Knowing all you know today about this case who do you think really killed JonBenet?

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The spider web thing never bothered me. Why? Because we had a rather big spider that was hanging in a web on our shed. Dh knocked it down and in hours it would be back.

 

[Chrishope]

I don’t have the book handy, but as I recall, he goes into more detail about the spider webs than Steve Thomas did. They both pointed out that the type of spider that spun the webs is dormant in the winter and would not have been making webs across the open areas of the broken window at that time (according to experts that were consulted). Beyond that, if it had been broken from the inside there would either be broken pieces of glass on top of the debris in the window well or no debris at all from the cleanup. If it was broken from the outside, there would have been more broken glass on the inside of the room (or signs of a recent cleanup).

And if there is any doubt just how it looked, Kolar included a portion of the actual police video taken that evening.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/18/new-clues-in-jonbenet-ramsey-murder.html#

Thanks to cynic for posting the video, just in case the TDB article gets lost or deleted:

DBKPV - YouTube

So, as with most things "Kolar" there is actually no new info at all. A little more detail perhaps, but we already knew of the spider web, and we've had 16 years to consider which side the window was broken from.

There are in fact signs of a recent cleanup. The piece of glass FW found and placed on the suitcase. Yes, it could have been there since summer, with the kids playing in the area and everyone (JR/PR/LHP) oblivious to the poor cleanup job. Or, it could be a sign that the glass was cleaned up that night/morning, hastily, and not thoroughly.

I don't see anything in the video which makes me conclude it was "impossible", or even improbable that the window was broken that night. In fact, I'd say it seem far more likely than a millionaire living with a broken window since summer, and the glass not being cleaned up completely during all that time, despite the room being a play area for the kids.

In one of the police interviews PR said she asked LHP to go behind her with the vacuum and clean up the glass - this was supposed to be back in the summer when JR supposedly stripped to his skivies and broke into the house through that window. The problem is LHP denies knowing anything about a broken window. She was the housekeeper. If there was glass to clean up she'd know about it. If she'd been asked by PR to vacuum up glass she'd probably recall that - as "Ramnesia" doesn't provide any benefit to LHP.


Then there was the statements by both PR and JR that they couldn't really recall if the glass had ever been fixed. C'mon, it wasn't that long ago. Is it really that hard to recall if a glass company came and fixed the window?

Of course if it had been broken during the summer, and if it had been fixed, then it might have been the intruder who broke it -except why would an intruder have cleaned up most of the glass? OK, so it couldn't have been fixed, so if it hadn't ever been repaired since JR's break in, why is there still a piece or two of glass lying around months later? Why has the window remained unfixed all this time? Why are the family taking the security risk of an open window? Why are they letting the heat go out the window? Why are the risking allowing vermin to come in the window?

Kolar gives us nothing that would make us conclude that the window could not have been broken that night/morning. In fact, when you consider that the glass wasn't cleaned completely, that PR lied about asking LHP to vac up the glass, and the window remaining broken for months on end (if JR's story were true) then it seems much more likely the window was broken that night/morning.

Note also that in the video we see the broken pane. Would they really have left all that jagged glass in place all those months with the kids playing in that room? No cardboard even taped over the hole?

 

[Chrishope]

The vid is interesting b/c Smit goes through as proof of how someone could use it as a point of entry. He evidently wasn't a big guy, and yet his hips fill the entire window opening, which actually illustrates how all of the surrounding dust, debris and spider webs would be impacted.

Also, kolar analyzes the "evolution" of JRs accounts of that morning. It makes for interesting reading.

The evolution of JR's accounts is very interesting. He goes from "no, no one came in that window, I broke it myself" to "Why yes, that might well be how the intruder got in".

 

[UKGuy]

The evolution of JR's accounts is very interesting. He goes from "no, no one came in that window, I broke it myself" to "Why yes, that might well be how the intruder got in".

Chrishope,
All of which suggests JR might be hiding something, otherwise you would be given a straightforward explanation that required no qualification.

JR could have opened the window that morning and broken it, thus staging a broken window, for whatever purpose. If he did then he never hit the window from the inside to the outside, otherwise there would be glass lying on the outside. So JR's version of events is consistent with breaking the window from the outside to the inside. the point of contention is when did this occur?

I cannot see someone like JR, not to mention PR, ignoring a broken window, which represents a potential point of entry for any and all to the R household.

A little lateral thought suggests someone else might have broken the window with a view to staging, but JR vetoed it and came up with the locked out scenario?

JR seems to have a series of explanations for various artifacts in the basement, that although individually are reasonable, cumulatively they do not seem to add up. They appear to be ad hoc explanations, e.g. the samsonite suitcase.

Yet for some items, e.g. the collection of JonBenet photographs, they are disowned.


.

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,
All of which suggests JR might be hiding something, otherwise you would be given a straightforward explanation that required no qualification.

Hiding something or trying to manufacture something.

JR could have opened the window that morning and broken it, thus staging a broken window, for whatever purpose.

The staging would be for the purpose of providing an entry point for a mythical intruder.

If he did then he never hit the window from the inside to the outside, otherwise there would be glass lying on the outside.

The window is in a wooden frame, the frame being hinged so that it swings into the room. So it could be broken from either side, while standing inside the room. My guess is that it was broken from the outer side of the pane while the frame was swung inward as far as possible. But really it could have been broken from either side of the pane.

So JR's version of events is consistent with breaking the window from the outside to the inside. the point of contention is when did this occur?

Yes, it's consistent. It could have been broken, by JR, the past summer, while he stood in the window well, in his skivies, with his shoes on. It's possible. IMO not very probable.

I cannot see someone like JR, not to mention PR, ignoring a broken window, which represents a potential point of entry for any and all to the R household.

I can't see it either. Not just because of security but all the warm air is flowing out the window, cold air is coming in when the furnace isn't on, critters can come in...... At the very least if it was not fixed properly it would have been boarded up, or some cardboard taped over it.

A little lateral thought suggests someone else might have broken the window with a view to staging, but JR vetoed it and came up with the locked out scenario?

That's possible. A little straight forward thought suggests JR may have broken it himself then for some reason came up with the lockout scenario.

JR seems to have a series of explanations for various artifacts in the basement, that although individually are reasonable, cumulatively they do not seem to add up. They appear to be ad hoc explanations, e.g. the samsonite suitcase.

His explanations are things he finally seems to "remember" during the police interviews. Strangely, at the time he was talking to the police, in his home, on the morning of the 26th, the conversation being about window and door security, he fails to recall various things -such as the Samsonite under the window, the "fact" that the window had actually been open but JR closed it, and so on.

Yet for some items, e.g. the collection of JonBenet photographs, they are disowned.


.

Yes, that is weird.

 

[Chelly]

Hiding something or trying to manufacture something.



The staging would be for the purpose of providing an entry point for a mythical intruder.



The window is in a wooden frame, the frame being hinged so that it swings into the room. So it could be broken from either side, while standing inside the room. My guess is that it was broken from the outer side of the pane while the frame was swung inward as far as possible. But really it could have been broken from either side of the pane.



Yes, it's consistent. It could have been broken, by JR, the past summer, while he stood in the window well, in his skivies, with his shoes on. It's possible. IMO not very probable.



I can't see it either. Not just because of security but all the warm air is flowing out the window, cold air is coming in when the furnace isn't on, critters can come in...... At the very least if it was not fixed properly it would have been boarded up, or some cardboard taped over it.



That's possible. A little straight forward thought suggests JR may have broken it himself then for some reason came up with the lockout scenario.



His explanations are things he finally seems to "remember" during the police interviews. Strangely, at the time he was talking to the police, in his home, on the morning of the 26th, the conversation being about window and door security, he fails to recall various things -such as the Samsonite under the window, the "fact" that the window had actually been open but JR closed it, and so on.




Yes, that is weird.

BBM
Chrishope, I often wonder about that window. I believe it was part of the staging for reasons you stated. Interesting that the only piece of glass found from that broken window was by FW who placed the piece on the shelf, or was it placed on top of the luggage? In any case, there was no report by BPD of other glass fragments or slivers on the floor and apparently there were no signs on the floor of broken glass cleanup.

 

[Chrishope]

BBM
Chrishope, I often wonder about that window. I believe it was part of the staging for reasons you stated. Interesting that the only piece of glass found from that broken window was by FW who placed the piece on the shelf, or was it placed on top of the luggage? In any case, there was no report by BPD of other glass fragments or slivers on the floor and apparently there were no signs on the floor of broken glass cleanup.

If I recall correctly, he found it on the suitcase and placed it on the ledge.
Which of course means that the suitcase was in that exact spot since summer time, when JR broke in because he forgot his key. (-: Otherwise there's no reason for a piece of glass to be on it. But wait, according to JR, the suitcase is out of place, not where it usually belongs. Hmmm.

Edit. Now that I'm thinking of it, I'm not sure FW found the piece of glass on the suitcase, I think it might have been on the floor. I think he moved the suitcase. I'll have to refresh my memory.

 

[UKGuy]

If I recall correctly, he found it on the suitcase and placed it on the ledge.
Which of course means that the suitcase was in that exact spot since summer time, when JR broke in because he forgot his key. (-: Otherwise there's no reason for a piece of glass to be on it. But wait, according to JR, the suitcase is out of place, not where it usually belongs. Hmmm.

Edit. Now that I'm thinking of it, I'm not sure FW found the piece of glass on the suitcase, I think it might have been on the floor. I think he moved the suitcase. I'll have to refresh my memory.

Chrishope,
Your edit reflects a Fleet White's recollection of events. Of course if he moved the suitcase maybe the glass was already present, i.e. some landed on the suitcase some on the floor?

Looks to me as if the suitcase was part of a prior staging which involved a broken window?


Excerpts from Perfect Murder/Perfect Town

The police interviewed Linda Hoffmann-Pugh for a second time on Friday, December 27:
When the police asked if she’d seen a broken window in the basement or had ever cleaned up broken glass from a broken window, she said she couldn’t recall anything like that.

Lou Smit was another problem, though the detective didn’t reveal the reasons to McKinley. He wouldn’t listen to them and had his own ideas—like his nutty stun-gun theory. Smit thought there was a strong possibility that an intruder had entered the house. He kept talking about the pieces of glass that had been found on top of the suitcase under the broken basement window,

The third piece of evidence was related to the window in the basement train room. It had been open, there was a scuff mark on the wall under it, and pieces of glass had been found on the suitcase just beneath it—possibly the result of Fleet White’s visit to the basement window that morning when he picked up the broken glass from the floor under the window and replaced some of it on the windowsill.

White told the detectives that he had been there only a few minutes when he started to search the house. Alone, he went down to the basement, found some of the lights on, and started calling out JonBenét’s name. It was so cluttered down there—with boxes stacked everywhere and shelves overflowing with odds and ends—that he could hardly see any open spaces where she might be. He started in Burke’s train and hobby room, where he saw a suitcase sitting under a broken window. On the floor under the window, he found small pieces of glass. He placed some of them on the windowsill. Then he moved the suitcase a few feet to get a closer look at the window.

.

 

[midwest mama]

Wait. There was a photo showing a small piece of glass on the suitcase. Either that suitcase was in that room back in the summer when JR "broke" the window , or if the suitcase had been placed there as part of a staging the window did get broken also for staging purposes.

With the semen stained comforter and the Suess book inside, and the suitcase being EITHER put there earlier or grabbed from another basement room location that night, it makes me wonder if those items were being used for prior molestations in the basement. Which would factor in JAR.

 

[madeleine]

Wait. There was a photo showing a small piece of glass on the suitcase. Either that suitcase was in that room back in the summer when JR "broke" the window , or if the suitcase had been placed there as part of a staging the window did get broken also for staging purposes.

With the semen stained comforter and the Suess book inside, and the suitcase being EITHER put there earlier or grabbed from another basement room location that night, it makes me wonder if those items were being used for prior molestations in the basement. Which would factor in JAR.

or maybe someone else used JAR's blanket? you wouldn't use your own blanket (wife could notice it's missing)...

 

[Darlene733510]

I am curious about when BR was questioned, I believe for one hour a day, three days in a row. Did they ever ask him if he and JB went down to the kitchen, and ate pineapple after they came home from the Whites. Did he have a glass of tea that evening, and leave the glass on the table.
Because of BR's age, at the time, is this something else that we may never know? Did they ask him if he got the pineapple out of the fridge, or did PR get it for him?

 

[DeeDee249]

I am curious about when BR was questioned, I believe for one hour a day, three days in a row. Did they ever ask him if he and JB went down to the kitchen, and ate pineapple after they came home from the Whites. Did he have a glass of tea that evening, and leave the glass on the table.
Because of BR's age, at the time, is this something else that we may never know? Did they ask him if he got the pineapple out of the fridge, or did PR get it for him?

Because of his age, BR's depositions will never be made public.

 

[Chelly]

Because of his age, BR's depositions will never be made public.

Guess we'll just have to wait for someone to leak it.:facepalm:

 

[Darlene733510]

DeeDee - could the GJ have gotten the medical records, even though Dr B. said he would not release them? Another question I have is was LW in court every time the GJ questioned everyone, and could LW object to the questions they asked of the people being questioned, and the would the Judge then decide if the person could answer?
The fact that the GJ voted to indict because of the testimony of the people they called on for questioning, indicates to me that there is a lof of info we may never have access to.
Am I wrong to think that once the GJ was finished, under normal circumstances we would have access to all the testimony, but if BR was the guilty one that is why the records remain sealed.

 

[questfortrue]

DeeDee - could the GJ have gotten the medical records, even though Dr B. said he would not release them? Another question I have is was LW in court every time the GJ questioned everyone, and could LW object to the questions they asked of the people being questioned, and the would the Judge then decide if the person could answer?
The fact that the GJ voted to indict because of the testimony of the people they called on for questioning, indicates to me that there is a lof of info we may never have access to.
Am I wrong to think that once the GJ was finished, under normal circumstances we would have access to all the testimony, but if BR was the guilty one that is why the records remain sealed.

I can't answer all your questions, because IDK about some of the stuff, but my understanding is that LS and JD were allowed to testify, which is very unusual. Usually it is the means for a jury of peers to decide if an indictment should be returned - IOW it's not a trial where a defense attorney makes a presentation.

From AH himself: At a press conference, “I and my prosecution task force believe we do not have sufficient evidence to warrant filing of charges against anyone who has been investigated at this time." (Don’t know if it is true that his “prosecution task force” believes that. MK, the lead prosecutor, certainly didn't believe it.) But regardless, AH essentially hid from the public that there was a true bill returned by the GJ. AH did not handle the paperwork properly and did not sign the indictment. In so doing, in enabled the statute of limitations to erase the indictment findings of abuse leading to death. :banghead:

About indictments Cynic posted this: http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=10203&page=9

Nice photo op for PR:
http://www.sheknows.com/entertainment/articles/983539/jonbenet-ramsey-murder-case-grand-jury-wanted-to-indict-parents

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee - could the GJ have gotten the medical records, even though Dr B. said he would not release them? Another question I have is was LW in court every time the GJ questioned everyone, and could LW object to the questions they asked of the people being questioned, and the would the Judge then decide if the person could answer?
The fact that the GJ voted to indict because of the testimony of the people they called on for questioning, indicates to me that there is a lof of info we may never have access to.
Am I wrong to think that once the GJ was finished, under normal circumstances we would have access to all the testimony, but if BR was the guilty one that is why the records remain sealed.

Of course medical records can be subpoenaed. And that included JB's. Had her pediatrician been ordered by a judge to provide them, he would have had to do so. However, the DA had no spine, so he refused to ask for a warrant for the medical records. And if you recall, Dr, B had said that he would destroy the records before he turned them over LE. Now...what does that say about what this family wanted to keep hidden? This was the MURDER of one of his patients! Wouldn't you want to HELP the police solve it? In this case, the answer was no- the Rs and their "team" (which included the DA) did NOT want the police to solve this case.

 

[2 percent]

Of course medical records can be subpoenaed. And that included JB's. Had her pediatrician been ordered by a judge to provide them, he would have had to do so. However, the DA had no spine, so he refused to ask for a warrant for the medical records. And if you recall, Dr, B had said that he would destroy the records before he turned them over LE. Now...what does that say about what this family wanted to keep hidden? This was the MURDER of one of his patients! Wouldn't you want to HELP the police solve it? In this case, the answer was no- the Rs and their "team" (which included the DA) did NOT want the police to solve this case.

Whoa...really? I don't remember ever reading that! Dr. B was in for a very rude awakening! If he had destroyed those records when he was knowingly under subpoena, he could lose more than a little money for contempt - obstruction, conspiracy or just plain abetting could head the charges. If convicted of a felony, there goes the Dr's license. Even a misdemeanor could hurt, depends on his malpractice carrier and the hospitals he uses.

What's so weird is that getting the medical records of a murdered child who appears to have signs of previous molestation is fairly routine. Why would the doctor want to destroy records? Only explanation I can come up with is he wants to hide his own incompetence. Or worse, wants to hide his negligence.

 

[Darlene733510]

Thanks DeeDee - I knew you would have the answers to my questions.

The more I think about this case, the madder I get. AH, LS, ML, LW, and those who deliberately sabotaged this case must have had no conscience. That's what happens when wealth and power are more important than a child's life. Then there are the bystanders who let it all continue, and knew someone got away with murder, and refused to speak up in defense of JB. Just like PR, they will,probably take their secrets to the grave.

 

[Chelly]

Whoa...really? I don't remember ever reading that! Dr. B was in for a very rude awakening! If he had destroyed those records when he was knowingly under subpoena, he could lose more than a little money for contempt - obstruction, conspiracy or just plain abetting could head the charges. If convicted of a felony, there goes the Dr's license. Even a misdemeanor could hurt, depends on his malpractice carrier and the hospitals he uses.

What's so weird is that getting the medical records of a murdered child who appears to have signs of previous molestation is fairly routine. Why would the doctor want to destroy records? Only explanation I can come up with is he wants to hide his own incompetence. Or worse, wants to hide his negligence.

And is under the thumbs of the R's.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Of course medical records can be subpoenaed. And that included JB's. Had her pediatrician been ordered by a judge to provide them, he would have had to do so. However, the DA had no spine, so he refused to ask for a warrant for the medical records. And if you recall, Dr, B had said that he would destroy the records before he turned them over LE. Now...what does that say about what this family wanted to keep hidden? This was the MURDER of one of his patients! Wouldn't you want to HELP the police solve it? In this case, the answer was no- the Rs and their "team" (which included the DA) did NOT want the police to solve this case.

Do you have a link for this assertion from the dr? Do you know where that came from?