DNA - conclusive?

[Lacy Wood]

I don't subscribe to Lacy Wood's "pageant-stunt theory", but I think that most agree that this was not, and probably never was, a kidnapping. Your "foreign faction" theory, IMO, is equally ludicrous. I think it is fair to say that the Ramseys, their supporters, their worst enemies, and most members of LE, both in Boulder and the FBI, agree with me on that one.

Voice of Reason

I have brought up the idea of a pageant scheme, but not quite as a theory that stands alone. It is actually a conjecture for a possible reason for that note to have been written by PR prior to the events unfolding Christmas night. The early popular theories (my "theory" is from 1997) of the case usually said one of two things: 1. An intruder made himself at home and wrote the note waiting for the Ramseys to come home. 2. JonBenet was killed by accident or otherwise by a family member and the note was written to create an intruder issue. The problems with the intruder-written note idea are obvious, I believe, but I also could not envision the family writing that note over a dead child. The references to a number of movie lines, flights of fancy, etc seem to me to be the product of refering to notes or relaxed, imaginative reaching, as opposed to a panicked or frenzied composition.

In a sense of clarifying, I would personally describe my view as more of a prior note theory. Just as you do, I believe, I look at the known evidence and try to form a theory that is reasonably consistent with the facts and inferences. The pageant scheme scenario is only viable if the note was written earlier, and if it was written earlier, there could be a different reason.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Voice of Reason

I have brought up the idea of a pageant scheme, but not quite as a theory that stands alone. It is actually a conjecture for a possible reason for that note to have been written by PR prior to the events unfolding Christmas night. The early popular theories (my "theory" is from 1997) of the case usually said one of two things: 1. An intruder made himself at home and wrote the note waiting for the Ramseys to come home. 2. JonBenet was killed by accident or otherwise by a family member and the note was written to create an intruder issue. The problems with the intruder-written note idea are obvious, I believe, but I also could not envision the family writing that note over a dead child. The references to a number of movie lines, flights of fancy, etc seem to me to be the product of refering to notes or relaxed, imaginative reaching, as opposed to a panicked or frenzied composition.

In a sense of clarifying, I would personally describe my view as more of a prior note theory. Just as you do, I believe, I look at the known evidence and try to form a theory that is reasonably consistent with the facts and inferences. The pageant scheme scenario is only viable if the note was written earlier, and if it was written earlier, there could be a different reason.

Lacy Wood,

I wasn't trying to knock your theory. I was just trying to make a point to Holdontoyourhat regarding his/her theory. I find your theory interesting because it takes a different angle.

VoR

 

[Lacy Wood]

IMO, this fake kidnapping idea joins many other wishful thinkers.

Wishful thinking is when you take a brutal killing by a child killer still on the loose, an unpopular idea for obvious reasons, and wrap it up to make it look like a rich family's scandal.

Earth to Holdontoyourhat: It WAS a fake kidnapping. Remember? The body was in the basement. "They" never took her. Exploring ideas that explore WHY there would be a fake note, with the body in the basement, is a big part of why this forum exists. When you suggest people and their ideas you reject are "wishful thinkers" and "wishful thinking", you identify your own agenda here. The sentence above ("Wishful thinking is when you....") is an illogical attack on objective posting, i.e., by assuming your own conclusion to be true, you use that as justification to suggest others are distorting and have false motives...("wrap it up to make it look like a rich family's scandal.") You''ll need persuasive arguments to be convincing, not labels.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Thanks for your comments Tipper.

My thought about the pageants projected toward the Miss America pageant which some think was in Mom's mind. You may have noticed that you can't be Miss America anymore without an issue to overcome such as a disease, handicap, ethnic "liability" or something similar. Being a kidnap survivor might make up for being an issueless white rich girl.

I have not read "Fatal Justice". I'll check the library.

How do you get to this POV from the evidence? You've got a 3 page ransom note, a garrote, a strangled AND headbashed 6 year old, and that's about it. IMO, the girl was murdered in two ways to make sure she was dead, so she could not identify her killer.

 

[Rainsong]

Perhaps I should have qualified that statement for you, Rainsong, since it seems you didn't understand we were speaking in DNA terms. For DNA purposes, we are all the same under our skin.

Yes, I knew about the bones.

While the title of the thread deals with DNA, your post did not. Instead, you dealt with ethnicity which is not the same as race.

Rainsong

 

[tipper]

Earth to Holdontoyourhat: It WAS a fake kidnapping. Remember? The body was in the basement. "They" never took her. Exploring ideas that explore WHY there would be a fake note, with the body in the basement, is a big part of why this forum exists. When you suggest people and their ideas you reject are "wishful thinkers" and "wishful thinking", you identify your own agenda here. The sentence above ("Wishful thinking is when you....") is an illogical attack on objective posting, i.e., by assuming your own conclusion to be true, you use that as justification to suggest others are distorting and have false motives...("wrap it up to make it look like a rich family's scandal.") You''ll need persuasive arguments to be convincing, not labels.

Not to be too persnickety but legally, if anyone other than her family moved her from her bedroom to the basement it WAS a kidnapping.

 

[Jayelles]

While the title of the thread deals with DNA, your post did not. Instead, you dealt with ethnicity which is not the same as race.

Rainsong

Could you explain your reasoning here? How is WY confusing race with ethicity? Her post was quite clearly "biologically speaking" and not "culturally speaking".

 

[Voice of Reason]

IMO, the girl was murdered in two ways to make sure she was dead, so she could not identify her killer.

Doesn't this quote of yours destroy your foreign-faction theory? How would JBR identify a member of a foreign faction? Your post suggests she knew her killer.

 

[Lacy Wood]

How do you get to this POV from the evidence? You've got a 3 page ransom note, a garrote, a strangled AND headbashed 6 year old, and that's about it. IMO, the girl was murdered in two ways to make sure she was dead, so she could not identify her killer.

My idea was presented as one reason a note could have been written prior to the night of the 25th. I suggested the possibility to deal with the fact that a note like that seems unlikely from an intruder or from murderous or grieving parents. I realize you have suggested a "literal" acceptance of the note and a "real" small foreign faction, but the fact JonBenet was not taken away makes the note contents inconsistent with the reality of what happened, and suspect in its entirety. When the real origin of the note is explained, the case is essentially solved...and if the note should turn out to have been written in advance by someone in the family, then "unlikely" events a priori become not just likely, but certain.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Doesn't this quote of yours destroy your foreign-faction theory? How would JBR identify a member of a foreign faction? Your post suggests she knew her killer.

Have you ever heard of a lineup? That's when the cops line up their prime suspect along with some of their coworkers, and the witness is able to pick out the prime suspect. Your post is interesting, though.

 

[Voice of Reason]

Have you ever heard of a lineup? That's when the cops line up their prime suspect along with some of their coworkers, and the witness is able to pick out the prime suspect. Your post is interesting, though.

So what you're saying is that a member of a foreign faction killed JBR, but he did so twice, just in case he were discovered in his foreign home and brought back to America for a lineup in which ?? would identify him as the killer?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Doesn't this quote of yours destroy your foreign-faction theory? How would JBR identify a member of a foreign faction? Your post suggests she knew her killer.

There are at least three ways JBR, having survived, would be able to identify a member of a foreign faction. First, she could pick him out from a lineup. Second, she could have helped police to create a sketch, and then anyone worldwide could tie in the sketch with the handwriting. Third, JBR could simply recognize him in public.

My post never suggested she knew her killer. You suggested it.

IMO, the combination of headbashing and strangling was assurance for the perp that she would not live to tell. If anything, it suggests an experienced perp.

 

[Voice of Reason]

There are at least three ways JBR, having survived, would be able to identify a member of a foreign faction. First, she could pick him out from a lineup. Second, she could have helped police to create a sketch, and then anyone worldwide could tie in the sketch with the handwriting. Third, JBR could simply recognize him in public.

My post never suggested she knew her killer. You suggested it.

IMO, the combination of headbashing and strangling was assurance for the perp that she would not live to tell. If anything, it suggests an experienced perp.

I think that anyone in LE would disagree with this. I did suggest she knew her killer, but I did so based on your post...the way you portrayed the events tends to point towards someone JBR knew. The "overkilling" does not suggest an experienced perp, but a perp known to the victim. This is LE 101. Are you suggesting that an experienced knows better than to assume the victim is dead after strangling her, because it has been his experience that sometimes victims are still alive and then spot them in public or pick them out of a lineup? I think you're just diggin yourself a hole...

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I think that anyone in LE would disagree with this. I did suggest she knew her killer, but I did so based on your post...the way you portrayed the events tends to point towards someone JBR knew. The "overkilling" does not suggest an experienced perp, but a perp known to the victim. This is LE 101. Are you suggesting that an experienced knows better than to assume the victim is dead after strangling her, because it has been his experience that sometimes victims are still alive and then spot them in public or pick them out of a lineup? I think you're just diggin yourself a hole...

Again I don't think I suggested what you have described above. Maybe if you replace the term 'still alive' with 'resuscitated,' you'd be closer to my POV.