Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? Poll

[reintarnation]

WOW. I had always assumed that because of the position of her arms in rigor, how loose the restraints were, and the fact that they were placed over top of her clothing that it indicated the ligatures were placed post mortem, and therefore staged. To my knowledge, JR never claimed to alter anything but removing the tape from JBR's mouth.

I'm inclined to believe Walsh's statement was false, as it would contradict her being found in that blanket, which is accepted as fact. What are other's thoughts on the validity of this claim, then and now?

 

[questfortrue]

The purpose of staging is to deceive about what really happened. I think one of the long established problems with this case is that long ago the circumstances in which JonBenet was found has been identified as staging, when what we have factually is that there was inefficient or subsequently modified restraints and/or a choking device, likely tentative or restrained sexual assault compared with what generally happens in sexually motivated homicide, insufficient clean up and odd re-dressing. We don't know what part of any of that was done with the purpose of deceit to the "true" nature of the crime.

We can make a reasonable inference that the cleaning and re-dressing can be done for dual purposes, to hide evidence and to care for JonBenet. But the other stuff - they could be legitimate artefacts of the crime even though they are bizarre. So theories grow around the idea that these elements are manufactured for the purpose of deceit when they were not, they were genuine parts of the initial crime.

Yes, this is Kolar's conundrum, at what point the beginning of staging occurs. This could be when someone finds her by the wc or even inside the wc, depending on whether BR has placed her in either place. Assuming for discussion an SBP disorder: Since we don't have BR's medical records to determine if there was co-morbidity with something else, something which might point to far deeper issues, we don't know what or how much was done to her by BR or modified by others to deceive. We only have the adults' statements after she is found. In this regard deceit is recognized by FW and LE almost immediately, both in the wc and after JB is brought up from the basement.

Btw, JR does state he tried to remove her wrist ligatures. An additional perplexing action or statement if they were as loose as the coroner indicated.

 

[otg]

(rs&bbm)

Given the way her body was found, does that mean that her wrists were tied above her head and maybe she was hung?

If any of the upcoming investigative documentaries suggest a “partial hanging” as a possibility, just remember you heard it here first:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...d-Strangulation-Devices&p=5771888#post5771888

(If you read any of the other posts, remember that this was all written in 2010, before a lot of other information came out.)

 

[midwest mama]

snipped for brevity.....

Btw, JR does state he tried to remove her wrist ligatures. An additional perplexing action or statement if they were as loose as the coroner indicated.

I have wondered if JR simply was providing a clear reason for any evidence of his having handled the ligatures that might have been found during forensics testing. I also have suspected he stated that he, himself, had wrapped some Christmas gifts that year (I think it's in TOSOS) in the basement, in order to provide an alibi for any forensics evidence that might have been discovered from him on any of the torn open gifts found in the WC: i.e. the Bloomies purchased for Jenny.

 

[Tadpole12]

So basically the light switch is in the exact spot you'd expect to find a light switch when opening that door.

Yes! Exactly.

 

[questfortrue]

basement floor plans:
http://b.heart.50megs.com/ramsey/Images/Bsmt.jpg

[video=youtube;2q8YkikAoSk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2q8YkikAoSk&index=5&list=UUIpISsUtk7LemdNDHAz4ycA[/video]

Ramsey Home Tour 2B

re wine cellar
24:20 This is the light switch just inside the door
would be on the left hand side as you
open the door and entered the room.
the door to the room swings from right - correction -
from left to right and opens out away from the wine cellar.

re boiler room
26:06 This is where the light switch is located,
just inside the door, on the left as you would come through the door.
This particular door swings in.
Cabinet located in this area, with several drawers and doors.
Should also be noted that the height of these light switches, down here
this one here and the one in the wine room are approximately the same height
And they're a little higher than most normal house light switches


[switch protrudes from stud]

Thank you for the video. I noted the source again is likely Smit since it’s from PW, the journalist/author/friend of the Rs.

Just for additional accuracy on the light switch. There were two light switches in the room – one lower on the west wall, the other inside on what looks to be a stud. This info on the two switches is in IRMI. All of my doors which open towards me, swing to the left, not the right, so perhaps it would be a little confusing where exactly someone might expect the light switch to be. (I could be confused where the switch should be anyway. ) Here are a couple of photos for some clarification of where the second light switch is located.

 

[otg]

Thank you for the video. I noted the source again is likely Smit since it’s from PW, the journalist/author/friend of the Rs.

I believe this and all the other videos I linked last week were taken by Ollie Gray. Here's the link to those videos again (on Paula Wayward's Youtube account):
https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=UUIpISsUtk7LemdNDHAz4ycA

Anyone wanting an idea of the layout of the house really should take the time to watch the videos. I'm not sure exactly when Gray took them, but there is also this in one of them:

Just for additional accuracy on the light switch. There were two light switches in the room – one lower on the west wall, the other inside on what looks to be a stud. This info on the two switches is in IRMI. All of my doors which open towards me, swing to the left, not the right, so perhaps it would be a little confusing where exactly someone might expect the light switch to be. (I could be confused where the switch should be anyway. ) Here are a couple of photos for some clarification of where the second light switch is located.

I'm not certain, but I think the way the light/electricity worked in the WC is this:
The switch just inside the door turned on the electricity to the outlet/switch low on the other wall. There were no light fixtures overhead in the room, so someone placed a fluorescent light panel against the wall that was plugged into that outlet (which had a separate on/off switch). In your first photo, you can see the electrical cord running loosely up the wall over to where the light panel was located. In order for the light to be turned on, both switches had to be turned on. That's just all my supposition based on the few photos we've seen of that room. If that's the case, it might account for why Fleet White couldn't turn on the light when he felt around in the dark for a switch.

 

[singularity]

(rs&bbm) If any of the upcoming investigative documentaries suggest a “partial hanging” as a possibility, just remember you heard it here first:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...d-Strangulation-Devices&p=5771888#post5771888

(If you read any of the other posts, remember that this was all written in 2010, before a lot of other information came out.)

That was a great post. You went in depth on your reasoning behind your stance but I'll post three simple reasons why I also believe it is a real possibility.....

1. No one but the killer(s) know the original crime scene. Even if found on the WC floor, doesn't mean she was originally in that position.
2. John and Fleet's description of how her body was found do not match.
3. The JOhn Walsh comment

Its also possible she was hung with the loose bindings on her wrists as well.

 

[BBB167893]

questfortrue,
Coroner Meyer makes no reference to ligature marks in his Autopsy Report here is where he cites wrist or ligature etc.



...



...



...



So despite Meyer explicitly saying he looked closely at the right wrist he makes no mention of ligature marks or furrow, etc.

Its absence in the report will not make or break the case. Kolar is talking up what presumably must be part of his case theory, which does not detract from his central point, i.e. more than one person was involved in the staging.

I have always thought that there was multiple staging and Kolar is firming this up. I put it to SuperDave that Patsy could have asphyxiated and staged JonBenet with JR later amending the staging. The same evidence also allows for a BDI where BR does some initial staging with later both PR and JR amending it to suit their kidnapping scenario?

.

That's quite a challenge. I admit, the evidence could allow for those scenarios. I'll also admit that I gave considerable thought to the first idea. But as the evidence, that I know of, stands, I just can't see it any other way than PR and JR together, with JR maybe amending it later on.

 

[madeleine]

Not sure of the forum you referenced, mama (and greetings, my friend), but here is the article in full (Kolar is a lot more specific in this article than I've seen him be in any other interviews):

https://www.realcrimedaily.com/debu...what-was-the-familys-real-role-in-the-murder/

The undoing shows that one person was responsible for the injuries and someone else was responsible for covering her up, concealing her and trying to in their own mind make her comfortable following the violence. I think two different sets of hands were involved, not literally, but this was fairly vicious. When you look at the blow to her head, we don’t know if it was intentional to kill her but it was a pretty heavy blunt object that was used to strike her in the head. Then there’s the pretty severe garrotting taking place, which seemed to be overkill for someone of her size or age. An adult could have easily suffocated her with a hand or strangled her with a hand versus using a cord to end her life.

So those are pretty vicious attacks when you look at the violence involved in the injuries and then, contrary to that, she’s placed and wrapped in a blanket “like a papoose”, according to John’s statement of the discovery of his daughter. That’s more of a caring act towards the victim compared to leaving them sprawled out on the floor for discovery and not protected in a blanket with her favourite nightgown next to her.

vicious attacks,injuries (plural)

dunno if I am reading all this correctly but is he implying that both blow and garotting where done by the same person?BR?cause he says an adult would have used his hands so I guess he means the child in the house.

is this what he is saying and the strangulation was part of the crime too and not staging?

interesting

would that mean that the wrist ligatures where part of the crime/play, whatever, too?

 

[Sunshine4Me]

The undoing shows that one person was responsible for the injuries and someone else was responsible for covering her up, concealing her and trying to in their own mind make her comfortable following the violence. I think two different sets of hands were involved, not literally, but this was fairly vicious. When you look at the blow to her head, we don’t know if it was intentional to kill her but it was a pretty heavy blunt object that was used to strike her in the head. Then there’s the pretty severe garrotting taking place, which seemed to be overkill for someone of her size or age. An adult could have easily suffocated her with a hand or strangled her with a hand versus using a cord to end her life.

So those are pretty vicious attacks when you look at the violence involved in the injuries and then, contrary to that, she’s placed and wrapped in a blanket “like a papoose”, according to John’s statement of the discovery of his daughter. That’s more of a caring act towards the victim compared to leaving them sprawled out on the floor for discovery and not protected in a blanket with her favourite nightgown next to her.

vicious attacks,injuries (plural)

dunno if I am reading all this correctly but is he implying that both blow and garotting where done by the same person?BR?cause he says an adult would have used his hands so I guess he means the child in the house.

is this what he is saying and the strangulation was part of the crime too and not staging?

interesting

would that mean that the wrist ligatures where part of the crime/play, whatever, too?

Don't mean to jump in, but that would make more sense to me. I've always struggled with John or Patsy strangling her.

Sent from my XT830C using Tapatalk

 

[madeleine]

Don't mean to jump in, but that would make more sense to me. I've always struggled with John or Patsy strangling her.

Sent from my XT830C using Tapatalk

I will leave out the who did it part, I find this very interesting cause I always found it hard to believe that someone would strangle a child just for staging.You/re panicked, okay, write a ransom note , clean the crime scene...but to pull that cord around her neck only to make it look like it was something else...too hard to imagine.Same re the sexual assault.I never bought the theory that says she was assaulted only for cover up.

 

[neesaki]

Many years ago, John Walsh made a statement about Jonbenet being found hanging and was cut down that caused shockwaves on the JBR sites at the time. Many said he got his facts wrong, others thought he let slip info that wasn't supposed to get out in the open.

To my knowledge, this has never been mentioned since.

I've never heard it before now, it is interesting though. Maybe JR and / or PR found her that way and cut her down. Or, initially staged it that way and changed their mind. It's hard to believe Walsh would say something out of thin air if it weren't true. Idk. This is all I can find on it.

From Forums for justice:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?679-JonBenet-hanging

 

[reintarnation]

I will leave out the who did it part, I find this very interesting cause I always found it hard to believe that someone would strangle a child just for staging.You/re panicked, okay, write a ransom note , clean the crime scene...but to pull that cord around her neck only to make it look like it was something else...too hard to imagine.Same re the sexual assault.I never bought the theory that says she was assaulted only for cover up.

Remember that the head blow occurred first and she didn't die. That would have necessitated an act of murder, ie, the garroting. The head blow incapacitated JBR, so she would not have been conscious to experience everything that happened to her body afterward. The garroting allows the person to strangle from behind (not have to see JBR's face) and without having to actually wrap their hands around her throat.

If the head blow was accidental, then it could follow that the remaining injuries were staged to cover up for why the head blow happened. The injuries do seem torturous, "overkill," and with a sexual motive...something that a family member (certainly not a mother or young child) would be capable of. Instead, the injuries point more toward a pedophile and/or violent intruder ("foreign faction," terrorism, etc.), which is critical if you are trying to implicate an imaginary perpetrator from outside the home.

Additionally, if you believe PDI (abuse for toileting issues), BDI (sexual exploration/play gone wrong), or that JBR was suffering at the hands of a chronic sexual abuser, then the paintbrush penetration accounts for vaginal trauma that happened just prior to the head blow. That, or the paintbrush penetration was a sexual assault that happened before the head blow. I don't see any logic in staging sexual assault to cover up for sexual assault - either the paintbrush penetration was an extension of recurring sexual abuse or the vaginal trauma had another source (PDI) and this was an attempt to provide an alternate explanation for it.

 

[otg]

The undoing shows that one person was responsible for the injuries and someone else was responsible for covering her up, concealing her and trying to in their own mind make her comfortable following the violence. I think two different sets of hands were involved, not literally, but this was fairly vicious. When you look at the blow to her head, we don’t know if it was intentional to kill her but it was a pretty heavy blunt object that was used to strike her in the head. Then there’s the pretty severe garrotting taking place, which seemed to be overkill for someone of her size or age. An adult could have easily suffocated her with a hand or strangled her with a hand versus using a cord to end her life.

So those are pretty vicious attacks when you look at the violence involved in the injuries and then, contrary to that, she’s placed and wrapped in a blanket “like a papoose”, according to John’s statement of the discovery of his daughter. That’s more of a caring act towards the victim compared to leaving them sprawled out on the floor for discovery and not protected in a blanket with her favourite nightgown next to her.

vicious attacks,injuries (plural)

dunno if I am reading all this correctly but is he implying that both blow and garotting where done by the same person?BR?cause he says an adult would have used his hands so I guess he means the child in the house.

is this what he is saying and the strangulation was part of the crime too and not staging?

interesting

would that mean that the wrist ligatures where part of the crime/play, whatever, too?

Kolar has been pretty coy about the exact circumstances of his theory, so it's hard to understand exactly what he thinks happened. Perhaps we'll learn more in the upcoming CBS documentary. (Unfortunately, I'm afraid he's been influenced too much by that idiot Spitz.)

I do think its interesting that it's that documentary (with Kolar) that they are promoting as ending with all of the investigators agreeing on their conclusion. (I mean, can you imagine Kolar agreeing with a theory that does not implicate Burke? If it did, wouldn't he have to retract most of his book?)

 

[ozazure]

If the head blow was accidental, then it could follow that the remaining injuries were staged to cover up for why the head blow happened. The injuries do seem torturous, "overkill," and with a sexual motive...something that a family member (certainly not a mother or young child) would be capable of. Instead, the injuries point more toward a pedophile and/or violent intruder ("foreign faction," terrorism, etc.), which is critical if you are trying to implicate an imaginary perpetrator from outside the home.

Or something akin to what happened to Jamie Bulger.

 

[singularity]

I don't see any logic in staging sexual assault to cover up for sexual assault -

I see the logic in it. If someone was abusing her, that has to be accounted for. If not, they've got some splainin' to do. So they stage the sexual assault to cover that base.

Kolar has been pretty coy about the exact circumstances of his theory, so it's hard to understand exactly what he thinks happened. Perhaps we'll learn more in the upcoming CBS documentary. (Unfortunately, I'm afraid he's been influenced too much by that idiot Spitz.)

I do think its interesting that it's that documentary (with Kolar) that they are promoting as ending with all of the investigators agreeing on their conclusion. (I mean, can you imagine Kolar agreeing with a theory that does not implicate Burke? If it did, wouldn't he have to retract most of his book?)

IMO Kolar's theory is going to be torn to shreds on the series. It'll either happen while he's on the panel or they'll wait until his segment is over to do it.

IMO after these shows are over, BDI is joining IDI in the graveyard of Ramsey theories.

I'm actually hoping KOlar isn't there to focus on BDI. I hope he focuses more on how implausible IDI really is, the family dysfunction, and the basement sequence. Kolar is the perfect person to introduce the oddities in that sequence to a general audience that doesn't know so much detail like us.

If all he's there for is BDI, his camera time will be very short.

Yes I can imagine Kolar being pushed into a corner by experts, his theory unraveling on TV, and him changing course or toning it down.

 

[madeleine]

Kolar has been pretty coy about the exact circumstances of his theory, so it's hard to understand exactly what he thinks happened. Perhaps we'll learn more in the upcoming CBS documentary. (Unfortunately, I'm afraid he's been influenced too much by that idiot Spitz.)

I do think its interesting that it's that documentary (with Kolar) that they are promoting as ending with all of the investigators agreeing on their conclusion. (I mean, can you imagine Kolar agreeing with a theory that does not implicate Burke? If it did, wouldn't he have to retract most of his book?)

At first I was excited about this show, but dunno.....
Pointing at one of the Ramseys without being able to disclose everything you know about the case would be another mistake.It happened with the books.Thomas and Kolar.Okay, thanks for the info but they told me half of the truth which makes speculations worse IMO.
I/d rather agree with actions like Brennan/s.
And yeah, Lee and Spitz being two of the experts.......sigh.Isn/t Spitz the one with the flashlight theory?

 

[UKGuy]

The undoing shows that one person was responsible for the injuries and someone else was responsible for covering her up, concealing her and trying to in their own mind make her comfortable following the violence. I think two different sets of hands were involved, not literally, but this was fairly vicious. When you look at the blow to her head, we don’t know if it was intentional to kill her but it was a pretty heavy blunt object that was used to strike her in the head. Then there’s the pretty severe garrotting taking place, which seemed to be overkill for someone of her size or age. An adult could have easily suffocated her with a hand or strangled her with a hand versus using a cord to end her life.

So those are pretty vicious attacks when you look at the violence involved in the injuries and then, contrary to that, she’s placed and wrapped in a blanket “like a papoose”, according to John’s statement of the discovery of his daughter. That’s more of a caring act towards the victim compared to leaving them sprawled out on the floor for discovery and not protected in a blanket with her favourite nightgown next to her.

vicious attacks,injuries (plural)

dunno if I am reading all this correctly but is he implying that both blow and garotting where done by the same person?BR?cause he says an adult would have used his hands so I guess he means the child in the house.

is this what he is saying and the strangulation was part of the crime too and not staging?

interesting

would that mean that the wrist ligatures where part of the crime/play, whatever, too?

madeleine,

dunno if I am reading all this correctly but is he implying that both blow and garotting where done by the same person?BR?cause he says an adult would have used his hands so I guess he means the child in the house.

You are reading it correctly. Its Kolar's implied BDI theory, where one person does it all.

Nancy Grace - Aired October 25, 2013 - 20:00
http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1310/25/ng.01.html

Bombshell tonight. In the last hours, we get proof. A Colorado grand jury votes to indict JonBenet Ramsey`s parents, John and Patsy Ramsey.

...

JEAN CASAREZ, HLN LEGAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, it`s fascinating because they`re saying that John and Patsy Ramsey unreasonably, knowingly, recklessly, feloniously allowed JonBenet to be placed in a position where she should -- could be the victim of child abuse that then could result in her death. And secondly, in another charge, that then they assisted a person so that they would not be investigated, found, prosecuted or convicted or even sentenced in the first-degree murder of JonBenet or child abuse resulting in death.

GRACE: Joining me right now is a very special guest. It is Dr. Henry Lee. As you all know, he is a renowned forensic science professor. And he worked on the case. He has reviewed the autopsy, even consulted with the district attorney`s office.

Dr. Henry Lee, it`s so wonderful to talk to you again. What do you make...

HENRY LEE, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: Same (ph) thing (ph), Nancy.

GRACE: ... of the fact that a grand jury had planned -- actually, returned indictments on John and Patsy Ramsey, the elected district attorney decided not to go forward with that prosecution?

LEE: Well, I agree with the grand jury`s finding, but also, I agree with their, you know, state attorney`s decision because scientific evidence cannot prove this actually it`s a murder case.

GRACE: What do you mean by that, Dr. Henry Lee?

LEE: Well, it`s an untimely death, and what caused the death, of course, the medical examiner already found out. But the manner of the death, whether or not that`s a homicide or accidental death, it`s possible, but physical evidence alone -- I did met with the district attorney and the investigator from Boulder, Colorado, many times. We have many meetings. The consensus decision is we just don`t have enough evidence go for a trial.

GRACE: Well, let me ask you think, Dr. Henry lee. What would have led a grand jury to indict them?

LEE: The indictment (INAUDIBLE) I did not look at what the release, whatever I heard just now your correspondents says, it`s something (INAUDIBLE) know about this death and maybe have knowledge about it, did not say they are the murderer. That`s two different -- different story. One say you know about this case. The other say you actually murder your child. That`s a more serious charge. We have to have enough evidence.

To Dr. Henry Lee, who worked on the case. Dr. Henry Lee, that testing in `98 showed there was DNA evidence in JonBenet`s underwear. Many speculated where it came from. In fact, many speculated it may have even come from the factory where the underwear was made.

What do you make of that DNA in her underwear?

LEE: Well, the DNA was found in the underwear. However, wasn`t from a semen stain. So just a biological stain have male DNA. doesn`t mean that`s definitely from sexual assault, a semen ejaculation from male. Could be any trace transfer because in 1998, STRs (ph) (INAUDIBLE) the repeat DNA with the so-called trace DNA or touch DNA. Now become more sensitive technique, which would find some result. They found some result on the panty, but doesn`t necessarily it`s a male ejaculate. In addition, the panty is size 10 to 14. As Nancy, you`ll recall, JonBenet, only 7 years old.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682466/Evidence of a Cover-up

Obstruction of Justice? "Patsy Ramsey should have been brought to trial for getting in the way of justice for her daughter, charges Dr. Henry Lee. 'It seemed to me that there was enough evidence to establish the level of proof needed to indict Patsy Ramsey of, at least, obstruction of justice. But Colorado law says that option was not possible as long as there was potential for a homicide charge. 'Even with all the evidence, I could see we were lacking luck. Many of the authorities believed they lacked Patsy's complete cooperation, who seemed lawyered up. I gave the case less than 50% chance of being solved. 13 months later when the grand jury's deliberations were complete but before the panel had the chance to vote on indicting one or both Ramseys, I told the DA not to file charges" (The Globe, December 25, 2006; quotation and source provided by Internet poster The Punisher).

In 1998, Dr. Lee described the case as extremely difficult. “Unfortunately, we don't have the original crime scene,” he told the Denver Post. “Unfortunately, we don't have much information from the witnesses. Also, we don't have a major piece of physical evidence yet. Also, we don't have that much luck yet.”

I really do not get why Dr Henry Lee is appearing on the CBS show The Case of JonBenet Ramsey unless he has found a new clue usin his http://www.henryleeinstitute.com/, he is famous for his skeptical remark Rice Cooked meaning the case is all messed up, whats changed?

Spitz is obviously going to tell us that the same person whacked JonBenet on the head with Maglite also sexually assaulted her, this chimes with Beckner's take on the death.

Magazine: JonBenet flashlight found

By CHRISTOPHER ANDERSON, Camera Staff Writer

Monday, January 12, 1998

A flashlight possibly used to inflict a fatal head wound on 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey was found during a review of evidence at Boulder police headquarters, according news reports.

The flashlight was first spotted on a kitchen counter in the Ramsey home on Dec. 26, 1996, the first day of the investigation, but had disappeared, according to an article in this week's issue of Time magazine.

After Boulder Police Cmdr. Mark Beckner ordered a review of all case files and materials, almost a year later, a flashlight was found in an evidence storage room at police headquarters.

The flashlight does not appear to belong to any police officers, according to the magazine.
...

This reminds of the size-12's, hey we need this for our theory to work!

With Jim Clemente on board I reckon the CBS theory will end up citing familial sexual abuse as a factor, with forensic linguistic profiler James Fitzgerald explaining away the Ransom Note, Spitz will cite his Maglite theory, Kolar will run through why its not an intruder case, and likely remind the audience how the GJ voted, i.e. Accessory to a Crime, and Child Abuse, with Henry Lee ending saying something like: Too much rice cooked, we may never know? Unless they found some new clue?

.

 

[madeleine]

Call me the bad girl but I don/t think they found any new clues.....