By Accident Or On Purpose Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey?

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

By Accident or on Purpose Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey?

  • An Intruder Killed JonBenet and Covered Up the Crime

    Votes: 38 7.1%
  • Patsy Ramsey Acted Alone in Killing JonBenet and Covering Up the Crime

    Votes: 23 4.3%
  • John Ramsey Acted Alone in Killing JonBenet and Covering Up the Crime

    Votes: 4 0.7%
  • Burke Killed JonBenet with Patsy and John Helping to Cover Up the Crime

    Votes: 394 73.4%
  • John and Patsy Acted Together in Killing JonBenet and Covering Up the Crime

    Votes: 30 5.6%
  • Other/I Don't Know

    Votes: 48 8.9%

  • Total voters
    537
If anyone can find a Ramsey quote anywhere where they say "we lost someone very dear/special/we loved etc" and not "we lost something" referring to JonBenet, I'll eat my hat. It might be a small point but it says so much about them.

Not to mention Patsy's favourite term, "that child".
 
If anyone can find a Ramsey quote anywhere where they say "we lost someone very dear/special/we loved etc" and not "we lost something" referring to JonBenet, I'll eat my hat. It might be a small point but it says so much about them.

Ms World perhaps.
 
I believe Patsy lost her temper with her daughter for wetting the bed. She had tried everything to stop JonBenet from this "horrible" lazy habit. (I have heard a group of bed wetting parents discuss the frustration of having a bed wetter. I believe that she wet the bed and Patsy was so mad she lost control right after she drug her into the kitchen in the middle of the night to eat pineapple. Pineapple is believed by some to reduce the ordor of body fluids. I think she used a taser to shock her when she was trying to train her and somehow JonBenet died. The rest of the night she staged her crime. I do not think John knew until after the little girl was dead and figured he would lose everything if he lost Patsy too. The son was just an unwanted bystander in their life...Patsy could not dress him up or show him off.
None of the above matches any evidence.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G920A using Tapatalk
 
It is seriously disturbing some of the theories that are put forth about the family. Just my opinion.

Sent from my 5017O using Tapatalk
 
It is seriously disturbing some of the theories that are put forth about the family. Just my opinion.

Sent from my 5017O using Tapatalk

juli99,
Sure, but you know about 90% of it is factually correct, its just how you interpret it.

e.g. Patsy was on various kinds of tranquilizers at the time JonBenet was killed, all medically prescribed, nothing illegal, so you can play that fact many ways.

People magazine quoted that fact out of one of her interviews with BPD, in an issue this year.


.
 
Not to mention Patsy's favourite term, "that child".

While I agree that some of her other comments are "off", this is actually one of those regional things. I've heard Southerners in particular use the phrase in an affectionate way. "Why, I could just hug that child and kiss those chubby little cheeks all day".
 
Let them eat cake:

There was a funnel web that connected the iron grating over the window well to the window frame which was not disturbed and which was broken when opened by LE after photos. Entomologists identified the spider and noted that such a spider could not make that web in a few hours but most importantly did not make webs in the winter. So, the undisturbed web was crucial to eliminate the 'intruder through the basement window' theory. Another web was formed in the lower left corner of the window opening which would have been eradicated by anyone sliding through that narrow space. It too remained intact.

Debris from the window well was undisturbed meaning no one stood on it or slid over it to get through the window. No debris was found on the floor under the window which necessarily would have clung to the shoes and clothing of the 'intruder' and fallen off as he landed into the basement or have been brushed into the house as he slid through the tiny opening.

No one entered through that window that night. Period.

The DA 'cleared' the Rs on tDna which, if taken as a whole and on it's face, would mean that SIX people were in the house, molesting and killing JBR. SIX. Yep, SIX different human tDNA cells were found on JBR's body, at least one was a female. The DA never suggested that a team of intruders committed this murder but following the logic that tDNA proved the R innocence should have noted the SIX foreign samples found. Further, the tDNA from the underpants and longjohns on which the DA based her claims is in fact mixed DNA from 2 individuals, not one, and consists of only 4 markers, not the requisite 13 to make a profile. It was junk, evidence of nothing.

Then consider that all brand new clothing has human cells on it and that brand new panties in the package would be contaminated with human cells from workers in the manufacturing process, and the idea that the tDNA found eliminated the parents is simply preposterous.

On the DNA subject....wasn't her body also moved upstairs and placed basically in a high traffic area of the house? Who knows how many people's DNA could have been in that area.
 
Yes. Most likely the work of a sexual predator, not the family. Just my unpopular opinion.

Sent from my 5017O using Tapatalk

Not only an unpopular opinion juli99 but no longer permitted to be discussed here by the owner of Websleuths.
 
Not only an unpopular opinion juli99 but no longer permitted to be discussed here by the owner of Websleuths.
That is truly bizarre. Well, I will not be participating then.

Sent from my 5017O using Tapatalk
 
Why is that Tortoise? Just curious, I've been to a fair few boards about this case and every angle was allowed to be discussed.
 
Why is that Tortoise? Just curious, I've been to a fair few boards about this case and every angle was allowed to be discussed.

Tricia made a post about it in the stickies. Let me know if you can't find it and I'll post a link.
 
And a generic intruder is not pulling in innocent people. Anyway, I am out of here.

Sent from my 5017O using Tapatalk
 
John had an older daughter who made claims of sexual abuse and cult activity within the home She died in a "car accident" shortly after coming forward with this information. I believe her. And I think John and Patsy conditioned Jon Benet for the very same thing. They let someone abuse their daughter and he accidentally killed her. That's my two cents at least.

I have never heard this before. Are you sure about what you state in your post?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
As a contributor with 30 years practice in child protection, I have to say there was something very wrong with the Ramsey's parenting.
It appears to me that the children were quite neglected emotionally. Jon-Benet was given a role to fulfill for her mother and grandmother so she had a job at 6, which required hair dye and I'm sure endless rehearsals. I'm not sure of Burke's job unless it was to please his mother who was overly concerned about appearances. The scatology is seriously concerning because it indicates a child who was extremely unhappy about something, as does the bed wetting. Both parents strike me as cold, with the children low on the list of priorities except when required to perform. Both those issues re bed wetting and scatology are indicators of sexual abuse, although I can't say who might be responsible. Whatever it is, it required the parents to be the least helpful in the discovery of suspects. That is truly unusual behaviour by parents who had a murdered child. Whatever it is we don't know, must be so awful that we will probably never know.
Thank you for your input - good post. This is how I see the family, too. I also see PR as Bthe narcissistic mother with boundary issues - enmeshed with JB (not only the youngest, but the daughter), but lacking the ability to discipline BR (now that he is older, replaced, and she is no longer enmeshed with him as much).

I'm reminded of a couple of things. Nedra Paugh's inappropriate comment about the size of BR's genitalia (sry, I'm not able to find the quote right now), and the books purchased by the Paughs and sent to the Ramseys on childhood behavior. They were intriguing if not foreboding.
• The Hurried Child, Growing Up Too Fast, David Elkind
• Children at Risk, Dobson & Bruer
• Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From Wrong, Kilpatrick
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
198
Guests online
1,692
Total visitors
1,890

Forum statistics

Threads
605,667
Messages
18,190,586
Members
233,492
Latest member
edlynch
Back
Top