I can't find a hole in this theory...

[Chrishope]

ok, I've been doing some back reading, and this is something I noticed. The woman who claimed she heard the scream, woke her husband up, and He was the neighbor who reported the metal on concrete noise. I couldn't find where he had been discredited, so since his wife is the one who woke him up, IMO, his story lends credence to her original statement. I mean, what are the odds that she woke up for no reason, imagined a scream, but then he heard, the late night metal on concrete noise? Also, another neighbor noticed the flashlight lighting, and another neighbor noticed a sunroom light turned off, for the 1st time ever. So, when all of these statements are put together, the neighborhood noticed a lot of unusual goings on that night moo.

OK, but how does this help solve the crime? Let's say that a scream was heard (It was apparently more than "negative energy") and it was someone in the Rs household who made the metal scraping on concrete noise. Now what?


How do we know it was JB who screamed? Even if we assume it was JB, so what? What do we do with that info? Why did she scream? Because of what was done to her vagina? Because she saw the golf club coming at her? Because the garrotte was being very slowly tightened which scared her but still provided her enough breath for a final scream? Because it was the first time she'd ever seen a grown man's penis enlarged by sexual excitement? Because Burke was threatening her with his knife?

What made the scraping on concrete noise? Moving paint cans, or something else? Who did it; PR, BR, JR, the intruder?

As far as we can tell, the scream fits any scenario -IDI, JDI, PDI, JDI/PDI, BDI, and any other I may have omitted. It can just as well be left out of each and every theory.

It may be interesting to speculate on why JB screamed. It may be interesting to speculate on why the paint cans were moved. But none of it actually assists us in solving the crime. People feel obliged to weave the scream into a scenario so we end up getting questionable notions such as - she was clubbed in the head to silence her after she screamed. Why not just place a hand over her mouth?

 

[dodie20]

JDI scenario. JBR already dead, placed in blanket, in WC. JR needs to get PR and BR out of the house to buy the time, to get rid of JBR body. How to explain PR the absence of JBR in the morning? How to explain other members of his family and his friends that JBR is gone? JR, as the 'problem-solving' CEO, got an idea. He writes the following 'kidnapping' note: 'Mr. Ramsey, you're a scambag and it's time to PAY! We have your daughter! In exchange for your daughter, you must do the following. Take your wife and son to airport IMMIDIETLY. Upon arrival, go to public phone and call 123-4567. You'll get instruction for the next step. If you'll do exectly what we said - you'll be able to go on vacation with your daughter as was planned. One wrong move - and your daughter is DEAD.'


Not boring?:woohoo:

I've always wondered why the author went into so much detail about the different ways JB would be killed, when 1 'kill' or 'dead' would have been enough. Really, the only logical answer, was to give them an excuse to not call the cops. JR would seem like the most likely suspect here, because surely PR wouldn't have thought she could find a way to dispose of a body. Though, when I read the note, I detected some indecisiveness about what to do with the body, (proper burial or not)... but, if PR was the guilty one, she did some extreme things, and somebody who could do those things, probably, could go ahead and finish the job. Maybe dispose of her before the others woke up? There Was that suitcase in the basement...moo

 

[UKGuy]

Some BDIs believe the plan was to let the cops find both the RN and the body.

The thinking (if that word can be used) is that A) it's better than leaving her naked in her bed and calling the cops, and B) the cops will just shrug their shoulders and say "So, there's a minor inconsistency, let's just ignore it".

Of course there is also C) the Rs are narcissists and therefore just assume their plan is superior, despite the contradiction.

Don't loose hope doc, most RDIs have considered that the original plan was to dump the body. The note makes that obvious. So most have gotten half way there.

Chrishope,
Dumping the body would offer the appearance of a bona fide kidnapping, but it actually suffers from the same flaw, that dumping JonBenet in the wine-cellar has: she has patently not been kidnapped, even a dead body can be ransomed!

So docg's assumption regarding JR's convoluted plan to dump JonBenet outdoors whilst collecting the ransom demand, would eventually run into the same problems as that offered by the wine-cellar. The only distinction would be the time factor, possibly enough for the R's to escape Colorado?

So maybe most RDI consider an outdoor deposition, then alike the R's recognize it has disadvantages. So like the R's they consider hiding the body can substitute for the outdoor deposition, not perfect, but the R's did not have many options, and they might gain the time required to escape?

The R's simply rolled the dice that morning, messed up as much forensic evidence and called the legal team in, and it eventually it all worked out in their favor!


.

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,
Dumping the body would offer the appearance of a bona fide kidnapping, but it actually suffers from the same flaw, that dumping JonBenet in the wine-cellar has: she has patently not been kidnapped, even a dead body can be ransomed!

So docg's assumption regarding JR's convoluted plan to dump JonBenet outdoors whilst collecting the ransom demand, would eventually run into the same problems as that offered by the wine-cellar. The only distinction would be the time factor, possibly enough for the R's to escape Colorado?

So maybe most RDI consider an outdoor deposition, then alike the R's recognize it has disadvantages. So like the R's they consider hiding the body can substitute for the outdoor deposition, not perfect, but the R's did not have many options, and they might gain the time required to escape?

The R's simply rolled the dice that morning, messed up as much forensic evidence and called the legal team in, and it eventually it all worked out in their favor!


.

Except that the dumped body first has to be found. Meanwhile the kidnapping scenario is plausible. Then, when and if (more like when) it's found, it's still plausible that the kidnappers dumped her.

The police would of course suspect that the Rs had dumped her (I mean, as one possibility) but if the evidence were successfully destroyed, there would be no case.

The body in the WC, by contrast, does not make for a plausible kidnapping scenario. So hiding the body in the WC really isn't a good substitute for dumping it somewhere.

If the body were dumped there would be no need of an "escape" plan.

 

[OpenMind4U]

Not boring, no. But not relevant either. How does rewriting the ransom note explain why the 911 call was made so early?

DocG, with your sense of humor, c'mon!...Don't you see that RN is the ONLY evidence in JBR case that stands by itself as the 'joke' to the logical thinking mankind as well as to 'kidnappers' community. Just let yourself laugh a little...I'm sure you're not taking this RN seriously, right?...because nobody did!

 

[BOESP]

<snipped for non-essential comments>

Don't loose hope doc, most RDIs have considered that the original plan was to dump the body. The note makes that obvious. So most have gotten half way there.

Really? Where is the empirical evidence report that supports the statement bold-cased above?

Sweeping generalities .....

 

[dodie20]

As I stated in my blog, the minute you start to speculate about all the many aspects of this case that might or might not be relevant, that might or might not be evidence, that someone said or saw or thought or suspected, then: Abandon All Hope Ye Who Enter Here. It is a morass. Internet sleuths and even experienced LE professionals have been floundering around in this morass for years, and gotten nowhere, so why keep rehashing all this old old stuff that ultimately tells us nothing?

because even if it doesn't solve the case, it's still a piece to the puzzle, and IMO, no pieces should be tossed out. In this situation for instance, it's logical to assume that if the neighbors heard and saw out of the ordinary things, going on in the Ramsey house, then the people in the Ramsey house, saw and heard the same things. I know this goes against some theories, of only 1 person being in the know, but all of these witness statements shouldn't be ignored. And personally, I think there's enough evidence to back up the original statement of the scream, to take it seriously. IMO, there are a few possibilities here...either JR, PR, or BR made JB scream, and the others investigated, or PR made JB scream, and it was ignored by the others, because they were used to PR and JB fighting and screaming, (backed up by the housekeeper). But even if this is what happened, they had a good idea of what happened, when JB was missing the next morning. So, after considering all the neighbor's statements, I think it's slim that anybody except PR, acted completely alone. MOO.

 

[DeeDee249]

I really don't mean to offend the many sincere people who want to learn more about the case and feel the need to take all the various elements seriously. That is commendable. The problem is that when we do take all this seriously, we are stumbling in a morass -- and to illustrate what I mean, let's take the example of the scream lady and her husband.

The alleged scream has been used to cast doubt on the intruder theory, since one would suppose that such a scream would awaken everyone in the house. But according to the Ramseys they heard no scream and slept soundly. Sounds like they were lying. Score one for RDI.

But her husband testified he heard the sound of metal on concrete, which suggests the sound the grate over the window well would make when being moved. Sounds like an intruder. Score one for IDI.

Now let's assume both reports are accurate. What do we have? A score of 0. Nada. And multiply that by all the other inconclusive and contradictory reports and evidence and, yes, we have a morass.

The metal scraping concrete was not the window grate- here's my reasoning:
The scream that awoke the neighbor caused her to wake her husband right away. He THEN heard the "metal scraping concrete". The "intruders" had LOTS more to do after that scream- write the note, stage the body, etc. They would not have moved that grate back into place within seconds or even minutes of the scream. It would have been a few hours.
Besides, on the concrete floor of the wineceller were some paint cans and a large piece of sheet metal that covered a small floor safe. I feel they are more likely causes of the metal scraping sound.

 

[midwest mama]

Not true. I was informed on good authority that my theory was in fact the original theory held by the investigators, i.e., John operating on his own with Patsy out of the loop. It was only after John was ruled out as writer of the note that the picture changed. And that's a big part of my argument, that this was a huge mistake. If we rule John back IN, then there's no reason not to reinstate the original theory, as developed by the original investigative team, assisted by the FBI.

Did some more reading on the case this evening and verify that initally the investigators did see JR as their prime suspect. Here is something else that stymied me (from the Jon Benet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia):

FBI Assessment. "The FBI believed that JonBenet's vaginal trauma was not consistent with a history of sexual abuse, and they had turned up no evidence of any other type of abuse. The sexual violation of JonBenet, whether pre or postmortem did not appear to have been committed for the perpetrators gratification. The penetration, which caused minor genital trauma, was more likely part of a staged crime scene intended to mislead the police."

This being the opinion of the FBI, who we should be able to respect as a top authority on the evidence/facts of the case, would lead us away from thinking Burke might have been involved with JB in sex play. :waitasec: Bummer, I really want to include that aspect in my theory - it makes me feel more empathetic for JR and PR having to be involved in the final deeds.

Then, from the same info source:
"Dr. Robert Kirschner of the University of Chicago's pathology department went even further, pointing out that her vaginal opening was twice the normal size for six-year-olds. He stated, "The genital injuries indicate penetration, not only (previously) by a penis, but by another instrument and are evidence of molestation that night as well as previous molestation." "If she had been taken to a hospital emergency room, and doctors had seen the genital evidence, her father would have been arrested"

And, from PMPT, pg 56: "Under the black light, the coroner saw a residue on the child's upper thigh that could have come from semen, though residue from blood and even from certain kinds of soaps could appear the same way under the black light. Nevertheless, the detectives conjectured that they were semen traces." :what: I can see that this is one of those places where conjecture could not hold up in a courtroom, but if we are supposed to be looking at a case and forming a theory based upon the opinions of credible sources, I think the case detectives deserve our respect of their opinion.

Taking into consideration the statements above, now I have to take an even closer look at JR as being more heinous than I already think he is. So, while some of us keep going round the same old circle track, bear in mind that a pit stop to take on new fuel can make some serious changes to the outcome at the finish line!

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

She flip-flopped again, later admitting she did actually hear a scream. Possibly she was "leaned on" to retract her original statement. I do know she was so shaken up by being mixed up in all this that they moved away shortly after. Personally I believe she heard a scream that woke her up. But I will say that her changing her story twice doesn't help her credibility.

A neighbor is woke up between midnight and two in the morning by a child's terrified scream and it suddenly stops. You wake your husband and he hears a grating sound. The next day you find out a child that lived across the street from you has been murdered. I think she heard JonBenet scream and it stopped because she'd been hit and was down.

Were metal trash cans used in the Ramsey's neighborhood?

 

[UKGuy]

Explains what away? Patsy stated that she wouldn't have used that spoon with that bowl. Your suspicions regarding that totally innocuous statement say more about you than Patsy. And this is only one of many instances where zealots on both sides literally manufacture evidence from nothing, sort of like spinning gold from straw. Only in this case you're not spinning gold but nonsense.




I was trying to get you to see how close your own thought process was to that of Lacy and Smit. You have the same tendency to extrapolate from evidence that is clearly inconclusive to evidence that's proof positive of either 1. an intruder or 2. a Ramsey conspiracy. Inconclusive means inconclusive. You can spin it for years and it will remain inconclusive. So why not move on to consider other possibilities?



Sorry, but Patsy had already announced the existence of the note to the 911 operator. Too late to destroy it, wouldn't you say? And why bother with the practice note? The 900 pound elephant is sitting on top of the one that goes on for 2 1/2 pages.



You actually think the note is genuine? Authored by John? That's about the strangest take on this case I've ever heard. So John is the kidnapper? Whew, maybe you belong on another forum.



Well, what was it then? What plan do you see?

As for forensic evidence, there is NO evidence even suggesting Patsy killed her daughter or constructed the garotte. The fiber evidence is easily explainable, so would probably be tossed out in court. The only thing resembling real evidence is her handwriting, and admittedly certain "experts" claim she wrote the note. However, none of those that count, i.e., those hired by the authorities, have been anywhere near so certain and some have seen no reason to believe she wrote it. Sorry, but that is very far from conclusive.

As for Patsy's behavior, I must say it's amazing to me how so much has been made of so little. She looked between her fingers? She cried out when the body of her daughter was brought upstairs. And because this sort of behavior is unacceptable to YOU, that means she killed her daughter? That means she staged a kidnapping? Again this sort of thing isn't even hearsay, it's just someone's opinion based on nothing at all.

docg,
mmm. lots of ad hominem rhetoric there, not much substance though, no evidentiary explanations. I reckon you know your theory has some serious holes in it.

Elsewhere you remark: Not true. I was informed on good authority that my theory was in fact the original theory held by the investigators, i.e., John operating on his own with Patsy out of the loop..

So for your version of JDI to be valid it has to pass the Patsy Test, Patsy's behaviour has to be consistent with her ignorance about JR being the guilty party.

And this is where it falls down, without repeating all the examples where Patsy acts in collusion with John, you should simply accept, your theory is fine until it is examined in detail.

If it is JDI, and it might be, then I agree JR probably considered dumping JonBenet outdoors, this fits in with an abduction plan. But something patently changed his mind, you reckon it was an unforeseen event over which he had no control, others can have different views, but still uphold a JDI theory.



.

 

[Chrishope]

A neighbor is woke up between midnight and two in the morning by a child's terrified scream and it suddenly stops. You wake your husband and he hears a grating sound. The next day you find out a child that lived across the street from you has been murdered. I think she heard JonBenet scream and it stopped because she'd been hit and was down.

Were metal trash cans used in the Ramsey's neighborhood?

The idea that the scream stopped when she was clubbed on the head is a popular one, and a possibility. I've always been skeptical of it. It would be so much easier to place a hand over the mouth, not to mention much quicker than rearing back and striking with a golf club or maglite.

 

[carole]

The idea that the scream stopped when she was clubbed on the head is a popular one, and a possibility. I've always been skeptical of it. It would be so much easier to place a hand over the mouth, not to mention much quicker than rearing back and striking with a golf club or maglite.

BBM

Exactly, we don't know that the head injury was in response to the scream. The strike could have been later, we don't know why it happened.

 

[rashomon]

Regardless of any other evidence you might want to think of, in order to make a case you HAVE to get beyond this fundamental problem. That's what I think I've done. But if you have a better solution, by all means share it.

I have a few theories/possible scenarios, one of them (PDI) I shared here on the 'Members Theories' thread several years ago:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20426&page=2
(post # 46)

Today, I lean more toward sexual abuse having played a substantial role. (I also have a theory/possible scenario on that).

Kolar's book (which I have only scanned over so far, but will go through in detail soon) seems to be another bombshell. Maybe this case is simpler than we all thought?

 

[SyraKelly]

Docg-I read your *scenario*and my question may prove I know nothing about sleuthing- LOL-But here it goes
If John wrote the RN & wanted to do all the things in your scenario-Pasty not calling 911,getting B & P out of the house etc etc...Why did John leave the RN for Pasty to find
Wouldn't it have been more likely that the *kidnappers* would have left the RN on his study desk-so he pretends to find it..goes to Pasty & says...Pasty-we have a serious issue,JB has been kidnapped & their is a RN-If Pasty asked to see the RN-all he had to say was-NO-I don't want to scare you-just do as I say.Pack you & Burke a bag-I am going to take you to the airport-I will take care of everything-I 'll do as they say- get her back- met you & Burke wherever...This way no 911 call,no Pasty or Burke in house. he can get all the other things done.This is just a short version of what might have happened -so please don't take every word as literal....i typed this fast-my cable guy is here-so please excuse all typos!!!

 

[InstantProof]

Docg-I read your *scenario*and my question may prove I know nothing about sleuthing- LOL-But here it goes
If John wrote the RN & wanted to do all the things in your scenario-Pasty not calling 911,getting B & P out of the house etc etc...Why did John leave the RN for Pasty to find
Wouldn't it have been more likely that the *kidnappers* would have left the RN on his study desk-so he pretends to find it..goes to Pasty & says...Pasty-we have a serious issue,JB has been kidnapped & their is a RN-If Pasty asked to see the RN-all he had to say was-NO-I don't want to scare you-just do as I say.Pack you & Burke a bag-I am going to take you to the airport-I will take care of everything-I 'll do as they say- get her back- met you & Burke wherever...This way no 911 call,no Pasty or Burke in house. he can get all the other things done.This is just a short version of what might have happened -so please don't take every word as literal....i typed this fast-my cable guy is here-so please excuse all typos!!!

IMO if John wrote the note he'd want someone else to find it, it's too obvious to write a note and say "look what I found". It was left in a spot Patsy would find it. Maybe he didn't think Patsy was very bright in this way, and he could quote movie lines and write on the pad in the kitchen. Staging for her, not the police. If this theory about John is correct then he assumed Patsy wouldn't call 911 and she was too quick, or he had let her out of his sight.

 

[pistolina]

Not sure if this has been asked or not but if part of JR's plan was to NOT involve the police - then why did he tell PR to call them?

http://www.acandyrose.com/1997BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm

snip
JR: Well I&#8217;m, it&#8217;s a lot of screaming going on around that, but we saw the note and read the first part. Ah, I think I might have run upstairs to look in JonBenet&#8217;s room. At one point I laid it on the floor and spread it out so I could read it real fast without having to sit and read it. At some point we checked Burke, I think I checked Burke. Patsy asked what should we do, and I said call the police, and she called 911.
Snip

 

[SyraKelly]

He laid the note on floor-so he wouldn't have to sit and read it-OKAY!! LOL
This statement doesn't even make sense to me!

 

[midwest mama]

Thanks, mama, for this very interesting research. I would be very reluctant to accept the notion that vaginal trauma could have been part of a coverup and I really wonder if this was the FBI's assessment or the assessment of Steve Thomas, who wanted very much to believe Patsy was responsible for every part of the murder and coverup, with John out of the loop until the following day.

Maybe Thomas found an FBI pal willing to go along with that, but to me this is one of the most bizarre ideas ever tossed into this extremely strange mix. I can certainly imagine a mother killing her daughter, but I cannot for the life of me imagine a mother violating her own daughter like that in order to cover up a murder to make it look like a sexual assault. That's beyond depraved! When we add the fact that a head blow could easily have been reported as an accident, and that there was also evidence of chronic vaginal injury, Thomas's theory makes absolutely no sense at all. Here again we see the problem ANY theory involving Patsy will inevitably have. And why NO DA has ever believed it possible to make such a case in court.

So I'm glad you've decided to take a closer look at JR, because he is certainly the most likely by far to have done all that was done that night.

I do not think PR was the one who inflicted the vaginal trauma on JB that caused the fresh injury that was described in the autopsy report, and I took the FBI report as a statement that just reported their opinion was the vaginal injury was done as part of a cover up. Personally, I believe the vaginal injury could have been caused by either BR as part of his involvement in the early stages of JB's death, and if not by him, then I believe JR had to be the one to inflict that injury in order to cover up the previous sexual abuse he knew about - no matter who had committed the previous abuse.

 

[midwest mama]

Not sure if this has been asked or not but if part of JR's plan was to NOT involve the police - then why did he tell PR to call them?

http://www.acandyrose.com/1997BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm

snip
JR: Well I’m, it’s a lot of screaming going on around that, but we saw the note and read the first part. Ah, I think I might have run upstairs to look in JonBenet’s room. At one point I laid it on the floor and spread it out so I could read it real fast without having to sit and read it. At some point we checked Burke, I think I checked Burke. Patsy asked what should we do, and I said call the police, and she called 911.
Snip

Patsy also said she told JR that she was going to call the police, and went ahead and did it. Their statements have conflicted regarding whose idea it was to call the police.