Suppose It was intruder BUT Patsy wrote the RN

[Stevem3]

What if intruder came in and sexually assaulted and killed JB. The next day parents wake up And find JB not in her room, so frantically search every room in house and find her in wine cellar. They realize she is dead and start to untie her and wipe her and put new panties on her ( to try and dignify her body ). Then John suddenly realizes he could get falsely convicted of this crime because those in the house are always most likely suspects, or Patsy realizes this. They then decide to tie her back up, write ransom note and call police. They naively think police won’t fully search house so RN will buy them time to secretly hide body.

This explains many problems in the case
- fibers of John/Patsy on body
- explains away vicious assault by parents
- satisfies unknown male DNA
- explains ransom note written by Patsy
- explains enhanced 911 call with Burke saying “what did you find”
- explains immediate lawyering up of Ramsey’s

The problem with this theory is
- would they be so naive to think police would not search home ?
- why call police so early ? Unless John knew cops would have evidence of their flight time so police would know exactly when Ramsey’s would be aware JB was missing
- doesn’t solve movie references in RN, but neither does RDI solve movie references in note.

 

[icedtea4me]

No. If this had actually happened, Patsy and John would be authentically and genuinely distraught. There would be no need to do anything but call the police.

 

[Stevem3]

No. If this had actually happened, Patsy and John would be authentically and genuinely distraught. There would be no need to do anything but call the police.

Yes I agree they would have been distraught and devastated. But they still may have feared being wrongly accused of her death. It is rational to be worried that a dead body in your home may lead to your conviction even if you didn’t commit the crime.

 

[proust20]

Problems with IDI are means of entry and the pineapple.

 

[icedtea4me]

Yes I agree they would have been distraught and devastated. But they still may have feared being wrongly accused of her death. It is rational to be worried that a dead body in your home may lead to your conviction even if you didn’t commit the crime.

They'd be able to tell that the body was redressed. I think it's highly unlikely that John nor Patsy would pay attention to exactly where the elastic on the longjohns had been around her waist. If the waistband is even a millimeter off from where the white pressure line is, then authorities are going to know the body was recently redressed.

 

[ILikeToBendPages]

Why molest her just a little like Nedra Paugh said. You break in to just molest her or rape? You've had plenty of time and opportunities between feeding her pineapple and cracking her skull open. You'd have an hour to two hours before you choke her to death, and your goal was to just molest her?

You wake up and your daughter is missing. You're told she's with an unknown faction and they want money or they'll kill her and there is a time limit to be met. Any normal person wouldn't think to search high and low, but to call the police and really be in distress.

Don't forget Pasty won for dramatic speech in the Ms. Virginia finals. She knew how to act. In the sunroom wailing and crying, JonBenet was about fifteen feet beneath her in the wine cellar.

Women tend to dispose of their offspring and hide what they did in dark places. JonBenet was left in a dark womb like room, swaddled like a baby. An intruder isn't going to do that.

John didn't know and was acting normal for what was happening that morning. It changed when there was no call, John reading the ransom note, knowing it was Patsy and went looking for JonBenet. after that John demeanor was changed and from that point on John knew they'd need separate lawyers.

Why would Pasty write the rn for an intruder?

John Ramsey was worth much much more than one hundred and eighteen thousand dollars. I think it was John Fernie that said John could ask the bank for millions and they'd been available that morning. But if Pasty is doing the intruder a favor and writing the note why not ask for more?

 

[Panniniclaus]

I still don't understand the motive for murder. Many years later none of this makes any more sense.

 

[Me66]

I still don't understand the motive for murder. Many years later none of this makes any more sense.

Because it probably wasn’t murder. Murder needs prior intent. I believe it started as an argument of some sort, JB got clocked in the head (torch?) and appeared to be dead. They didn’t want their perfect family to be blamed. So they staged it as murder and framed "a small foreign faction"
. That way they were victims, not perpetrators.
If she didn't die from the head wound, they killed her with the strangulation. But if they already thought she was dead anyway, they couldn’t have formed an intent to kill her. So not murder.
Might explain why the Grand Jury charges didn't include murder.

 

[icedtea4me]

Because it probably wasn’t murder. Murder needs prior intent. I believe it started as an argument of some sort, JB got clocked in the head (torch?) and appeared to be dead. They didn’t want their perfect family to be blamed. So they staged it as murder and framed "a small foreign faction"
. That way they were victims, not perpetrators.
If she didn't die from the head wound, they killed her with the strangulation. But if they already thought she was dead anyway, they couldn’t have formed an intent to kill her. So not murder.
Might explain why the Grand Jury charges didn't include murder.

Unless you know what was listed for counts I, II, III, IV, IV-b, V, and VI you can't state that murder wasn't included.

 

[UKGuy]

Unless you know what was listed for counts I, II, III, IV, IV-b, V, and VI you can't state that murder wasn't included.

icedtea4me
We know what was listed in COUNT VII:

COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime)

On or about December 25, and December 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colorado, John Bennett Ramsey (or alternately, Patricia Paugh Ramsey) did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.

Both parents have the same worded count leveled at them, i.e. assisting the person who cannot be either John or Patsy as the above says explicitly that the person was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree.

If either parent has a sealed Count of Murder in the First Degree leveled at them how can they then have COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime) leveled, basically saying they assisted themselves?

Can you assist here?

.

 

[icedtea4me]

icedtea4me
We know what was listed in COUNT VII:


Both parents have the same worded count leveled at them, i.e. assisting the person who cannot be either John or Patsy as the above says explicitly that the person was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree.

If either parent has a sealed Count of Murder in the First Degree leveled at them how can they then have COUNT VII (Accessory to a Crime) leveled, basically saying they assisted themselves?

Can you assist here?

.

I would think that the one who wrote out all nine charges (I, II, III, IV, IV-a, IV-b, V, VI, and VII) decided to make them the same for each individual with the hope that one would be seen as being the killer and the other being the assistant. As it turned out, it looks like the jury was willing to vote that John assisted Patsy and Patsy assisted John.

If you can think of what the charges for counts I, II, III, and IV were, I'd like to hear them.

 

[Me66]

I’m in Australia and our laws are different so apologies if I’m not wording this properly.
Could Burke have been charged with murder given his age? If John & Patsy were listed for assisting a person suspected of murder in the first degree, can that legally be Burke?
Or do they look at the method of killing, call it “murder in the first” and then the consideration of whether whether the perpetrator can be ruled in or out (eg due to their age) is a secondary decision?

 

[icedtea4me]

I’m in Australia and our laws are different so apologies if I’m not wording this properly.
Could Burke have been charged with murder given his age? If John & Patsy were listed for assisting a person suspected of murder in the first degree, can that legally be Burke?
Or do they look at the method of killing, call it “murder in the first” and then the consideration of whether whether the perpetrator can be ruled in or out (eg due to their age) is a secondary decision?

It's not the method of killing, but whether or not it was premeditated. Often prosecutors will also have other charges related to killing (e.g. murder in the 2nd, voluntary manslaughter) in case the charge of first degree murder falls through.

 

[Me66]

Ok.
So the options for the charge of assisting a person who committed first degree murder are:
1. John did it, Patsy assisted.
2. Patsy did it, John assisted.
3. Neither Patsy nor John did it and they both assisted someone else.

For 1. or 2. it would indicate (as was pointed out earlier) that the grand jury wanted it both ways - charge them both and sort it out later who actually did it.

For 3. Given that the only “someone else” in the house was Burke, for Patsy and John to have a count of assisting a person who committed first degree murder, does this mean that there had to actually be a charge of first degree murder that could be listed against Burke? Because I thought he was too young for such a charge. So is this saying that Burke isn’t in the frame? Or is the grand jury saying that John & Patsy didn’t do it, but they helped a third person, and it isn’t our job to consider whether that person could be charged?

Sorry if I’m being unclear - I’m trying to understand what comes first - including or excluding Burke, or deciding that the death fit the description of murder in the first.

 

[icedtea4me]

Ok.
So the options for the charge of assisting a person who committed first degree murder are:
1. John did it, Patsy assisted.
2. Patsy did it, John assisted.
3. Neither Patsy nor John did it and they both assisted someone else.

For 1. or 2. it would indicate (as was pointed out earlier) that the grand jury wanted it both ways - charge them both and sort it out later who actually did it.

For 3. Given that the only “someone else” in the house was Burke, for Patsy and John to have a count of assisting a person who committed first degree murder, does this mean that there had to actually be a charge of first degree murder that could be listed against Burke? Because I thought he was too young for such a charge. So is this saying that Burke isn’t in the frame? Or is the grand jury saying that John & Patsy didn’t do it, but they helped a third person, and it isn’t our job to consider whether that person could be charged?

Sorry if I’m being unclear - I’m trying to understand what comes first - including or excluding Burke, or deciding that the death fit the description of murder in the first.

Unless things have changed since 1996, it looks like the youngest age a person can be charged with murder in Colorado is 10 (with exceptions).

Minimum Age for Delinquency Adjudication—Multi-Jurisdiction Survey – NJDC

 

[Me66]

So that would rule him out as the person who John & Patsy assisted then? No charge = no one to charge them with assisting?
Or would the law allow a charge of assisting even if the person they assisted can’t be charged? Can they be charged with assisting a person to commit a crime that technically hasn’t been committed?

 

[UKGuy]

I would think that the one who wrote out all nine charges (I, II, III, IV, IV-a, IV-b, V, VI, and VII) decided to make them the same for each individual with the hope that one would be seen as being the killer and the other being the assistant. As it turned out, it looks like the jury was willing to vote that John assisted Patsy and Patsy assisted John.

If you can think of what the charges for counts I, II, III, and IV were, I'd like to hear them.

icedtea4me,
Counts I through to IV are elementary.

Hint: They are all the charges that person is accused of plus an extra one for bad behavior.

There are only so many counts that can be leveled, Murder In The First Degree being the most prominent.

.