber or DNA evidence on her pointed to a family member, then surely it's game over. The longer she is supposed to have spent in the company of an intruder/abductor the more imperative it becomes that some physical evidence of this person or some other location be found on her person?

    Is it conceivable that John (or Patsy at a push) decided that ultimately the safer bet was to have her found in the home, where the trace evidence might be more easily explained, at a crime scene that could be effectively compromised forensically within moments?

    Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
  25. T'was the night of the murder
    no connection is known
    to the murder so heinous
    and his beloved fifth born

    He carried her home and placed her in bed
    and went to sleep with his wife
    then woke up to her dead

    In his grief and his sorrow
    and that of his wife
    in the next few days
    they would fight for their life

    He knows not what happened
    and neither does she
    but someone else does
    SOMEONE WITH A KEY

    For her resentment was thick
    most probably sick
    her background unclear
    she who had cleaned and always was near

    She took a detective
    who wanted to know
    and lied and cried and put on a show

    The detective they say had made up his mind
    in his book he had written, this he would find:
    that the parents who loved her
    were out of THEIR minds

    And the years have gone by
    the mother is gone
    but the dad still hopes and believes
    that justice is blind

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If we could only find that crazy Mexican Ninja who writes Ransom notes and murders kids.......

      -J

      Delete
    2. Cute INQ...

      We had the Ninja but BPD let him get away.. Cuz they are just that stupid..

      Delete
  26. Since it's my birthday, I'll post a picture of the top of my fridge for you folks. I have a very open minded girlfriend to put up with my obsession with this case.

    http://i.imgur.com/zisCdVX.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is the pineapple because you are a fan of Psych?

      -J

      Delete
    2. Haha no it's homage to the pineapple in the jbr case.

      Delete
    3. yea I thought so, but was hoping it was for Psych. You really are obsessed :-)

      -J

      Delete
    4. Happy Birthday, Zach.. Hopefully another year older and wiser

      Delete
    5. Hey, maybe this is the year you will come around to the IDI theory.. Ya never know! :)

      Delete
  27. Happy birthday Zachary - love it - but what is that yellow thing.... oh... can't tell.... too big to be cereal.... is it some sort of.... fruit...... is it.... pineap - OH WAIT it's fruit cocktail, right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL!!!!!! Brilliant MHN...absolutely love it

      -J

      Delete
  28. Lmao thank you so much! My girlfriend puts up with a lot of ridiculousness and all my friends know my deep obsession with this case. It's become some what of an ongoing joke to make an allusion to this case anytime we hear the words glass, pineapple, case, or window.

    ReplyDelete
  29. My last jbr related birthday post about me, then I'll get back to discussing the case. Here I am in my favorite party shirt. As you can see, political correctness and appropriateness are top priorities.

    http://i.imgur.com/NoxzfmF.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very good. At least you're not wearing a tiara.

      Delete
  30. Leigh, I think by saying a Ninja could have gotten into the house it takes away from your argument that an intruder did it because people have a problem with the word "Ninja" and Intruder as in IDI in the same sentence. You can still argue the Intruder did it scenario by linking Intruder with Key. I don't know that any neighborhood Ninja would have been able to get a key to the Ramsey house and we know no one climbed through that window. We can narrow down the intruder even further by surmising he/she/they had intimate knowledge of the house floor plan, where the wine cellar was (Linda Hoffman Pugh and associates (son in laws and or Mervin) had removed Christmas trees from that room before Christmas on instruction from Patsy. The intruder knew where Jon Benet's underwear was, each pair put under a day of the week. The intruder knew there was no house alarm set, knew where the flashlight was kept - or spotted it already out - and was very intimately familiar with Patsy's handwriting and where she kept her pad and pen. In fact, go back 20 years and the Ramsey's did not submit handwriting samples, but Linda gave Thomas samples she had from Patsy for analysis. How helpful of her!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Ninja name came from the 12 year old girl/victims mother as he was dressed all in black and wore a face mask,
      We kow, most likely, he didnt come in through THAT window..Others were unlocked.. How did Ninja get into the other houses.. Hes a pro.. And we dont know who put that underwear on her.. maybe she did herself..maybe Burke helped her.. And John gave the pad to police as hand writing samples on the first day..Personally..I dont think LHP was in on it.. I think her husband was more likely the one.. But I think she maybe found uot later and went after Patsy

      Delete
    2. Yes, I don't know that she came in physically herself that night, but if not she was in on the planning and orchestrated it, handed out the key. Was very familiar with the layout, and helped set up Patsy to take the fall. Orchestrated her to take up the fall. I also have a few niggling thoughts about ingesting the pineapple and that is was 2 hours prior to death. And I think the letter could have been written previous and either hidden there for use, or brought in along with the tape and cord. I think that strangulation was the original plan and something went awry necessitating a blow to the head to shut up the muffled cries of a struggling girl. Death came 45 min to 2 hours after head blow and I would think more like 45 min. They would have wanted to exit as quickly as possible.

      Delete
    3. Quickly as possible. As in staying for a considerable amount of time and not being worried about being heard or caught. An intruder would definitely stage a scene, redress their victim, and not bring their own supplies <3.

      Delete
    4. The original autopsy report list strangulation as cause of death first on the list.. The head blow came after

      Delete
    5. Wasn't clear - by niggling I mean just when did JB ingest that pineapple if she was taken from her bed. I don't think a sleeping JB was roused by her father with the promise of a pineapple piece. Would you rather continue sleeping to wake up for pineapple. But he DID have pineapple or something similar in her small intestine that remained undigested 2 hours prior to death. I'm not a forensic scientist by any stretch of the imagination so I do not know how the body behaves after eating. I have read that it takes up to 30 hours to turn food into fecal matter, making it's way all the way from esophagus to small intestine to large intestine to colon, etc., and on out. And it was found in the small intestine so I do not know when she ate it or how she came to eat it. Or when. I don't think it's possible she would have grabbed it from the counter before they left for the party and had it still remain in her small intestine after midnight. So that does mean two hours prior to death as the examiner said.

      Delete
    6. Well I also have another theory.. A crime of opportunity.. He didnt bring anything as that wasnt his original plan.. He learned of the $118k and decided, at that moment, to make it a kidnapping.

      Delete
    7. It was within 2 hours I would guess.. but how is that relevant? It may or may not be related at all..

      Delete
    8. Can't wait to see what your new theory is tomorrow! Hope it includes the intruder not bringing any supplies but bringing the suspense novel!

      Delete
  31. I re-watched Linda Arndt's interview and though it looks like she inspired the character Crazy Eyes in Orange is the New Black, she said some interesting things. The one main thing that sticks out to me is that the 10am deadline came and went with NO reaction from John or Patsy. If it was only John that was involved, then I don't know how anybody can explain away Patsy not reacting to it. We already have Fleet White saying neither Patsy or John mentioned the RN, but neither of them saying anything to the police about the 10 am deadline? Some will argue the deadline was the day after (debatable), but those same people will say Patsy didn't truly believe the note to be real. The bottom line is there are just way too many oddities by Patsy that add up to her HAVING to have some involvement which is why it couldn't have only been John that did this crime.

    -J

    ReplyDelete
  32. People are not seeing the forest for the trees. Instead of analyzing every tree step back and see the forest. Would it might not dawn on you when 8:00, 9:00, 10:00 came and no call that a call was not going to come. They did, afterall, do what the note said not to do. They called the police. "Your house will be carefully monitored" and words to that effect. They not only looked at a stray dog, they informed law enforcement. John is smart. I think he could put two and two together and know that this was not a kidnapping. And although he looked around the house once he didn't see anything. Becoming more and more agitated by early afternoon Linda gave him a job to do - search the house one more time. Possibly he had been thinking that he hadn't check the wine cellar door earlier. So that is the first place he ran to. He must have known just before the opened that door what he would find. And it confirmed his suspicions that it was not a kidnapping, there would never be a call for the ransom money, and his daughter was never coming back.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I agree people do over analyze the case... And I think that John..on a subconscious level..knew the house... something clicked in his mind about that room..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Arndt tells John to search TOP to BOTTOM in the house. He immediately runs to that room......yes, I think he is so lucky he should have gone to Vegas. He didn't guess that room, he KNEW where the body would be

      -J

      Delete
    2. Okay, he knew where it would be. What does that change? Does knowing his house and thinking where the body might be equal he put her there? Why wait until 1:00? Why not "discover" it sooner? He had plenty of time to think about where it might be once he saw no ransom call was going to be made. If you owned a huge mansion and you had searched every room but for one wouldn't that one be the last place you might run to?

      Delete
    3. You would have a point if John didn't downright lie and deflect constantly throughout the investigation. He went to that room because he knew what was in there.

      Delete
    4. See, I dont see it a s lying.. Memories have different interpretations.. especially when stressed or when being threatened.. sometimes you respond to minor details..sometimes you dont.

      Delete
    5. Sometimes you don't work with authorities and stonewall them to distance yourself from the investigation.

      Delete
    6. You do if their overall operating theory is you had something to do with the death of your child and that they were going to mount a case to try and prove it. They did what any people would do who had the means to do so - hire an attorney - the firm - get together your own handwriting experts and investigators as time went by. Maybe it wasn't smart going on National television but we have seen here how national television effects people's opinions and shape their thinking ("J" and the CBS special). So I wouldn't have done so, but they did.

      Delete
    7. If that's what you're into. You stick to your IDI guns!

      Delete
    8. Live and learn, INQ but they were being accused on national TV.. hard not to respond to that..Fuqing Steve Thomas..What if someone went on national TV and said you were a murderer.. Christ!

      Delete
    9. Round and round we go. This reminds me of the old days, on Justicewatch and Webbsleuths. The morass. Profiling will get you nowhere. And ALL the evidence is inconclusive. The only way out of the labyrinth is to follow the thread of LOGIC. It will take you there, but you gotta pick up every stitch.

      Delete
    10. Must be the season of the witch

      Delete
    11. Only till Nov 8th then it's OVER . hehehe!

      Delete
  34. If you really want to break down this case, there isn't solid evidence of anyone committing this crime. Maybe Jonbenet really isn't dead and the whole Katy Perry conspiracy theory is legitimate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's the thing though Zachary. The evidence is there. They aren't going to get any more. Even if they do the Y testing and identify some new markers, we all suspect they came from transference or manufacturing. But hey, they would be great, if they perform new tests so we can at least rule out once again.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, thats another thing...the DNA.. f an unknown Hispanic male.. in 5 places ...on a dead body.. Come ON people..

      Delete
    3. All the evidence is inconclusive though. It all comes down to logic. It's hard to believe an intruder would stay in the house for hours, not be heard, and not bring any supplies with him. But hey, it doesn't seem like we are going to change each others mind. I gotta hand it to Doc, I don't see how he can defend his theory year after year without being so agitated he closes the site. It must get real tiresome.

      Delete
    4. It's actually 2 places but hey continue your deflection and ignoring the evidence Melinda.

      Delete
    5. He was there for hours BEFORE they got home.. And its 5, 2 on panties.. 2 on long johns and under fingernails

      Delete
    6. You don't know that he or she was there before they got home. It's not. It's 2 all together. 6 unique profiles all together. The fingernail evidence was female by the way, and was due to contamination. This helps my theory and even I dismiss it.

      Delete
    7. THats true.. we dont know how long he was there.. The UHM DNA was found in the most places.

      Delete
    8. Zach, if we all just stop responding to the IDI craziness then it doesn't give them a voice

      Delete
    9. You have a point Anonymous at 9:43 AM

      Delete
    10. I like CCS idea better but ignoring them might work if Doc G will not give them their own sandbox to play in. The one liners interrupt everybody and drive me crazy.

      Delete
    11. You know what drives me crazy? Six paragraph long posts.. I feel Like I an being held hostage for half n hour..Especially when I have to respond to them..27 thoughts at a time..Have mercy!

      Delete
    12. I'm guilty of that Leigh, for sure

      Delete
    13. I think everyone here is..'cept me..lol

      Delete
  35. I like how Melinda Ramsey says that a Ninja committed this crime only because it's a possibility yet doesn't include the Ramsey's who were actually in the house at the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The intruder was also in the house at the time.

      Delete
    2. Yeah, right with the headless horseman and Medusa.

      Delete
    3. People dont just one day become psychopathic killers..

      Delete
  36. I think ya'll take care of the Ramsey theories just fine without me..

    ReplyDelete
  37. If LHP and Co, why would they wait 45 min to 2hrs to finish her off?, exactly how did they determine that this much time elapsed and is it definitive.? Here's where I am at the moment, I don't believe Patsy's actions, statements or behaviour any less than I do John's, logically I'm led to Burke doing the head blow and garotte get with the parents doing the cover up. As much as it's hard for me to imagine, it still makes more sense than the accumulative deception and actions by both the parents.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some staging had to take place that night. Why wait? I don't know. These aren't sophisticated criminals with a mastermind plan of action that will take them to the promised land.

      Delete
    2. No but they certainly wouldn't have wanted to be caught wandering round the house either.

      Delete
  38. There are new developments and things worth discussing; Doc has several times started new threads with provocative prefaces, but every time someone begins a worthwhile conversation we're derailed by responding to the very vocal IDI proponents, and that's a shame. We've lost some old timers who made worthwhile contributions, and newcomers with fresh ideas or questions are drowned out, and that's a shame, too.

    We've all heard their arguments, numerous times. They don't seem to hear ours. Is there some way around this impasse? Perhaps Doc could give them their own IDI thread, and anyone interested could check in there, while the rest of us return to discussions we find more meaningful?

    Apologies, Doc, for stepping on your toes, but I think many of us are frustrated.
    CC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    2. Thank you, CC

      Med

      Delete
    3. CC we finally agree on something! :-)

      So many seasoned detectives have looked at this case and only Lou Smit and Dr. freaking Phil believe IDI.

      -J

      Delete
    4. Exactly, J! :)

      Med

      Delete
    5. Yes, perhaps we should also do away with the first amendment right as well. Look, there have been other theorists here that have made interesting points, Hercule for one, for which you in particular body slammed him mercilessly. J has a right to his theory and opinion as well. Leigh and I disagree within the I did it theorem, but let's get rid of everyone who doesn't adhere to your particular theory, of which we haven't completely heard out here. Only critiques of others.

      Delete
    6. Wrong, J.. Many BPD and the DA's office believe IDI.. As well as others.. There have even been TV shows with the IDI theory.

      Delete
    7. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

      Delete
    8. Inq – Listen you can post all you want on here. It’s not my site and if you were told to stop posting, I would leave the site. That being said…….

      The Ramsey’s liked movies which is soooooo unlucky for them, because this crazed intruder also liked movies and used movie quotes in their 3 page RN. Another unlucky thing for the Ramsey’s is that the intruder just so happened to have handwriting that matched both John and Patsy. This Intruder was supposedly doing this for money, yet after leaving her dead body, they didn’t attempt to take any of the countless valuables that were in the house. Oh, the Ramsey’s were also super unlucky because the Intruder forgot their pen and paper at home and borrowed each from the Ramsey’s. None of the DNA that was found matched ANY of the people you or LT named and the most logical answer is that the DNA innocently got there from a factory worker. Wait there is more! John Ramsey is soooooooooooooo unlucky that the exact window he claimed to have crawled through after forgetting his keys is the same window that an Intruder possibly used to get in. I almost forgot, this intruder also happened to know how to tie knots that both John and Burke also knew how to tie.

      Seriously can we just stop this charade?

      -J

      Delete
    9. Did they test Ninja DNA? Nope.. And,, Ninja was found wandering around peoples houses in the middle of the night.many times.. . But he didnt steal from them.. More supporting evidence of him..

      Delete
    10. Boy did you just skew everything off the charts in the wrong direction! How do you know the Ramsey liked movies, I'm not even going to go there. Did you not hear what I said so many pages ago, that the intruder was not some slobbering pedophile who crawled through the window. It was someone they knew who had complete access to the house on numerous occasions who knew the habits of the family, the lay out of the house who had a key, for whom paper and pen similar to Patsy's including an actual pad taken from Patsy's was found in her home, and black duct tape and white nylon chord. The intruder had to have worn gloves. Both in the commission of writing the note and tying up the girl. What charade are we to be stopping?

      Delete
    11. They had movie posters all over their house

      I will never comment on the IDI again. Seriously I am arguing against the boogeyman. Inq - just because you WANT something to be, doesn't make it so.

      -J

      Delete
    12. That sounds far more reasonable to me than John garroting his daughter then slamming her in the head with the force of a freight train.. Jesus

      Delete
    13. Movie posters were popular in the 90's How old are you all?

      Delete
    14. Or a young boy hitting his sister with such force as to crack her skull, then running to mom or dad to fix it, which they do so by strangling their daughter and writing a note. That is why I suggested weeks ago that Burke did all of it, but then that didn't make sense either. Why would he do that.

      Delete
    15. YOU believed that theory 10 days ago!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      -J

      Delete
    16. I think that a kid that age, who did that, wouldnt tell his parents..

      Delete
    17. Leigh I was responding to J above regarding skewed versions. But....how would your Ninja have known the layout of that house and whether or not an alarm was set or if the sleeping parents had any kind of weapons or bats with which to protect themselves from an intruder. So we differ, but it's okay. We'll hash it out. Oh, and how did said Ninja get in.

      Delete
    18. How did he get into all the other houses.. Who knows, but he did.. Again, he was inside, walking around before they got home.. learning the layout.. Its not THAT hard to learn..and who is to say that this was his first time in that house..

      Delete
    19. I didn't believe it J, I suggested it. Don't worry, I'm not going back to BDI. I'm firmly IDI. Had to consider everything.

      Delete
    20. Not asking you to switch.....good luck finding your answers

      -J

      Delete
    21. Many IDI shows that spread false innuendos like a stun gun still being used and that an intruder came through the window wearing HiTek boots. If you are going to make a show you think you could at least get your facts straight 20 years later.

      Delete
    22. Yes Keiser, but I was not one of them

      Delete
    23. I am...lol.. There was a stun gun.. and we still havent found out why the boot print didnt match up on Helgoth

      Delete
    24. Man.. there is sooo much evidence pointing to an intruder,its hard to keep track of it all.. :)

      Delete
  39. But, let's by all means discuss the DNA testing and if the Boulder community wants to spend the money to re examine this case. We could also discuss investigator bias and how that shaped the collective conclusions that did not resolve this particular homicide. Or Mary Lacy and her false exoneration based on DNA which now is called into question - even if it has anything at all to do with this case. I'm all for that. Want to go first?

    ReplyDelete
  40. Well, the DNA is all we have and we will ever have..short of a confession.. So. yeah.. we have to pursue that..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, because all the rest is theory. Although we have certain "clues" for sure. We have the note, we have the wiped down flashlight AND batteries, etc., etc., we have fibers but their interpretations and reasons for having them show up where they did is subject to interpretation, so we could begin again by looking at what we don't have. A real suspect. And why that might be.

      Delete
    2. Yep.. Its DNA or a confession.. Anything less and it will be rejected... I wish they would reveal more info to the public.. after all this time.. what can it hurt..

      Delete
  41. I will bring something else up here for thought. Although it was theorized that the flashlight was the instrument that was used for the head blow they really don't know if it was or not. A bat was found outside the basement window that had carpet fibers from the basement floor on it. I'm going to throw a speculation in here that perhaps the flashlight was used to creep around in the dark and not the murder weapon. And that was why it was wiped down, so as not to leave prints from the intruder But the batteries - so if a battery change happened any time before that night prints would have been John's, or Patsy's possibly Burke, yet no prints. So print-free batteries and flashlight to me indicate intruder. But not necessarily because it was a murder weapon but used for lighting purposes. After it's purpose was fulfilled it was set on the kitchen counter, instead of back in the junk drawer where it belonged. wiped clean.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again more believable to me.. I think it was not the flashlight as it seems to me that the arc is upside down..or would have left a straight edge..as it did in the CBS movie..

      Delete
    2. Also, INQ.. Merve Pugh had an odd response when first told about JBR.. I dont recall exactly, maybe someone here can .. but, he asked the cop if JBR was strangled.. You would have to turn a queer eye to that question..

      Delete
    3. I'm reminded of an old post I posted here back in 2012, titled, "Why I Am So Popular." http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/07/why-i-am-so-popular-or-murder-on.html

      Here's how it ends:

      "There are two prevailing views of this case. One is that Patsy must have killed her daughter and written the note. The other is that there was an intruder and both Patsy and John are innocent victims. Each side has provided more than enough evidence of the absurdity of the other side's view. And the arguments marshaled by both sides have been, I must say, VERY convincing. And so, yes: I'm convinced!!!! By BOTH sides. And I've said as much. TO both sides. I agree with you. You are BOTH wrong."

      Interesting that back then Burke wasn't on the table at all. The odds on favorite was Patsy. How times have changed. But the basic principle remains the same: each faction has very effectively argued for the absurdity of the other faction's position. And yes, I'm convinced. You are ALL wrong.

      Delete
    4. Here it is Leigh: page 36 Steve Thomas's book writes about Linda's husband, Mervin Pugh. "Mervin asked, 'How did she die, was it natural, strangulation, or what?'" Steve Thomas says "The questions were awfully close to the truth, close enough to raise police suspicion." Well geesh, why not look into that a little bit more closely then!

      Delete
    5. I know! I still say that they blew him off way too early..There is a lot there...

      Delete
    6. Doc... I'm never wrong... what can I say :)

      Delete
    7. Me neither. (Note absence of emoticon.)

      Delete
  42. Doc:

    Might John have increased his chances with Patsy reacting to the ransome note the way he wanted her to by including the following additional warning, or something similiar to it?

    "John, do not try and grow a brain. We are scrutinizing your every move. We have tapped your phone in a way you will never discover. Should you or your wife try to call the police or anyone to inform them of your situation prior to our meeting tomorrow or later today, we will hear the conversation and your daughter dies"

    Your thoughts?

    Mike G.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems to me that John included more than enough dire warnings in that note -- and made them very clear. The problem seems to have been that Patsy became so alarmed after reading the first few lines that she dropped the note and headed for the phone. Before he could stop her. So anything he added at the end wouldn't have helped. At least that's one scenario to consider.

      Delete
    2. Doc, I know you believe the note’s main purpose was to fool Patsy, which of course is possible. What seems more logical in that instance would have been the shorter the note the better. If Patsy wasn’t involved, then why wait until paragraph # 3 before issuing a warning about calling the police or notifying anybody? So, this would have made more sense

      We have your daughter! We will be calling you between _____ to arrange a drop off of _____ money. Do not alert ANYBODY or your daughter is dead!

      Something along those lines. IF the sole purpose was to fool Patsy and only Patsy then the ONLY thing John would have needed to avoid was the police being called. Everything else would be pure fluff, correct? It makes no sense to have a page of fluff and then the warning. John could have written a shorter note and verbally controlled the situation with Patsy. What I believe is the note was concocted by John and Patsy to fool the authorities. The note references a small foreign faction pointing to an unknown terrorist group. But then it also points to $118,000 which is essentially John’s bonus, so that points to a co-worker or somebody who has done business with John. The note has so many different motivations that it could be thousands of different people who were responsible. The references to John getting rested and everything else is solely directed at him because if it was directed at Patsy it would greatly limit the number of people to look at. Patsy wouldn’t have had the business dealings or be as known that would make her a potential target.

      -J

      Delete
    3. J -- I agree with you in that John would have written a shorter note if he wrote it specifically to deceive Patsy. That's why I believe they wrote the note together -- it definitely has a Patsy spin on it.

      Danni

      Delete
    4. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  43. " What I believe is that the note was concocted by John and Patsy to fool the authorities"

    My honest question to you, J. I'm here trying to understand everyone.
    Why did they make the 911 call if they wanted to fool the authorities? How did they fool them?
    Thank you.
    Med.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I believe they intentionally made the 911 call so the police WOULD find the body in the basement, but that backfired. And the ransom note backfired...but remember they had very little time to make decisions and were distraught in the process, so everything they did doesn't add up, nor should it. I posted my theory a page back.

      Danni

      Delete
  44. The RN was written, after the headblow and before or after the garotte, IMO, and as John was contemplating WTH he was going to do. It was a ToDo list obfuscated by a RN. Everything in it covers his actions for the next 30+ hours. It was never intended to be turned over to LE. It was intended to fool Patsy. Calling 911, while seeming to be a major flaw in his plan, was likely just a fraction of what was going on in his mind at the time. It was in the RN to not call, that's all he was concerned about. Everything else in the RN would have allowed him to get rid of the body without any question, which, as you can imagine, was a grim task to come to grips with. I can easily see why he didn't think having the warning not to call 911 on the middle of the second page was a bad idea.

    ReplyDelete
  45. In just a few short days we're going to be treated to a Lifetime Movie doing a close up of a wet bed and John giving a police officer a tour. I wonder how long it will take Lin Wood to slap them with a lawsuit?

    ReplyDelete
  46. Yes, I have. IT starts out with the 911 call. It's really eerie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ya have a link or anything? Id like to see it too..

      Delete
  47. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  48. Oh here you go - wwwmylifetime.com/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. OK, thank you.. I wonder what angle they will take on it.. You dont get Lifetime channel? Actually, I'm not sure I do either lol Better check that out :)

      Delete