Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? Poll

[Tricia]

The point is not to argue. I have yet to hear evidence Burke did it. The name of the thread is who did it, not burke did it. My vote is for mommy. No evidence points towards burke. He didn't write the note.

I agree Burke didn't write the note but do you think it's possible that Patsy wrote the note to throw the police off into thinking an intruder killed JBR when in reality it was Burke?

 

[singularity]

John made an interesting comment regarding drinking in the transcripts but don't have time to dig for it at the moment.

I found this although I may have already posted it here before....don't remember.


Anyways....



MIKE KANE: How often did you smoke a cigar?

JOHN RAMSEY: I couldn't smoke in the house. And Jonbenet would actually get after me if I smoked or drank a beer. So the only time I would smoke a cigar is if I drove to the airport or
something like that. So, once or twice a week,maybe.

-----------

This does insinuate there may have been a problem with alcohol in this family. Under normal circumstances, a six year old child wouldn't know or even care that Daddy drinks a beer. However, if there are domestic disputes,drinking is involved, and children are observing this, a child can put two and two together and notice the link between mommy and daddy drinking and how alcohol helps fuel the incidents.

Had the FBI or other detectives heard this from John, they would have asked him to elaborate on this issue.

I also don't buy John's line about not smoking in the house. IF true, I'd believe Patsy had more influence over that decision than his six year old daughter. Mr. Alpha Male Big Daddy CEO Man is gonna smoke where he wants to smoke....same with drinking.

 

[OliviaG1996]

BBM - When Steve Thomas faced off on television with John and Patsy Ramsey, Patsy agreed with Thomas that whoever wrote the note killed JonBenet.

To be fair, PR also said she didn't write the note. I don't take anything she said at face value.

IMO, it would make sense for PR to say whoever wrote the note killed JBR no matter which R was responsible because 1.) she knew many were suspecting her of writing it and could have rather taken the bullet of having people (other than LE, of course) think she was the killer rather than who really did kill JBR and/or 2.) she thought that most people hearing of the case in passing assumed that one and one person only committed every portion of this crime.

My second thought reminds me of the Ramsey press conference that took place May 1, 1997:

Patsy: "We feel there are at least two people on the face of this earth that know who did this: and that is the killer, and someone that that person may have confided in."

 

[mrseeker]

I agree Burke didn't write the note but do you think it's possible that Patsy wrote the note to throw the police off into thinking an intruder killed JBR when in reality it was Burke?

I think patsy wrote the note to convince John to leave the house the next morning for the bank. Then she could dump the body. That is my theory of this long rambling note. The note is very specific which is not what a kidnapper would bother with. I think she was under the influence and kept adding to the note thinking she needed to be more persuasive. I don't think she was thinking as far ahead as the police. Re-read the note and see she is begging at times, threatening at times, for john to get up and go to the bank in the AM. I think she prepared the body for a sexual assault murder scene. If she had been left in the house that morning, we would have found JBR on the side of some road a few miles out of town, not the basement. If John had done this or had been part of the staging, the body would have been moved before the 911 call. Protecting Burke? It's possible. Protecting herself? Most probable.

 

[UKGuy]

BBM - When Steve Thomas faced off on television with John and Patsy Ramsey, Patsy agreed with Thomas that whoever wrote the note killed JonBenet.

BOESP,
That's because Patsy was proposing IDI, and of course the intruder kidnapped JonBenet and wrote the note, how else could it be?


Its counter intuitive, Patsy is authoring a fake ransom note so to create a fake crime-scene scenario, and the crime-scene she is hoping to substitute need not be one she created.

Again if the case were PDI Patsy would have cleaned up the breakfast bar and not made up the nonsense about the size-12's. Why bother with a RN yet leave other more important forensic evidence lying about?

.

 

[UKGuy]

I think patsy wrote the note to convince John to leave the house the next morning for the bank. Then she could dump the body. That is my theory of this long rambling note. The note is very specific which is not what a kidnapper would bother with. I think she was under the influence and kept adding to the note thinking she needed to be more persuasive. I don't think she was thinking as far ahead as the police. Re-read the note and see she is begging at times, threatening at times, for john to get up and go to the bank in the AM. I think she prepared the body for a sexual assault murder scene. If she had been left in the house that morning, we would have found JBR on the side of some road a few miles out of town, not the basement. If John had done this or had been part of the staging, the body would have been moved before the 911 call. Protecting Burke? It's possible. Protecting herself? Most probable.

mrseeker,
Regardless of who did it, the killer had the opportunity to dump JonBenet outdoors first, even just 100 yards up the street, then come back and author the ransom note at leasure, there was no need for JonBenet to be dumped into the wine-cellar.

If Patsy can kill JonBenet then fake a crime-scene followed up with a ransom note, she could have just have easily dumped JonBenet first.

Why does Patsy require all this staging, it cannot be because she wants rid of forensic evidence, since she left the fake crime-scene littered with her own personal forensic items, she left her fingerprints on the pineapple serving bowl, she demonstrated she was ignorant about crucial crime-scene artifact, i.e. the size-12's, then there is the acute and chronic sexual assaults, what is all that about?

How does JR know what to say when he tells the police his version of events, how come it matches PR's, similarly with BR, except that which was later retracted?

This case is most definitely not PDI, it might be JDI or BDI, but PDI only in as much she assisted with the staging, as charged in the true bills.

According to the GJ the case is neither PDI or JDI, and they saw evidence withheld from us.

.

 

[mrseeker]

mrseeker,
Regardless of who did it, the killer had the opportunity to dump JonBenet outdoors first, even just 100 yards up the street, then come back and author the ransom note at leasure, there was no need for JonBenet to be dumped into the wine-cellar.

If Patsy can kill JonBenet then fake a crime-scene followed up with a ransom note, she could have just have easily dumped JonBenet first.

Why does Patsy require all this staging, it cannot be because she wants rid of forensic evidence, since she left the fake crime-scene littered with her own personal forensic items, she left her fingerprints on the pineapple serving bowl, she demonstrated she was ignorant about crucial crime-scene artifact, i.e. the size-12's, then there is the acute and chronic sexual assaults, what is all that about?

How does JR know what to say when he tells the police his version of events, how come it matches PR's, similarly with BR, except that which was later retracted?

This case is most definitely not PDI, it might be JDI or BDI, but PDI only in as much she assisted with the staging, as charged in the true bills.

According to the GJ the case is neither PDI or JDI, and they saw evidence withheld from us.

.

I disagree. Patsy could not have run out the door with a body down the street with confidence nobody would notice. However, if she had been able to have the house that morning to herself she could have dragged the body to her car in the garage. She requires the staging because, first she is not right in the head, and she dreamed up this dramatic staging, but did not get to complete it.

 

[BOESP]

BOESP,
That's because Patsy was proposing IDI, and of course the intruder kidnapped JonBenet and wrote the note, how else could it be?


Its counter intuitive, Patsy is authoring a fake ransom note so to create a fake crime-scene scenario, and the crime-scene she is hoping to substitute need not be one she created.

Again if the case were PDI Patsy would have cleaned up the breakfast bar and not made up the nonsense about the size-12's. Why bother with a RN yet leave other more important forensic evidence lying about?

.

UKGuy, I understand what you are saying and while I have no idea who killed JonBenet, Patsy's statement about the note writer being the killer rang true based on Patsy's demeanor, body language, and verbal communications. She also appeared truthful in saying two people know what happened: the killer and a person the killer confided in.

The cords, the bruising and markings on JonBenet's body, the basement location, the totality of what is available publicly, suggests to me that Steve Thomas's belief that Patsy subjected JonBenet to corporal punishment is most likely what happened.

For all I know, the breakfast bar was a left-over from earlier in the day. Regardless, in times of stress it is impossible to remember everything that should be done to cya. This was the killer's first rodeo, imo, and they had no idea how to stage a crime scene. I believe the FBI used the term "staging within staging," which suggests, to me, that Patsy staged and John added in his two cents after Patsy's staging.

As to the size 12 panties, if they mean anything at all, I think they were handy at the time a pair of clean panties were needed. Nothing more or nothing less.

As I've said before, Burke's actions could have precipitated something that triggered his mother into reckless, irrational behavior that resulted in JonBenet's death. Patsy seems the most likely candidate to me, followed by John. Statistically, John would be the most likely candidate.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

JonBenet's case is on the cover of People magazine this week.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

And we are getting another Lifetime movie:

http://www.people.com/article/jonbenet-ramsey-lifetime-movie-exclusive

So for the 20th anniversary we have so far

-3-part Investigation Discovery special
-2-hour CNN special (heard about this on Peter Boyles show)
--6-hour CBS special
-Sundance documentary
-3-part Dr. Phil special
-Lifetime movie

So we have at least 18+ hours of JonBenet programming.

And Kolar is going to be on CBS's special:

But The Case of: Jon Benét Ramsey hopes to break new ground in the case by re-uniting original investigators, including the former New York City prosecutor, retired F.B.I. supervisory special agent and profiler Jim Clemente; world-renowned forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee; former chief investigator for the district attorney in Boulder, Colorado, James Kolar; leading forensic pathologist Dr. Werner Spitz; and retired F.B.I. supervisory special agent and forensic linguistic profiler James Fitzgerald.

 

[UKGuy]

eileenhawkeye,
That's excellent, plenty to watch. Looking forward to see who says but all these theories cannot be right?

 

[FrankieB]

According to the GJ the case is neither PDI or JDI, and they saw evidence withheld from us.

Agreed 100%

 

[questfortrue]

And we are getting another Lifetime movie:

http://www.people.com/article/jonbenet-ramsey-lifetime-movie-exclusive

So for the 20th anniversary we have so far

-3-part Investigation Discovery special
-2-hour CNN special (heard about this on Peter Boyles show)
--6-hour CBS special
-Sundance documentary
-3-part Dr. Phil special
-Lifetime movie

So we have at least 18+ hours of JonBenet programming.

And Kolar is going to be on CBS's special:

Fitzgerald is a very respected forensic linguist. Clemente is, according to what I've seen in interviews, dismissive of intruder theories. At least they will be presenting an alternative viewpoint to the Rs' narrative.

 

[singularity]

BOESP,
Why bother with a RN yet leave other more important forensic evidence lying about?

.

Because the clock was running down. They had a trip scheduled that morning and everyone knew about it. If they start dragging things out and its postponed, people in their circle will start wondering what's going on over there.

THis is true no matter which Ramseys are involved.

No chance in hell was anyone in that family going to dump her body outside the house. Its why everything wound up being placed down in that hellhole.

And we are getting another Lifetime movie:

http://www.people.com/article/jonbenet-ramsey-lifetime-movie-exclusive

So for the 20th anniversary we have so far

-3-part Investigation Discovery special
-2-hour CNN special (heard about this on Peter Boyles show)
--6-hour CBS special
-Sundance documentary
-3-part Dr. Phil special
-Lifetime movie

So we have at least 18+ hours of JonBenet programming.

And Kolar is going to be on CBS's special:

I expect even more shows. Its the big anniversary and they'll cover it almost as much as they did since the late 90s.

The key is showing us new evidence. If its just a rehash of everything we already know and mainly focuses on IDI, none of these shows will do any good but bring her name back into mainstream focus.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Because the clock was running down. They had a trip scheduled that morning and everyone knew about it. If they start dragging things out and its postponed, people in their circle will start wondering what's going on over there.

THis is true no matter which Ramseys are involved.

No chance in hell was anyone in that family going to dump her body outside the house. Its why everything wound up being placed down in that hellhole.




I expect even more shows. Its the big anniversary and they'll cover it almost as much as they did since the late 90s.

The key is showing us new evidence. If its just a rehash of everything we already know and mainly focuses on IDI, none of these shows will do any good but bring her name back into mainstream focus.

I agree that that will definitely be more. The majority announced so far is airing before December so we should get shows around the actual anniversary. They probably won't be announced until October or even November. Plus we haven't heard what ABC, FOX, NBC are doing for it yet.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BBB167893]

And we are getting another Lifetime movie:

http://www.people.com/article/jonbenet-ramsey-lifetime-movie-exclusive

So for the 20th anniversary we have so far

-3-part Investigation Discovery special
-2-hour CNN special (heard about this on Peter Boyles show)
--6-hour CBS special
-Sundance documentary
-3-part Dr. Phil special
-Lifetime movie

So we have at least 18+ hours of JonBenet programming.

And Kolar is going to be on CBS's special:

At least it won't ALL be IDI bull***t.

 

[BBB167893]

Why does Patsy require all this staging, it cannot be because she wants rid of forensic evidence, since she left the fake crime-scene littered with her own personal forensic items, she left her fingerprints on the pineapple serving bowl, she demonstrated she was ignorant about crucial crime-scene artifact, i.e. the size-12's, then there is the acute and chronic sexual assaults, what is all that about?

How does JR know what to say when he tells the police his version of events, how come it matches PR's, similarly with BR, except that which was later retracted?
.

I'd like to add my two cents, UKGuy. As to the first question, you said it yourself: she was ignorant of forensics. These were not master criminals, quite the opposite. And I think the reason there was so much staging was that she was trying to think of everything and didn't have all the time in the world in which to do it. There's also the factor of whether or not there was any kind of argument with JR about what should be done.

As to the second, I strongly believe that JR and PR were in it together. To what end, I'm not 100% yet.

 

[Roy23]

at least it won't all be idi bull***t.

lol!!!

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Looks like we have two more specials coming out:

September 30: 2-hour CNN special
October 2: 2-hour A&E special

During past anniversaries, I was worried that the 20th anniversary would be...I don't want to say forgotten...but I thought that the coverage would simply be that around December 26, you would see articles summarizing the case and talking about how it's the anniversary. And that would be it. I did not expect there to be this many projects for it so I am pleasantly surprised. Besides OJ and the obvious ones like JFK and 9/11, is there any other case that gets this more attention around an anniversary? 7 projects in the works...and none for December yet, which is the actual anniversary month.

http://www.wehaveyourdaughter.net/new-events/

 

[BBB167893]

lol!!!

Yeah, that's what I'd say every time more of that bull***t comes out, except there's nothing funny about it.

And I'll tell you something else, brother: just because there are *advertiser censored**-clowns like Paula Woodward on your side, don't think that RDI has run out of ammunition. Or have you forgotten that I'm 2-2?