Premeditated?

[Meara]

A disclaimer -- I have done graduate and ongoing study in psychology, and abnormal psychology in particular, but hold no degrees in this field. If any members here have more extensive knowledge in this area, please do speak up! Meanwhile, below are the DSM criteria for IED:

A. Several discrete episodes of failure to resist aggressive impulses that
result in serious assaultive acts or destruction of property.

B. The degree of aggressiveness expressed during the episodes is grossly
out of proportion to any precipitating psychosocial stressors.

C. The aggressive episodes are not better accounted for by another mental
disorder (e.g., antisocial personality disorder, borderline personality
disorder, a psychotic disorder, a manic episode, conduct disorder, or
attention deficit hyperactiviy disorder) and are not due to the direct
physiological effects of a substance (e.g., a drug of abuse, a medication)
or a general medical condition (e.g., head trauma, Alzheimer's disease).

 

[Meara]

Thanks very much :blushing: Maybe a separate thread would be useful. Hm. If time allows, and if further pondering keeps leading in this direction, I will write things up in a more organized way and see if our Moderator Goddess approves : ) For now, I trust Kolar when he says the sealed med records are the key to this case. And I think that what what presented as sexual aggression could have been staging that masked IED behavior (and may also have been cover for JR, if he was in fact molesting JBR. I wouldn't put anything past that lizard.)

 

[Anyhoo]

Again, I agree with Anyhoo here. This case is unbelievable- I don't know about anyone else, but I've got so many different thoughts/speculations, especially after reading all these interesting comments, the inside of my head feels like a tumble dryer!

I agree that the head blow was just so severe, that it had to be intentional, and the more I think about it, maybe that's one thing we can all feel pretty sure about, and use it as a kind if starting point? If intentional, it proves that, as Anyhoo has said, someone within the house that night wanted JB dead.

Does that mean that he/she/they wanted to kill her at that moment in time, in reaction to something happening on the spur of the moment? For example, in a sudden fit of rage, for some reason? Or a knee-jerk reaction to JB's sudden loud scream, in the middle of some kind of abusive situation/molestation where killing her had not been the initial intention? Or in a much more planned, pre meditated way, where there was a considered/ruthless need in advance to "get her out of the way", or to silence her?

I agree with Anyhoo and Nom de Plume that I'm recently leaning more towards this being JR than PR ( even if PR wrote the ransom note and was a knowing accomplice). I can't imagine him going to such risky lengths to protect anyone apart from himself. Using items that pointed towards Patsy, may even have been his Plan B, as Nom de Plume has speculated?

It is my feeling that the staging JR did was not to protect PR or BR but to protect JR, always the person he cared about the most. If so this means JR committed the murder himself and had (in his own mind) a good reason for doing so. The threat of being exposed as a child molester by JB would IMO be such a reason. Can you imagine the powerful CEO of a billion dollar company being taken down by a six year old girl? There was no way he was going to let that happen.

If JR is really innocent, he has no need to hire all of the attorneys he did for himself. Always the prime concern was for JR and everyone else was secondary. The only reason all of those other people needed attorneys was to prevent information from getting out about JR himself. In everything he did, he was the main one being protected.

I agree with many others that I think Burke was probably molesting JB over a period of time, and possibly also JAR, too. My gut instinct is that JR must have been, too, as there are very few other explanations to explain his actions and lies. Unless he was acting on behalf of concealing his own wrong doings, as well as other adults outside the family too ( not on the night of the murder, but possibly prior to that?) This is only an idea, of course, and could well be wrong.

Just thinking about Anyhoo's gut instinct on another thread the Ramsey's were "no ordinary family"- if it isn't already obvious, I'm becoming convinced of that! Not sure exactly what Anyhoo was alluding to, but I'm wondering what sort of things they may have been part of or involved in, prior to the murder? Or, just at the very least, that behind closed doors they might have been the kind of family (sick I know, but it can and does happen, in all walks of life) where both father and sons could have been involved in molesting their daughter/sister? I've no idea, just speculation, of course.

Just another thing to wonder- if Patsy wrote the note and was an accomplice, was she an accomplice all the way along, or did she become one only after the murder had taken place that night? Just wondering about her statement in an interview that "only two people on the face of this earth" know what happened that night- the killer and someone that person confided in? The look of incredulous shock on John's face when she said that stands out to me!

PR was no rocket scientist as proven by her statements in the media, etc., which is why I always smile when someone here suggests she is the evil mastermind who did it all. For those people saying that, I don't think we are talking about the same PR. It is ludicrous IMO to think that this woman would have the intelligence and ruthlessness to do all this on her own. Add enough emotions and this woman is going to mentally fold and need someone else (who IS a thinker) to tell her what to do. That person was her husband.

The tone of the ransom note comes across to me as not only meant for the police, but also as a warning/threat to the other spouse that they must co operate or they will regret it. As has been said earlier, perhaps Patsy meant: You've created this mess, so you must sort this out, or there will be consequences!

Yes! Yes! Yes! The language of the RN was a message from PR to JR. You made this mess and now you clean it up. That strikes true to me.

Just one more thing, (as if there isn't already enough!)- what does anyone think of Stephen Singular's theory? I don't agree that JB was removed from the house that night, but it's interesting that he thought John was more afraid of his wife finding out things, than of the police? He was implying that John had knowingly arranged for JB to be put in a potentially dangerous situation with other people, such as a photographer, possibly without Patsy's knowledge/consent, that had somehow gone wrong... I don't really think this happened, especially on Christmas night, but I do have a nagging feeling that maybe both Ramsey's could have been covering for someone else as well as themselves? Too confusing!

I bought and read his entire book because I was fascinated with his theory, but the book turned out to be a supreme disappointment and his theory, while still fascinating to me, seems like a fantasy that is totally unsubstantiated by facts. I still hold the suspicion in the back of my mind that the Ramsey's are covering up for someone else outside of the family but I do not know why they would do that.

I also agree with Anyhoo that I think Christmas night may have been intentional in some way, partly as well because the Ramsey's wanted to put this on JB's headstone. Does anyone think there could be any possibility of some sort of ritualistic element to the killing, or is that way off base? It does sound very far fetched to us "ordinary" people, but it can and does happen? Or maybe that sort of thing would have come out by now, if so?

Yes, I suspect a ritualistic element to the killing. I always have. That is why I bought SS's book because that was his theory. A lot of people here won't even consider that possibility but I consider it a possibility. When I was talking about the Ramsey's not being a normal family, I was alluding to this.

Sorry for such marathon ramblings- just wanted to put all my confused questions out there, without clogging the thread up with multiple posts! :twocents:

 

[Anyhoo]

If that were true it does not fit with why they would completely get rid of some evidence and not others. Nothing on the main floor. It makes it clear to me that the person who killed her was indeed in a hurry to get out if there and cleaned up all the evidence they could from the basement. If it was an R. They would have also gotten rid of the pineapple, the note pad and practice sheets. It is obvious to me that normal practical Occam's razor thinking goes along with if they are going to clean up and get rid if evidence that was never found that was involved in the actual murder they would have also removed anything that connected them including the note pad, pen and papers found in trash.

The r's would not be under pressure to work fast. The intruder would be after the murder and do he took what he had possession of and fled.

Jmo


Forgive the autocorrect. Tapatalk has a mind of its own.

I agree that it appears to be true that the killer removed items from the basement but did not remove items from the main floors. I can see how that would be significant from an IDI perspective. I can also ask the question that, if RDI, why wouldn't they have cleaned up/removed items from the upstairs rooms before LE arrived at the house? That would be to me a no-brainer unless those items were meant to be found by LE as some kind of staging.

The pineapple being left out can be explained by the killer/stagers not considering it significant (not thinking LE could derive any conclusions from it). But the notepad and practice RN does confuse me as to why they would leave those there. If staging, this staging pointed back to the family, so what purpose could it have?

 

[Anyhoo]

Really thoughtful post! My short answer is IDK whether BR had such a disorder or not but it sure would explain a sudden assault. Guess I fall into the Non-premeditated camp regards how this evolved. IED could truly be an explanation for the unplanned/non-premeditated aspect of this. Like Kolar says, unsealing those medical records might be the absolute key to understanding more.

Interesting theory that might explain the head blow but does not explain the strangulation, IMO. I could accept that BR struck his sister over the head with something and caused near fatal injuries, but then you have to explain who came in afterwards and strangled JB to death with the garrote. In such a situation, I could see JR doing it as staging to protect his son, but if so then that means JR is the murderer of his daughter.

 

[Anti-K]

it's not the least bit distorted. sometimes the truth hurts. as for prejudicial, that's a valid concept in a court of law but not in the court of public opinion (which is where we are)



Mike Bynum was a personal friend. am I obligated to accept anything from his mouth that attempts to paint the guilty parties innocent? no, I am not. you can, that's your choice. mine is different



"ransoming the body/refusing to release the body for the funeral" was a media ploy concocted by Team Ramsey during the first two days because they knew it would create public sympathy. the source(s) and route(s) of those terms are well documented. there was no truth to it at all. Bynum's furtherance of it during the DS intreview doesn't make it true. questions remain to this day because the body was not held longer than it was and subjected to further testing



his experience AS a profiler is what got him hired, and his assessment per his profiling experience was valuable because it informed Team Ramsay of which dangers to avoid and which to prepare for when your clients are the most viable suspects in a murder case

it has been clearly stated that Team Ramsey investigators were out and about just a few hours after the body was discovered. that is another facet of this case, among many, which is distinctly unique. I cannot think of one other child murder/kidnapping case where the child's family immediately hired its own investigators while stonewalling local LE

it is also well documented that JR has told three different versions as to when/how he hired legal assistance. the most notable thing about the truth is that it remains the same from telling to telling

I would appreciate it if you would not use terms like distorted and prejudicial when referring to my posts. hey, you can even feel free to not refer to my posts at all. it's very easy to scroll on by when you see posts you disagree with. I do it all the time

I apologize if I offended you. My post wasn’t meant as an attack on your person. However, I stand by my original objection. Yes, I know, we disagree but certainly we can disagree politely.

I don’t think that we should believe that Bynum is a liar simply because he was friends with the Ramseys.

Eller wanted to hold the body until he got his Ramsey interviews. Meyer refused to hold the body. He said that there was no reason to do so. Hofstrom and Mason told Eller he couldn’t do it. BPD’s legal advisor told Eller he couldn’t do it. PMPT; p. 145 None of this was a media ploy, never mind a media ploy created by “Team Ramsey.”

Douglas was hired by the lawyers to assess their clients. Yes, he became deeper involved further on down the road, but I don’t recall that he ever worked for the Ramseys. Regardless, hiring someone like Douglas seems like a smart move for an innocent person with money and distrust and lack of faith in the police. I even think that hiring your own investigators, if you have the means, is also a wise move. And, the sooner the better.

But, we could have it your way and let’s say that it all was as you say it was. Now what? Some people might see some of this as grounds for suspicion (I think being in the house that night sufficed). So, let’s investigate them. That’s what I wold do. Hey! They hired lawyers. Maybe they’re hiding something. Let’s see if we can find out what.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

I mostly agree with this post. I partly disagree with this post.

If that were true it does not fit with why they would completely get rid of some evidence and not others. Nothing on the main floor. It makes it clear to me that the person who killed her was indeed in a hurry to get out if there and cleaned up all the evidence they could from the basement. If it was an R. They would have also gotten rid of the pineapple, the note pad and practice sheets. It is obvious to me that normal practical Occam's razor thinking goes along with if they are going to clean up and get rid if evidence that was never found that was involved in the actual murder they would have also removed anything that connected them including the note pad, pen and papers found in trash.

The r's would not be under pressure to work fast. The intruder would be after the murder and do he took what he had possession of and fled.

Jmo


Forgive the autocorrect. Tapatalk has a mind of its own.

The Ramseys could have taken as long as they wanted perfecting their crime scene. The note arguably gave them until noonish of the 27th, and they could have created a ransom note that would have given them longer than that it=f they needed extra time. They would have to phone a couple people and say sorry, unexpected emergency, will explain later, can’t talk, bye. Lie, lie, lie; later, say they lied because of the ransom note.

If the Ramseys disposed of anything than that would show that they were concerned about investigators discovering evidence that could incriminate them. However, the use of the paintbrush for the garrote, the use of the pen and notepad, the length of the note, the supposed use of inside information, etc all contradict that claim. So, if there were items disposed of, than they were disposed of for some reason other than they might incriminate the Ramseys.

This suggests that someone other than the Ramseys disposed of those items.

I don’t agree that an intruder would have necessarily been in any hurry to exit, and I don’t see any evidence that shows such a thing. I also disagree that nothing was removed from the first floor. Pages are removed from the notepad, supposedly, at least one of them is a draft of the RN. I’m not even sure that missing items can be traced to any floor as some of these items may have originated outside of the home (tape, cord, brown cotton whatever...).
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

I agree that it appears to be true that the killer removed items from the basement but did not remove items from the main floors. I can see how that would be significant from an IDI perspective. I can also ask the question that, if RDI, why wouldn't they have cleaned up/removed items from the upstairs rooms before LE arrived at the house? That would be to me a no-brainer unless those items were meant to be found by LE as some kind of staging.

The pineapple being left out can be explained by the killer/stagers not considering it significant (not thinking LE could derive any conclusions from it). But the notepad and practice RN does confuse me as to why they would leave those there. If staging, this staging pointed back to the family, so what purpose could it have?

You just said it, “unless those items were meant to be found by LE as some kind of staging.” And, what are those items? Items that specifically incriminate the Ramseys. Coincidence?
...

AK

 

[Nom de plume]

:moo:

Care to expand?

I know this is a very unpopular theory here, but it seems odd to me that JR had two daughters that died. Two daughters that reportedly complained of "ritualistic abuse", and both died shortly after. I realize the stories are just that, stories, rumors, but where there's smoke there's usually fire. I do not believe Beth's car "accident" was an accident at all. I think it was intentional to shut her up, just as I believe JB was killed to silence her. :moo:

 

[Anyhoo]

You just said it, “unless those items were meant to be found by LE as some kind of staging.” And, what are those items? Items that specifically incriminate the Ramseys. Coincidence?
...

AK

I do see what you are saying and this is a mystery to me that I cannot explain. It is completely illogical why the Ramsey's would call LE over to the house before they had cleaned up some of the evidence pointing to them.

 

[questfortrue]

Interesting theory that might explain the head blow but does not explain the strangulation, IMO. I could accept that BR struck his sister over the head with something and caused near fatal injuries, but then you have to explain who came in afterwards and strangled JB to death with the garrote. In such a situation, I could see JR doing it as staging to protect his son, but if so then that means JR is the murderer of his daughter.

You won’t find any disagreement from me regards JR and construction of a garotte. But ever since the Indictment was announced it struck me that the GJ could not agree on who actually strangled JB. The physical evidence for his participation in it is weak; otoh, the behavioral evidence registers something strongly.

From Kolar’s book: “But there were still other trace fibers that had yet to be accounted for . Brown cotton fibers had been found on four items closely associated with the body of JonBenét and implements used in her murder. Lab technicians thought the fibers similar to a pair of cotton work gloves. Had the gloves gone the way of the cord, duct tape, practice notes, and stun gun when the perpetrator left the home that night?”
You might have seen this interesting exchange between PR, Interviewers L and MK and the R’s Atlanta attorney LW. LW earned his keep preventing PR from making a mistake. Imo.
August 28, 2000

Q. (By Mr. Levin) Greenery. Did you have garden
9 gloves that you wore when you were, when you
10 were -- I assume, you tell me if I am
11 wrong, I assume that you cut them off some
12 of your Evergreen trees outside?
13 A. Yeah.
14 Q. Do you wear gloves when you do
15 that?
16 A. No.
17 Q. And I know that you -- there were
18 some flower beds I believe that you
19 occasionally worked with, that you worked on
20 that were on, is it, the south side of the
21 house?
22 A. The rose, I think the roses.
23 Q. Did you wear gardening gloves when
24 you worked out in the yard?
25 A. Not usually.
0180
1 Q. Did you own gardening gloves?
2 A. I don't think so, no.
3 Q. Do you recall ever seeing in your
4 house brown kind of work gloves, cotton?
5 A. Brown cotton? John had -- I
6 don't remember brown work gloves.
7 Q. Can you picture what I am talking
8 about?
-Snipped for space -
4 CHIEF BECKNER: Before we go too
5 far, for clarification for me, when you were
6 asked about wearing garden gloves, you said
7 not usually, I believe. Does that mean
8 sometimes you would?
9 THE WITNESS: I don't remember
10 doing that. I mean, I do wear them now
11 because now I am wearing these funny
12 fingernails, I don't want to get them messed
13 up, but I don't think I was doing it then.
14 So I don't, I don't ever remember -- I am
15 not a big gardener, so I didn't have all of
16 the trappings, you know, all of that stuff.
17 So I do not remember having any gardening
18 gloves.
19 Q. (By Mr. Kane) You started to say
20 that John had. John had what?
21 MR. WOOD: Let's see exactly what
22 she said.
23 MR. KANE: Lin, she said John had
24 30 seconds ago. What did John have?
25 MR. WOOD: Excuse me. The
0182
1 question was, do you recall ever seeing in
2 your house brown kind of work gloves, cotton,
3 and you went brown cotton, and you said John
4 had, and you said I don't remember brown.
5 All I want to do is put it in the context
6 of what she said. Do you remember saying
7 that?
8 THE WITNESS: Yes.
9 MR. WOOD: Now, Mr. Kane, go
10 right ahead.
11 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Now that you've
12 had time to think about it for a minute,
13 what did John have?
14 A. What kind of gloves did he have?
15 Q. What were you about to say? You
16 said John had.
17 A. John had ski gloves.
18 Q. (By Mr. Levin) In addition to
19 his ski gloves, Mrs. Ramsey, do you recall
20 John having any kind of work gloves that he
21 might have kept in the car if he had to
22 change a tire or anything like that?
23 A. No.
24 Q. Just for clarification, for the
25 record, when you say no, does that mean no,
0183
1 you don't recall whether he did or didn't or
2 no, he did not own any work gloves?
3 A. I don't recall that he did. You
4 will have to ask him if he did.

:banghead:

 

[gramcracker]

"Conspiracies are proven bit by bit, speck by speck, brick by brick, until all of a sudden you have a mosaic. They are proven by circumstantial evidence. Conspiracies are conceived in shadowy recesses. They are not hatched on television in front of 5,000,000 witnesses."

- Vince Bugliosi

 

[Scandigirl]

This is certainly becoming a really fascinating discussion! Just throwing my :twocents: in again, if nobody minds.

Meara's theory about BR's possible rage disorder (apologies for my ignorance in not using the correct terms) is really interesting and obviously stems from being very knowledgable about the subject, far more than me!

I can really see that it could be possible that he suffered/still suffers? from something like that, and I agree that it's really compelling that his medical records remain sealed- why the need for such secrecy? It immediately looks extremely suspicious. Also, I agree that if you are on the right lines with this about Burke, then this would explain an awful lot, as well as comments about the need for "forgiveness" towards the killer.

Annoyingly, I can't remember where, but I read an anecdote about Burke's behaviour at school... It was in relation to how he was coping not long after JB's murder. Someone was saying that he never spoke about it , but was obviously suffering inside from pent-up anger- apparently he was in a school music band or orchestra, and everyone was shocked when he had a full-blown temper tantrum and flung his instrument on the floor... I'm sorry that I can't remember any more details. Has anyone else heard of this?

I can believe it possible that Burke was struggling with a disorder, and that it was causing problems within the family, that he had possibly been or threatened violence to JB, and that he was receiving therapy and/or medication. I might be wrong, and it's only my own strong feelings, but I just can't shake a gut instinct that, even if this was occurring, it still doesn't fully explain JB's murder and everything that has surrounded it, or entirely explain the strange behaviour of the parents. I just still feel it's more complex than that, and involving something that encompassed the whole family, not just one person. I know it's only an instinct, which is entirely personal and subjective, so not saying that I'm right, just sharing my thoughts!

It's very suspicious that Burke's medical records have been shrouded in secrecy, but so have JB's as well, not just his. For both children to have been suffering from encropresis is extreme and pretty unusual... Does this suggest that both children may have been subjected to sexual abuse, or some pretty awful type of other abuse? I just wonder if both their medical records are heavily guarded, because they were both victims, which suggests that there was something serious coming from someone else either immediately within the family, or with close access to it?

I don't know enough about the proper psychological or medical facts, but could Burke's "flat" demeanour be a sign that he had shut down and was trying to detach himself emotionally? Maybe the temper episodes happened when he couldn't always maintain that? He probably was being medicated as well, though.

I think the other problem for me about any BDI theory ( again, I'm not saying I'm right, and could be totally wrong!), is that it just doesn't explain to me the nature of the cover-up. I can believe that parents would conspire to covering up one of their children attacking/killing the other, but would any "ordinary" parents make a mental leap out of the blue, especially in a panic on the very same night, to think up using a garrotte, and staging something so brutal? I mean, honestly, there aren't any parents I know where such a thought would be on their radar, and even enter their heads, even if they were desperate!

The garrotte and strangulation were real, it wasn't just hung loosely like a neck scarf, but deeply embedded into her neck. To me, whether used for staging or not, such brutality says a lot about the person(s) choosing such a device, especially in relation to their own child, Unless we're saying that Burke made the garrotte and used it himself? I know it could be possible, but just to me, I feel realistically it's unlikely. I can see Burke doing a head bash in rage, but not the garrotte. Could be wrong, though.

The final problem, for me, is the apparent attitude of both John and Patsy towards JB, after her death. If covering for Burke, they would surely still have shown much more tenderness/closeness/grief about JB dying, their supposedly beloved other child, and Burke's poor unfortunate victim? It's difficult to say for sure that they didn't grieve much more deeply in private, but to me, they didn't show the level I would expect, and why use such distancing language when speaking about her? It's only my own instincts, but they seemed almost relieved that she was gone.

Even if the Ramsey's reactions is just objective speculation, why did JR lawyer up his own side of the family immediately, and not Patsy's? It seems to me that he was more anxious to keep secrets quiet about himself, than about anyone else in the family, including Burke?

Sorry again for such a long post- just so many aspects to consider! I'm sure we could all write a book on our own thoughts, by now! :blushing:

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

If JR is really innocent, he has no need to hire all of the attorneys he did for himself.

I'm still amazed at this sentiment. Everyone needs attorneys. Guilty or innocent. And they have a right to one.
I hope anyone who is being investigated for any reason would have good attorney.




Forgive the autocorrect. Tapatalk has a mind of its own.

 

[Venom]

Yeah everyone needs attorneys. But should a parent of a child found murdered in her own house use attorneys to hide behind and finesse on how they are to be treated, get out of formal interviews for months, among other things? Nope. But that's my opinion.

 

[bettybaby00]

Yeah everyone needs attorneys. But should a parent of a child found murdered in her own house use attorneys to hide behind and finesse on how they are to be treated, get out of formal interviews for months, among other things? Nope. But that's my opinion.

Exactly. What's even more damning to me, is not that they sought out legal advice, but rather the speed in which they did it. The very evening of the murder....and who is the 1st person his lawyer wants to chat with. None other than FW. And low and behold, who is one of the 1st to have been thrown under the bus?

 

[DeDee]

Exactly. What's even more damning to me, is not that they sought out legal advice, but rather the speed in which they did it. The very evening of the murder....and who is the 1st person his lawyer wants to chat with. None other than FW. And low and behold, who is one of the 1st to have been thrown under the bus?

The address where JonBenet was murdered was changed from 755 15th Street to 749 15th Street.


Fleet Oil Co
743 15th Street
Boulder, CO


How long has FW had his office on 15th Street?

 

[Anyhoo]

I'm still amazed at this sentiment. Everyone needs attorneys. Guilty or innocent. And they have a right to one.
I hope anyone who is being investigated for any reason would have good attorney.




Forgive the autocorrect. Tapatalk has a mind of its own.

You completely misunderstood my statement. While everyone has a right to hire an attorney, if JR is really innocent then he has no need to hire a whole team of high priced attorneys because the evidence will bear out his innocence (unless you believe LE would manufacture false evidence or would grossly misinterpret evidence as to put the onus of guilt upon him, a completely innocent man). You see, Scarlett, a truly innocent person knows that the police can do all the investigation they want and the investigation will actually clear them. In this case, JR did the opposite, he lawyered up to the max and obstructed the LE investigation at every turn. While that behavior does not necessarily prove his guilt, it indicates he is not cooperating with LE and has something to hide. These are not the acts of an innocent person. If you were not so obsessed with an imaginary intruder this would not have to be explained to you.

 

[Mama2JML]

The address where JonBenet was murdered was changed from 755 15th Street to 749 15th Street.


Fleet Oil Co
743 15th Street
Boulder, CO


How long has FW had his office on 15th Street?

The Whites were living @ 743 15th street when the Ramsey's moved into their home, just two doors down; late Summer of '94.

 

[Mama2JML]

The address where JonBenet was murdered was changed from 755 15th Street to 749 15th Street.


Fleet Oil Co
743 15th Street
Boulder, CO


How long has FW had his office on 15th Street?

IDK, but the Whites were living @ 743 15th street when the Ramsey's moved into their home, just two doors down; late Summer of '94.