If you look at it logically it's very clear who did it!

[887sMtreme]

I disagree. I believe the plan was to move the body before they left town. They were sending everyone on a wild goose chase. And It worked.

Who would leave town with a supposedly kidnapped child unaccounted for? “Call us if you find her ‘k bye!”

 

[CloudedTruth]

Good point. But since they usually used plastic bags and not suitcases, it might have been suspicious. And I think JR had already loaded presents on the plane in plastic bags the day before.

I forgot to ad that Mike Archuleta was the pilot. He was a good friend of the family. He would've questioned where JBR was.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I know that the R’s used plastic bags instead of suitcases on that particular plane to keep the weight down. There was no cargo hold, there was only space behind the seats. so a suitcase probably would’ve been a little suspicious to the pilot. But I can tell you, having flown on a private plane out of DIA in 2012, I did not have to go through security nor was my bag X-rayed or checked by anyone. I would assume that in 1996 and out of a smaller regional airport there would not have been any security protocols that would have prevented them from hiding JBR’s body in a suitcase. Just the weight limitations of the plane itself and that being not their usual, which might have been noticed by the pilot.

Who would leave town with a supposedly kidnapped child unaccounted for? “Call us if you find her ‘k bye!”

It certainly was a red flag for me when they were poised to leave hours after finding her body.

 

[CloudedTruth]

It certainly was a red flag for me when they were poised to leave hours after finding her body.

1000%. And JR was telling LE that he had a meeting to attend the following morning in Atlanta as the reason for leaving. Say, what? They were supposed to be going to Charlevoix to celebrate Christmas with JAR & MR, then on to a cruise. Now suddenly and out of the blue he has a business meeting? After his daughter has been found murdered? I don't think so.......

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

1000%. And JR was telling LE that he had a meeting to attend the following morning in Atlanta as the reason for leaving. Say, what? They were supposed to be going to Charlevoix to celebrate Christmas with JAR & MR, then on to a cruise. Now suddenly and out of the blue he has a business meeting? After his daughter has been found murdered? I don't think so.......

Even if it was true, how could you leave your loved one, your child. What plans could take precedence over death?

 

[CloudedTruth]

Even if it was true, how could you leave your loved one, your child. What plans could take precedence over death?

It makes no sense.

 

[Meara]

Every time I hear Patsy “ran” up that spiral staircase, I question how feasible that was — I mean apart from how she maneuvered over the step on which the RN was *supposedly* spread, something for which we have only her word. How fit was she? We know she was weakened by cancer treatments that ended two years previously. Have we heard that she was engaged thereafter in strength-building, exercise, or fitness activities of any kind? I just don’t buy that whole staircase scenario. I’d love to hear opinions on this.

887s, I don't buy the staircase scenario, either. The main thing that debunks it for me is Patsy's claim that she went down the stairs, skipped the step the ransom note was spread out on, and descended to the step below it to look at the note. Skipping that step would be difficult on any staircase and was dangerously difficult on the spiral staircase (PMPT, p. 748, Kindle edition). Further, she says she then ran up the stairs, again skipping over the step with the note - such a gazelle! - and that she and John then supposedly descended the spiral stairs together, now with both of them skipping the step with the note. It's ridiculous. Why go through that difficulty again, with John, when they had a regular staircase just on the other side of the children's playroom? The story creates movie-like mental images so compelling that people still talk about the note on the stairs as though they'd seen it themselves when, in fact, as you say, it's something for which we have only Patsy's word. It's fantasy staging. I suspect the note was never on the stairs at all, never left the desk/table/counter where it was written until it was positioned on the floor by the patio door.

 

[Rain on my Parade]

887s, I don't buy the staircase scenario, either. The main thing that debunks it for me is Patsy's claim that she went down the stairs, skipped the step the ransom note was spread out on, and descended to the step below it to look at the note. Skipping that step would be difficult on any staircase and was dangerously difficult on the spiral staircase (PMPT, p. 748, Kindle edition). Further, she says she then ran up the stairs, again skipping over the step with the note - such a gazelle! - and that she and John then supposedly descended the spiral stairs together, now with both of them skipping the step with the note. It's ridiculous. Why go through that difficulty again, with John, when they had a regular staircase just on the other side of the children's playroom? The story creates movie-like mental images so compelling that people still talk about the note on the stairs as though they'd seen it themselves when, in fact, as you say, it's something for which we have only Patsy's word. It's fantasy staging. I suspect the note was never on the stairs at all, never left the desk/table/counter where it was written until it was positioned on the floor by the patio door.

Meara,
I suspect you are correct. How else do we explain PR handing off the note to JR and then laying the note on the floor to read in his underwear. Why not just go to the den and sit on the couch? We should ask “If you handled the note John, then where are your prints”? PR partial palm print was found on the note. Palm print would mean leaning on the paper as apposed to handling.
**PR. Stated she waited for JR by the wet bar after handing off the note and that he came from around the corner. I interrupt that to mean he came via the butlers pantry. Had he been in the basement or just checking on BR?

 

[Meara]

Meara,
I suspect you are correct. How else do we explain PR handing off the note to JR and then laying the note on the floor to read in his underwear. Why not just go to the den and sit on the couch? We should ask “If you handled the note John, then where are your prints”? PR partial palm print was found on the note. Palm print would mean leaning on the paper as apposed to handling.
**PR. Stated she waited for JR by the wet bar after handing off the note and that he came from around the corner. I interrupt that to mean he came via the butlers pantry. Had he been in the basement or just checking on BR?

"Why not just go to the den and sit on the couch?"
Indeed!

John's prints
JR may have an out. If he did touch the note soon after showering, he might not have had enough sweat or natural oil on his hands to produce prints.

PR's palm print implies leaning on the paper vs. handling it
Excellent point! Leaning on the paper implies resting the palm while writing.

"PR stated she waited for JR by the wet bar after handing off the note and that he came from around the corner. I [interpret] that to mean he came via the butlers pantry. Had he been in the basement or just checking on BR?"

This is a great find! For those new to the case/newer members, have a look at the floor plan of the ground floor:

https://www.documentingreality.com/forum/f227/jonben-t-ramsey-floor-plans-8222/

IF PR was standing by the wet bar (2) and JR came around a corner, he either came up the stairs from the lower hall (aka butler's pantry) turned left past her, and took the note to the patio door just outside the study; or, he came from the kitchen, turned right to walk over to PR, then took the note and walked back to the patio door. PR's wording does make it sound like JR came from the butler's pantry stairs - "around the corner" next to her rather than from the kitchen further away. It's significant IF PR was standing by the wet bar - the location where police found the notepad on which the ransom note was written, and where the note might well have stayed until it was moved to the floor. JR would have returned there. From where? Working backwards, if he reached the wet bar via the butler's pantry, it means he came from the basement. It's a direct route between the two and was further out of earshot from BR than the kitchen route. If he'd been in BR's room, the shortest route would have been down the main stairs to the foyer and through the kitchen. JR wouldn't have been coming up from checking the butler's pantry door at that point. In her interviews, PR says he checked doors later, after the 911 call.

Well, that's a lot of if's. And the Rams lied a lot. But I have to think there are elements of truth in their narrative; the best lies include some truth. With these if's I get a sense of how things may have unfolded that morning, which, if only partly accurate, is at least more plausible than PR's version. There was no note on the stairs, no screaming (not then, anyway), no leaping. PR may be outlining the real run-up to the 911 call - how she paced around the back hall, maybe set out the note on the stairs while JR checked everything in the basement; how JR came back and maybe moved the note, saying it was more believable by the door under brighter light. Perhaps PR kept the note-found-on-the-stairs part in the story, sensing its dramatic value.

 

[Rain on my Parade]

PR may be outlining the real run-up to the 911 call - how she paced around the back hall, maybe set out the note on the stairs while JR checked everything in the basement; how JR came back and maybe moved the note, saying it was more believable by the door under brighter light. Perhaps PR kept the note-found-on-the-stairs part in the story, sensing its dramatic value.

Meara,
I believe PR fabricated the note being on the stairs in the first place to point direction away from herself and onto LHP. That is how they communicated. The picture is clearer if the note was already laid out on the floor. Otherwise why is JR crouching on the floor? And why in his underwear? He was already taking a shower when PR got up. She then did her makeup, hair, got dressed, headed to the 2nd floor to fiddle w/JB outfit and then headed downstairs. Read partial note and screamed for JR. JR is still in his underwear after all this time? Okay, sure. Maybe he was shaving but still. It is my belief that had JR handled the note he would have sat down in the den on the couch to read it; not kneeling on the floor. This is pure make believe on her part.

I recently read that Steve Thomas was of the opinion that PR was the only person that was psychotic enough to perform such unspeakable acts on her daughter.

I also went back and started to read the police interview by PR and she states that she and JB had a talk through the years (since JB was 4) that only she and Dr. Buff (w/her in the room) were the only people allowed, to ever touch her private parts; that her bathing suit touched. This was shared with her, by her friend Pinkie Barber. Why have this kind of talk with your daughter when she is 4? And then, there after? What is going on her exactly?

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Meara,
I believe PR fabricated the note being on the stairs in the first place to point direction away from herself and onto LHP. That is how they communicated. The picture is clearer if the note was already laid out on the floor. Otherwise why is JR crouching on the floor? And why in his underwear? He was already taking a shower when PR got up. She then did her makeup, hair, got dressed, headed to the 2nd floor to fiddle w/JB outfit and then headed downstairs. Read partial note and screamed for JR. JR is still in his underwear after all this time? Okay, sure. Maybe he was shaving but still. It is my belief that had JR handled the note he would have sat down in the den on the couch to read it; not kneeling on the floor. This is pure make believe on her part.

I recently read that Steve Thomas was of the opinion that PR was the only person that was psychotic enough to perform such unspeakable acts on her daughter.

I also went back and started to read the police interview by PR and she states that she and JB had a talk through the years (since JB was 4) that only she and Dr. Buff (w/her in the room) were the only people allowed, to ever touch her private parts; that her bathing suit touched. This was shared with her, by her friend Pinkie Barber. Why have this kind of talk with your daughter when she is 4? And then, there after? What is going on her exactly?

I'm not sure that PR explaining to JB appropriate touching at age 4 is all that uncommon. It also depends on the child. What their understanding of what you tell them is and perhaps the child's level of modesty. Is it her age that you felt was inappropriate to have that discussion?

 

[Rain on my Parade]

double post

 

[Rain on my Parade]

I'm not sure that PR explaining to JB appropriate touching at age 4 is all that uncommon. It also depends on the child. What their understanding of what you tell them is and perhaps the child's level of modesty. Is it her age that you felt was inappropriate to have that discussion?

Ispywithmylittleeye,
I don’t think it is inappropriate. I find it very unusual to have such a discussion with a child so young (at least in the year of 1994) and to continue to have that discussion with her. Unless of coarse there was cause. Today’s reality with the sex trafficking; I can better understand.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Ispywithmylittleeye,
I don’t think it is inappropriate. I find it very unusual to have such a discussion with a child so young (at least in the year of 1994) and to continue to have that discussion with her. Unless of coarse there was cause. Today’s reality with the sex trafficking; I can better understand.

It would be interesting to know what the thoughts on this were back in the 90's, what the "norm" was relevant to when this occurred. Also taking into account that PR had JBR immersed in the beauty pageant scene, and perhaps being aware of the potential that presented for inappropriate touching opportunities. What does kind of stick out to me, and this is just my perspective, is the need to have the Dr. present for these discussions. I do think that was a little unusual. Was PR relying on him to convey the information, or was it to observe how she reacted to it for any signs of it having occurred? And to have these discussions continue to occur as is implied kind of stands out too. Was there a concern beyond usual expectations? Or is PR again trying to ensure she is presenting a picture that every precaution was taken with regard to parental obligation? Since we know there was evidence of prior SA, one considers this information through a different, more discerning lens. It also begs the question if JR had similar discussions with BR?

 

[Meara]

It would be interesting to know what the thoughts on this were back in the 90's, what the "norm" was relevant to when this occurred. Also taking into account that PR had JBR immersed in the beauty pageant scene, and perhaps being aware of the potential that presented for inappropriate touching opportunities. What does kind of stick out to me, and this is just my perspective, is the need to have the Dr. present for these discussions. I do think that was a little unusual. Was PR relying on him to convey the information, or was it to observe how she reacted to it for any signs of it having occurred? And to have these discussions continue to occur as is implied kind of stands out too. Was there a concern beyond usual expectations? Or is PR again trying to ensure she is presenting a picture that every precaution was taken with regard to parental obligation? Since we know there was evidence of prior SA, one considers this information through a different, more discerning lens. It also begs the question if JR had similar discussions with BR?

We'll see what Rain says, but I don't think PR ever said that Dr. Boeuf needed to be present for these discussions. My recollection - and understanding of Rain's comment - is that PR told JBR that Dr. Boeuf was an exception; that it was okay if he touched her in the "swimsuit area" but only if Mom was also present.

My daughters were a little older than JBR. Where we lived, having the talk with grade schoolers about safe/inappropriate touching began to take hold in the mid - late 80s and was the norm by the early 90s. It doesn't strike me as unusual that PR discussed this with JBR; and I think the pageants could have made the caution all the more advisable.

 

[Rain on my Parade]

We'll see what Rain says, but I don't think PR ever said that Dr. Boeuf needed to be present for these discussions. My recollection - and understanding of Rain's comment - is that PR told JBR that Dr. Boeuf was an exception; that it was okay if he touched her in the "swimsuit area" but only if Mom was also present.

Meara,
You are correct about the doctor’s presence. What caught my attention is JB was SA as part of the coverup the night of her murder. Who was SA JB? We know about her and BR under the covers. But her toileting issues seemed to be picking up speed the last part of her life. We also know about the defecation found in her bed as told by LHP. Also worth noting: BR knife was found in the basement not in the laundry area where LHP had hid it from BR. The diapers were also found hanging out of this cabinet? Wondering if perhaps since Mom schooled JB on the touching if she wasn’t the SA perpetrator. Just a consideration.

My daughters were a little older than JBR. Where we lived, having the talk with grade schoolers about safe/inappropriate touching began to take hold in the mid - late 80s and was the norm by the early 90s. It doesn't strike me as unusual that PR discussed this with JBR; and I think the pageants could have made the caution all the more advisable.

Okay, I will give you that, but being 4 isn’t grade school yet. I remember the tampon in the boat commercials and thinking (if I had a little girl) how would I explain that commercial to her if she asked? JB was still in her formative years when her mom chose to sit her down and have a talk with her about her privates and then to continue to advise her is honestly beyond me. I have to say that the beauty pageants sexualize little girls and big girls as well. Sort of like the truth behind Playboy/Miss America and what was really going on.

 

[Rain on my Parade]

It would be interesting to know what the thoughts on this were back in the 90's, what the "norm" was relevant to when this occurred. Also taking into account that PR had JBR immersed in the beauty pageant scene, and perhaps being aware of the potential that presented for inappropriate touching opportunities. What does kind of stick out to me, and this is just my perspective, is the need to have the Dr. present for these discussions. I do think that was a little unusual. Was PR relying on him to convey the information, or was it to observe how she reacted to it for any signs of it having occurred? And to have these discussions continue to occur as is implied kind of stands out too. Was there a concern beyond usual expectations? Or is PR again trying to ensure she is presenting a picture that every precaution was taken with regard to parental obligation? Since we know there was evidence of prior SA, one considers this information through a different, more discerning lens. It also begs the question if JR had similar discussions with BR?

CloudedTruth,
Great point. I seriously doubt it. Unless … BR was the SA perpetrator.

 

[887sMtreme]

We'll see what Rain says, but I don't think PR ever said that Dr. Boeuf needed to be present for these discussions. My recollection - and understanding of Rain's comment - is that PR told JBR that Dr. Boeuf was an exception; that it was okay if he touched her in the "swimsuit area" but only if Mom was also present.

My daughters were a little older than JBR. Where we lived, having the talk with grade schoolers about safe/inappropriate touching began to take hold in the mid - late 80s and was the norm by the early 90s. It doesn't strike me as unusual that PR discussed this with JBR; and I think the pageants could have made the caution all the more advisable.

That’s as i remember it, too. This was common by the late 1970s in my age group, as part of the Feminist Movement, of which I’m pretty sure Patsy didn’t consider herself a part. Had it seeped into Southern Baptist culture by the early-to-mid ‘90s? I think it’s likely, if not as a matter of feminist bodily autonomy, then for the more conventional reason of protecting female purity.

It’s Dr. Beuf, by the way.

 

[Meara]

Meara,
I believe PR fabricated the note being on the stairs in the first place to point direction away from herself and onto LHP. That is how they communicated. The picture is clearer if the note was already laid out on the floor. Otherwise why is JR crouching on the floor? And why in his underwear? He was already taking a shower when PR got up. She then did her makeup, hair, got dressed, headed to the 2nd floor to fiddle w/JB outfit and then headed downstairs. Read partial note and screamed for JR. JR is still in his underwear after all this time? Okay, sure. Maybe he was shaving but still. It is my belief that had JR handled the note he would have sat down in the den on the couch to read it; not kneeling on the floor. This is pure make believe on her part.

I recently read that Steve Thomas was of the opinion that PR was the only person that was psychotic enough to perform such unspeakable acts on her daughter.

Your retelling of John's marathon shower/prep time is both creepy and very funny. What the heck WAS he doing? Maybe staging something in the master bedroom?

So we agree that the note-on-the-stairs story is bogus. However, I'm not following your train of thought entirely. If the spiral stairs story was meant to direct suspicion towards LHP, why not leave it on the stairs for the police to see? What do you think was the motive for moving it to the floor outside the study?

It’s always informative to see where PR gets most rattled in the police interviews. While writing my post at #109, I reread the “finding the note” portions. As long as PR has some control of the narrative, she's okay; but the harder she's pressed for details of who did what and the exact sequence of events, the more her language unravels. The "I mean, you know"s, incomplete thoughts, vagueness, and self-interruptions multiply until she's approaching incoherence. From the 1997 interview:

TT: Okay. Patsy, do you recall who moved the note from the bottom of the stairs down to where John could read it with the good lighting.
PR: I think he did. I, I (inaudible) . . .
TT: Okay.
PR: . . .don’t remember exactly, but, I mean it was just, I was just, I was just nuts I (inaudible)

The 1998 interview has this bizarre reply :

9 TOM HANEY: Where does John, and we
10 will use a red marker now for John, where does
11 he first appear in there, at least in this
12 diagram, if you can start there?
13 PATSY RAMSEY: He comes down those
14 stairs there. (Indicating) and so we are both
15 like standing here, I am pacing, I said oh, my
16 God, you know there is a note, she's been
17 kidnapped. She is not in her bed, you know.
18 You know, then everything gets really you know,
19 who's on first kind of thing.

What? PR is referencing the famous comedy routine by Abbott and Costello. In it, two characters are trying to talk about baseball but can't understand each other because they're using words that sound alike to refer to two different things; e.g., Who's on first? = Which player is on first base? and = The player on first base is named Who. The wordplay is so clever and witty, it's a comedy classic - and therefore sickeningly out of place in the interview. The first time I read it, I gasped. Saying "then everything gets really you know who's on first kind of thing" is also shockingly arrogant and dismissive, like saying, 'I know you want to solve my daughter's murder, but I can't be bothered to go over all these details [especially since John and I only rehearsed the outline. Stick to the script!]. But why the reference to "Who's on first?" of all things? Why not just say 'everything gets chaotic?' I think this is PR’s unconscious confession that she’s lying to mislead investigators - holding two different versions of events in her mind - and, more twistedly, that, to her, deceiving them is a game. Could this also signal a deep split in PR’s psyche, with different parts having different experiences of the same events and being unable to communicate with each other? Either way, it's a plus for Steve Thomas’s assessment of PR’s psychotic potential.

 

[Meara]

That’s as i remember it, too. This was common by the late 1970s in my age group, as part of the Feminist Movement, of which I’m pretty sure Patsy didn’t consider herself a part. Had it seeped into Southern Baptist culture by the early-to-mid ‘90s? I think it’s likely, if not as a matter of feminist bodily autonomy, then for the more conventional reason of protecting female purity.

It’s Dr. Beuf, by the way.

Thanks. Are PR's pretensions contagious? "Boeuf" is French (for "beef")!