The Ramseys are no longer “cleared” according to Stan Garnett

[WANM]

Why would the Ramseys kill their daughter? Everyone has theories but no one has any proof to back it up. They gained nothing from killing their daughter.

 

[joeskidbeck]

Why would the Ramseys kill their daughter? Everyone has theories but no one has any proof to back it up. They gained nothing from killing their daughter.

WANM, none of the RDIs that I know of believe that the Ramseys killed their daughter on purpose. None of us believe they even remotely wanted her to die. I can't speak for everyone, of course, but most believe this was a horrible accident that was staged to look like a murder. I'm sure they did not want anyone to go to prison for a terrible mistake. If you would like to understand how we came to our conclusions, please read the "Member's Theories" thread. I'm sure a lot of the theories have changed over the years due to new or newly revealed evidence (I know mine has, anyway), but this is the best way to get the answer to your questions. This is a case where motive or motivation has no part in JonBenet's death and all anyone can do is speculate based on the evidence. You're right, there is no proof, but there is a lot of evidence to back up the accidental death with staging and very little (or possibly, none) proof of an intruder in their home.
Thanks for listening,
Becky

 

[BBB167893]

Why would the Ramseys kill their daughter?

Why does ANYONE kill their child?

Everyone has theories but no one has any proof to back it up. They gained nothing from killing their daughter.

Who says they DID? Who says they intended to gain anything from it? I think Becky has answered that question superbly.

Although, I guess it depends on how you look at it. The Ramseys did gain one thing from JB's death: fame, or infamy, if you prefer.

 

[DeeDee249]

Why would the Ramseys kill their daughter? Everyone has theories but no one has any proof to back it up. They gained nothing from killing their daughter.

It was not their intention to gain anything. Not every murder is done for gain, material or otherwise. Some are the result of rage, and in murders that are not premeditated (and I do not believe this one was) rage is usually the driving force. It was not their intention to kill her either. This was an accidental death covered up to look like a kidnapping/murder. Does that mean the head bash was an accident? Yes and no. She was slammed/bashed deliberately in either an act of rage or to shut her up. But the intent was not to kill her. And it may not have been a parent- she had two brothers. (one was a half-brother)- one KNOWN to be in the house that night and the other suspected of being in the house that night.

SD is right...why does any parent do something like this? The reasons vary depending on the specific case- but the bottom line is parents can and do kill their children. Even nice, good-looking, wealthy parents with nice houses and nice clothes and pretty manners.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Why does ANYONE kill their child?



Who says they DID? Who says they intended to gain anything from it? I think Becky has answered that question superbly.

Although, I guess it depends on how you look at it. The Ramseys did gain one thing from JB's death: fame, or infamy, if you prefer.

I don't think John and Patsy killed JonBenet to gain fame/infamy. They never could have predicted the amount of media coverage the case would have gotten. What happens if they kill JBR in the hopes of becoming household names and the national media doesn't pick up the story? It just seems like too big of a risk to take. Remember, it wasn't until the 2000s when numerous child murder cases started appearing on national TV.

BTW, do you mean that John and Patsy intended to make themselves (in)famous or intended for JonBenet to be (in)famous? Or both? OJ's case had just ended and he became the "star" of that murder case, not Nicole Brown Simpson or Ron Goldman. Did John and Patsy think that they would become (in)famous) and JBR would be a second thought? I think that's a more likely possiblity than the R's killing JBR to make JBR in(famous) because they would have no case to base that off of. What child murder case happened before JBR where the victim became extremely in(famous)?

I don't think Patsy minded at all that JonBenet became a household name after her murder, but I don't think she or John intended for that to happen.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I have never believed this happened for anyone's fame or infamy and if I know Dave as well as I think I do, I'm sure he doesn't either.

 

[MurriFlower]

Why would the Ramseys kill their daughter?

Why indeed! There are bedwetting theories, sexual assault theories, jealousy theories. All of which are put forth as 'reasons' for one of the R's to kill her and the other(s) to cover it up.

Everyone has theories but no one has any proof to back it up

.
Absolutely correct. There was no evidence of a prior history of abuse, either sexual or physical and no reason to think any sibling harboured murderous jealousy.

They gained nothing from killing their daughter.

In fact, they lived a nightmare from that time forth. As if it wasn't bad enough to have lost a child under those circumstances, the whole family has been slandered ever since with unfounded accusations, the cost in legal fees has been enormous, the cost in emotional pain and suffering must have been overwhelming and extended not just to the neuclear family but has radiated out to extended family, friends, former employees.

What they 'lost' following her death was far in excess of any gain they may have made if they HAD killed her and covered it up.

On the otherhand, a motive for her murder by another person has not been established, beyond what was stated in the RN ($118,000).

RDI and IDI are not as far removed as you would think. Both believe her murder was unintentional/accidental, it was prompted by rage or fear (or both), it was instantly regretted and the murderer 'undid' the crime by re-dressing and wrapping. The differences simply whether it was one of the people in the house that night (the Rs), or someone who gained entry while they were absent and waited till the family slept before taking JBR from her bed. There is no absolutely difinitive evidence to support either, so you must use your own judgement to evaluate whatever pieces of the puzzle we have to work with. There are many 'red herrings' and we suspect also evidence that has not been made public.

In short, for true crime devotees, it's fascinating, but always with the intention of uncovering the real culprit and solving the mystery.

 

[twinkiesmom]

Why would the Ramseys kill their daughter? Everyone has theories but no one has any proof to back it up. They gained nothing from killing their daughter.

I disagree with your premise...There's always a payoff of some kind, sometimes a twisted temporary kind....Take the mother who allegedly just killed her two teens....She gained a temporary relief from their challenging behavior, but traded away their futures and her freedom. The death penalty for mouthing off is crazy, but because it doesn't make sense doesn't make her innocent.

I think there is a huge difference (you could drive a semi through) between accidental and unintentional...not everyone here believes this was a pure accident.

 

[SunnieRN]

Very true TM! Good post!

 

[BBB167893]

I don't think John and Patsy killed JonBenet to gain fame/infamy. They never could have predicted the amount of media coverage the case would have gotten. What happens if they kill JBR in the hopes of becoming household names and the national media doesn't pick up the story? It just seems like too big of a risk to take. Remember, it wasn't until the 2000s when numerous child murder cases started appearing on national TV.

I don't think they did it for that reason, either. I think that was just a bonus.

BTW, do you mean that John and Patsy intended to make themselves (in)famous or intended for JonBenet to be (in)famous? Or both?
OJ's case had just ended and he became the "star" of that murder case, not Nicole Brown Simpson or Ron Goldman. Did John and Patsy think that they would become (in)famous) and JBR would be a second thought? I think that's a more likely possiblity than the R's killing JBR to make JBR in(famous) because they would have no case to base that off of. What child murder case happened before JBR where the victim became extremely in(famous)?

I don't think Patsy minded at all that JonBenet became a household name after her murder, but I don't think she or John intended for that to happen.

Agreed.

 

[Tadpole12]

JonBenet Ramsey: Unsolved
Jan 27, 2011

http://www.examiner.com/true-crime-in-national/jonbenet-ramsey-unsolved

"Of course an intruder murdered JonBenet Ramsey. The evidence is there to illustrate his entrance to the home, much of what he did inside, and his eventual exit. This was a savage predatory crime committed against a child by a male whose life was fueled by fixation and fantasy. Forget the handwriting analysis. Read the ransom note for content. It is a guide to how his head works."


​

 

[cynic]

JonBenet Ramsey: Unsolved
Jan 27, 2011

http://www.examiner.com/true-crime-in-national/jonbenet-ramsey-unsolved

"Of course an intruder murdered JonBenet Ramsey. The evidence is there to illustrate his entrance to the home, much of what he did inside, and his eventual exit. This was a savage predatory crime committed against a child by a male whose life was fueled by fixation and fantasy. Forget the handwriting analysis. Read the ransom note for content. It is a guide to how his head works."​

Some more from the same author - John Philpin:

O.J. didn’t do it

A jury acquitted Orenthal James Simpson of the murders of his wife Nicole, and Ron Goldman. The public convicted him, and a civil court later found him liable for the two deaths.
…
Sherlock Holmes observed, “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” One man did not commit these murders. The most likely suspects are the two white men Tom Lang saw talking with Nicole Simpson on the sidewalk outside her home.
http://www.examiner.com/true-crime-in-national/o-j-didn-t-do-it

Sure.
O.J. is innocent, and so are the Ramseys.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

ANYONE can write examiner.com articles.

 

[BBB167893]

Some more from the same author - John Philpin:

O.J. didn’t do it

A jury acquitted Orenthal James Simpson of the murders of his wife Nicole, and Ron Goldman. The public convicted him, and a civil court later found him liable for the two deaths.
…
Sherlock Holmes observed, “Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.” One man did not commit these murders. The most likely suspects are the two white men Tom Lang saw talking with Nicole Simpson on the sidewalk outside her home.
http://www.examiner.com/true-crime-in-national/o-j-didn-t-do-it

Sure.
O.J. is innocent, and so are the Ramseys.

Yeah, I've read that "article" before. This guy's a crank, pure and simple.