Questions you'd like answers to...

[AndHence]

The question of what each Ramsey knew and when they knew it is a fascinating one. I've always believed Burke was sent up to bed that night not knowing he'd killed JonBenet. In his head, the kidnapping was an entirely separate event and he was never told anything about the cover-up.

As for John, there is some compelling evidence that perhaps he woke up entirely unaware of what had transpired the night before and then figured some version of it out as the morning unfolded. This doesn't quite explain why he closed ranks so quickly. John would have no way of knowing what the DNA and handwriting tests would reveal. For all he knew, Patsy or Burke's DNA could have been all over JonBenet. I would say the odds of him being in on the cover-up from the start are higher than the alternative.

If we agree that Patsy wrote the note, it's clear she was involved in the cover-up from an early stage. What I'd like to know is if the Ramseys were aware of JonBenet's head injury. It's possible they might have thought she had broken her neck. Additionally, it's fairly clear they didn't know about the pineapple or they'd have incorporated it into their version of events.

 

[Cranberry]

Where is the quote of "he didn't mean to kill her" from?

CircuitGuy, Here is information on that quote that was in Kolar's book: Kolar, A. James. Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet?
Father Holverstock advised he had been heating a glass of water in the kitchen microwave when things began to happen. Fleet White had a look on his face that he’d “never seen before,” and racing past him through the kitchen, exclaimed that JonBenét had been found.
The next thing he knew, he was standing in the foyer area near the top of the basement stairs, and John Ramsey had his daughter in his hands. It was Holverstock’s recollection that Ramsey blurted out, “I don’t think he meant to kill her, because she was wrapped in a blanket,” or that “she was warm, she was wrapped in a blanket.”

 

[UKGuy]

CircuitGuy, Here is information on that quote that was in Kolar's book: Kolar, A. James. Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet?
Father Holverstock advised he had been heating a glass of water in the kitchen microwave when things began to happen. Fleet White had a look on his face that he’d “never seen before,” and racing past him through the kitchen, exclaimed that JonBenét had been found.
The next thing he knew, he was standing in the foyer area near the top of the basement stairs, and John Ramsey had his daughter in his hands. It was Holverstock’s recollection that Ramsey blurted out, “I don’t think he meant to kill her, because she was wrapped in a blanket,” or that “she was warm, she was wrapped in a blanket.”

Cranberry,
If that's not JR spinning a line, then could that he refer to BR and exclude Patsy on grounds of gender?

.

 

[sedndun]

The question of what each Ramsey knew and when they knew it is a fascinating one. I've always believed Burke was sent up to bed that night not knowing he'd killed JonBenet. In his head, the kidnapping was an entirely separate event and he was never told anything about the cover-up.

As for John, there is some compelling evidence that perhaps he woke up entirely unaware of what had transpired the night before and then figured some version of it out as the morning unfolded. This doesn't quite explain why he closed ranks so quickly. John would have no way of knowing what the DNA and handwriting tests would reveal. For all he knew, Patsy or Burke's DNA could have been all over JonBenet. I would say the odds of him being in on the cover-up from the start are higher than the alternative.

If we agree that Patsy wrote the note, it's clear she was involved in the cover-up from an early stage. What I'd like to know is if the Ramseys were aware of JonBenet's head injury. It's possible they might have thought she had broken her neck. Additionally, it's fairly clear they didn't know about the pineapple or they'd have incorporated it into their version of events.

Burke may have dealt the blow and been responsible for the lower neck marks. He may not have known of the staging and ransom.
If Patsy did the cover-up thinking JonBenet dead and it was she who applied the cord in an effort to hide what Burke had done and make it look like a failed kidnapping, then it was she who actually killed JonBenet but didn't know that.
John may not have known and may still not know the details of what happened. I think he knew there were issues in the family that he'd possibly ignored and all he needed to know was that they had finally gotten completely out of hand. Guilty by negligence.

There are some interview questions where it's hard to discern fake shock from actual shock. The Ramsey's at least expressed shock when learning of the skull fracture and I believe they also did when learning that the cord was what actually killed JonBenet.

So possibly you have an odd circle of guilt where no one sees blame landing squarely on them. Burke set things in motion, but perhaps doesn't see himself as the killer. Patsy may have actually dealt the final blow, but this was a mistake caused by the actions of her son. John may have had his hands clean of the dirty work, but was negligent in his parental duties and bears the most blame for every thing that happened after the body was found up until this day.

 

[EtherealMoonRose]

Burke may have dealt the blow and been responsible for the lower neck marks. He may not have known of the staging and ransom.
If Patsy did the cover-up thinking JonBenet dead and it was she who applied the cord in an effort to hide what Burke had done and make it look like a failed kidnapping, then it was she who actually killed JonBenet but didn't know that.
John may not have known and may still not know the details of what happened. I think he knew there were issues in the family that he'd possibly ignored and all he needed to know was that they had finally gotten completely out of hand. Guilty by negligence.

There are some interview questions where it's hard to discern fake shock from actual shock. The Ramsey's at least expressed shock when learning of the skull fracture and I believe they also did when learning that the cord was what actually killed JonBenet.

So possibly you have an odd circle of guilt where no one sees blame landing squarely on them. Burke set things in motion, but perhaps doesn't see himself as the killer. Patsy may have actually dealt the final blow, but this was a mistake caused by the actions of her son. John may have had his hands clean of the dirty work, but was negligent in his parental duties and bears the most blame for every thing that happened after the body was found up until this day.

I agree with most of this, but I think BR was the one who strangled her and PR staged the garrotte.

Do you have sources to the interviews where they were shocked? Would love to read it.

 

[CircuitGuy]

I'm leaning more towards the idea that no Ramsey knew everything and still does not. Even in the interviews that took place years later, John and Patsy had conflicting accounts, and Burke's were even more different. As they years continued to pass, their stories became self-conflicting. Even by the Dr Phil interview, John and Burke didn't seem to have all their ducks in a row.

This is a key feature of liars in general. Even if they have full knowledge and time agree on a story, they make mistakes. The stories disagreeing points to lying, but it does not imply to me that they didn't agree on a story.

BTW, I enjoyed the post and agree with most of it except this one point.

 

[Cranberry]

Cranberry,
If that's not JR spinning a line, then could that he refer to BR and exclude Patsy on grounds of gender?

.

UKGuy, yes that appears where JR was placing the blame. JR never blamed Patsy for anything. Through All.

 

[Miz Adventure]

Burke may have dealt the blow and been responsible for the lower neck marks. He may not have known of the staging and ransom.
If Patsy did the cover-up thinking JonBenet dead and it was she who applied the cord in an effort to hide what Burke had done and make it look like a failed kidnapping, then it was she who actually killed JonBenet but didn't know that.
John may not have known and may still not know the details of what happened. I think he knew there were issues in the family that he'd possibly ignored and all he needed to know was that they had finally gotten completely out of hand. Guilty by negligence.

There are some interview questions where it's hard to discern fake shock from actual shock. The Ramsey's at least expressed shock when learning of the skull fracture and I believe they also did when learning that the cord was what actually killed JonBenet.

So possibly you have an odd circle of guilt where no one sees blame landing squarely on them. Burke set things in motion, but perhaps doesn't see himself as the killer. Patsy may have actually dealt the final blow, but this was a mistake caused by the actions of her son. John may have had his hands clean of the dirty work, but was negligent in his parental duties and bears the most blame for every thing that happened after the body was found up until this day.

I am reasonably convinced that the R's were not aware of the skull fracture until the autopsy.

Patsy sounded genuinely shocked when informed of the possible prior sexual molestation of JBR.

I don't think Patsy had anything to do with the ligature. What mother could do that to her daughter? Patsy may have been unbalanced but she wasn't bat-crazy although a lot of people seem to want to portray her as such.

After I read ST's book I tended to think PR was responsible for the death of her daughter - but now - in the light of what has been revealed about BR, I think that he is the more likely perpetrator. Then the parents covered up the crime.

 

[andreww]

I am reasonably convinced that the R's were not aware of the skull fracture until the autopsy.

Patsy sounded genuinely shocked when informed of the possible prior sexual molestation of JBR.

I don't think Patsy had anything to do with the ligature. What mother could do that to her daughter? Patsy may have been unbalanced but she wasn't bat-crazy although a lot of people seem to want to portray her as such.

After I read ST's book I tended to think PR was responsible for the death of her daughter - but now - in the light of what has been revealed about BR, I think that he is the more likely perpetrator. Then the parents covered up the crime.

Sorry, what has been revealed about Burke Ramsey?

 

[Miz Adventure]

Sorry, what has been revealed about Burke Ramsey?

Nothing new, as far as I know.

I was referring to what we have now seen and heard about BR - since ST wrote his book accusing PR.

 

[sedndun]

I don't think Patsy had anything to do with the ligature. What mother could do that to her daughter? Patsy may have been unbalanced but she wasn't bat-crazy although a lot of people seem to want to portray her as such.

I think there are three ways to look at the ligature:

1) It was a weapon used to kill her brutally and intentionally.

2) It was used for staging to give the appearance of a brutal kidnapping gone wrong.

3) It was used for staging to cover up another strangulation attempt made earlier that evening and the marks it left. Same as the paintbrush (it is assumed) used to stab her in the genitals- a brutal thing for anyone to do, but possibly done with the specific intent of seeming brutal so to distract from other abuse that may have family ties.

 

[Userid]

^ Number 3 makes the most sense, especially with regards to the paintbrush.

 

[Miz Adventure]

I think there are three ways to look at the ligature:

1) It was a weapon used to kill her brutally and intentionally.

2) It was used for staging to give the appearance of a brutal kidnapping gone wrong.

3) It was used for staging to cover up another strangulation attempt made earlier that evening and the marks it left. Same as the paintbrush (it is assumed) used to stab her in the genitals- a brutal thing for anyone to do, but possibly done with the specific intent of seeming brutal so to distract from other abuse that may have family ties.

Yes I can see that, but I don't think Patsy had anything to do with that cord. I don't think any part of the strangulation (or garrotte) was staging. BR did it all. From what I know of Patsy I don't think she would have had the heart to put a cord around her daughter's neck, even if she thought she was already deceased.

I think that the staging the parents did was more gentle; they wrapped the body in a white blanket, Patsy wrote the note. John may or may not have broken that window (I tend to think he didn't and that it was broken during the summer, as he stated). The flashlight was wiped inside and out.

Possibly JBR's clothing was pulled down to see if BR had interfered with her and she was wiped with something - I'm not certain about this, and her clothing pulled up again. I suspect BR had put this clothing on JBR. Who knows what was in the mind of this boy?

 

[UKGuy]

Yes I can see that, but I don't think Patsy had anything to do with that cord. I don't think any part of the strangulation (or garrotte) was staging. BR did it all. From what I know of Patsy I don't think she would have had the heart to put a cord around her daughter's neck, even if she thought she was already deceased.

I think that the staging the parents did was more gentle; they wrapped the body in a white blanket, Patsy wrote the note. John may or may not have broken that window (I tend to think he didn't and that it was broken during the summer, as he stated). The flashlight was wiped inside and out.

Possibly JBR's clothing was pulled down to see if BR had interfered with her and she was wiped with something - I'm not certain about this, and her clothing pulled up again. I suspect BR had put this clothing on JBR. Who knows what was in the mind of this boy?

Miz Adventure,
You will sleep soundly tonight knowing that Coroner Meyer stated verbatim as part of his autopsy report that JonBenet was wiped down.

Paraphrasing, JonBenet had no blood on the parts of her groin to match the corresponding bloodstained region of her under wear, i.e. size-12's.

Definitely wiped down, so staging took place. So if you are staging a sexual assault why bother cleaning JonBenet up?

.

 

[singularity]

Yes I can see that, but I don't think Patsy had anything to do with that cord. I don't think any part of the strangulation (or garrotte) was staging. BR did it all. From what I know of Patsy I don't think she would have had the heart to put a cord around her daughter's neck, even if she thought she was already deceased.

Why are her fibers twisted into the cord if she didn't have anything to do with it?

 

[BBB167893]

Why are her fibers twisted into the cord if she didn't have anything to do with it?

I'm sure those fibers just fell into it. (Rolls eyes)

 

[Userid]

Miz Adventure,
You will sleep soundly tonight knowing that Coroner Meyer stated verbatim as part of his autopsy report that JonBenet was wiped down.

Paraphrasing, JonBenet had no blood on the parts of her groin to match the corresponding bloodstained region of her under wear, i.e. size-12's.

Definitely wiped down, so staging took place. So if you are staging a sexual assault why bother cleaning JonBenet up?

.

(to the bolded) They weren't trying to "stage" a sexual assault; they were trying to cover one up.

 

[Annapurna]

(to the bolded) They weren't trying to "stage" a sexual assault; they were trying to cover one up.

I 100% agree with this, which is why the idea of assaulting her with the paintbrush to "cover up" previous abuse makes no sense to me. You don't stage an assault and then clean up all evidence of it (as best you can). One could make the argument for multiple stagers with different motives, but that seems more complex than is likely.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Userid]

^ I can see it from both sides, in a way. If there was blood that was present after the paintbrush was inserted, it would be obvious that something "jagged" was used; an instrument, as opposed to an appendage. The blood was most likely cleaned up to remove the fact that something was used to "cover up" said abuse.

Then again, I see your and UKGuy's point also now: inserting the paintbrush is equivalent to simulating a sexual assault. So why simulate the assault at all, if you're cleaning the body after?

But again, I think it was a last ditch effort to cover up prior sexual abuse, because if the paintbrush was never used, an autopsy could more easily reveal that prolonged prior abuse was going on -- and that would obviously point directly to the family. This is what they were desperately trying to cover up with the paintbrush, and this is why she was cleaned after the fact -- they didn't want any indication whatsoever, of both prolonged prior abuse, and of the fact a cover-up (with the paintbrush) took place at all. It was a safety measure. For all intents and purposes, it worked, because there is still somewhat of a debate as to whether or not prolonged abuse was occurring (I believe there was, but her pediatrician disagrees, among some others, as we all know).

 

[TeaTime]

Do we know that the paintbrush was used in the sexual assault, rather than a digit that handled the paintbrush?