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

[THE BUNK]

Yo

u 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,,,

He probably did, but he was probably more concerned that Patsy may have wrote a confession note instead of a ransom note. That's his real fear! That patsy may hand over a note to the police that says in line 20 "my husband killed my daughter. Please help me!!"

You question John not looking over the note....but you don't question why the intruder or his accomplices didn't look over it either?? The 3 page Ransom could also have a personal touch that points to the IDI killer's identity as well.

The note is ridiculous from both the RDI and the IDI perspective. Why would either John Ramsey or an experienced intruder write such a note without looking over it.

 

[tovarisch]

He probably did, but he was probably more concerned that Patsy may have wrote a confession note instead of a ransom note. That's his real fear! That patsy may hand over a note to the police that says in line 20 "my husband killed my daughter. Please help me!!"

You question John not looking over the note....but you don't question why the intruder or his accomplices didn't look over it either?? The 3 page Ransom could also have a personal touch that points to the IDI killer's identity as well.

The note is ridiculous from both the RDI and the IDI perspective. Why would either John Ramsey or an experienced intruder write such a note without looking over it.

You say, John saw the note and decided it`s better than Patsy`s revealing all the nasty dynamics going on in the family. And he was afraid she might secretly ask police for help..
I cannot accept it. Because in this case John would not leave Patsy`s sight for one second while the police and detectives had been in the house and that would fit the behavior of the controlling molester –tyron father in the family, he would not leaving sight of her for one second. John behavior was 180 degree opposite; he was not around Patsy and was not afraid of her doing wrong or saying wrong. He was not concentrated on Patsy or even the police, he had his mission- to find his daughter and /or liquid cash for ransom, which, cash, they did not have in their bank account.
.
The intruders were not adults and they were not intelligent. For them ransom note was acceptable and perfectly smart. The ransom is reflecting the intelligence of the author, and that`s my point. They proof read it, of cause; it was easy, because it was partly prepared in advance. They were proud of it. Don`t you hear the music of triumph in the end of the note? I do.

 

[Chewy]

I can't believe that two people covering up a crime together would construct a ransom note and not just read it. During a cover up there will be lots of stress and anxiety so obviously they are going to double check the note.

 

[tovarisch]

I can't believe that two people covering up a crime together would construct a ransom note and not just read it. During a cover up there will be lots of stress and anxiety so obviously they are going to double check the note.

That`s exactly my opinion too.That kind of "report" would never pass John`s " department", considering his level of intelligence.
[modsnip]

 

[Mama2JML]

Official exoneration based on DNA evidence, but guilty in the eyes of a few:

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2007-05-28/news/0705270632_1_dna-jimmy-ray-bromgard-exoneration

 

[Mama2JML]

Wrongful conviction & feces smeared on the little girl's dresser!
http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Kennedy_Brewer.php

 

[Mama2JML]

Good GAWWWD, how does LE get away with this?!

"Brown then took it upon himself to try and find the victim’s true killer. After a fire destroyed all of his court documents at his step-father’s house, he asked for copies of his documents under the Freedom of Information Act. He found documents that had not been disclosed to the defense implicating another man, Barry Bench. Bench had acted oddly around the time of the murder and was upset at the victim because the farmhouse that she lived in belonged to the Bench family (she had dated Bench’s brother up until two months before the murder). In 2003, Brown wrote to Bench, telling him that DNA would implicate him when Brown finally got testing. Bench committed suicide by stepping in front of an Amtrak train five days after the letter was mailed."​

Acted strangely, committed suicide, and the victim knew the true perpetrator. Cases like this one REALLY make me question the BPD's investigation into some of the more curious Ramsey case POIs...

http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/Roy_Brown.php

 

[tovarisch]

According to the coroner`s report the small intestine contains small amount of thick mucus and undigested portions of food material in it, that we are assuming ` was a pineapple.

The amount of it thick mucus with portions of indigested food/ pineapple altogether there was 8-10 cc, (cubic centimeters).

I made a drawing: Width 2 cm x Length 5cm x Height 1cm. It`s a very tiny cube, size of the small school eraser, and don`t forget it was measured by coroner as mucous with portions of food in it TOGETHER. Mucous took space too in this tiny cube.

Only several chunks of cut fresh pineapple could fit in this cube, I guess not more than 5-6 chunks.

It`s one table spoon of mucous with pineapple, the max. !

Now let`s think together- this tiny amount could not be the WHOLE AMOUNT of indigested SNACK.
Where was the rest of pinapple snack?

 

[THE BUNK]

Acted strangely, committed suicide, and the victim knew the true perpetrator. Cases like this one REALLY make me question the BPD's investigation into some of the more curious Ramsey case POIs...

Like who? Michael Helgoth?

 

[THE BUNK]

I can't believe that two people covering up a crime together would construct a ransom note and not just read it. During a cover up there will be lots of stress and anxiety so obviously they are going to double check the note.

Double check it for what? What would warrant an "error"?

 

[THE BUNK]

The intruders were not adults and they were not intelligent

I really hope you are not suggesting the kidnappers were under 17.

The language of the ransom not suggests a person in their late 20's at least.

You say, John saw the note and decided it`s better than Patsy`s revealing all the nasty dynamics going on in the family. And he was afraid she might secretly ask police for help..
I cannot accept it. Because in this case John would not leave Patsy`s sight for one second while the police and detectives had been in the house and that would fit the behavior of the controlling molester –tyron father in the family, he would not leaving sight of her for one second. J

No honor among thieves or murderers. Whatever family dynamic they had was destroyed by the possibility of mutual assured destruction. Either one of them could rat the other out and send to them jail. Patsy had as much power in this situation as John did. They both had to agree to it. No matter how ridiculous the others idea, they both had to agree to it. If Patsy was not willing to dispose of Jon Benet's body, John had to agree to it.

 

[THE BUNK]

Now let`s think together- this tiny amount could not be the WHOLE AMOUNT of indigested SNACK.
Where was the rest of pinapple snack?

If your making inquiries in regards to the pineapple, I would look into whether anyone at the party may have had a pineapple chunk as part of a garnish for an alcohol beverage. That may be why nobody remembers pineapple being served.

 

[tovarisch]

If your making inquiries in regards to the pineapple, I would look into whether anyone at the party may have had a pineapple chunk as part of a garnish for an alcohol beverage. That may be why nobody remembers pineapple being served.

Thank you, The Bunk! My heart is singing ! la-la-la!

This amount of pineaple does not fit the snack! It could be garnish! Together with olives !! Greenish! Pineaple is yellow, never greenish ! The amount is ti-i-i-i-i-ny !!!!! Less than table spoon ! La-la-la ...
Jonbenet had not had snack of pinaple at home !

 

[Chewy]

Double check it for what? What would warrant an "error"?

Stress and anxiety.

Good catch on the pineapple btw

 

[gramcracker]

According to the coroner`s report the small intestine contains small amount of thick mucus and undigested portions of food material in it, that we are assuming ` was a pineapple.

The amount of it thick mucus with portions of indigested food/ pineapple altogether there was 8-10 cc, (cubic centimeters).

I made a drawing: Width 2 cm x Length 5cm x Height 1cm. It`s a very tiny cube, size of the small school eraser, and don`t forget it was measured by coroner as mucous with portions of food in it TOGETHER. Mucous took space too in this tiny cube.

Only several chunks of cut fresh pineapple could fit in this cube, I guess not more than 5-6 chunks.

It`s one table spoon of mucous with pineapple, the max. !

Now let`s think together- this tiny amount could not be the WHOLE AMOUNT of indigested SNACK.
Where was the rest of pinapple snack?

BBM

that is not correct. perhaps you read it too quickly? the measured 8 - 10 cc/1.5 - 2 teaspoons refers to the contents of the stomach (the mucous alone), not the contents of the small intestine

" ... The stomach contains a small amount (8 - 10 cc) of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material without particulate matter identified. ... "

"... The proximal portion of the small intestine contains fragmented pieces of yellow to light green-tan apparent vegetable or fruit material which may represent fragments of pineapple. ... "
http://www.acandyrose.com/12271996jonbenet07.gif

the AR does not state that the number of vegetable/fruit pieces was counted or that the volume of the pieces was measured. that information would have been documented during the testing which was done later, when the fragmented pieces found in the small intestine (not the stomach) were identified as raw pineapple

 

[Chewy]

It's an interesting point though, if she just had bit in her, it could have been a garnish which matches everything

 

[THE BUNK]

Originally Posted by THE BUNK View Post
Double check it for what? What would warrant an "error"?
Stress and anxiety.

Good catch on the pineapple btw

Thanks but what would they be double checking the ransom note for?

 

[Chewy]

I really don't know how to explain something so obvious ?

 

[Tawny]

Hindsight is 20/20. We can look at the note and see glaring discrepancies, but in the moment, The R's may not have thought there were errors in their note, if they were the authors. They may believe the note was perfect as it was. JMO

 

[Chewy]

After they reread it.....SMH