My Alternate Theory

[rashomon]

In my theory, I don't want to make the assumption that the lethal head blow came after the R's returned from the Whites party. I don't want to make any assumptions about what happened before and I sure don't want to accept the R's word about what happened before.

The time line of the wounds inflicted on JonBenet has been established on the basis of medical evidence; it is independent of the Ramseys' version of events; crucial elements of the forensic evidence flat-out contradict the version which the Ramseys offered to the police.

The pineapple evidence in the victim's small intestine for example exposes the Ramseys' statement that JonBenet had been awake when they got home as a a flat-out lie.

Pineapple digests very fast, especially when eaten without other food.
The head injury was inflicted first (see J. Kolar's book (p. 64), where he refers to the medical evidence which led the experts LE consulted on the case to conclude this): The quick digestion time of pineapple places the head injury about 30 minutes after JonBenet ate the fruit (corroborating evidence: fresh pineapple was also found in a bowl sitting on the table in the North dining room, next to the kitchen).

Here is a link to Forums for Justice where a poster ('learnin', who also posts here on WBS) who has worked as a medical imaging technologist for many years presents his extensive research about the digestion time of pineapple.

Link to the thread on Forums for Justice where poster koldkase has collected the medical imaging technologist's crucial info (starting from post #43):
http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=9490&page=4

Putting all this info together, it results in a timeline where JonBenet suffered the skull fracture not long after the family had arrived home.

 

[BOESP]

In my theory, I don't want to make the assumption that the lethal head blow came after the R's returned from the Whites party. I don't want to make any assumptions about what happened before and I sure don't want to accept the R's word about what happened before.

Anyhoo, how would you explain the pineapple if JonBenet was already injured before arriving home?

 

[Anyhoo]

I agree that the pineapple evidence appears to prove that the lethal head blow came while JB was at her house on the night of 12-25. That is all it says.

That does not invalidate this theory because we are still discussing the R's version of what happened that day. "Returning from the White's party" is R testimony. Anything that cannot be proven with forensic evidence is suspect.

If the lethal head blow happened at the house then it means that the non-R that killed JB was at the R house that night, either alone or with other non-R's also.

One other question I have is this: is it a proven fact that the R's had planned to take a long vacation the next morning? Is this rock solid or is it possible this is something the R's invented to give cover to themselves and possibly others?

 

[DeeDee249]

I agree that the pineapple evidence appears to prove that the lethal head blow came while JB was at her house on the night of 12-25. That is all it says.

That does not invalidate this theory because we are still discussing the R's version of what happened that day. "Returning from the White's party" is R testimony. Anything that cannot be proven with forensic evidence is suspect.

If the lethal head blow happened at the house then it means that the non-R that killed JB was at the R house that night, either alone or with other non-R's also.

One other question I have is this: is it a proven fact that the R's had planned to take a long vacation the next morning? Is this rock solid or is it possible this is something the R's invented to give cover to themselves and possibly others?

I agree there could have been others at the house that night that have not been identified. Some feel JAR was there because a neighbor claimed to have seen him. His face is obscured in ATM photos and JR got his ex-wife lawyered up immediately so one could question her about JAR's presence Christmas Day. Some feel it could have been Patsy's father. There is some "gray area" about when he flew back to Atlanta or why he was there alone in the first place. Some feel BR had a friend there, one who was going to Charlevoix with them. None of these people seem to me like anyone the Rs would ALLOW to molest their daughter.
When Patsy made her comments "we didn't mean for this to happen" and asking a friend "couldn't you fix this for me?" that raises a red flag to me, but I lean more towards Patsy meaning that they were aware of ongoing issues with BR and JB and had been discussing these issues with the pediatrician. Before they could resolve it, JB was dead. It is very hard for an abused child to "escape" or break the cycle of abuse while they are as young as JB was, especially when the abuser lives in the home or has repeated, unrestricted access to the child. Threats to pets, family, etc. can keep the child silent and that cannot be overlooked. Usually the child "escapes" when they grow old enough to physically rebuff the abuser or old enough to be credible if they threaten to expose them.

We can't prove whether the trip to Charlevoix was a hoax (I don't think it was), but the SECOND trip was a Disney Cruise and that should be easily verifiable as to whether the Rs were booked on that trip.

 

[Anyhoo]

I agree there could have been others at the house that night that have not been identified. Some feel JAR was there because a neighbor claimed to have seen him. His face is obscured in ATM photos and JR got his ex-wife lawyered up immediately so one could question her about JAR's presence Christmas Day. Some feel it could have been Patsy's father. There is some "gray area" about when he flew back to Atlanta or why he was there alone in the first place. Some feel BR had a friend there, one who was going to Charlevoix with them. None of these people seem to me like anyone the Rs would ALLOW to molest their daughter.
When Patsy made her comments "we didn't mean for this to happen" and asking a friend "couldn't you fix this for me?" that raises a red flag to me, but I lean more towards Patsy meaning that they were aware of ongoing issues with BR and JB and had been discussing these issues with the pediatrician. Before they could resolve it, JB was dead. It is very hard for an abused child to "escape" or break the cycle of abuse while they are as young as JB was, especially when the abuser lives in the home or has repeated, unrestricted access to the child. Threats to pets, family, etc. can keep the child silent and that cannot be overlooked. Usually the child "escapes" when they grow old enough to physically rebuff the abuser or old enough to be credible if they threaten to expose them.

We can't prove whether the trip to Charlevoix was a hoax (I don't think it was), but the SECOND trip was a Disney Cruise and that should be easily verifiable as to whether the Rs were booked on that trip.

Investigating other people at the house that night that have not been identified would be a key part of my theory. The R's want us to believe that no one else was there except for them and possibly this secret intruder that was invented for us, but why should we believe that? While I cannot prove it, I sense that there were one or more others at the house that night that the R's knew about but are covering for.

PR's statement that you mention indicates to me that they knew that something inappropriate was happening but they (JR and PR) allowed it to continue and also that they did not expect it would result in their daughter's murder, which in fact it did.

Again you are thinking in conventional terms and I am thinking in nonconventional terms in this theory. When I think of what could have really happened, I don't constrain myself by thinking in normal terms, terms that I myself can relate to if I were the R's. Instead I allow myself to think of anything that could have happened that is outside what we think of as normal or conventional, because that is where I believe the answer to this lies. Unless we are willing to look at all possibilities, I fear we are doomed just to go in meaningless circles. Secrets have been kept well in this case. What we all know is but a small fraction of what there is to know, and many things we think we know could be false. Conventional theories have been well explored, but my theory is not a conventional one.

The trip the R's were taking in the morning, if not a fabrication, seems significant to me. It seems significant beyond merely putting stresses and pressures on the R family that accidently led to this tragedy. There is something there I cannot put my finger on. In other words, it is not a coincidence, I feel, that this happened on the day that it did (Christmas, 12-25) and also not a coincidence that the R's planned to leave town the next day. It all ties in somehow.

 

[BOESP]

I agree that the pineapple evidence appears to prove that the lethal head blow came while JB was at her house on the night of 12-25. That is all it says.

That does not invalidate this theory because we are still discussing the R's version of what happened that day. "Returning from the White's party" is R testimony. Anything that cannot be proven with forensic evidence is suspect.

If the lethal head blow happened at the house then it means that the non-R that killed JB was at the R house that night, either alone or with other non-R's also.

One other question I have is this: is it a proven fact that the R's had planned to take a long vacation the next morning? Is this rock solid or is it possible this is something the R's invented to give cover to themselves and possibly others?

The guests at the White's party would corroborate the Ramsey statements as to when the Ramseys arrived and when they left the Whites. That would be forensic testimony. So, you think whatever happened occurred between leaving the Whites and arriving at the Ramsey home. Or are you saying someone came home with the Ramseys and they are a responsible? TIA

 

[Anyhoo]

The guests at the White's party would corroborate the Ramsey statements as to when the Ramseys arrived and when they left the Whites. That would be forensic testimony. So, you think whatever happened occurred between leaving the Whites and arriving at the Ramsey home. Or are you saying someone came home with the Ramseys and they are a responsible? TIA

Is it possible that the people attending the White's party who the police questioned (which would very likely be the Whites themselves) would lie to support the R cover story? In my theory, it is very possible that they would, esp. if those very same people are part of this group I spoke of earlier. The Whites would be "prime candidates" to be part of this group. Testimony given to LE is not what I consider to be forensic testimony because anyone can lie for whatever reason, and if those lies are accepted as fact then an investigation is compromised. Forensic evidence is evidence outside of spoken testimony, such as the pineapple evidence and also the foreign DNA evidence that BDI proponents so easily want to dismiss.

What I am saying is that the story the R's told us is a fiction that does not in any way fit with the discovery of JB's brutally murdered body found down in that basement room. Everyone believing this fiction is why this murder has not been solved to this day, IMO. Discover the truth about what actually happened that day and everything will make sense.

 

[BOESP]

Is it possible that the people attending the White's party who the police questioned (which would very likely be the Whites themselves) would lie to support the R cover story? In my theory, it is very possible that they would, esp. if those very same people are part of this group I spoke of earlier. The Whites would be "prime candidates" to be part of this group. Testimony given to LE is not what I consider to be forensic testimony because anyone can lie for whatever reason, and if those lies are accepted as fact then an investigation is compromised. Forensic evidence is evidence outside of spoken testimony, such as the pineapple evidence and also the foreign DNA evidence that BDI proponents so easily want to dismiss.

What I am saying is that the story the R's told us is a fiction that does not in any way fit with the discovery of JB's brutally murdered body found down in that basement room. Everyone believing this fiction is why this murder has not been solved to this day, IMO. Discover the truth about what actually happened that day and everything will make sense.

It's my understanding that the Whites had other guests besides the Ramseys. Seems like there were several people there. Sorry I can't remember where I read this (probably Schiller or Thomas) but I can't see a convoluted conspiracy theory involving everyone at the Whites.

Forensic evidence is any evidence of high enough quality to be admissible in a court of law. Testimonial evidence is used all the time.

 

[DeeDee249]

It's my understanding that the Whites had other guests besides the Ramseys. Seems like there were several people there. Sorry I can't remember where I read this (probably Schiller or Thomas) but I can't see a convoluted conspiracy theory involving everyone at the Whites.

Forensic evidence is any evidence of high enough quality to be admissible in a court of law. Testimonial evidence is used all the time.

There were several other guests there, including the White's parents, I believe, or at least some of their kids grandparents or other relatives were there. In fact, when FW brought BR back to his house that morning, he and his wife left BR and their own 2 kids in the care of a relative who had come for the Holidays. There might have been other children apart from the Rs and W's kids.