Aphrodite Jones, JonBenet, and Lou Smit?

[eileenhawkeye]

The JBR episode of Aphrodite Jones got 1.07 million viewers, and ID (the channel it was on) averaged 576,000 viewers in prime in the first quarter of 2011. It's a cable channel that a lot of people don't get so you have to factor that into the ratings; they're not comparable to CBS/NBC/FOX/ABC ratings.

 

[UKGuy]

from what I've read I think the fight between the two started because their stories were contradicting,the stuff they both told LE re finding the body,the position of the body ,etc,basically re everything that happened when they went down there.
it's obvious that one of them is lying.
it's beyond my understanding how FW opens the door and doesn't see ANYTHING and when JR opens it he instantly sees the blanket/body.

madeleine,
There are many imponderables in this case, and this is one of them.

Also what motivated FW to return to the wine-cellar? He must have been suspicious and thought where is this, or was he checking what could be seen just by looking in?

Since he missed JonBenet on his first visit, I'll bet he was confused as to why John saw JonBenet immediately.

I think FW thought JonBenet had been moved there that morning, rightly or wrongly, and since any intruder was long gone, he must have seen through the ransom note and had a eureka moment?

He probably could not prove anything directly but his intuition likely had him re-assessing his friends the Ramsey's.

.

 

[roseofsharon]

IMO, it is unbelievable that the R's would have such a vulnerable residence. They didn't use their alarm system, JR apparently broke in the same basement window because he claims he did not have his key one day and the iron grate covering the window area can be easily lifted out and this area is very dark and totally out of street view.

The window appeared to be single glaze. It was an older home, however, this window had not been upgraded.

The entire home, in particular the basement is not secured at all and an intruder is able to reach the children's floor first before they go any farther up the stairs. The R's would not hear a thing.

IMO, the R's, in particular JR was irresponsible in not ensuring his home, with so many floors, was not secured with state of the art security systems, including closed circuit monitors. Money was no issue for the R's.

IMO, who puts their precious children on the second floor and themselves on the third -- this is reckless.

Do we know how many group homes were in the vicinity of the R home in 1996?

These are my opinions and thoughts only. The anger and frustration of this case will never go away.

:banghead:

 

[Maikai]

There should have been things done during the remodeling of the house to make it more secure. Glass block windows would have been an inexpensive start. The security system was old---it could have been upgraded to a more user-friendly system. A security expert should have been brought in when the remodelling plans were drawn up. The Ramseys said they were naive when it came to what was going on in the area and they had a false sense of secuirty. There was all sorts of housing---student..and transcient. Transcients that had been hanging out on the Pearl Street Mall were pushed into the University Hill area, because they couldn't have their dogs on Pearl Street. Some of these transcients were violent. Drug use and crime were both increasing.

 

[DeeDee249]

Drug users want instant money-cash or jewelry- the R house wasn't robbed, though Patsy flashed plenty of jewelry around.
Druggies hanging out on the streets don't kidnap for ransom- then KILL the victim without collecting the ransom.
JB wasn't killed by druggies hanging around the Pearl Street Mall.

 

[Agatha_C]

Like DeeDee said>>>> Nothing was missing, both R's were asked and both said no. Also Jonbenet had on solid gold ring, bracelet, and necklace. She was still wearing them when her body was found.

How would this druggie, have known so much about the R's? Like the amount of JR's bonus or that JBR liked pineapple so much? How did they know that the R's would be gone and for as long as they were or if the R's had a dog and/or that dog would be gone for the night?

This druggie was able to come into the R's home, take their daughter down stairs feed her and give BR a drink and the kids were not afraid enough to wake their parents, BR even went back to bed and never said a word about the stranger down stairs with Jonbenet? This druggie even knew her favorite nightgown and blanket and that PR used to draw hearts in Jonbenets hand to cheer her up.

A stranger did not do this, unless it was Sandy Stranger and Patsy invited her....

 

[joe]

I watched this episode on OnDemand today. I thought it might be helpful to add, I watched another show AJ did on the Zodiac Killer. She featured two people who claimed their fathers/step fathers were the Zodiac. One in particular reproduced a hood similar to what Zodiac wore. I did some reseach on line and found that these two people were hoaxers and the hood turned out not to have any concrete tie to the murders (I believe, I'm not 100%). It does seem she's doing tabloid work. It's too bad, I love the other shows on ID, maybe they'll switch this one out back with Deadly Women for On Demand.

 

[roseofsharon]

Drug users want instant money-cash or jewelry- the R house wasn't robbed, though Patsy flashed plenty of jewelry around.
Druggies hanging out on the streets don't kidnap for ransom- then KILL the victim without collecting the ransom.
JB wasn't killed by druggies hanging around the Pearl Street Mall.

With all due respect to your point DD, I agree with you in that druggies do not kidnap for ransom, however, group homes also include homes for special care and community aftercare for those suffering from major mental illnesses. It is also a known fact that these individuals often have a dual diagnosis -- mental illness and an addiction, so delusions, hallucinations are common and unfortunately, criminal activity is acted out, so it is not out of the realm of possibility that this crime could have been committed by someone with a mental illness under the influence of drugs.

Another case in point -- many individuals sitting in prisons need psychiatric treatment, thus many people with mental illness also have a criminal history.

The infamous M family - California - August 1969 comes to mind with reference to those under the influence and the horrific crimes committed.

The above comments are IMO only.

 

[Whaleshark]

... so it is not out of the realm of possibility that this crime could have been committed by someone with a mental illness under the influence of drugs.

well, that might apply whether it was an intruder or not...

but if you are assuming it's an intruder with a mental illness under the influence of drugs, i would not expect the RN to read the way it does...RN is too personal. A random mentally ill person from a group home would not use the statements about John using that good ole southern common sense of his, nor would he/she be able to successfully navigate the intricacies of that house without having been there multiple times...and then be able to be stealth about it, while also being mentally ill, on drugs, and all the while during a very short window of time while the Rs are sleeping... they would also have to know where to find all the items used on Jonbenet and in the crime...

And the first comment JR made about who did the crime was "this is an inside job".....however, he then blamed everyone from the guy who killed Susannah Chase to his own friends, employees, pedophiles, and friends again....

Point taken though: a mentally ill person would be probable in a case of stalking and obsessive, violent and murderous behavior: Mark David Chapman, John Hinckley come to mind... but if that's the profile we are looking at, then the RN and its message becomes key, and the behavior after that as well. Then this person had to know where the winecellar/storage room was, and again, all the belongings, and familiarity with the house, and be able to do all those things while the parents slept throught it during that small window of time.

And even when trying to abduct a child from his/her own home, which does happen of course: Polly Klaas, Elizabeth Smart, Danielle Van Dam, and Jessica Lunsford - the kidnapper is not sticking around to write ransom note, possibly feed pineapple to, commit crime, and hide body in the house with the family there sleeping the whole time. The kidnapper/rapist/murderer in each of these cases took the children and left as fast as he could, then committed the crimes and murders where he had control in a familiar environment.

Taking all that into consideration, it still makes that scenario less probable than otherwise...

 

[Maikai]

Stealing items, they have to fence them. I think the drug of choice could have been crack. If someone watched "Ransom" the idea could have been hatched---besides the Access article on l2/21/96. The person or persons could have thought their note would work---John would trot off to the bank and get the $118,000, and it would be easy money for a few hours work. I've read people on crack have delusions of grandeur--they think they can do anything. When they come down they can have fits of rage.

The movie lines could have been their idea of a joke, and thought they were being clever. There's also the unexplainable article from the year before that was found when John received an award. There was a red X on John's head----similar to a scene in "Ricochet." The movie lines to me indicates a younger male or two that got their inspiration from "Ranson" and the Access article, that thought this would be easy money.

 

[Whaleshark]

The movie lines to me indicates a younger male or two that got their inspiration from "Ranson" and the Access article, that thought this would be easy money.

yeah, but no.

 

[Whaleshark]

The movie lines to me indicates a younger male or two that got their inspiration from "Ranson" and the Access article, that thought this would be easy money.

yeah, but no.

they would show up with the RN note, materials, and plan...at a minimum. for the note to be written there at the house on the notepad it was on, they either had to be there in the house during the window of time the Rs left for the party, not worrying about when they would return, or sitting up with the flashlights writing it after they were asleep, not worrying about being caught.

...even if they scoped out the place previously, watched them arrive home, had been there waiting...successfully, quietly, navigated the house, got the girl, left the note, thinking it would be easy money....they would slip out as fast as they can with her....if they screwed up while family is right there in the house sleeping, and can't take her for some reason, they aren't going to take the time to stay longer and hide her in a wine cellar they probably didn't know about. they need to leave the body and go....
unless they tied up, knocked out, or incapacitated the family in some way, and are not worried about them at that point. and there's also another child to worry about. that child can also hear things going on....are these guys going to stay and put her down there in that room, in those clothes, with that blanket and her dolls, and leave her there....then still leave the premises undetected just as they came in? if it was that easy to slip in and out, why not take her: dead body or not....and why stay through all that with family simply sleeping upstairs not worried about getting caught?

Even though Leopold and Loeb did kill their victim, and send a RN afterwards, they still kidnapped and took the boy away.

 

[Agatha_C]

If this was a kidnapping gone wrong, why the elaborate staging? Why leave the body when money was the whole object of the crime? I mean really, dead or alive the R's would have paid to get her back.

While on the subject of group homes, where did the druggies plan to keep her hidden once they had gotten her out of the house? I dont think group homes allow such things, I could be wrong (not.

 

[Agatha_C]

Also, why would they have left the ransom note? Indeed, why point to yourself at all if you didnt have too, there was nothing to gain by leaving the child behind and the note. So why? What was the point?

Another thing, why did they leave the brother after they fixed him tea, he could have and would have told? Why did they leave him alive and in the house? They had murdered one child, but another was right upstairs and they were already good friends as they had fixed him iced tea and shared a snack with he and his sister? They were such good friend, that too this day BR has said nothing about them, to his parents, LE, or the Grand jury? NOT!!!!!!

 

[DeeDee249]

No resident of a group home did this. Again- how would they have known about the bonus amount, the pineapple, the nightie, etc. A mentally ill person sane enough not to leave a SINGLE print or DNA at the scene? PLEASE do not bring up the DNA on the clothing. It wouldn't be there and NOWHERE else if it had anything to do with this crime.
There'd be SOMETHING- SOMEWHERE- that was evidence of an intruder. There is ZERO evidence of an intruder.

 

[roseofsharon]

This is the first time I have read about BR and tea?? - could you please let me know the details regarding this - TY and ...

JB was not wearing a nightie -- PR left her white sweater with a silver star on her that she wore that day to the W's on xmas day and put her long johns on the bottom and she apparently slept right through this after being carried up the stairs to bed after the R's arrived home from the W's.

IMO and from the regarding this case.

Regarding the pineapple -- an intruder could easily convince a child to reveal a favourite food to eat and if they had been in the home for a few hours, would have known the pineapple was there.

 

[Whaleshark]

nope, you got more reading to do. PR first stated that JonBenet went to bed in a red turtleneck, then changed her story. Wet balled up red turtleneck was found in the bathroom.

and we're not saying she was found in the nightie...barbie nightie was found in the blanket that she was lying on that was partially covering her.

 

[roseofsharon]

I thought PR stated she wanted JB to be dressed like her for xmas day -- black velvet pants and red turtlenecks, but JB fussed about it with her mom and insisted on the white sweater with the silver star. Hmm, so the red turtleneck found in the sink -- odd considering PR wanted her to wear it.

IMO

 

[azwriter]

yeah, but no.

they would show up with the RN note, materials, and plan...at a minimum. for the note to be written there at the house on the notepad it was on, they either had to be there in the house during the window of time the Rs left for the party, not worrying about when they would return, or sitting up with the flashlights writing it after they were asleep, not worrying about being caught.

...even if they scoped out the place previously, watched them arrive home, had been there waiting...successfully, quietly, navigated the house, got the girl, left the note, thinking it would be easy money....they would slip out as fast as they can with her....if they screwed up while family is right there in the house sleeping, and can't take her for some reason, they aren't going to take the time to stay longer and hide her in a wine cellar they probably didn't know about. they need to leave the body and go....
unless they tied up, knocked out, or incapacitated the family in some way, and are not worried about them at that point. and there's also another child to worry about. that child can also hear things going on....are these guys going to stay and put her down there in that room, in those clothes, with that blanket and her dolls, and leave her there....then still leave the premises undetected just as they came in? if it was that easy to slip in and out, why not take her: dead body or not....and why stay through all that with family simply sleeping upstairs not worried about getting caught?

Even though Leopold and Loeb did kill their victim, and send a RN afterwards, they still kidnapped and took the boy away.

Good post.
Here's where I get stalled. How on earth did an intruder go throughout the home - upstairs, downstairs and all around without leaving one piece of evidence there was a stranger in the home. Stepping alone into the wine cellar where JonBenet was found, would mean the possibility of someone stepping into the mold, getting in on the soles of the shoes and tracking it out into other parts of the basement or home depending on which way this intruder fled.

I had a guy come to my house to fix our garage door. He was here 20 minutes. He stayed in the garage except for a quick step into the house to use the phone in the kitchen. He left a footprint on the kitchen tile floors from the dust on the floor of the gargage. He also left mud in the drive-way that fell from the tires of his truck. And, although I didn't check I'm sure his fingerprints were on the phone and the garage door or equipment.

Even if the intruder in the Ramsey home wore gloves, chances are he'd have take then off to write the very long ransom note.

As far as I'm concerned the chances are slim someone could enter the house, have that much time and access to the different parts of the home and not leave ONE single clue or piece of evidence he was there. JMO

 

[roseofsharon]

Good post.
Here's where I get stalled. How on earth did an intruder go throughout the home - upstairs, downstairs and all around without leaving one piece of evidence there was a stranger in the home. Stepping alone into the wine cellar where JonBenet was found, would mean the possibility of someone stepping into the mold, getting in on the soles of the shoes and tracking it out into other parts of the basement or home depending on which way this intruder fled.

I had a guy come to my house to fix our garage door. He was here 20 minutes. He stayed in the garage except for a quick step into the house to use the phone in the kitchen. He left a footprint on the kitchen tile floors from the dust on the floor of the gargage. He also left mud in the drive-way that fell from the tires of his truck. And, although I didn't check I'm sure his fingerprints were on the phone and the garage door or equipment.

Even if the intruder in the Ramsey home wore gloves, chances are he'd have take then off to write the very long ransom note.

As far as I'm concerned the chances are slim someone could enter the house, have that much time and access to the different parts of the home and not leave ONE single clue or piece of evidence he was there. JMO

Just being devil's advocate for a minute AZ, but there was a very high profile murder case in Canada recently regarding a very prominent man who did enter people's homes, looked in drawers, stealing undergarments, and some of the people who were victimized did not even realize their underwear had been stolen until it was shown to them to identify or that their homes had been broken into and this guy took at good look around!

I think if there was an intruder, it wasn't the first time they had been in that home and the home was not secure -- maybe obsessed with the R's and resentment of their affluent lifestyle.

If the R's did this, are we to believe they took the time to walk through their entire home wiping up this powder from the wine cellar before calling police?

Just my own thoughts and opinions.:twocents: