Steve Thomas's Theory/Murder Timeline

[bettybaby00]

I don't know if we know the exact words the 911 operator (Archuletta) used to describe what she heard. My understanding (from Kolar, I think) is that she was so upset about what she heard that she told investigators to listen to it again for something at the end. Did she describe that something as "voices", "words", or "another conversation"? I don't know. But I do know that she heard it first-hand, before she ever heard it on a recording.

As far as the "dissipation" of something, I would again have to know exactly what she was describing. Did she mean Patsy's hysteria had dissipated? (I don't think so -- because to me she seems just as hysterical wailing at the end for Jesus to help her as she did when she said, "I'm the mother. Oh my God. Please.") Or did she mean that the volume of her voice dissipated because she had walked away from the receiver after thinking she had hung it up?

BBM

We analyze nearly every nuance in this case! you bring up a good possible scenario. Dissipate is an interesting word choice, and IMO Kolar didn't pull it out of nowhere.

dis·si·pate verb \ˈdi-sə-ˌpāt\
1) to cause (something) to spread out and disappear

2): to separate into parts and disappear or go away

As you point out it could mean several different things.

once PR placed the phone down, her mouth was no longer in close proximity to the phone's mouthpiece, possibly a foot or 2 away. Also, she was more likely turning away from the desk, rather than "walking away?"



"Foreign Faction"

Upon hearing of JonBenét’s murder, Archuleta nearly became ill. A supervisor directed her to her office where she sat and tried to calm her emotions. She could not get past the notion that something had been wrong about the 911 call and it had been there, troubling her subconscious during her days off. Archuleta asked her supervisor if police had listened to the 911 tape and was told that they had already obtained a copy of the recording: “What about the end of the call? Have they listened to the tail end of the call after Patsy Ramsey had stopped talking?” The supervisor looked back at Archuleta with a puzzled look on her face. “What are you talking about?” she asked. The 911 call didn’t end when Patsy stopped talking to her, Archuleta explained. The telephone line had not disconnected immediately, and she had heard a definite change in the tone of Patsy Ramsey’s voice before the call was fully terminated. Archuleta explained that the hysterical nature of Patsy Ramsey’s voice appeared to have dissipated, and she thought that she had been talking to someone nearby at her end of the telephone line. Investigators needed to listen to that extended part of the 911 call, Archuleta told her supervisor.

BBM

"dissipation of the hysterical nature in PRs tone," might her "Help me, Jesus, Help me, Jesus," be the reaction to realizing Burke was in the room asking questions? Might her tone have changed from hysterical to shocked, or tense in reaction?

Perhaps more important, the 911 operator does not say, "I heard 3 distinct voices," but instead stated, "she had been talking to someone nearby." Who? JR? Why would he respond to "help me Jesus," with "we're not talking to you!"

Archuleta heard something that bothered her for days...and when the analysis was done, several technicians, along with a BPD Det. all independently heard 3 voices, and all independently heard the same conversation.

MOO

 

[UKGuy]

BBM

We analyze nearly every nuance in this case! you bring up a good possible scenario. Dissipate is an interesting word choice, and IMO Kolar didn't pull it out of nowhere.

dis·si·pate verb \ˈdi-sə-ˌpāt\
1) to cause (something) to spread out and disappear

2): to separate into parts and disappear or go away

As you point out it could mean several different things.

once PR placed the phone down, her mouth was no longer in close proximity to the phone's mouthpiece, possibly a foot or 2 away. Also, she was more likely turning away from the desk, rather than "walking away?"



"Foreign Faction"



BBM

"dissipation of the hysterical nature in PRs tone," might her "Help me, Jesus, Help me, Jesus," be the reaction to realizing Burke was in the room asking questions? Might her tone have changed from hysterical to shocked, or tense in reaction?

Perhaps more important, the 911 operator does not say, "I heard 3 distinct voices," but instead stated, "she had been talking to someone nearby." Who? JR? Why would he respond to "help me Jesus," with "we're not talking to you!"

Archuleta heard something that bothered her for days...and when the analysis was done, several technicians, along with a BPD Det. all independently heard 3 voices, and all independently heard the same conversation.

MOO

bettybaby00,
Dissipate is an apt choice of word for the context. I think what Kolar is attempting to convey is not a tailing off in audible vocal volume, but a cathartic change in mood, since dissipate can be used to describe a release of emotion: She wanted to dissipate her anger. This is what I think Archuleta is referencing?

It was probably this switch in mood that bothered Archuleta, she likely sensed it was out of place in a 911 kidnapping call?

The parents later admitted that BR was wide awake that morning and they had sent him back to bed to fake being asleep.

.

 

[UKGuy]

In the matter of the asphyxiation of Jonbenet, I consider the terms ligature and garrote to be interchangeable. Yes, the cord around the victim’s neck is misnamed; it is not a garrote, but it has been referred to as a garrote as far back as I can remember. It has been referred to as a garrote for so long and with such consistency that I believe referring to it as a garrote is an accepted and legitimate use of the term.
.

As I understand it, the “dispute” is indeed over “ligature strangulation.” I may have misunderstood UKGuy, but as I understand it, UKGuy is saying that Jonbenet was not asphyxiated by the cord around her neck (call it whatever you like). Read this post by UKGuy, and tell me that I’m wrong. http://tinyurl.com/pjreg32
.

Arguing that it was not a garrote is fine, and it’s a winning argument; but, the fact that it was not a garrote is meaningless as far as the asphyxiation is concerned. She was asphyxiated by the cord found circumferentially embedded in her neck, it simply does not matter what you call it. But, this is not what is being discussed, anyway.
...

AK

Anti-K,
What I was attempting to say was that the device tied around JonBenet's neck could not have operated mechanically as a garrote, so was not responsible for asphyxiating her. The ligature alone was sufficient to asphyxiate her. I reckon the paintbrush handle was added after she was asphyxiated. Since a piece of the paintbrush handle is still missing, it may have been left inside JonBenet for shock value?

.

 

[Aynia]

Ok, thanks. I wasn't sure if I was understanding the line of thought completely. I have a hard time buying it, but I do understand it better. There are just so many things that don't make sense. Staging like that I would suggest supports a theory that all of the family members are in on it, or at least both JR and PR. An outsider or JR/PR alone stand too much of a risk of being caught after the believed death and during the staging. There would have been too much concern that one of the Ramseys was aroused from their sleep and checked out the house and then they'd be caught red handed. But if it were the Ramseys, the more logical staging would have included diverting attention from them by removing the body from the house and not pointing attention to them by leaving the body in the house, using SOME items from the house as part of the staging. Just trying to picture a scenario in which that kind of staging makes sense.

The staging... if it came from people inside the house and was done in a hurry, what else could be used other than items that were already in the house?
The body being found inside, IMO,MOO, they needed it for "proper burial " ...I can't see PR being able of just taking it outside somewhere. Again just MOO and all other disclaimers.

 

[Anti-K]

Anti-K,
What I was attempting to say was that the device tied around JonBenet's neck could not have operated mechanically as a garrote, so was not responsible for asphyxiating her. The ligature alone was sufficient to asphyxiate her. I reckon the paintbrush handle was added after she was asphyxiated. Since a piece of the paintbrush handle is still missing, it may have been left inside JonBenet for shock value?

.

It didn’t operate “mechanically as a garrote.” It operated mechanically as a slip knot. And, as a slipknot, it was “responsible for asphyxiating her.”
.

The hair entwined in the cord wrapped around the handle and, according to Kolar, “that had been pulled from, um, from her head and neck area” suggests that the paintbrush handle was added before it was pulled.
.

The missing piece of the paintbrush handle was not left inside of the victim.
...

AK

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,
BBM: And how credible are you? Just accept you and DocG have been found out, its that simple. You backed the wrong horse and it came last.

At least as credible as someone who thinks the Rs thought the police would believe a kidnapping occurred after they'd found the body in the house.

Its not about what I believe its all about the facts, none of which suggest a relocation was planned.

To me the facts seem to indicate a plan to relocate the body. First, as already mentioned, the kidnapping scenario is much more believable if it looks as though a kidnapping actually took place. (And of course, it's much less convincing when it obviously did not take place). Second, if the "intruder" was supposed to have done it, there really isn't any reason to redress the body, much less put the body in the WC.

You had said that in your opinion, the size 12s tell us there was no plan to relocate the body. I'd still like to hear (read) your reasoning on that point.

The RN states that the kidnappers have her, which to me is a further indication that there was a plan to relocate the body. And of course, by relocate, I mean dump outside the house, not move from one part of the basemen to another.

A trial is only a consideration of produced evidence it need not consider all the evidence, evidence that might predujice the accussed could be ommitted, so your hypothetical trial need not include all the evidence, only that which preordaines the result!


.

Then what did you mean by testing a theory?

 

[Chrishope]

Common sense tells us that, but at a time like that, common sense is not on the radar. They could certainly have staged a kidnapping- temporarily hiding her in the winecellar- and not realizing that police would remain at the house until the house was cleared and sealed. When they finally realized police were not going to leave them alone in the house, whatever plans they had for her body, perhaps calling police back and saying she'd been found, delivered, whatever- had to be abandoned. At that point, JR used the first chance he got to "find" her. So yes, to them, they could stage a kidnapping when there had been no kidnapping.

Well it's always possible to claim they were acting irrationally, w/o common sense, and that can't really be dismissed. I prefer to try to solve the case assuming that the culprit(s) acted as a rational culprit, trying his best to get away with the crime.

But I agree with you that common sense tells us the kidnapping scenario is a "no-go" once the body is found inside the house.

They'd also have had to assume (w/o common sense) that a competent search would not be made (turned out to be the case) and that the dogs would not be brought in.

It's really hard for me to believe they thought the body would remain undiscovered by the police.

 

[Chrishope]

I don't know if we know the exact words the 911 operator (Archuletta) used to describe what she heard. My understanding (from Kolar, I think) is that she was so upset about what she heard that she told investigators to listen to it again for something at the end. Did she describe that something as "voices", "words", or "another conversation"? I don't know. But I do know that she heard it first-hand, before she ever heard it on a recording.

As far as the "dissipation" of something, I would again have to know exactly what she was describing. Did she mean Patsy's hysteria had dissipated? (I don't think so -- because to me she seems just as hysterical wailing at the end for Jesus to help her as she did when she said, "I'm the mother. Oh my God. Please.") Or did she mean that the volume of her voice dissipated because she had walked away from the receiver after thinking she had hung it up?

The call eventually ended. Was the disconnection because PR finally did hang up, or because 911 eventually disconnected?

 

[Chrishope]

It didn’t operate “mechanically as a garrote.” It operated mechanically as a slip knot. And, as a slipknot, it was “responsible for asphyxiating her.”
.

The hair entwined in the cord wrapped around the handle and, according to Kolar, “that had been pulled from, um, from her head and neck area” suggests that the paintbrush handle was added before it was pulled.
.

The missing piece of the paintbrush handle was not left inside of the victim.
...

AK

The device (whatever we choose to call it) certainly could have asphyxiated her.

I have a little trouble calling it a slip knot, as I have tied the knot myself in 1/4' nylon line, much like that found at the crime scene. It slips in one direction -to tighten, but does not slip easily to loosen. But I suppose since is slips it's a slip knot. Once place around her neck, it certainly could asphyxiate her.

 

[UKGuy]

It didn’t operate “mechanically as a garrote.” It operated mechanically as a slip knot. And, as a slipknot, it was “responsible for asphyxiating her.”
.

The hair entwined in the cord wrapped around the handle and, according to Kolar, “that had been pulled from, um, from her head and neck area” suggests that the paintbrush handle was added before it was pulled.
.

The missing piece of the paintbrush handle was not left inside of the victim.
...

AK

Anti-K,

The missing piece of the paintbrush handle was not left inside of the victim.

And your source for this little nugget is?

If the device operated as a slipknot, why bother with a broken piece of paintbrush handle, why not simply apply as a ligature? Given the length of the ligature why not simply attach the complete paintbrush handle, why was it necessary to break it?

.

 

[BOESP]

Simplified version:

911 does not hang up as long as there is a connection. 911 wants the caller to, generally, stay on the line until officers arrive.

Reports by a third party may disconnect after all necessary information is obtained after the dispatcher confirms this-that-and-the-other with the caller.

 

[UKGuy]

At least as credible as someone who thinks the Rs thought the police would believe a kidnapping occurred after they'd found the body in the house.



To me the facts seem to indicate a plan to relocate the body. First, as already mentioned, the kidnapping scenario is much more believable if it looks as though a kidnapping actually took place. (And of course, it's much less convincing when it obviously did not take place). Second, if the "intruder" was supposed to have done it, there really isn't any reason to redress the body, much less put the body in the WC.

You had said that in your opinion, the size 12s tell us there was no plan to relocate the body. I'd still like to hear (read) your reasoning on that point.

The RN states that the kidnappers have her, which to me is a further indication that there was a plan to relocate the body. And of course, by relocate, I mean dump outside the house, not move from one part of the basemen to another.



Then what did you mean by testing a theory?

Chrishope,

At least as credible as someone who thinks the Rs thought the police would believe a kidnapping occurred after they'd found the body in the house.

I reckon the R's assumed that JonBenet would be found by LE or cadaver dogs early that morning. When this never happened JR took the opportunity to immediately relocate BR out of the house. This was patently a revision of any prior planning. The received wisdom for months after JonBenet was found was IDI and LS's psychopathic pedophile with an AE fetish was prime candidate.

You had said that in your opinion, the size 12s tell us there was no plan to relocate the body. I'd still like to hear (read) your reasoning on that point.

If Plan A is to relocate JonBenet away from the house, then cleaning and redressing JonBenet is redundant?

The redressing of JonBenet is intended as domestic staging, not as part of some external crime-scene deposit, but to hide and mask whatever took place that night, since the R's assume that JonBenet's body is going to be discovered by LE, then they go to great lengths to hide her acute sexual assault and over stage her asphyxiation, so to mask any prior injuries to her neck? External crime-scene deposits are rarely staged, commonly the victim is posed.

In short if JR intended to relocate JonBenet then all the redressing is not required, even he would realize once an Autopsy was performed, questions would be asked why the kidnapper redressed JonBenet in clean size-12's, wiped her down with JR's shirt, and fed her pineapple in the breakfast bar prior to whacking her on the head?

Then what did you mean by testing a theory?

I'm not sure what you are asking here, the trial is hypothetical but DocG's theory is allegedly more advanced, it is a theory with lots of evidence to support it, except many aspects are events which were to take place in the future, i.e. not the night JonBenet was killed. This means the theory cannot be tested. JR can never be put on trial using DocG's theory as a prosecution case.


.

 

[dodie20]

bettybaby00,
Dissipate is an apt choice of word for the context. I think what Kolar is attempting to convey is not a tailing off in audible vocal volume, but a cathartic change in mood, since dissipate can be used to describe a release of emotion: She wanted to dissipate her anger. This is what I think Archuleta is referencing?

It was probably this switch in mood that bothered Archuleta, she likely sensed it was out of place in a 911 kidnapping call?

The parents later admitted that BR was wide awake that morning and they had sent him back to bed to fake being asleep.

.

depends...was 'dissipate', Kolar's word or Archuletta's? I took it as her choice of word, and from the way Kolar wrote about it, I took it as PR went from hysterical to not hysterical and having a conversation with someone. Whatever it was, it alarmed the operator. I've been thinking about what the operator could have heard, (she never said anything about JR's angry voice), and I can't imagine what could have been so alarming. moo

 

[UKGuy]

depends...was 'dissipate', Kolar's word or Archuletta's? I took it as her choice of word, and from the way Kolar wrote about it, I took it as PR went from hysterical to not hysterical and having a conversation with someone. Whatever it was, it alarmed the operator. I've been thinking about what the operator could have heard, (she never said anything about JR's angry voice), and I can't imagine what could have been so alarming. moo

dodie20,
I think it was Kolar's? I agree with much of what you say. Archuletta likely noted the change in the emotional tone of PR's voice, i.e. say back to normal, with a small gap to exhale or dissipate as in I'm glad thats over?

.

 

[DeeDee249]

Well it's always possible to claim they were acting irrationally, w/o common sense, and that can't really be dismissed. I prefer to try to solve the case assuming that the culprit(s) acted as a rational culprit, trying his best to get away with the crime.

But I agree with you that common sense tells us the kidnapping scenario is a "no-go" once the body is found inside the house.

They'd also have had to assume (w/o common sense) that a competent search would not be made (turned out to be the case) and that the dogs would not be brought in.

It's really hard for me to believe they thought the body would remain undiscovered by the police.

Interestingly, the police did NOT actually find the body, though. I think they thought the winecellar was hidden enough (you could only get to it from another room, not from the hallways of the basement) that she wouldn't be found by police. And she wasn't- although Officer French DID locate the room- he couldn't figure out how to open the door. He claimed later that he just didn't think it was important to open the door because no one could be hiding in there since the latch worked from the outside. Of course, he never thought someone might have HIDDEN something (like JB) in there. Yes- police work at its finest.

 

[otg]

(bbm)

Simplified version:

911 does not hang up as long as there is a connection. 911 wants the caller to, generally, stay on the line until officers arrive.

Reports by a third party may disconnect after all necessary information is obtained after the dispatcher confirms this-that-and-the-other with the caller.

You're absolutely correct, BOESP. You can even tell that this was the case on the Ramsey 911 call. That's why Archuleta kept saying "Patsy, Patsy, Patsy." She was trying to get her to keep the phone line active and not hang up because for all anyone knew, the "kidnappers" could still be inside the house.

 

[BOESP]

(bbm)You're absolutely correct, BOESP. You can even tell that this was the case on the Ramsey 911 call. That's why Archuleta kept saying "Patsy, Patsy, Patsy." She was trying to get her to keep the phone line active and not hang up because for all anyone knew, the "kidnappers" could still be inside the house.

I either never knew or else have forgotten whether or not it is publicly known if Archuleta called Patsy back. The general rule would be that the dispatcher makes a callback if there is a disconnect.

 

[otg]

I either never knew or else have forgotten whether or not it is publicly known if Archuleta called Patsy back. The general rule would be that the dispatcher makes a callback if there is a disconnect.

I never heard (that I recall) whether or not she attempted a call-back. If she did, she most likely got a busy signal while half of Boulder was being called over. (Okay, maybe that's just a little bit of an exaggeration.)

My guess is that when Patsy went to make the first call to their friends after the 911 call, that's when she discovered the errant hang-up. If the end of the call hadn't been erased on the version that was released to the public, we might be able to hear the actual disconnection (before waiting for a dial tone to begin calling).

 

[Anti-K]

At least as credible as someone who thinks the Rs thought the police would believe a kidnapping occurred after they'd found the body in the house.



To me the facts seem to indicate a plan to relocate the body. First, as already mentioned, the kidnapping scenario is much more believable if it looks as though a kidnapping actually took place. (And of course, it's much less convincing when it obviously did not take place). Second, if the "intruder" was supposed to have done it, there really isn't any reason to redress the body, much less put the body in the WC.

You had said that in your opinion, the size 12s tell us there was no plan to relocate the body. I'd still like to hear (read) your reasoning on that point.

The RN states that the kidnappers have her, which to me is a further indication that there was a plan to relocate the body. And of course, by relocate, I mean dump outside the house, not move from one part of the basemen to another.



Then what did you mean by testing a theory?

As I see it, the only thing that suggests the intent to dispose of the body is the ransom note. But, the body wasn’t disposed of, and it wasn’t located as if it was ready to be disposed of, and the police were called (Mrs Ramsey would not have made that call if she knew about the body and Mr Ramsey would not have allowed that call if he knew about the body).

If the plan had been to relocate the body, than why is it in the basement? It should be in the trunk of his car, or stashed somewhere in the garage.
.

Well, I can think of a reason or two why an intruder might redress his victim, and as to why he might put the body in the WC. And, if I couldn’t think of any reasons, it would mean nothing.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

The device (whatever we choose to call it) certainly could have asphyxiated her.

I have a little trouble calling it a slip knot, as I have tied the knot myself in 1/4' nylon line, much like that found at the crime scene. It slips in one direction -to tighten, but does not slip easily to loosen. But I suppose since is slips it's a slip knot. Once place around her neck, it certainly could asphyxiate her.

In my experience, it depends on how you tie it (type of slip knot). It can slip with ease in both directions, or it can slip in one direction (tight) only, and everything in between
...

AK