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

[Anti-K]

The strongest evidence of an intruder is the single pubic hair found on the blanket. But did it come from an intruder? Could it have come from a house guest at the open house, or from the Whites party. Maybe it's been on the floor of that basement for years?

You say you believe the intruder left via the bp door? Then why stack the suitcase under the window? This intruder felt comfortable enough to pen a rambling RN but felt compelled to climb on a suitcase out a broken window? PR commented that she didn't leave the tea bag in the glass, are we to believe the intruder boiled water and made tea while the Ramsey's slept?? It all just seems far fetched. Especially when you factor in the uncooperative parents.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t think very many people would agree that the pubic hair found on the blanket is the strongest evidence of an intruder. I don’t think you’d even find agreement on the hair itself. Most would say it was not a pubic hair, and many would say that the hair was ultimately identified as a Ramsey hair.

Some would say that the ransom note was the strongest piece of intruder evidence, the blatant use of ramsey-incriminating materials, the unidentified handwriting; or the damage inflicted on the victim, or the DNA commingled in the victim’s blood, or the tDNA, some would say the lack of motive, or family/behavioral history; some might cite the disturbance in the basement window, or the items "missing” from the scene, etc as being the strongest evidence of an intruder, but I don’t think hardly anyone would cite that singe hair.
...

AK

 

[tovarisch]

I don’t think very many people would agree that the pubic hair found on the blanket is the strongest evidence of an intruder. I don’t think you’d even find agreement on the hair itself. Most would say it was not a pubic hair, and many would say that the hair was ultimately identified as a Ramsey hair.

Some would say that the ransom note was the strongest piece of intruder evidence, the blatant use of ramsey-incriminating materials, the unidentified handwriting; or the damage inflicted on the victim, or the DNA commingled in the victim’s blood, or the tDNA, some would say the lack of motive, or
family/behavioral history; some might cite the disturbance in the basement window, or the items "missing” from the scene, etc as being the strongest evidence of an intruder, but I don’t think hardly anyone would cite that singe hair.

I would say that 118,000 the strongest clue if we can read in it. It was bonus Access Graphics awarded Mr. Ramsey for reaching 1 billion in sales in 1996. What sales? Interestingly enough, in sales of military technology. Access Graphics was a daughter company of Lockheed Martins, who were and still is a main Pentagon contractor.

We respect you business but not country it serves. And down after this line- "asking" for bonus for the success in military sales. Global Justice made a good point, that is not unrelated.

 

[Mama2JML]

The bonus (which wasn't precisely $118,000) was earned in 1995, but I seem to recall it was paid out gradually over the 12 months of 1996. (...not 100% sure, I'll check my sources and post my findings.)

 

[tovarisch]

The bonus (which wasn't precisely $118,000) was earned in 1995, but I seem to recall it was paid out gradually over the 12 months of 1996. (...not 100% sure, I'll check my sources and post my findings.)

I know that bonus was 118,666 and change. The significance is that the killer(s) knew about him and explained why he was on their list : they did not respect the country, Mr.Ramsey served with military contracts of his company, he successfully achieved high level in sales for the defense of the country. They were upset with his service.
Bonus had been paid in Feb 1996. Who cares installments or lump sum
The point is they WERE consistent in their ransom . Foreign faction, do not respect your country, we know what and who you were serving, we know you got bonus for your service, give it to us, or else...

 

[tovarisch]

The word "country you serve". Serving.... Think about it. Not everybody serving the country, but military people do. The word serving the country appropriate Only for the military personal. Mr. Ramsey, former navy officer, in 1995-1996 was in business that "served the country". Respectful business. But not the country it served. Because they said who they are.
Now. They knew Mr. Ramsey not only was a fat rich cat of Boulder city, they knew exactlywhathis business about. He (his company) sold new computer technology for the defense of the country, and it was something pretty sophisticated and good, government paid big-big buck, and then followed Mr. Ramsey bonus.
Now. Let`s think if local pedo would be so upset with this success in the defense of the country. Would he care to mention it in the ransom? Should not he have been happy with the rest of citizens? Would local pedo even think in the direction of the defense of the country?
Would have Patsy ?
The ransom is not crazy rambling. We should "listen carefully" to every word in order to read it correctly.

 

[andreww]

It is crazy rambling in my opinion. All staging. It's a ransom note with no kidnapping!

You say "some crazy pedo", yet we have no actual evidence that the murderer even attempted the act of intercourse. I certainly think a crazy pedo would have gratified himself before strangling her.

So we have a ransom note without a victim and a one sided sexual assault. This is why the whole thing seems to be nothing more than a staged event. I believe, contrary to the views of one of the previous posters, that this all probably started with the head injury. Everything else is there just to cloud the issue. The Ramsey's were all in the house that night. I just cannot accept that someone could do that much damage to a child without waking any of
Them. The neighbors heard the scream, why didn't the Rs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mama2JML]

'Crazy' is a fitting, though, broad term. Presuming the perp is/was a 'pedo[phile]' is troublesome as the theory lacks evidentiary support. IMHO.

'Sexual sadist' is a more appropriate, specific classification and a most common element to IDI theories.

"Sexual sadism refers to the derivation of sexual pleasure from the infliction of pain, suffering and/or humiliation upon another person. The pain and suffering of the victim, which may be both physical and psychological, is pivotal to the sexual arousal and pleasure."​

http://www.forensicpsychiatry.ca/paraphilia/sadism.htm

 

[Global Justice Ops]

It is crazy rambling in my opinion. All staging. It's a ransom note with no kidnapping!

You say "some crazy pedo", yet we have no actual evidence that the murderer even attempted the act of intercourse. I certainly think a crazy pedo would have gratified himself before strangling her.

So we have a ransom note without a victim and a one sided sexual assault. This is why the whole thing seems to be nothing more than a staged event. I believe, contrary to the views of one of the previous posters, that this all probably started with the head injury. Everything else is there just to cloud the issue. The Ramsey's were all in the house that night. I just cannot accept that someone could do that much damage to a child without waking any of
Them. The neighbors heard the scream, why didn't the Rs?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can understand why you would call it crazy but it’s not necessarily just rambling, there is structure to the ransom note. He notifies the reader he has JonBenet and wants to exchange her for money. He then goes and says HOW he wants the money delivered to him and how he plans to communicate with the Ramseys. He then addresses the consequences of failing to raise the ransom. He constantly reiterated that JonBenet would die if anything was done that he did not approve of.

This killer wanted to be in control. I can easily visualize a person who is willing to kill a child based off the actions of the child’s parent, also killing the child if the child resisted him or angered him. JonBenet fought back that night. The DNA beneath her fingernail and the fingernail marks above the garrote imply this.

You don’t have evidence of sexual intercourse but you DO have a missing part of the broken paintbrush that was never found and material matching the paintbrush found inside JonBenet’s vagina. You have blood in that location and evidence of somebody wiping the area.

ONE neighbor claimed to have heard a scream, and later said she was not sure if she was just imagining it or not. The first thing she said the day after the murder was that she DID hear it. And I believe her.

Lou Smit AND Steve Thomas, who disagreed on what happened went to the house and conducted tests.
A scream from the basement carried outside though the open vent but could NOT be heard from the basement to the third floor where the parents were.

If you don’t think a grown man using cord, duct tape, and a stun gun can overpower a 45 lbs. six year old girl with minimal noise….well I’ll just say I disagree.

 

[Seth AbdulHayy]

Hello everyone, I have read here for a long time but I've never posted before that I can recall. I came to this thread curious but skeptical, because I thought from reading RDI threads that certain facts were established which I now know are not in fact as clear as they seemed. One was that it had been determined that Patty wrote the ransom note, but finding out that she was not conclusively cleared as having done so made me look further into what other mistaken things I had started to believe. The quality of research in this thread is very good.

It is such a tremendous mystery what tragedy befell that poor child. I've started to believe through all of this reading in time that the primary assumption is that whoever wrote the ransom note either killed the child or was attempting to cover for someone else who did.

Wouldn't it be awful if this latter option did happen, but the person was incorrect, that the child had in fact been killed by an intruder, but that each suspecting the other, they took steps to protect what family remained? The horrible grief of not only losing a child but suspecting ones loved one of having perpetrated it would certainly be enough to put someone in the state of mind to pen the ransom note. Note just doesn't seem cleverly contrived to me, but rather written in a panic by someone accustomed to writing and using the best of their ability to be top of mind creative.

Perhaps the person might be thinking they only had to create a reasonable doubt, and because they too might have one, they would feel justified in doing so even though it would obstruct justice. Some reason to believe that one of the others had committed the crime, or that other people would believe that this was the case.

Meanwhile, the intruder was a stalker -- I believe it was most likely the person child referred to when she spoke of a secret visit, although not necessarily the person who played Santa --- and none of the family were guilty of the crime at all. They have begun to book Kiltey because they acted as guilty people might, had they decided to create enough reasonable doubt due to their fear of each other's possible involvement.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Hello everyone, I have read here for a long time but I've never posted before that I can recall. I came to this thread curious but skeptical, because I thought from reading RDI threads that certain facts were established which I now know are not in fact as clear as they seemed. One was that it had been determined that Patty wrote the ransom note, but finding out that she was not conclusively cleared as having done so made me look further into what other mistaken things I had started to believe. The quality of research in this thread is very good.

It is such a tremendous mystery what tragedy befell that poor child. I've started to believe through all of this reading in time that the primary assumption is that whoever wrote the ransom note either killed the child or was attempting to cover for someone else who did.

Wouldn't it be awful if this latter option did happen, but the person was incorrect, that the child had in fact been killed by an intruder, but that each suspecting the other, they took steps to protect what family remained? The horrible grief of not only losing a child but suspecting ones loved one of having perpetrated it would certainly be enough to put someone in the state of mind to pen the ransom note. Note just doesn't seem cleverly contrived to me, but rather written in a panic by someone accustomed to writing and using the best of their ability to be top of mind creative.

Perhaps the person might be thinking they only had to create a reasonable doubt, and because they too might have one, they would feel justified in doing so even though it would obstruct justice. Some reason to believe that one of the others had committed the crime, or that other people would believe that this was the case.

Meanwhile, the intruder was a stalker -- I believe it was most likely the person child referred to when she spoke of a secret visit, although not necessarily the person who played Santa --- and none of the family were guilty of the crime at all. They have begun to book Kiltey because they acted as guilty people might, had they decided to create enough reasonable doubt due to their fear of each other's possible involvement.

With all I have read and studied and looked into personally, to make sure it has merit in this case, The case against the R's falls apart. There is nothing to support that they had anything to do with this crime and were cleared of the crime with DNA evidence.

The fact remains that people just like kicking them. There is no evidence that ties the R's to this crime but there is evidence that points to an intruder. People don't like the intruder theory because it leaves an unknown and they like to have a solution but sometimes there just isn't one of it there was in this case, I believe that the way the crime scene was handled and the case let that killer escape justice. I believe that as time goes by we may see more improvement in DNA and there may be another way to catch the killer.

But I think the people that cared most about real justice in this case have resolved themselves to the fact they may never really get it.

 

[Global Justice Ops]

I want feedback on this possible chain of events:

The killer applied the stun gun on JonBenet’s her face in her room. This rendered her unconscious. He placed duct tape over her mouth and carried her down the spiral staircase and on to the basement. Inside the basement he placed her face down on the floor and loosely tied her hands with white nylon cord.

JonBenet recovered from initial electroshock and began to move around in confusion while still being face down. The killer shocked her for a second time on her back, knocking her unconscious once more. He then constructed the garrote and placed it on JonBenet’s neck. The initial placement of the garrote is low on JonBenet’s neck with minimal pressure.

The killer then pulls the child’s pants down and assaults her with the broken end of the paintbrush. The excruciating pain causes JonBenet to regain consciousness. She rips the duct tape off and screams. The killer quickly pulls the garrote as tight as he can to silence her, JonBenet claws at her neck for a few seconds before she loses consciousness. This leaves fingernail marks above the ligature that are visible in the autopsy photos.

The killer is no longer comfortable with where he is. He thinks the scream might have been heard. He is ignorant to the fact that it could not be heard upstairs. Moving to finish things, he orally assaults JonBenet, depositing his saliva on her blood and creating the mixed sample. He redresses the child and moves her into her final resting place inside the cellar.

There he once again exerts as much force as he can on the garrote. To ensure that she will die, the killer strikes her over the head. The blood has already been cutoff to her brain from the garrote so internal bleeding is minimal and swelling is unobservable. Before leaving the killer wraps JonBenet in the white blanket.

As he exits from the basement window the killer lets the grate smash back down as he starts running to the alleyway. This noise is heard by Melody Stanton’s husband who reported hearing the sound of metal crashing on concrete.

 

[tovarisch]

"The case against the R`s falls apart". How true.
"The fact remains that people just like kicking them". How true, for almost 20 years. Even they go so far, as they add their own fantasies as a proven facts , as handwriting matched Patsy`s, Patsy had bi-poler, Patsy had multi-personality and so on, endless...fantasies. DNA of R`s allover the body.....

Contrary to RDI, to the respect of IDI WS-ters, is not the case on our side of the barricades. We stick to the fact, and facts only. Whatever is available, it`s sufficient to remain unshaken in IDI.

 

[tovarisch]

I want feedback on this possible chain of events:

You said: The killer applied the stun gun on JonBenet’s her face in her room. This rendered her unconscious. He placed duct tape over her mouth and carried her down the spiral staircase and on to the basement. Inside the basement he placed her face down on the floor and loosely tied her hands with white nylon cord.

My comment: Agree- made her unconscious before taken to the basement. Agree- put the duct tape over her mouths to prevent her making noises. Agree-took down the stairs while unconscious, facts-green garland from the stairs in her hair. Disagree- used stun gun, facts- never proven if it was a stun gun. Tied her hands-agree, it`s a fact, yet we don` t know when.

You said: JonBenet recovered from initial electroshock and began to move around in confusion while still being face down. The killer shocked her for a second time on her back, knocking her unconscious once more. He then constructed the garrote and placed it on JonBenet’s neck. The initial placement of the garrote is low on JonBenet’s neck with minimal pressure.

My comment: disagree that JB recovered ever after the first blow. He (they) miscalculated the strength of a blow on the child. Facts: duck tape--clear one only impression of closed lips, unmovable closed lips.

You said :The killer then pulls the child’s pants down and assaults her with the broken end of the paintbrush. The excruciating pain causes JonBenet to regain consciousness. She rips the duct tape off and screams. The killer quickly pulls the garrote as tight as he can to silence her, JonBenet claws at her neck for a few seconds before she loses consciousness. This leaves fingernail marks above the ligature that are visible in the autopsy photos.

My comments: Assaulted with the end of the paintbrush, disagree, facts-it was never found to conform it was in deed an object of assault. My opinion- to short and thin , to have been grasped with the hand and to have enough length left to insert and cause such a damage. She screams-disagree, facts: no witness to prove she did cream, spiritual scream does not apply. Facts: duck tape- once again, unmovable closed lips. JB claws at her neck. Disagree: visible, as we might think, on the photo marks do not apply, unless in the report. Official report conforms other way, no struggle.

You said :The killer is no longer comfortable with where he is. He thinks the scream might have been heard. He is ignorant to the fact that it could not be heard upstairs. Moving to finish things, he orally assaults JonBenet, depositing his saliva on her blood and creating the mixed sample. He redresses the child and moves her into her final resting place inside the cellar.

My comments: killer was not comfortable, agree, facts: left his stuff behind, the bag with the huge rope,very old flashlight with brand new batteries, and who knows what else, there is a practice to hide from the public the most important evidence from the crime scene, which is known ONLY to the killer and the task force. Orally assaulted JB, disagree, it was one tiny spot of human fluid, could be sneeze, I believe if sexual assault have happened, more fluid would be found, not just one tiny-tiny spot . The report stated that object was inserted at the moment of dying or after death. The assault with the object was performed most likely on a body. I do know if necrophilia is common amongst pedophiles, but to my opinion it was humiliation, not act of pleasure for the monster. I do not think those who were in the house were pedophiles. Reason? it was at least two intruders. Pedophiles do not go together for the same victim, am I wrong ? They might be hired by pedo.

You said: There he once again exerts as much force as he can on the garrote. To ensure that she will die, the killer strikes her over the head. The blood has already been cutoff to her brain from the garrote so internal bleeding is minimal and swelling is unobservable. Before leaving the killer wraps JonBenet in the white blanket.

My comment: agree, tremendous force on the garrote, which seams to me very consistent with the tremendous head blow. The same person done both , he was big and strong, and rather angry. Possibly, never killed a child before, therefore overdone with it. I need to add, there was two shoe prints next to JB body, it was at least two intruders, but the killer was one of them.

You said: As he exits from the basement window the killer lets the grate smash back down as he starts running to the alleyway. This noise is heard by Melody Stanton’s husband who reported hearing the sound of metal crashing on concrete.

My comments: I have different opinion how he (they) exited. He (they) left flashlight in the kitchen, after it served it purpose, had been turn off, placed on the crowdy counter and forgotten. They were exiting into the dark street without flashlight on , obviously, therefore it was forgotten. Metal noise heard, I tend to agree that the boiler room might not be their first choice, if we only knew here what kind of heavy metal equipment ( like old huge fridge) was stored in the basement, and they MIGHT moved it to hide the body behind. The equipment made a metal SCRATCHING noise ( was it scratching or crashing??Big difference) and they dropped the idea, and moved JB to the BR.

I appreciate your theory, little disagreements is not a big deal. You could be right about the head blow was the last. Or that they exited from the basement. Who knows? I could be wrong on my reasoning. Thank you.

 

[Mama2JML]

The 'metal on concrete' sound could have been caused by a metal bat hitting pavement.

The amount of genetic material found on new bloomies from unopened packages was 1/10th of the amount as that which resulted in the foreign male DNA profile now in CODIS.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mama2JML]

BTW, Patsy was not the only person that could not be eliminated as the author of the RN. She was the only person "KNOWN to be in the house" (per Steve Thomas) that could not be eliminated as the author of the RN. Patsy did not write the note.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tovarisch]

The 'metal on concrete' sound could have been caused by a metal bat hitting pavement.

The amount of genetic material found on new bloomies from unopened packages was 1/10th of the amount as that which resulted in the foreign male DNA profile now in CODIS.


It`s my wrong use of English, as always . My own husbands sometimes misunderstands me ) No doubt in my mind that DNA in the blood sport in panties is the unidentified intruder`s fluid. What I wanted to express that it`s too minimal quantity to be an evidence of oral sex performed on JB.

I want for the first time reveal my personal strong believe on the issue. The never found object inserted in the dead body was a primitive single thing as FINGER of an intruder, gloved, which he spitted on before making an assault. The residue of a glove was found inside the v-a`s cavity. Simple like this, and the most natural to think of.

P.S. My computer`s not doing well ,I cannot reply in proper format, I try my best.

 

[Global Justice Ops]

The substance in question glowed blue during testing, according to Kolar. He wrote in his book that this indicated it was saliva. Kolar did not believe an intruder did it so he proposed it was deposited there from sneezing or a related manner.

The girl who was sexually assaulted in her bed by an intruder seven months after JonBenet was, went to the same dance studio that JonBenet did. She told the police officers that the man pinned her to the bed, talked to her using her name, and told her he would strangle her if she screamed. He assaulted her orally. The girls mom was able to hear the commotion, wake up and scare the man off. He escaped by jumping from a second floor window.

The police later theorized the perpetrator came into the house when the mother and daughter were away, waited for everyone to fall asleep and then made his move. The alarm system was on in the house, and he bypassed it. He knew what he was doing.

The police dismissed any connection whatsoever with the JonBenet case. Why? I don't know. But it is my belief that this man was involved in both crimes.

 

[andreww]

BTW, Patsy was not the only person that could not be eliminated as the author of the RN. She was the only person "KNOWN to be in the house" (per Steve Thomas) that could not be eliminated as the author of the RN. Patsy did not write the note.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It I recall correctly, wasn't it fairly obvious that PR was trying to alter her handwriting? I hear she was ambidextrous, so couldn't the note have been written left handed? IMO it would be very difficult to positively match samples if the author was disguising there handwriting on both the note and the samples provided.

That's the problem with this case. People want 100% conclusive evidence, and because the Rs were very careful to sanitize the scene, I don't think we'll ever have that. But to me there are enough similarities in the note to strongly consider PR as the author.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Global Justice Ops]

You can thank Linda Arndt and Officer French for allowing all the freinds the Ramseys called that morning to come into the house. Nobody would have challenged a LE official if they stated that this was a crime scene and nobody was allowed. Even if it was being viewed as a kidnapping at that point.

Arndt then proceeded to completely shatter long standing police and crime scene investigation protocol by having the victims/suspects search the crime scene. That is UNHEARD of.

Don't blame the Ramseys.

 

[tovarisch]

The substance in question glowed blue during testing, according to Kolar. He wrote in his book that this indicated it was saliva. Kolar did not believe an intruder did it so he proposed it was deposited there from sneezing or a related manner.

The girl who was sexually assaulted in her bed by an intruder seven months after JonBenet was, went to the same dance studio that JonBenet did. She told the police officers that the man pinned her to the bed, talked to her using her name, and told her he would strangle her if she screamed. He assaulted her orally. The girls mom was able to hear the commotion, wake up and scare the man off. He escaped by jumping from a second floor window.

The police later theorized the perpetrator came into the house when the mother and daughter were away, waited for everyone to fall asleep and then made his move. The alarm system was on in the house, and he bypassed it. He knew what he was doing.

The police dismissed any connection whatsoever with the JonBenet case. Why? I don't know. But it is my belief that this man was involved in both crimes.

I remember the story. I believe it was a big deal for the police, they jumped on it right away to see if it was connected. But DNA of an intruder in Amy`s case ( police nicknamed the girl Amy for privacy) did not match DNA in JB case.
It tells us, again, that DNA is the granite base in JB case. For the police, and for us, IDI.