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

[DeeDee249]

This isn't necessarily directed at you justthinkin, but many RDIs theorize all kinds of late night phone calls to doctors, lawyers, the Governor, etc. I'm not saying such calls were made, but if a call were made to anyone with any legal knowledge at all they'd surely have been informed that Burke was too young to be prosecuted.

It would be ironic if the cover up was done just out of ignorance of the age of culpability. JR was the kind of guy who could get his lawyer out of bed at 3 am and the lawyer would not have a cross word to say.

I didn't get an ISP until '99, so I can't say what the state of the net was in '96. I don't even know if the Rs had internet service then. I'm wondering if JR couldn't have looked it up on the computer? (I assume they had one)

I can't believe the Rs didn't at least know that Burke could not be tried as an adult, even if they thought he was chargeable.

Being informed BR wasn't able to be prosecuted isn't the only issue here. They had a DEAD CHILD in their home. Their child- their home. The coverup was needed for FAR more than preventing BR from prosecution. They had to provide SOME reason for her death. People KNEW they had a daughter- a daughter with a "public profile" for what it was. They couldn't just pretend they didn't HAVE her any more! They'd have to say she was dead. "How did she die? Oh, we don't know- she just died.
This was a very suspicious death, with external evidence (the bleeding) of sexual assault. They couldn't pretend it didn't happen just because BR was too young to be prosecuted. Even if it could never be publicly acknowledged that BR may have been involved, people would definitely infer that simply because no one else was charged. The ONLY way out for them was to say it was a kidnapping/intruder.

As for the broken window- in one of JR's interviews, and I believe LHP mentioned it too, he spoke of not remembering whether Patsy had asked LHP to clean it up or not, and he didn't recall having it fixed. He claimed he meant to, but just didn't get around to it.
Have you SEEN that train room in pics- the whole basement for that matter? It was cluttered beyond belief. LHP likely never cleaned the basement at all- hot could she? She cleaned the main house only, and even then it was all she could to to keep up with Patsy's well-acknowledged clutter.

 

[sandover]

KK,

Again, I apologize if I offended or insulted you. I come from a background where we speak bluntly and we see argument as a form of entertainment. I sometimes don't realize that I'm offending people.


I think I will just concentrate on writing up my theory of the case, and post very infrequently until then. The day to day discussion really doesn't seem to be worthwhile - and this is not directed at you. Many people here are not trying to solve the crime, they are trying to defend their theory of the case. Ridiculous implausible things are defended because it fits a theory of the case. Basic and sensible things are denied for the same reason. Pineapple and the word hence and stun gun marks are discussed, endlessly, all to no avail, as these things cannot help us understand what happened.
People don't change their minds, they just cling desperately to their preconceptions. This applies to me as well. I see now there is little point in these discussions. Few people are swayed by anyone else's analysis, and feelings are hurt or anger is created when there is no need for it. Again, this is not directed at you , KK, it's just that I question the benefit of spending a lot of time here. It's something that I've been thinking about for a while. Some of you have spent 16 years on this case. I think I'll get out while I still have a life.

I agree. It's so depressing that people cling to their old theories!

Anyone can read my old theory (PDI) in Members' Theories. DocG came up with the right theory, I struggled with it, and I realized he was adhering to reality, not speculation as every other theory I've read.

The fact that someone would want to argue that the window was broken from the outside at an earlier date when there is both no proof of that and no logic to it given what we DO know... it depresses me immensely.

I agree that most people don't want to get to the truth here. Most people just want to defend their pet theory. Sad.

 

[midwest mama]

Hey, midwest mama, your challenge was very meaningful and forced me to pare my theory down to the bone, so I decided to post my response to you on my blog, along with your initial request. You can find it here.

If you'd rather I didn't mention you by "name" or quote you, let me know and I'll do a rewrite.

And thanks!

Read the blog post, appreciate your capsulized presentation. I agree with you that JR lied about breaking the window prior to the night of the murder. The testimony of the housekeeper would negate what JR had stated. His ridiculous story cannot be substantiated in any way.

But, when I saw the video on TDB, the condition of the upper window cobwebs really drove home my conviction on him not breaking the window earlier.

We have a farm, so I am familiar with lots of situations regarding broken cobwebs, and if a cobweb is broken for as long as summer to winter, while the "silk" is unbelievably strong, we don't see many tiny wisps like the ones in the video dangling because they USUALLY manage to stick themselves onto a larger piece of web - in essence, making a piece with "smooth" edges. It's hard for me to make this word picture. But, IMHO, especially the single strand flexible web in the upper corner, with the little ball of wisp, looks like what you might expect from a fresh break. If that little wisp continued to jostle around in air filtration, it would probably be "stuck" within at least a couple of weeks. But I am no expert, so I could never swear to that. :blushing1:

Also, if that break had occurred in the summer, no self-respecting spider like those on our farm would have settled for creating that ridiculous single, wimpy, wispy line of web up in that corner alone. If it had been working a web in a corner of a broken space, the web would have been complete enough to catch food, or provide a resting space for the spider. And hence, there should have been a small "working web" built there, intact, since there were no visible signs of disturbance in the window well that could have torn it apart. Wait, a mouse, bent on clambering over broken shards of glass, might have been entertained by unraveling that web! They are known to try to escape pending winters by seeking shelter through holes in things to get inside a house. So, as you have pointed out elsewhere, this becomes some of that refutable evidence, doesn't it? :shush:

But, air filtration through the window hole, even during a 6 month period, would not have been strong enough to break up a working web, and leave a single thin line, with a tiny wisp. We have to use gloved hands or swishing brooms in our barn spaces to take apart those type of webs.

So, DocG, my observation about a silly cobweb does validate exactly what you have stated so frequently - it becomes easily refuted in some way, and would be a waste of time to use in formulating incriminating evidence on which to base a theory. :banghead:

Just wanted to let you know I am moving ever so slowly a little closer to the JDI camp. :juggle:

 

[midwest mama]

Well, if either Ramsey admitted to anything, I for one would be fascinated to see how many lawsuits would fall on top of their heads.

I say, :woohoo::woohoo: BRING 'EM ON!! lease:

We've all been on this :rollercoaster: far too long!

 

[Chrishope]

I agree. It's so depressing that people cling to their old theories!

Anyone can read my old theory (PDI) in Members' Theories. DocG came up with the right theory, I struggled with it, and I realized he was adhering to reality, not speculation as every other theory I've read.

The fact that someone would want to argue that the window was broken from the outside at an earlier date when there is both no proof of that and no logic to it given what we DO know... it depresses me immensely.

I agree that most people don't want to get to the truth here. Most people just want to defend their pet theory. Sad.

It's not just that people cling to their theory, we all do that a bit, it's just the unreasonableness of some of the things they say. We've got seasoned veterans of the case who know the details like the back of their hand trying to convince themselves the housekeeper didn't go down the basement between August and Christmas. We've got insightful people insisting the red jacket fibers can only transfer primarily from PR to the garotte. I know they know better. I'm not really looking for converts, but why be willfully silly about things? It doesn't do people credit.

I did think of a question or two for docG, so I'll turn to that.

 

[Chrishope]

docG

I understand that JR might not have gotten very far with his plan. I don't mean just in execution, but maybe he just hadn't fully developed that plan. He was a desperate man trying to save his ***.

I would think the body needs to be dumped before the ransom money is obtained from the bank. He can't be sure the bank won't call the police or FBI, and with a large cash withdrawal, in 100s and 20s, they will know something is wrong. The bank might contact authorities even w/o JR's knowledge.

This puts him at risk of being under surveillance, not by the phoney kidnappers, but by the real police/FBI.

By writing the RN in such a way that the call comes between 8 and 10, on the 27th, he effectively forces himself to get the money during bank hours on the 26th. That means he either has only a few hours, during daylight, to get rid of the body, or he has to dump it after collecting the money, in which case he's increased his risk.

It might have been better had the call been to detail the ransom demand, not just the delivery.

He might well have gotten away with it, but there were ways he'd be able to lower the risk if he'd thought it through a bit more.

 

[SyraKelly]

Docg-I think I missed your answer to this & I apologize-but you said something to the effect-John would copy the RN & give the copy to the police-then get rid of the original..What is the purpose of the copy? Thanks

 

[sandover]

docG

I understand that JR might not have gotten very far with his plan. I don't mean just in execution, but maybe he just hadn't fully developed that plan. He was a desperate man trying to save his ***.

I would think the body needs to be dumped before the ransom money is obtained from the bank. He can't be sure the bank won't call the police or FBI, and with a large cash withdrawal, in 100s and 20s, they will know something is wrong. The bank might contact authorities even w/o JR's knowledge.

This puts him at risk of being under surveillance, not by the phoney kidnappers, but by the real police/FBI.

By writing the RN in such a way that the call comes between 8 and 10, on the 27th, he effectively forces himself to get the money during bank hours on the 26th. That means he either has only a few hours, during daylight, to get rid of the body, or he has to dump it after collecting the money, in which case he's increased his risk.

It might have been better had the call been to detail the ransom demand, not just the delivery.

He might well have gotten away with it, but there were ways he'd be able to lower the risk if he'd thought it through a bit more.

It's possible he was arrogant/narcissistic (or rich) enough to feel like he could get that money without drawing suspicion (even if that was unrealistic).

But it does seem to me that he expected his family to be out of the house within a few hours, giving him ample time to get rid of the body and get the money -- again, perhaps he was overestimating what he could accomplish, but it doesn't seem unduly unrealistic to me.

The other scenario is this: we know he called his friend in Atlanta that morning... perhaps his plan HAD been to get rid of the body that morning, then go to a remote pay phone (protecting himself from being "monitored" or seen by the kidnappers) and call a high-powered friend or two about what to do, swearing them to "secrecy" because of what the note said. He might have expected his friend or lawyer to say, "I know it's a risk, but we have to contact the police/FBI -- we'll do it, you just hold tight."

He could always say he didn't call his friend from home out of fear that his phone was being monitored by the foreign faction (hence the specificity of those warnings in the RN) and that he needed to take a risk to talk to a trusted friend. Anyway, by the time the police or FBI found a way to contact him, the body would be safely dumped and JR could claim he was merely obeying the primary warning of the RN by not contacting police himself, but that his trusted friend advised otherwise.

It might sound convoluted, but I can see how his logic would work on that panicked night -- that he could have a relatively convincing explanation about why he initially didn't contact police but then later involved them.

 

[sandover]

It's not just that people cling to their theory, we all do that a bit, it's just the unreasonableness of some of the things they say. We've got seasoned veterans of the case who know the details like the back of their hand trying to convince themselves the housekeeper didn't go down the basement between August and Christmas. We've got insightful people insisting the red jacket fibers can only transfer primarily from PR to the garotte. I know they know better. I'm not really looking for converts, but why be willfully silly about things? It doesn't do people credit.

I did think of a question or two for docG, so I'll turn to that.

We all cling to our theories, but we should be able to tell the difference between a FACT (what JR says in interviews, for example) and a SPECULATION (how JB got those abrasions)? There is no point in INSISTING on something that can never be known when we have so much to work with (not as much as we'd like of course) which is irrefutable...

 

[DeeDee249]

It's not just that people cling to their theory, we all do that a bit, it's just the unreasonableness of some of the things they say. We've got seasoned veterans of the case who know the details like the back of their hand trying to convince themselves the housekeeper didn't go down the basement between August and Christmas. We've got insightful people insisting the red jacket fibers can only transfer primarily from PR to the garotte. I know they know better. I'm not really looking for converts, but why be willfully silly about things? It doesn't do people credit.

I did think of a question or two for docG, so I'll turn to that.

If you are referring to MY post- I never said she LHP never went DOWN the basement- she laundered JB's blanket there every day. I said she likely didn't CLEAN down there. How could she? Too cluttered. My posts are neither willful or silly. I am just as convinced of my own theories as you or any IDI are of theirs, and none of them are silly. The people who were in the house when JB was killed remain suspects UNTIL another suspect is named. None of us will likely convert the other. It has to be one's own idea.
I cannot think of any other way the red and black jacket fibers got on the cord knot. If it was transferred on another garment, those fibers would be there too. Patsy told LE she never wore that jacket in the basement, nor while painting. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one.
Some of the things I see posted here by IDI are just as willful and silly, though I would never say that. (I do think it, though).

 

[sandover]

If you are referring to MY post- I never said she LHP never went DOWN the basement- she laundered JB's blanket there every day. I said she likely didn't CLEAN down there. How could she? Too cluttered. My posts are neither willful or silly. I am just as convinced of my own theories as you or any IDI are of theirs, and none of them are silly. The people who were in the house when JB was killed remain suspects UNTIL another suspect is named. None of us will likely convert the other. It has to be one's own idea.
I cannot think of any other way the red and black jacket fibers got on the cord knot. If it was transferred on another garment, those fibers would be there too. Patsy told LE she never wore that jacket in the basement, nor while painting. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one.
Some of the things I see posted here by IDI are just as willful and silly, though I would never say that. (I do think it, though).

So is your theory that Patsy was staging a dead JonBenet while wearing her red and black jacket? Does that really seem likely to you?

 

[DeeDee249]

So is your theory that Patsy was staging a dead JonBenet while wearing her red and black jacket? Does that really seem likely to you?

Yes it does.
It seems likely to me that Patsy never undressed after they got home from the White's and was still wearing the clothes she wore that day. This wasn't an "outdoor" jacket- this was more like a sweater/jacket a woman would wear as part of a suit or ensemble. Patsy wore it over a red turtleneck and with black velvet pants. Patsy answered the door 6 am the next morning still wearing the same clothes and coiffed hair and full makeup on. Just like she was at the party.

 

[sandover]

Yes it does.
It seems likely to me that Patsy never undressed after they got home from the White's and was still wearing the clothes she wore that day. This wasn't an "outdoor" jacket- this was more like a sweater/jacket a woman would wear as part of a suit or ensemble. Patsy wore it over a red turtleneck and with black velvet pants. Patsy answered the door 6 am the next morning still wearing the same clothes and coiffed hair and full makeup on. Just like she was at the party.

So she never got undressed, killed her daughter, elaborately staged her, didn't change any clothing at all and called 911 and invited the cops in to her home. Got it.

 

[Chrishope]

If you are referring to MY post- I never said she LHP never went DOWN the basement- she laundered JB's blanket there every day. I said she likely didn't CLEAN down there. How could she? Too cluttered. My posts are neither willful or silly. I am just as convinced of my own theories as you or any IDI are of theirs, and none of them are silly. The people who were in the house when JB was killed remain suspects UNTIL another suspect is named. None of us will likely convert the other. It has to be one's own idea.
I cannot think of any other way the red and black jacket fibers got on the cord knot. If it was transferred on another garment, those fibers would be there too. Patsy told LE she never wore that jacket in the basement, nor while painting. Sometimes the simplest explanation is the right one.
Some of the things I see posted here by IDI are just as willful and silly, though I would never say that. (I do think it, though).

So you agree she went down the basement, yet you think she didn't see the hole in the window that had supposedly been there since August, maybe even July? You don't think she noticed the cold air pouring in when she took the paint tote down the basement on the 22nd?

The simplest answer on the fibers is 2ndry transfer. There were white and brown fibers as well, though no known source. Fibers don't always transfer, despite Locard, so there needn't be fibers from the other garments.

The more important point is that we will never know, so it's largely a waste of time to bicker whether they were primary/secondary. There are ways to make an educated guess, but not with the evidence available to the public -which may or may not be all the evidence there is.

I was actually thinking of someone else's post, but I may have got her comment mixed up with yours. It was something to the effect that LHP hadn't noticed the window, which stretches credulity.

 

[midwest mama]

So she never got undressed, killed her daughter, elaborately staged her, didn't change any clothing at all and called 911 and invited the cops in to her home. Got it.

My edit of above: 'So she never got undressed, helped to elaborately stage her, didn't change any clothing at all and called 911 and let the cops into her home. That's it.' hwow:

BR started it, JR finished it, JR and PR staged it and tried to cover it up. :moo:

 

[sandover]

I find it stunning that the same people who are arguing that PR wiped down the outside and INSIDE of a flashlight also staged an entire crime scene while wearing her clothes from that evening, leaving evidence of her participation everywhere.

Got it.

 

[DeeDee249]

So she never got undressed, killed her daughter, elaborately staged her, didn't change any clothing at all and called 911 and invited the cops in to her home. Got it.

She never had time- when they got back, Patsy still had lots of things to do to get ready for the trip early the next morning. Then, at some point during the next 2 hours or so, whatever led to the death of JB took place.

You see, forensics doesn't lie or coverup. The time of death, even though approximate, has a small enough window that any kidnapping/intruder/murder would have had to take place while the family was still awake, and walking about the house.
Although they would WANT people to believe someone got into the house unnoticed during the wee hours, took her from her bed, fed her pineapple, molested her, made her scream loudly enough to be heard across the street, bashed her, wrote the note being careful to copy Patsy's handwriting perfectly without actually knowing her, and the the elaborate staging all unheard by the family and all completed between the hours of, lets say, 2 am and 5 am. Right. Got it.

 

[OpenMind4U]

If John and Patsy were in on this together, they would have been in complete charge of the situation. The trip could easily have been cancelled "due to illness." There would have been no need to rush. How much time would it have taken for Patsy to shower and change anyhow, maybe 10 minutes at most?

People write about profiling all the time on this forum. Well, what is the profile of a criminal so clever as to pen a ransom note that to this day remains a mystery, yet so stupid as to neglect to change her clothes before calling the police? So stupid, also, as to give a phoney ransom note written in her own hand to the police, so it could be used as evidence against her. So stupid also as to call the police so early, with the body of the victim still in the house, thus negating the whole point of the note.

Good question! PR and JR are NOT the 'clever criminals'. Neither of them was an experience killer before December 25, 1996. Unfortunate, paintfull situation on that night, put them in position to perform the 'criminal' activities (staging, obstraction of justice, lying) for the sake of PROTECTING another member of their family. JMO.

This kind of behavior is NOT new to LE. And regardless if you do trust Kolar experience/opinion or not, the 'organized' versa 'disorganized' elements of ANY crime is an IMPORTANT 'calling cards' in identifying the motive and mean of the crime. You don't have to trust me on this - read other books on criminal behavior.

Kolar did a great job explaining which element in JBR case points to 'organized' and/or 'disorganized' activities. Especially, about the RN. Writing RN by using PR notebook and pen (items which belong to Ramsey, always been inside of their house, has evidence of the 'practice' attempt) - all of these are 'disorganized' activities done under 'stress', without any kind of PREPARATION 'ahead of time'. John and Patsy Ramsey did NOT ORGANIZE JBR murder. However, both of them did DISORGANIZE it....and many 'stupid' mistakes were done in the process....

JMO

 

[DeeDee249]

If John and Patsy were in on this together, they would have been in complete charge of the situation. The trip could easily have been cancelled "due to illness." There would have been no need to rush. How much time would it have taken for Patsy to shower and change anyhow, maybe 10 minutes at most?

People write about profiling all the time on this forum. Well, what is the profile of a criminal so clever as to pen a ransom note that to this day remains a mystery, yet so stupid as to neglect to change her clothes before calling the police? So stupid, also, as to give a phoney ransom note written in her own hand to the police, so it could be used as evidence against her. So stupid also as to call the police so early, with the body of the victim still in the house, thus negating the whole point of the note.

Try to imagine if you can, the state of mind of the parents that night. It would border on insanity. Adrenaline can help us do things we never thought we would and cortisol helps us through the stress. The parents WERE in charge. They did what they felt they should to cover up what was an unintentional death. (different from an accidental death).
We are ALL "Monday Morning Quarterbacks" here, and armchair detectives. We do the best we can with the available information and form our theories accordingly.
A call to the pilot (who was also a personal friend) was likely made LONG before JR was overheard by police trying to arrange a flight to Atlanta while his daughter's body was lying under the Christmas Tree. They were supposed to be at that airport at 7 am. As far as we know, the pilot did not call to see where they were or come to see what happened. There were police in the home by 6 am, minutes after the 911 call. No calls came in. Other than the pastor and friends, no one came to the house to see why they were not at the airport. So the pilot KNEW.
They HAD to call the police eventually. What were they going to say when there was no more JB around? A DEAD child means an autopsy ALWAYS. Even when a child dies of a known illness or in the hospital. They might have known some things would have been discovered (pineapple in her digestive tract, internal vaginal injuries) but they obviously knew her body would be examined. This was a dead child with NO apparent cause of death. Someone was going to try to determine the cause.
Claiming she was kidnapped (when it was obvious she was still in the house) was what they came up with. So did Casey Anthony, though she "knew the person" who had Caylee. Worked pretty well for them, didn't it? None of them were held responsible for the deaths of their children.
No one knows what they really were thinking. There are obviously things they did that in retrospect were "stupid" (your words, not mine) or made them look guilty.
Doesn't mean they were not involved.

 

[DeeDee249]

Funny, but all the stupid mistakes seem to have been made by Patsy. All we ever got from John were lies.

I don't agree that Patsy made all the mistakes. I think she had John's input every step of the way. Patsy did not do this alone.