Is JBR's killer alive or dead?

[luvbeaches]

The killer is dead, IMO.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

Imo, the killer is alive and has never been questioned by LE.

Ocean

 

[Buzz Mills]

Imo, the killer is alive and has never been questioned by LE.

Ocean

That is my opinion too, obe one.

 

[philamena]

Is there a possibility that a mod could edit the above poll or possibly erase it and start a new one? LOL the wording is more than a little confusing.

 

[Eagle1]

We get to exercise our "hunches" and it's not hard to figure out what the pollster means, plus, he or she has posted a correction.

I'm rather surprised that so far, the majority feel the killer is dead. Never been questionned is my hunch although the R's and friends may have been somehow involved, in the coverup at least.

 

[Toltec]

The killer is dead and unfortunately could not give a death-bed confession due to the fact that her husband and/or son would be fingered.

 

[philamena]

The killer is dead and unfortunately could not give a death-bed confession due to the fact that her husband and/or son would be fingered.

:clap: :clap: :clap:

 

[BBB167893]

That about covers it for me, Toltec.

 

[rashomon]

Guru Josh, you asked:

Is JBR's killer alive or dead?
- Yes
- No

But in that context, answering an 'or' question with either 'yes' or 'no' doesn't make sense. For example, if I ask you if your grandmother is alive or dead, and you answer "no", this doesn't make sense from the logical point of view. Which is why I'm afraid the poll results won't say much.

The poll question should have been put like that:
"Is JB's killer alive"? [or: "Is JB's killer dead?"]

- yes
- no
- I don't know

 

[UKGuy]

JonBenet's killer may be very much alive, the odds are 2:1 and possibly higher if a conspiracy was involved.

You should never really rule out the possibility that one or more of the Ramsey's were jointly involved in some criminal activity towards JonBenet which led to her death.

Its very likely that both John and Patsy were jointly involved, either by omission or comission, the staging suggests this, since it was the product of more than one person?

For the ADI enthusiasts just why was an accident masked with such bizarre staging, including a sexual assault. Why not stage an elaborate accident?


There is more to JonBenet's death than meets the eye!




.

 

[rashomon]

JonBenet's killer may be very much alive, the odds are 2:1 and possibly higher if a conspiracy was involved.

You should never really rule out the possibility that one or more of the Ramsey's were jointly involved in some criminal activity towards JonBenet which led to her death.

Its very likely that both John and Patsy were jointly involved, either by omission or comission, the staging suggests this, since it was the product of more than one person?

For the ADI enthusiasts just why was an accident masked with such bizarre staging, including a sexual assault. Why not stage an elaborate accident?

There is more to JonBenet's death than meets the eye!

Because the staging of an accident only (even if it was elaborately done) would not have pointed away enough from the parents as the perps.
But a bizarre sexaul assault staging would do exactly that: point away from the parents as the perps.
How often have we heard on JBR message boards "I can't imagine parents would garrote their child." And that's exactly what the Ramseys wanted people to believe.
And it worked with many people - it even worked with Lou Smit.

 

[UKGuy]

Because the staging of an accident only (even if it was elaborately done) would not have pointed away enough from the parents as the perps.
But a bizarre sexaul assault staging would do exactly that: point away from the parents as the perps.
How often have we heard on JBR message boards "I can't imagine parents would garrote their child." And that's exactly what the Ramseys wanted people to believe.
And it worked with many people - it even worked with Lou Smit.

rashomon,

Why should an accident have to point anywhere? Remember on a prior occassion Burke accidentally whacked JonBenet with a golf-club and this accident was swiftly dealt with, no concerns regarding embarrassment or other peoples opinions!

imo a sexual assault within the house points directly at one or more of the residents, and for the BPD this was their initial line of investigation.

Citing Lou Smit is not a good example, since his Intruder Theory has been falsified. Also with him having access to all those case records and forensic evidence must mean he was prejudiced, certainly not independent given his Ramsey association.

So ADI proponents are suggesting the Ramsey's staged a complex murder to mask an accident, all with no guarantee it would succeed?

Why not stage an elaborate accident then, at least its not a murder?


imo something does not add up here.





.

 

[BBB167893]

Because the staging of an accident only (even if it was elaborately done) would not have pointed away enough from the parents as the perps.
But a bizarre sexaul assault staging would do exactly that: point away from the parents as the perps.
How often have we heard on JBR message boards "I can't imagine parents would garrote their child." And that's exactly what the Ramseys wanted people to believe.
And it worked with many people - it even worked with Lou Smit.

It's more than that, rashomon. UKGuy, I've been WAITING for this chance!

The reason is psychological, as well. Remember what Mike Kane said? He said "this was a very theatrical production and she's a very theatrical person."

He lent more credence to this idea (and a possible motive) by saying that she would never confess because she gets too much enjoyment out of being the mother of a dead beauty queen.

Other people, including my brother, have questioned that. I believe his exact words were, "Guv, that would mean she'd enjoy being chief suspect."

But as I explained it to him, that's part of the package deal. Follow me on this: if she's the hero of her own story, a hero needs a good villain, right? In this case, she has two: the "intruder" and the cops! As long as they focus on her, she can play the victim and get sympathy (she thinks). It's classic martyr thinking.

(Even my bro had to think about that one!)

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

Why should an accident have to point anywhere? Remember on a prior occassion Burke accidentally whacked JonBenet with a golf-club and this accident was swiftly dealt with, no concerns regarding embarrassment or other peoples opinions!
...

So ADI proponents are suggesting the Ramsey's staged a complex murder to mask an accident, all with no guarantee it would succeed?

Why not stage an elaborate accident then, at least its not a murder?

imo something does not add up here.

The situation is different when a child (accidentally or even on purpose) hits his sibling. In addition, the wound inflicted by Burke was far less serious than the deadly head wound which JB received on that tragic night.
Now what should the Ramseys have told the hospital staff? That the child fell down the stairs in the middle of the night, or fell down in the bathroom? How many parents try to cover it up just like that? Many, which is why hosital staff are very trained in that field and see a red flag immediately. The Ramseys wouldn't have stood a chance to get away with it.

And how would you stage an elaborate accident with such a head wound? The choices are very limited imo.

imo a sexual assault within the house points directly at one or more of the residents

Not if it is done in such a bizarre way.

The Ramseys didn't stage an elaborate murder scene to mask a mere 'accident' - they staged it to mask a homicide, although an unintentional one.

And an even deeper motive may have been behind the elaborate sexual assault scene: suppose John Ramsey had been chronically abusing his daughter: then he knew the autopsy could have revealed this. And the vaginal injury could have been inflicted with the purpose to hide those signs of chronic abuse.

 

[angelwngs]

It's more than that, rashomon. UKGuy, I've been WAITING for this chance!

The reason is psychological, as well. Remember what Mike Kane said? He said "this was a very theatrical production and she's a very theatrical person."

He lent more credence to this idea (and a possible motive) by saying that she would never confess because she gets too much enjoyment out of being the mother of a dead beauty queen.

Other people, including my brother, have questioned that. I believe his exact words were, "Guv, that would mean she'd enjoy being chief suspect."

But as I explained it to him, that's part of the package deal. Follow me on this: if she's the hero of her own story, a hero needs a good villain, right? In this case, she has two: the "intruder" and the cops! As long as they focus on her, she can play the victim and get sympathy (she thinks). It's classic martyr thinking.

(Even my bro had to think about that one!)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
This Chickadee is in 110% agreement! I lived closely for 44 years with someone exhibiting this personality type. Day in day out others had to learn to dodge this person constantly throwing curveballs at everyone within range. This person could NEVER accept even a 'smidgin' of responsibility for ever doing anything 'wrong'. It was always 'someone else who was to blame' and the tables were always twisted and turned to make this person become the center of attention and seen as the one who had "SACFIFICED" everything for the good and betterment of another or others! When negative events were indeed undeniable, this person suddenly had moments of complete and total 'amnesia', accusing others of 'making-up' events which in this person's words, "never happened". This person masterfully succeeded in manipulating perception. It was as if we were always witness to, (or at worst, sometimes forcably cast as the opponent), in a chess match between the Good Witch Glenda and the Wicked Witch of the West, each having interchangable faces!

This falls right into place, SD! It explains why I have been so 'bent on' seeing elements of DID/MPD involved here as well. The emotional, over the top hysterionics in publically broadcasted interviews and the childlike persona was intended to 'elicit sympathy'. A 'Dec. 25th death date' adds to the 'martyr syndrome' thought process. You are so on the money, with your suggestion that the 'intruder' and the cops fall right into place in creating the villians. They perfectly support her being viewed as the victim/martyr. And what better villian to end the story of a grieving mother, than with her own death at the hands the monster Cancer, forever to being seen as a victim!
(I understand that this sounds very cold, but I witnessed first hand, the person in my own life using me as a pawn to write their own eulogy to create this exact "Forever After" ending, and at this moment I feel physically sick about it!)

Your theory is totally supported by the statement 'straight from the horse's mouth', 'She will never have to die or ovarian cancer or bury one of her own children.', all the while, showing no sorrow for JBR's life as a child having been cut so short, in such a brutal way. Instead, in some extreme exhibition of Martyrdom, she apparently tries to flip the table of sympathy around from focusing on a sweet innocent child who was killed, for the sole purpose of causing others to focus on the 'horrific pain' that the 'mother' had experienced in her own life.....

Thanks SD for slapping me in the face with what was so obvious, but something I apparently didn't want to see.....until now.

No blasphemy intended, but I am... suprised that some people do not have psychosomatically induced crucifixion marks on their hands...........

 

[sharkeyes]

The killer is dead and unfortunately could not give a death-bed confession due to the fact that her husband and/or son would be fingered.

Agreed.

 

[UKGuy]

The situation is different when a child (accidentally or even on purpose) hits his sibling. In addition, the wound inflicted by Burke was far less serious than the deadly head wound which JB received on that tragic night.
Now what should the Ramseys have told the hospital staff? That the child fell down the stairs in the middle of the night, or fell down in the bathroom? How many parents try to cover it up just like that? Many, which is why hosital staff are very trained in that field and see a red flag immediately. The Ramseys wouldn't have stood a chance to get away with it.

And how would you stage an elaborate accident with such a head wound? The choices are very limited imo.


Not if it is done in such a bizarre way.

The Ramseys didn't stage an elaborate murder scene to mask a mere 'accident' - they staged it to mask a homicide, although an unintentional one.

And an even deeper motive may have been behind the elaborate sexual assault scene: suppose John Ramsey had been chronically abusing his daughter: then he knew the autopsy could have revealed this. And the vaginal injury could have been inflicted with the purpose to hide those signs of chronic abuse.

rashomon,

The Ramseys didn't stage an elaborate murder scene to mask a mere 'accident' - they staged it to mask a homicide, although an unintentional one.

But JonBenet was not dead after her accident either a further strangulation or/and a head bash was delivered to finish her off?

She was possibly still alive when she was sexually assaulted, the blood on her genitals and underwear bears testimony to this?

And you are suggesting a homicide was being masked, the forensic evidence is patently clear, multiple attempts were made to kill JonBenet, and she was sexually assaulted, all whilst still alive, in my book all this adds up to murder!

And an even deeper motive may have been behind the elaborate sexual assault scene: suppose John Ramsey had been chronically abusing his daughter: then he knew the autopsy could have revealed this. And the vaginal injury could have been inflicted with the purpose to hide those signs of chronic abuse.

This is possible but does not explain why it was visited upon JonBenet while she was still alive. Recursively an an even deeper motive is simply that John Ramsey silenced JonBenet to avoid the abuse being made public?

JonBenet was violently and systematically murdered, then this was staged to be an intruder abduction, which was later revised.



.

 

[sharkeyes]

It's more than that, rashomon. UKGuy, I've been WAITING for this chance!

The reason is psychological, as well. Remember what Mike Kane said? He said "this was a very theatrical production and she's a very theatrical person."

He lent more credence to this idea (and a possible motive) by saying that she would never confess because she gets too much enjoyment out of being the mother of a dead beauty queen.

Other people, including my brother, have questioned that. I believe his exact words were, "Guv, that would mean she'd enjoy being chief suspect."

But as I explained it to him, that's part of the package deal. Follow me on this: if she's the hero of her own story, a hero needs a good villain, right? In this case, she has two: the "intruder" and the cops! As long as they focus on her, she can play the victim and get sympathy (she thinks). It's classic martyr thinking.

...Very interesting....makes sense to me!

 

[UKGuy]

It's more than that, rashomon. UKGuy, I've been WAITING for this chance!

The reason is psychological, as well. Remember what Mike Kane said? He said "this was a very theatrical production and she's a very theatrical person."

He lent more credence to this idea (and a possible motive) by saying that she would never confess because she gets too much enjoyment out of being the mother of a dead beauty queen.

Other people, including my brother, have questioned that. I believe his exact words were, "Guv, that would mean she'd enjoy being chief suspect."

But as I explained it to him, that's part of the package deal. Follow me on this: if she's the hero of her own story, a hero needs a good villain, right? In this case, she has two: the "intruder" and the cops! As long as they focus on her, she can play the victim and get sympathy (she thinks). It's classic martyr thinking.

(Even my bro had to think about that one!)

SuperDave,

He lent more credence to this idea (and a possible motive) by saying that she would never confess because she gets too much enjoyment out of being the mother of a dead beauty queen.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here? Are you suggesting Patsy created an elaborate staging because she wished to slot herself into the role of the mother of a dead beauty queen?

That is, the obvious pleasure and gratification she recieved as the mother of an alive beauty queen, was replaced with another role?

There is a topic in offender profiling known as a Psychological Autopsy which is a reconstruction of the victim’s psychology and its relationship to the offender.

And here there is a kind of inversion or transference of victimhood?



.

 

[Eagle1]

Hi, Supe,

Good story and a good post, but to continue our lively discussions, can I play your brother for a minute?

Maybe he should have said something like (1) "But you have no proof whatsoever that PR had a martyr complex, or (2) that the perp who planned the "play" to be so confusing, almost every clue contradicted by some other clue, doesn't have a martyr complex. Lots of people do. " He could still come back at you after thinking about it.

Can you really imagine me or you enjoying (1) losing a child, (2) being accused by so many who want to oversimplify and jump to conclusions, (3) having cancer return long after the 5-yr all-clear, probably partly because of STRESS? She was a spunky person, but her stress clearly showed. I doubt she was stoned because with lots of meds you're warned not to drink.

Can I be your other brother? Just kidding.