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.

Wednesday, November 2, 2016

I'm Running as Fast as Can to Keep Up

I wish this blog didn't do that "Load More" thing, which makes it so hard to find some of the later posts. Here's still more space to vent. Enjoy!

186 comments:

  1. J ,here's the link. Click on Patsy's 98 interview, then scroll to 0197 where she's asked about the drawing. Further down, after a break, patsy wants to clear things up. This is at 2nd June at 0206

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. https://m.reddit.com/r/JonBenet/comments/2uympt/reposting_all_police_interview_transcripts_with/

      Delete
    2. eveJ WOW!!!! Thank you for this! I actually have read thru a lot of the 1998 interview before which is bizarre in multiple spots, but the part you sent me about the Heart on the hand seems like a MASSIVE slip up on her part. I didn't have doubts that Patsy was involved, but this should be the AHA moment for anybody on the fence. She slipped up by saying she saw the Heart that morning and had to back peddle because of her slip.

      There is a part in that interview where they ask about Burke knowing more than he has said and she really doesn't give a firm answer on it.

      I am sure the JDI crowd will concoct some explanation for this, but Doc the ball is in your court to explain this

      -J

      Delete
    3. Well just I posted this before, sorry for repetition but it still gets me. The Jdi's basically answered by saying she probably got mixed up with morning or afternoon.

      Delete
    4. Sorry predicted txt. I meant J not just.

      Delete
    5. No worries, thats basically my name :-)

      Oh I know they will come up with something, but seriously reading thru a lot of that interview, it's very eye opening. She's soooooo vague about a lot of details. Adds meaningless details about some things but then can't remember details on bigger issues. There is absolutely no doubt Patsy was involved in one way or another

      -J

      Delete
    6. Thanks for the link and where to look for it evej. You're a gem!

      Delete
  2. Doc, the issues on this blog are getting worse. I don't know how these free blogs run. Do you have unlimited space? If not, might need to start cleaning up some of the old areas of the site. It could be some other technical issue as well.

    One suggestion...

    Have the trolls cut back on the personal chit chat. Nobody wants to scroll through that garbage anyways. It's been really bad in the last two sections. They can email one another to indulge in that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah well.. we have to scroll past your garbage too..

      Delete
    2. ^ Doc, no substance, off topic, personal abuse. She really is ruining this blog doc.

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I dont think its a heart, really.. It looks like it might even be a V ..for victory... with a circle around it... Hard to tell by the pic's.. But they want it to be, or it is, a heart to try to implicate Patsy

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

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

      Delete
    4. Agreed.. It could just be the kids drawing on themselves.. I know I did at that age.. But yes.. this is why they didnt want to talk to them at all.. Stupid stuff like that.

      Delete
    5. The cops thought it was a heart. Patsy thought it was a heart. Did Patsy lie, or are you just emptying another sack of your mud into the water?

      A v with a circle around it? Yes, maybe you're right. And if you look closely at the photo some attempt has clearly been made to force her fingers into the shape of the letters SBTC.

      Your schtick is getting tiresome. This one is desperately weak even by your usual standards.

      Delete
    6. And the arrogance - to imply that in the unsolved murder of a child who is found with a symbol drawn on her hand, there is something remiss in the police trying to determine whether she or anyone else known to Patsy was in the habit of drawing such a thing, whether JBR washed her hands after dinner or before bed, and when the heart was first noticed by Patsy.

      If the cops had NOT asked about it you'd crucify them for that. "She was found with a symbol drawn on her hand, and the cops never even tried to get to the bottom of that, it could've been linked to other intruder cases so they probably didn't want to find out. No wonder the Ramseys didn't want to cooperate with them!"

      Jeez.

      Delete
    7. I think the cops are lying about it.. Make it a heart and that would be Patsy saying I live you good bye or some such thing.. They had an angle of some sort or would not have been pressing on it

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

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

      Delete
    10. Yes, thats what I think... Trying to get Patsy to confess to something..lol Lord help any of us who ever find themselves up against crooks and lairs like them

      Delete
    11. Your attempted deflections are funny.

      Delete
  4. Have you read the entire statement? I'm not talking about when or who used to draw on her hand, it was a specific question, asking how patsy knew about the drawing on jbr's hand. Patsy answered, because she saw it there the next morning. After a break, the first thing she wants to clarify is that she may have pictured it in her mind or read about it somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  5. evej -- I agree with you. This same type of thing happened in all of the JR/PR interviews. During intermission they would consult with their attorney's and then come back with a different answer after the break. It was VERY obvious they are lying throughout the interviews. I truly believe we could solve this case if the police would release all of the information they have, plus the GJ papers. The Ramsey's are so lucky they had good lawyers (if you want to call them good...I don't know how they sleep at night).

    Danni

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And with respect, that's why you'd make a terrible investigator.

      Delete
    2. I agree, INQ.. You would make a good investigator as you dont imagine stuff that isnt there... You and the cops see what they want to see MHN..

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

      Delete
    4. Leigh, you've already proved yourself to be the most blinkered and biased person posting here, so nothing you say really has any value or consequence anyway.

      Inquisitive - let me get this right: a partisan troll just told you you'd make a great investigator, and your response was... "Thanks!"

      What are you, 15 years old? Christ on a stick this is getting so pathetic.

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Uh-oh, do I sense a conversion/reversion to the PDI school of thought coming up, Inquisitive?

      Delete
    2. You were warned Leigh; enjoy her company while it lasts :)

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

      Delete
  8. This blog is starting to go downhill thanks to Melinda Ramsey.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Zack, I did wish you a happy birthday on the other entry but it gets lost in the "load more" area. I don't know if the adult Ramsey kids would be posting due to the tether of Lin Wood, et al. Remember at the very beginning John retained lawyers for his two older kids as well as his ex-wife when BPD wanted to question them. Melinda was a nurse at the time and still may be. I don't know that she has ever been online to sully her name. It's just another day to skip and scroll. No one has to engage with anyone that you don't feel contributes in a positive way on the blog.

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

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Really... Why would they murder JB... I havent heard a good rational for that, ever..

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

    ReplyDelete
  12. Hey Doc, I'm outta here. Laurel and Hardy are starting to bore me. It's concerted and deliberate, and dishonest. You're letting this blog die, sir. The numbers may be impressive, but the content of the comments is dying a death because nobody with a brain wants to waste time arguing against a dishonest and evasive fantasist all day.

    Thanks and goodbye.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't go MHN ...you are one of my favorites!
      Med

      Delete
    2. MHN - I can empathize with the frustration. So decided to watch the World Series. I post on another blog about the McStay case, where a perp was arrested and we wait for trial. It's a small group and we do post a lot of music videos during down time. Many of the folks are in California. The blog owner may be open to a thread for discussion on the Ramsey case. It's here
      https://cuttingthebs.wordpress.com/. If you are open to a message board forum I can suggest one as well. Take it easy and don't let it get to you.

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

      Delete
    4. We have linked to all kinds of places from ffj to ws to topix and reddit, etc. that has photos, info, pertaining to the case. Corn's blog isn't mine. He doesn't earn any money by having people post there. You better step off with using the "threatening" bit. This is my final post to you.

      Delete
    5. I'm sorry, folks, but this blog has become so cluttered with comments that I simply can't keep up. I just don't have time to go through everything and delete whatever seems irrelevant. And I don't want to mark anyone posting here as a spammer, because we need to hear from all sides. If some posters offend you, feel free to scroll past their posts.

      As for the rest, what I am seeing is a reversion to issues that for me are old, old, old and I have no interest in going over all that stuff again in any detail, because I know from past experience that it will get us nowhere.

      If you're convinced that what Patsy said about the heart is a dead giveaway, I have no problem with that, it's your prerogative. For me, the essence of the case is spelled out in my first three posts and everything else needs to be seen in that light. The notion that certain of Patsy's confused or vague responses constitute deliberate lies or confessions of guilt doesn't strike me as convincing. She was under tremendous pressure and had been under sedation for some time, so it's not surprising that she might have confused the late morning with the early afternoon, or might have, as she claimed, got confused between something she read about and something she actually saw. In studies of eye witness accounts we see that sort of thing happening all the time.

      Sorry, but I must insist on following the facts and logic of the case rather than nit picking odds and ends that might seem suspicious but are most likely just the result of confusion, pressure and the effect of meds.

      Delete
    6. Doc....I promise you it isn't personal, but it seems that IF Patsy does anything suspicious you write it off that she was under sedation, pressure or it was an innocent mistake. When John does anything, it's suspicious and that's why there is reason to look at him and him only. You have your own motivations and prerogative which you are entitled to, but can you really be objective when you have written both a blog and book that asserts only 1 theory? Patsy absolutely can't be involved, because if she is your theory isn't correct. For me, there is more than enough inconsistencies that lead me to believe there is no other conclusion but to say Patsy was aware and involved.

      -J

      Delete
    7. My reasons for looking at John only are based on the facts and logic as outlined in the first three posts on this blog. Once the logic is understood, that has an effect on how we view everything else.

      But even if that were not the case, there are huge differences between the sort of things Patsy's accused of and the sort of things that make John look so suspicious. Peering at a cop through your fingers or getting confused about that santa bear or the heart drawing can easily be explained.

      I see nothing suspicious in her eyeing that cop to get some idea of what he might be up to, but that's often been seen as a sure sign of guilt. Why?

      Steve Thomas claimed that Patsy stopped using manuscript "a" after the night of the crime, but as I've demonstrated, he was wrong. Does that mean he lied? Does that make him suspicious? Should we now regard him as a suspect? Of course not. He saw what he wanted to see, failed to see what he didn't want to see, and got it wrong. Same with Patsy. She wanted to see intruder evidence and she decided she'd found it. She got it wrong. Just as Thomas got it wrong. That doesn't make it a lie. And as I've said, if she were involved in the coverup, then she'd have had no problem telling the police that she herself drew the heart before tucking her daughter in.

      John's lies and prevarications are of a completely different order. He saw the basement window open, closed it and never reported it until months later. Unlike the santa bear or the heart, that window is central to the case. And yes, his failure to report it is suspicious. He knew very well all the doors had been locked, and yet he kept insisting that "seven open windows and doors" had been found, knowing full well that none of them could have afforded entry to the house.

      He phoned Archuletta to arrange a flight out of Boulder shortly after the body of his daughter was discovered. Obviously his intention was to get out of there as soon as possible, without having to answer any questions. How suspicious is THAT? And then, in his book, he lied about it, calling it an "urban legend."

      He instructed his lawyers to stonewall the police while his wife lay grief stricken and under heavy sedation.

      Finally, he lied about breaking the basement window months earlier, which tells us he must have broken it the night of the crime.

      Sorry, but John's lies are a LOT more suspicious than anything Patsy did or said.

      Delete
  13. Ya know... Its easy to be nice..

    ReplyDelete
  14. Me too. The discussions used to be interesting, but who wants to wade thru Leigh Too anger and insults or try to follow Inquisitive minute to minute stream of consciousness comments only to find nothing of substance anyway. Too bad. This used to be the best JBR site.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dont dish it out if you cant take it..

      Delete
  15. wow....
    It does sound as she slipped up...
    And what is worse is that she needed to clarify the whole statement the following day by saying that all she saw was a red heart in her mind...wow again...that is bizarre ...
    oh well...it seems as if Mrs Ramsey did not just have memory problems...
    This gem that's been hidden at day light is a game changer for me...I cant explain now how JDI alone and Patsy saw the read heart on JB's hand when she was supposed to be missing! : o
    Med

    ReplyDelete
  16. Unfortunately, I have to agree with MHN regarding the apparent disintegration of this once excellent blog. I came to this blog originally because it put forth the only theory which was coherent, and which was discussed by thoughtful posters wanting to get to the bottom of this case. However, recently, due to some very specific posters, the conversation has devolved into the exact meaningless tripe that so many blogs offer, i.e., websleuths. I was very happy when this blog came along, but I am saddened by its recent direction.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well Dear.. as Doc has said.. ALL theories are welcome.. If you have trouble dealing with people that oppose you.. Why come to a public board? The IDI theory is as valid as any other..

    ReplyDelete
  18. Disappointing to hear people are leaving because this is a great blog and Doc deserves a lot of credit for sticking with it.

    I don't have any problems with Leigh or Inquisitive and their IDI theory...even though I think this is simply impossible and has been blown out of the water as a viable theory. However, it is frustrating their 20 or 30 one line comments in the matter of an hour. If you have something to say, that's fine, just submit it in a thought out post.

    People on here know that I (and J) are extremely confident that Burke did it. To me, it's literally the only viable theory out there and everything falls into place whilst keeping things simple and ignoring the "noise". But I'm happy for anyone to argue against me and have a grown-up discussion about it.

    Lets just all think before we hit the "Publish" button :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There are 15 one line posts on this page alone that are NOT mine.. Yes, think before you hit publish.

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

      Delete
    3. Just to qualify: It's not your theories that are driving people away, Leigh (as outlandish and fanciful as they are, of course you're as entitled to them as we are to ours). It's your personal attacks and childish retorts.
      It is the fact you have begun to treat this blog as if it were your own, personal, Twitter account.
      It is because you willfully deny factual evidence.
      It is because you have an agenda, and that agenda has nothing to do with seeing justice for JBR, but instead has more to do with protecting JR at all costs - even if that means completely fabricating the truth.
      In a nutshell - you're incredibly, intentionally dishonest. Three or four people have left in the space of a week, and all have cited you as their reason for leaving - so, either you are indeed the common denominator, in which case you might want to look at modifying your antisocial behavior somewhat.....or we're all just sharing the same delusion, in which case all of us are the problem, and we should simply leave you here to play by yourself.

      Delete
    4. If Burke did it, why wouldn't they just report it as an accident? Burke was too young to be charged with anything or face any real punishment. It seems bizarre to me that both parents, both well educated would go to such extreme lengths- ransom note, staged strangulation, etc.- to cover up an accident. You would have to be sick to even think of all that, let alone actually do it.

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

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

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well On the note.. I was thinking maybe LHP took that pad with her when she left.. then returned it..It was the pad that they communicated on and since she was off..maybe Patsy didnt notice it missing..Especially with the holiday at hand..

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

      Delete
    3. Yes and when the RN is addressed to Mr and Mrs Ramsey.. it sounds like it is respectful.. which is odd considering the circumstances..

      Delete
    4. Apparently she was respectful toward John. She respected his "bussiness".

      Delete
    5. All makes sense, doesn t it.. Before I knew about Ninja.. I was leaning LHP and others..I think the BPD looked away because they thought Merve was an alcoholic and couldnt do it.. Maybe not.. but he could have had friends that could. I dont know.. There isnt a lot of info out there on them.. Im not convinced of anyone really.. But I guess none of us are..

      Delete
    6. LHP had two sons in law. I'm not sure but they may have been involved in helping move the Christmas trees out of the wine cellar. She says so. I'll have to find it in the book.

      Delete
    7. And yes.. thats another thing.. they knew about the wine cellar. I dodnt know about the Sons in Law..Hmm.. Thats interesting.. Maybe I should re-examine these people..

      Delete
  20. I'm waiting to see if the message board owner texts me back about what email accounts are allowed on her forum. She owns Cheri's Corner for the Missing. The public can read but certain areas can only be accessed by registered members as well as even separate private forums can be made that only a few members get in. (that had to be done for certain cases where family members of the missing/murdered wanted to discuss). On Cornelius's cutting through the bs site, he has made private areas on the blog for members as well. Those are just some options to consider, private vs. public.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, it has nothing to do with your constant whining for three days about how you dont approve of how this blog is run..Sure.

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

    ReplyDelete


  22. InquisitiveNovember 2, 2016 at 3:22 PM

    Or it could be the illegible scratchings of a six year old going wild with a red pen.

    Leigh TooNovember 2, 2016 at 3:23 PM

    Agreed.. It could just be the kids drawing on themselves.. I know I did at that age.. But yes.. this is why they didnt want to talk to them at all.. Stupid stuff like that."

    ----

    Only took ONE minute to respond to that? Inquisitive and Leigh Too are the same person. They're also both here at the same time and gone at the same time.

    Pathetic.

    I'm leaving as well although I've only posted four or five times so I wont be missed. I mainly just prefer reading this site a few times a week. Too much horse shit to wade through now. Its like the old days of being in an AOL chat room but instead of bots, its one person talking to themselves in a near continuous feed with a handful of real posts in between.

    ReplyDelete
  23. lol No wonder you all are PDI, JDI and BDI.. You are all a bunch of conspiracy nuts :)

    I am not Melinda.. I am not INQ... smh.. There are millions of people that are IDI.. We are the only ones to survive your onslaught or assaults..

    Lighten up people..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That being said.. Who is this guy anyway.. He has posted 3 times and all were assaults on me.. wth?

      Delete
  24. It's obvious that LT is trolling, so please everyone just ignore her comments. I enjoy the constructive debates, so I hope J, MHK, Ms. D, Inq., Zack, Diamonlil, evej and others will stick around, as I am learning a lot about the case. Thanks! Danni

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Danni - here is a 2012 ffj thread on JonBenet's hand with images and police questioning. They are discussing the pustules that are on her hands as well. Patsy testified she'd use nail polish (yikes! when rubbing alcohol would work for ink) irrc, JonBenet was right hand dominant. Keep in mind the medical records for both children were locked up tight.*note- I was never a member of ffj or ws

      http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?10200-About-that-red-heart-on-JonBenet-s-hand

      Delete
    2. Wanted to add that fire ant bites leave pustules and are quite the problem here in the South. Unsure when the family's last visit to Georgia or another southern state was. Have no idea if fire ants live in Colorado. However some on that forum think it could be an STD/STI.

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

    ReplyDelete
  26. Fictionalized? Oh rats.. Thats like Steve Thomas' book.. and OJ's If I did it book... LOL.. Well I guess everyone is afraid of Lin Wood.. I would be too But you and I are safe :)

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

    ReplyDelete
  28. He said he is done with this case..as I recall.. He was on Larry King in what 2011 with the Ramseys..15 Years later.. 12 years after he left the case..lol Oh yeah, he was mad as hell! He was the worst of the worst, as far as I am concerned.. I cant imagine being stalked like he did them for so many years..

    ReplyDelete
  29. It's funny because I think that was the first book I read about the case. And it had me thinking P did it. Over bed wetting. Come to find out a few weeks ago, she didn't wet the bed that night. That is I found that out. The real information was there all along.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He is such the jerk.. He was also the one leaking info to the press and wasnt he the one with the Vanity Fair article that leaked even more info on the case.. Of course some lies.. some twisting of reality.. Never fair and impartial.. as, for gods sakes. he should be..if no one else He knew she didnt wet the bed.. and he knew the RN was crumbled up and left in the back bedroom... He never says anything about those things.. How the hell can anyone respect his opinion.. There is just no integrity there..

      Delete
  30. Some one earlier mentioned The Bonita Papers. I read them myself last night and I'm really pretty amazed by the details outlined that have held up all these years later.

    Although it is stated that they are inaccurate in some places, this statement is found toward the bottom of this small novelette.

    "RED HEART ON JONBENET's PALM: Patsy drew one regularly on JonBenet, telling her it was so that she would take her heart wherever she went."

    http://www.re-newsit.com/p/the-bonita-papers-are-unedited-notes-of.html

    GS

    ReplyDelete
  31. I highly recommend reading up on Histrionic Personality Disorder, beginning with the Wikipedia article:

    "A mnemonic that can be used to remember the characteristics of histrionic personality disorder is shortened as "PRAISE ME":[8][9]
    Provocative (or seductive) behavior
    Relationships are considered more intimate than they actually are
    Attention-seeking
    Influenced easily by others or circumstances
    Speech (style) wants to impress; lacks detail
    Emotional lability; shallowness
    Make-up; physical appearance is used to draw attention to self
    Exaggerated emotions; theatrical"

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Histrionic_personality_disorder

    Then this website, which lists more characteristics and traits - including these quotes:

    "However, people who suffer from HPD are often just as interested in attracting negative attention, including shock, anger, outrage, shame, guilt and remorse."

    "Holiday Triggers - Mood Swings in Personality-Disordered individuals are often triggered or amplified by emotional events such as family holidays, significant anniversaries and events which trigger emotional memories."

    "Hysteria - An inappropriate over-reaction to bad news or disappointments, which diverts attention away from the real problem and towards the person who is having the reaction."

    http://outofthefog.website/personality-disorders-1/2015/12/6/histrionic-personality-disorder-hpd

    Read the Bonita Papers and see if you don't agree with me that it fits Patsy to a "t".

    GS

    ReplyDelete
  32. I'm getting really tired of all the yakking about the heart on JonBenet's hand. If Patsy was involved in the coverup and that heart was a problem for her, all she needed to say was that "yes, I drew that heart on her hand when I was putting her to bed that night." It's like the pineapple nonsense. If they were in it together they'd have had no problem testifying that yes, they fed her some pineapple -- and yes, Patsy drew a heart on her hand before tucking her in."

    It just amazes me how easy it is for people to make assumptions (usually based on confirmation bias) without thinking through the logic of what happened and what was being said, and why.

    As for the condition of this blog, sure, I could do as so many other moderators have done, close it up to anyone who disagrees with me and turn it into an echo chamber. I refuse to do that. As I see it, interesting points have been and are being made by people on all sides of this debate, so for me it's interesting despite all the rehashing of so many old issues. There are new people here for whom these issues are new, so what the heck.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As is the case with anything that has been brought forward opposing Doc's theory, he writes it off as nonsense and then criticizes anybody who believes in it. The only way to interpret Patsy's response regarding the heart is that she slipped up and then had to back peddle to talk her way out of it the following day.
      Regarding the pineapple....IF they didn't know Burke and JB ate it then what are they covering for??????? Because the bowl was just left there my assumption is they didn't know Burke was eating it, they didn't know JB ate a piece and it would become a clue on the autopsy report.

      -J

      Delete
  33. DocG, is it possible that JBR really was kidnapped, but then murdered and returned to the home after the kidnappers discovered that police had been called, as per the instructions in the note? I know she wasn't beheaded and I know an intruder would have to have been very bold to return to the house with LE present, but given the ineptitude shown by the BPD, it might have been possible. Otherwise, why did John wait till his second search of the house to "discover" the body, if he knew where it was all along? Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think it likely that kidnappers would take such a huge risk and also I don't see how they could have returned her without being seen. Nor do I see any reason why they would want to do that.

      But your second point does make some sense, yes. John could easily have "discovered" the body early that morning, especially if his main purpose was to contaminate the crime scene. That suggests the possibility that she could have been moved to that room later that morning, when John went AWOL. Possibly he had her in the trunk of his car and then moved her.

      It's also possible that he'd been hoping someone else would find her, since, as is well known, the guilty person is often the one who finds the body -- so his finding her right off the bat would have looked suspicious.

      Delete
    2. Thank you for the reply. I realize my first question was far fetched, was just wondering if anyone had condidered it.
      In regards to your last paragraph, if John had wanted someone else to discover the body, he could have easily had Fleet do it by asking him to check behind the wine cellar door.
      I've read several books on the case, including yours. Yours is the most plausible theory by far in my opinion. I find BDI almost laughable. Patsy and intruder theories somewhat more plausible than BDI, but not as complete as yours.

      Delete
  34. I agree with James, MHN, and the others frustrated by the ridiculousness that has ensued as of late from LT and co. Doc, I love your blog and respect your ideas and like reading other opinions to help me formulate ideas about the case (still waffling btwn JDI and BDI). However, the personal chitchat, veiled insults, and one liners are tiresome and driving people away. Ban them please for all our sakes so we can get back to solving this case. thanks, E

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I won't ban them. But I will warn them: one liners will be deleted when found by me unless they contain new and pertinent information or ideas. And any post that's just a rehash of what's been said before might well get deleted. So. You know who you are. Be warned!

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

      Delete
  35. JR lied. One of the search warrant says he told the cops that morning she was UNDERNEATH the blanket. So it would have been impossible for him to see her right after opening the door!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have no doubt he lied. Fleet had looked in that room with dark adapted eyes and saw nothing unusual. And as I recall, the blanket was white, which would have made it relatively easy to spot. John looked in shortly after noon with eyes that were NOT dark adapted and saw her instantly, despite the fact that, as you say, she was under the blanket. I think either he moved her into that room late that morning or moved her quickly from a remote corner of the room to the area just behind the door.

      Delete
    2. I think even if it were a kidnapping gone wrong, real kidnappers would have taken the body with them anyway and tried to collect the ransom. That's exactly what happened in the Charles Lindbergh case.
      Or the kidnappers would have taken the note and the body, destroyed both and gone into hiding. Leaving both the note and the body makes no sense whatsoever. It's also almost impossible to believe that a kidnapper would sit down inside the home and write a 3 page note, with 3 other people inside the house. Maybe a quick few lines if he was stupid enough to forget to bring a note, but not a 3 page letter, filled with way more information then necessary. That about eliminates the intruder theory for me. I think the case would have been solved within days if the BPD had been the least bit competent and not so badly contaminated the crime scene. Hard to believe a detective would allow John and FW to search the home without an officer. If we had a picture of JBR body as she was found, in the wine cellar, that alone may have solved the case.

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

      Delete
  36. I don't think this was a staged kidnapping. I think it was a staging of a failed kidnapping - a kidnapping which was meant to look like it had gone suddenly and drastically wrong.
    The second and third pages of the ransom note consist almost entirely of threats to kill JBR.
    These supposed "kidnappers" seem less concerned about extorting money (a paltry $118,000?!) than finding an excuse to kill JBR. They devote most of the ransom note to explaining all the things that would trigger them to kill.
    I think the rest of the note, the first page, is just padding to try to create some sort of vague motivation and fill it with distractions and red herrings. The Ramseys have shown themselves to be the masters at creating distractions and red herrings. The key information I believe is the portrait of the extremely edgy kidnappers who will kill with the least provocation.

    Maybe the Ramseys made their flurry of "panicky" phone calls very early in the hope that the window for time of death might be broad enough that something in their actions could be perceived as triggering her murder.
    The problem for this scenario was that JBR's time of death was established as being much earlier, and worse still, that the violence against her happened in two parts separated in time (head blow and strangulation). So her murder could no longer be interpreted as the knee jerk response of trigger-happy kidnappers who panicked and fled the scene. But I guess it might have seemed like it was worth a try. They might have been hoping the cold basement might preserve her body enough to make establishing time of death less precise.I don't know much about such things, but then again they probably didn't either.

    I don't believe that JR or PR ever intended to remove the body from their home.
    In fact, I think JR expected her body to be found pretty quickly (and hoped it would - just not by them). This is one of the reasons I think they took the (seemingly) reckless and stupid action of inviting a bunch of people over so early and at the same time as the police.
    It was not, in fact, recklessness, stupidity or panic. They needed to mess up forensic evidence (or disguise the lack of forensic evidence) as much as possible and as quickly as possible.
    They also needed to separate Burke from the police,quickly and quietly and without arousing suspicion. He was the biggest danger to their fabrications.

    I think JR's agitation later in the day may have been because JBR had NOT been found. He was perhaps seeing the potential for this to drag on longer than he anticipated. Plus there were starting to be obvious signs of decomposition. :(
    I speculate that JR may have moved JBR's body into a more obvious location directly behind the cellar door during the time he went missing that morning.
    The big problem was that Fleet White had already looked in the wine cellar earlier and seen nothing, unbeknownest to JR.
    (One thing that always puzzles me is this: if Fleet had already looked in the cellar, why was the door locked when JR came to it and found JBR? It seems strange that FW locked it again after looking in, although it is possible. Maybe someone can help me here if they have some info on that.)

    The Ramseys are people who were wanting to "move on". I think they wanted JBR found and "properly buried" ASAP, to lawyer up, bluff it out, and to move on (literally, if JR could have managed it!). Even Burke spoke about moving on, probably picked up from this parents' language.

    I think that they needed to create a scenario for why their daughter was dead in their home, and the "kidnapping gone wrong" was their best attempt. It shouldn't have worked, but amazingly it did.
    AMD

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow, great post. Probably one of the best posts I've read on here. Thanks very much.

      And for the record, I agree with everything you said.

      Delete
    2. I've never heard of anyone staging a failed kidnapping and I don't see why anyone would think such staging would fool the police. Such an interpretation strikes me as desperation by someone who simply refuses to let go of Patsy and is willing to consider even the most unlikely interpretation of the facts to keep her under that umbrella of suspicion.

      Nothing personal, by the way, because your view of the note is shared probably by the vast majority following the case, including many in LE. This is the problem I've been faced with for years. There's just this huge thicket of assumptions and confirmation bias produced by those of us who rightly see no possibility of an intruder, yet can't really get a handle on how that note could have been written by anyone else than Patsy, once John has been ruled out. So all eyes and ears have been on her and anything she's ever said or done that could possibly be interpreted as suspicious is seen as a sure sign of guilt.

      One more time: the note, as handed to the police that morning, explained nothing, and was certainly NOT seen as intruder evidence. On the contrary, it was and still is the reason so many are convinced this was an inside job. Without the note, it could have easily been seen as a home invasion by a pedophile, and any of the long list of possible suspects could have done it.

      No way the Ramseys could have been indicted because there'd be way too much reasonable doubt. It's the combination of brutal murder PLUS the obviously phony note that's focused so much attention on the Ramseys lo these 20 years.

      As I see it, John got away with it basically because he was "ruled out" as writer of the note, and as a result the investigation was literally sidetracked onto a dead end.

      Delete
    3. Great post! Agree with you completely that they expected the body to be found earlier, which is why they probably gave no reaction to the 10am deadline. Then as time kept going on, JR had to take action and find the body himself! Really well thought out and look forward to more post's from you!

      -J

      Delete
    4. Doc,

      If there hadn't been a note, an arrest of Patsy and John would have taken place hours after police arrived. To argue otherwise is so baffling to me that I don't really have words. To this day there has never been a definitive answer as to who wrote the note, so even though it was poorly written, it technically worked.

      -J

      Delete
    5. Well, the issue with staging, for me, is that there wasnt enough staging.. Take the RN note on put it on JB's pillow and no one would have known that a crime was even committed.. I think I would have, maybe, disheveled her bed.. left the flashlight on the floor next to JB..or left a window opened..left the pad and pen on the floor..left her long johns and panties down or off.. Something like that..

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

      Delete
    7. JB's room was right next to the staircase.. But the tape, they say, was put on late in the game as it had no tongue marks on it..indicating she was not conscious..
      Sorry...Hey, INQ!

      Delete
    8. Yes, that's a consideration - about the tape. But they brought tape with them so why not use a piece initially to muzzle her, remove it down in the basement and put a new piece (cut with Burke's knife) over her by now, non-breathing mouth. That would be part of the staging.

      Delete
    9. Inquisitive, why do you think, if Burke saw an intruder carrying JB down the stairs, he still maintains to this day that he never saw anything? Wouldn't he be the first to admit he'd seen an intruder, especially now that the public views him as a suspect?

      Delete
  37. It was mentioned that perhaps JR moved JB's body to the WC sometime that morning. However, wouldn't livor mortis determine if JB's body had been moved?

    I tried searching for an answer, but all I've found is very general information. Perhaps that's because livor mortis only provides general information? Meaning, that if the position of a body isn't changed drastically (i.e., going from laying face down to lying face up) is livor mortis helpful? If JB was originally lying on her back in a car trunk or crawl space, and then moved to the WC and laid on her back, would the ME be able to determine that she had been moved?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The ME arrived so late in the day that many possible clues were lost. In the face of the fact that it became impossible to establish time of death, my guess is that the livor mortis evidence became inconclusive.

      Delete
    2. The lividity would be the same, as long as she was lying flat..on a flat surface.. no matter where she was.

      Delete
    3. If she had have been placed in two very different positions (say, initially on her back, then on her side or her stomach) whilst the blood was still pooling, wouldn't the livor mortis surely have shown that, flat surface or not?

      Delete
    4. Yes.. both being both flat and on a flat surface would be required

      Delete
    5. I would say absolutely, Ms. D.

      What I was wondering though was, if she was originally in one location lying on her back, and was then picked up (while her blood was still pooling) and moved to the WC (and again placed on her back) would livor mortis show that she had been moved? In other words, if she was placed in the same position, after being moved, would the short amount of time it took to move her body be enough to cause a shift in lividity? Additionally, although it would be easy to place her in the same general position (on her back,) it might be harder (or not even thought of) to place her in the EXACT same position that she was in originally. For exmample, when she was found, her arms were above her head and her head was cocked to the side. Wouldn't she have to have been in this EXACT same position before she was moved, for there to be no shift in lividity?

      Unfortunately, I'm not sure I'm explaining what I mean very clearly.

      Delete
    6. As long as it was a very short period..maybe 5minutes.. And how long she had been dead could effect it too..

      Delete
  38. Hello, and thank you for this opportunity. I'll begin. What possible earthly reasons would John have had to want to find the body himself? Because he needed to press his DNA and fibers onto her body? Because he wanted to corrupt his own DNA that would normally be found on her body? Because he wanted the "whole thing to be over with" so he could get to Charlevoix? Because he was agitated beyond belief and "just couldn't take it any more?" Don't get so happy,none of those explanations will solve this case. And so I will reiterate:

    It was an inside job - by someone who knew that family intimately. Someone who had been on the inside. Someone who had practiced that note using quotes and storylines from Ruthless People, Dirty Harry and Ransom - intermixed with sayings picked up from Patsy, Patsy's mother and sisters. Good common southern sense, and the like. Someone who had a sort of theme to the kind of movies they preferred - kidnapping/ransom themes. Do you think that is the kind of fare Patsy, John and kids would sit and watch during family movie night? Stories about kidnapping one's children?

    They had a two -fold plan - remove the body and make a call - "Listen carefully" - not "Read carefully" as in a note, OR have the note from Patsy's own pad, removed days earlier to be left at the foot of the staircase if things went wrong. Or leave the body in the remote part of the basement where it would not be discovered and appear to be a kidnapping with a note that explained why she was not around.

    The person who did this likely also made some modifications to the letter that night, scratching out certain words or changing it all together. The person knew Patsy's style from viewing countless notes written in her hand as a method of communication with her, aka the housekeeper, and Christmas letters and the like. She would have been able to copy certain letters and disguise her handwriting to make it similar to Patsy's, but not capable of out and out forgery - I don't know too many people that can do that, especially in a long note. The materials used were brought in, and removed. They could find no white cord or black tape elsewhere. A single strand on an American Doll or behind a picture frame as far as I know, were not matched to the tape or cord used. Yet they did confiscate 3 rolls of black tape, white nylon cord, white linen notepaper and one of the pads that belonged to the Ramseys, in addition to 3 sharpie pens from the Pugh home. Yes Doc, the note was not seen as intruder evidence because they believed the note was written by Patsy. And if you, as a lay person not qualified to analyze handwriting try to find a match between Patsy OR John, you cannot find one.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've already responded to this theory more than once, and have no desire to keep repeating myself, sorry.

      Delete
    2. Oooo,, there is another interesting thing.. The comment in the note about using Johns good Southern common sense.. LHP was a Southerner... she would say something like that..

      Delete
    3. It's logic versus speculation, as you have not one shred of evidence. Your theory is based on a speculation that the trauma to the vagina was prior, not aft. With absolutely no evidence that he had done so. Everyone said she had a good relationship with her father, looked forward to him coming home every day from work, was happy to see him, his co workers didn't notice anything out of the ordinary. Then we get to the note and you can't match it to him. Then we take even further leaps that he broke a window, moved a suitcase, went downstairs earlier and dragged her body from one location to another, covered her in her favorite blanket because well, he did love her, then left a note where P. would be the first one up and would likely call the police. Then he sits around in his house all day, getting more and more agitated and can take no longer and runs right to her body and carries her upstairs - why? Cuz he was tired of the police not solving the crime?

      Delete
    4. Hey Leigh. Or LHP heard Nedra say it. The note was a mixture of things.

      Delete
    5. Possibly.. Nedra was a bit insolent to John..:) She made a statement like.. go to work John and earn some more money .or something similar...

      Delete
    6. Inq – Ok, it really comes down to this. Do you believe John Ramsey was telling the truth about having to break into the house via the basement window months earlier?

      -J

      Delete
    7. I have had to break into my house before,, havent you?

      Delete
    8. J - It does sound like rather a tall tale - especially since he said he removed his clothes and kept his shoes on so as not to dirty his clothes. But Burke himself said his dad had broken in that way and let him in the front. However John said when they were away was when he found himself locked out and came in so yes, it sounds like a hinky story but then you have to ask yourself, why would he make up a story showing he himself broke the window when he would want them to think an intruder did it.

      Delete
    9. I have a question for you J. Do you think either parent would strangle their daughter and assault her with a paintbrush handle to protect their son?

      Delete
    10. You just posted the above before I could post my response to your previous comment, so I will answer it. Yes, I do.

      Inq – see this is where the IDI hits a real snag. The story John tells wasn’t forthcoming which is part of the many reasons it’s troubling to me and he even lies by saying he told Arndt about his window story when that wasn’t the case. If it’s a true story, then he is literally the most unlucky person in the world! Ultimately I don’t know what happened at that window. It could have been the start of a staging job OR it was broken that night innocently by one of the kids throwing something or swinging something. Either way, John’s window story seems like a cover up for something, which then leads to Patsy and Burke lying later on to help support Johns story. So, you really need to ask yourself….are the Ramsey’s literally the most unlucky people in the world or were they involved?

      -J

      Delete
    11. It's good that you're still in the game - thinking, pondering, I sense your mind isn't made up so keep questioning and then the answers will come to you.

      Delete
    12. for beginners: RN - inside job, garotte - loosely tied, not even an garotte, brutality - yes, it was murder, dna - touch dna/composite/very small mixed amount, stun gun - debunked/lou smit was dreaming
      please do some reading before spaming and trolling around!
      but perhaps it was some alienintruder travelling through space and time creating this case.
      Z

      Delete
    13. The garrote was not loosely tied, Z!
      It cut into JonBenet's neck! Have you seen the autopsy photos? While there was obvious staging - the garrote was created solely with the intention of causing death. Perhaps you should also do some reading before "spamming and trolling". The facts are blurry enough without introducing more red herrings into the mix......the garrote KILLED JB. It was not "loosely tied", and nowhere on the coroner's report does it say that.

      Delete
  39. Doc, I dont understand why it is so hard to understand that it is possible for someone to possibly slip when being interrogated(Patsy) about the heart among other things. Surely even you have to admit the enormous amount of inconsistencies in PR answers and story compared to that of an innocent person. If it were just once or maybe even twice then you could chalk it up to being manipulated or bad memory but her answers are almost always vague or she cant recall. I think that if PR were involved you have to understand the amount of lying that more than one person would have to coordinate amd the details that it would entail would be enormous. Impossible, if someone does not know which questions and what evidence were going to be thrown out at you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's your perception of her responses, not mine. Looks to me as though she recalls a great deal and when she says she can't recall I see no reason to doubt her. Would you recall every single thing you did on a given day?

      The only instances of lying I can find in Patsy's testimony is when she is supporting John's version of what happened. Which leads me to believe he was manipulating her. Other than that I don't see lies. Any more than I see lies in Steve Thomas's book, where he gets many things wrong, or James Kolar's book, where he echoes some of the same incorrect assertions offered by Thomas.

      When I watched those FBI agents attempt to make sense of the sounds we hear after the 911 hangup, claiming they could very clearly hear John and Burke's voices where all I heard was garbled crosstalk, I would not accuse them of lying. They heard what they wanted to hear -- and to my ears they got it wrong. And yes, Patsy got some things wrong too. But mostly she was extremely cooperative and patient. What you are seeing in her responses is confirmation bias.

      Delete
    2. She says multiple times that John said to call 911 in her 1998 interview. Was she manipulated into saying this? Makes ZERO sense

      -J

      Delete
    3. DOC- I agree with you about Patsy... Poor woman lost her little girl in the most heinous way possible.. I dont think I would be right in the head for a long time.. I can imagine th stress she was under with Thomas hot on her trail.. And the hang up 911 cal.. People will have a change in pitch to their voice whine extremely upset.. SO if she had her back to the phone with a whining high pitched voice, it could sound like a child.. And John could be saying THEY arent talking to you instead of WE arent talking to you.. Meaning the RN didnt address her.. just him..

      Delete
    4. "She says multiple times that John said to call 911 in her 1998 interview. Was she manipulated into saying this?"

      I'm sure you saw the clip from the A&E video I posted, J. She very clearly states that SHE told HIM she was calling the police. So obviously there is a contradiction in that regard. If later she says it was his idea that doesn't remove the contradiction. So yes, I think she was the one who decided to call and that he manipulated her into going along with the version he initially presented on their first CNN interview.

      As I've said many times, she would never have agreed to make that call with the body still in the house if she'd written that note or was involved in any way with staging.

      Delete
  40. We're dealing with some seriously competent kidnappers. They become apparitions when entering the house. They're not heard, stay for hours, don't bring any of their own supplies (because obviously the house has everything they need) and silly them, forget to kidnap their target! But decide to sexually assault the target anyway and leave a ransom note that could implicate them if their identity is ever revealed. They also clean and redress their target because that's something an intruder would definitlely do. All for 118k which is definitely worth committing a federal crime. Seems very likely.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Was the story of Fleet White's daughter missing but found hiding later under her bed true? If so, there is another possible source for the idea of a kidnapping, right? And the response that it draws from the police, the commotion and ramifications. I'm sure Fleet's daughter got a good lecture on that.

    Doc, where is the logic in John killing JonBenet, writing the note himself, then also finding her himself? The cops had cleared out for the most part. All of them would leave eventually, and he had to know that a kidnapping would evolve into a Federal investigation.

    Then to take the time to write that note, but take the chance that Patsy might find it before he was out of the shower and might call the police before he could talk to her. The note could have been put anywhere, even mailed to them. But as smart as he was, he never thought Patsy might find it before he wanted her to? Of all the places to leave a ransom note. Just seems "stupid" to me, and John doesn't strike me as that stupid.

    Look at the personalities involved here. I'm sure it dawned on John who wrote that note, and left him absolutely shell-shocked. And at that point, he realized JonBenet had to be still in the house.

    GS

    ReplyDelete
  42. In the meantime, all attention is riveted on Patsy. Her friends, the victim advocates, the pastor, Linda Arndt. The histrionics. Basking in the limelight.

    GS

    ReplyDelete
  43. It does, doesn't it Zach? With a key and knowing the schedule of the Ramsey's that afternoon/evening they would have come in and hid and waited. Waited until all lights were out and the house was still. Waited until Burke finally went up to bed and waited a little beyond that for sleep. Somewhere around 11:30 or 12 they would have acted, and been out of there by 1 or 2. Might have started out a premeditated kidnapping but they came prepared for the inevitability that she may have to be killed and once you have motive figured out you will have the answers you need. She could not have been let go in any event. When O.J. murdered his two victims it was a tough pill for the jury to swallow that he could have done ALL THAT in a short time span. And gotten home to get picked up by his limo driver - even so he was late. Two murders in 15 minutes. Mind boggling.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Two murders in 15 minutes because it was a fast stab and go. There wasn't a novel long ransom note, conclusive evidence of an intruder, and he didn't wait hours in the house without being heard. So your example is a little weak here.

      Delete
    2. My analogy was people believed O.J. couldn't have done all that he did with the timeline they provided and still get back within minutes of catching his limo ride to the airport - even though he was late. And in this case, the Ramsey case, people assume if it was an intruder the intruder would have had to be there all night, killing, staging and writing a note. It's the perception of reality that is wrong. O.J. had time to do what he did, and the intruders did not take as much time as you think they did - especially since the note was written elsewhere and brought in, or modified once they were there.

      Delete
    3. "Especially since the note was written elsewhere and brought in, or modified once they were there."

      Can you cite your sources please, Inquisitive?

      "And in this case, the Ramsey case, people assume if it was an intruder the intruder would have had to be there all night, killing, staging and writing a note. It's the perception of reality that is wrong."

      No, even if you're correct with regards to the ransom note, you're still ignoring the fact there is a 45 minute - 2 hr gap between JB's head wound and the strangulation! NO intruder waits around that long if his intention all along was to kill her ("She could not have been let go in any event") - he smashes her over the head, then strangles her and gets the hell out of there. Before you joined the IDI camp, Inquisitive, you agreed on this point!!!

      Delete
    4. Theories dont require citing.. JB had a MASSIVE head injury yet only 2 tsp of blood in her brain case.. She wasnt alive for 2 hours..or even 45 minutes

      Delete
    5. Where did you obtain your medical degree, Leigh?

      You always disagree with the coroners, so you must have a medical degree of your own - or are you just making up b.s to bolster your theory?

      Delete
    6. I am a Registered Nurse.. I graduated college in 1991.

      Delete
    7. In other words not qualified to make a diagnosis and should be informed enough not to argue with the 6 or 8 or however many highly qualified medical doctors who did.

      Delete
    8. What diagnosis? You should always question your doctor.. They arent all A students you know.. As like when many disagree .. as is the case here.

      Delete
  44. Interesting Inq, that you've argued that John had no history of child abuse, yet you now find yourself fixated on Linda and her husband, who have no history of criminal activity of any sort, and lack the vocabulary and literary skills to have written the note. Killing their victim would have to have been an essential part of their plan, because JonBenet would have recognized them. So not only are they burglars and kidnappers, but also cold blooded murderers. Anything of THAT sort in their history?

    Not to mention forgers. AND master criminals, since they appear to have committed the perfect crime. Where do you suppose they managed to pick up such impressive skills?

    Not only did they expect to collect a ransom, they also wanted to pin the crime on Patsy. So not only did they plan a murder, but also went to the additional added effort of "borrowing" one of Patsy's notepads, penning an inordinately detailed "ransom" note on three of the sheets and then returned the notepad to its place in the kitchen, assuming the forensics people would be alert enough to compare the torn off portion to the torn off portion of the note, thus implicating Patsy, as it was her pad. VERY impressive. Only they failed miserably in one crucial respect: the writing on the note they left on those stairs looks NOTHING like Patsy's writing style, not even close. Despite a few very questionable "matches" of individual letters, 6 experienced handwriting specialists saw no basis for concluding she wrote the note and most agreed it was "unlikely." How embarrassing! How do you frame anyone with a note that looks like someone else wrote it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They had an accomplice.. No telling what his history or skill set was.. And someone said that it looked like they used a dictionary to write the note..It doesnt seem to match the handwriting.. so sloppy.. uneven... Maybe they wrote it in the dark tho..

      Delete
    2. The RN to me seems like feigned intelligence.. attache.. at this time.. You know..people dont speak like that..Certainly to low brow for a Ramsey.. I dont think they could have dumbed down to that..

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

      Delete
    4. Another thing, Inq. You don't think it's a bit of a leap to believe that LHP could kill, or play a role in the killing of JB? This was an innocent child with whom she interacted on a regular basis. There is nothing in LHP's past to indicate she is a psychopath. Even if she hated the Ramseys, or was desperate for money, I think it's a bit of a stretch to think that it would be so easy for her to kidnap/kill an innocent child who she knew.

      Also, Leigh Too, I think you are over simplifying what has to transpire for multiple people to become involved in something like this. First, LHP, or her husband would have to approach the other with the proposal of kidnapping JB for a ransom. If you're going to throw an accomplice into the mix, that means that they would have had to approach another individual and expose their plan. Pretty risky business for two people that aren't career criminals. Not to mention the fact than an accomplice equals less money for all involved.

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

      Delete
    6. HKH_ Unless someone approached HIM.. Knowing he had access to the house with his wife working there.. And with the article in the newspaper about him..

      Delete
    7. HKH- Personally, I dont think LHP was in on it at the start.. Maybe found out later about Merve's involvement..Then went on the Patsy attacks.. handing out pamphlets on the court house corner, indicating her..

      Delete
    8. "Do you know how many people in this country murder who do not have a past career in murdering?"

      While that may be true, I really don't think it's relevant. How many other murder cases are significantly similar to JB's murder? My question was, do you really think that LHP, who has no history of violence or signs of being a psychopath, could all of the sudden decide to kill, or take part in the killing of a child she knew, because she needed money?

      @Leigh, OK, so if someone approached him, the same ideas still apply. Someone had to propose this crime. A risk in and of itself. And if the two of them do decide to do it, wouldn't that logically mean they would plan to split the ransom money? $60,000 a piece, hardly seems worth it.

      Delete
    9. I dont think you have ever been dirt dog poor and broke..lol $60k ...in the 90s was a lot of money.. People have murdered for far less.. Ive seen them on TV shows to it for $2k.. But these things happen people hire a hit man to kill husbands and wives all the time.. Its risky but, people still do it..

      Delete
    10. It's ridiculous for you to pretend to know anything about my financial situation, past or present.

      Who said the Pughs were "dirt dog poor?" LHP has even described herself as "a regular person with a regular financial situation."

      Of course people have killed for far less. That's irrelevant. Did any of these people issue a ransom demand of only 2k?

      I found 6 or 7 other cases in US history, of kidnapping with a ransom note, where the ransom amount was reported. For each case, I entered the amount of the ransom and the year of the kidnapping into an inflation calculator. I also divided 118,000 by two, to get 59,000 (b/c of your claim of a possible accomplice) and entered 59,000 and the year 1996 into the inflation calculator. Every other ransom amount (the earliest of the cases occurring in 1874) was double that of the Ramsey ransom split between two accomplices. Actually, even the full amount was less than all of the others.

      Also, you aren't seriously suggesting that the Pughs hired a hit man to kill JB, after you insinuate the Pughs were "dirt dog poor," are you?

      Delete
    11. Inquisitive, interesting that you chose only to respond to Doc's mention of LHP forging Patsy's handwriting.....you never touched anything else he said. Why is that? I, for one, would love to hear your explanation to his other questions, especially as your very argument excludes John on the basis that people don't become psychotic child killers over night, yet that's *exactly* what you're asking us to swallow with your LHP theory.

      "Interesting Inq, that you've argued that John had no history of child abuse, yet you now find yourself fixated on Linda and her husband, who have no history of criminal activity of any sort, and lack the vocabulary and literary skills to have written the note. Killing their victim would have to have been an essential part of their plan, because JonBenet would have recognized them. So not only are they burglars and kidnappers, but also cold blooded murderers. Anything of THAT sort in their history?

      Not to mention forgers. AND master criminals, since they appear to have committed the perfect crime. Where do you suppose they managed to pick up such impressive skills?"

      Delete
    12. The Pughs were simple, uneducated people - Merv a barely functioning alcoholic who couldn't hold a job. By her own admission, Inquisitive's ever-changing opinions are based on whatever book she has last read: Little Girl Blu in the present instance, previously Kolar and Thomas. Let's hope she reads Doc's e-book next.
      CC

      Delete
    13. They had an accomplice.. And Son in laws may be involved. I dont think she said Merve did this all on his own..

      Delete
  45. Doc,
    Have you ever considered the possibility that Patsy and John, could have been both involved in abusing JB?. She was accidentally and gravely injured and they chose to kill her to cover up the prior molestation?
    I really adhere to the JDI theory but could never understand Patsy's role and the only way I see her participating in the staging is if she had something to do in the abuse.
    Med

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If they were in it together the 911 call would not have been made when it was. As I see it, Patsy's role was that of an innocent dupe, nothing more.

      Delete
  46. Anyone have a theory on what caused the triangular(ish) shaped abrasion on the front, left side of JB's neck?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The garotte being yanked.. as far as I know

      Delete
    2. Some of the bruising looks like thumb prints to me, slap and/or cigarette burn, but do not know if anything other than garrote has ever been determined by forensics.

      Delete
  47. Nobody else but John could have written that RN. It really reads fort itself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. First off, that is just pure speculation. Second, just because John authored the note, doesn't mean Patsy and Burke we involved in this crime. To me there is definitely parts of the note that have a female touch to it.

      -J

      Delete
    2. I don't think the ransom note has a gender specific tone. You can make a case for either John or Patsy, but I definitely don't see the merit to forensic linguistics. It just screams pseudo-science to me.

      Delete
    3. I didn't want from my gender comment to sway from my message. Regardless if it was proven that John "wrote" the note, there is nothing to say Patsy didn't help write it.

      -J

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

      Delete
  48. This case bugged me for years. I spent hours and hours exploring the rabbit hole and it seemed everywhere I turned there were more paths to explore. I would get frustrated and confused and come up with some theory that I thought could work, but then throw it away because it never rang true. I periodically checked up on the case and tried so hard to solve it myself.

    What fascinated and frustrated me the most was that there was so much evidence that seemed to point to everyone and yet no one. I wanted so badly to be the one to crack the case. I thought it must be solvable with so much information and evidence out there. It felt like there was an obvious answer but I could never twist the lens to make the picture become clear.

    Then I found this blog. I skipped my classes and read everything I could. I then bought the ebook and I got mad at Doc. Why? Because Doc solved the case. I no longer think about the Ramsey case anymore because there's nothing to really sift through anymore. John did it. Everything makes perfect sense. The big errors I was making was that John was ruled out as the ransom note writer and that I always thought of John and Patsy as one person rather than two individuals.

    I'm writing this because I'm absolutely amazed at the posters on this blog. Doc's theory is genius and I figured it was only a matter of time before the pitchforks started coming for John Ramsey. I figured everyone would read what I read and realize John did it alone. I figured the internet would slowly start to turn on John after this blog picked up in popularity.

    Well its 2016 and I'm at a loss for what I'm seeing here. I almost suspect some of you are being paid by John to troll this blog because I'm baffled how very few people have accepted that John did it. Please, please, please re-read the ebook and the original posts doc has written.

    John Ramsey is guilty as sin and it pains me that more people can't accept this.

    Thank you doc, and screw you for ruining something that fascinated me!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem with Doc's theory, for me, is that you have to believe that John was sexually molesting Jonbenet..I dont see it.. And she had an intact hymen.. So, I just cant go there..

      Delete
    2. No you wouldn't need to determine that JR molested JBR if he murdered her. Hypothetically, JR could have checked on JBR right after he shooed BR off to bed, where JBR wouldn't turn tv off or soiled herself. JR could have had a fit if he wasn't used to cleaning feces/potty accidents and the rest staged to cover his murder.

      According to some experts JBR was a victim of chronic abuse. But it doesn't mean JR was the person abusing her. Jmo, but I think JBR may have been abused and whoever was abusing her, most likely murdered her. But abuse and murder could also be independent and separate events.

      Delete
    3. Thanks, Anonymous. I've always thought John was the genius. I'm just the hound dog that sniffed him out.

      Delete
    4. Exactly, Anonymous. So many are willing to believe Patsy killed JB in a fit of rage over a bed wetting accident, but won't concede that John could have done the same thing (killed his daughter in a fit or rage - not necessarily over a bed wetting incident). I think it is more likely it was to cover up sexual abuse, and the garrote certainly points towards some kind of premeditation - even if it was only planned half an hour in advance - but the motive isn't important to me, as the evidence speaks for itself, all of which points towards John, regardless of motive.
      I too figured that, after reading Doc's blog, the case was solved and it was only a matter of time before his theory just became the accepted theory on all of the internet sites. Not so! And I believe this is because - as we've seen here - people have an overwhelming need to believe Patsy did it......or now, more so than ever, Burke. That Patsy wasn't "ruled out" of writing the note is a big part of it, but on many other forums I visit, I just see an intense, bitter, hatred of Patsy which is really quite startling. People don't like that she put her daughter in pageants. They don't like the way she came across in interviews. They *want* her to be guilty.

      Delete
    5. SOmebody needs to buy Anonymous above a cigarette after his praise of Doc...good god :-)

      Ms D, I need to challenge you on this statement. I think one flaw on this blog is erroneous statements like this get thrown out and confuse people

      "but the motive isn't important to me, as the evidence speaks for itself, all of which points towards John, regardless of motive."

      Are you arguing John did it in a rage and oh, he just so happened to be molesting her? If JDI, then for me it HAS to be about motive. But regarding all the "evidence" pointing to him, I'm extremely curious on this. I don't know that John wrote the note but what is SO irrelevant about it is that even if we definitively know who authored the note, we will NEVER have proof that Patsy didn't help. We will also NEVER know that if she was being molested, WHO the person was committing the act. Who cares what stats say...stats aren't specific to this case. You are fully entitled to feel JDI, but don't confuse opinion with facts.

      -J

      Delete
    6. ANON... Yes, thats true but, I believe that Doc theory is based on sex abuse.. I could be wrong as even among JDI people, motives vary.. But I dont see John cleaning a poopy JB.. he would have called out Patsy on that one, for sure :)

      Delete
  49. Everything adds up to me EXCEPT Patsys deception in the 911 call, coupled with her aloof back tracking interrogations and interviews. I feel like she was made aware the morning of and was possibly gaslighted.

    ReplyDelete
  50. PR had advanced cancer, two young children one of whom was brutally and grotesquely murdered and violated in the home, and PR appeared sedated in interviews. Emotionally and psychologically she must have been going through really deep anguish and I think she would have been susceptible to any influence by others.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Newcomers should not believe Leigh Too's blatant lies about the prior sexual abuse. One of the two doctors who examined JBR's body at the request of the Medical Examiner found her hymen "shriveled and retracted", not intact.
    CC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am beginning to wonder why Leigh Too always so vehemently denies there being any evidence of prior sexual abuse. I know she lies about most things, but the sexual abuse seems to be a real sticking point for her.....which makes me think she must surely know John Ramsey in some capacity. She doesn't merely promote the intruder theory - as Inquisitive does - she defends John Ramsey in such a way that it comes across as almost creepy at this point. We all have our theories, but no one disputes cold, hard, evidence here like Leigh does.

      Delete
    2. But it's OK for your pal to accuse the Pughs?

      Delete
    3. Leigh Too never lies.. She doesnt have to.

      Her hymen was intact.. from 2 to 10 o'clock position.. INTACT.. not much of a sex abuser, is he.. As I have aid before.. the vagina in not a sealed vault.. urine and feces and soaps and powders can get in.. causing irritation. JB had been to the doc with a diagnosis of vaginitis..more than once, as I recall THis is most likely the cause of any scarring or irritation to the hymen and vaginal tissue.

      Delete
    4. The Ramsey's accused Fleet White, Priscilla White, John Mark Karr Linda Hoffman Pugh or anybody else they can think of to the cops but that's okay, right Lier Too cuz their the poor innocent Ramseys.

      Delete
    5. Oh come on.. I can hear Steve Thomas now.. Listen, Mrs White.. I just spoke to the Ramseys.. They said they think you did it.. That you were always jealous of Patsy and JB.. All those trophies.. all of their money.. You hated them, didnt you. They said you have had it in form her all along..

      Steve Thomas is an emotional cripple.. a twerp with a gun and a badge.. He became a petty tyrant and will rot in Hell for what he has done.. And rightfully so.

      Delete
    6. Well Zach, you are sounding mean. I'm a JDI believer, I probs have similar beliefs about the afterlife, and I am voting for one of 2 presidential candidates that might not be the same one you are voting for. I don't believe L2 has posted anything on here that has furthered this case, but I sure as heck am not going to profile this person as anything other than someone i disagree with!

      Delete
  52. Any detailed info re Fleet White?

    ReplyDelete