JonBenet's Dream Team

[Ravyn]

Stange thing to me is how did JR shirt fibers was found in JB panties and if you think about it truly the intruder WOULD NOT of acess to his shirt especially if JR took off his clothes in his bedroom...And JR admitted the shirt belong to him...And I have to keep in mind if the R's could lie about BR being awake when the 911 call was made that it could be easy for them to lie period....

 

[Mysteeri]

SuperDave wrote:
Again, it helps to remember who the Rs' first targets were, and why they were so eager at first to name people who had keys.

Because there were no signs of forced entry? Wasn`t the police eager to know who had keys to the house? I mean the R`s would be eager to think of people who had easy access to the house if innocent, too. And I don`t quite understand, why the R´s (if guilty) were targeting people with easy access to the house, since it narrows down the possible subjects who may very well have alibis.

I wrote:
I`m not sure though, why they had to find the RN first.

SuperDave replied:
Because it explains why they didn't search the house for JB's body at first. It explains WHY JB wound up dead: because they went against the writer's instructions.

Ok, it explains why they didn`t search the house thoroughly at first. But they would have gone against the instructions too if they had found her missing first and called the police.

SuperDave wrote:
Well, that's interesting, because in 2000, the Rs claimed that their Atlanta home was broken into. JR claims he came home and caught the thief in the act. (His description is nothing less than hilarious.) His explanation? He left the door unlocked. Quite a tale, that.

I haven`t read about that yet. Was it proven a lie, then?

I wrote:
I think it`s a bit misleading to say they tried to direct the attention of the police (if I don`t know about their innocence).
SuperDave wrote:
Misleading? You have my interest.

I mean that the police was interested in people who had easy access and keys to the house, the Rs didn`t have to direct their attention.

I wrote:
Anyway, to focus on people who had access to the house narrows down the possible suspects- not good for the R´s so for me, it`s an indication of innocence.

SuperDave wrote:
I guess they realized that, because they switched to the "window" story.

Guilty or innocent, perhaps they had to "switch" to that story when they realized they were suspects because there were no signs of forced entry.

About LS, well there seems to be a lot to say about him. I think I`d like to stick to this for now:

SuperDave wrote:
Or the times when he made up evidence out of thin air?

 

[Jane Osa]

Stange thing to me is how did JR shirt fibers was found in JB panties and if you think about it truly the intruder WOULD NOT of acess to his shirt especially if JR took off his clothes in his bedroom...And JR admitted the shirt belong to him...And I have to keep in mind if the R's could lie about BR being awake when the 911 call was made that it could be easy for them to lie period....

The whole timeline begins on a lie on their part - that Jonbenet was asleep & carried up to bed - LIE! Johns himself later contradicts himself, Burke says she was awake...and she had pineapple which had been eaten a few hours before death. Now, if I remember right there is at least one person who thinks an intruder her gave her a nice little snack.....which I thought was some sort of ironic joke at the time but....it wasn't.

You know the IDI would be plausible IF the evidence added up that way...the evidence individually & collectively points to the R.s (yes, yes, there is the holy DNA - as I said if someone helped them that explains that, & many other explainations which have already been posted explains that, too.).

Intruders take the body - maybe the body is later found, maybe not. Maybe there are clues, maybe not (Polly Klass, Danielle VanDamm, etc). But, they do NOT hang around a house...have snacks, write long 'ransom' notes in the office, & after 'botching up' the kidnap & apparently being in a quandry of what to do/how to kill her but manage to many times over, when she's dead redress her & tape her up...cause maybe they'll take, but no, they then they decide they won't...and finally leave the body where there could be evidence linking them instead of taking & disposing (and isn't it amazing that aside from the 'touch' DNA there is NO evidence..oh, right, aside from the Ramseys).....


I think they had intended on taking Jonbenet's body out of the house & to Atlanta & dispose of it...the actually thought they could leave & wanted to - real concerned parents there. When they realized they weren't going anywhere...John 'discovers' the body....

 

[madeleine]

The whole timeline begins on a lie on their part - that Jonbenet was asleep & carried up to bed - LIE! Johns himself later contradicts himself, Burke says she was awake...and she had pineapple which had been eaten a few hours before death. Now, if I remember right there is at least one person who thinks an intruder her gave her a nice little snack.....which I thought was some sort of ironic joke at the time but....it wasn't.

You know the IDI would be plausible IF the evidence added up that way...the evidence individually & collectively points to the R.s (yes, yes, there is the holy DNA - as I said if someone helped them that explains that, & many other explainations which have already been posted explains that, too.).

Intruders take the body - maybe the body is later found, maybe not. Maybe there are clues, maybe not (Polly Klass, Danielle VanDamm, etc). But, they do NOT hang around a house...have snacks, write long 'ransom' notes in the office, & after 'botching up' the kidnap & apparently being in a quandry of what to do/how to kill her but manage to many times over, when she's dead redress her & tape her up...cause maybe they'll take, but no, they then they decide they won't...and finally leave the body where there could be evidence linking them instead of taking & disposing (and isn't it amazing that aside from the 'touch' DNA there is NO evidence..oh, right, aside from the Ramseys).....


I think they had intended on taking Jonbenet's body out of the house & to Atlanta & dispose of it...the actually thought they could leave & wanted to - real concerned parents there. When they realized they weren't going anywhere...John 'discovers' the body....

Reminds me of the missing phone records ...Maybe they DID plan to take her body somewhere else by plane and something didn't work out .Fleet didn't see the body in the basement earlier that morning.Maybe it was kept somewhere else and JR changed his mind and thought it would be better to "find" her.I am more and more convinced that the location where the body was found is part of the staging,she wasn't killed in the basement IMO.

 

[Ravyn]

But some says they was confused I don't see how cause the R's stories kept changing and I agree if you tell the truth this would not be a problem but if you lie then you have to remember then sooner or later the lie is caught...The R's always said they was railroad by looking at the interviews with the LE I sure can't see where..Heck,Lou Smit gave JR answers and way outs...

 

[BBB167893]

SuperDave wrote:
Again, it helps to remember who the Rs' first targets were, and why they were so eager at first to name people who had keys.

Because there were no signs of forced entry? Wasn`t the police eager to know who had keys to the house? I mean the R`s would be eager to think of people who had easy access to the house if innocent, too. And I don`t quite understand, why the R´s (if guilty) were targeting people with easy access to the house, since it narrows down the possible subjects who may very well have alibis.

Well, let me put it this way: a lot of the people they named couldn't afford the kind of legal talent they had, and as such were in less position to defend themselves.

I wrote:
I`m not sure though, why they had to find the RN first.

SuperDave replied:
Because it explains why they didn't search the house for JB's body at first. It explains WHY JB wound up dead: because they went against the writer's instructions.

Ok, it explains why they didn`t search the house thoroughly at first. But they would have gone against the instructions too if they had found her missing first and called the police.

Not necessarily. Eventually, yes, but they wouldn't necessarily know she was kidnapped, you see.

SuperDave wrote:
Well, that's interesting, because in 2000, the Rs claimed that their Atlanta home was broken into. JR claims he came home and caught the thief in the act. (His description is nothing less than hilarious.) His explanation? He left the door unlocked. Quite a tale, that.

I haven`t read about that yet. Was it proven a lie, then?

From what I understand, the Atlanta cops had it pegged as a fake early on, since nothing of any real value was stolen, the description (a well-dressed, soft-spoken, light-skinned black man) was outlandish, and JR's story about being trapped in the bathroom while screaming is pretty stupid. Add to that no suspect matching that description has ever struck again (sort of like the "intruder," wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more).

Moreover, my point was, if one of your children was murdered right under your nose because you couldn't be bothered to fix a single window, are you EVER going to leave a door unlocked again? Especially since PR made such a big deal in one of her interviews about how she would have beefed up her security so the house was practically a fortress.

I wrote:
I think it`s a bit misleading to say they tried to direct the attention of the police (if I don`t know about their innocence).
SuperDave wrote:
Misleading? You have my interest.

I mean that the police was interested in people who had easy access and keys to the house, the Rs didn`t have to direct their attention.

Well, it's one thing for the cops to get around to them as part of SOP. It's another thing to drop hints.

I wrote:
Anyway, to focus on people who had access to the house narrows down the possible suspects- not good for the R´s so for me, it`s an indication of innocence.

SuperDave wrote:
I guess they realized that, because they switched to the "window" story.

Guilty or innocent, perhaps they had to "switch" to that story when they realized they were suspects because there were no signs of forced entry.

Actually, they switched AFTER the police checked those people out.

About LS, well there seems to be a lot to say about him.

An entire chapter, in my case.

I think I`d like to stick to this for now:

SuperDave wrote:
Or the times when he made up evidence out of thin air?

Excellent. That refers to how he created the whole "stun gun" affair.

 

[Ravyn]

I believe the R's was going to move JB also,but I wonder about that night cause if neighbors was telling the truth about hearing metal scraping metal came in..

 

[Ravyn]

Now in five months the new DA would be replacing DA Mary Lacy and with her writting that letter to John Ramsey most likely tied the new DA's hands..With this new DNA how far would someone go to try stay in office or make it look like they was doing their job...And with finding out Lacy sent the longjohns in maybe the DNA should be more closely looked at..

 

[Ravyn]

And a other thing when the news of this DNA, Lacy just forgot about the other evidence that pointed to the R's...Now comes why? Did she write that letter....

Evidence we have
1) The ransom note
2)Fibers surrounding the crime scene
3)Contradictions of the R's statements.

Now before I believe in this DNA..The evidence that Lacy just ingored is still very huge part of this case...

 

[Mysteeri]

I wrote:
Ok, it explains why they didn`t search the house thoroughly at first. But they would have gone against the instructions too if they had found her missing first and called the police.

SuperDave wrote:
Not necessarily. Eventually, yes, but they wouldn't necessarily know she was kidnapped, you see.

I don`t see. I`m thinking too, that going against the instructions would in the R`s mind explain JB`s death, but if they found the RN after calling the police, they would have gone against the instructions unwittingly, unintentionally, which would have been better for them.

SuperDave wrote:
From what I understand, the Atlanta cops had it pegged as a fake early on, since nothing of any real value was stolen, the description (a well-dressed, soft-spoken, light-skinned black man) was outlandish, and JR's story about being trapped in the bathroom while screaming is pretty stupid. Add to that no suspect matching that description has ever struck again (sort of like the "intruder," wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more).

Alright, I won`t comment on that since I haven`t read about it.

SuperDave wrote:
Moreover, my point was, if one of your children was murdered right under your nose because you couldn't be bothered to fix a single window, are you EVER going to leave a door unlocked again? Especially since PR made such a big deal in one of her interviews about how she would have beefed up her security so the house was practically a fortress.

Not intentionally.

SuperDave wrote:
Well, it's one thing for the cops to get around to them as part of SOP. It's another thing to drop hints.

They`d think of hints if innocent too. I wouldn`t use the words "drop hints" because I`m not sure about their guilt.

SuperDave wrote:
Actually, they switched AFTER the police checked those people out.

I`m not sure about that, but again they could have "switched" to that story, or should I say theory, guilty or innocent.

Excellent. That refers to how he created the whole "stun gun" affair.

Ok, I`ll find out for myself.

 

[BBB167893]

Now in five months the new DA would be replacing DA Mary Lacy and with her writing that letter to John Ramsey most likely tied the new DA's hands..

I think that was the idea.

 

[BBB167893]

I wrote:
Ok, it explains why they didn`t search the house thoroughly at first. But they would have gone against the instructions too if they had found her missing first and called the police.

SuperDave wrote:
Not necessarily. Eventually, yes, but they wouldn't necessarily know she was kidnapped, you see.

I don`t see.

I didn't phrase that particularly well. What I mean is this: IF the Rs are innocent, and they found JB missing before they found the note, they wouldn't immediately know that she had been kidnapped. She might be in another part of the house or wandered away on her own. The Rn provided a concrete reason for why she wasn't there.

I`m thinking too, that going against the instructions would in the R`s mind explain JB`s death,

Very good.

but if they found the RN after calling the police, they would have gone against the instructions unwittingly, unintentionally, which would have been better for them.

I got to thinking about that. It goes with what I said above. If they had called 911 without finding the note first, wouldn't it look a little odd to the police that they didn't find it first, since it was in plain sight in the same area where the 911 call was made?

Besides, (and more importantly), that assumes an awful lot of competence on the part of first-time criminals. I realize that I've asked this question many times, but it bears repeating, just how clearly were the Rs supposed to have been thinking in the first place?

SuperDave wrote:
From what I understand, the Atlanta cops had it pegged as a fake early on, since nothing of any real value was stolen, the description (a well-dressed, soft-spoken, light-skinned black man) was outlandish, and JR's story about being trapped in the bathroom while screaming is pretty stupid. Add to that no suspect matching that description has ever struck again (sort of like the "intruder," wink wink, nudge nudge, say no more).

Alright, I won`t comment on that since I haven`t read about it.

Heck of a coincidence, though, wouldn't you say?

SuperDave wrote:
Moreover, my point was, if one of your children was murdered right under your nose because you couldn't be bothered to fix a single window, are you EVER going to leave a door unlocked again? Especially since PR made such a big deal in one of her interviews about how she would have beefed up her security so the house was practically a fortress.

Not intentionally.

I didn't say intentionally.

SuperDave wrote:
Well, it's one thing for the cops to get around to them as part of SOP. It's another thing to drop hints.

They`d think of hints if innocent too. I wouldn`t use the words "drop hints" because I`m not sure about their guilt.

To each their own.

SuperDave wrote:
Actually, they switched AFTER the police checked those people out.

I`m not sure about that, but again they could have "switched" to that story, or should I say theory, guilty or innocent.

I figure if they're innocent, no need to switch. No need for a whole lot of the other inconsistencies.

Excellent. That refers to how he created the whole "stun gun" affair.

Ok, I`ll find out for myself.

Very good. I have just the website for you.

 

[Jane Osa]

This is a stretch - but, for those who know - is there any possibility that the ligature was placed around Jonbenet's neck after the phone call? I'm sure because of rigor mortis, etc. that's easy to discern....just wondering if anyone knows the timeline of the ligature. I'm thinking she was strangled with her collar - and the ligature could have been later when they realized they weren't taking the body anywhere. I realize this would be glaring if true & probably not..just asking those with the patience to answer stupid questions!

It is bizarre, this ligature, & suggests something nefarious going on in the R. household and/or it reinforces my belief that someone helped them. If she were dead, putting that cord around her as they did, plus the sexual assault is extreme. But, the extremity is one of the main reasons people, despite it all, say 'oh, but parents will never do that!' - so, it could have been quite savvy on their part....

 

[DeeDee249]

This is a stretch - but, for those who know - is there any possibility that the ligature was placed around Jonbenet's neck after the phone call? I'm sure because of rigor mortis, etc. that's easy to discern....just wondering if anyone knows the timeline of the ligature. I'm thinking she was strangled with her collar - and the ligature could have been later when they realized they weren't taking the body anywhere. I realize this would be glaring if true & probably not..just asking those with the patience to answer stupid questions!

It is bizarre, this ligature, & suggests something nefarious going on in the R. household and/or it reinforces my belief that someone helped them. If she were dead, putting that cord around her as they did, plus the sexual assault is extreme. But, the extremity is one of the main reasons people, despite it all, say 'oh, but parents will never do that!' - so, it could have been quite savvy on their part....

Livor mortis patterns develop within minutes of death. This has already been discussed, but to be brief- the ligature was put on when she was alive because the furrow is red. If she was dead, it would be white.
There were petechiae in several places, also indicating she was alive when strangled, including the telltale petechiae in her eyelids.

 

[Ravyn]

I think that was the idea.

I believe that was the idea also...Cause she just didn't do her job..And still wonder if the R's lawyers had ties with Lacy..

 

[Sophie]

I believe that was the idea also...Cause she just didn't do her job..And still wonder if the R's lawyers had ties with Lacy..

:clap:


I know this is another one of my boring leitmotifs but I don't know how Lacy could exonerate the Ramseys on the basis that she did - she was essentially exonerating anyone whose DNA didn't match regardless of their other connections to the crime as well as making the Ramseys as non-stick as Teflon regardless of what future evidence might appear since a half-decent defence lawyer would use that letter to the max. I have my issues with AH but I honestly think that the worst prosecutorial malfeasance came from Lacy.

 

[Ravyn]

:clap:


I know this is another one of my boring leitmotifs but I don't know how Lacy could exonerate the Ramseys on the basis that she did - she was essentially exonerating anyone whose DNA didn't match regardless of their other connections to the crime as well as making the Ramseys as non-stick as Teflon regardless of what future evidence might appear since a half-decent defence lawyer would use that letter to the max. I have my issues with AH but I honestly think that the worst prosecutorial malfeasance came from Lacy.

She did that...But really on DNA alone I don't understand her actions...But then again with her doing just that maybe this is showing no ties for the R's lawyers with the new DA...And about the DNA no one can honestly say that some male didn't touch the longjohns and panties while they was in the evidence room...And when I said that I meant soon after the death cause I'm guessing the pros can date the DNA..

 

[Mysteeri]

SuperDave wrote:
I got to thinking about that. It goes with what I said above. If they had called 911 without finding the note first, wouldn't it look a little odd to the police that they didn't find it first, since it was in plain sight in the same area where the 911 call was made?

The RN would of course have been somewhere else, though it would have been weird if it was not in plain sight.

SuperDave wrote:
just how clearly were the Rs supposed to have been thinking in the first place?

Not very clearly I suppose.

SuperDave wrote:
Heck of a coincidence, though, wouldn't you say?

I`m not familiar with the crime rates of Atlanta. Why did he make up such a story?

SuperDave wrote:
I figure if they're innocent, no need to switch. No need for a whole lot of the other inconsistencies.

I figure since they were prime suspects, they had to defend themselves and the possibility of an intruder entering the house. Yes, some inconsistensies bother me.


SuperDave wrote:
Very good. I have just the website for you.
Go ahead and provide the link. I`d like to ask a quick question first: could the big red mark beside her throat be from a stun gun? Since it`s ok to speculate, what if the double marks were from a stun gun that was not yet switched on, or working correctly? Perhaps it was an inexperienced user..even first-timer. Or if the stun gun didn`t work at all and after that came the head blow.

 

[Ravyn]

Can experts say how long DNA be in the place that it was found...And can they say if it was put at the same time....Cause how ST book in his book it was even hard for them to get the LE to give fringprints..

 

[Ravyn]

This is my theory of the intruder...

1) Enters house via basement window careful not to make noise going in don't want neighbors to hear..

2) Sneeks up stairs to make sure after he last check no one suddenly pay a visit since it Christmas ..

3) Once realizing none is in the house..What's next? Snoop, Why snoop, have to find the paystub..And while finding the paystub found a sample of Pr's handwritting this might come in handy..

4) Find a pad and pen cause finding the paystub..Can ask for $118,000 close enough to the bouns don't want to be exact on it..Also with the handwritting sample PR write almost like her and the LE would never look at me,myself,and I now put a small forigen faction to this never be looking for one..

5) Now the waiting games begins cause the R's will be home soon cause they do have to leave early in the morning on a trip..Just hang out and wait..

Now writting this an intruder no way...To many things that the intruder wouldn't know.

Like the main thing the size 12 panties wrapped in the basement just luck whatever more signs to the R's....