The Suitcase - Duvet, Sham & Dr. Suess

[Mama2JML]

BBM

Something else strikes me as odd(and mentioned before) why were there no pictures of JAR in the book DOI. I know only the author knows that but isnt it weird? The whole family has their photos in there but none of him. And something else... if and I mean if JAR had something to do with it maybe thats why no photos Christmas day. Maybe there were photos and they had to be destroyed because he would have been in there. MoO

Do you have DOI handy? I don't have access to my copy @ the moment, and it's been a while since I looked through the photos...

Photos were taken Christmas morning/day/evening. LE collected the Ramseys cameras and processed the film. LE also has photos from the 23rd & photos taken @ the Whites' house on the 25th. However, there is no video recording (of the Rs' Christmas morning) known to exist.

 

[elannia]

BBMDo you have DOI handy? I don't have access to my copy @ the moment, and it's been a while since I looked through the photos...

Photos were taken Christmas morning/day/evening. LE collected the Ramseys cameras and processed the film. LE also has photos from the 23rd & photos taken @ the Whites' house on the 25th. However, there is no video recording (of the Rs' Christmas morning) known to exist.

Yes i have it. Yes, john said he forgot to charge the batteries for the video camera. I would love to see photos from the White's

 

[elannia]

BBMDo you have DOI handy? I don't have access to my copy @ the moment, and it's been a while since I looked through the photos...

Photos were taken Christmas morning/day/evening. LE collected the Ramseys cameras and processed the film. LE also has photos from the 23rd & photos taken @ the Whites' house on the 25th. However, there is no video recording (of the Rs' Christmas morning) known to exist.

Do you know what type camera they had? I just wonder if they could have deleted some of the photos so no one could see whats on them.

 

[THE BUNK]

I was aways suspicious about JR getting lawyers for his first wife and older son. The ex-wife especially. She was in Georgia and was not a suspect- never was. So why the lawyer?

JR didn't get lawyers for Patsy's side of the family, did he?

 

[chlban]

Keep in mind that there is nothing to prevent John from killing Patsy right then and there if she doesn't go along with the plan. If John is that desperate to protect his son, why wouldn't Patsy believe he would be desperate enough to kill her as well? All he needs to do is add his wife to the ransom note tally and leave her body in the basement with a rope around it as well.

I think people have not calculated "fear of her husband John" as a reason why Patsy would decide to be a co-conspirator.

OK, that might explain going along with it for the moment, but she remained married to him for another 10 years until her death. She knew, as they all did, that she was the main focus of the BPD. If I recall correctly, their lawyers told them there was a better than 50/50 chance that the
Grand Jury would indict her (guess they had that right).

I respect you Bunk, in fact I consider your contribution about your "Sharpie" experiment to be one of the best pieces of circumstantial evidence I have seen unearthed in a long time. I am surprised the PD never thought of that, but a whole lot of us sleuthers didn't either.

That said, I think our theories are pretty different. I have always leaned to PDI. It seems you lean to JDI. Nothing wrong with that all any of us have are theories. But I don't see Patsy as afraid of John. I have always felt that John really did wake up to nightmare that morning. I thinki that is why the 911 call had to be made when it was. However, I do think that all the plausable theories, PDI, JDI and BDI-with staging from P & J, havae merit.

As for JAR, I doubt you really think that one has merit. I know I don't. First, he was cleared by everyone, including Smit. His alibi was solid. The fact that his semen was found on an article in the house he often stayed at, IMO, really means nothing.

 

[chlban]

JR didn't get lawyers for Patsy's side of the family, did he?

I don't recall ever reading that he did.

 

[elannia]

JR didn't get lawyers for Patsy's side of the family, did he?

Nope. Just his side

 

[elannia]

OK, that might explain going along with it for the moment, but she remained married to him for another 10 years until her death. She knew, as they all did, that she was the main focus of the BPD. If I recall correctly, their lawyers told them there was a better than 50/50 chance that the
Grand Jury would indict her (guess they had that right).

I respect you Bunk, in fact I consider your contribution about your "Sharpie" experiment to be one of the best pieces of circumstantial evidence I have seen unearthed in a long time. I am surprised the PD never thought of that, but a whole lot of us sleuthers didn't either.

That said, I think our theories are pretty different. I have always leaned to PDI. It seems you lean to JDI. Nothing wrong with that all any of us have are theories. But I don't see Patsy as afraid of John. I have always felt that John really did wake up to nightmare that morning. I thinki that is why the 911 call had to be made when it was. However, I do think that all the plausable theories, PDI, JDI and BDI-with staging from P & J, havae merit.

As for JAR, I doubt you really think that one has merit. I know I don't. First, he was cleared by everyone, including Smit. His alibi was solid. The fact that his semen was found on an article in the house he often stayed at, IMO, really means nothing.

But why all the lawyers for Johns side of the family? Even ST said there was a 6 hour gap when JAR was supposedly asleep at his moms house( i dont believe one can fly from atl to boulder in that time)

 

[elannia]

But why all the lawyers for Johns side of the family? Even ST said there was a 6 hour gap when JAR was supposedly asleep at his moms house( i dont believe one can fly from atl to boulder in that time)

Ok the flying time would be about 2 hours and 28 minutes I checked. But is there any way possible he could have boarded a plane( under false name, etc?) This was back in 96 and everything is much different now

 

[chlban]

Ok the flying time would be about 2 hours and 28 minutes I checked. But is there any way possible he could have boarded a plane( under false name, etc?) This was back in 96 and everything is much different now

That Premeditated? That's really a stretch. Sorry, but I just think this is silly conjecture. Everyone known to the Ramsey's was cleared by the BPD
and DA, including Smit who was desperate to latch onto a viable suspect. if I remember correctly, Smit held out longest to clear the McRenoylds and I think the photographer, whose name escapes me. But even he let go of JAR fairly early on.

 

[elannia]

That Premeditated? That's really a stretch. Sorry, but I just think this is silly conjecture. Everyone known to the Ramsey's was cleared by the BPD
and DA, including Smit who was desperate to latch onto a viable suspect. if I remember correctly, Smit held out longest to clear the McRenoylds and I think the photographer, whose name escapes me. But even he let go of JAR fairly early on.

Yea well may be a stretch but hey its just my opinion. Thanks. And why do you suppose mr ramsey got his side of the family lawyers but not patsys? May be silly to you but not to me

 

[elannia]

That Premeditated? That's really a stretch. Sorry, but I just think this is silly conjecture. Everyone known to the Ramsey's was cleared by the BPD
and DA, including Smit who was desperate to latch onto a viable suspect. if I remember correctly, Smit held out longest to clear the McRenoylds and I think the photographer, whose name escapes me. But even he let go of JAR fairly early on.[/QUOTE yea everyone known to the ramseys was cleared(even the own family members who I feel shouldnt been) John and patsy were "cleared" by lacy. Heck she even wrote him an apolgetic note. This whole case was a mess beginning with that 911 call

 

[elannia]

I know JAR was cleared and the GJ indicted J and R but im just guessing here. The indictment did say that they didnt protect or or put her in a situation, and maybe were covering for someone else. So if J and P didnt do it who are they covering for?

 

[THE BUNK]

But why all the lawyers for Johns side of the family? Even ST said there was a 6 hour gap when JAR was supposedly asleep at his moms house( i dont believe one can fly from atl to boulder in that time)

Especially if your supposed to be innocent. Why would John's side of the family be at risk for incriminating him any more than Patsy's.

From an RDI perspective, it indicates that there was a secret that John wanted to hide that only his side of the family would know.

 

[chlban]

I know JAR was cleared and the GJ indicted J and R but im just guessing here. The indictment did say that they didnt protect or or put her in a situation, and maybe were covering for someone else. So if J and P didnt do it who are they covering for?

I think that would be fairly obvious. The only persoh in the house still alive the next morning.
However, some people feel that the indictment was meant as a compromise, because they weren't sure which adult killed her. I don't know.

What I do believe is that Patsy wrote that RN, and there were only two other people, besides herself, that she would do that to protect. Personally I lean toward she was protecting herself. But I am open to the other two options.

No way she would have endured all the finger pointing and accusations for her step son.

 

[Tadpole12]

I agree. That ATM photo has been posted here before. You can't see his face at all. The young man in the photo is wearing a white baseball cap and all you can see is his chin. There is no way to positively ID the person in the photo as JAR. I am not sure how I feel about his involvement. He also provided a movie ticket stub- which proves nothing- it could have belonged to anyone. I was aways suspicious about JR getting lawyers for his first wife and older son. The ex-wife especially. She was in Georgia and was not a suspect- never was. So why the lawyer? I believe she would have been asked if she had an photographic proof that JAR was with her Christmas day. I put it all together with Joe Barnhill's statements about seeing JAR walking up the front walk- and wonder what OTHER college-age young man would be going into the R house in the middle of Christmas Day with the family home at that time. Lets suppose it wasn't JAR but one of his friends from school. Does that mean JAR was at home at his father's house that day and NOT with his mother in Georgia? The whole "JAR in Boulder that day" thing is very unclear to me.

Heyya DeeDee249

The whole "JAR in Boulder that day" thing is very unclear to me.

Ya.
I was browsing through the daily camera archive
http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/topics/
and noted the expediency (December 31, 1996) by which the adult siblings of JBR were 'not eliminated'.

Girl's brothers were out of state
Police aren't eliminating anyone as suspect in JonBenet's slaying
http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1996/12/31-1.html

The fact that his semen was found on an article in the house he often stayed at, IMO, really means nothing.

I wonder what kind of dna would be on the book found in the suitcase.

 

[elannia]

I think that would be fairly obvious. The only persoh in the house still alive the next morning.
However, some people feel that the indictment was meant as a compromise, because they weren't sure which adult killed her. I don't know.

What I do believe is that Patsy wrote that RN, and there were only two other people, besides herself, that she would do that to protect. Personally I lean toward she was protecting herself. But I am open to the other two options.

No way she would have endured all the finger pointing and accusations for her step son.

I agree with you on her not covering for her stepson. And when I said whonwere they covering for I meant it as JAR or Burke. Yes she would have taken the heat for burke but JAR? Something just doesnt sit right with me about the book DOI though with no pictures of him

 

[THE BUNK]

OK, that might explain going along with it for the moment, but she remained married to him for another 10 years until her death. She knew, as they all did, that she was the main focus of the BPD. If I recall correctly, their lawyers told them there was a better than 50/50 chance that the
Grand Jury would indict her (guess they had that right).

1. John can still pay someone to kill her (or her family) from whatever jail he is in. If John has the resources to influence a DA, he would have the power to hire someone to have PR die in the same way JBR did.

2. Until the cuffs are put on Patsy, John's plan is working. The minute that happens either Ramsey has the opportunity to rat the other one out. That is one of the tragedies of this grand jury. It robbed us the opportunity of one of the Ramsey's confessing or plea barganing.

3. Given her cancer, divorce may not have been an option. Insurance. Also perhaps she was considering divorce but the remission occurred.

4. From a JDI perspective, Patsy has the clear evidence of Jon killing their child. This murder would give her a clear indication of what John could do.

5. There is nothing to prevent John from issuing the same threat of death if Patsy divorces him.
Divorce would put her beyond his control and risk their innocence.

6. If Patsy divorces John, she will need to get her own legal team to defend herself. Unless she decides to confess she will need to get her own lawyers with their own strategies. That may not be an ideal situation for her. Why not use John legal team?

 

[Anyhoo]

I can answer this question with confidence now when I could not before. There is no connection between the crime and the suitcase and its contents. The suitcase and its contents was placed there, after the murder, to plant a false clue (or multiple false clues) in this case to conceal the true cause and more importantly the true LOCATION of the murder. Location is a very critical part of understanding the murder. You have to know where it really happened before you can even begin to solve it. But to answer your question, its all staging. Ignore it and focus instead on finding out where this crime really took place and who was really involved.

 

[midwest mama]

I can answer this question with confidence now when I could not before. There is no connection between the crime and the suitcase and its contents. The suitcase and its contents was placed there, after the murder, to plant a false clue (or multiple false clues) in this case to conceal the true cause and more importantly the true LOCATION of the murder. Location is a very critical part of understanding the murder. You have to know where it really happened before you can even begin to solve it. But to answer your question, its all staging. Ignore it and focus instead on finding out where this crime really took place and who was really involved.

How do you substantiate your claims about the suitcase?