tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post1908317571844146246..comments2024-02-23T18:09:21.379-05:00Comments on Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case: Patsy's RoleDocGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comBlogger124125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-17771415835704952422018-07-05T11:22:00.573-04:002018-07-05T11:22:00.573-04:00Given that John did it (as Doc has convinced me), ...Given that John did it (as Doc has convinced me), many people wonder how Patsy could not have come to suspect him over the years, or if she did suspect, why she did not speak out. Many good reasons have been given here. One reason I have not seen mentioned is that upon being faced with the reality of JonBenet’s being the victim of molestation (which Patsy seems not to have recognized or else had been in denial about), Patsy may have felt an immense burden of shame that this occurred in her family and that she did not see it and protect her daughter. It’s possible that the shame of incest may have been even worse in her mind than not having been able to protect her daughter from murder. <br /><br />So, I see two possibilities stemming from this: 1) Patsy continued to believe in an intruder theory, in part because it allowed her to continue denying that incest had occurred (even though she still had to deal with the thought of the molestation), thus allowing her to avoid the worst of the shame. 2) Even though Patsy was completely innocent of the murder, she felt immense guilt at not having been able to protect her daughter from the molestation/incest (which in her religious worldview may have been even more serious than the murder), and this feeling of guilt colored her behavior afterward, perhaps even making her feel that she genuinely did share some of the blame with the murderer. <br /><br />Shame is an incredibly powerful emotion and can affect people in unexpected ways.<br /><br />-- SAAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-34126287727419422452015-03-14T04:22:40.874-04:002015-03-14T04:22:40.874-04:00I came to this weeks ago. I read most of this blog...I came to this weeks ago. I read most of this blog and a lot makes sense--dismiss motive and focus on the facts. Okay. But I've been reading other sites as well. Most everyone is grazing in one pasture or another. Some pastures are overgrown because they're full of toxic weeds.<br />Patsy's motive for placing the call when she did...Patsy knew John's schedule. She knew what he did in the morning. She knew that she could be caught carrying the body out of the house by the neighbors. She could have very easily have waited for John to get up, shower and then scream for him. She could have waited for that moment because that was her routine. If she would have done this differently like allowing him to discover the note, he would have been more suspicious of her. So she was the one to discover the note and dial 911. The 911 call is not solid evidence that John did it, but it's good a very good argument.<br /><br />BoldBearAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-86935477545111139922014-12-30T11:12:44.557-05:002014-12-30T11:12:44.557-05:00You make an excellent point. I don't think &qu...You make an excellent point. I don't think "framing" Patsy was part of his original plan. But once he was "ruled out," and everyone began focusing on her, that definitely took a lot of the pressure off of him. Steve Thomas even offered him a "pass," hoping he'd inform on Patsy. That would not have worked for him, as he needed her cooperation. But all the attention on her certainly helped him and it's possible he encouraged it, yes.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-50630479138334009662014-12-29T13:29:50.381-05:002014-12-29T13:29:50.381-05:00I think part of JRs strategy was to partially fram...I think part of JRs strategy was to partially frame PR, but not outright frame her. First he wanted people to believe the intruder theory, but if some people didn't buy the intruder theory (and let's face it, it is hard to believe) better the suspicion on Patsy than him. Let me be clear, he didn't want Patsy convicted, he just wanted people suspicious of her, to distract and take the focus off him.<br /><br />So he put her on nationally TV one week after the murder, when she was out of her skull with grief, and heavily medicated. (I wouldn't be surprised if JR manipulated the doctor into upping Patsy's dosage). She looks like a nut to everyone, and he sits there and plays the calm and normal concerned dad. All eyes are moved from him to her.<br /><br />He hired the hand writing experts. The word was sent I'm sure to exonerate JR and say there is a remote possibility the RN was written by PR. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-42817127841649804722014-12-23T01:24:58.885-05:002014-12-23T01:24:58.885-05:00I agree, you are very smart, in the way you have f...I agree, you are very smart, in the way you have figured this case out. I still don't understand why everyone was and is so against Patsy. She WAS an emotional basket case, and seemed very drugged out. John Ramsey insisted that they be interviewed together and not separated- proof he was afraid they could break Patsy down. But the biggest thing for me, was when I saw his real handwriting- that was total proof, why didn't the police see that??? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-75770182746186796292014-10-04T22:15:46.744-04:002014-10-04T22:15:46.744-04:00If JR had been convicted and Patsy exonerated, the...If JR had been convicted and Patsy exonerated, then she would have probably sued for divorce, for one thing - and received alimony and also child support. She also could probably have sued John for wrongful death. One way or another, she'd have been in a position to collect a few million dollars at least, I'd imagine. More than enough to pay for health insurance. DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-6180706624190234042014-10-04T20:34:00.097-04:002014-10-04T20:34:00.097-04:00I have a question, as I have never lived in the US...I have a question, as I have never lived in the USA:<br />What would have happened to Patsy's health insurance if JR had been convicted of being involved in JBR's death? Or, even, if JR had been convicted of child sexual abuse? - Or again, if Patsy had left / divorced JR? <br />Cheers,<br />BLBernard Lindennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-88931822793713773102014-09-23T09:01:17.137-04:002014-09-23T09:01:17.137-04:00That's an interesting suggestion. I contacted ...That's an interesting suggestion. I contacted the DA and the police chief some time ago, sending them links to this blog, but never got a response. <br /><br />Here's the problem: There are by now probably at least a dozen books out on this case, plus a whole slew of websites by people promoting one theory or another, centered on a favorite suspect. I think the LE people in Boulder have grown tired of reviewing all the tips and theories and would rather just not think anymore about this very strange and puzzling case. Just in the past year or so we've had a book by the lead detective under DA Lacy, James Kolar, suggesting that Burke was responsible, and another book by a long time Websleuths poster, Superdave, insisting that Patsy did it, which is, of course, most people's favorite theory (backed up by a "mountain" of dubious "evidence"). And also, of course, my book, focusing on John, who hardly anyone suspects of anything more than complicity. <br /><br />A better bet than the DA might be the media. There are now so many "true crime" shows competing on television that I get the feeling they must be starved for material by now. But the whole JonBenet thing is now so old and so overdone, I don't see much hope of getting much of a response unless something dramatic happens to renew people's interest in the case. I keep hoping that at some point Burke will decide to speak out, but until then . . . <br /><br />As far as getting the word out, however, the most useful thing would be to encourage people who haven't already done so to post reviews on the book's Amazon website. There are already around a dozen, but more would be helpful.<br /><br />We might also try to encourage people to email the DA, suggesting he read the book or at least do some reading on this blog. It certainly couldn't hurt.<br /><br />As for your second question, John as a person is, for me, an enigma. It's very hard to "read" him. I don't really see him as a serial child molester though -- that seems unlikely. He seems like an ordinary guy who got tempted and let his libido disastrously get out of hand. But truthfully we know very little about John, especially what he was up to on all those "business trips" he took, which kept him away from home most of the time.<br /><br />Will he slip up again? I hate to say it, but I hope so. And if he does I hope he gets caught before he does any serious harm.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-20797128705872311492014-09-22T23:11:19.709-04:002014-09-22T23:11:19.709-04:00Doc, can we all collaborate on a way to get the Bo...Doc, can we all collaborate on a way to get the Boulder DA to read your book? or the police? do you think a petition would help? Also, just wondering if you think JR will ever slip up again and molest a child? iOW do you think he could be repeat offender? -anonymomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-1117877318916143382014-09-22T20:01:30.300-04:002014-09-22T20:01:30.300-04:00I watched the Barbara Walters interview again. Mo...I watched the Barbara Walters interview again. More than the hesitation and nodding, I noticed the hesitation and even stumbling on her words a bit. But I appeared to me, throughout the whole interview, that she was slightly drugged or sleepy, or both. She could have very well just undergone some chemo treatments and was feeling the residual of that.<br /><br />bbAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-73468982756103760072014-09-22T16:26:39.715-04:002014-09-22T16:26:39.715-04:00First of all, when initially asked, in her police ...First of all, when initially asked, in her police interview, whether she would take a polygraph, she replied that she'd gladly take ten if it would help move things forward. If you read something negative in her body language during a much later interview, the fact remains that she did respond positively to that suggestion when first asked. Imo her demeanor at that time reflected John's influence and the influence of the attorneys who wanted them both on the same page.<br /><br />Also it's important to understand that NO ONE in LE or the media ever expressed any doubts as to John having been ruled out. So it wasn't just Patsy being convinced by some handwriting experts, that conclusion permeated the air she breathed, it was simply taken for granted by all involved, even those convinced there was no intruder.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-26540358711663207992014-09-22T11:33:51.777-04:002014-09-22T11:33:51.777-04:00I just checked the blog and saw I was mentioned, s...I just checked the blog and saw I was mentioned, so thought I would comment. :-)<br /><br />Here is the thing, regarding the handwriting of the RN. I have and will always believe its just a junk science. On shows like Pawn Stars, we see handwriting experts to determine if it is a celebrities signature and from that standpoint, I get it. Either Joe Dimaggio signed a picture or he didn't. So, the problem for me is that whether John, Patsy, Burke or a million other people wrote that note, it is IMPOSSIBLE to tell whose handwriting it is because whoever wrote it clearly didn't write in their normal style. The person could have written it with the opposite hand or simply just wrote differently to disguise it. The reason I say all of this is because I am just done reading about a "handwriting expert" ruling somebody out as being the main reason she wouldn't look at John. I just watched a Dateline where the wife was 100% convinced her husband wrote something and it turned out to be another persons. Obviously John Ramsey didn't sit down and in his normal handwriting, sit down and write a 3 page note in his everyday handwriting. Ok, so this is important because I just have a very hard time believing that Patsy would NEVER look at John based on a few experts ruling him out. <br />All I am stating is that when you look at the mountain of evidence that there is, any number of them would raise a red flag for her. Another one being that JR was specific in saying that he took a sleeping pill to help him through the night, so IF PR recalls him getting up at any point in the night, I would imagine she would question it. <br />I wrote about that Barbara Walter's interview and Doc said he didn't see a hesitation from Patsy was asked whether she would take a polygraph or not. I guess hesitation is the wrong word, because when Walter's asks her, I see Patsy look down, then nodding "no" she says she would. I dont normally like to read too much into body language, but this interview is 8 years after the crime! It is just such a ridiculous reaction to a very simple question that it makes it really hard to explain how a truly innocent person would do that.<br /><br />-J<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-35382111340109774162014-09-22T10:58:32.667-04:002014-09-22T10:58:32.667-04:00Yes, bb, I agree. I mostly agree with Doc that Pat...Yes, bb, I agree. I mostly agree with Doc that Patsy did not see her way to view John as the murderer. Yet, there are a number of things that make you wonder what she did know about John, or at least wonder what secrets she was hiding (per Linda Arndt). Maybe, prior to the murder, she had begun to wonder about JonBenet's vaginal issues and what was causing them. But because numerous visits to the doctor revealed nothing, she had no basis for suspecting someone was harming JB. Over the years the concerns and observations about John could have weighed on her conscience she but could not bring herself to draw any hard conclusions. I do agree with Doc that there were so many reasons and obstacles that would prevent Patsy from really seeing the light. And I know J disagrees with these as being true obstacles. However, in many cases of incest, there is evidence that the mother knew or should have known about the abuse and said nothing. When it comes to incest in families, denial is a way that many people cope with the unthinkable. Patsy probably recalled some things in hindsight that she realized were odd but could not bring herself to raise to anyone. Linda A. must have known this. I do wish Linda would speak out about what she does know that could help. I guess no one in LE would listen to her though. -AnonymomAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-85643173952854768922014-09-21T14:19:26.731-04:002014-09-21T14:19:26.731-04:00In other words, through your relentless logic, I ...In other words, through your relentless logic, I think you win :)<br /><br />MMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-56399890623920854672014-09-21T14:17:53.817-04:002014-09-21T14:17:53.817-04:00I know this is a little random, but I think that T...I know this is a little random, but I think that The John And Patsy Show is another reason we can assume Kolar is wrong and Burke did not kill his sister, accidentally or otherwise. If they were covering up for their son, they would avoid publicity, avoid the limelight, avoid the subject. Talking about it would be dangerous for the secret they were hiding....and how could they expect Burke to understand and keep silent if they got on TV and lied? Especially after they both avoided indictment? It was over. <br /><br />The cynical reason to talk to Steve Thomas, of all people, on the Larry King show, would be for John to show solidarity with his possibly murderous wife. It kept the spotlight on Patsy as the killer while making John look good. It also reassured their entire family and supporters, including Burke, that they would do anything to catch the intruder by keeping the case alive. <br /><br />I am becoming convinced, doc, that Patsy was a pawn.<br /><br />MMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-72680074152199266832014-09-21T13:50:07.417-04:002014-09-21T13:50:07.417-04:00Good question. But obviously it would look extreme...Good question. But obviously it would look extremely suspicious for John to just happen to open that door and discover the body. He would have needed a good reason to do that and since the police were focused on a kidnapping, they saw no reason to systematically search the house. And if John had suggested that, and the body was found, that would have looked awfully suspicious also.<br /><br />So as I see it there was no safe way for John to discover the body on his own. He was probably assuming that sooner or later they'd find it, and he just needed to sweat it out. Finally, Arndt gave him the opportunity by telling him to search the house thoroughly for clues. If she hadn't done that the body might not have been discovered for some time.<br /><br />Regardless, however, there was no way John could have hoped to remove the body after the police had been called. That certainly was NOT a part of his plan as it would have been far too risky. The time to get the body out was before the police were called -- and if Patsy had gone along with that plan, that's what would have happened.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-87374313667498816802014-09-21T10:16:07.081-04:002014-09-21T10:16:07.081-04:00Doc, another odd thing about this case is the time...Doc, another odd thing about this case is the timeline of events that morning. Police are called at 5:52am depending on which site you read, followed by the arrival of officers shortly after 6am. But yet the body isn't "discovered" until 1:30 PM. If Linda Arndt doesn't ask John and FW to search the house, what was the plan regarding the body? Obviously if John was the one who orchestrated the entire thing, then he very well knew that no phone call would be coming from any kidnappers at any point that day. The police weren't going to just leave, so I just don't understand waiting 7.5 hours to go downstairs and find the body. It seemed extremely important that John be the one to find the body, hold the body, remove the duct tape so that it could explain any of his DNA being on the body. So, if JR being the one to find her being that crucial, WHY does he wait 7 hours? We obviously know LA asked him to search the house, but he would have no way of knowing she would do that. Plus, the more time that passed, the more obvious it was that the kidnappers were not calling. Im just curious as to an explanation for this. There is no way that John would have just thought the police would leave at that point, so there would have been zero opportunity to remove the body.<br /><br />-JAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-9348684260041555862014-09-20T13:27:10.714-04:002014-09-20T13:27:10.714-04:00Thanks, I didn't think there were two calls on...Thanks, I didn't think there were two calls on the 26th. The 911 call center would have a record of it. <br /><br />CHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-83297921191633464972014-09-20T12:41:54.018-04:002014-09-20T12:41:54.018-04:00I have a feeling that what happened at the Ramsey...I have a feeling that what happened at the Ramsey party, a few days prior to the murder, got confused with what happened the morning after the murder. There was a 911 hangup at the party, and that's been explained as an innocent error on Fleet White's part. But I haven't been able to find any evidence for a 911 hangup on the 26th, no. I apologize for any confusion I've caused, but at this point I think there was just one 911 call on the 26th, with no prior hangup.<br /><br />Even if there were a hangup, and regardless of what might have happened prior to Patsy's 911 call, however, I still don't see any reason for that call to have been made if Patsy and John were collaborating on the staging of a kidnap. Even if Burke had awakened and noticed that JonBenet was missing, all they needed to do was show him the note and explain that she'd been kidnapped. They'd have told him they were afraid to call the police because of the warnings in the note. I see no reason why he would have defied them over this, but even if he had attempted to call 911 and report the "kidnapping," and one of his parents had forced him to hang up, there would still have been no reason for them to change their plan. It could easily have been reported as a mistake. Even if police arrived at their door, they could have apologized and said it was a mistake.<br /><br />Later, after the "ransom" had been "paid" and the body had been removed, they'd have called the police for sure, to report what had happened. It would have been no problem for them to "confess" at that point that there had been a kidnapping after all, but they'd been too afraid for JonBenet's safety to report it at that time.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-37124773206655733372014-09-20T11:10:51.782-04:002014-09-20T11:10:51.782-04:00Where is the evidence of this "first" 91...Where is the evidence of this "first" 911 call on the morning of the 26th? <br /><br />CHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-259225557982585802014-09-20T08:24:55.588-04:002014-09-20T08:24:55.588-04:00I have to agree with J concerning Burke being sent...I have to agree with J concerning Burke being sent off with the Whites .I also would not want my other child out of my sight. I would feel safer with him in the same room, and police and friends around me. I also struggle to understand why either John or Patsy would call friends round that morning, when the RN clearly states they are being watched and their daughters life depends on their actions.. given the situation, Even if my husband told me to make calls or went to do so himself, I would strongly warn him of the consequences. Maybe J, This is just our perspective.<br />Going back to the suitcase and Larry King, when Lou Smit had his interview, he said that reports from the lab showed that fibers on Jonbenet's clothes came from fibers inside the suitcase, suggesting someone had tried to put the body inside.<br />So if Doc's theory is correct, maybe this was part of John's plan. He does go on to say that no parent has ever killed their own child with the method used on Jonbenet, First for everything i suppose you could say.<br />Just a reminder of patsy's gravestone, it reads " Grace, love and Faithfulness. Through all"evejnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-12052123653829993982014-09-20T00:16:11.653-04:002014-09-20T00:16:11.653-04:00Thanks, J, for reminding us about the Barbara Walt...Thanks, J, for reminding us about the Barbara Walter's interview. <br /><br />Your first reference is an example of how easily John can lie. Here's what he says about that call in their book:<br /><br />"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 early on the morning of 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. (p. 324)"<br /><br />In an earlier blog post, I described that as "a classic John Ramsey half truth. No, John's call that morning didn't involve a hasty trip to Atlanta. But his call around 1:30 PM, after the body had been found, did involve making arrangements for just such a trip. John has nothing to say about that call, of course."<br /><br />We're talking about two calls, not one, as John states in the book. So when he admits in the interview to making the second call, which, yes, was in fact an arrangement to "make a hasty trip to Atlanta" he acknowledges that his story about the "urban legend" was in fact not completely honest -- in fact a lie. And by the way, according to the policeman who caught him in the act, he initially claimed he had an important business trip to attend -- which means taking Patsy and Burke with him was NOT part of the plan.<br /><br />As far as the question about the lie detector test is concerned, I see no hesitation whatsoever. However, Patsy's response is a half truth. Neither was asked directly to take such a test, but both were asked whether they would take one IF asked. John truthfully explains this and truthfully repeats his answer: he was offended. When Patsy had been asked, however, she'd responded that yes, she'd take ten of them if it helped the police solve the case. Now let's think a bit about their responses in this interview. Patsy could truthfully have reminded Barbara that's she'd been willing to take a test, in contrast to John, who clearly was not. But she says nothing. This, to me, tells us a lot about her unwillingness to say anything that might make waves, that might indicate that they weren't in lock step on every single aspect of the case. She knows very well that she was willing to take a polygraph, but she remains silent because it would make John look bad. This to me is the story with Pasty consistently throughout the sad history of this case.<br /><br />DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-62043251806763471722014-09-19T23:23:10.460-04:002014-09-19T23:23:10.460-04:00J- I truly believe that when he made that pilot ca...J- I truly believe that when he made that pilot call on 12/26 that John thought his goose was cooked. It was a glaringly defensive move - I don't think he imagined that he was going to get away with this crime. Who on earth RUNS from the newly discovered body of his child? Watching that Barbara Walters interview it is amazing to think he got away with it. Truly.<br /><br />That said, it brings the question up again -- what was the legal strategy here? That the best defense was a good offense? Try the case on TV with Larry King and Barbara Walters and muddy the prosecutorial waters? It seems blindingly dumb, but the lawyers must have supported it. And, of course, it worked.<br /><br />MM<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-68302381294065429512014-09-19T22:22:12.185-04:002014-09-19T22:22:12.185-04:00CH- This was such an astute take on the Patsy prob...CH- This was such an astute take on the Patsy problem. Credit Doc for saying it first, but you put it in a way that makes sense to me:<br /><br />"A person's frame of reference sets boundaries on their thinking. You and I, and everyone else reading and commenting are approaching this as sleuths trying to solve a crime. Initially we are open to all possibilities and we just go where the evidence and logic takes us. <br /><br />Patsy isn't approaching it in quite the same way. She "knows" JR didn't do it because he's been ruled out as the author of the RN. She knows the most respected detective in CO (LS) thinks it was an intruder. She knows the vice cop turned rookie murder investigator (ST) thinks she did it, and she knows that's wrong. She not only knows these things, but has a strong emotional connection to these "facts"; a connection you and I don't have....So her frame of reference is limiting what she is able to think about the case."<br /><br />She seems willfully blind or duplicitous to me, but that is because I am failing to understand her very special reality. Starting to get it :)<br /><br />MM<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-41080012675123121232014-09-19T20:22:42.940-04:002014-09-19T20:22:42.940-04:00kp, this is such a good point. He recalled so lit...kp, this is such a good point. He recalled so little that one wondered about his cognitive ability. But of course, it was a sham. Who forgets the kidnapping and murder of a child? The details are embedded in the brain and recur over and over and over, derailing peoples' lives and mental health. Every single detail becomes a part of the story, no detail too small.<br /><br />MMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com