The Chair Blocking the Basement Door

[otg]

So, what UKGuy stated in post #84

is a lie?

No....

 

[Userid]

Userid, I am not guessing that the presents are relevant, I am suggesting that we don't know. And because of that, you have to be careful weighing the answers you get. Until you know for certain that the presents are not involved in the crime, you have to take any answers you get about them as possibly being purposely misleading or possibly being simply the truth. In this case, what Kolar said is a statement. He is not a suspect, he is a detective. He has no reason to be dishonest. He could be telling you things in order to sway your opinion BUT if they were not truthful, he would blow his whole theory apart if caught. So why risk it? If you allow his statement to stand, it comes down to the simple fact you have Burke POSSIBLY taking responsibility for the open packages and you have Patsy doing the same thing. Which sounds more logical? You think a child taking responsibility for something he did not do sounds more logical then an adult doing the same thing. I disagree. We shall have to agree to disagree.

Same difference.

It's a message board. We are both throwing stuff out there and the reasoning why we believe what we believe.

Lou Schmit was a detective too, just like Kolar. As a matter of fact, many people still consider Schmit to be one of the greatest detectives that has ever lived. Do you take his word as gospel too?

I'm not suggesting Kolar is lying on purpose; I'm simply saying, it's quite possible he believes what he is saying, but he's simply wrong with certain elements of his theory. You don't have to be lying to gain tunnel vision -- as evidenced by Schmit.

 

[Userid]

Singularity, Burke and the rest of the Ramseys for that matter would have to explain their DNA or other trace evidence of themselves on things, even in their own home, on things that shouldn't be there. A good example would be Burke's fingerprints on the bowl of pineapple that is sitting out on on the table where no one in the family is willing to account for it. It also contains the pineapple that was found in the digestive system of the victim which appears to have been eaten shortly before she died. Now Burke needs to be able to explain why his fingerprints are on that bowl when no one in the family can explain why the bowl is there. Great reason for him to suddenly now have remembered coming down stairs and maybe have gotten a snack.

As for Beckner being BDI, no I never said that. I said if you read Beckner's AMA, he said he agreed with much of what Kolar said. It is hard, I guess, to disagree with the facts! We were not discussing Kolar's theory, only Kolar's reporting of the facts.

Personally, I don't think you can take too much of what any of the Ramsey's say as fact. I think you should take it as you would any other suspect in any other murder case. You listen to what is said and you record it all down. Then you look to see what you can factually back up as the truth and what you can pick apart as nonsense. And somewhere, underneath it all, you MIGHT find the truth. But you have to dig for it.

I think you need to look up the definitions of "fact" and "theory".

No one is "disagreeing with the facts" here. For example, no one is disagreeing that there were partially opened presents in the wine cellar; but there is an argument as to whether or not they served as the driving motive (i.e. Kolar's theory) that caused the crime.

A "theory" out of Kolar's mouth isn't a "fact."

 

[AndHence]

It's possible John's statement about the chair blocking the basement door is a slip-up. He may very well have moved a chair down there during a trip prior to 911 call. This would be similar in nature to him telling his family he found JonBenet's body at 11am. Or both statements could be the confused memories of a father who just lost another child and is still trying to piece together what happened. John remains an enigma in this case.

 

[Jolamom]

I think you need to look up the definitions of "fact" and "theory".

No one is "disagreeing with the facts" here. For example, no one is disagreeing that there were partially opened presents in the wine cellar; but there is an argument as to whether or not they served as the driving motive (i.e. Kolar's theory) that caused the crime.

A "theory" out of Kolar's mouth isn't a "fact."

In Kolar's book, he clearly and carefully expresses when he is conveying facts and when he is offering his opinion. I am taking what he states as facts as just that. I have no trouble understanding when he is theorizing and I don't necessarily agree with all his ideas. I also have read Patsy's statements and see where she has changed and contorted the facts over time to fit with what evidence is presented to her. Which is why I now have come to the conclusion that Patsy may or may not be giving a factual account any time she has given a statement, one must look for factual evidence to either corroborate or contradict her. On the other hand, I have not found Kolar's statement of facts to have been refuted by anyone knowledgeable. So unless there is evidence that suggests Kolar stated he learned during his investigation is untrue, I will go with that. Which is, IMO, a undisputed fact, not theory.

 

[MsFox]

What chair? There was a chair by the wine cellar door?

Apparently it was sitting outside the train room door or doorway, obviously that door is at the end of the small hall that contained the WC. Viewpoint from stairs. Seems like it could have been dragged to the door.
I've been looking for the pic again...you can only see the top of the chair in one photo from what I remember.
But in testimony or interview with JR he said he moved it aside, to enter the train room and I think he said he moved it back, after the first visit to the basement....but don't quote me on hat second part. Anywho......from there it's not very clear, but JR eludes that if he had to move it to get into the room, the perp had to have moved it there so perps fingerprints would also be on it......but the questioning, turned to...well how could a perp move the chair there if the door was closed already (assuming the door opened to the outside of the room)..... I don't think it was really discussed after that, because it didn't fit with a perp leaving thru the window in basement.
But it sure dawned on me, the lock on the WC was at the top of the door. Burke would have needed it to open the door! Hmmmm

 

[UKGuy]

Apparently it was sitting outside the train room door or doorway, obviously that door is at the end of the small hall that contained the WC. Viewpoint from stairs. Seems like it could have been dragged to the door.
I've been looking for the pic again...you can only see the top of the chair in one photo from what I remember.
But in testimony or interview with JR he said he moved it aside, to enter the train room and I think he said he moved it back, after the first visit to the basement....but don't quote me on hat second part. Anywho......from there it's not very clear, but JR eludes that if he had to move it to get into the room, the perp had to have moved it there so perps fingerprints would also be on it......but the questioning, turned to...well how could a perp move the chair there if the door was closed already (assuming the door opened to the outside of the room)..... I don't think it was really discussed after that, because it didn't fit with a perp leaving thru the window in basement.
But it sure dawned on me, the lock on the WC was at the top of the door. Burke would have needed it to open the door! Hmmmm

MsFox,
The chair and JR's account has always mystified people. I interpret it as JR attempting to explain away either prior staging or actual crime-scene evidence. Consider his remarks regarding the suitcase or broken window.

JonBenet or Burke might have used the chair to open the wine-cellar. According to Kolar, Burke visited the wine-cellar Christmas afternoon and said he opened the Partially Opened Gifts.

It could be JonBenet that used the chair to open the latched door, and Burke is thinking he has to offer an explanation for the Partialy Opened Gifts. Patsy patently thought the same.

So something that took place in the basement is being covered up by both Patsy and Burke.

.

 

[MsFox]

MsFox,
The chair and JR's account has always mystified people.....

....It could be JonBenet that used the chair to open the latched door, and Burke is thinking he has to offer an explanation for the Partialy Opened Gifts. Patsy patently thought the same.

So something that took place in the basement is being covered up by both Patsy and Burke.

.

I may be wrong but I don't think JBR could reach that latch, she'd be on her tippy toes, then have the ability to grab the latch and pull it to open it too? Not buying it.

As far as JR explaining away evidence, his fingerprints and DNA would be on household items, no need to explain that away.
Cover Prior staging? How would the chair fit into that? If the chair was outside the train room door, and that door opened into the area where the stairs are, it wouldn't make sense that an intruder would or could put the chair back (as even the detective pointed out) so if JR was staging it, that just doesn't make sense when wanting to point to an intruder.
The window thing...well absolutely he would try to explain away any prints etc if he were staging the broken window.

As far as anyone saying anything about opening gifts....i don't recall anyone ever saying they were in enWC but I could be wrong. If you know? Oh and no I don't recall what he said about the suitcase, other than vaguely that it usually not in that spot, or something. Again I'd appreciate tapping your knowledge of that too.

 

[MsFox]

Kolar thinks BR did it all including the ligature asphyxiation and possibly the redressing. He reckons BR exhibited Sexual Behavior Problems (SBP) which was part motivation for the crime.

I'm not a 100% on that, then again I've not seen all the evidence Kolar has.

.[/QUOTE]

That's very interesting Kolar theory. I literally only have what you posted about him.


The BDI answered a lot of questions for me personally and I was a IDI until I saw his interview.
I still couldn't get wrap my brain around (even if Burke hit her too hard, kinda by accident) either of the parents putting that garrote on her the way it was and staging everything else. No freaking way. I still don't believe it. They would have called 911....and dealt with whatever consequences, knowing it was an "on purpose accident" by a 9 year old, smart rich people who just saw OJ get off, don't go that far to cover up, an "accident".

But if B did all of it.....well.....that would answer that question. Of course they would try to cover that up. That's sick and demented what was done to that little girl. They would know that would for sure require some intervention via a psychiatric ward. And that I believe the Ramsey's would for sure cover up and want to go away.

Ps And the note I feel was by a younger individual, if you look at the words, it's almost like they are sounding out the words as it written, the longer words. Maybe they made him write the note, knowing they could shield him from the spotlight. Like they did.

 

[UKGuy]

I may be wrong but I don't think JBR could reach that latch, she'd be on her tippy toes, then have the ability to grab the latch and pull it to open it too? Not buying it.

As far as JR explaining away evidence, his fingerprints and DNA would be on household items, no need to explain that away.
Cover Prior staging? How would the chair fit into that? If the chair was outside the train room door, and that door opened into the area where the stairs are, it wouldn't make sense that an intruder would or could put the chair back (as even the detective pointed out) so if JR was staging it, that just doesn't make sense when wanting to point to an intruder.
The window thing...well absolutely he would try to explain away any prints etc if he were staging the broken window.

As far as anyone saying anything about opening gifts....i don't recall anyone ever saying they were in enWC but I could be wrong. If you know? Oh and no I don't recall what he said about the suitcase, other than vaguely that it usually not in that spot, or something. Again I'd appreciate tapping your knowledge of that too.

MsFox,
JR said he personally relocated the suitcase from JAR's bedroom down to the basement. The R's employed a housekeeper to do that kind of stuff. Housework was not on JR's domestic todo list. e.g. the housekeeper moved Patsy's painting equipment from upstairs down to the basement. On the day of the Ramseys' Christmas party, I took the paint tote downstairs.....by Linda Hoffmann-Pugh


If it was not JonBenet who opened the gifts, why is Patsy saying she opened them?

NE Book
Lou Smit: "...Did you tell anybody about that?"

John Ramsey: "I don't really remember...
...

The suitcase was unusual. That shouldn't have been there. I took that suitcase downstairs, I remember. But I sure wouldn't have taken it all the way back there and put it against the window. I'm 99.9 percent (sure) that I wouldn't have taken it all the way back and set it against that wall."

NE Book Page 314

"Like Patsy, John was shown a series of crime scene photographs. One showed a chair blocking the door into the train room in the basement. To get to the broken window in the cellar, someone has to go through that door. Ramsey found the chair blocking the entranceway during his first search of the basement, moved it and then moved it back, he said. The information cast some doubt on the intruder theory."

Lou Smit: "So you think that the chair would block the door and nobody would have gotten in there without moving it?"

John Ramsey: "Correct"

Lou Smit: "In other words, let's say that the intruder goes into the train room, gets out, let's say, that window?"

John Ramsey: "Uh huh."

Lou Smit: "How in effect would he get that chair to block that door, if that is the case, is what I'm saying?"

John Ramsey: "I don't know... I go down, I say, "Ooh, that door is blocked." I move the chair and went in the room."

Lou Smit: "So you couldn't have gotten in without moving the chair?"

John Ramsey: "Correct... I had to move the chair."

Lou Smit: "The thing I'm trying to figure out in my mind then is, if an intruder went through the door, he'd almost have to pull the chair behind him... because that would have been his exit... so that's not very logical as far as......"

John Ramsey: "I think it is. I mean if this person is that bizarrely clever to have not left any good evidence, but left all these little funny clues around, they... are clever enough to pull the chair back when they left."

June 1998 John Ramsey Interrogation by Lou Smit and Mike Kane (Presents in Wine Cellar)

20 JOHN RAMSEY: Well Patsy had gotten a bunch
21 of gifts at FAO Schwartz up in New York in early
22 December, some of which were for them were for
23 Burke's birthday, which was in January. She didn't
24 know they were in the closet exactly,

...

0273 13 LOU SMIT: You notice how the packages seem
14 to be partially opened. Can you explain this?
15 JOHN RAMSEY: No, I can't.
16 LOU SMIT: So Patsy had gone there and
17 just kind looked to see what was (INAUDBILE)?
18 JOHN RAMSEY: It's possible. (INAUDIBLE) I mean,
19 you can figure out what's in them. The cigar box
20 was sitting on a paint can, or something like
21 that. And I believe it shouldn't have.

mmm, Smit leading JR on ...

NE Book Page 85:

Tom Trujillo: "Okay, Were you ever, you were not ever in the basement that morning before the police got there?"

Patsy Ramsey: "No, I was not."

Steve Thomas: "Patsy, when were you last in that cellar basement room prior to Christmas?"

Patsy Ramsey: "Prior to Christmas?"

Steve Thomas: "Yes, ma'am."

Patsy Ramsey: "Well, I was there, I was down there a lot on the 24th wrapping, and I was there on the 25th wrapping.."

June 1998 Patsy Ramsey Interrogation by Thomas Haney and Trip DeMuth (Presents in Wine Cellar)

0392
20 PATSY RAMSEY: I believe for, you know, I
21 held some back for Burke's birthday which is in
22 January.
23 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.
24 TOM HANEY: So that could have been that.
25 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. I don't remember what

0393
1 was in them.
2 TOM HANEY: Would any of these packages be
3 opened?
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably. Well, see, these
5 came up, I was at FAO Schwartz in New York when
6 JonBenet and I were up there for a trip, and I had them
7 sent back to Boulder and they wrapped them, free gift
8 wrapping.
9 So like right here it looks like I kind of
10 peeled a little back to see what was in it because I
11 couldn't remember what was in them.
12 TRIP DEMUTH: If the wrapping has been undone
13 partially, that was --
14 PATSY RAMSEY: I probably would have done
15 that to peek to see what was in there.
16 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.

NE Book Page 36:

Tom Trujillo: (Where) do you normally store the Christmas presents say before the 25th?

Patsy Ramsey: "......the basement. I had them all in the basement."

Tom Trujillo: "Okay. Why don't you walk me through the rest of the 25th? What all did you guys do that day?"

Patsy Ramsey: "Well, I continued to wrap some presents. I went back down to the basement on the washing machine area there and wrapped for taking the stuff to the lake..."

.

 

[UKGuy]

Kolar thinks BR did it all including the ligature asphyxiation and possibly the redressing. He reckons BR exhibited Sexual Behavior Problems (SBP) which was part motivation for the crime.

I'm not a 100% on that, then again I've not seen all the evidence Kolar has.

.

That's very interesting Kolar theory. I literally only have what you posted about him.


The BDI answered a lot of questions for me personally and I was a IDI until I saw his interview.
I still couldn't get wrap my brain around (even if Burke hit her too hard, kinda by accident) either of the parents putting that garrote on her the way it was and staging everything else. No freaking way. I still don't believe it. They would have called 911....and dealt with whatever consequences, knowing it was an "on purpose accident" by a 9 year old, smart rich people who just saw OJ get off, don't go that far to cover up, an "accident".

But if B did all of it.....well.....that would answer that question. Of course they would try to cover that up. That's sick and demented what was done to that little girl. They would know that would for sure require some intervention via a psychiatric ward. And that I believe the Ramsey's would for sure cover up and want to go away.

Ps And the note I feel was by a younger individual, if you look at the words, it's almost like they are sounding out the words as it written, the longer words. Maybe they made him write the note, knowing they could shield him from the spotlight. Like they did.[/QUOTE]

MsFox,
The case appears to be BDI with Patsy staging it as an abduction, she even masks evidence by saying she did stuff BR might have done, e.g. redressed JonBenet in the long johns and opened the gifts in the wine-cellar?

That BR exhibited Sexual Behavior Problems (SBP) is speculation on Kolar's part unless he has seen or heard evidence to back this aspect of his theory up.

BDI explains a lot of the evidence and why the parents might collude in an abduction staging.

.

 

[Gnat]

I may be wrong but I don't think JBR could reach that latch, she'd be on her tippy toes, then have the ability to grab the latch and pull it to open it too? Not buying it.



.

IMO JBR would of been to scared to go down to the basement alone. 6 yr olds are silly that way.

 

[Gnat]

If BR had some sort of sexual problem he would still have it. The media would be all over that. Going to therapy. Buying *advertiser censored*. Something of this level would of started a fire in BR that The Ramsey's wouldn't be able to hide or control. Jmo. The kid is innocent

 

[icedtea4me]

Apparently it was sitting outside the train room door or doorway, obviously that door is at the end of the small hall that contained the WC. Viewpoint from stairs. Seems like it could have been dragged to the door.
I've been looking for the pic again...you can only see the top of the chair in one photo from what I remember.
But in testimony or interview with JR he said he moved it aside, to enter the train room and I think he said he moved it back, after the first visit to the basement....but don't quote me on hat second part. Anywho......from there it's not very clear, but JR eludes that if he had to move it to get into the room, the perp had to have moved it there so perps fingerprints would also be on it......but the questioning, turned to...well how could a perp move the chair there if the door was closed already (assuming the door opened to the outside of the room)..... I don't think it was really discussed after that, because it didn't fit with a perp leaving thru the window in basement.
But it sure dawned on me, the lock on the WC was at the top of the door. Burke would have needed it to open the door! Hmmmm

The hobby room was the train room.

 

[icedtea4me]

*snip*Ps And the note I feel was by a younger individual, if you look at the words, it's almost like they are sounding out the words as it written, the longer words. Maybe they made him write the note, knowing they could shield him from the spotlight. Like they did.

You think Burke would be more likely to write "do not [inserted via proofreader's caret] particularly like you" than Patsy?

 

[icedtea4me]

*snip*According to Kolar, Burke visited the wine-cellar Christmas afternoon and said he opened the Partially Opened Gifts.*snip*

There would be no need to open gifts that had already been partially opened.

 

[UKGuy]

There would be no need to open gifts that had already been partially opened.

icedtea4me,
I describe them as on the search list, so to distinguish them from those unopened or close by. Kolar is saying Burke Ramsey admitted opening the gifts in the wine-cellar on Christmas afternoon, thus rendering them Partially Opened.

Now that is problematic for PDI theorists since Patsy claims she opened those gifts. So who is right Patsy or Burke, and why would one want to alter a version of events?

.

 

[UKGuy]

If BR had some sort of sexual problem he would still have it. The media would be all over that. Going to therapy. Buying *advertiser censored*. Something of this level would of started a fire in BR that The Ramsey's wouldn't be able to hide or control. Jmo. The kid is innocent

Gnat,
Maybe he has grown up, matured , got over it? Could be he is in weekly or monthly therapy, and/or has special female visitors, he has the money to purchase solutions.

This is the aspect of the case that will expand once JR leaves us, and LW has less influemce over BR. The media know the public wants more information on this topic, even if its to show its all nonsense!

.

 

[icedtea4me]

icedtea4me,
I describe them as on the search list, so to distinguish them from those unopened or close by. Kolar is saying Burke Ramsey admitted opening the gifts in the wine-cellar on Christmas afternoon, thus rendering them Partially Opened.

Then you ought to have said "According to Kolar, Burke visited the wine-cellar Christmas afternoon and said he partially opened the gifts" instead of "According to Kolar, Burke visited the wine-cellar Christmas afternoon and said he opened the Partially Opened Gifts".

Now that is problematic for PDI theorists since Patsy claims she opened those gifts. So who is right Patsy or Burke, and why would one want to alter a version of events?

Are you saying that Burke said to Kolar "I partially opened gifts in the wine cellar on Christmas afternoon", yes or no?

 

[UKGuy]

Then you ought to have said "According to Kolar, Burke visited the wine-cellar Christmas afternoon and said he partially opened the gifts" instead of "According to Kolar, Burke visited the wine-cellar Christmas afternoon and said he opened the Partially Opened Gifts".



Are you saying that Burke said to Kolar "I partially opened gifts in the wine cellar on Christmas afternoon", yes or no?

icedtea4me,
I forget whether Kolar relates it as a first or second person account. Either way he is stating BR is taking responsibility for opening the gifts. I still wonder why Kolar refers to them as Christmas Gifts, if they are Birthday Gifts? You will be right over the Partially Opened syntax. I've just become used to describing in that
tortured form.

.