Still Asking Questions Here

[JMO8778]

oh,but it IS relevant! you can't just blow it off that easily.And the R's would have been all over it if it weren't true.and I suspect you probably know that.Thomas isn't the one doing the twisting...

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Ravyn,

That's what I've been wondering about lately within the IDI scenario ..... all the expectations and critiques of the Rs behaviour. I mean if they were advised by their lawyers to evade certain answers or to misdirect, why wouldn't they? Even if they had fed JBR the pineapple why wouldn't they have lied for their own self preservation, given that they claimed to have believed that the investigation was tring to railroad them?

From what I've read. it's difficult to point to an outright lie by the Ramseys.

Hey.
and Hi Ravyn.

I guess I was just sayin' ? what I've been thinking about the pineapple in relation to the IDI scenario, because IMO the PDI scenarios are flush with details and suppositions and seem so plausible if not for the touch dna evidence, exhoneration of the Rs and new reality of an IDI.
Trying to reconcile ... think of a way or a reason why the Ramsey's would distance themselves from the pineapple, a reason that would not reflect or be indicative of 'their guilt'.

 

[DeeDee249]

Hey.
and Hi Ravyn.

I guess I was just sayin' ? what I've been thinking about the pineapple in relation to the IDI scenario, because IMO the PDI scenarios are flush with details and suppositions and seem so plausible if not for the touch dna evidence, exhoneration of the Rs and new reality of an IDI.
Trying to reconcile ... think of a way or a reason why the Ramsey's would distance themselves from the pineapple, a reason that would not reflect or be indicative of 'their guilt'.

There is no innocent reason for them to distance themselves. The pineapple snack in and of itself isn't something that needed to be lied about. It is the fact that it proves she was NOT asleep for a period of time after they arrived home that night that causes a problem for them. They have said that JB was asleep in the car and carried into the house and never seen alive again. Yet, BR told LE his sister walked into the house.
There is no reason why they couldn't have said they gave her a pineapple bedtime snack. Don't know why they felt they had to say she was asleep the whole time, it doesn't really impact the rest of the crime- the snack and whether she walked into the house or was carried asleep do not have any impact on what happened later. That is why it is so incriminating that they lied about something they need not have lied about.
The only thing I can think of it that they never expected pineapple to show up in the autopsy. And the pineapple shows the death occurred about 2 hours after they returned home, making an intruder crime much less plausible.

 

[Tadpole12]

There is no innocent reason for them to distance themselves. The pineapple snack in and of itself isn't something that needed to be lied about. It is the fact that it proves she was NOT asleep for a period of time after they arrived home that night that causes a problem for them. They have said that JB was asleep in the car and carried into the house and never seen alive again. Yet, BR told LE his sister walked into the house.
There is no reason why they couldn't have said they gave her a pineapple bedtime snack. Don't know why they felt they had to say she was asleep the whole time, it doesn't really impact the rest of the crime- the snack and whether she walked into the house or was carried asleep do not have any impact on what happened later. That is why it is so incriminating that they lied about something they need not have lied about.
The only thing I can think of it that they never expected pineapple to show up in the autopsy. And the pineapple shows the death occurred about 2 hours after they returned home, making an intruder crime much less plausible.

Hi DeeDee.


"That is why it is so incriminating that they lied about something they need not have lied about."

Ya I get that. It places them closer to the TOD.
Just thinkin' about a plausible explanation, given the bowl on counter, the same said bowl in photo, PR pattern of purchasing the fresh pinapple ..... within the IDI scenario, if the IDI did not bring the pineapple, then why would the Ramseys deny they purhased it.
They were under advisement to do so or .... they did not purchase the pineapple.

Ya, in a way the pineapple is a non issue,
but it is a point most often referenced and rehashed in defense of the RDI scenarios, that no IDI would bring 'fresh pinapple' into a kidnapping scenario adds to the suggestion that it would be ludicrous to suggest anyone other than the Rs DI.

 

[DeeDee249]

Hi DeeDee.


"That is why it is so incriminating that they lied about something they need not have lied about."

Ya I get that. It places them closer to the TOD.
Just thinkin' about a plausible explanation, given the bowl on counter, the same said bowl in photo, PR pattern of purchasing the fresh pinapple ..... within the IDI scenario, if the IDI did not bring the pineapple, then why would the Ramseys deny they purhased it.
They were under advisement to do so or .... they did not purchase the pineapple.

Ya, in a way the pineapple is a non issue,
but it is a point most often referenced and rehashed in defense of the RDI scenarios, that no IDI would bring 'fresh pinapple' into a kidnapping scenario adds to the suggestion that it would be ludicrous to suggest anyone other than the Rs DI.

It had been mentioned by several people who knew her that JB loved pineapple and even PR had said she kept pineapple in the house for her. PR said she usually bought the fresh pineapple that was sold already cut. When LE discussed the pineapple found in the autopsy, PR asked "was it fresh or canned". That was an odd thing for the mother of a murdered child to say. What difference does it make to the mother of the victim? Is that the only thing you can think of to ask? I think PR was setting the stage here. If told it was canned, she'd say well, I only buy fresh. If told it was fresh, she'd say she only bought canned.
Being confronted with fresh pineapple known to be still in the home (that matched what was found in JB), the only thing they could do was deny ever feeding it to her that night.
Remember, they didn't just deny feeding the pineapple. At first, PR even denied owning the bowl. Yet her prints were on the bowl.
The pineapple, specifically the LYING about the pineapple, is a BIG reason why I am RDI. There is simply no other explanation for it. I am not talking about denying feeding her the pineapple. I am talking about denying OWNING the pineapple (and bowl). THAT is the part that raises my suspicions.

I'd go with them being advised to to do.

 

[Ravyn]

Hey.
and Hi Ravyn.

I guess I was just sayin' ? what I've been thinking about the pineapple in relation to the IDI scenario, because IMO the PDI scenarios are flush with details and suppositions and seem so plausible if not for the touch dna evidence, exhoneration of the Rs and new reality of an IDI.
Trying to reconcile ... think of a way or a reason why the Ramsey's would distance themselves from the pineapple, a reason that would not reflect or be indicative of 'their guilt'.

Hi,Tad
That's a good question, if the R's were told by their lawyers to distance themsleves,Why? Cause this could put them there around TOD or maybe this runs deeper than what I thought..But so far I have read that DA Lacy hasn't release any info on this male DNA so really how would we know if it means anything to the case,like I said before this case is always twisting and turning..

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hi DeeDee.


"That is why it is so incriminating that they lied about something they need not have lied about."

Ya I get that. It places them closer to the TOD.
Just thinkin' about a plausible explanation, given the bowl on counter, the same said bowl in photo, PR pattern of purchasing the fresh pinapple ..... within the IDI scenario, if the IDI did not bring the pineapple, then why would the Ramseys deny they purhased it.
They were under advisement to do so or .... they did not purchase the pineapple.

Ya, in a way the pineapple is a non issue,
but it is a point most often referenced and rehashed in defense of the RDI scenarios, that no IDI would bring 'fresh pinapple' into a kidnapping scenario adds to the suggestion that it would be ludicrous to suggest anyone other than the Rs DI.

Hey Tad

The fact that the R's seem to know nothing about the pineapple or the preparation of it, combined with the new IDI-ism, supports the idea that the intruders brought pineapple with them.

It is odd for pineapple to be left out of place, by innocent parents or parents covering up the accidental death of their child. It would, however, be odd for an intruder to have put the pineapple back where it belonged in the refrigerator. The least odd pineapple scenario is where an intruder abandoned the bowl of pineapple.

RDI is not able to see that the pineapple may have an enticement characteristic, or even that JBR may be living off that bowl of pineapple for a few days. RDI just has this incoherent 'lets have a pineapple snack because JBR loves pineapple and thats what we do after an exhausting day and before we start the rough stuff" or something like that.

 

[Ravyn]

Did the LE take the Santa Claus suit from the basmenet...Just wondering right now I just can't find it...

 

[Maikai]

Did the LE take the Santa Claus suit from the basmenet...Just wondering right now I just can't find it...

Yes. It's listed on the search warrant. Considering all the junk in the basement, I wonder why they took that suit---did it appear out of order--what about it made them take it?

A santa claus suit on Christmas night? Good disguise.

 

[Ravyn]

Thank you Maikai, I have been looking for the info on the santa suit...I couldn't find it at the time I was searching...

 

[Ravyn]

Now this question might sound dumb, a ransom note left and all the friends knew the note was left, why? did Fleet White go to the basement to see if Jonbenet was hiding like his daughter did just few days before..This just been nagging at me cause the note says we have your daughter plz forgive me here it don't say your daughter is hiding in the house..

 

[Maikai]

Now this question might sound dumb, a ransom note left and all the friends knew the note was left, why? did Fleet White go to the basement to see if Jonbenet was hiding like his daughter did just few days before..This just been nagging at me cause the note says we have your daughter plz forgive me here it don't say your daughter is hiding in the house..

FW knew JBR didn't write the note. Everyone thought she had been taken from the house. They also thought the police had thoroughly searched the house when they first got there which we know didn't happen. They even missed the broken window and suitcase as a point of egress.

 

[Ravyn]

I think we all can say a 6 year old didn't write the note..Point is FW knew of the ransom note why did he tell the LE he search the basement to see if JB could had been hiding..And FW move the suitcase I read that..A broken window JR claim to have broken when he broke into the house..

 

[Maikai]

I think we all can say a 6 year old didn't write the note..Point is FW knew of the ransom note why did he tell the LE he search the basement to see if JB could had been hiding..And FW move the suitcase I read that..A broken window JR claim to have broken when he broke into the house..

It wouldn't make sense that she was hiding, after they found the ransom note. I'm thinking at some point FW did go down to the basement--before her body was found. He moved the suitcase, but not far. In fact I think both FW and JR had been down in the basement, and when FW asked about the window, JR told him he had broken it for access months ago. JR says he reported it to Linda Arndt as a possible means of leaving the house. At the time, no one thought she was dead and left in the house. Now that I'm thinking further about it, I believe FW DID open the cellar door, and glanced in--he couldn't find the light switch. It may have been dark, and apparently he didn't look at the floor. So you're right, FW was in the basement earlier looking around.

 

[BBB167893]

It depends who you're listening to. SpinMaster Thomas, or a respected forensic pathologist.

How about Werner Spitz?

I have doubts it was even proven conclusively that it was pineapple. During the autopsy when it was called out, as some kind of fiber, Linda Arndt asked if it could be pineapple, and Meyer supposedly responded it could be. LA noticed the pineapple on the coutertop.

At a later time, Meyer said it was in fact pineapple and described it as having sharp edges and being poorly chewed.

 

[BBB167893]

Hey.
and Hi Ravyn.

I guess I was just sayin' ? what I've been thinking about the pineapple in relation to the IDI scenario, because IMO the PDI scenarios are flush with details and suppositions and seem so plausible if not for the touch dna evidence, exhoneration of the Rs and new reality of an IDI.

If you ask me, it's still plausible.

Trying to reconcile ... think of a way or a reason why the Ramsey's would distance themselves from the pineapple, a reason that would not reflect or be indicative of 'their guilt'.

Tad, there's an old saying: when you're in a hole, you don't dig deeper. And the Rs used a steam shovel.

 

[JMO8778]

Yes. It's listed on the search warrant. Considering all the junk in the basement, I wonder why they took that suit---did it appear out of order--what about it made them take it?

A santa claus suit on Christmas night? Good disguise.

the R's were q'd about it.It was theirs.It didn't belong to any intruder.
maybe it was used to disguise one of the R's.

 

[mysterymax]

The evidentiary value alone would make a gift to the cops. And I can tell you this: unless she was developmentally disabled (intellectually speaking) there is no way that child would have sat down at midnight with a total stranger at her family's kitchen table to shoot the breeze while eating a little snack. I doubt she would even have sat with Santa--did she have NO instinct for self-preservation? It boggles the mind. She had to have eaten the pineapple with someone she knew and trusted. If my child had gotten out of bed at a stranger's behest I would wake from the soundest sleep--parental instincts are supercharged around young kids. I could hear my six year old son whispering that he was going to throw up from the other end of our house.

To think that JBR just wandered from bed in some sort of trusting trance is utterly impossible to believe.

 

[JMO8778]

The evidentiary value alone would make a gift to the cops. And I can tell you this: unless she was developmentally disabled (intellectually speaking) there is no way that child would have sat down at midnight with a total stranger at her family's kitchen table to shoot the breeze while eating a little snack. I doubt she would even have sat with Santa--did she have NO instinct for self-preservation? It boggles the mind. She had to have eaten the pineapple with someone she knew and trusted. If my child had gotten out of bed at a stranger's behest I would wake from the soundest sleep--parental instincts are supercharged around young kids. I could hear my six year old son whispering that he was going to throw up from the other end of our house.

To think that JBR just wandered from bed in some sort of trusting trance is utterly impossible to believe.

especially on Christmas night,when she'd gotten up early that day and had a full day.even JR himself said she was exhausted.She would have been out like a light and extremely difficult to rouse,as any 6 yo in that situation would have been.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The evidentiary value alone would make a gift to the cops. And I can tell you this: unless she was developmentally disabled (intellectually speaking) there is no way that child would have sat down at midnight with a total stranger at her family's kitchen table to shoot the breeze while eating a little snack. I doubt she would even have sat with Santa--did she have NO instinct for self-preservation? It boggles the mind. She had to have eaten the pineapple with someone she knew and trusted. If my child had gotten out of bed at a stranger's behest I would wake from the soundest sleep--parental instincts are supercharged around young kids. I could hear my six year old son whispering that he was going to throw up from the other end of our house.

To think that JBR just wandered from bed in some sort of trusting trance is utterly impossible to believe.

In bold are your ideas of what you think would happen if an intruder did it. Not to be confused with what actually happened. or with what this IDI thinks happened. We really know very little about what actually happened.