Who do you think is guilty? I'm relatively new here and...

[Dragognosis]

"To date no JDI or PDI theory has offered a rational explanation for JonBenet being staged as found in the wine-cellar."

The act was committed by an irrational person, rational explanations do not apply.

 

[David Rogers]

"To date no JDI or PDI theory has offered a rational explanation for JonBenet being staged as found in the wine-cellar."

The act was committed by an irrational person, rational explanations do not apply.

She might not have been staged there. It was a place to hide evidence until they could get rid of it. They never planned on the police staying.

 

[Dragognosis]

I don't think there was evidence of "they" anyway.

 

[UKGuy]

"To date no JDI or PDI theory has offered a rational explanation for JonBenet being staged as found in the wine-cellar."

The act was committed by an irrational person, rational explanations do not apply.

Dragognosis,
I think everyone knows an irrational person killed JonBenet, but that rational explanations do not apply is plain nonsense right out of school of Dada or Freud.

The person(s) who redressed JonBenet had a rationale and that can be discussed and debated.

The person(s) who redressed JonBenet need not be the same person who killed her, patently their agenda can differ from that of the killer.

That is, a rational explanation can be offered as to why JonBenet eneded up dressed as she was in the wine-cellar.

.

 

[Dragognosis]

Proof is the acceptance of evidence validating an hypothesis. No one can force acceptance ergo no one can force proof. All one can do is present evidence. See the thread Patsy Had Dissociative Identity Disorder.

 

[Dragognosis]

Burke had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. He was cleared. John found the body in the morning so he had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. There is no evidence of anyone else in the house that night. So Patsy did the whole thing. Imo.

All the strange aspects of the case are due to Patsy's irrational state of mind. Imo. Trying to understand the case from the perspective of a normally adapted person is a mistake, one profilers learned to avoid a long time ago.

 

[UKGuy]

Proof is the acceptance of evidence validating an hypothesis. No one can force acceptance ergo no one can force proof. All one can do is present evidence. See the thread Patsy Had Dissociative Identity Disorder.

Dragognosis,

Proof is the acceptance of evidence validating an hypothesis. No one can force acceptance ergo no one can force proof.

This applies in spades to your DID theory, since with an absence of evidence and none likely to surface unless Patsy's medical records are made public showing she had DID, it is a theory that cannot be validated or verified, i.e. it is in the jargon untestable, it ranks with Freudianism, Spiritualism and Scientology.

You should check out the book: The Sherlock Effect, How Forensic Doctors and Investigators Disastrously Reason Like the Great Detective
The Sherlock Effect: How Forensic Doctors and Investigators Disastrously Reason Like the Great Detective

Some Case Headlines are:

Daily Mail, October 10, 2015: Doctor Whose Blunder Left Couple Accused of Abusing Their Baby Made the Same Mistake Six Years Ago

The Gazette, September 24, 2015: Medical Examiner Testifies to Wounds That Killed Kerry O’Clair Jefferson

Great Falls Tribune, September 21, 2015: Jaraczeski Defense Shifts Blame

Akron Beacon Journal, November 13, 2015: Evidence Shows Pregnant Woman was Strangled From Behind in 1985, Examiner Testifies in Scott Purk Trial

The Wilson Times, November 6, 2017: State Rests Gregory Parks Murder Case on Pathologists’ Testimony

CBC News, November 7, 2016: Forensic Pathologist Testifies Diane Werendowicz’s Death Was a Sexually-Motivated Homicide

Sherlock reasons backwards and many modern day Medical Examiners follow this practice with disastrous results.

Beyond reasonable doubt is what is tested in a court not deductive proof, since legal types are not engaged in deriving theorems.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Burke had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. He was cleared. John found the body in the morning so he had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. There is no evidence of anyone else in the house that night. So Patsy did the whole thing. Imo.

All the strange aspects of the case are due to Patsy's irrational state of mind. Imo. Trying to understand the case from the perspective of a normally adapted person is a mistake, one profilers learned to avoid a long time ago.

Dragognosis,

All the strange aspects of the case are due to Patsy's irrational state of mind

Fine, how about constraining everything you know regarding the state of Patsy's subjective mind to your DID thread, and stop interrupting other folks discussions?
.

 

[David Rogers]

Burke had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. He was cleared. John found the body in the morning so he had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. There is no evidence of anyone else in the house that night. So Patsy did the whole thing. Imo.

All the strange aspects of the case are due to Patsy's irrational state of mind. Imo. Trying to understand the case from the perspective of a normally adapted person is a mistake, one profilers learned to avoid a long time ago.

John knew exactly where to go to find the body. He was involved.

 

[Dragognosis]

No he wasn't.

 

[TL4S]

I've yet to read a single post on this thread that yields enough proof to claim any one theory is correct. Actually, most of the comments are more dissuasive than anything. JMO

 

[Cottonstar]

"To date no JDI or PDI theory has offered a rational explanation for JonBenet being staged as found in the wine-cellar."

The act was committed by an irrational person, rational explanations do not apply.

Burke had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. He was cleared. John found the body in the morning so he had nothing to do with any of it. Imo. There is no evidence of anyone else in the house that night. So Patsy did the whole thing. Imo.

All the strange aspects of the case are due to Patsy's irrational state of mind. Imo. Trying to understand the case from the perspective of a normally adapted person is a mistake, one profilers learned to avoid a long time ago.

Ok Brothermoon.

 

[Veronica Lodge]

John knew exactly where to go to find the body. He was involved.

Yep.
If he truly wasn't involved at the start, why would he not cash in later on the whole "Crazy Patsy - I'm Sad" angle? He could have cleared himself (and Burke) and probably made lots of money and gained public sympathy.

John was extremely involved. He has a lot to hide and just looking at pictures of him give me the creeps.

UKGuy - a question for you please: With the two ponytails, do you think Burke tied one of them for some reason?? I'm confused about this part.

 

[MaryNo]

Ms. Justice,

She never wore leggings to the White's Christmas Party, she was supposed to be dressed similar to Patsy with matching tops and pants, Patsy says JonBenet chose to wear the White Gape Top, and Black Velvet Pants.


Sure this is the likely source of any stranger touch-dna, nothing has been released about Burke's touch-dna being present or absent from either the longjohns or the size-12 underwear.

Atlanta 2000 Patsy Interview, Excerpt

To parse Patsy's verbiage you only need to ask what size would she purchase for her niece, e.g. size-12, and what size for JonBenet, e.g. size-6?

Any other purchase outcome would yield two sets of identical Bloomingdale Days Of The week underwear in JonBenet's underwear drawer.

Now later in the same interview Patsy was told the sizes of underwear taken from JonBenet;s underwear drawer:
Atlanta 2000 Patsy Interview, Excerpt

Suggesting Patsy never purchased two sets of size-12 Bloomingdales underwear on her New York trip ! Hence JonBenet likely wore size-6 Bloomingdales to the White's Christmas Party and that the Wedesday pair might be missing from those taken from JonBenet's underwear drawer, to date BPD have never released details regarding Days of the Week or Brand.


No, here is what Patsy says:
Atlanta 2000 Patsy Interview, Excerpt

Patsy is claiming to put all the size-12's into JonBenet's underwear drawer, yet investigators then tell her there were no size-12's found in the drawer.

Patently Patsy is fabricating an explanation for JonBenet wearing Patsy's niece's underwear !

.

So, in your opinion, none of these memory failures/alterations could have anything to do with DID? In this post you state Patsy is fabricating an explanation. Is it possible that she has no real knowledge in relationship to the underwear? I feel this is a rage killing, not "Patsy was annoyed JB wet herself again" killing.
People here are saying that information on Patsy's personality switches would have been discussed by now. I'm not sure of that UK. These people circled the wagons so fast, as to be unbelievable. Do we believe they would talk about this stuff? Would we believe pageant parents whose kids lost to JB? Would DID have necessarily showed itself in therapy?

 

[UKGuy]

So, in your opinion, none of these memory failures/alterations could have anything to do with DID? In this post you state Patsy is fabricating an explanation. Is it possible that she has no real knowledge in relationship to the underwear? I feel this is a rage killing, not "Patsy was annoyed JB wet herself again" killing.
People here are saying that information on Patsy's personality switches would have been discussed by now. I'm not sure of that UK. These people circled the wagons so fast, as to be unbelievable. Do we believe they would talk about this stuff? Would we believe pageant parents whose kids lost to JB? Would DID have necessarily showed itself in therapy?

MaryNo

So, in your opinion, none of these memory failures/alterations could have anything to do with DID?

I'm not against DID, Patsy may or may not have had MPD, etc. Its just that Patsy is fairly consistent with her failures/alterations, i.e. they tend to match hiding any link to BDI or JDI.

In this post you state Patsy is fabricating an explanation. Is it possible that she has no real knowledge in relationship to the underwear?

Sure, turn it round, e.g. Patsy is ignorant regarding the size-12's so fabricates an explanation. Patsy states in the interview that she read about the size-12's:

Atlanta 2000 Patsy Interview Excerpt

11 Q. Where was it that you became

12 aware that this was -- where was it that it

13 was made a big deal? What was the source

14 of your information that Bloomingdale's

15 panties somehow were significant that made

16 you then say, wait a second, did I ever buy

17 those?

18 MR. WOOD: Do you have a precise

19 recollection of that event occurring where

20 all of a sudden something happened and you

21 decided it was some big deal?

22 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I

23 mean, my first thought is something in the

24 tabloids, but, you know, they get everything

25 wrong, so --

0093

1 Q. (By Mr. Kane) Okay. Were you

2 aware that these were the size of panties

3 that she was wearing, and this has been

4 publicized, it is out in the open, that they

5 were size 12 to 14? Were you aware of

6 that?

7 A. I have become aware of that, yes.

8 Q. And how did you become aware of

9 that?

10 A. Something I read, I am sure.

11 Q. And I will just state a fact

12 here. I mean, there were 15 pair of panties

13 taken out of, by the police, out of

14 JonBenet's panty drawer in her bathroom. Is

15 that where she kept -

16 A. Uh-huh (affirmative).

17 Q. -- where you were describing that

18 they were just put in that drawer?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Okay. And every one of those was

21 either a size four or a size six. Okay?

Suggesting she never knew JonBenet was wearing size-12 Bloomingdales underwear, yet Kane tells Patsy no size-12's were found in JonBenet's underwear drawer, despite Patsy claiming she put them there, i.e. no loss of memory here.

I feel this is a rage killing,

It looks that way, yet it might be staged with JonBenet's injuries faked to mimic a rage attack?

Do we believe they would talk about this stuff?

Of course, all three Ransey's colluded to offer ostensibly the same version of events, except those relating to Burke broke down, e.g. JonBenet walked into the house, and he could be heard talking on the 911 call, during which the parents admitted he was awake!

Would we believe pageant parents whose kids lost to JB?

Why not? BPD investigators checked the pageant angle and drew a blank.

Would DID have necessarily showed itself in therapy?

Nope, but a skilled therapist would have picked up on if it was bad enough to lead to a homicide.

BTW: Burke and JonBenet were in therapy in the weeks leading up to her death, so there was stuff going on, what for who knows but enough for JonBenet to be attending a therapist, six years old and needing therapy, its gotta be scary stuff !

.

 

[UKGuy]

deleted for repetition

 

[UKGuy]

Yep.
If he truly wasn't involved at the start, why would he not cash in later on the whole "Crazy Patsy - I'm Sad" angle? He could have cleared himself (and Burke) and probably made lots of money and gained public sympathy.

John was extremely involved. He has a lot to hide and just looking at pictures of him give me the creeps.

UKGuy - a question for you please: With the two ponytails, do you think Burke tied one of them for some reason?? I'm confused about this part.

Veronica Lodge,

UKGuy - a question for you please: With the two ponytails, do you think Burke tied one of them for some reason?? I'm confused about this part.

Your confused, LOL, who isn't?

Yes I think Burke tied one of them, consider how Patsy states she normally puts JonBenet to bed with one ponytail, i.e. just puts her hair up?

Despite Patsy claiming she just redressed JonBenet in Burke's longjohns, and thats all, i.e. no ponytail. JonBenet evidences two ponytails.

How so, most likely because alike the size-12's, Burke has attempted to stage JonBenet, and in the panic Patsy overlooked the ponytails, but in interview cannot take a direct bullet for Burke !

For years I was advocating multiple staging but in the interest of reducing the complexity of any BDI theory I reduced it to just what Patsy is alleged to have done.

Yet, I reckon Patsy does not convince on the size-12's or about putting Burke's longjohns on her, and even less so regarding the ponytails, add in Kolar's cryptic remarks about the soiled pajamas belonging to Burke, feces on the Candy Box, and IMO there is enough to suggest this is the remnants of a prior staging?

.

 

[MaryNo]

MaryNo

I'm not against DID, Patsy may or may not have had MPD, etc. Its just that Patsy is fairly consistent with her failures/alterations, i.e. they tend to match hiding any link to BDI or JDI.
Couldn't this consistency be the result of the main personality being unaware of the traumatized personality's behavior, and the main personality being protective of her son, and husband?

Sure, turn it round, e.g. Patsy is ignorant regarding the size-12's so fabricates an explanation. Patsy states in the interview that she read about the size-12's:

Atlanta 2000 Patsy Interview Excerpt


Suggesting she never knew JonBenet was wearing size-12 Bloomingdales underwear, yet Kane tells Patsy no size-12's were found in JonBenet's underwear drawer, despite Patsy claiming she put them there, i.e. no loss of memory here.
Could this be because Adult Patsy put them in the drawer, but the traumatized personality dressed JB?


It looks that way, yet it might be staged with JonBenet's injuries faked to mimic a rage attack?
With evidence of fecal matter, urine, and real/staging sexual assault, I believe the rage is real, and if DID, then this is related to the traumatized personality's motive for killing JB. The fecal matter having been wiped on the candy, and wasn't there some disturbance of JB's trophies? I'd have to go back, and look at that. Don't you feel some of this has a juvenile energy to it? Look at the double pony hairstyle. Next I look at the way her hair was styled, and the color of the clothing when she was found. It's almost as if a purification ritual took place. The insistence on the Christmas date on her tombstone, instead of the 26th fits somewhere into that cleansing ritual.

Of course, all three Ransey's colluded to offer ostensibly the same version of events, except those relating to Burke broke down, e.g. JonBenet walked into the house, and he could be heard talking on the 911 call, during which the parents admitted he was awake!
Oops! I'm sorry. I was referring to the friends of the Ramseys. They all circled the wagons, and aren't telling the whole story. I think most parents would want to keep the surviving child as far from this kind of horror as possible.

Nope, but a skilled therapist would have picked up on if it was bad enough to lead to a homicide.
I'd really like to see Patsy's file!

BTW: Burke and JonBenet were in therapy in the weeks leading up to her death, so there was stuff going on, what for who knows but enough for JonBenet to be attending a therapist, six years old and needing therapy, its gotta be scary stuff !
I couldn't testify to this, but I think some really horrible stuff happened to these kids.

Thanks for the discussion UK!
.

 

[UKGuy]

MaryNo,

With evidence of fecal matter, urine, and real/staging sexual assault, I believe the rage is real, and if DID, then this is related to the traumatized personality's motive for killing JB. The fecal matter having been wiped on the candy, and wasn't there some disturbance of JB's trophies? I'd have to go back, and look at that. Don't you feel some of this has a juvenile energy to it? Look at the double pony hairstyle. Next I look at the way her hair was styled, and the color of the clothing when she was found. It's almost as if a purification ritual took place. The insistence on the Christmas date on her tombstone, instead of the 26th fits somewhere into that cleansing ritual.

The thing about DID is it can work in either direction. You can invoke it to explain stuff Patsy is alleged to have done, or as motive, etc, even as a reason for the staging, i.e. one self says save Burke or John, another self says do this, do that, i.e. enact a ritual or some OCD routine?

The major takeaway in this case for anyone serious in understanding it is that the wine-cellar and nearly everything in it has been staged, this includes JonBenet,

Patsy does not say she dressed JonBenet's hair for bed, so it was obviously a postmortem addition. Similar applies to the size-12's and Burke's longjohns, as there is no way Patsy or John would stage in this manner assuming either was responsible.

Its likely that Patsy or John removed the Barbie Gown from JonBenet and redressed her back into the White Gap Top, so to match their new version of events, i.e. straight to bed !

Given the apparent amateurishness of the staging that leaves Burke as the prime suspect, add in the sexual assault and the probability meter starts to move higher.


I reckon JonBenet was staged about three times, once by Burke, again by Patsy then by John, each one adding their interpretation of what a staged homicide should look like.

You could argue there was a purification ritual, i.e. it was motivated to remove forensic evidence, e.g. was any fecal matter flushed down JonBenet's bathroom toilet?


The Christmas date on her tombstone is weird, but its just a family detail, some families do move the time of death to suit their emotional circumstances, everyone knows it cannot relate to how JonBenet died.


.

 

[Dragognosis]

"The major takeaway in this case for anyone serious"

Seriously.