Sorry, I missed this post.
Some of the body of evidence that supports the IDI position:
the ransom note. Yes, that’s right. I realize that you and many RDI are convinced that Mrs Ramsey wrote the note, but some RDI think that Mr Ramsey wrote the note. You guys can’t even convince each other, you’re certainly not going to convince me, and, neither belief has been confirmed by any of the credible experts. As far as we are concerned the author remains unidentified.
The ransom note contradicts the body in the house. People report (fake) kidnappings only after a body has been disposed of. In fact, it is the disposal that causes the killer to make such a report – they need to explain why so-and-so is missing. In such a case a ransom note would make sense and a ransom note would point suspicion elsewhere. But, Jonbenet was not missing; she had not been disposed of.
If RDI, the ransom note becomes nonsensical, contradictory, and unnecessarily self-incriminating.
The nature of the crime and cause(s) of death. There are some people who are capable of committing these acts upon a child; some of those people are parents. However, we have no evidence (behavioral, familial, etc), despite massive investigation, to show that these parents were capable of performing these acts upon this child. In fact, the evidence (behavioral, familial, etc) contradicts the claim.
No identified motivation to explain the nature of the crime and the cause(s) of death.
No evidence of forcible entry; locked doors. If the Ramseys wanted investigators to believe that someone came into their home and murdered their child then they needed to provide an entry/exit point – an unlocked door, at least. Instead, they made their imaginary intruder’s entry appear a mystery; more than a mystery: unlikely. This contradicts their supposed intent.
The body is hidden in the basement and not disposed of, nor in a place that might indicate that it was going to be disposed of (trunk of car; garage, etc) which contradicts the (fake) kidnapping.
There is trace evidence. Trace evidence of the exact kind and in the exact locations that we might expect to find if an intruder had committed this crime (fibers, hair – on the tape, the ligatures, in the hands, in the genital area, etc). Could they have innocent explanations? Sure. Was effort put into finding those innocent explanations? Yes. Were any found? So far: no.
There are items seemingly brought into the home, and there are items seemingly removed from the home (but, items that could incriminate the parents were not removed!!!).
There is more, but the point is made; now we can add tDNA and the CODIS DNA – three matched samples on two pieces of clothing.
Yes, you can try to explain away what you like by theory, but so can I.
...
AK
RANSOM NOTE:
Ubowski stated there were indications that PR wrote the note. He is a certified member of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners and was the CBI lab agent in charge on the case.
Speckin couldn't rule her out as the author and stated "there was only an infinitesimal chance that some random intruder would have handwriting characteristics so remarkably similar to those of a parent sleeping upstairs." He is forensic document analyst and is also a certified member of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners.
Epstein claimed he was "absolutely certain" that PR was the author of the note. He served as president for the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners and was deemed qualified by the court to testify. Both Rile and Cunningham (hired by the Ramseys) couldn't eliminate her either.
Experts disagree on whether or not she wrote the note. Therefore, you are incorrect. The belief HAS been confirmed by experts deemed credible by the court.
CONTRADICTION OF NOTE: The ransom note was an explanation for their missing daughter. It gave the parents the incentive to point the finger outside of the home. Without the RN you'd be left with 3 family members in the home with a dead child in their basement and no where to cast suspicion. The way the Ramsey's repeatedly bounced around "who done it" only proves my point further. If IDI, why would the Ramsey's call over the Whites the second they found their daughter missing when they would soon turn them in as suspects? These were people they called after finding their daughter "kidnapped by a foreign fraction" yet, they would soon turn their backs on the friends they trusted enough to ignore the ransom notes warning? Where would they dispose of her? I couldn't see anyone logically risking that when living in such close proximities to neighbors and dogs.
If an intruder wrote the note, what was the motivation? Not money. Not kidnapping. So what's the point of the note? It would be nonsensical for an intruder to write the note. Obviously the note wasn't "self incriminating" considering you just said no credible experts could identify her as the author...
BEHAVIOR OF PARENTS: Actually, Linda (Housekeeper) said she believed PR suffered from "multiple personalities" and stated "She'd be in a good mood and then she'd be cranky. She got into arguments with JonBenet about wearing a dress or about a friend coming over. I had never seen Patsy so upset." This finding in addition to the extreme amount of stress that the holidays cause is significant. John also had his fair share of oddity. When Beth died in a car accident he was reported to have been heard "crying and wailing" in the middle of the night and kept pictures of her everywhere. But when his young daughter is murdered in his own home he tells CNN that he is not angry with the killer and believes they deserve forgiveness. I've never read anything about the parents that contradicted the idea that they either had a part in the murder or covered it up. Care to elaborate?
MOTIVATION: I don't believe it was premeditated. I think Patsy snapped and attempted to cover it up. The repeated religious affirmations are striking as well IMO. I believe that she convinced herself that she had done nothing wrong by her religion and relied on faith throughout her life to fix problems. I'm in no way saying that's the wrong way to live, I just think she found comfort in her sins through the faith she had depended on for healing. In addition, many IDI's have tried to ignore the fact that PR answered the door wearing the same clothes from the night before as normal. But, in DOI she said "I remember my mothers words, Never leave the house without your makeup. Plus we are going to be with Melinda's fiancé, Stewart, so I want to make a good impression." So she decided to apply a fresh face of makeup that morning, but put on the same dirty clothes and not shower in preparation to meet with Melinda's finace? This is just an example of her statements contradicting one another.
POINT OF ENTRY: Early on the window was deemed the point of entry by the Ramseys, Smit, etc... When that fell through, attention turned to various points of entry like the butler door or someone with a key. John Ramsey told police on the morning of December 26th that he had checked the locks on the doors and windows the previous night. Later he denied ever saying this and claimed he didn't check the locks. Why the change in story? He also later claimed to have found the window in the basement open and that he had pulled it closed.
JR: I said, you know, this window’s broken, but I think I broke it last summer. It just hasn’t been fixed. And it was opened, but I closed it earlier and we got down on the floor and looked around for some glass just to be sure that it hadn’t been broken again. They came up with numerous possible points of entry, but none that were deemed the definite way the intruder entered the home. But boy did they try!
Again where would they dispose of the body at? Where would they have gotten a spare car trunk that wouldn't be linked back to them? They lived close enough to neighbors that they reported seeing the lights on in the home. How would anyone have taken a body (or entered the home for that matter) without being seen or heard? Not to mention there were dogs in the neighborhood. How would anyone have gotten past them as well without alerting them?
I won't get into the trace evidence argument because you already know where I stand on that, but I will say something I was thinking about earlier. The duct tape on JB's mouth had her lips imprinted leading us to believe that she was already passed when it was placed on her. The tape would have more than likely been torn off of the roll and placed directly on her mouth without problem which leaving little room for innocent fiber transfer from the floor, JB's clothing, etc... This only furthers my problem with the fact that fibers from the sweater PR wore the night of the murder ended up on the sticky side of the tape innocently.
That's true, however I think it's important to include that black duct tape was found on the backside of paintings in the home and a receipt was found from December with items matching the cost of the duct tape. In Thomas's book he discusses the discovery that the cord used in the murder could have been bought from a store close to JR. I don't have my book on me, but feel free to look it up!
Both IDI and RDI have their theories and explanations. I hope you don't take anything I've said as mean! I enjoy discussion about the case because it helps point out holes I've left in my own theory and opens my eyes to others thoughts surrounding the case.
