Hi everyone. I'm a newbie here, but I've been following this case pretty closely for a long time. I find it amazing, and disappointing, that the mainstream media has been pushing the "Ramseys are innocent" line all long, even to the extent of recently trumpeting that they've been "cleared." That flies in the face of all reason, imho.
As Sherlock Holmes said, "Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." This case exemplifies that credo; since any intruder theory is contradicted by a slew of evidence and all common sense, then someone inside the house must have been responsible for JonBenet's death. I admit that there are problems with any RDI theory, but nothing else is possible, imho.
I feel that the ransom note is the most crucial piece of evidence in this case. I don't see how anyone can believe it's a legitimate ransom note. What kidnapper would leave a ransom note in the same location where a dead body is? What exactly were they hoping to hold for ransom? What group refers to themselves as "foreign?" The length is absurd- law enforcement officials know from experience that ransom notes are invariably short and to the point. This "War and Peace of ransom notes" is a huge red flag. It caught the police's attention immediately and was the primary reason the parents were viewed with suspicion from the outset. The note has Patsy's personality written all over it. If she didn't write it, then her doppleganger did.
With the relative certainty that Patsy wrote the ransom note, speculating about what happened to cause JonBenet's death becomes a lot harder. Since Patsy must have been involved, in some way, because she wrote the phony ransom note, what role did she play in the actual death? There is Steve Thomas's accident/rage theory, in which Patsy killed JonBenet in a fit of rage over bed wetting issues. Some believe Patsy may have killed JonBenet in a warped bit of jealousy when she discovered John molesting her or suddenly had an epiphany that her husband had been molesting her. Finally, I suppose those who think John was the murderer feel that it happened in some way through his improper sexual relations with his daughter (Cyril Wecht's "sex game" gone awry theory was proposed early on).
However, I find it hard to accept that any wife would help cover up her husband's murder of her daughter. Since Patsy wrote the note, imho, I don't think John was the killer. I also have trouble imagining Patsy becoming that angry with her child over what were apparently chronic bed wetting issues that had been going on for some time, to the point of fracturing her skull in some horrible way. So, what could have compelled her to write the ransom note, if neither she nor John was directly involved in JonBenet's death?
I think the best answer is that Burke, in some improbable way, caused JonBenet's fatal skull fracture, and her parents, in a delusional but somewhat understandable reaction, conspired to cover up the crime. I think that's the only explanation for why they stuck together, if one of them did it. Surely John would have recognized Patsy's characteristic voice, if not her handwriting, all over that ridiculous ransom note. He would never have helped cover up his wife's murder (even though accidental) of his precious daughter.
As already noted, Patsy would be even less likely to cover up her husband's perverted escapades, resulting in the tragic death of her little beauty queen.
There are problems even with the Burke did it theory, but it is the only one, I feel, that explains the ransom note (which Patsy wrote) and the elaborate, invented kidnapping scenario. Neither parent wanted to lose their other child, and they justified their actions by reasoning that the death was accidental (whether it was or not, this is undoubtedly what Burke would have claimed). That still leaves the mystery of the strangling with the garotte; I simply can't picture any parents being able to do such a thing to the corspe of their small child, but they must have, unless Burke strangled her in some strange sex game, but then the skull fracture would have been staged. It's even less possible to envision parents smashing the skull of their dead daughter.
This is the most baffling case I've ever researched. While it seems a certainty that the parents were covering up something, any scenario of JonBenet's death is plagued by the incomprehensible combo of skull fracture/ garotte strangulation. It's overkill of an unimaginable degree, but since the ransom note (combined with the body being left at the same location) excludes any real kidnappers, and bears the unmistakable imprint of Patsy Ramsey, I can come to no other conclusion than that someone in that house was responsible for the death of JonBenet.
That's my newbie take. All comments are welcome.
As Sherlock Holmes said, "Once you've eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth." This case exemplifies that credo; since any intruder theory is contradicted by a slew of evidence and all common sense, then someone inside the house must have been responsible for JonBenet's death. I admit that there are problems with any RDI theory, but nothing else is possible, imho.
I feel that the ransom note is the most crucial piece of evidence in this case. I don't see how anyone can believe it's a legitimate ransom note. What kidnapper would leave a ransom note in the same location where a dead body is? What exactly were they hoping to hold for ransom? What group refers to themselves as "foreign?" The length is absurd- law enforcement officials know from experience that ransom notes are invariably short and to the point. This "War and Peace of ransom notes" is a huge red flag. It caught the police's attention immediately and was the primary reason the parents were viewed with suspicion from the outset. The note has Patsy's personality written all over it. If she didn't write it, then her doppleganger did.
With the relative certainty that Patsy wrote the ransom note, speculating about what happened to cause JonBenet's death becomes a lot harder. Since Patsy must have been involved, in some way, because she wrote the phony ransom note, what role did she play in the actual death? There is Steve Thomas's accident/rage theory, in which Patsy killed JonBenet in a fit of rage over bed wetting issues. Some believe Patsy may have killed JonBenet in a warped bit of jealousy when she discovered John molesting her or suddenly had an epiphany that her husband had been molesting her. Finally, I suppose those who think John was the murderer feel that it happened in some way through his improper sexual relations with his daughter (Cyril Wecht's "sex game" gone awry theory was proposed early on).
However, I find it hard to accept that any wife would help cover up her husband's murder of her daughter. Since Patsy wrote the note, imho, I don't think John was the killer. I also have trouble imagining Patsy becoming that angry with her child over what were apparently chronic bed wetting issues that had been going on for some time, to the point of fracturing her skull in some horrible way. So, what could have compelled her to write the ransom note, if neither she nor John was directly involved in JonBenet's death?
I think the best answer is that Burke, in some improbable way, caused JonBenet's fatal skull fracture, and her parents, in a delusional but somewhat understandable reaction, conspired to cover up the crime. I think that's the only explanation for why they stuck together, if one of them did it. Surely John would have recognized Patsy's characteristic voice, if not her handwriting, all over that ridiculous ransom note. He would never have helped cover up his wife's murder (even though accidental) of his precious daughter.
As already noted, Patsy would be even less likely to cover up her husband's perverted escapades, resulting in the tragic death of her little beauty queen.
There are problems even with the Burke did it theory, but it is the only one, I feel, that explains the ransom note (which Patsy wrote) and the elaborate, invented kidnapping scenario. Neither parent wanted to lose their other child, and they justified their actions by reasoning that the death was accidental (whether it was or not, this is undoubtedly what Burke would have claimed). That still leaves the mystery of the strangling with the garotte; I simply can't picture any parents being able to do such a thing to the corspe of their small child, but they must have, unless Burke strangled her in some strange sex game, but then the skull fracture would have been staged. It's even less possible to envision parents smashing the skull of their dead daughter.
This is the most baffling case I've ever researched. While it seems a certainty that the parents were covering up something, any scenario of JonBenet's death is plagued by the incomprehensible combo of skull fracture/ garotte strangulation. It's overkill of an unimaginable degree, but since the ransom note (combined with the body being left at the same location) excludes any real kidnappers, and bears the unmistakable imprint of Patsy Ramsey, I can come to no other conclusion than that someone in that house was responsible for the death of JonBenet.
That's my newbie take. All comments are welcome.