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, May 14, 2018

Back to Basics

Aka "Making room for more comments."

222 comments:

  1. Thanks Doc! Hope you are doing well and enjoying the spring, or "sprummer" that some areas are experiencing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I haven’t posted on here in a while, as I have been reading and watching a lot about the Golden State Killer case. But, it got me thinking back to the JBR case and how I still hope it will be solved one day

    The Golden State Killer case had over 150 crimes committed at the minimum by the same person and yet it took 40 years to arrest somebody responsible. That’s what makes the JBR case just so fascinating is that she was murdered by one of 3 people and yet here we are over 20 years later with no answers. So, to start from the beginning, these are the things I am 100% confident about:

    • JBR was NOT murdered by an intruder – Obviously that means John, Patsy or Burke murdered her
    • The Ramsey’s arrived home after 9pm and she’s murdered by 5:30 am the next morning -- That leaves roughly 8 hours to commit the crime, write a RN and do any staging necessary.

    According to the Ramsey’s, JBR is asleep and carried to the bed when they arrive home after close to 9pm. So, this is where the rubber hits the road for all of us have a theory on this case. This is the “choose your own adventure” moment in the case.
    What I am referring to is WHAT MADE JBR COME DOWNSTAIRS THAT NIGHT?

    • The JDI camp will say he either lured or carried her downstairs to either a) play some disgusting sex game with her that accidentally leads to her death or b) shut her up so that she can’t talk to anybody about the molestation from John.
    • The PDI camp will say that JBR wet her bed which caused Patsy to fly off the handle and kill her
    • The BDI camp (which is my camp) says that Burke was downstairs eating pineapple when JBR must have seen the light or heard commotion downstairs and went to see what was going on.

    I won’t even entertain the IDI, because it is so implausible. So, that’s it, JDI, BDI, PDI……one of those 3 is the answer to this unsolved crime. This case has been dissected on her every which way, but for me, the moment JBR leaves her bed that night starts a series of events that lead to her death. There isn’t a 911 call, there isn’t a RN, there isn’t a broken basement window until she gets out of bed. For me, the most logical answer is that she saw light or heard something downstairs and carrying her pillow with her, goes to see what is going on. Anybody that has kids knows that when they start the nap in the car, they rarely maintain that nap once home, which causes them to awake to most things. I believe the series of fateful events happened because of an innocent moment….which makes this whole case just so tragic.

    -J

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I strongly believe it had something to do with Fleet White! In the 12 hours prior to her dead and the 12 hours afterwards he pops up everywhere. He is John's closest friend, he attends the Party on the fateful night, In fact in those 24 hours he was with JonBenet as much as John was (I think even more)
      - At the christmas party all night until the Ramsay's left at 9pm and then he was back crack of dawn the next morning (on John's request...?) to help find JonBenet ...which he in fact DID find her body in that obscure basement room...
      People all looked at Patsy and John because the evidence DOES NOT AND NEVER HAS pointed to an intruder... everything was done from inside the home - police soon conclude that the house is so expansive that only a very close friend or relative could have navigated the dark house over multiple stories - remembering this is supposed to be with jon benets body.... or did uncle Fleet come round for christmas cookies, his mere familiarity to the children would easily have her roused for a christmas present ... ssshhh santa will hear you!!! have her walk down to the lower level of the home without caution or raising the alarm....

      When the note was placed on the step she was already dead... he didn't dare re-enter the upstairs quarters as it was getting late and the parents would be stirring... he hastily wrote the rambling note and then he slipped away... only to shower, aliby check and return an hour or 2 later....

      Delete
  3. I don't think it was IDI or RDI. I do think that it may have started innocent, but it wasn't innocent in the end.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Not sure what you mean....you dont think it was an intruder or a Ramsey?

      -J

      Delete
    2. Yeah, I basically mean that. I don't think it was anyone in the house, that night.

      Delete
    3. The time of death established that JonBenet was murdered"that night". Her corpse was found in the basement; it didn't get there by itself.

      Isn't Kindergarten a pre-requisite to Blogging 101?

      Delete
    4. No, kindergarten is not a prerequisite to blogging. This is a copy of the autopsy: http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/coroner-jonbenet-ramsey-autopsy

      It states the time of death as 1:23 am. For your other point, you can see my below post. I think that her body may have gotten there by accident; therefore, no one intentionally put her body in the basement.

      Delete
    5. 1323 is 1:23pm not am, which corresponds to the time JonBenet's body was discovered by John. There was no official time of death because she died many hours before her body was discovery.

      Delete
    6. So? No one in their right mind knows that; therefore, it means am,not pm, to normal people.

      Delete
    7. "Military Time operates on a uniquetime system. Military time is a concise method of expressing time that is used by the military as well as emergency services such as law enforcement, firefighting and emergency medical personnel as well as hospitals. ... With military time, the hours are numbered from 00 to 23."

      Dr John Meyer, the Boulder County ME, as both a member of LE and a medical practitioner, properly used military time on the autopsy report, indicating the body was found at 1:23 in the afternoon.

      Time of death remains unknown.

      Delete
    8. You must really like to argue. This is ridiculous.

      Delete
    9. Military time is widely used and many people in their right mind know that 1323 corresponds to 1:23pm. I encourage to read up on the case; the exact time of death is not known.

      Delete
  4. I just read two books -- one on serial killer Ed Edwards, and the other on the Golden State Killer. Both made me reflect back on the Ramsey case, and the more I think about how amateurish the staging was - the bindings and ransom note in particular - the more I'm convinced that it was Patsy. I read Docs book a while back and the JDI theory was very convincing, but I just can't see him writing a note like that (lengthy and gibberish). And Patsy did immediately try to frame the housekeeper (who would have likely seen one of John's paychecks -- thus Patsy using the $118,000 figure). I don't think the JBR case will ever be solved.

    Danni

    ReplyDelete
  5. From a July 2008 Boulder Daily Camera article by local reporter Clay Evans:

    Home Ongoing Coverage: Jon Benet Ramsey Story

    Clay Evans: Judgment and the Ramseys

    Posted: 07/09/2008 09:56:00 AM MDT

    "It was early 1997, and the press coverage about the slaying of JonBenet Ramsey was skewing vigorously against her mother and father, Patsy and John Ramsey.

    Story after story, 'leaked' information from police investigating the case implied, in ever-stronger terms, that there was no other 'logical' conclusion than that they had killed their 6-year-old daughter.

    One exceedingly well-known law enforcement officer - for whom I have deep respect to this day - told me, 'We know the dad did it. We're just getting our ducks in a row.'

    As this tidal wave of implication rose to a crest, I got a call from Bryan Morgan, the family's then-attorney. He said John and Patsy had chosen a few reporters to meet with, and would I be willing. Absolutely, I said. What a scoop.

    I could ask about anything, Morgan emphasized, except details of the case. I met John at Morgan's house on Mapleton Hill for a session that went somewhat over an hour.

    Later, after I'd pursued and published some stories in the Camera based on leads I gained from my newfound sources (including Morgan), I had a lot of people tell me I'd been suckered. I was a shill for a killer. I'd been had.

    But as I told my editors, and anyone else who asked - and people did ask, once it became known I'd had contact with John (Patsy was not there, though I'd interviewed her in 1994, long before this tragedy struck) - if John Ramsey was a killer, he was the most terrifying kind: A chameleon who betrayed not the slightest hint of depravity."

    Eight years later, in Evans's review of Paula Woodward's book in October 2016, he mentions that same local law enforcement official again:

    Home Entertainment Story

    Entertainment
    Review: Paula Woodward's JonBenét Ramsey book defends parents account of unsolved murder provides some new information

    By Clay Evans

    For the Camera
    Posted: 10/27/2016 05:29:07 PM MDT

    Woodward

    "We Have Your Daughter: The Unsolved Murder of JonBenét Ramsey Twenty Years Later"

    Author: Paula Woodward

    "Like Woodward, I was involved with the Ramsey investigation as a reporter for the Daily Camera from the beginning, working my sources, contributing tips and information and becoming a conduit of information from the Ramsey family. Four days after the murder, a top investigator (still prominent and highly professional) local law-enforcement official confidently told me off the record, 'We know it's the dad. We're just getting our ducks in a row.'

    In the end, Woodward amply makes her case that John and Patsy Ramsey suffered at the hands of investigators who became wedded to their theory of the crime early on and later succumbed to recurrent bouts of confirmation bias. Those looking for a strong summation of the facts and controversies of the case from the perspective of the Ramsey family will find much to pore over in Woodward's book."

    Question: Do we know who the "prominent and highly professional local law-enforcement official" who was "exceedingly well-known," for whom "Evans had deep respect" who confided to Evans four days after the murder that "they were certain the dad did it," is?

    Black Sheep

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This is strictly a guess since Evans properly declines to reveal sources. However, I would guess that it could be Ron Gossage who was there from the beginning of the investigation. It surprises me if he revealed that since his partner Thomas believed the deed had been done by Patsy.

      JR always claimed that he lawyered up when he received a phone call that BPD was targeting him. It's certainly plausible that they had zeroed in on him, based on behavior (he did attempt to flee Boulder that afternoon until the officers told him he needed to stick around). Plus the fact that she had been molested.
      -T

      Delete
  6. The purpose of the note was to stage a kidnapping, with the obvious intention of getting the body out of the house before the police were called. I see no other explanation. No one stages a failed kidnapping, that's absurd. And if there had been a change of plan then it would have made no sense to hand a possibly incriminating ransom note over to the police for no reason.

    If Patsy were involved she would therefor not have called 911 that morning but waited until the body had been removed.

    If Burke did it and the parents were covering for him, then once again Patsy would not have called 911 when she did.

    No intruder theory makes any sense.

    The only remaining candidate is John Ramsey. As I see it, this is a no brainer. But that's not the only reason to suspect him. There is plenty of other evidence, as laid out in detail on this blog.

    I'm continually amazed at how difficult it is for so many to get it. I.e., see the obvious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The problem is that it just isn't as obvious as you choose to believe. To believe JDI, you have to believe this was premeditated murder to shut JBR up from talking or getting examined by the doctor. There isn't a shred of evidence that she was talking to anybody about it, nor is there any evidence whatsoever that he was the one molesting her. There is nothing in his past or in the years following the case to say JR is a child molester.

      The obvious scenario to me is that Burke was eating a snack because there is a bowl of pineapple out with his fingerprints on it) along with a glass. JBR heard a noise or saw the light on and wandered downstairs with her pillow.

      For me this is the most logical and obvious scenario to how JBR wandered downstairs. Now if you want to go with JDI, then you are ok with Burke being awake, John having little time to carry out his plan, but go for it.

      -J

      Delete
    2. If it was an intruder, this is my timeline of events:

      12/25/1996
      1) felt not well, so carried in from car after party to kitchen by dad, JR
      2) got set down in kitchen by dad and threw up from cocktail at party in bowl
      3) laid down at kitchen table on flashlight
      4) carried up to bedroom by dad and carried down to bathroom by mom
      5) told by mom to get ready for bed while mom gets ready for bed
      6) when mom is out of earshot, intruder sneaks up on JBR to choke her
      7) struggle ensues next
      8) struggle leaves bathroom and ends up in basement, so mom thinks that JBR put her to bed when she's not in bathroom
      9) intruder leaves JBR in basement
      10) intruder leaves pre-written RN on stairs
      11) intruder sneaks up to kitchen b/c family is asleep and puts pen and pad back
      12) intruder sneaks down to basement and out of front door
      13) JBR struggles a while in basement
      14) JBR dies early next day in basement

      Delete
    3. The "purpose of the note" will be argued over until kingdom come, Doc. How much better would it have been to place a frantic call to 911 and report your daughter just missing? No note. I think since John had no time to remove the body after Patsy called 911 (your theory) and he couldn't foresee that possibility,(and why couldn't he?) no note at all would have served him/them better. It worked out, but he couldn't know it would work out.

      Delete
    4. Not sure what your point is, Lou. Obviously whoever committed this crime felt that it was necessary to stage a kidnapping. That goes equally well if you want to pin it on Patsy or Burke rather than John. And if you prefer the intruder theory then you have to explain a lot more things, such as: why wait until in the house to write your note? why write it by hand? why leave the note for no reason after your kidnap attempt has failed? why write a note at all since a phone call would have done as well and would have been less incriminating?

      Delete
    5. Actually, if you are willing to agree with me that John did and Patsy was innocent, then at least one reason for the note should be obvious: to frighten Patsy into NOT calling the police when she discovered that JonBenet was missing.

      Delete
  7. 1) No evidence or testimony supports this statement;
    2) There was no vomit in the bowl of pineapple;
    3) No evidence or testimony supports this statement;
    4) JBR's bathroom was en suite - no need to be "carried down" anywhere;
    5) No evidence or testimony, etc;
    6) Why would an intruder be intent on killing JBR?
    7) Ditto;
    8) See #4. Patsy would pass by JBR's bed when checking bathroom;
    9) Why would a struggle between an adult and a child, who in your scenario had already been choked, take place over 3 floors? Why didn't she scream, or run UPstairs to her parents' room?
    10) Why a RN if intruder's intent, per your #6, was murder?
    11) If your intruder's intent was to kidnap, why not come with a prepared RN?
    12) Front door not in basement;
    13) No evidence, blah blah;
    15) Time of death has not been established.

    ReplyDelete
  8. This is the most absurd theory. I am sorry to be rude.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't be sorry. It belongs in the trash.

      Delete
  9. Has anyone seen the news reports that John Ramsey is considering exhumation of JonBenet's body? Thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I googled and read the In Touch and National Enquirer stories but it was mentioned that John had emailed Radar Online.

      From that article, with crime scene photos, they report that Jonbenet was hit in the head with *a baseball bat*.

      Anyway, here's the link

      https://radaronline.com/photos/jonbenet-ramsey-father-john-may-allow-investigators-to-exhume-beauty-queens-body/

      Delete
  10. Off topic....

    Anyone hear where they think the Golden State Killer may also have been the Zodiac Killer? And if so, he's been doing this since the 60's. They are undergoing further testing.

    Can you imagine? WOW!

    EG

    ReplyDelete
  11. Any thoughts on the Kyron Horman case?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's been a long time since I've looked for updates in that case. From what I recall the step mom also had a die hard friend that would not cooperate with police. From what little evidence, step mom looks good for it.

      Delete
  12. I’ve always wondered, if John did it, why wouldn’t he just leave a door unlocked and partially open to indicate where the “intruder” entered? Why go through all the trouble of staging then restaging the basement window?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As it seems to me, John must have been initially planning on the basement window as entry-exit point. Simply leaving a door open would not, in his mind, have been as convincing as the clear evidence of a break-in that he'd been preparing at the window. When Patsy's 911 call caught him off-guard he would have realized he had to un-stage his previous (incomplete) staging and the first thing he would have needed to do was head for the basement to clean up the broken glass. By the time he'd done that the police would have been on their way and it would have been too late for him to unlock one of the doors -- he would not have wanted Patsy or the arriving police to see him doing that. So when they arrived, he'd have had no choice but to inform them that all the doors were locked, since he knew they'd be checking them anyhow.

      Delete
    2. Hi Doc,

      Like your blog!

      Why would JR need to unstage if the police were called?


      If the glass was broken from inside, most of the glass, would land outside in the grate and possibly small fragments on the windowsill. If broken from the outside, almost all glass would land on the sill and basement floor.

      srsly, I'm wondering, because very little glass was found at the scene. A shard on the floor of the basement that White placed on the sill and nothing else. I think JR wanted to use the basement window as entry/exit pt for staging, as itt had previously been broken. He only latterly realized, hey if Intruder came in through the window,where's the rest of the glass?

      Delete
  13. Whether you believe Hercule that the window break was an old break, or Doc, that it was fresh, there's no doubt that John used it in a tactical way, by first pointing it out to Fleet and letting the police infer that an intruder could have come in that way. There was a lengthy discussion in here regarding why John would have re staged the break, pointing to the idea that it would have looked too obvious. In any event, there is no doubt that John was underestimated as an expert crime scene manipulator. I think the only one or the primary one who was on to him was Mike Kane but sadly, couldn't prove it.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Also Anonymous it was important in John's narrative, to let law enforcement know his family was protected to the best of his ability, by making sure all windows and doors were locked (although didn't see fit to set the alarm). Which door or window would he then have to have left unlocked, in order to accommodate an intruder and intruder theory. He'd then have to explain why, after all of his safety and precautions, he had failed to lock one door or window.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Most here will agree this case, if it ever resolves, will do so via DNA matching. The recent resolution of cold cases (of both Joseph James DeAngelo and William Earl Talbott) via genetic genealogy / GEDMatch provide further indication that modern methods get results.

    Offenders (and un/fortunately others) may not be aware that DNA info, whether publicly or privately shared, isnt necessarily safe from LE searches...and LE will obtain DNA data by whatever means necessary as we have seen.

    “In the double murder in Washington State (William Earl Talbott), the suspect’s DNA matched two relatives, both fairly close by the standards of this research: a second cousin and a half–first cousin once removed. The former relative was on the mother’s side, the latter the father’s side, so the suspect was not hard to identify. “

    I pray these new methodologies do provide final resolution in this case, to include all suspects regardless of any previous LE contact...

    CC2

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "Most here will agree...this case will be resolved via DNA matching". Not true.

      Delete
    2. Stan Garrett himself did not believe that DNA testing was the key to solving this case.

      Delete
  16. JBR case will not be solved by DNA.

    The Zodiac case could very well be (by the way, the Golden State Killer is NOT the Zodiac).

    ReplyDelete
  17. “When Patsy's 911 call caught him off-guard he would have realized he had to un-stage his previous (incomplete) staging and the first thing he would have needed to do was head for the basement to clean up the broken glass.”

    Would it not have taken a similar amount of time to further stage the break-in or perhaps even complete it? Intentionally disturbing debris inside the window well or the grime on a windowsill would have taken roughly the same amount of time to clean up glass. The suitcase would have needed to be moved in order to retrieve pieces of glass. After he was finished, why would John return the suitcase to its original position if he were trying to un-stage his crime?

    Hercule

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A last minute attempt to stage would have been extremely risky and also time-consuming -- time John would not have had at his disposal. There was no way to properly stage an entry through that window without covering his clothing with dust and debris, something that would have proven very difficult to explain. Leaving the suitcase in place may well have been an oversight, as he would have had a lot on his mind at that point. It looks as though he only had a minute or two to deal with the problem before the police arrived, so he had to prioritize. Cleaning up the broken glass was essential, so that's what he did in the brief time he had available.

      What do YOU think happened down there, Hercule? Assuming John's story is credible, how do you explain the suitcase? How do you explain Linda's insistence that she knew nothing about any broken glass?

      Delete
  18. I am sorry, Doc, but it makes no sense to move a suitcase out of the way to clean up glass THEN place it back where it was IF time was of the essence.

    If John had carefully broken the window that night I think it is logical to assume that he would have disturbed the windowsill in doing so. I do not see how he could have avoided disturbing at least a portion of the dust on the sill. At some point John would have needed to brace himself as he opened the window and punched a hole from the outside. Furthermore, he would have had no reason at that point in time to avoid touching the windowsill. Any type of disturbance on the sill would only lend credence to the intruder theory.

    I believe Patsy placed the suitcase under that window out of convenience because it had already been broken. There was no need to break another window and risk waking up anyone or explaining to the police why they didn’t hear it break. Implicating Linda in the clean up story would only make Linda look guiltier upon her denial of vacuuming up glass. Patsy had already suggested in the beginning that she was her first suspect because Linda’s handwriting was similar to the ransom note and that she had asked to borrow money. Is it then surprising that Patsy would want to make up a lie to further support Linda as a prime suspect?

    Hercule

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hercule tackles himself for a nine yard loss.

    Black Sheep

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unless you can explain how your paltry comment should be applied in this context, I suggest you keep it to yourself.

      Hercule

      Delete
  20. The broken window, and its clean-up, is the weakest part of Doc's theory, as he has acknowledged.

    John had 7 minutes between the time of Patsy's 911 call and the arrival of Officer French in which to run down to the basement, clean up, grind, and flush broken glass (in his underwear, presumably unnoticed by Patsy), then race up 3 floors to their bedroom, dress, come back down to the foyer, and present himself, perfectly composed, to French.

    I don't buy it and never have. Much simpler to believe, as I do, that the window had been previously broken (as Burke attested), never mended, and John intended to take advantage of that fact and stage it further later in the day, when Patsy and Burke were out of the house and he had the luxury of time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If the window had been previously broken, then why all John's angst over how police believed he'd found it? He wasn't the type to worry about implecations stemming from the incidental, which is consistent a narcissist's seemingly opposite ability to make mountains out of molehills or vice versa, depending on the situation.

      Burke is on record for having said he'd heard his parents arguing quite vociferously very early that morning. It stands to reason that before the phone was off the hook, John had time to trial-foist a line of reasoning upon Patsy that fell short of exposing his own duplicity, but that was summarily rejected in no kind fashion. There's a world of difference in what can be accomplished in seven minutes once the clock starts to tick, and KNOWING when the clock is ABOUT to start ticking.

      Delete
    2. We still can't edit post-submission?

      Third sentence, first paragraph:
      "with" a narcissists seemingly opposite ability....

      Third sentence, second paragraph:
      that John......had "had" time to.....

      Delete
    3. Your post remains nearly indecipherable.

      Delete
    4. Sorry if it strains you to argue instead of attack... surprising coming from a women who calls herself a lawyer.

      But you're not even an ambulance chaser with a rank, CC.
      And I will report back to Ms. D you're not even worth a second effort.



      You use your tt

      Delete
    5. Happily, I'm not only a highly qualified trial lawyer, but an intelligent and erudite woman. The minute you make any sense, we'll discuss.

      Give Ms D my best.

      Delete
    6. In the meantime, please explain to me what "an amnulance chaser with a rank" might be, and "trial- foist".

      Delete
    7. I suspect you're Blogger 101, Anon, another confused, ill-informed poster here, whose prose style, such as it is, closely resembles yours.

      S/he styles herself as a writer. I suggest you both do some JBR research, and make an attempt to do better.

      Delete
  21. If the window had been that important to John, he could have easily skipped meeting officer French at the door. I would not think it to look unusual for one parent to still be checking the house for clues. Any sort of dust or dirt clinging to John’s clothes could be explained since the basement was cluttered with dusty junk. John could have told French the window was broken and he took it upon himself to check the window well. No one would then be able to claim that an intruder did not use the window as an entry or exit.

    Hercule

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But that isn't what happened. John did, in fact, meet French at the door, perfectly dressed and utterly composed, which flies in the face of frantic unstaging in his underwear and bare feet in the basement.

      Delete
    2. Exactly. It does not work.

      Hercule

      Delete
    3. Which does not, in the least, make your feeble PDI theory more viable.

      Delete
    4. That is something new I hadn't considered Hercule - that Patsy brought Linda into the window story to implicate her even further as a viable suspect. You're right - first it was the story of being desperate enough to ask for a loan, the cleaning up of glass in the basement, and don't forget Patsy's mother saying Linda's comment about a pretty little girl who could be kidnapped. The Ramsey's needed suspects.

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

      Delete
    6. Not at all new, Inky Dink/Castor/lou Have I mentioned how much I hate liars and poseurs?

      Delete
    7. You've certainly mentioned how much you hate, period.

      Delete
    8. Just you, darlin'. Exclusively you. You lie and shape-change, publish blatant falsehoods, you dissemble, you contribute nothing. Caylee Anthony, again? Really?

      Delete
    9. Whaddayathink, Inky Dink? Time for another identity change? Another shape-shift? I'm all in favor...how 'bout Roseanne?

      Delete
    10. John knew the critical moments he needed to be physically present. What Patsy's first words to the arriving officer were, was one of those moments, but somehow I think you knew that...

      Delete
  22. Hercule, regarding my paltry comment, which I can't keep to myself since it is already out there:

    In response to DocG, your first stated thought was to assume that the suitcase was moved (a point DocG doesn't even make) to clean up broken glass and then moved back into place, stating:

    "I am sorry, Doc, but it makes no sense to move a suitcase out of the way to clean up glass THEN place it back where it was IF time was of the essence."

    Regardless, it's quite possible to move a suitcase a few feet over and back regardless of "time being of the essence."

    When one asserts an absurd conclusion to a hypothesis that no one else brought up, he is losing an argument with himself. You didn't even give yourself a sporting chance.

    Again, in a broader sense, DocG's description of the partial staging should be understood in the context of the ransom note and to whom it was written. That is, the incomplete window staging at the point of the 911 call was because only Patsy would have been the target of the window staging that morning had the plan worked.

    Black Sheep

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

    ReplyDelete
  24. J, 5/19, 20, 21 Oxygen aired The Case of Caylee Anthony with Laura Richards and Jim Clemente. Did you get a chance to see it? They brought in Dr. Henry Lee again, but I notice, at least throughout episode one, they aren't coming to any conclusions. They enlisted someone to make chloroform and decided it was not easy to make, so then they hypothesized that chloroform may have come from the glue in the trunk around the wheel well, since the floor mat was removed. I found that a little far fetched. My internet provider only allowed me one episode, so if you saw it what did you think of it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey Lou....I actually started watching the beginning, but was hard to watch when they were talking about their feelings of loss about Caylee.
      I think it was True Crime Garage that did a 4 part podcast on it and it was a really good listen. One of the guys theories was that Casey used chloroform to knock her out and then used duct tape to stop her from breathing. The chloroform was used so Casey wouldnt have to hear her struggle. The whole case is just awful...but zero doubt in my mind that Casey killed her intentionally.

      -J

      Delete
    2. But who fed her the pineapple, J-man?

      Delete
    3. HA!!! Rhetorical question?

      -J

      Delete
  25. Always a pleasure to discuss fruit with you, J. How ya' been?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL...things are good! It had been a while since I was on here, but then the Golden State Killer was caught (hopefully) and it got me back down the rabbit hole of this case. It still is the one case at the top of my list I hope gets resolved one day. I am hopeful that when John Ramsey is near death, he might come clean on what he knows. The problem is if Burke did it as I suspect, we might have to wait a long time.

      Hope all is well!

      Delete
    2. Gotcha'. JBR is at the top of this prosecutor's list as well.

      The GSK thing is astounding, on many levels.

      Delete
  26. “Regardless, it's quite possible to move a suitcase a few feet over and back regardless of ‘time being of the essence.’”

    Yes, and John would have had time to jab his thumb into his eye, but that is hardly the point. You missed it completely. If John is attempting to UNSTAGE why would he bother using a nanosecond to move the suitcase back to its original position? Oh that is right. You attempted to speak on Doc’s behalf, but failed to make any sense. Either you are claiming that Doc does not think that John would need to move a suitcase that is surrounded by glass or you are suggesting that Doc does not believe that John had already placed the suitcase underneath the broken window before the 911 call, yet for some asinine reason, put it there after he cleaned up broken glass? Please explain either of those illogic assertions.

    Hercule

    ReplyDelete
  27. Hercule, I don't think DocG cares enough to unpack your suitcase issues. Neither do I.

    If I'm speaking up on anyone's behalf, it is Patsy.

    Black Sheep

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your refusal to acknowledge the importance of the suitcase as it relates to Doc’s theory tells me everything I need to know about your lack of investigative skills. Next time, you might want to pick a fight with an amateur sleuth if winning a debate is what you regard as most important.

      Hercule

      Delete
    2. Hercule...I am with you on this. EVERY. DETAIL. MATTERS. The whole concept of the note allowing John to get BR and PR out of the house so he could stage makes zero sense. My very first thought would be WHO TOOK HER and then HOW DID THEY GET IN THE HOUSE???? If John's master plan was to stage the whole day then he would be reliant on Patsy leaving the house immediately. If she goes in the basement, she would notice things that he wouldn't be able to stage better later in the day. For me, the 911 call is NEVER made if that was his plan. John wakes up, makes sure he is the 1st to see the note and IF Patsy reacts different than expected, then she must be another victim. In the JDI scenario, he is killing JBR to shut her up from exposing his molestation of her.....surely a man who is willing to kill his own kid, would kill anybody from preventing his secret from getting out. If somebody comes back with "Well, Patsy was frantic and could have been away from John when she called" I am not buying it. There is just no way he ever lets her make that call. He would have 100% controlled the entire scene until he got them out of the house.

      -J

      Delete
    3. Anybody think that in a BDI scenario...Burke is chasing JBR and she is the one who pulls the suitcase over to prop herself up to escape from him?

      -J

      Delete
    4. An "amateur sleuth", Herc? I sense another of your delusions of grandeur coming on.

      Delete
  28. Hi J, no I don't think she would do that. I think she would just try to run back up the stairs.

    I know people that knew her said she was a "tomboy", unless she had seen someone else previously do that, I don't believe it would even be a consideration.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Lil, here is the problem with that window......the RN says "a group of individuals." If the windows purpose was used to show an entry point, it sure would seem odd to have that be the place where multiple people are crawling through. Also, why purposely risk the glass break at that time of night? The much easier and more logical scenario would be to go destroy a door knob from the outside of the house or simply leaving a door unlocked. That is of course if JDI.
    The window would literally be the worst possible way to exit that house. Not only would a kidnapper have to crawl through a tight space carrying a child, they would also have to lift up a a heavy grate to escape. This is why I believe the window break was separate from the cover up. JBR taking pineapple and either that being the reason or taking a toy from Burke which leads to her fleeing to the basement where she is cornered. The only way out or away from her brother would be to climb thru that window and get out. Even in the JDI scenario, JB could have tried to escape thru that window.
    My conclusion is that the window break had nothing to do with the cover up or to show a point of entry. It was an accident, just like JBR's murder.

    -J

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. J, I find the scenario that JBR tried to climb out the window to escape from Burke to be far-fetched. When fighting, my kids ran to me or my husband to tattle. Never in a million years would one of them try to crawl out of a window in the middle of the night. I don't know if you have children, but the behaviors you theorize about when kids are fighting are just not normal. You may say that Burke was not normal, but JBR seemed like a pretty normal little girl and didn't seem afraid of her brother to the degree that she would not tattle on him.

      Are you saying JBR would have broken the window, or do you think the window was already broken?

      If JDI, he could have broken the window in a panic after Patsy called the police, having thought he had more time to do the staging if Patsy had responded the way he had expected. Upon realizing that police would be searching his house, he had no choice but to clear the glass as best he could (during the time he was "missing" that morning), so that that basement did not become the primary focus of a search given that her body was hidden down there.

      Regarding the pineapple (again), there is just not enough information to conclude anything other than she ate it and no one claims to have given it to her. Any of the 3 in that house could have given it to her and are lying about it. Or, she could have found it on the table and grabbed a bite. All we know from the pineapple is that she was awake that evening, that she was downstairs for some reason.

      As for JDI, the fact that he was trying to bolt for Atlanta just hours after his little girl was found dead is all I need to know. That, and the fact that he behaves like a narcissist is a huge red flag.
      Knowing what I know about incest, naive little girls trust the perp. No one suspects men like that of anything and are shocked when the perp is uncovered, even if it is years later.

      I do not know why you find it hard to accept that John could not have been committing incest. People that take advantage of young family members prey on those that will trust them and who don't even realize until they are older that the behavior is wrong or bad.

      Personally, I think Patsy was very suspicious that something was going on, and it may have explained her bad mood in the month prior. After JBR was found dead, I think she went into denial or was afraid that John would do something horrible to her, possibly even frame her. -LE

      Delete
    2. I don't find it hard to believe that John could have been molesting her, but it would be a completely isolated incident in John's life. There isn't a history of bad behavior by him and for 20+ years now, people have been trying to dig up any dirt they can on him. The reason I don't think it was John is because the motive makes no sense at all. If he murdered her, then there had to be some level of premeditation. If the plan was to stage a kidnapping, then why in the world wouldn't you have a better entry point? Even if he was going to spend the whole next day to stage a crime, the entry point MUST be something he would have to stage first to fool Patsy.

      Regarding JB climbing out the window....I think the one person in this whole case we know NOTHING about is Burke. Sure he was 10, but for all we know, we could have been terrorizing JB her whole life. Will I argue it's a fact she broke the window? No, of course not. But, I will argue that it's plausible to me that she tried to get away from him with any means necessary.

      -J

      Delete
    3. So, my point about incest is: there doesn't have to be a prior history or a repeat incident, and even if there was, it could easily go uncovered because girls don't report it. My grandfather never touched his daughter. He had 9 granddaughters and molested 2 of them. He was in his 70's when he did this. They never told until after he died. Looking back, the family realizes he had opportunity with those 2 girls more so than the others, but he could also have messed with more than those 2 - no one knows why just them. Until they were older, they didn't realize what he had done and then it was too late. History means NOTHING when it comes to the sneaky ways of incest.

      My son was a pretty good little kid, but he sure knew how to terrorize his sister when he wanted to. Of course, we always caught him and punished him. How would a well supervised kid like Burke get away with terrorizing JBR? Its not like they were latchkey kids.

      The people I know in Atlanta who knew the Ramsey's would say that JBR was good for tattling on her brother when he bothered her.

      Yes, I think John premeditated, and he was arrogant enough to think his less than perfect plan would work. He was used to getting away with pulling the wool over the eyes of his first wife, that's for sure.

      Delete
    4. Lady E: As usual, I agree comoletely. Thanks for your personal insights vis-a-vis incest. I'm sure it's painful, and difficult to share.

      Come home soon. The Gulf Coast is an excellent choice...though I personally prefer Sarasota to Naples.

      Rock on; you're a valuable contributor.

      Delete
    5. Hi CC, thanks! Yes, my 2 cousins were brave young ladies to finally share their experience. I admire them for being open about it now for the sake of others' awareness. One of them is involved with the cause and has not met any victims so far whose predator had a prior history or repeated the crime with anyone else who could or would share their "secret."

      I have never been to Sarasota if you can believe it! I know that Naples is very hot this time of year. I'd love to check out Sarasota soon; maybe this summer. -LE

      Delete
    6. Florida is hot, as you know - any time, anywhere, May-November. We have 6 blissful months, and then a season in hell. It is what it is.

      My favourite part of Sarasota is The Ringling. I go twice a year for the kids' art show, and have bought a bunch. The Circus Museum is also way cool. The place has a nice artsy vibe I enjoy, as opposed to Naples' nouveau riche, but you be the judge.

      Delete
    7. I will definitely want to check out Sarasota - I like the artsy vibe sort of town. Naples was too quiet and seems to be too ritzy for my taste. Great idea to check out The Ringling! I'm aiming for a roadtrip this year, before November. Thanks for the suggestion, CC! -LE

      Delete
  30. Anyone else see this?
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5797009/High-profile-forensic-psychiatrist-aided-JonBenet-Ramsey-investigation-shot-dead.html
    Minnesota Linda

    ReplyDelete
  31. Yes, what a shock, I saw it posted on Topix.

    Another link

    https://www.nbcnews.com/news/crime-courts/high-profile-forensic-psychiatrist-shot-dead-outside-phoenix-office-n879291

    ReplyDelete
  32. More victims in Arizona now, another male psychologist and two female paralegals. Killed on Friday and Saturday.

    Scary, hope those in that area take precautions and tighten security.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. News link

      http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/06/03/arizona-slaying-may-be-4th-in-string-including-jonbenet-ramsey-case-doc-police-say.amp.html

      Delete
    2. Did you see this? http://www.tmz.com/2018/06/04/jonbenet-ramsey-psychiatrist-killer-suicide-cops/

      Delete
  33. A blind hollywood gossip site which has been consistently correct on even the most outlandish stories over the past 5 years (since I've started following) is claiming Burke arranged the murder due to incriminating information on him regarding his involvement in JBR's murder, due to be shared in the near future.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's possible to do or cause crazy things if you're really upset and BR would be really upset at this news.

      Delete
  34. Ballistic tests have shown that the guy who killed Steven Pitt also shot 4-6 other people, and himself, with the same gun, because of his divorce proceedings. It has nothing whatsoever to do with Burke Ramsey.

    Get your facts straight.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Doc

    Interesting article about forensic knot experts who have solved murders after studying crime scene knots.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.atlasobscura.com/articles/knot-forensics.amp

    There’s a lot you can figure out about perpetrators after studying their knots. Perhaps we can get one of these guys to study the JBR knot photos.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Hello, it’s been a while since I’ve written but I keep up with the blog from time to time. I do appreciate Doc and everyone’s point of view even though it’s different from mine. In fact, something Mrs D had said back in the day helped refine my theory so here goes. My bdi theory is different than anyone else’s due to some advanced medical training i took recently so pls read until the part about why I think JBRs body was in shock and how the affects of shock can make untrained medical professionals unable to find a pulse and rendering the body extremely cold. Thus leading to why JR believe his daughter was already dead by the time BR had finished (by mistake) the deed. Read on pls:

    - JBR was known to sometimes sleep in her brothers second bed, esp after a bed wetting incident.
    - That night we know that BR and JR stayed in the kitchen late to finish putting together a toy. We know BR later admitted to having snuck down afterwards by himself.
    - JBR wakes, can’t remember if evidence of bedwetting, and takes her pillow to her brothers room.
    -BR is not there, he’s gone downstairs.
    -She goes to look for him downstairs, finds him eating a snack and putting together his toy. That is why the pillow ended up in the kitchen.
    - I believe the both of them wanted to check out the Xmas presents in the basement. To me this is a key detail people forget.
    - they go downstairs, with a flashlight, and start ripping back some of the wrapping paper to see what presents are underneath. PR story is not believable that she did bc she forgot what was inside. Any human who meticulously wraps a present doesn’t tear their work - they try to lift the tape or a flap in a careful manner and then reseal. The ripping is something a kid would do.
    - An argument ensues btwn JBR and BR - I believe over the presents. BR hits her over the head w the flashlight. He had hit her before w a golf club so it’s not uncharted territory.
    - JBR goes down and BR doesn’t quite understand what happened or what he did and waits in hopes she’s playing or she’ll pop up.
    - when she doesn’t, he prods her w a train track piece (marks on body). Only kids use other items to poke and pride at things they are scare at. An adult would have shaken her, checked her pulse, tapped her shoulder etc. A sacred kid who thinks he just hurt someone jabs that person like they would a worm on a playground - just proding, are u ok?
    - when no answer, he panics and gets dad. JR was the man in the house and PR had been very sick - it makes sense that in a crisis BR goes to JR first.
    - BR explains what he did. Now here is where the key lies.

    CONTINUED by E below (too many characters)

    ReplyDelete
  37. - When a person has had severe trauma, ie bullet wounds, head injury, etc, the body immediately goes into shock. What I learned at training is that a) people in shock sometimes have a very faint pulse and sometimes it’s undectable. That is why one of the steps in trauma care is to later check for the pulse from the carotid artery in the neck. Most people obv don’t know this, I mainly always check people’s wrists. From there, you have to physically watch a persons chest raise from the head level bc sometimes you will not feel breath/oxygen. I doubt JR did this either. Lastly, the key signs of shock is extreme cold of the body as the blood rushes to the heart and the wound/trauma area. That is why you see people wrapped in blankets when they have severe injuries. My bet is that JR felt for a pulse, didn’t find one, checked for breathing, didn’t feel anything, and additionally, realized how dead cold her body was (esp since likely that shock set in for a while while BR was proding or waiting to see if she woke). Any normal human being could easily assume she was dead. My instructor, a 25 y emergency medic in the army, was very adamant to us that symptoms of shock can mistakenly make people think the person is no longer alive hence some of the double checks (neck pulse, chest moving).
    - So. JR believes JBR to have died from the head blow. That solves the question of why he wouldn’t immed call 911 or try to save her. He believed her already gone.
    - JR sends him upstairs fill him all will be good. JR just believes he lost his daughter and he had previously lost another child to a car accident. All he has left is his other son from the other marriage and BR. He obv does not want to lose his son to prison when he’s just lost his daughter.
    - many will say that BR wouldn’t have been tried bc of his age - this was before the age of google, how was JR to know the laws and rules of minors and crimes and what would happen?
    - so he hatched a plan to cover up so that BR is not suspected and he can live a normal life.
    - how do u deflect blame? If you just have a head injury, police could suspect any one of the family members or an accident. However, so something very gruesome and NO one suspects a family member. In fact, Mrs D uses that argument v effectively - no parent would ever willingly sadomize their child w a pain brush handle and gatrotte then. Well yeah. That’s the point. JR wanted to ensure he did something so gruesome there was NO way anyone could suspect family.
    - he does what he does and hides the body in a corner of the basement. Perhaps bc he’s worried PR may not go along w the plan to dump JBR body in the woods (she was religious after all and JBR was her prize daughter, she may object to leaving her corpse in the woods for a few days until police found her), JR writes the ransom note to a) ensure that more deflection away from the family b) like Doc says, give pretext for moving a body out of the house in the large attaché case and c) to keep PR thinking it’s a kidnapping until he can move the body and police find it so PR can’t object.
    - in the am he stepped away to shower thinking PR would read the note and be too scared to call police since it specifically threatens not to or JBR would be killed. He may not have expected PR to get up that early and likely preferred for her to read the note with him so he could sway her not to call.
    - we know PR screwed up his plan by calling. So I think at that point he is forced to read her into the plan. He later rearranges the location of the body to ensure it is found and also opens the window bc he wasn’t planning on an intruder kidnapping but thinks on his feet last minute.
    - PR ultimately must have understood the sacrifice JR made to save BR. And BR must now realize he killed his sister, but likely was told otherwise when he was young.

    I don’t see any missing ends to my part. Welcome Comments! E

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your theory is a variation on a recurring theme, and while I applaud your EMT training, I believe it may have misled you. In your zeal, you overlook one key fact, and gloss over another.

      1) It does not explain the prior sexual abuse; and

      2) It's improbable unto impossible that John could have "read" Patsy into his plan and elicited her understanding, compassion (for him!), cooperation, and relative composure in the 7 minutes between her phone call and the arrival of Officer French.

      And btw, there is contradictory evidence to your reference to your "removing the body in a large attache". JBR weighed 45 lbs, stood 45" tall. Tests have shown she could not possibly have fit into the Samsonite suitcase, much less any kind of attache.



      Delete
    2. There is no need to explain prior sexual abuse, since there is no strong evidence such abuse occurred. If there was, the Ramseys would have been brought to trial to face charges of such abuse. They weren't. Ergo the evidence was at best ambiguous. This self evident logic seems to escape you every single time which is why you're still here posting about an old irrelevant unsolvable cold case.

      Delete
    3. Matt, there is evidence of abuse, but no clear way to link it to John or anyone else. You have to have someone to charge. Six medical experts saw signs of abuse, and Linda Arndt, who was at the autopsy, saw it with her own eyes. Alex Hunter felt his hands were tied since he could not link the prior abuse to a specific person or persons. And he could not make a case that both parents abused her sexually or even prove that Patsy knew about it.

      This is why Doc has opined that Alex could have charged John as the only adult male in the house, and see what John would say under oath. Of course, he could deny everything, but he would have to answer cross-examination questions that might trip him up.

      This issue is about building a case and bringing it forward. You cannot conclude that there was no sexual abuse just because they cannot prove who did it or prove when it happened. The physical evidence does not tell us WHO abused her. It makes logical sense that it was likely a male, and likely someone who not only had easy access to JBR, but could manipulate her as a young child to stay silent about it, at least for a time. We're speculating that JBR was about to start "telling on" him.

      BTW, E has some other facts wrong in her theory about Burke. The incident with the golf club was reported as him swinging it with JBR behind him, and he accidently whacked her in the cheek. That is different than attacking her on purpose with a club.
      Also, JBR was not sodomized. Finally, John had more than just another son surviving the deaths of 2 siblings. There was the older half-sister, Melinda.
      I can't take such theories about Burke seriously when basic facts are mis-stated.
      -LE

      Delete
    4. Who else could abuse her but her parents? It's an open and shut case. They didn't have the evidence, or the parents would have been charged. Not to mention the prior abuse + murder is a slam dunk motive + means + opportunity = conviction wham bam thank you mam. We have to believe in a conspiracy to believe the evidence of prior abuse was anything but ambiguous.

      This case is ice cold, and always was. It's 2018 let's agree to move on.

      Delete
    5. In the world of this internet blog there's a chronically sexually abused dead kid lying bound in her parents house and a prosecutor going "gee who could've done it, no case here."

      In reality there's a mysterious murder, some ambiguous but easily defense expert refuted unclear signs of abuse, thus no motive, plus no definitive murder weapon or forensics, and, wait for it...no case.

      Delete
    6. Oh my.
      You are entitled to an opinion, even if it is based on a lack of knowledge about the experts and their testimony regarding JonBenéts genital injuries. I know way-y-y too much about the documentation of her sexual abuse to really pay you much mind. But perhaps the suggestion to move on is a good one for you to follow?
      -T

      Delete
    7. Matt's logic goes something like this: A body is found beaten in an alley. There are no eye witnesses or suspects. Therefore there have been no arrests. Because there have been no arrests, there must not be any proof he was beaten and thus there really was no need to seek justice - the victim's loved ones need to move on. LOL.

      Delete
  38. Former Police Chief Mark Beckner stated unequivocally there was prior sexual abuse. Kolar and Thomas both referred to it in their books, and cited their medical sources.

    I'm in good company; you're in denial because prior sexual abuse doesn't fit your preconceived theory.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Here's a thought, Matt: It's 2018, none of us is solely preoccupied with this cold case, but many maintain an interest - have a look at JBR on reddit, or Webbsleuths.

    Perhaps it's you should move on.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Meanwhile for those who follow the Zodiac case....

    From a law enforcement source:

    A full DNA profile can now be obtained from a small hair such as found on the back of the Zodiac stamp from 2002. The amazing breakthrough came from anthropology research.

    Exciting times....

    ReplyDelete
  41. Respectfully to the longtime researchers here, as I've only recently looked deeper into this case. Lots has come out since the investigation began. With twenty years plus of history my thoughts have likely, pardon the grammar, been thunk up before.

    A couple things came to mind as I was reading up on it. First was the pineapple found in her digestive system. Do you think possibly it may have been fed to her in an attempt to revive her? I once, illogically, tried to revive a poor dead puppy the mother squished by offering it food and trying to give it water. I know, dumb, but itwas almost instinct as a last ditch effort.

    Another thought as related to my experiences. I once had a house with a very similar basement window. A determined adult could probably get through it in an emergency, but the use of the window as an entrance or exit enthralled not only my kids but the neighbor kids as well. They liked coming and going using non-traditional points of entry. There was something exciting about a "secret" entrance.

    In our neighborhood a whole subculture existed amongst the younger set, often unbeknownst to the elders. I don't find it hard at all to believe it's possible there could have been more to what was going on in the Ramsey basement. Someone was probablymessing with that poor little girl. That much is pretty much established.

    Perhaps there was a curiosity game involved, playing doctor, and things went too far, she threatened to tell, and the rest is history. The DNA may eventually be matched to the culprit.

    Patsy and John, blinded by their emotions, were never privy to what really happened, and thus believed what was put forth, covering up what they thought Burke accidentally did. Burke in fact may have left when the game got personal, grossed out, didn't want to play the game, and gone to play with his own toys awhile. When he returned JBR had been killed so he got scared and went and hid in his bed. Don't forget the overheard "What did you find?" At the end of the 911 call. Burke might've heard the scream, known something bad happened, and hid, terrified.

    Maybe the importance of clues inside the suitcase, perhaos forgotten by the older sibling, where he'd hidden his once-titillating literature from prying eyes in an old suitcase, along with his blanket, as he was bored with the mildly suggestive book.The younger generation of John's family had since rediscovered the book, a gold mine for curious kids.

    The book's proximity to the scene suggests to me hormone driven curiosity leading to first-hand investigation with the handy female, jbr. I'd think this was an somewhat inexperienced immature person, probably known to the kids.

    I'm not linking these thoughts into a tight theory but just observed these things. The pineapple is probably just a clue that the party hadn't ended when the parents thought the kids were tucked in. Kids are riding high on Christmas with all the toys and vacations and all. They try things they might not otherwise, hunting for excitement.

    ReplyDelete
  42. I would suggest that you read Doc's book, mentioned at the top of this blog, called Ruled IN: Solving the Jonbenet Ramsey Case.

    ReplyDelete
  43. Thinking that the body was to be disposed of may very well have been all of the confusion and possibly lead to an argument between JR and PR that morning. Any sexual abuse, can just as easily be pointed to BR as the guilty party. Trying to portray BR as a "computer nerd" is nothing more than trying to manipulate the facts. BR was far from a normal child. Stats of someome being a pedophile and only committing sexual acts as a "one time occurence or with only person" are extremely low while statistics of sexual acts between young siblings are extremely high. Even more dangerous is attempting to lock in any theory in this case and claim it as being simple and concrete. Especially when there are a great many other scenarios that make just as much sense. JR was fully investigated in the beginning of this case until long after he was cleared of the handwriting for the exact same claim. Nothing was found , not a single shred of evidence. Nothing from his other children , nothing from neighbors or friends and nothing from LE. While evidence of PR routinely lying and changing her stories was found routinely. Anyone who thinks it is even possible that no one else knows what happened in that house or even has a clue to what happened is a gullible dunce.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No one is saying JR was a pedophile. Read Ken Lanning’s description of regressed situational molesters.

      Even if one wishes to point to BR for the abuse, a conclusion can't be justified by quoting high sibling abuse statistics. These stats are skewed because juveniles, meaning those in the age bracket 13-18, are much more prevalently represented. Abuse among young children BR’s age or younger is very rarely reported to authorities since parents simply try to handle it on their own. -T

      Delete
  44. Also I would like to clear up the nonsense I have read on this blog about the 911 call.
    "When the DA had to give Burke a copy of the 911 tape before his grand jury testimony, that was further proof he was on it, or why would the DA have to give it to his lawyer? At that time, the Colorado law was that grand jury witnesses had a right to have copies of any prior statements they made in evidence."
    Feel free to come up another fantasy like opinion as you JDI do with every other fact regarding this case that does not point to JDI.
     Just because you claim you cant hear it or have not heard the correct version SURE THE HELL DOES NOT MEAN IT IS NOT EVIDENCE. Just because it does not jive with your theory does not mean it is not evidence either.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Anon - June 11th @5:55

    That's what I've always thought myself, Anon. Someone else was there in that basement a bit older than the others, perhaps.
    Not sure of the specifics, but the R's may have known or assumed that BR was partly responsible somehow and therefore proceeded with the RN as a detour/cover up.

    Hope everyone is doing well. It's been awhile since I've been on. Life is crazy here in the big apple and the hits just keep on comin'. One good thing, am glad the weather is warmer.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why would the Ramsey's cover up for someone else? Someone who, if as you say influenced Burke, they would throw that person under the bus and blame said person for involving Burke. And if they did want to cover up for the nasty little gang, why did they fake a kidnapping with a body in the house?

      Delete
  46. Anon - 6/12 @ 5:30

    To protect BR, if he was in any way involved. I agree with Anon 5:55. Somehow it all ties in; the suitcase, the book, the blanket, and on and on. We don't know how because we weren't there and we don't know what happened.

    I do understand how some conclude that JR is the murderer, as he was the only adult male in the house. I also understand how other's conclude that PR was responsible, her being ill, at the end of her rope, and on and on.

    However, I don't believe either parent would do that to their baby girl. Not those two parents, anyway. She was the sunshine of their lives--PR's pride and joy, JR's little princess, I am sure. I can't draw that line from heinous, sexually abusive murdering parents to who they were and how they lived their lives.

    I am not saying its not possible, but for me, it's not probable. I'd need to see some concrete proof in order to believe that.

    EG


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IMO, Patsy didn't do anything to her baby girl. She was the one calling the doctor and showing concern for her health. JR, on the other hand, if he was committing incest, had his own life/livelihood/reputation on the line. He hit her from behind, thinking he had done her in. The rest was done after he thought she was dead and he was about to get caught because Patsy foiled his plan. Its really simple if you can accept that people will do anything to keep from going to jail for life. Incest is done in a way that the child doesn't know that what is being done to them is "heinous" and the perp convinces himself that he's doing it out of "love."

      Not too many people on this blog think both Patsy and John were heinously abusing their child. Most think if Patsy did it, she was out of her mind with stress. Those who think Burke did it have come up with various motives that make no sense when taking the situation in whole. That leaves John, the lip-licking liar who wanted to hop a plane before his little princess even got cold in the morgue. The guy who liked his hookups to dress in pageant dresses. The guy who threw his best friends under the bus. The guy who isn't really looking for the killer and never set up a foundation for her. The one who wanted to go on CNN rather than cooperate with the police. Yeah, I find it real easy to believe he's not the nice, Christian man he wants you to think he is.

      Delete
  47. I am not going to say anything good or try and say that JR is a good man. I dont know him personally and neither does anyone else here. When you have studied every nook and cranny there is available about this case for 20 plus years it becomes very obvious that PR was at the least involved in covering this up after the murder. Lets be realistic on here for a change.

    That being said, it has been mentioned by many JDI on this site that incest and sexual abuse get covered up by people and family members often.
    I concur and agree 100%.
    What I have never heard of and no one will ever get me to believe is that not only was the abuse covered up but then the cold blooded murder of a young child to cover up the abuse and then the wife continues to sleep next to a cold blooded murderer for many years after. Surely, PR would have to be thinking that she would be killed next, for knowing what she knew and possibly even their other child. There is NO WAY POSSIBLE.
    This is why only JDI will argue to infinite and ridiculously illogical ends to keep PR out of it completely because then their whole theory is down the tubes.
    JR was FULLY investigated on these exact claims right off the get go because the police were thinking just like the JDI on here and they found those thoughts to be wrong and came back with not a dam thing.
    What did happen was evidence started pointing at PR. The JDI will try and tell you it means nothing that PR's fibers were on the duct tape and everywhere else but most importantly in the garotte. Now it could be coincidence and all be transfer fibers but that is NOT the MOST LIKELY scenario. The most likely and probable scenario is that PR was in contact with JBR's body. End of story.

    ReplyDelete
  48. First of all, the JDI theorists do not propose that Patsy knew. You’re arguing with yourself on that one. There is no evidence that she knew – her comments about the broken window have pros and cons for both Patsy’s innocence and guilt. Likewise there is little evidence that she didn't know - other than the fact that she called 911. That fact, along with the fact that she did not leave John, did not express any suspicions of him, and her overall behavior of expressing profound grief, does play into the theory espoused on this blog.
    Did she later suspect something? Possibly - we don't know what she discussed with Linda Arndt on her deathbed. As a realistic person myself, I try to think about what I would do if I was dying and at the same time dealing with any late-coming suspicions. There would be a lot to weigh, and none of the outcomes, should I choose to now accuse my husband, would be good for me or my only living child. Besides, how do you wage such a war when you’re dying and the husband is paying your medical bills? If you’ve ever been seriously ill, you’ll know that you live hour to hour in your suffering.
    Say what you believe about the fibers. I just vacuumed my husband's home office and found lint and fibers on his chair that belong to me. I have never sat in that chair and I don't go in his office (I have my own office). He cleans it, but today I decided to do so because he's not feeling well. How did all those fibers of mine (hair, lint from a clothing item of mine) get on his chair? Well, from him transferring them there. You will never be able to prove that fibers from within a house found at a crime scene inside that house got there WHEN THE CRIME WAS COMMITTED. And, you can't prove a negative, meaning you can't prove Patsy was NOT there WHEN THE CRIME WAS COMMITTED. You simply can't conclude much of anything about those fibers. But I would ask you this - how do you think John's shirt fiber got inside JBR's panties? This was a new pair put on her - not the ones she was wearing while alive and thus could have been transferred there by herself. Oh wait, maybe Patsy transferred John’s shirt fiber. Just one – though hers were everywhere else except the panties. Luck, I guess.
    Finally, many people will disagree with you that John was fully investigated. For goodness sake, did you not read anything here? The police FAILED. The prosecutor FAILED. Justice for JBR was a FAIL. The case would be closed IF it had been brought to a just conclusion. It has not – which is why it is classified as a cold case but an open case.
    John’s handwriting analysis was a farce. Even if there was a qualified and reliable analysis, hardly any samples were taken from John. Doc’s own analysis ought to open your eyes. If it does not, then you might want to get an eye exam, and I don’t mean that to be sarcastic at all.
    The fact is, John hired high powered lawyers. John refused to sit down with the police. John threw his friends under the bus in the WORST way – implying they were killers. If you did not kill your own child, would you really start blaming your friends and neighbors? John tried to run out of town. John didn’t display grief. John got his stories mixed up. John lied to his first wife. John’s handwriting his eerily similar to the RN. John disappeared for a while on the day JBR was found. John was gone a while on Christmas day. He is a despised person in Atlanta. Patsy was loved by all who came in contact with her. I lived near them and I do know this.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Does anyone know if the sweater JBR was supposed to wear to the Fleet dinner which was a look-alike to Patsy's sweater was made of the same yarns? It'd explain the fibers on HBR if She had been made to put on the rejected seater, then changed to the star top and bolero. Just a thought...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know, but its a good question. The fibers on JBR could have come from her own sweater, not Patsy's. Back in the 90's when mother-daughter outfits were "in", they were sold in shops and came from the same manufacturer/designer/supplier. Its plausible that JBR's matching sweater could have been out of the same material. -LE

      Delete
  50. Just wondering about something.

    For some time I believed that JR was beginning to have job problems based on what he claimed to say to Patsy in DOI. In their book there was a passage regarding JR’s reevaluation of his work. Perhaps this alleged conversation with Patsy had been planned to give her the idea that he was ready to fully embrace his role as a family man. The passage from DOI occurs some time around/before the big AG hoopla of the billion dollar sales achievement. He wrote that he spoke with Patsy about taking a year off, to spend time with the family, travel, ostensibly to smell the roses. He claimed it was his reaction to her serious illness which had compelled him to reassess work and life.

    When I read this I considered perhaps JR knew that Access Graphics might be offered in a complex trade with GE and that he might not be retained as CEO. But if the company had attained such fiscal glory, why wouldn’t he be retained?

    It’s doubtful, imo, JR was so valuable to LM that they would have given him a year off. Too, given the Paughs’ (Patsy and her family) appreciation of JR’s association with a major corporation and the money he was making, it’s also doubtful that Patsy would have embraced this idea.

    Then the other events in December came into focus – Patsy’s emergency calls to the doctor and the school’s conversation with JR regarding JB’s toileting issues. (Of course no one can say who was abusing JB with any certainty, but it’s acknowledged by professionals that abuse frequently affects a child’s autonomic nervous system disrupting the body’s unconscious actions, such as the regulation of urinary or bowel control.) A post written by LE some months ago still resonates with me. She wrote: “I believe JR had been worried for some time about what he had gotten himself into.” This is what I believe too.

    Because of JR’s ability to plan and calculate, I’ve wondered whether the ‘year off’ idea he floated could have been an early warning flag, that he wanted to take everyone away before an examination of his daughter could occur. -T

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wasn't JR also considering buying back AG in 1996, T? I haven't read DOI, as I refuse to contribute to the Ramseys' enrichment, but I've read that elsewhere.

      Was he entertaining two diametrically opposed ideas in the same time period, or just telling Patsy what she may have wanted to hear?

      Delete
    2. Yes, JR stated in their book that he wanted to do a management buyout or an IPO and then sell the company to GE or someone else. Timing is always a little ‘iffy’ in considering when JR was working on this idea. But it was mentioned in DOI after JR received a phone call from his boss in Sept. ’97. JR was told that LM’s deal with GE was going through. However, to note, as indicated by the idea of a management buyout, JR did not own AG at that point in time. He was an officer of the company and sat on the LM executive board. This idea of a management buyout and IPO was antithetical to LM’s plans, and JR would have known that since he did sit on their board. I vote that he was providing a story to Patsy. -T

      Delete
  51. O/T - for Zed or any of the Aussie friends, I have to know your opinion on musk sticks. I have never heard of them until today. Reading a review on a fragrance and the poster compared it to 'Pink musk sticks' and I had to Google it. tia

    ReplyDelete
  52. Posing a question for all amateur sleuths:

    Why did John Ramsey introduce a discussion of a little chair that was in the basement, such chair being just under doorknob height and from all indications quite sturdy, in his interviews with the district attorney investigators and Lou Smit on June 23-24, 1998?

    From Foreign Faction: "I found it intriguing that John Ramsey did not introduce the chair into the intruder equation until June 1998, nearly eighteen months after the murder of his daughter."

    Kolar, A. James. Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet? (p. 405). Ventus Publishing, llc. Kindle Edition.

    Ramsey ascribed to an intruder a purpose for the chair, which was to block the entrance to the train room. Obviously it didn't really block the entrance because Ramsey got into the train room by moving the chair aside, according to him.

    Continuing from Faction: "Lou Smit questioned John in depth about the blockage of the Train Room door during the interviews conducted in June 1998, and it appeared to be a significant element that supported his intruder theory. But as noted above, the blockage of the doorway was never mentioned in John’s April 1997 interview and after its brief appearance in 1998, it was suddenly excised from any further discussion about his theory of the intruder’s actions in his home. The chair that played such a significant role in establishing the existence of an intruder is never again mentioned following Lou Smit’s 1998 exploration of the matter.

    Kolar, A. James. Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet? (p. 404). Ventus Publishing, llc. Kindle Edition.

    Was it just random misdirection by Ramsey, or was there a more revealing purpose for Ramsey's introducing the chair and then moving on from it?

    Kolar pieces the timeline about the closing and latching of the window that morning by John together with Fleet White's and law enforcement's early searches of the basement to skeptically deduce that there would have been intruders in the basement while police were there that morning, who would have had to escape from the basement after police had arrived.

    His skepticism notwithstanding, Kolar (and Smit) didn't seem to want to pursue a theory about a sturdy chair being a better prop than a wobbly suitcase under the train room window.

    I think the introduction of the chair by Ramsey as a block of the door was an alibi for the chair's not being under the broken window instead of the ridiculous suitcase staging under the window.

    John's statement that the suitcase "shouldn't have been there" was absolutely true. It probably should have been upstairs in the older son's bedroom from whence it had likely been removed in the middle of the night.

    Maddeningly, no one ever asked Ramsey: "Then where was it supposed to have been?" Was it ok that it was in the basement but just not under the window?

    Where did that suitcase reside on the evening of December 25th when the Ramseys came home from the Christmas party? If not in the basement, then why was it brought into the basement at all?

    An intruder would not lug a big suitcase through the house down two flights of stairs to exit a basement window--and similarly, if no intruder existed, why would Ramsey use that suitcase to stage an exit from the window--when a useful chair was sitting only a few feet away.

    If the suitcase was the "adequate sized attache" mentioned in the ransom note and it had been moved in the night from its normal place upstairs to anyplace else below, then it had to be put somewhere at the last minute following the 911 call to indicate a purpose for it other than its being linked to the ransom note.

    Was the chair discussion, casually brought up and dropped by Ramsey, simply a nugget of advance cover introduced by Ramsey (albeit belatedly after thinking it through) in case investigators were putting two and two together when discovering, if they ever did discover, where that suitcase began the night?

    Black Sheep

    ReplyDelete
  53. I think the chair likely was always in the basement, but a housekeeper or a regular visitor to the basement might know. (Since I don't count much of what family has said about their own property).

    The chair could also be used by a short person to stand on to reach the latch on the "wine closet" door as well.

    ReplyDelete
  54. "Why did John Ramsey introduce a discussion of a little chair that was in the basement, such chair being just under doorknob height and from all indications quite sturdy, in his interviews with the district attorney investigators and Lou Smit on June 23-24, 1998? Was it just random misdirection by Ramsey, or was there a more revealing purpose for Ramsey's introducing the chair and then moving on from it? Was it ok that it was in the basement but just not under the window? Where did that suitcase reside on the evening of December 25th when the Ramseys came home from the Christmas party? If not in the basement, then why was it brought into the basement at all? Was the chair discussion, casually brought up and dropped by Ramsey, simply a nugget of advance cover introduced by Ramsey (albeit belatedly after thinking it through) in case investigators were putting two and two together when discovering, if they ever did discover, where that suitcase began the night?" He was just as curious about it as they had been before. He didn't know if it was important or not. Yes, it was not moved in there on purpose. It was close enough to be knocked down the stairs. One of them pushed it down there. I think that it was both an idea and a cover.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I guess I'm asking anyone who actually knows, based on the records of the case and the questioning of all the various persons, where that suitcase was before it got into the basement on the morning of the 26th.

    I've read that the suitcase belonged to John Andrew and had some of his belongings in it, but was there ever any discussion about what room in the house it should have been in on the morning of December 26th? Maybe it was normally stored in the basement, but if it started the night in his bedroom, then I think it is the attache mentioned in the ransom note, as there is simply not a logical reason for it to have been taken downstairs for any purpose other than to hide the victim's body in it.

    And please, I know Ramsey wouldn't have carried the suitcase into the bank. I know that the garage was connected to the home. I know that people have said that the body would not have fit into the suitcase (photos show it to be pretty damn big).

    When Ramsey wrote the note, he established the need for two things to carry a meager $118,000 in small bills: One an "adequate sized attache" and two, a "paper bag" whose size didn't matter. Seriously?

    Anyway, the suitcase easily could have been thought by Ramsey at the time of the note's writing to be of a size to cover the body in case he was seen carrying it somewhere in the wild, and/or to carry the body in the back of the SUV he drove, which didn't have a trunk and couldn't hide the body if in a bag. I believe it was a Jeep Cherokee.

    His mind was constantly working to mislead, drop little red herrings, but always to cover all bases. In fact, when Lou Smit talked about the chair with him, he started cocking an eyebrow stating that putting that chair back into place was not a logical thing for an intruder to do, and John said something to the effect that the intruder seemed to be leaving little clues. Right.

    The chair was given a purpose to cover for the basement window's covering of the roving suitcase. Diabolical and scary but I think very possible.

    Black Sheep


    ReplyDelete
  56. Jr said he took the suitcase down to the basement months before her death.
    In his interview, John says he found JBR wrapped in a white blanket, he takes her upstairs but then says he was glad he found her and not Patsy. He says he wouldn't want Patsy to see her like that so he ran up to the tv room and grabbed a blanket to cover her. Where is this tv room up again? And why would he need to cover her with another blanket before Patsy would see her?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Because he picked her up in the basement, leaving the white blanket behind. Who knows why. One could argue that he wasn't thinking -- Fleet was yelling to call 911 and John had to pretend he thought she was alive and medics could help. Then Linda Arndt confirmed she was dead (rigamortis had set in) and she allowed John to cover her with a throw found in the upstairs room.

      Delete
    2. Yes I get that the white blanket is left behind in the basement. But once upstairs with JBR he says he ran upstairs to the TV room? To grab a blanket from a chair. Lou Smit then says, upstairs? as if surprised. So I'm asking was there a tv room above the living room where he laid her?

      Delete
  57. As far as I can see, the only tv room is on the floor he has already taken taken jbr up to. Is he remembering running up from basement to get the blanket at the time of her death?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is a floor layout of the 2nd floor where the children's rooms were. (I'm not counting the basement as the first floor): https://www.google.com/search?q=jonbenet+house+layout&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwid-JHgnN7bAhVNF6wKHVvOAYoQ7AkIOA&biw=1280&bih=581#imgrc=My4xH3qc0eioRM:
      I suppose John could have been talking about the playroom on the kids's level. Other accounts I read said that the throw came from nearby, when she was laid by the Christmas tree.

      Delete
  58. Well he said upstairs to tv room in his 98 transcripts.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah well I’m in the JDI camp so I believe John is a liar and couldn’t get his story straight. But the different accounts of the blanket are not that helpful in solving the case IMHO.

      Delete
  59. PR was caught red handed in more lies about evidence and creating an intruder than JR was and quite possibly the most lies ever told by a suspect who was not arrested. Including the window, Christmas bear, heart, door wall, 911 call and BR never owning a pair of Hi-Tek boots with a compass on them, when she herself, in fact was the one who bought them, just to name a few. The receipt shows that PR also lied about not being able to remember what she bought at McGuckins hardware as well. You can not just excuse away that many lies as a coincidence, that is unless you are a JDI.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not following your point. I don't think anyone disputes that Patsy told some things the could be lies, half-truths, or were genuine memory losses. JDI's are not basing their theory on who told the most lies. The theory is based on all the things that have been outlined on this blog. Patsy and John gave conflicting information, that is for sure. We really don't know what what can be ascribed to memory loss vs. lying in this case, but I think I could forget what I bought at a hardware store yet NEVER forget whether I fixed a window that I took my clothes off in order to break so I could get in the house. Now that seems hard to forget, to me.

      I don't know what this has to do with the blanket and where it was retrieved from. John either had a false memory or he purposely lied about the blanket. All I said was that I don't think knowing where the blanket came from is helpful to solving the case. Capiche?

      Delete
    2. No youre right, my asking where the tv room was isn't going to help solve the case. I just wanted to know if it was more lies from the Ramsey's

      Delete
  60. I was not replying to your comment anon. To be clear however, there were NO half-lies or half truths, they were complete lies. No suspect in the history of murder cases has ever had this much memory loss.
    PR must have been stricken down with amnesia for this to be possible. While JR has not been caught in one single lie, only speculation that he lied.
    As I have said before there is more than enough proof for any logical minded person to see that PR may have been grieving but she surely knew what happened that night making this JDI theory not plausible.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JR called his pilot less than 30 minutes after "finding" his dead daughter, telling a cop who overheard the call that he had an "important business meeting" in Atlanta, which was demonstrably false.

      Delete
    2. If you intend to refute JR'S blatant lie about diverting his private flight from Minneapolis to Atlanta, please also include sources for your statement that "No suspect in the history of murder cases. . ."

      Delete
  61. Misogyny has definitely played a huge role in this case. “John is a good Christian man.” “Patsy went psycho.” “There’s NO WAY John abused his daughter.”

    The police really screwed the case up. They were correct to assume John as the killer at first and then slipped up.

    I don’t know of too many cancer patients who snap and kill their beloved children.

    ReplyDelete
  62. If you want to consider that her murder began as an accident, then either Patsy or Burke could have done it, beloved or not.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The accident scenario has been discussed on this blog for years. If you've not caught up on the posts here, you should go back and read. You can't change the minds of people who have been vetting and discussing the scenarios for a long time, by just stating your unsubstantiated opinions. What Doc G has put forward is based on the known information and making logical inferences from it.

      RSmith, I do agree with you, and this IS just an opinion about the judgements of people involved in this case. Misogyny was in full play. Why not consider that John was the one with mental or psychological issues? Patsy was way more socially adapted than he was, she was popular and got along with people. She was friendly, giving, and kind to others. Yet somehow John gets a pass because he was a "businessman." Lets not forget that his business would have failed had it not been for Patsy's dad helping him get the business properly launched.

      Delete
  63. "Why not consider that John was the one with mental and psychological issues?" would be a waste of time and energy when there is nothing to suggest he "issues." It was Burke seeing a psychiatrist (after). John started as a cog in a wheel, then developed a product that allowed him to grow and develop his own division that was about to go global. One can still be friendly, giving and kind to others and cover up a crime, or cover for someone else.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One doesn’t have to scratch the surface much to see that JR had issues which were never addressed professionally. The most obvious issue was his deception with his first wife during the time she was pregnant and bore his son, 1976. Initially JR said his affair when married lasted “two years maybe”. He changes that figure in the same interview to 8 months to a year. Some dates:
      1976 - Affair with GW
      1977 – His wife throws him out and files for divorce
      1978 – Divorce finalized.
      1979 – According to JR, Patsy is the one who helped him finally end the relationship with GW.

      Also in his history was deception with his company Southern Peripherals and Instruments. The owners said that JR tried to expense about $5000 in repairs and personal flying costs to the company.

      And lastly, it’s fitting to note and wonder that LM in the spring of ’96 asked one of the former owners of AG (who’d been marginalized after JR arrived) to return and handle the majority of their international trade. A question might arise whether GE auditors, pre-sale, had discovered fiscal irregularities in connection to JR.

      IMO, JR was a man capable of deep deception. That he never received professional help does nothing to prove his lack of issues.

      Delete
  64. In addition to John's lie about the thwarted trip to Atlanta, Anon, he told another whopper: Despite the fact he claimed to "discover" the broken window early in the morning, he did not rush upstairs to report it to one of the cops, as he claimed to have done in his first interview with LE.

    I see no innocent explanation for either lie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh, if you don't know about John and his character issues, then for sure you have not done enough research.

      You are also missing a lot of information about how Lockheed Martin came to acquired Access Graphics. John was not a cog any where, unless you count the job he had in engineering sales prior to starting his own business. The fact is, his start up was floundering, and Patsy's father, who was an engineer and manager at Union Carbide, stepped in to help the business get a foothold in the market. Later, the business was purchased by Lockheed Martin. Access Graphics was a software distributor. John did not develop a product, he developed a business to distribute products. By going global, I assume you mean that after becoming a part of LHM, AG was growing in that its client base was expanding beyond the US market into the global market.

      Delete
  65. Afternoon All..(OT)

    Just finished watching "The Staircase" on Netflix which is a docuseries on the Michael Peterson case. He was accused and found guilty of murdering his wife. He was later granted a re-trial, ultimately took an Alford Plea and is free today.
    Any thoughts on this case? The Owl Theory?

    EG

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi ya EG, I don't have Netflix but I did watch the trial. That was the time of Peterson West (Scott Peterson) and Peterson East (Michael) wife murder trials on tv.

      With Michael's case, another one involving cobwebs...and the blow poke. Owl theory, pure bunk. First jury got it right.

      Creepy dude. Years later a similar thing happened here in Alabama where the wife is murdered by her husband as he had a secret homosexual online affair going on. That man, a preacher, was found guilty as well.

      Delete
  66. The Staircase was on last year, and again this year, and I re-watched it. It is really hideously creepy. He's such a psychopath. You can tell by listening to him and watching him. If you youtube the second trial where he takes the Alfred Plea Kathleen's sister just let him have it - more content than on Netflix. She also made the point that the tip of the blowpoke was mysteriously absent. A story about him says he abused his dog. He's a hideous POS.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Hi Lil..

    Yea that Peterson trio (Mike, Scott and Drew)--pretty strange when you look at each one of them. What are the chances?

    The owl theory had me going, with the feathers, etc. but how does that explain the "crushed thyroid cartilage" indicating someone had tried to strangle her.

    I also had trouble believing that his wife would accept his homosexual dalliances and not be concerned with what he might be bringing home to her, in addition to the cheating part of it.

    However, the prosecution made errors as well--that whole blow poke thing, knowing they had found it earlier and had even snapped a picture of them holding it. The lab/dna guy who blatantly lied, withheld information in the reports. That's scary stuff and can put innocent people away for life.

    EG

    ReplyDelete
  68. With all that's happening in the U.S. right now (the illegal alien, border crossing, family separating thing, etc.) it's surprising that people still take time to ponder the JonBenet Ramsey murder mystery, but I'm glad they do. Ever child's life is priceless and any interruption or untimely ending of it should be accounted for. I have two children, both adults now, and I have nine grandchildren. If one of them was killed and the perpetrator of the crime was unknown I would appreciate people keeping the case in the public spotlight for as long as it took to apprehend that person.
    That being said, I have suspected John, Patsy, the housekeeper and her husband, Burke, Burke's friends, Fleet White, the man who dressed as Santa, one of the Ramsey's neighbors, and an unknown intruder. Currently, I'm undecided as to who killed the precious child, but I am of the notion that the Ramseys know more than they've been willing to divulge. It seems to me that the way their accounts of the events surrounding her death have changed from time to time, and the fact that John has apparently done little to aid in the hunt for the killer strongly suggests they have been complicit in suppressing the truth.
    Of course, it can be argued that such a tramatic event induced a state of shock so severe that it impaired the memory, and that emotional exhaustion after their child's death prevented them from actively searching for the murderer. Indeed, this may be the case. But I tend to be led by my gut feeling, which tells me that the Ramseys have not told all they know about how JonBenet died.
    This case haunts me; I dream of her. Just the other night I dreamed that a young boy (he looked around the age of 13) killed her. She had a doll in her hands and he wrestled it from her and attacked her. I felt the overwhelming terror she experienced as he came for her. At that point I woke.
    I pray the truth about her death will be discovered and will become public knowledge soon so we can let the little beauty queen rest in peace.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Every child - not "ever child." Sorry.

    ReplyDelete
  70. When I say the Ramseys haven't told all, I mean to indicate John and Burke, as I am aware that Patsy is deceased.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is an inordinate number of ANTONYMS (word or phrase paired with it's polar opposite)contained within the RN.This is indicative that the RN was actually CONSTRUCTED prior to the night of the murder.In other words; the RN was not COMPOSED on Dec.26/96..viz.premeditation,meticulously planning.A few examples--1.JR is a FAT CAT(rich,admired,living the dream)vs I am a STRAY DOG (outcast,deviant,barely getting by)..2.People like JR head off to work with an ATTACHE vs I pack my lunch in a BROWN PAPER BAG(brown bagger)..3.JR appears RESTED vs My lifestyle is EXHAUSTING..4.DELIVERY(JR has the best of delivered to him on a silver platter)vs i PICK-UP the scraps left behind.5.she is SAFE/UNHARMED vs. SHE DIES/BEHEADED etc. etc. and the last but not least...it is UP to you John/(directly adjacent)/ use that good SOUTHERN..south refers to direction..any map any place UP with always in a NORTHERN direction.I welcome any comments in regards to this idea./////Melatonin-used as a sleep aid-can be purchased in either natural or synthetic form.It occurs naturally in the body and peak output occurs between the hours of 11PM and 2AM.The autopsy drug screen showed no sign of drugs.It is not considered a drug.My question..would EXTREME levels of melatonin show up in a drug screen.THINK PINEAPPLE.////RN written on pgs.27,28,29 of Rnotepad.It may be of importance to know if the page in the notepad directly after page 29 contains any trace whatsoever in regards to INK BLEED...if it doesn't..Houston we have a problem. Thanks for the read.

      Delete
    2. have you been smoking those funny cigarettes again?

      Delete
    3. I think that melatonin would seep all of the way into the body by the time for a drug screen or autopsy. This is a quick rundown of my timeline. One who knew JonBenet Ramsey’s killer went home to Ga for Thanksgiving. One who knew JonBenet Ramsey’s killer came back to Co from Thanksgiving with pineapple. One who knew JonBenet Ramsey’s killer took the pineapple to the Ramseys’ Christmas party on 12/23/1996 where JonBenet Ramsey ate the pineapple. JonBenet Ramsey died 3 days after the Ramseys’ Christmas party on 12/26/1996.

      Some guest at the Ramseys’ Christmas party on 12/23/1996 leaves the pre-written RN on the stairs. This guest at the Ramseys’ Christmas party sneaks up to the kitchen and the guest puts the pen and the pad back b/c no one is around to stop the guest. This guest sneaks back to the Ramseys’ Christmas party and out of the front door after the Ramseys’ Christmas party.

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

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

      Delete
  71. Sorry, but this is even more indecipherable than your usual gibberish.

    Importing pineapple? Leaving the RN 3 days in advance?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for your insightful comment.JR mentioned he took 2mg. of melatonin before retiring on the evening in question.There has been no plausible explanation for the pineapple found in the digestive tract,nor,the pineapple in the bowl.We cannot say,with absolute certainty,how many items from the residence were used in the commission of this crime...I merely mentioned there was a chance of a link between pineapple/melatonin.. as 1.the packaging(possibly in Boulder police storage) may be a source of UNCONTAMINATED TOUCH DNA.and 2. It would be advantageous to the perpetrating party of this crime if the child was less responsive to the events which occurred that evening..viz..fight off the actual assault.That said....I have a MAG flashlight,it's not mine and..it's a mirrored match to the one found at the crime scene..a young gentleman from an out of town plumbing company(35 miles as the crow flies)inadvertently left it on my kitchen counter when he was finished checking on a fixture in the furthest reaches under the main floor of my house..the quote was too high so I opted out of having the work done..I chased out the door after him;but,sadly,he'd already taken off.I phoned them pronto but no-one ever returned to pick it up.I would have thrown it out years ago, but it seems a shame to waste a perfectly functioning and rather expensive looking item..in closing..thank you for reminding me I needed to pick up cigarettes soon..Players Standard Blue King Size...the price went up recently..$12.39 a pack +tax...Canadian dollars. Thanks for the use of the site DOC..have a nice life.

      Delete
    2. To be clear, this Anon is responding to the Anon who posted about him/her sparking up, and I was responding to Blogger 101. The nature of the "reply" function on this site can be confusing.

      Delete
  72. Everyone in the frieking world including BPD knows that PR was in on the cover up except the few of you on this site who deny the obvious. The lies , the behavior and the evidence all point one way, which makes your theory null and void. Also, is it possible that JR was abusing JBR ? Well of course it is possible, highly unlikely, but possible. It was fully investigated by BPD however, ad nauseam. It is also extremely unlikely that a pedo is a one time offender, and yes a one time offender is still a pedo.

    Those who want to argue need to look no further than the statistics. PERIOD. Those who are sickenly turned on sexually by a child of young age DO NOT just stop being sexually excited by young children. End story. Coming up with a story that JR was afraid JBR was going to "tell on him" without a shred of evidence or anything even close to evidence is pulling a theory out of thin air, which is exactly what this is. PR called Dr Beuf on a regular basis and JBR visited him on a regular basis, so there was nothing out of the ordinary there.
    Anyone claiming that they know this is what happened is delirious.

    I have a good question for anyone who claims this even makes sense.

    Going by this theory does it not seem odd that JBR had visited DR Beuf within a couple of weeks before her murder yet JR was not worried about her visiting Dr Beuf, then all of a sudden he is worried that PR called Dr Beuf ?
    Odds are that JR did not even know and was not typically involved in when and if PR talked to or took JBR to to see her pediatrician. The odds are that JR never even knew about the calls to Dr Beuf that your theory so delicately hangs on.

    ReplyDelete
  73. The tainting and twisting of stories and evidence here is ridiculous. The flight JR called to arrange was not for him to take off on the run alone. PR knew about this call and the plan was to get the whole family, including PR and BR out of Boulder, not just himself as you JDI imply. Most likely what he was going to do was take advice from Mike Bynum to meet and hire lawyers while there.

    The basement window that JR supposedly did not report that morning - We do not even know for a fact that he did not bring it up that morning, even if he did not bring it up that morning then surely later on he was trying to create an intruder, just as PR was caught in several lies doing the exact same thing many times over. They may have even been advised by legal counsel or even their hired public relations to do so, we just dont know.
    There is a whole lot of straw grabbing and needle in a haystack type theories in here claiming to be much .ore solid than they are.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you say doesn’t stand up to what has been written here. I won’t bore people with reiterations. But will mention one item - JR’s statements.

      If you really study his statements with the authorities, in his books TOSOS and DOI, and his on the air interviews you will come to see that he comes across as a master of “twisting and tainting”. I can provide many examples but will mention only one you ‘ve highlighted. JR calls it an urban legend that he was trying to arrange for his pilot to fly him out of town.

      From DOI: “AFTER A MONTH-LONG BREAK, the grand jury reconvened on January 5, 1999. Patsy and I heard that Mike Archuleta was subpoenaed to testify, and I knew he would clarify one of the urban legends that had been floated by the media, if he were asked. They had reported that I had called Mike on December 26, 1996, to arrange a hasty trip to Atlanta. Of course, that wasn’t true. I had called Mike to tell him what had happened. He took the responsibility of contacting Melinda and John Andrew, who were already en route to meet us.”

      Actually, no one was concerned about that call in the morning to the pilot. It was the call within a half hour of JB’s body being discovered when JR asked his pilot about readying the plane to fly to Atlanta for a business meeting which deeply concerned LE.

      Then in addition to the DOI explanation he provides yet one more clarification when he speaks to Barbara Walters. He states that the call to the pilot was just because they wanted to go home to Atlanta.

      So “Twisting and Tainting” . . . JR was as smooth an impresario of this ability as anyone could meet.
      -T

      Delete
    2. Thanks for continuing to post, and for identifying yourself, T.

      Delete
    3. All that twisting and tainting was done to shield someone else

      Delete
    4. Care to elaborate how you've determined this?

      Delete
  74. I am not even disagreeing that JR told some lies. I am simply disagreeing that PR told more. As far as that call after JBR's body was found, he was getting the whole family out of there, PR knew about it, is my point. On this site it has beem construed many times as JR and only JR was attempting to flee out of Dodge ALONE and that is just not the case. As far as him denying it years later, I am sure he was instructed by his counsel to do so and he amd PR were most likely instructed to deny anything that would implicate them.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I am not aware of anyone on this site maintaining that JR intended to fly to Atlanta alone. If you have a quote to that effect, please post it.

    JR had not spoken to Bynum at the time he called Mike Archuletta the afternoon of the 26th. They spoke that night.

    JR would not fly to Atlanta to hire a Georgia attorney; he needed a Colorado attorney who understood the laws of that state and was licensed to practice there.

    Lawyers never advise their clients to lie. It's called suborning perjury, and it's an Ethical violation taken very, very seriously.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dear forensic handwriting experts...if I type in the letter " u " you will notice there is a line running down the right side..I would think this is a trait common to most people printing the letter " u ". Look at the ALL the letter u's in the Ransom Note...yeppp..semi-circular..NO LINE..unfaltering. With this in mind;look at PR's exemplars..notice anything? Disguised or not...there is a high probability the writer of this note will Consistently form the letter "u" in a semi-circular fashion WITHOUT the vertical addition.

      Delete
    2. JR's sample (available in the thread "Either Or" here on Doc's site) also shows the letter u printed without the vertical line. What's more, it runs into the next letter, just as do many of the u's in the RN.

      Delete
  76. "New Round of DNA tests completed, more could follow" in an article posted by Charlie Brennan 6/30/18. So at last, we hear. Apparently enough to be entered into the CODIS database, but they are keeping tight-lipped about it. Possibly more testing to come. Dougherty (sp?) states this is still an active case. Thank God for that.

    ReplyDelete
  77. One thing I've wondered regarding the notepad and RN, is, if the RN and practice note were written on pages from the middle of the notepad, what happened to the other missing pages? Or am I mistaken in thinking there were several unaccounted for?

    Another big ?? In my mind is mention of Someone taking a pad of the same type paper home and I think returning it. Odd.

    Did AG use this type notepad and JR brought it home from work? Was it purchased as s single pad or bulk packaged? A clue could be where the paper came from if it was from a bulk source.

    ReplyDelete
  78. Anon above makes a great point. If JBR has chronic damage to her vagina and was being sexually abused by JR as this blog claims, then surely he would have had to do something much sooner than he did when JBR had actual visits and not just calls to her pediatrician. He lets her visit her pediatrician not knowing the if sexual abuse would be found but then he goes over the edge because of calls to Dr Beuf ?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Yes, that makes no sense. Patsy claims she doesn't even remember making the calls - so either she is lying, or they really weren't significant in her mind. Also we don't know why she made the calls. It could have been anything. Many people try and fit the evidence to a theory or their beliefs to the evidence.

    ReplyDelete
  80. I was listening to a podcast that was discussing the Mr. Cruel case in Australia. No, I do not believe John Ramsey is Mr. Cruel. My reason for the post is that one major think stood out in the Mr. Cruel case with the Ramsey case. RED HERRINGS! In the Mr. Cruel case, he would have fake phone conversations, leave messages, etc that were all done to keep the police guessing. Some on here believe the purpose of the RN was to buy John a day to stage the house.....I am not one of those people. IMO the RN's sole purpose was to point investigators in as many directions as possible. Foreign Faction, John's bonus money, multiple kidnappers.......it gave red herring after red herring after red herring.

    -J

    ReplyDelete
  81. thank you J, I'm agreeing with you.

    ReplyDelete
  82. I agree as well J. If there was chronic sexual abuse to JBR and that is a big if in my mind.

    Simply because how much experience did the M.E or any M.E.s have in checking an injured vagina of a 6 yr old vs chronic abuse of a 6 yr old, probably never.

    If this were the case then JBR had visited Dr Beuf in just days before JBR's murder and on a pretty regular basis right before her murder. There would have been no way JR could know that he would not have been discovered long before and would have had to act much sooner. Now all of a sudden some calls that we do not even know existed completely hold this theory together, or not.

    That being said PR mysteriously forgets and/or changes her stories more than any suspect in a murder case EVER.

    Whether or not PR was involved she got damn lucky that she was not arrested on her statements alone.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Former Chief Beckner stated unequivocally in a press conference 2 years ago there was prior sexual abuse. Kolar and Thomas both referred to it in their books, and cited forensic medical corroborating sources.

      The ME called in Dr Andrew Sirontak, a pediatric abuse specialist from Denver Childrens', to view the body. Sirontak confirmed chronic sexual abuse.

      Without an internal pelvic exam it is impossible to determine sexual abuse. Dr Beuf has stated he never performed one.

      The 3 calls were placed after hours, between 5-6 PM. They're in Beuf's records.

      Of course Patsy lied about the calls in her third interview with LE. To admit she was concerned about her child's recurring vaginal infections when the prior sexual abuse was swirling in the media would be tantamount to accusing one of her family.

      I've asked you for proof of ... "more than any suspect in a murder case EVER", but none is yet forthcoming.

      Happily, this is not yet a fascist state; cops do not arrest on " statements alone". Or lies, for that matter.

      Delete
    2. Sorry; second interview with LE.

      Delete
  83. Glad to see you back cc
    Did Dr Andrew Sirontak perform a internal pelvic exam so as to prove the ongoing sexual abuse

    ReplyDelete
  84. Thank you. Glad to be here.

    An autopsy would include a pelvic exam. Dr Meyer was sufficiently alarmed by what he saw to call in a more experienced colleague, who corroborated his findings.

    Since sexual abuse cannot be determined absent a pelvic, it's safe to say Sirontak performed one on the child's corpse, as he stated unequivocally JBR had suffered prior chronic sexual abuse.

    ReplyDelete
  85. Thank you for clearing that up.
    An upcoming exam after Christmas could be motive for murder right?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Seems so to me, Claire. Three calls to your peditrician after hours on 12/17 sounds like panic, not a routine cold or other childhood complaint.

      What do you think?

      Delete
  86. I am not even going to disagree that JBR had prior sexual abuse. If you read my statement I said - How many times had the medical examiner autopsied a violated vagina and in a dead 6 yr old child vs a 6 yr old child who was autopsied and had chronic sexual abuse or even an adult ? My first thought is most likely never and my point is that it is most certainly possible that the trauma suffered by JB that night, either by sexual abuse and even possibly just staging could be construed by even a very experienced medical examiner as chronic abuse. It is all very possible and most likely that while an experienced M.E. had seen sexual abuse of a child before they had never seen a child or anyone who had a violated vagina in a child or anyone for the purpose of staging.
    What I am getting at is I do believe there is an enormous amount of error possible in this just as I believe there is with whether or not the head blow came first. This scenario could possibky have never been seen before by the M.E. either.
    There are very odd situations and rarities in this case that have possibly never occured before which leave alot to opinion.

    If you believe there was chronic sexual abuse then an explanation would be needed to explain how JR let JBR go to Dr Beuf within 10 days of her murder and many times prior without knowing that she could have a pelvic exam and he could be exposed then and every time prior that JBR went ?

    Main point is that it is highly unlikely that those calls meant anything if he was sexually abusing for a long period of time and then letting her visit her pedo. If what is claimed here is true he surely would have murdered her long before ever letting her visit her pediatrician.
    As far as the claims of constant vaginal infections , JBR had 3 in little over 2 years which is not uncommon at all in a female with bedwetting problems.

    Also, PR and stats regarding more lies than any suspect ever, I have followed probably 300 cases in reading and the ID channel in OCD like matter for a very long time and I have never seen it before EVER. It would be very hard for mw to prove a negative. I have slept every night with ID channel on for many many years so I am no spring chicken in the knowledge of this.
    Also on not being able to arrest someone only on their statements you are 100% incorrect.I have seen many many suspect lie about their alibis among other things and as as soon as it doesnt check out with their wife etc they are charged and 0 evidence other than circumstantial, if that. I have seen many a conviction with 0 evidence and only a suspects statements used against them. The whole point of interrogating a suspect is to catch them in a lie.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You clearly have too much free time, and too little facts. Change your channel and do some serious JBR reading before boring us again. A little legal education wouldn't hurt, either.

      Delete
    2. I need no more facts or to read about this case anymore than I have. Possibly it is you , who claims to be a lawyer but is most likely FULL OF SHIT , who needs more legal education rather that hide behind a false online identity.

      Delete
  87. I honestly don't know because how could Patsy not have put two and two together. She couldn't have let all this go by unnoticed and why didn't Jon Benet’s pediatrician suspect sexual abuse and if he did by law he would have to report it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I appreciate your interest, as I'm sure Doc does. This has all been dealt with on his blog, going back to 2012. I suggest you and the ever-boring Anon do more research, here or on candyrose, or Miss Marple's JBR Encyclopedia.

      Delete
    2. Denial is very common in these circumstances. Some never move past denial.
      Beuf, JB's pediatrician, passed away last year. It's known he was good friends with this family, but we don't know how much Patsy revealed as far as JB's bedwetting/toiletting issues.
      -T

      Delete
  88. Are her medical records sealed and can her pediatrician confirm she had a appointment after Christmas and what it was for or is that sealed too?

    ReplyDelete