Members' Theories

[MurriFlower]

Looks that way!

That's what I'm saying! That's why it makes sense to ditch them, provided there was any left over to ditch.

Then why did you say, and I quote, No they had no reason to get rid of the remainder of the cord. Any IDI could have found it tied around a box in the wine cellar and used it. Makes no sense.

You're toying with me SD.

According to RDI, the lack of cord and tape in the house points to the R's guilt. You also think that finding cord and tape in the house would have pointed to their guilt as well. You RDIs can't have it both ways.

If cord had been tied around a box as LHP said, then either RDI or IDI could have used it so it wouldn't have necessarily implicated the Rs. My point was that I believe LHP made that up. Otherwise there would have been the remains of the cord still in the house. No one buys enough cord just to tie one box, you buy a whole roll. Why would LHP make that up unless she was trying to explain where the cord came from (within the house) and hence, support the suspicion of the R's and deflect attention from looking to hard for an IDI. Only the IDI would know the cord was brought in and that there was no more to be found in the house.

This is what I meant earlier about the BPD relying too heavily on LHP, who should have been a suspect also.

 

[WHITEFANG]

The matching DNA from an unknown male found in several places it did not belong on the corpse and the lack of visible bleeding, swelling and bruising are the HEADLINES of this horror story forever exonerating the Ramseys.

We can and will, I am certain, consider and debate practically endlessly the myriad scenarios how everything played out. Fine. Even fun. The foundation though is solid, immutable and clearly defined.

​

 

[DeeDee249]

You're toying with me SD.

According to RDI, the lack of cord and tape in the house points to the R's guilt. You also think that finding cord and tape in the house would have pointed to their guilt as well. You RDIs can't have it both ways.


This is what I meant earlier about the BPD relying too heavily on LHP, who should have been a suspect also.

Actually, we CAN have it both ways. Neither version automatically excludes the Rs. If remaining cord and tape were found in the house, or if the receipt had listed the tape and cord specifically, the Rs are implicated.
The tape and cord are NOT found, but that could mean the Rs got them out of the house. They were not searched when they left (breach of police protocol again).
By the same token, either version could also apply to IDI. If the tape and cord were sourced to the house or the Rs, an intruder could have found them and used them, they need not have been brought in. And an intruder could have taken them out.
The only thing linked to the Rs is the receipt.

And LHP WAS a suspect- so was her husband. They were the first suspects interviewed, I believe. And writing samples were obtained, as well as other samples. They were cleared.

 

[MurriFlower]

The only thing linked to the Rs is the receipt.

Yes, the alleged receipt, which would require a lot more evidence before we could say it was linked in any way to the cord and tape.

And LHP WAS a suspect- so was her husband. They were the first suspects interviewed, I believe. And writing samples were obtained, as well as other samples. They were cleared.

So, you must be the one person who thus far has voted Yes to the Poll: Do you agree with the way LE and the DA cleared people in this case?

 

[DeeDee249]

Yes, the alleged receipt, which would require a lot more evidence before we could say it was linked in any way to the cord and tape.



So, you must be the one person who thus far has voted Yes to the Poll: Do you agree with the way LE and the DA cleared people in this case?

Depends. In general, I do not agree. I think they were too lax in some regards. But I'd tend to agree more with BPD than the DA. And I haven't voted in the poll yet.

 

[BBB167893]

You're toying with me SD.

I'm doing my best not to!

According to RDI, the lack of cord and tape in the house points to the R's guilt. You also think that finding cord and tape in the house would have pointed to their guilt as well. You RDIs can't have it both ways.

Good point. To me, it's not that one or the other points directly to guilt, merely that's it's damn odd.

If cord had been tied around a box as LHP said, then either RDI or IDI could have used it so it wouldn't have necessarily implicated the Rs.

True, I suppose.

My point was that I believe LHP made that up.

I got that.

Otherwise there would have been the remains of the cord still in the house.

Not necessarily. Who knows where the rest might have gone?

No one buys enough cord just to tie one box, you buy a whole roll.

Hmm. I don't know how true this is, but I've heard that one of the stores in Boulder (the Army-Navy store I think) had a feature where you didn't have to buy a whole package. They had this spool that you could specify how much you wanted and they'd cut that much off for you.

Why would LHP make that up unless she was trying to explain where the cord came from (within the house) and hence, support the suspicion of the R's and deflect attention from looking to hard for an IDI.

I think you give her too much credit.

This is what I meant earlier about the BPD relying too heavily on LHP, who should have been a suspect also.

I understand that perfectly.

 

[MurriFlower]

I'm doing my best not to!

Good point. To me, it's not that one or the other points directly to guilt, merely that's it's damn odd.

True, I suppose.

I got that.

I understand that perfectly.

:woohoo: It must be my birthday!!

Not necessarily. Who knows where the rest might have gone?

Hmm. I don't know how true this is, but I've heard that one of the stores in Boulder (the Army-Navy store I think) had a feature where you didn't have to buy a whole package. They had this spool that you could specify how much you wanted and they'd cut that much off for you.

Well that's a circular argument. Firstly, you are saying that the rest of the cord wouldn't necessarily be in the house, then you are saying that they probably didn't buy a full spool because you can buy it by the length.

DD has stated that evidence against the Rs is a receipt from a store for the exact amount of cord and tape. This is how she explains the Rs having cord and tape. How much cord was that for, was it the exact amount that was tied around JBR's neck and wrists? If so what length was it and how much was it per foot? Didn't the sales assistant think it odd that rich people would be so frugal in their cord purchases? Did he comment on it to another sales assistant? And the tape, what length was it and what price? Did they buy a whole roll or just enough to go over her mouth? Is there a store that just sells short lengths of tape? If not then to explain where the rest of it went - was BR sent away with just the remainder of the tape now? What did he do with it? Was he seen mending some of his toys with it?

I think you give her too much credit.

Hey, she had a bit of time to come up with this, I'm not saying it was straight off the cuff!

 

[DeeDee249]

:woohoo: It must be my birthday!!




Well that's a circular argument. Firstly, you are saying that the rest of the cord wouldn't necessarily be in the house, then you are saying that they probably didn't buy a full spool because you can buy it by the length.

DD has stated that evidence against the Rs is a receipt from a store for the exact amount of cord and tape. This is how she explains the Rs having cord and tape. How much cord was that for, was it the exact amount that was tied around JBR's neck and wrists? If so what length was it and how much was it per foot? Didn't the sales assistant think it odd that rich people would be so frugal in their cord purchases? Did he comment on it to another sales assistant? And the tape, what length was it and what price? Did they buy a whole roll or just enough to go over her mouth? Is there a store that just sells short lengths of tape? If not then to explain where the rest of it went - was BR sent away with just the remainder of the tape now? What did he do with it? Was he seen mending some of his toys with it?



Hey, she had a bit of time to come up with this, I'm not saying it was straight off the cuff!

You misunderstood me. The receipt was not for the exact LENGTH of cord and tape but for the exact DOLLAR amount (price) of the cord and tape and was rung up on the exact department key as the cord and tape would have been sold from.
Let me try to explain for those who may not understand about that type of cash register. Most cash registers today, even in small stores, work with some type of computerized inventory system, either a bar code or key in. When a receipt is printed out for a customer, it will show an item by item list of exactly what was bought, and next to it the price and (in some systems) the department it came from if the shop makes those distinctions. For example- in the Shop Rite you might buy tomatoes. The receipt will show "tomatoes" followed by the price and the code for the produce department. My local hardware sells cord and duct tape, too. The receipt would show the actual item name "duct tape" followed by the price and then the department "hardware" as opposed to "electric" or "paint", etc.
In the case of the R receipt from McGuckin's - this was 1996 and that shop still used a system where the price and department section alone showed up on the receipt. It did not print out the actual name of the item i.e tape or cord. If someone who had purchased those items wished to return them, the receipt would have the price the item sold at as well as the section of the store they came from and that would be sufficient.
As I recall, when questioned about the receipt (they may have even been shown it) a representative of McGuckins said that not long after that, the shop switched to a new inventory system and the current receipts did show the actual item as well as the price and department.
Any clearer? Or have I totally confused you?

 

[MurriFlower]

You misunderstood me. The receipt was not for the exact LENGTH of cord and tape but for the exact DOLLAR amount (price) of the cord and tape and was rung up on the exact department key as the cord and tape would have been sold from.
Let me try to explain for those who may not understand about that type of cash register. Most cash registers today, even in small stores, work with some type of computerized inventory system, either a bar code or key in. When a receipt is printed out for a customer, it will show an item by item list of exactly what was bought, and next to it the price and (in some systems) the department it came from if the shop makes those distinctions. For example- in the Shop Rite you might buy tomatoes. The receipt will show "tomatoes" followed by the price and the code for the produce department. My local hardware sells cord and duct tape, too. The receipt would show the actual item name "duct tape" followed by the price and then the department "hardware" as opposed to "electric" or "paint", etc.
In the case of the R receipt from McGuckin's - this was 1996 and that shop still used a system where the price and department section alone showed up on the receipt. It did not print out the actual name of the item i.e tape or cord. If someone who had purchased those items wished to return them, the receipt would have the price the item sold at as well as the section of the store they came from and that would be sufficient.
As I recall, when questioned about the receipt (they may have even been shown it) a representative of McGuckins said that not long after that, the shop switched to a new inventory system and the current receipts did show the actual item as well as the price and department.
Any clearer? Or have I totally confused you?

No, I didn't misunderstand you at all.

SD said they may have bought a 'length' of cord from an Army/Navy store, enough to tie up the box that LHP said was in the wine cellar tied with that exact same cord. DD on the other hand, maintains that there is a receipt from McGuckins (not listing what was purchased) but for the exact same amount that cord and tape cost and from the same 'department' that cord and tape is sold.

Ok, so here are two different things. In SD's case, there is no excess cord to dispose of, as the amount tied on the box was exactly the same amount required to tie up and garrotte JBR. In DD's case the whole spool of cord was purchased and some of it used on the box, again the exact amount found tied on JBR. We need to know if there was any evidence of the cord having been tied around some other item (the R's would have had to untie previous knots, so there would have been marks on the cord, or there would be unnecessary knots on the cord).

If DD is correct, and the receipt is really for a spool of cord and roll of tape, then the remainder of the spool of cord should have been in the house. They had no need to get rid of it (via BR) because it didn't implicate them remember, what they used on JBR was the cord that was tied around the box in the cellar.

If SD is correct and they purchased a length of cord from the Army/Navy store, then the receipt DD refers to is nothing to do with this case.

 

[DeeDee249]

No, I didn't misunderstand you at all.

SD said they may have bought a 'length' of cord from an Army/Navy store, enough to tie up the box that LHP said was in the wine cellar tied with that exact same cord. DD on the other hand, maintains that there is a receipt from McGuckins (not listing what was purchased) but for the exact same amount that cord and tape cost and from the same 'department' that cord and tape is sold.

Ok, so here are two different things. In SD's case, there is no excess cord to dispose of, as the amount tied on the box was exactly the same amount required to tie up and garrotte JBR. In DD's case the whole spool of cord was purchased and some of it used on the box, again the exact amount found tied on JBR. We need to know if there was any evidence of the cord having been tied around some other item (the R's would have had to untie previous knots, so there would have been marks on the cord, or there would be unnecessary knots on the cord).

If DD is correct, and the receipt is really for a spool of cord and roll of tape, then the remainder of the spool of cord should have been in the house. They had no need to get rid of it (via BR) because it didn't implicate them remember, what they used on JBR was the cord that was tied around the box in the cellar.

If SD is correct and they purchased a length of cord from the Army/Navy store, then the receipt DD refers to is nothing to do with this case.

I never mentioned that I thought they got the cord from around a box. As a matter of fact, the first time I read about that box tied with cord was right here a few days ago. So the box really doesn't play a necessary part in my theory. I also don't think the Rs would have given he cord and tape to BR.
The only way I see those things being snuck out of the house are with the Rs that night as they left the house unsearched wearing winter coats. Or hidden in something later taken from the house-like the golf bag that was so important for JR to have that days after his daughter's brutal murder and with I'd guess was a LOT more to be concerned about, that he needed to specifically ask Patsy's sister to get this from the house.
I don't recall anyone from LE ever asking JR about his need for that golf bag. This was December in Colorado. Not really golfing weather. And though he was headed to Atlanta, it was for his daughter's funeral. If he was already thinking about playing golf at that point, he is more callous than I thought.
Besides, the entire house was going to be packed up as the remaining family moved to Atlanta. Couldn't that golf bag have waited?

 

[MurriFlower]

I never mentioned that I thought they got the cord from around a box. As a matter of fact, the first time I read about that box tied with cord was right here a few days ago. So the box really doesn't play a necessary part in my theory. I also don't think the Rs would have given he cord and tape to BR.
The only way I see those things being snuck out of the house are with the Rs that night as they left the house unsearched wearing winter coats. Or hidden in something later taken from the house-like the golf bag that was so important for JR to have that days after his daughter's brutal murder and with I'd guess was a LOT more to be concerned about, that he needed to specifically ask Patsy's sister to get this from the house.
I don't recall anyone from LE ever asking JR about his need for that golf bag. This was December in Colorado. Not really golfing weather. And though he was headed to Atlanta, it was for his daughter's funeral. If he was already thinking about playing golf at that point, he is more callous than I thought.
Besides, the entire house was going to be packed up as the remaining family moved to Atlanta. Couldn't that golf bag have waited?

Lets leave the golf bag out of this for the moment and stick with the cord.

No, you are absolutely right DD, you never said it was tied around the box.

LHP said this in her 'unpublished book' "I remember just such a cord wrapped in just such a way around a box in the basement next to where her body was found." Now, back to where I began with this. Either LHP is lying about the cord being around the box OR that exact same cord was used to kill JBR. Which is it??

 

[BBB167893]

:woohoo: It must be my birthday!!

You'll get used to me after a while.

Well that's a circular argument. Firstly, you are saying that the rest of the cord wouldn't necessarily be in the house, then you are saying that they probably didn't buy a full spool because you can buy it by the length.

Now, now. Don't put words in my mouth. I didn't say they did or did not but it by the length from that store. I'm just trying to provide context is all.

DD has stated that evidence against the Rs is a receipt from a store for the exact amount of cord and tape. This is how she explains the Rs having cord and tape.

Same deal here. It's a hell of a coincidence, isn't it?

How much cord was that for, was it the exact amount that was tied around JBR's neck and wrists? If so what length was it and how much was it per foot?

That I don't know.

Didn't the sales assistant think it odd that rich people would be so frugal in their cord purchases? Did he comment on it to another sales assistant?

As a sales associate myself, it's rare to comment on what people buy unless they're regulars.

And the tape, what length was it and what price? Did they buy a whole roll or just enough to go over her mouth?

Henry Lee seemed to suggest that the piece of tape was a used piece; that it came off of something else. Some of us were talking about that a while back.

If not then to explain where the rest of it went - was BR sent away with just the remainder of the tape now? What did he do with it? Was he seen mending some of his toys with it?

Doubtful, although perhaps close. Don't forget about Pam's raid through the house.

Hey, she had a bit of time to come up with this, I'm not saying it was straight off the cuff!

Fine by me.

 

[BBB167893]

SD said they may have bought a 'length' of cord from an Army/Navy store, enough to tie up the box that LHP said was in the wine cellar tied with that exact same cord.

I didn't say that.

If DD is correct, and the receipt is really for a spool of cord and roll of tape, then the remainder of the spool of cord should have been in the house. They had no need to get rid of it (via BR) because it didn't implicate them remember, what they used on JBR was the cord that was tied around the box in the cellar.

If SD is correct and they purchased a length of cord from the Army/Navy store, then the receipt DD refers to is nothing to do with this case.

Perhaps without meaning to, you've presented us with a poser. Hmm.

 

[MurriFlower]

MurriFlower said: No one buys enough cord just to tie one box, you buy a whole roll.

Super Dave said: Hmm. I don't know how true this is, but I've heard that one of the stores in Boulder (the Army-Navy store I think) had a feature where you didn't have to buy a whole package. They had this spool that you could specify how much you wanted and they'd cut that much off for you.

MurriFlower Said: SD said they may have bought a 'length' of cord from an Army/Navy store, enough to tie up the box that LHP said was in the wine cellar tied with that exact same cord.

SuperDave Said: I didn't say that.

Yeth you thurtainly did Thuper!!

Perhaps without meaning to, you've presented us with a poser. Hmm.

Pleath, give me thum credit! I thurtainly DID mean to!!

 

[BBB167893]

Yeth you thurtainly did Thuper!!

Very funny.

MurriFlower, I'm pretty sure about what I did and didn't say. After all, if I have a thought, I'm the first to know about it. You made a general statement; I responded with another. I didn't imply anything.

Pleath, give me thum credit! I thurtainly DID mean to!!

It's hard to give you any credit when you start acting like this, but let's go with it.

 

[MurriFlower]

Very funny.

MurriFlower, I'm pretty sure about what I did and didn't say. After all, if I have a thought, I'm the first to know about it. You made a general statement; I responded with another. I didn't imply anything.

Hmm, you have a very interesting way of posing opposing thoughts then denying having made them as suggestions.

If I said. It's a lovely day today. You might say, well I don't know about that, they are saying it could rain. I might then tell someone, SD says it could rain. You would then say, I never said that I was just replying to your general statement, I didn't imply that it could rain.

If you aren't prepared to 'own' the things you say, why bother to say them in the first place?

It's hard to give you any credit when you start acting like this, but let's go with it.

Right then, lets get back to what I was trying to say two days ago.

LHP said: "I remember just such a cord wrapped in just such a way around a box in the basement next to where her body was found."

Now, there are only two options: it either was this cord that was used OR LHP is lying.

Which is it?

 

[WHITEFANG]

LHP said: "I remember just such a cord wrapped in just such a way around a box in the basement next to where her body was found."

Now, there are only two options: it either was this cord that was used OR LHP is lying.

Which is it?

What was LHP doing in the room where her body was found just before her murder? And why would she notice this cord?

 

[MurriFlower]

LHP said: "I remember just such a cord wrapped in just such a way around a box in the basement next to where her body was found."
What was LHP doing in the room where her body was found just before her murder? And why would she notice this cord?

No, this quote is from her 'unpublished book', you can look at it here: http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=3952&pp=12

 

[madeleine]

I assume they tested the garrote for touch DNA before it was completely destroyed?

If the R's bought it,their touch DNA must be on it,right?I don't think PR used gloves when she went shopping.

If her touch DNA is on it>she bought it>it can be traced to the R house and it means they lied about it>why

 

[madeleine]

But I think it was destroyed before touch DNA testing existed.