Members' Theories

[singularity]

I don't need to recall physics to realize that doesn't change anything in an IDI theory. You're actually creating a partial exchange between the victim and victim's mother but instead of taking it in a logical direction from that point, your phantom intruder is about to enter stage right as the victim and her family supposedly go to sleep.

You're also leaving out the fact that the victim's brother and father were awake and walking around with flashlights for some godforsaken reason and the victim's mother still had packing to do even though she had to get ready to fly on a trip in a few hours.

Nobody was sleeping with sugar plums dancing in their heads.

 

[archieil]

Did you wake up?

What timeline do you use?

With you as my truthful friend, I think I would be stateing me is a guy who created the Universe.

Where is the information they were not sleeping by midnight and was not sleeping till 4 o'clock?

[edit] bat just after a building = very possibly intruder was leaving the house with lights on in 3rd-floor windows.

 

[singularity]

I'm gonna wrap this IDI stuff up but wanted to say something....

For many years I was a fence straddler. I straddled between RDI and very friendly IDI....and by friendly I mean close. Something JAR related which would technically make it a version of RDI but with an accomplice(s). Also entertained the possibility of the robbery gone wrong scenario but it hit the usual obstacle.....ignores the personal nature of the crime.

While I never thought Fleet killed her, I have many issues with what is called the 'basement sequence'. It didn't add up then and it doesn't add up now. The issues with this sequence helped me realize how disingenuous IDI really was. It is a key element of this story no matter what happened yet they simply danced around the issue. They had to. To acknowledge it is insinuating John was up to no good.

Then they'd try to have their cake and eat it too. Paint Fleet as this monster but canonize saint John. More disingenuity.

I'm not fond of theories that need to remove key evidence in the hope of being swallowed. It shows that they're so far offtrack that they might as well not even be researching/following the case and that interest in anything resembling justice for the victim is in doubt.

IDI is most guilty of this.

IDI comes across as a mocking of this victim and adds another layer of dirt over her grave. To not acknowledge what this little girl went through just to push some fantasy that has nothing backing it up and prays to distance her dysfunctional family from the tragedy is almost beyond words.

Its sickening and is a game that no longer deserves to be played.

 

[archieil]

Good thing I was talking with JI group, not with you.

Your only idea is my short/basic story is against your feelings.

I'm sorry for your feelings...

you will be broken terribly.

[edit] sorry but I'm not going to crap anything before the correct time pass. I need hard evidence and I hope it will be available soon. kids... do not read Doctor Who diaries... It will not help you.

 

[flourish]

It's wise to review the websleuths rules upon arrival

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2279603



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120AZ using Tapatalk

 

[archieil]

It's wise to review the websleuths rules upon arrival

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2279603



Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-J120AZ using Tapatalk

Thanks.

My FB page was created as dedicated to my theory but probably is nowhere on the list of allowed, not allowed FB pages.

Not planning to start an organization for a single theory .

I feel less and less pressure on my mind with every day passing. Nice feeling.

[edit] I was searching someone who will bother with webslaugth on his own/knew the forum and it rules but it seems gaming portals not helping much in "adult" matters.

 

[TeaTime]

Ok, Archieil - what was stolen from the house? Where is it? Who has it?

 

[archieil]

Ok, Archieil - what was stolen from the house? Where is it? Who has it?

any ideas?

I have 3 versions of my basic storyline concerning this matter.

My reasoning:
if burglar met bonus info in some papers... why does he look on papers on the desk/drawers?

counting he was wearing gloves, duct tape could be used to turn pages.

 

[BBB167893]

Is what happened to ruin the investigation to begin with realized here in forum form? It appears so, imo.

POLITICS is what ruined this investigation.

 

[BoldBear]

Can we move discussion to a discussion thread please? I watch for date changes on this thread to see if someone has a new slant on a theory.

 

[HRP]

This is pure fantasy. You are in the Lou Smit school of thought..... create an intruder out of thin air and give him whichever character traits, interests, etc. that suit whichever direction you are going with it.

Interest in Bosnia?!? May have visited Britain?!? A hunter?

The possibilities are literally endless. Maybe he visited Arizona, was interested in Canada, and instead of hunting he collected postage stamps as a hobby.

This is one of the reasons this stuff is shunned now.

You also do what IDI always loved to do....

You ignore the personal nature of the crime by simply stating this phantom intruder knew the family somehow and/or monitored them but this is disingenuous..... it still doesn't explain the personal nature of the crime....and you know it. IDI always hoped people would ignore these pesky facts.

No one in 2017 is going to ignore it.

IDI does not work anymore whether discussion is banned or not. The only people it will work on are those who know nothing about the case. Hell, even those previously high up on the IDI food chain never believed it at all. They had ulterior motives for pushing it.

How convenient!

There's less than zero evidence to indicate this.

Another problem for IDI. It cant follow the evidence because the evidence takes them to RDI. They know it....which is why they ignore it.

You would've loved all the Ramsey sites many years ago when it was carte blanche and IDI had a specific agenda.

Its just not feasible anymore(it really never was) and while not a big fan of anything resembling censorship, I'm glad WS pulled the plug on this stuff.

Yes. No different, no better, no worse than any other IDI scenario.

You've got a really big problem with this....in 20 years and counting, there's less than zero evidence of this and even if there was a hint of truth to it, the Ramseys, Lou Smit, and Jameson would've been instantly screaming it from the highest mountaintop. They didn't.....because nothing was stolen from the house. period.

Its desperation to add elements of fantasy into unrealistic IDI scenarios and like I already said, it doesn't work anymore.

I didn't finish it and will not because the rules state no "intruder theories" allowed. I didn't know it at the time and wanted to continue to add to it.

I do not understand why you broke the rule and brought it up again knowing I will not break the rules and elaborate on my intruder theory.

I get it. No intruder theories. No need to thump a podium. I graciously left this thread and even apologized to Tricia for posting it on her forum. (I apologized in private message and in public on this thread).

So drop it. I get you--The Ramsey's did it, you and others say.

As for a theory in regard to the Ramsy's doing it, I could write one down. Do I want to? No. Why? Because there is something that doesn't fit imo.

Also, please. Do not tell me what I have and have not researched or what my life experience is.

 

[TeaTime]

any ideas?

I have 3 versions of my basic storyline concerning this matter.

My reasoning:
if burglar met bonus info in some papers... why does he look on papers on the desk/drawers?

counting he was wearing gloves, duct tape could be used to turn pages.

I think you can stop going down the rabbit hole on this one. There is absolutely no evidence that there was a burglar that night. None. Very few people knew what JR's bonus was that year. Aside from the corporate heads, JR, PR and the accounting department, his bonus would have been a private matter.

Personally, I think PR wanted that bonus money for herself. She would think it was just 'extra' money and therefore she should get it and be able to spend it as she wished on pageants and such. JR wasn't as foolish with money. She spent nearly $800K redecorating and renovating the house and priced it out of the market. I think JR turned off the money drain and she didn't get to finish everything.

 

[archieil]

ok.

Thanks for conversation

I'm goint to collect some carrots in the mean time having my own hole.

 

[singularity]

I do not understand why you broke the rule and brought it up again knowing I will not break the rules and elaborate on my intruder theory.

Not as clever as you think it is. I didn't break any rules. I'm not pushing IDI theories. I posted some reasons why its not feasible.

So drop it.

I did. Then you "brought it up again"....

BoldBear is right. Most people check this thread just to see theories.

 

[DeDee]

I think you can stop going down the rabbit hole on this one. There is absolutely no evidence that there was a burglar that night. None. Very few people knew what JR's bonus was that year. Aside from the corporate heads, JR, PR and the accounting department, his bonus would have been a private matter.

Personally, I think PR wanted that bonus money for herself. She would think it was just 'extra' money and therefore she should get it and be able to spend it as she wished on pageants and such. JR wasn't as foolish with money. She spent nearly $800K redecorating and renovating the house and priced it out of the market. I think JR turned off the money drain and she didn't get to finish everything.

The $118,117.50 bonus was long gone. It was issued in February 1996 for JRs work performance bonus for the year prior, 1995.
http://www.acandyrose.com/s-evidence-ransom-vs-bonus.htm

Steve Thomas and John Ramsey:

ST: John, this $118,000, is that a, do you believe that to be tied to your 95 bonus paid in 96?
JR: Well, that’s, I mean that occurred to me later as I started to think about what that number meant, and I thought, gee that might have been the net amount of my bonus. I didn’t even know that until we had, we went back and looked. And that was paid in February of 96, and was $118,223 or something like that. And I think that’s a plausible place where that number could have come from, and it certainly showed up in every pay stub of mine from then on, through the rest of the year.

 

[Ambitioned]

The $118,117.50 bonus was long gone.

Probably sunk into mink, diamonds, and purses for her weekly purse swaps.

 

[HRP]

Not as clever as you think it is. I didn't break any rules. I'm not pushing IDI theories. I posted some reasons why its not feasible.


I did. Then you "brought it up again"....

BoldBear is right. Most people check this thread just to see theories.

My theory was not completely written down. Your statement (underlined) appears to be fashioned to provoke. Notice my wording.

Your reply back is just to get the last word, it appears.

However, here's a "Ramsey's did it theory" so not to break the rules for this thread and forum.

Theory: The Ramsey's did it. They sat together on the spiral staircase and wrote a note together about foreign factions & reasons the daughter they killed might be beheaded if they contacted anyone, (even a dog), and then they set themselves up to look like the ones who did it. After they did that, they called the police, a priest, and friends. They wanted decades being thought guilty, even after death. They did it because they didn't want to be caught doing something bad, like never having any record of physical abuse toward their children, or because the spoon in the pineapple bowl was too big, or because a black flashlight, standing upright like a Greek column, clashes with the glassware. But due to "politics", they were never punished. Patsy only died being thought a monster, although in my country, one is innocent until proven guilty. And John and Burke are publicly persecuted because, you know, they did it.

 

[Tadpole12]

My theory was not completely written down. Your statement (underlined) appears to be fashioned to provoke. Notice my wording.

Your reply back is just to get the last word, it appears.

However, here's a "Ramsey's did it theory" so not to break the rules for this thread and forum.

Theory: The Ramsey's did it. They sat together on the spiral staircase and wrote a note together about foreign factions & reasons the daughter they killed might be beheaded if they contacted anyone, (even a dog), and then they set themselves up to look like the ones who did it. After they did that, they called the police, a priest, and friends. They wanted decades being thought guilty, even after death. They did it because they didn't want to be caught doing something bad, like never having any record of physical abuse toward their children, or because the spoon in the pineapple bowl was too big, or because a black flashlight, standing upright like a Greek column, clashes with the glassware. But due to "politics", they were never punished. Patsy only died being thought a monster, although in my country, one is innocent until proven guilty. And John and Burke are publicly persecuted because, you know, they did it.

Somewhere between sarcasm and vitriol?
Is not a good place to be.
Repulsion.

 

[avessweeney]

I'm from Denver, Colorado and my junior year of high school, I got to meet and work with a former detective who worked the case. My theory differs from hers slightly, but without a doubt the weapon used was that of a flashlight-- specifically the one found in the Ramsey's kitchen. My theory is that in a fit of rage, Patsy killed her daughter, from wetting the bed, which her pajamas were soaked in urine. I do believe there was some inappropriate touching from John Ramsey, which would explain the abrasions on the inside of JonBenet's vaginal wall. Burke has admitted that Patsy would become angry with JonBenet when she did wet the bed, but is an obvious symptom of sexual abuse. Burke being heard on the 911 call I do believe, but it was more likely he heard his parents attempting to conceal JonBenet's death that night, which explains him being awake. The ransom note is undoubtedly authored by Patsy, she uses words that identify as females to experts: using non-concrete phrases like "do not particularly," when a male would likely say "they don't." Experts have proven more than 70 percent of that ransom note is extraneous and even derived from famous movies, the family enjoyed, even some they had posters of in the house.

 

[TiffanyL_AS]

My theory 1.a.

Burke killed her.
Knowing he'd had scatological issues, I believe he may possibly have been being molested by JR. JR said he took BR to go build a toy after they got home. If he'd in fact been abused by his father then, in addition to the stress of the holiday, he may have taken his anger and frustrations out on his sister, whom he'd sexually touched on a few occasions. All sexual contact he would have learned from his father.

A fight occurred, he hits her. Then creates a garrotte and strangles her in a rage, also stabbing her with the train tracks at some point...perhaps to see if she'll move.

Patsy finds JBR, horrified, and goes about cleaning the mess of it all up.

1.b.
Same as above except, Burke, who was known to be intelligent tries to clean her up himself and hide JBR in the cellar.

"What did you find?" He asks his parents after the 911 call. They had found what he did to her and he may have just gotten out of bed to learn this.

In this scenario, Patsy and John would have discovered their son had done a truly horrific deed in murdering their daughter and were now in "protect" mode.

2.a.
Burke grows angry over JBR stealing pineapple from his fruit bowl. He hits her with the flashlight. Stabs her with a few things to possibly try to awaken her downstairs. He leaves her to hide in fear in his room.

Mother finds JBR and with John forms the garrote theory that someone else came in and killed her to divert attention from the accident that happened.

---I find it less probable that one of the parents would garrotte JBR, however. I would only think that likely if in fact one of them had already killed her.

2.b
JBR wets bed. Mom changes her, then goes back to packing for their Christmas vacation. Burke takes his flashlight and JB down stairs to play. At some point he gets angry or jealous and hits her. In a rage, he asphyxiates JB to death.

He's had rage issues against her before and may have "forgotten child syndrome" resulting in severe jealousy. JBR may also have taunted him or teased him which provoked an outburst. He's also struck her with a golf bat before.

His boot prints were found in the cellar. He knew how to fashion complicated knots as well.

--I do struggle with BR knowing how to fashion a garrotte, but it's certainly not impossible. And may reveal some of his sadistic interests.

2.c.
Basically I think Burke hit her. I think if he's able to strike her so hard, and if he may have been sexually Touching her, then he easily could have made the garrote. By doing something so strange and yet sophisticated, police would never suspect their son.

---I would be fascinated to know if he's into BDSM as an adult.

JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk