Overkill - Overkill in a homicide refers to the use of excessive force or brutality beyond what is necessary to cause death.

[Meara]

TY Meara,
He very well may be though!
My post was just to share some more common aspects of Aspergers and how it can be misunderstood especially with communication deficits.
That Dr Phil interview though!

I appreciate and respect your insights, ispy. You shed much light on why assessing BR was/is tricky.

He very well may be though!
LOL. Sorry, it's all so convoluted, I have to laugh sometimes. But that IS the crux of it. If BDI: Just because the viciousness of JBR's murder makes BR look psychopathic, that doesn't mean he wasn't driven by extreme symptoms of AS. But just because he may have been suffering extreme symptoms of AS, that doesn't mean his actions weren't also malice driven and psychopathic.

I don't drink, but maybe I should.

 

[CloudedTruth]

I have a lot of difficultly believing another beauty pageant mother is responsible. Was there a bitter rivalry happening? With respect, it still seems absurd to my mind. I am also inclined to question how canny and strong a 9 year old is to be able to fashion a garrotte through breaking a paintbrush handle, winding a thick knot on it then having the grip to tighten the cord into the flesh and causing grave ligature injury marks. Was his DNA ever tested? Autopsy photos show JB had burn marks on her skin so the idea of a stun gun had been floated. One paedophile convicted a few years before over a 7 year old had a tie to the area, confessed to someone on the Boxing Day after and carried a stun gun but authorities had no interest in him. Seemed to take so long to drop her parents as suspects if the DNA would quickly rule them out like it apparently did for him. I don’t have a suspect theory myself and other than considering immediate family members, the hired help crossed my mind including their relatives like of the housekeeper whose DNA was possibly not obtained. The housekeeper refused a polygraph I read.

I think the pageant bitter rivalry theory is unlikely too, for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which is that no one spoke about or reported that there was a rivalry. With the long list of possible suspects the R’s came up with, that did not make an appearance.

It is my opinion the garrote, etc was part of the coverup, most likely by the parents and not BR, even if he was the perpetrator of the head blow.

The marks on JBR noted in the autopsy report are bruising according to the coroner, not burn marks. The stun gun theory was Lou Smit’s idea, but he couldn’t prove it. The marks do not match a stun gun’s marks. He was dead set on the IDI and the stun gun became part of trying to prove that. Most experts debunked the use of a stun gun.

 

[Meara]

I found a snippet from the dance instructor Kit Andre, which is in the book Perfect Murder, Perfect Town. The discussion is about whether or not JBR really enjoyed the pageant life, or was it really more for PR? In it she says that PR made JBR look like a clown. She goes on to say that PR didn't have a sense of proportion about how this should fit into her child's life. "The pageants were PR's gig. JonBenet was her alter ego". That really struck a chord with me in relation to how the pageant stuff was perceived by others, and why there most likely was an intervention being planned. This ties in with PR in general I think. She seemed to gravitate towards excess. No sense of proportion. Overkill.

At the time of her death, JBR reportedly had around 30 trophies. She was 6 years old. That's a lot of trophies to have amassed in such a short time. The costumes and fittings, the make-up, the lightened hair, learning songs and dance moves, learning how to strut around provocatively.....it's just a lot for a 6 year old. At that age most kids just want to be kids. Remembering the comment JBR made to one of her friends about the trophies really belonging to her mom and that they should be in her room.....I think at least in the beginning dressing up and performing were probably fun for her, but as time went on it sure feels like PR was pushing hard to make her daughter into something I'm not so sure she really wanted to be. There is no doubt in my mind that a Miss America crown was something that PR coveted greatly. To have that vicariously through JBR would be a dream come true. To the point of losing sight of what is best for the child, the wants & desires of the child. Satisfying the mother's ambitions and dreams.

And for PR herself, the excesses are prevalent. The huge house, putting the house on display, putting her child on display, Christmas trees in every room, expensive parties.

And for a bit of a left turn, can this also relate to her being the author / writer of the RN? It was two and a half pages long, which is ridiculous for a true ransom note. It was excessive. It showed a lack of a sense of proportion. IMO it has PR's imprint all over it.

The friends sensing something was building towards a crisis feels spot on.

Thanks very much for finding Kit Andre's input in PMPT - good work and super valuable! You are so right in illustrating that lack of a sense of proportion as a pervasive characteristic in PR.

We've seen the photos showing the discomfiting resemblance between some of JBR's costumes and some of PR's pageant outfits. In saying that PR made JBR "look like a clown," could Kit Andre have been reacting, in part, to the outdated aesthetic of those lookalike costumes? In any case, they underscore PR's blurring of boundaries between herself and JBR.

Something else that strikes me - A narcissistic parent doesn't necessarily keep a child from doing what interests the child, or what he/she excels at, or force the child to do something. Ns are basically parasitic, so it's often the case that they support something the child likes/excels at and then take it over and exploit it. A child co-opted in this way is put in a double-bind: keep doing something I care about and participate in the psychological lie; or else stop participating in the lie but give up something important to me. A child may feel the double-bind yet lack the vocabulary to express it. I think JBR showed wisdom beyond her years when she said her trophies were really her mom's.

A person looking on could miss the psychological tension, if the child appears to be enjoying herself, as I think JR did -
JR is to nuance as PR is to self-restraint. When he said JBR loved performing in the pageants, I think it was true; she did. What he didn't grasp, apparently, was that her delight was coming at a mounting psychological cost.

By winter of 1996 JBR was exhibiting signs of rebellion against PR; refusing to wear matching outfits, e.g. It sounds like she was instinctively trying to hang on to a sense of self. This would not have sat well with PR at all. To a healthy parent, a child's disagreement or rebellion is just that. To an N it's an existential threat.

So, I wonder whether any/all of this is what PR's friends were picking up on. And I wonder if it's what BR was picking up on. He would have been very sensitive to the tension and have wanted it to stop.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I appreciate and respect your insights, ispy. You shed much light on why assessing BR was/is tricky.

He very well may be though!
LOL. Sorry, it's all so convoluted, I have to laugh sometimes. But that IS the crux of it. If BDI: Just because the viciousness of JBR's murder makes BR look psychopathic, that doesn't mean he wasn't driven by extreme symptoms of AS. But just because he may have been suffering extreme symptoms of AS, that doesn't mean his actions weren't also malice driven and psychopathic.

I don't drink, but maybe I should.

What I find interesting is interviews of young BR vs adult BR.
I noticed when he was interviewed as a child he was skirmy , maybe precocious, a little bit of a wise guy and a little bit literal but the Dr. Phil interview screamed social awkwardness. WTH happened?...sometimes with asd the social demands as kids get older can make it more obvious than when they are young but what was that?
If he indeed was responsible for all the atrocities done to her, well I think psycopath would be apropos.
If there was a accident with inappropriate touching on his part, I feel bad for him because his parents made him a pariah for life. If I did that to my child, I too may spend my whole life trying to point in another direction.

Might as well drink, this case is dizzying

 

[CloudedTruth]

Thanks very much for finding Kit Andre's input in PMPT - good work and super valuable! You are so right in illustrating that lack of a sense of proportion as a pervasive characteristic in PR.

We've seen the photos showing the discomfiting resemblance between some of JBR's costumes and some of PR's pageant outfits. In saying that PR made JBR "look like a clown," could Kit Andre have been reacting, in part, to the outdated aesthetic of those lookalike costumes? In any case, they underscore PR's blurring of boundaries between herself and JBR.

Something else that strikes me - A narcissistic parent doesn't necessarily keep a child from doing what interests the child, or what he/she excels at, or force the child to do something. Ns are basically parasitic, so it's often the case that they support something the child likes/excels at and then take it over and exploit it. A child co-opted in this way is put in a double-bind: keep doing something I care about and participate in the psychological lie; or else stop participating in the lie but give up something important to me. A child may feel the double-bind yet lack the vocabulary to express it. I think JBR showed wisdom beyond her years when she said her trophies were really her mom's.

A person looking on could miss the psychological tension, if the child appears to be enjoying herself, as I think JR did -
JR is to nuance as PR is to self-restraint. When he said JBR loved performing in the pageants, I think it was true; she did. What he didn't grasp, apparently, was that her delight was coming at a mounting psychological cost.

By winter of 1996 JBR was exhibiting signs of rebellion against PR; refusing to wear matching outfits, e.g. It sounds like she was instinctively trying to hang on to a sense of self. This would not have sat well with PR at all. To a healthy parent, a child's disagreement or rebellion is just that. To an N it's an existential threat.

So, I wonder whether any/all of this is what PR's friends were picking up on. And I wonder if it's what BR was picking up on. He would have been very sensitive to the tension and have wanted it to stop.

Another memory Kit shared, was rehearsing a dance with JBR the first time they met and worked together. PR was in another room while Kit and JBR were in the studio as Kit was teaching her the dance moves. They had gone through it 2-3 times, when PR opened the door and came in. She said that she had experience doing this, so she was going to do the moves with JBR, next to her. Kit said she realized at that moment this would all be on PR’s terms, how PR wanted it done.

So yes, I think she thought her experience of those years ago was exactly how it should be. She was living her moments of the past and transporting them to the present, apparently without regard to how things had changed.

From what I have gathered,JBR did enjoy the performing aspect. That’s just one part of it though. She was starting to rebel and resist PR’s wanting to dress them alike and dictating what she wore. I think the costuming, the makeup, the need to present a look that PR was dictating, and as you mentioned was outdated was something she did not enjoy. Even at 6 she would want to wear what was current and reflected in what her peers were wearing.

I definitely see the signs of narcissism in PR.

 

[jtennison7171]

"...what prompted him to act at that particular time?"
I've wondered about this, too. Since all behavior is multiply determined, then, if it was BR, I think a larger pattern rather than any one incident holds the clues. And a sustained, “dots connected” narrative of BR’s life is something missing from the case. What follows is only a bare bones version, based on key events we know and statements BR has made. It's not really adequate, but maybe it's a start to understanding more about the timing, the anger, and the overkill. It all has to do with being 6 ½ years old.

BR's birthday acquired associations with death and Christmas. His half-sister Beth died on 1/8/92, two weeks after Christmas, casting a pall of grief on his 5th birthday barely three weeks later. The following summer PR was diagnosed with end stage cancer and began commuting to Bethesda for experimental treatments. Nedra and the housekeeper became the children's caretakers. BR was 6 ½. PR was so weak and immunodeficient that she isolated to JAR's room. By Christmastime 1993, as BR approached his 7th birthday, it wasn't clear whether PR would survive.

She did survive, and in the latter part of 1994 was recovered enough to enter JBR in her first pageant. Around Thanksgiving in 1995, PR was declared to be in full remission. By then all the pageant efforts - the contests, costumes, lessons, photoshoots, travel, spending - were in full swing. Too full. Scarcely a year later, several family friends felt that the whole "mega JonBenet thing" had gotten completely out of hand and planned an intervention with PR. They might have noted that such an excess creates a corresponding deficit, that BR was neglected. At 8 and 9 he had school, friends, scouting; but nothing replaces a mother’s time and attention or makes you feel okay if you know she's spending a ton more money on your sister than she is on you.

What happened to BR during those two years? When PR became ill, BR was the apple of her eye. Suddenly, he had almost no contact with her for months. The pain was so overwhelming that it had to be bound in anger, anger that drove him to smear the bathroom wall with feces. He had felt worried and afraid; he had missed his mom; he had been brave; and he looked for some acknowledgment of that, of what he had come through. As PR regained her health, BR also expected, as children that age do, that things would simply go back to being the way they were. Not only did neither of these things happen, in 1994 JBR - his sunny, beautiful, sometimes bratty little sister who teased him, smashed his legos, interrupted his playtime with friends, and acted bossy - JBR replaced him as the golden child.

At Christmas 1996, JBR was the center of her mother’s world and destined to stay there for the next 13 years until she was crowned Miss America. At 6 ½ her life looked great. What a contrast to BR’s life at 6 ½. Through no fault of his own, he lost his mother for months and life as he had known it. His family seemed not to notice that loss. The difference in his and JBR’s fortunes must have felt deeply unfair to him. The family had no place for his grief or his outrage. Studies show that fairness is a universal value and anger a universal response to injustice. Children in particular feel injustice keenly.

In December 1996, the parents attended or hosted party after party and gala events. In between these, on December 6th, JBR rode in the Boulder parade on her own float, “Little Miss Colorado,” made by PR’s father. On December 17th, JBR also won the “Colorado’s Little Miss Christmas Pageant” and won a prize at a separate event near Denver. On December 20th, JBR also spent an entire school day performing her latest routine for every single class in her school - which was BR's school, too. On December 22nd, she also participated in a pageant at a nearby mall. The intense focus on JBR’s outward appearance matched the indifference to BR’s inner world. Maybe by Christmas BR had just had enough.

Young children process logically, symbolically, unconsciously, in make-believe, and magical thinking all at the same time. Surely, in BR’s mind JBR didn’t deserve so much attention and applause. Maybe his mom would pay more attention to him if she weren’t so busy with all the pageant stuff. Maybe it was too painful to think that his mom would stay wrapped up in JBR forever; that there was no way back to being the apple of her eye. The summer he was 6 ½, his happy life ended abruptly in Charlevoix when his mother’s cancer was discovered. Maybe it made a kind of sense that if his father’s favorite, Beth, died suddenly around Christmastime, right when everyone was happy, then if his mother’s favorite, JBR, also died suddenly at Christmastime, it would make things even, in a way. Maybe if something happened to JBR, the family and PR’s frantic pace would be calmer for a while, the way they were after Beth died. Maybe if they could go to Charlevoix without JBR, things would be okay. Maybe if JBR’s life ended at 6 ½, that would make things fair. It would be a kind of reset that made it possible to get on with his life - his real and rightful life in his mothers' doting regard, the one that stopped in Charlevoix in 1993, life as he’d known it before cancer and the pageants and mega JonBenet.

Admittedly, I can’t know the details or exactly how the dots connect, but, from my studies and work, I believe that, if BR killed JBR, the motivation and timing emerged from his mental and emotional associations, conscious and unconscious, of death, Christmas, mother, profound loss, grief, anger, and Charlevoix. However things unfolded on the night of 12/25/96, I believe that immediate events themselves were not the trigger but what those events represented to BR.

Very well said, brilliantly written and great points that I have often thought myself.

 

[Meara]

Very well said, brilliantly written and great points that I have often thought myself.

Thank you so much. The "larger pattern" view seems to have resonated with a number of folks.

 

[Meara]

Another memory Kit shared, was rehearsing a dance with JBR the first time they met and worked together. PR was in another room while Kit and JBR were in the studio as Kit was teaching her the dance moves. They had gone through it 2-3 times, when PR opened the door and came in. She said that she had experience doing this, so she was going to do the moves with JBR, next to her. Kit said she realized at that moment this would all be on PR’s terms, how PR wanted it done.

So yes, I think she thought her experience of those years ago was exactly how it should be. She was living her moments of the past and transporting them to the present, apparently without regard to how things had changed.

From what I have gathered,JBR did enjoy the performing aspect. That’s just one part of it though. She was starting to rebel and resist PR’s wanting to dress them alike and dictating what she wore. I think the costuming, the makeup, the need to present a look that PR was dictating, and as you mentioned was outdated was something she did not enjoy. Even at 6 she would want to wear what was current and reflected in what her peers were wearing.

I definitely see the signs of narcissism in PR.

Oh gosh, yes, picturing that scene of PR joining in (cringe). I’d forgotten that. Kit was right in realizing things would go forward on PR’s terms. The thing about Ns, though, is that while they can appear outwardly strong or even domineering, inwardly they are deflated and needy (The compensation is the measure of the wound.).You have to wonder, did PR also want recognition and admiration from Kit? That’s the kind of disordered dynamic that could really mess up a child like BR.

 

[GRT]

I have a lot of difficultly believing another beauty pageant mother is responsible. Was there a bitter rivalry happening? With respect, it still seems absurd to my mind. I am also inclined to question how canny and strong a 9 year old is to be able to fashion a garrotte through breaking a paintbrush handle, winding a thick knot on it then having the grip to tighten the cord into the flesh and causing grave ligature injury marks. Was his DNA ever tested? Autopsy photos show JB had burn marks on her skin so the idea of a stun gun had been floated. One paedophile convicted a few years before over a 7 year old had a tie to the area, confessed to someone on the Boxing Day after and carried a stun gun but authorities had no interest in him. Seemed to take so long to drop her parents as suspects if the DNA would quickly rule them out like it apparently did for him. I don’t have a suspect theory myself and other than considering immediate family members, the hired help crossed my mind including their relatives like of the housekeeper whose DNA was possibly not obtained. The housekeeper refused a polygraph I read.

Well, I could certainly be wrong, but that at least has a motive--there's virtually no motive for a family member to have killed JBR.

One of the best books I've ever read on the case is called Lou and Jonbenet. Boulder LE brought in homicide detective Lou Smit, and he quickly became disenfranchised with some of the LE who became fixated on the Ramsey's and ignored the strong evidence that an intruder killed JBR. In the book, there's even a photo of the early DNA that cleared the Ramseys--before they were once again cleared more than a decade later.

Your point about the housekeeper refusing a polygraph is also very interesting. The detective, Smit, has since died, but he was convinced the Ramseys were unfairly judged and he was passionate about finding who really killed JBR. From what I understand, his daughters have taken up his quest to obtain justice for the Ramsey family.

At any rate, it's an excellent book and I doubt that anyone who reads it would ever consider the Ramseys as suspects after that. The author (a good friend of Smit') lays out all the evidence in a way that's enlightening.

This is just MOO, but I think the real issue here is egotistical LE that refused to back down even after they're proven wrong.

My theory about the parent of a competitor could be way off base--I readily admit that--but there's simply no evidence that indicates a family member, especially a little boy was responsible.

 

[GRT]

Although I did a kind of forensic on BR that would account for his killing JBR and the timing of, I wasn't sure it accounted, in the end, for the overkill. From what we know of him at the time and have been able to observe since, I'd say he does display a broad array of symptoms of Asperger's Syndrome. While his traumas beginning around age 5 didn't cause it - the disorder is developmental - they surely can't have helped. But, were the organic and environmental factors together enough to cause what you describe as the intent to produce extreme harm or suffering, excessive brutality, intense rage, and viciousness? Would some degree of psychopathy also have to have been present for BR to inflict the injuries JBR suffered?

I know you've wondered about this, too, and it turns out we're not alone. This article in Psychology Today
Asperger's Disorder vs. Psychopathy suggests that people with AS tend not to be destructively or calculatedly violent. However, this article Psychiatric comorbidities in asperger syndrome and high functioning autism: diagnostic challenges - Annals of General Psychiatry and this one https://jaapl.org/content/49/4/462 from The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law both confirm that there is such a thing as Autistic Psychopathy; i.e., that AS and psychopathy can be comorbid (but aren't necessarily). In simple terms, the difficulty lies in sorting out whether the lack of empathy in an offender is one symptom among many others (as in AS) or a defining characteristic (as in psychopathy). It's a puzzle and a hot topic. With respect to BR, research shows the two disorders are likelier to overlap if there has been parental neglect and/or childhood trauma.

So where does that leave us? In an uncomfortable spot, I think. We can say that having AS made him very vulnerable to the skewed family dynamics but his lack of empathy may have had darker origins, as well. And that's what many have heard in his statement, "I'm getting on with my life" (One is tempted to ask, 'And do you like fava beans?'). If he is psychopathic, it's likely there would have been further offenses. We don't know of any - but then he does appear to live a somewhat cocooned life; and better management of AS after JBR's death may have dialed down the violent tendencies. His med records prior to the murder weren't sealed, only afterwards. You have to wonder whether that's because they included a new/tentative diagnosis of Autistic Psychopathy.

The problem with this theory is that BR hasn't been diagnosed with Aspergers, so it's all a bit of armchair psychiatry.

Plus, the DSM-5 doesn't list violence as a tendency of Asperger sufferers.

Statistically speaking, Asperger sufferers are more likely to be victims of violence rather than perpetrators.

It's not abnormal for someone who's been unfairly maligned to want to get on with their life. People who lose a loved one go through an immense amount of pain and grief. While finding and convicting a perp may help psychologically, even when that doesn't happen, most express a desire to want to get on with their lives. Gabby Petito's parents just expressed the same sentiment, and I don't think that's abnormal.

Over the years, I've heard so many off-the-wall theories; granted, my theory is off-the-wall as well, but we know that DNA evidence has cleared JBR's family members.

The only thing that attracted me to this specific thread was the term "overkill" in the title. Regardless of who killed JBR, the term overkill simply does not apply. There are many, many murders that are considered overkill, but not hers.

 

[TizerisT]

The DA did the right thing in not charging anyone in the Ramsey household because there was never any evidence that any of them were guilty. There is virtually no evidence of parental coverup. JMOO

In my opinion, LE started off on the wrong foot and it went downhill from there. That can happen when LE sets their sights on convicting someone and then ignores other avenues. And, it can snowball--they can dig their feet in (maybe because they don't want to be shown wrong?), and then they won't listen to reason.

That's what I think happened in this case. Someone badly wanted the Ramsey family to be guilty and so they kept pursuing it, but they were never successful because there was simply no evidence of any crime or coverup.

Yep, and astoundingly we have people on this forum. who, 27 years later, still think this is what happened, despite the mountains of evidence suggesting otherwise. LE were the biggest villians in this case minus the perp

 

[CloudedTruth]

Oh gosh, yes, picturing that scene of PR joining in (cringe). I’d forgotten that. Kit was right in realizing things would go forward on PR’s terms. The thing about Ns, though, is that while they can appear outwardly strong or even domineering, inwardly they are deflated and needy (The compensation is the measure of the wound.).You have to wonder, did PR also want recognition and admiration from Kit? That’s the kind of disordered dynamic that could really mess up a child like BR.

Yes, Ns need recognition and admiration because they are inwardly needy. I do believe that PR falls into that category, hence how important appearance was to her.

I had to deal with a narcissist whom my FIL got involved with after my MIL passed away. It was a nightmare. Part of what made it so in that instance was that both my husband and myself recognized immediately upon meeting her who and what she was, even though we really didn't know much at all about narcissism. We did not confront her, but she sensed that we saw through her so that set the stage for a battle from moment one. I don't think PR was at the same level as this woman was, but certainly their ability to charm others to ensure they are doing their bidding and believe in the hype they are presenting is prominent. Observing that as a child would be confusing, perhaps unsettling. They see things through a lens that is more pure.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Well, I could certainly be wrong, but that at least has a motive--there's virtually no motive for a family member to have killed JBR.

One of the best books I've ever read on the case is called Lou and Jonbenet. Boulder LE brought in homicide detective Lou Smit, and he quickly became disenfranchised with some of the LE who became fixated on the Ramsey's and ignored the strong evidence that an intruder killed JBR. In the book, there's even a photo of the early DNA that cleared the Ramseys--before they were once again cleared more than a decade later.

Your point about the housekeeper refusing a polygraph is also very interesting. The detective, Smit, has since died, but he was convinced the Ramseys were unfairly judged and he was passionate about finding who really killed JBR. From what I understand, his daughters have taken up his quest to obtain justice for the Ramsey family.

At any rate, it's an excellent book and I doubt that anyone who reads it would ever consider the Ramseys as suspects after that. The author (a good friend of Smit') lays out all the evidence in a way that's enlightening.

This is just MOO, but I think the real issue here is egotistical LE that refused to back down even after they're proven wrong.

My theory about the parent of a competitor could be way off base--I readily admit that--but there's simply no evidence that indicates a family member, especially a little boy was responsible.

I would note that a motive is not necessary for an accident. Since we do not know what happened that night, we cannot assume it was pre-meditated murder.

Are we sure the housekeeper refused to take a polygraph test? A source for that would be appreciated, as I have not been able to find anything other than just what some have said on Reddit, etc. We do know that she cooperated with handwriting samples, samples of her hair, etc. She was also a Grand Jury witness under oath.

I think Lou Smit was at his core a good guy, and certainly had a good career record. He was well respected. But a very important quality for a detective / investigator to have and maintain is the ability to be objective. I think Lou very much sympathized with the R's and got too close. They prayed together and their relationship was described as "very tight" by those who knew him. He ended up a friend. If you're going to malign the members of LE who worked this case as being biased, there should be acknowledgement that Lou Smit was as well.

Back to the DNA evidence. The sample from JBR's underwear amounted to 500 picograms (0.5 nanogram). 1 picogram is the equivalent to 1 billionth of 1 crystal of sugar. 1 nanogram is the equivalent to 1 millionth of 1 crystal of sugar. 1 milligram = a single crystal of sugar. 1 gram = 1/4 packet of sugar. 500 picograms = 0.5 nanograms = 0.0000000005 grams.

 

[Gunther Toody]

I would note that a motive is not necessary for an accident. Since we do not know what happened that night, we cannot assume it was pre-meditated murder.

Are we sure the housekeeper refused to take a polygraph test? A source for that would be appreciated, as I have not been able to find anything other than just what some have said on Reddit, etc. We do know that she cooperated with handwriting samples, samples of her hair, etc. She was also a Grand Jury witness under oath.

I think Lou Smit was at his core a good guy, and certainly had a good career record. He was well respected. But a very important quality for a detective / investigator to have and maintain is the ability to be objective. I think Lou very much sympathized with the R's and got too close. They prayed together and their relationship was described as "very tight" by those who knew him. He ended up a friend. If you're going to malign the members of LE who worked this case as being biased, there should be acknowledgement that Lou Smit was as well.

Back to the DNA evidence. The sample from JBR's underwear amounted to 500 picograms (0.5 nanogram). 1 picogram is the equivalent to 1 billionth of 1 crystal of sugar. 1 nanogram is the equivalent to 1 millionth of 1 crystal of sugar. 1 milligram = a single crystal of sugar. 1 gram = 1/4 packet of sugar. 500 picograms = 0.5 nanograms = 0.0000000005 grams.

Smit as well as Mary Lacy both lost their objectivity and suffered from implicit bias in favor of the Ramsey's.

With that mindset, both were looking for evidence that supported their belief rather than accepting the evidence at face value.

 

[GRT]

Smit as well as Mary Lacy both lost their objectivity and suffered from implicit bias in favor of the Ramsey's.

With that mindset, both were looking for evidence that supported their belief rather than accepting the evidence at face value.

Well, someone (several someone's actually) have lost their objectivity, but I don't think it was Smit.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Smit as well as Mary Lacy both lost their objectivity and suffered from implicit bias in favor of the Ramsey's.

With that mindset, both were looking for evidence that supported their belief rather than accepting the evidence at face value.

Agree.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Well, I could certainly be wrong, but that at least has a motive--there's virtually no motive for a family member to have killed JBR.

One of the best books I've ever read on the case is called Lou and Jonbenet. Boulder LE brought in homicide detective Lou Smit, and he quickly became disenfranchised with some of the LE who became fixated on the Ramsey's and ignored the strong evidence that an intruder killed JBR. In the book, there's even a photo of the early DNA that cleared the Ramseys--before they were once again cleared more than a decade later.

Your point about the housekeeper refusing a polygraph is also very interesting. The detective, Smit, has since died, but he was convinced the Ramseys were unfairly judged and he was passionate about finding who really killed JBR. From what I understand, his daughters have taken up his quest to obtain justice for the Ramsey family.

At any rate, it's an excellent book and I doubt that anyone who reads it would ever consider the Ramseys as suspects after that. The author (a good friend of Smit') lays out all the evidence in a way that's enlightening.

This is just MOO, but I think the real issue here is egotistical LE that refused to back down even after they're proven wrong.

My theory about the parent of a competitor could be way off base--I readily admit that--but there's simply no evidence that indicates a family member, especially a little boy was responsible.

I think ego plays far less in a person's mind after they have seen a dead child. Are you saying that all the men and women involved in this case were more interested in being right than seeing justice served?
I may be biased but my father was in LE, he has 3 daughters , if he took a call to someone's home and found a dead little girl, there would be no fiber in his being that wouldn't want to see the correct person punished. The pain of the suspect reoffending would be more than any cop could bare if they screwed up. Are there bad cops? Yes. Every single one involved on this case?
I don't buy that. Have you every seen a deceased child either by murder or accident?
It is the worst thing LE deal with in their career except maybe burn victims.

 

[CloudedTruth]

I think ego plays far less in a person's mind after they have seen a dead child. Are you saying that all the men and women involved in this case were more interested in being right than seeing justice served?
I may be biased but my father was in LE, he has 3 daughters , if he took a call to someone's home and found a dead little girl, there would be no fiber in his being that wouldn't want to see the correct person punished. The pain of the suspect reoffending would be more than any cop could bare if they screwed up. Are there bad cops? Yes. Every single one involved on this case?
I don't buy that. Have you every seen a deceased child either by murder or accident?
It is the worst thing LE deal with in their career except maybe burn victims.

This is an extremely valid point. And if one looks at the totality of the investigation, they were not focusing solely on the R's. But the family is always who they look at first. And here we have a family that had lawyered up before that day was over and who, despite their claims to the contrary did not cooperate with the investigation.

I get really tired of hearing the excuse that the entirety of the Boulder PD was out for them. Did they do everything right? No, admittedly they did not. But let's be honest and also admit that the R's immediately threw up a shield, obstructed and delayed and were quick to hire a PR team in addition to lawyers in order to put their spin on everything from day one, which included saying they were cooperating when they weren't. Even their friends started to suspect something wasn't right. It lead to an argument with Fleet White who told JR to stop hiding behind his lawyers. They acted like they had something to hide.

You are so correct in saying that in particular when it involves a child, most police get very invested in finding the perpetrator. They are deeply affected by these cases. So much so that often they require intensive therapy or even have to leave their jobs, or worse fall into unhealthy habits to cope with the trauma being involved in this cases has caused.

 

[Choices]

I think the pageant bitter rivalry theory is unlikely too, for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which is that no one spoke about or reported that there was a rivalry. With the long list of possible suspects the R’s came up with, that did not make an appearance.

It is my opinion the garrote, etc was part of the coverup, most likely by the parents and not BR, even if he was the perpetrator of the head blow.

The marks on JBR noted in the autopsy report are bruising according to the coroner, not burn marks. The stun gun theory was Lou Smit’s idea, but he couldn’t prove it. The marks do not match a stun gun’s marks. He was dead set on the IDI and the stun gun became part of trying to prove that. Most experts debunked the use of a stun gun.

I should say I am open to all theories despite how it strikes me from the outset. Better than risking tunnel vision like what happened at the Boulder PD. But certain other theories seem to make more sense to prioritize. This is the first I've taken a deeper look at the case so I'm appreciative of learning new details as I go while continuing to research it.
Does the BDI (I take it this means Burke Did It) scenario square up with the facts or evidence? Her whole family was cleared through the DNA found from the underwear and her fingernails. If they're not stun marks then what are they? Another expert did an exeriment on a pig and says it points to this. It can't be bruising.
Another child 9 months later was sexually assaulted in her home 5 mins from the Ramsey house. She also performed in local shows like JB. But there was no one looking into if it may be connected. That case went unsolved too.
John Ramsey at 80 still wants it solved and had been seeking outside help for however many years. Why if he was involved? I'm only a casual true crime observer yet I'm flabbergasted at the Boulder PD - not telling JR to not touch the evidence - he picked up JB from the basement and moved her after finding her. They should have handed it over to investigators with the appropriate expertise.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

This is an extremely valid point. And if one looks at the totality of the investigation, they were not focusing solely on the R's. But the family is always who they look at first. And here we have a family that had lawyered up before that day was over and who, despite their claims to the contrary did not cooperate with the investigation.

I get really tired of hearing the excuse that the entirety of the Boulder PD was out for them. Did they do everything right? No, admittedly they did not. But let's be honest and also admit that the R's immediately threw up a shield, obstructed and delayed and were quick to hire a PR team in addition to lawyers in order to put their spin on everything from day one, which included saying they were cooperating when they weren't. Even their friends started to suspect something wasn't right. It lead to an argument with Fleet White who told JR to stop hiding behind his lawyers. They acted like they had something to hide.

You are so correct in saying that in particular when it involves a child, most police get very invested in finding the perpetrator. They are deeply affected by these cases. So much so that often they require intensive therapy or even have to leave their jobs, or worse fall into unhealthy habits to cope with the trauma being involved in this cases has caused.

I get tired of hearing people parrot the Ramseys complaint that LE zeroed in on them and had tunnel vision. The amount of time and manpower put into this case was immense. How many murdered children have had this much exposure, scrutiny, and professional assistance from the FBI Cryril Wechct, Henry Lee ect.
If you want to examine motive of LE, I think a case with this much exposure would be a big Ole feather in someone's cap to solve, prosecute, and put away the person responsible. That would be a career changing accomplishment. Why hasn't any other LE, FBI, private detective closed this case in 30 years? For the same reason the records are sealed. Another anomaly is the case. Why the secrecy?

LE is not obligated to make suspects happy or better yet give them an opportunity to destroy evidence or flee the country. Had this case been reported as a missing child, I wonder how many supporters the Ramseys would have had. That 6th grade creative writing assignment RN sure served its purpose. Reading it now, it comes off as comical. Had there not been a dead child in another room, I'm thinking LE thought so too. The only thing I fault them for is not scrutinizing BRs homework assignments better because that note was just about on a creative 10 year old level. Not that I think he did, just the validity of it screams " nawww, that be BS"
You hit all the pertinent details as to why the Ramseys made it difficult for LE except one. The blatant and purposeful misdirection that can't be refuted due to the child secrecy shield around BR.