Intruder theories only - RDI theories not allowed! *READ FIRST POST* #2

[tovarisch]

tovarisch,

How do you propose we go about identifying her killer? What steps do you plan to take?

1. I think it`s a great idea to have voting on the controversial subjects, and the more subjects the better, and we have it already on the site, like those: Do you believe stun gun was used, Who molested JonBenet.

I propose to create newt thread , that somebody`s capable doing, (not me, I’m not capable computer-wise), Voting Room or something, where people can vote, including guests, anonioumosly, without discussion, just vote, on the subjects in dispute, numerous theories, facts or fiction, unanswered questions and so on. The main page of the tread somehow would automatically display results which are leading, putting it all together on the main spreadsheet, so we can see all leading results together, and we can understand where the collective opinion is standing at this point in time. For example, we can say today, looking on the stun gun voting, that stun gun had not been used. We need to bring all the voting threads together in one thread and add much more.
This way we can put IN ORDER collective knowledge and opinions, and we can identify the leading direction. Would be it great in any given day to see where we standing at every subject?

2. Keep doing what we are doing, argue and dig into the facts, dissect into the smallest, prove the smallest and after proved and voted, put together back to the whole.
3. I personally will be digging into ransom note and coroner`s report, which are original papers 100% and worth time digging. I just stumbled on the puzzle in the ransom (again!) after reading it 101-st time. I`ll soon post it, I`m trying right now to form my opinion, and I cannot. If I would not be able to form my opinion, I will post without my opinion, just as a question to everybody.

 

[madeleine]

If the killer was part of the Ramsey's circle of friends....then the suspect should have been identified by now. Unless of course the Ramsey's don't want the suspect to be found.

Or this member is someone who is known to only one of the family members. I.e. mistress, illegal business associate, homosexual lover, illegitimate family member.




That should be the first thing you should answer before you come up with a theory. The ransom note was the first piece of evidence in this case. It was evidence that allegedly prompted Patsy Ramsey to call and declare a kidnapping. Patsy Ramsey is the only witness to how this note was found.
A note that was created from materials that she used specifically.
A note addressed to John and not to any one else.



No, I just think there might be a language barrier.

I could be wrong but dogs usually only come out during missing persons cases and not in the first 24 hours of a kidnapping case. Dog's don't do well in potential hostage situations.

@bold

wow.never thought of this.but it's a very interesting possibility and you got me thinking.
am still RDI but I've always said that if IDI I am convinced that at least JR knows something.and @bold,underlined>>>now this is something PR definitely would have wanted to keep hidden (shame?)

I always found his comment puzzling...when he brought JB from the basement...that it's an inside job...he didn't think that after reading the stupid note....but he said it after finding JB ...if IDI I do believe that the comment was a SLIP and he regretted it later....

 

[madeleine]

They addressed the ransom to John only. It tells that they were not sexual perps, otherwise they might have addressed to Patsy too. Mark Karr did, he loved writing to Patsy. The terrible awful old sexual sadist Fish (or Fisher) did address his letter to the mother. Even if they planned to address the note to both, what the impressions on the trial note suggest, they dropped Patsy, it was about the men to men war and victory, the woman was not rival for them, what would they sayl the woman- we had defeated you , woman? Not a very great victory for them. Remember who they were in their sick heads and you`ll understand who they wanted do “business “with.

The half of the note was synthetic frankenstein letter, and I would think prepared in advance in the head of the leader, all those sayings, phrases from movies and books. The other half was raw killer`s emotions, as evil as could be, after the fact of the murder. Repetition of the image of beheaded girl, advice to take a deep nice rest, after they ripped the heart out of John`s chest. How more evil could it be then advice to go to take a rest after reading that ransom? It`s pure evil laughing in his face. I`ve read an expert profiled that it was motherly advice. I wanted to say when I`ve read it, Dear expert, I know that you are a man, you have never been a mother, I am, and let me sent it back to you—from all us, mothers – it`s NOT MOTHERLY advice- it`s a very EVIL l MAN advice. And it`s not an advice, It`s Victory! Over the enemy.

They were several perps. They had a weapon. They were young quick and prepared for confrontation, if needed. The kitchen, where the ransom writing took place was the BEST possible place in the house, considering that one of perp , or even two, were securing the stairwell from the third floor, the ONLY way that parents could unexpectedly descend from, while the leader put the ransom note in writing. If Ramsey would decent from the third floor, they would be in unfavorable position, the perps would saw them first from the dark of the hall way. The writing did not take more then 15 minuts. The paper was there, the pen was there, the stairwell had been watched.

The paper and pen were opportunity to write the ransom, the same like the pain brush was opportunity for the construction of the garrote. They saw, they used. Does not matter if they had or not ransom in their pocket. They wanted to write after the fact. They wanted to declare victory and claim the crime and laugh in the face of the parents and investigators, because they left so many clues in the ransom and in the crime scene. They openly showed their knowledge of the Ramsey`s family matters. They killed their daughter second time with Patsy`s pain brush. The head blow, my believe, was inflicted with their gun, I do not know if it was ever considered. They used the paper pads and pen from the kitchen. They said-we will call you! They needed time for the alibi. They won not only 8 hours; they won the time of almost two decades. They exited from the kitchen.
If the dog would be at the scene, we would not be all sitting here at the screens. The crime scene would not be contaminated. And the focus of investigators would go in the right direction.

@bold

the note is pretty silly except for one phrase IMO which if IDI could be a real warning,a sarcastic,teasing one:

Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult.

now....it's obvious that the writer thinks negative about JR when calling him a fat cat

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_cat_%28term%29"]Fat cat (term) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

The New York Times has described fat cats as symbols of "a deeply corrupt campaign finance system riddled with loopholes", with Americans seeing them as recipients of the "perks of power", but able to "buy access, influence policy and even veto appointments."[2]

It is also commonly used to describe a rich, greedy person who, due to ownership of large amounts of capital, is able to "live easy" off the work of others. It is also used to refer to executives whose pay is deemed by others to be excessive.[3]

The word has since acquired a meaning of a rich, powerful person of possibly 'undeserved' wealth.

--------------

it could also mean that the writer KNOWS a lot about some NEGATIVE stuff JR did...doesn't necessarily have to do with politics or dirty money/business related....

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

@bold

the note is pretty silly except for one phrase IMO which if IDI could be a real warning,a sarcastic,teasing one:

Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult.

now....it's obvious that the writer thinks negative about JR when calling him a fat cat

Fat cat (term) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The New York Times has described fat cats as symbols of "a deeply corrupt campaign finance system riddled with loopholes", with Americans seeing them as recipients of the "perks of power", but able to "buy access, influence policy and even veto appointments."[2]

It is also commonly used to describe a rich, greedy person who, due to ownership of large amounts of capital, is able to "live easy" off the work of others. It is also used to refer to executives whose pay is deemed by others to be excessive.[3]

The word has since acquired a meaning of a rich, powerful person of possibly 'undeserved' wealth.

--------------

it could also mean that the writer KNOWS a lot about some NEGATIVE stuff JR did...doesn't necessarily have to do with politics or dirty money/business related....

Or it just means they hate rich people and thought they sounded cool and authoritative.
To me this person is someone with a low self esteem that is trying so hard to sound like a big cheese. Really, he sounds like an idiot.

 

[2 percent]

Or it just means they hate rich people and thought they sounded cool and authoritative.
To me this person is someone with a low self esteem that is trying so hard to sound like a big cheese. Really, he sounds like an idiot.

People only reveal those insecurities in the heat of the moment. There is no IDI theory I've seen that surmised the note was heat of the moment. Quite the opposite, in fact

 

[tovarisch]

I stumbled on one phraise in the ransom note that gave me a lot of new thinking about the killer`s personality, that I want to share.

The phrase that stroked me as odd is in the middle of the ransom, but I need to start analysis from the beginning of the ransom, because it` all parts of the same idea.

In the very beginning of ransom note, the author - killer declared them as a group of individuals and plural pronouns were used adequately in the text. This part of the note seems prepared in advance, and included “all standards “: who they were, announced kidnapping and demanded ransom, nothing out of ordinary. If author had stopped right there with the ending “we will call you”, it would be very unhappy for us. Fortunately, the author ended with the common part, and he could not help himself and proceeded with his personal touch. At this point plural pronouns suddenly disappeared and turned into the singular” I, mine”...
“I will call you tomorrow between 8 and 10 to instruct on delivery”- the timing is out of reality, considering money taking from the bank
“I advise you to be rested”— psychological sadism
"If we monitor early” - switched again to plural
“We might call you early”—timing is out of reality
“Deviation of my instruction- switched back to singular ….immediate execution, remains, burial…”- psychological sadism

And right there, after words” execution, remains, burial” were the words that stroke me:

“The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise do not provoke them”.

The group of individuals suddenly become two gentlemen verses the author, and not as united as a group and faction with the same goal, it was in the beginning.

I added my words in the parenthesis to show what I see as a very strange dissociation.

The TWO GENTLEMEN (and not HE, the AUTHOR) watching over your daughter

Do not particular like you (it`s not the AUTHOR who did not like Mr. Ramsey, it`s THEM, the two gentlemen)

So I advice (he really liked to advice as he was a dear friend)

Not to provoke THEM (instead of US, and with this, HE, the author, put himself out of equation).

Why the author in this sentence in the middle of the note forgot that he was part of “we, us”, part of the group , switched to singular and distanced himself from the two gentlemen, who were the bad guys.

Immediately after the act of distancing from his group, author went back into uniting with the two other bad guys, and the most terrifying words came out, about killing of JonBenet , like multiple psychological sadistic words-overkills , words: she dies, dies, dies .. She dies, beheaded. He was back on track, brutal, sadistic, and he never deviated from the” we, us “to the end of the note anymore.

I concluded that this part of the note also had been prepared in advance, and he had not made a mistake in this part of the text.

He had his personal ID for a split of a second in the sentence where he dissociates himself from the group, and we know that he was the killer whatever he said, and it needs explanation what wrong went with his thinking, it might be a key to some discoveries.
My several conclusions.
1. Author was a loner - killer with multi alters personality’s disorder. He split into 3 alters two bad and one “innocent” kind of guy. He needed one alter to be unpunishable in his own eyes. This is not my favorable conclusion.
2. There were indeed a group, and the author of the note was not a leader, and had not participated in the act of killing, but anyway had been an accessory to the crime, securing the entrances- exits, writing the note, he`d been dictated the text to in the most, he was a writer possibly because of his best knowledge of English among others. I`m leaning towards my opinion #2 or #3.
3. All the above, but the author was a female, member of group and accessory to the crime with the limitation to writing the note, had been dictated the text to her mostly, she helped securing exits, all the above in #2, except killing. As a female she wanted dissociate herself from the two gentlemen.
4. Author had been carried away with the all his stupid false fantasies, suddenly remembered scene from the movie where two gentlemen watched over, put it in, not thinking. Being total nuts and moron.

Whatever it was, this praise has an important key to the killer personality and ID, my opinion.
The other facts need to be connected. I wonder about palm print on the cellar. Is it anywhere official report exist that it was Melinda`s indeed or is it all smoke and mirrors for us, the people?

 

[madeleine]

IMO "gentlemen" is mostly used by women...men usually use it only during speeches( formal) "ladies and gentlemen",etc...or during business meetings maybe...but they won't talk about their buddies or accomplices like this...so IMO that part of the RN is pure BS...

 

[madeleine]

IDI has the same problem as RDI.

you can't figure out the key problem,what was the killer's motivation?

was it sex?revenge?money?anger?it can't be ALL of them even if this is what the crime scene SUGGESTS.
it's a mess,you just can't know.
was he on drugs ,mentally ill?what was his state of mind?

both questions are important and the answer would bring us further no matter who we think did it.

 

[tovarisch]

I`m adding this to my previous post, one more though to consider for RDI believers.

If Patsy was the author of the ransom note and decided to go with the foreign faction, group of individuals as killers , why in the middle of her fiction (ransom note) exactly after the words “ execution.., remains…, burial” she decided to add drama and put physiological conflict between the “main characters”, and she wrote as if of the point of view of an author of ransom about the two gentlemen who better not to provoke?

For Shakespearian touch? Conflict between the main characters?

Had she even HAD TIME to think about putting drama inside drama?

I do not think so.

If RDI think she wrote the ransom, who WERE the TWO GENTLEMEN inside the group for Patsy?

It`s easy to say - O, it`s all BS, it`s just old Patsy`s writing nonsenses… And swipe it under the carpet.

Excuse me, if we are serious here, it`s the AUTHENTIC killer`s AUTHENTIC words. The killer was thinking as he was writing…And every word needs to be decoded.

One more. Why when questioned by the investigators who they thought the killer was, why Patsy did not say- I think who the ransom said- foreign faction! Instead she pointed to the people of her circles. Why then she even bothered to create foreign faction?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

People only reveal those insecurities in the heat of the moment. There is no IDI theory I've seen that surmised the note was heat of the moment. Quite the opposite, in fact

No. That is not the case here at all. This was not the heat of the moment. If you believe they wrote this than it was planned and thought out.

And in fact if it had been the R's the note would have said," I have JBR we will contact you, No police. "

Everyone knows that writing as little as possible is the best way. They also would have gotten rid of the pad and the pen.

No one in that house wrote that note. There is just no evidence that supports that.

 

[Tawny]

Because she was "flashy". Not my words.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Because she was "flashy". Not my words.

Your proof she wrote the note is she is flashy?

Okay..

 

[Tawny]

Your proof she wrote the note is she is flashy?

Okay..

I was referring tovarisch's questions. I said nothing about proof.

 

[tovarisch]

Because she was "flashy". Not my words.

Is flashy synonym senseless in your opinion?

What about Mr. John Ramsey?

Had he approved Patsy`s passage about him meeting FACE to FACE with killers to be scanned for electronic device?

How all THIS and THAT in the ransom note could have passed HIS approval?

 

[Chewy]

I was thinking that perhaps the problem with viewing the ransom note as "faked" or "thrown together" is based on the idea of what would happen if it was a real kidnapping.

If we look instead at the ransom note as a "controlling of the Ramseys" rather than a cover up of some sort, it changes the perspective.

IOW what was the motive of the Ransom note?

Let's reconsider some ideas.

A. The kidnappers would not have been so casual with their time in the house with the Ramseys because they would fear detection.

But what if they were prepared to kill the entire family. What if this was a revenge act and they half hoped the Ramseys would wake up and have to watch them kill their children. So guns aready they are prepared to kill if detected?

B. The ransom note is fake and rambling.

Consider times where you may have shot off a nasty email to someone. Or even responding here to a heated discussion. Stop and really think about it for a second.

I'm sure some people have not wanted to go on and one but once pulled into the writing they go overboard in their reply. If the person writing the note hated John Ramsey then this would match with them sliding out towards the end and writing how they were personally angry with John and that he's not the big big shot he seems to think he is. So who would be that angry with him?

The details in the note reveal the bonus. Did he get that bonus from doing something sneaky and self serving? Was someone hurt in the process of him making that bonus? If so that bonus could have been a driving source of anger for someone.


What if the perp just wanted to string him along. Make him freak out and think he had a chance of getting her back but all the while she's in the basement. He's put through hell and someone gets to watch from the outside.

Now what's interesting about this idea is that it narrows down the scope of suspects because the person would not have a way of knowing that this case would blow up in the media the way it did. It was pretty much unprecedented at the time. So who would be close enough to be able to witness the fallout without being detected?

If the whole thing was done for revenge, who wanted to get revenge?

 

[Tawny]

Is flashy synonym senseless in your opinion?

What about Mr. John Ramsey?

Had he approved Patsy`s passage about him meeting FACE to FACE with killers to be scanned for electronic device?

How all THIS and THAT in the ransom note could have passed HIS approval?

I don't think he approved anything past the first few sentences, and when he went to deal with the staging of the scene, she continued on her own. And then she called 911 before he had a chance to review it or change anything. JMO

But this is the IDI thread, so I won't delve into that here out of respect for the thread's intention

 

[THE BUNK]

What about Mr. John Ramsey?

Had he approved Patsy`s passage about him meeting FACE to FACE with killers to be scanned for electronic device?

How all THIS and THAT in the ransom note could have passed HIS approval?

How would John Ramsey know what a proper ransom note is supposed to be like? John Ramsy only has knowledge of movies to base a ransom note to base it off of.
To his cursory glance, the ransom note looks as appropriate as it ever would.


One thing that I think gets lost in this is the possibility that this ransom note was not supposed to be the last draft. John may have considered. Depending on how the scenario develops, John could have considered getting paper from the outside at some point and getting a better version of this note written.

John doesn't have to many choices here of ransom note authors, here. I believe a big reason why Patsy was chosen was because he believed Patsy could disguise her handwriting better. I'm pretty sure John thought that if he wrote the note, his handwriting would be recognized immediately.

 

[THE BUNK]

And in fact if it had been the R's the note would have said," I have JBR we will contact you, No police. "



I don't think Jonbenet's name was ever used once in the ransom note, was it? Which would be a good thing since it's correct spelling would have been a dead giveaway as to the identity of the killer.

Everyone knows that writing as little as possible is the best way. They also would have gotten rid of the pad and the pen

Not if your trying to cover up a crime. The more be written the more substantial and effective the note makes. A short one line note gives the impression that someone just quickly put it together. The detailed not gives the impression that someone took time to create it and deemed it important.

That is the key to ransom note. It's length indicates that it is important enough for the killer to risk composing such a length and leaving it at the scene.

The length of the note has never been that suspicious to me, because the collection of the ransom note is what makes it 3 pages. Without that section, it's at a reasonable 2 page length.

Which leads to a big question....why was the collection of the ransom money so important if the killer knew he was never going to collect it?

 

[THE BUNK]

BTW,
I have some questions on the condition in which the Ransom note was found... or how it was allegedly found since Patsy is the only witness to it's discovery.


When Patsy found the Ransom Note..was it folded? Or was it found without creases like fresh pages lifted from a pad? Were they laid on the same consecutive steps?

 

[tovarisch]

I don't think he approved anything past the first few sentences, and when he went to deal with the staging of the scene, she continued on her own. And then she called 911 before he had a chance to review it or change anything. JMO

But this is the IDI thread, so I won't delve into that here out of respect for the thread's intention

You are saying that Mr. Ramsey run to the basement, never had chance to review a ransom?
He never saw:
118,000
Him to receive the call between 8-10 am with the money in hand, nicely packed, and ready to get delivery instruction
Call might come even earlier
Two boggy gentlemen inside the group
Meeting face to face with the killers for delivery of money and pick up of daughter
The whole length of the ransom with personal touch to it,,,

I see where you are coming from. Because your version would be THE ONLY possible scenario for ” Ramseys wrote the note”.

Because this note would never pass the extreme intelligence of Mr. Ramsey. In this one I`m on your side.

He never had a chance to review it—I`m not buying this, If they were partners in crime.