Did JR tell us the Plan, #2 - RDI Only thread

[dazeerae]

Wow, Meara, you're blowing my mind. I'm always fascinated & taken off guard by people who can lie convincingly with complete confidence & ease. I don't think deception = murder, but it sure doesn't help Patsy's case.

Re: the ransom note being placed on the spiral stair step where other papers are frequently placed is not a giant leap in logic. Possibly just force of habit, & maybe the grain of truth needed to make the story seem more believable.

I'm familiar with the wine glasses story. Did it come from their book? Sorry, I would look it up, but I need to go to bed soon. While I'm researching tomorrow, I'll have to refresh my memory on Judith Miller.

About the other Judith (Phillips): how well do you have to train your 6 year old not to discuss the fact that you're coloring her hair several shades lighter?? I know very few young children who can keep any kind of secret when asked directly, & JonBenet said something like "Shhh, you're not supposed to talk about that." How sad to have a child already so versed in the art of deception.

Oh, & don't even get me started on the treatment of the pets which were more of an accessory or a toy, used & then quickly discarded. Possibly foreshadowing the discarding of their daughter for whatever reason we're not privy to.


*I hope this post makes some sense. I'm a bit sleep deprived.

 

[Scandigirl]

Hi Meara!

Thanks so much for your amazing and thought-provoking post! I'm waving and smiling back, as I haven't worked out how to use all the icons yet! I'm glad and relieved that the entire issue of those photos has been of some use, to generate further thinking, and not been a completely pointless red herring!

I have read before (although also can't remember where!) about the incidents of Patsy's lies that you described- but, how clever to link those to the ideas that Patsy could have positioned her writings on the stair. I think you're really on to something here!

I agree that Patsy' lies don't mean that she's a killer, but they don indicate someone who lies often and easily, and that she uses lies to put across her preferred reality to other people- very manipulative, and even dangerous!

Your ideas got me thinking, too- doesn't it seem that with the incident of the wine glasses, that Patsy was willing and able to step in and cover for John, and also to possibly do his "dirty work" for him if necessary, as he hadn't got the nerve, and she was mentally tougher? Apologies if this is completely way off, and it is a bit of a sinister thought, but it did pop into my head and make me wonder what you think?

I don't believe in either pre meditation or not necessarily, just open to consider all possibilities... I hope to read more fascinating posts from you and dazeerae, and everyone else- it's very thought-provoking!

 

[Scandigirl]

Just realised all my iPad typos- apologies, and hope my reply still makes some sense!!

 

[chlban]

dazeerae;10202107]Oh, & don't even get me started on the treatment of the pets which were more of an accessory or a toy, used & then quickly discarded. Possibly foreshadowing the discarding of their daughter for whatever reason we're not privy to

.


I have never read the Ramsey's books, I refuse to contribute to the idea that they are making money of the death of their child, so that one about the dog was new to me and made me ill.

What a cold hearted witch. Yep, just adds to my belief that Patsy could, and would, "finish off" her daughter if that is what it took to protect her reputation.

 

[Scandigirl]

.


I have never read the Ramsey's books, I refuse to contribute to the idea that they are making money of the death of their child, so that one about the dog was new to me and made me ill.

What a cold hearted witch. Yep, just adds to my belief that Patsy could, and would, "finish off" her daughter if that is what it took to protect her reputation.

I completely agree about not wanting to contribute any money to the Ramsey's- that's why I've never read a single book of theirs, either!

I know it's a really "out there" consideration, and possibly a step too far, but does anyone think it might also be possible that Patsy might have been capable of "finishing off" her daughter, for any reason best known to her and John between them, and that it could even have been agreed between them (even perhaps an unspoken understanding?) that she would be the one to take on the task of "taking care of that problem" for them, with John's knowledge and assistance? Only a tantalising thought, of course...

Dazeerae, I also agree that it is very sad that Patsy could have got a 6 year old to collude in the lie about dyeing her hair. Doesn't it make you wonder if maybe JonBenet was fearful of the possible consequences if she didn't comply? Or, perhaps she was just simply copying her mother's example of breezily lying about it to people, in an offhand way?

 

[Meara]

Wow, Meara, you're blowing my mind. I'm always fascinated & taken off guard by people who can lie convincingly with complete confidence & ease. I don't think deception = murder, but it sure doesn't help Patsy's case.

Re: the ransom note being placed on the spiral stair step where other papers are frequently placed is not a giant leap in logic. Possibly just force of habit, & maybe the grain of truth needed to make the story seem more believable.

I'm familiar with the wine glasses story. Did it come from their book? Sorry, I would look it up, but I need to go to bed soon. While I'm researching tomorrow, I'll have to refresh my memory on Judith Miller.

About the other Judith (Phillips): how well do you have to train your 6 year old not to discuss the fact that you're coloring her hair several shades lighter?? I know very few young children who can keep any kind of secret when asked directly, & JonBenet said something like "Shhh, you're not supposed to talk about that." How sad to have a child already so versed in the art of deception.

Oh, & don't even get me started on the treatment of the pets which were more of an accessory or a toy, used & then quickly discarded. Possibly foreshadowing the discarding of their daughter for whatever reason we're not privy to.


*I hope this post makes some sense. I'm a bit sleep deprived.

daze, thanks for your reply. More substantial stuff to come, but for now: I can't recall where I read the wine glass story, so it will take research this weekend to locate it. And, as if the case weren't confusing enough, Judith Philips and Judith Miller are one and the same. The Rams first knew her as Philips. Later, she married Tom Miller. Hope you got some sleep ~

 

[Meara]

Hi Meara!

Thanks so much for your amazing and thought-provoking post! I'm waving and smiling back, as I haven't worked out how to use all the icons yet! I'm glad and relieved that the entire issue of those photos has been of some use, to generate further thinking, and not been a completely pointless red herring!

I have read before (although also can't remember where!) about the incidents of Patsy's lies that you described- but, how clever to link those to the ideas that Patsy could have positioned her writings on the stair. I think you're really on to something here!

I agree that Patsy' lies don't mean that she's a killer, but they don indicate someone who lies often and easily, and that she uses lies to put across her preferred reality to other people- very manipulative, and even dangerous!

Your ideas got me thinking, too- doesn't it seem that with the incident of the wine glasses, that Patsy was willing and able to step in and cover for John, and also to possibly do his "dirty work" for him if necessary, as he hadn't got the nerve, and she was mentally tougher? Apologies if this is completely way off, and it is a bit of a sinister thought, but it did pop into my head and make me wonder what you think?

I don't believe in either pre meditation or not necessarily, just open to consider all possibilities... I hope to read more fascinating posts from you and dazeerae, and everyone else- it's very thought-provoking!

Thanks for your kind words and, again, for getting the wheels turning. And for the wave = ]

"preferred reality" - perfect!

"very manipulative, and even dangerous" - I'm afraid you're right. The Komrik article, and Komrik himself, are problematic, but there's one clear take-away: Never underestimate a narcissist.

"Patsy was willing and able to step in and cover for John" - Oh wasn't she, though? You have anticipated Part 2!

Using the other icons is easy once you know, Scandigirl. When you're writing a post, you'll see a small menu of smileys in a box to the right. At the bottom of the box you'll find a link to the whole menu, which has both icons and their text equivalents. To add a smiley to your post:

-- Place the cursor where you want the smiley to appear in your post.
-- Click on the More link to open the whole menu, which is linked to your composing window.
-- Click on the icon you want (which will automatically appear where the cursor is).
-- Return to your composing window.
-- You can also add a smiley by typing its text equivalent into your post.

That's it for now. So sorry, yesterday and today were non-stop, reducing me to a bear of very little brain. So, tomorrow I'll finally be back to write up what will by then be the somewhat anticlimactic concluding thoughts!

 

[Scandigirl]

Thanks for your kind words and, again, for getting the wheels turning. And for the wave = ]

"preferred reality" - perfect!

"very manipulative, and even dangerous" - I'm afraid you're right. The Komrik article, and Komrik himself, are problematic, but there's one clear take-away: Never underestimate a narcissist.

"Patsy was willing and able to step in and cover for John" - Oh wasn't she, though? You have anticipated Part 2!

Using the other icons is easy once you know, Scandigirl. When you're writing a post, you'll see a small menu of smileys in a box to the right. At the bottom of the box you'll find a link to the whole menu, which has both icons and their text equivalents. To add a smiley to your post:

-- Place the cursor where you want the smiley to appear in your post.
-- Click on the More link to open the whole menu, which is linked to your composing window.
-- Click on the icon you want (which will automatically appear where the cursor is).
-- Return to your composing window.
-- You can also add a smiley by typing its text equivalent into your post.

That's it for now. So sorry, yesterday and today were non-stop, reducing me to a bear of very little brain. So, tomorrow I'll finally be back to write up what will by then be the somewhat anticlimactic concluding thoughts!

Hi again Meara! :wave:

Thanks so much again for your helpful reply, and explaining how the icons work! I'll be waving, laughing, frowning away to my heart's content now! Don't apologise for being busy- I'm exactly the same, and have to drop in and out quickly sometimes, then try to catch up!

Sorry if I pre empted an aspect of your theory, but it hasn't spoiled anything- I'm looking forward and intrigued to read your full conclusion in more detail tomorrow, when you have time!

 

[questfortrue]

Hi Scandigirl :seeya:

RSBM
Fast forward a few years to early dating with JR. The scene I'm recalling went something like this. Patsy was about to enter JR's apartment holding two wine glasses when the mistress who had caught on that she was being dumped came up and asked, "Is he in there?" Patsy said, "Who?" and when the woman said "John Ramsey," Patsy said, "I don't know. I just came over to return these wine glasses." The woman left, and Patsy went inside, where JR was cowering behind a door, hiding from the dangerous dumpee. As John tells this story, he was enraptured by Patsy's ability to spin a cover story coolly and believably at the drop of a hat; and that was high praise from a man who had just spent two years lying to his wife. (Can anyone link a source for this story, by any chance? So sorry, can't locate it right now but will try again later.) RSBM

That story is from June 1998 John Ramsey Interrogation by Lou Smit and Mike Kane
It's on ACR - http://www.acandyrose.com/s-gloria-williams.htm

 

[Meara]

Thanks, qft! That was very nice of you to track down the source. :tyou: The 1998 interview is truly a gold mine of information.

 

[questfortrue]

Thanks, qft! That was very nice of you to track down the source. :tyou: The 1998 interview is truly a gold mine of information.

That little story about the start of PR’s and JR’s relationship caught my attention too, not just for the obvious ease PR lies and for the fact JR is wowed by her mastery of a situation. It enabled PR to defeat a rival easily in front of JR, ego strokes for PR here. But it also says something interesting about the dynamics between them: How alive and close both of them are in situations which call upon their best manipulative selves.

There's another story (Hodges book) about JR and PR “playing off” one another at what JP, photographer/past friend, termed her expense. She came to a party once at their house without her husband. JR met her at the door and gave her the male “once over” look/assessment JP felt really inappropriate, raving at how great she looked. Then JR called PR over and instead of PR leveling the awkwardness of the situation, PR joins him in raving over JP, reinforcing JP’s discomfort. A little private joke between JR and PR. So this is JP’s interpretation and one might not give it much weight, but it adds to the profile.

A third insight into JR amidst my rambling here. It involves his company, AG. JR merged his company with two other like distribution companies; he brought the fewest clients to the merger. He and the owner of one of the other two companies managed to oust the older owner of one of the companies out of the mix. Then JR is able to foist some of the bad rap for this upon the other guy and able to force him out as well, leaving only JR at the helm. While this extreme competitiveness in business works well and is acceptable, how does it play out in JR’s personal life? He selects a wife who is also able to demonstrate an unbridled push for perfection, to “top dog it” over others at the drop of a hat. And we can see this “seeming” perfection foisted upon JB.

People many times don’t become different in a crisis situation; they rely on their well-honed survival instincts. But it wasn’t enough to escape a “cover-up” indictment and who knows what else, JR and PR were intent on winning over the public. Imo, JR still cares deeply about whether he’s really “exonerated” in the public eye. (If he can’t have FW “fingered” in PW’s book, who else can he insinuate into the crime?) He wants to win that public relations aspect too. Count on it. JMHO

 

[Meara]

That little story about the start of PR’s and JR’s relationship caught my attention too, not just for the obvious ease PR lies and for the fact JR is wowed by her mastery of a situation. It enabled PR to defeat a rival easily in front of JR, ego strokes for PR here. But it also says something interesting about the dynamics between them: How alive and close both of them are in situations which call upon their best manipulative selves.

There's another story (Hodges book) about JR and PR “playing off” one another at what JP, photographer/past friend, termed her expense. She came to a party once at their house without her husband. JR met her at the door and gave her the male “once over” look/assessment JP felt really inappropriate, raving at how great she looked. Then JR called PR over and instead of PR leveling the awkwardness of the situation, PR joins him in raving over JP, reinforcing JP’s discomfort. A little private joke between JR and PR. So this is JP’s interpretation and one might not give it much weight, but it adds to the profile.

A third insight into JR amidst my rambling here. It involves his company, AG. JR merged his company with two other like distribution companies; he brought the fewest clients to the merger. He and the owner of one of the other two companies managed to oust the older owner of one of the companies out of the mix. Then JR is able to foist some of the bad rap for this upon the other guy and able to force him out as well, leaving only JR at the helm. While this extreme competitiveness in business works well and is acceptable, how does it play out in JR’s personal life? He selects a wife who is also able to demonstrate an unbridled push for perfection, to “top dog it” over others at the drop of a hat. And we can see this “seeming” perfection foisted upon JB.

People many times don’t become different in a crisis situation; they rely on their well-honed survival instincts. But it wasn’t enough to escape a “cover-up” indictment and who knows what else, JR and PR were intent on winning over the public. Imo, JR still cares deeply about whether he’s really “exonerated” in the public eye. (If he can’t have FW “fingered” in PW’s book, who else can he insinuate into the crime?) He wants to win that public relations aspect too. Count on it. JMHO

BBM

Excellent post, qft! That sentence, How alive and close both of them are in situations which call upon their best manipulative selves. -- that is exactly what I'm after, only you've said it far better than I ever could have done. In fact, you're about to see me say it less well in Part 2, which I'm drafting now! But I want to acknowledge your post first.

Your points about R and PR “playing off” one another and being intent on winning over the public are key insights into what made their relationship tick, IMO.

One other story - actually, a story within a story - comes to mind that is of a piece with what we're both considering. This is the one from DOI about the Rams and the Stines having drinks on the deck in Charlevoix and yucking it up over pretending to machine gun the paparazzi with a shot gun - and how funny they thought it was later that a photographer did manage to snap them but got there too late for the gunnery action (http://ruthees_library.tripod.com/shotgun.html). Poor guy, he "missed the jackpot photo of the century." The century? Really, Patsy? And what a bizarre focus. The scene occurred in June 1997, scarcely six months after their daughter's brutal murder in their home, and therefore only two months after they'd revisited the trauma in their first formal interviews with police, and with the couple who last saw the family before the murder.

I understand black humor in the face of tragedy and, on its own, the scene on the deck could qualify as that. What's off is the Rams' presentation of the story in DOI as straight humor. IOW, whereas black humor is meant to be disturbing, the Rams offer theirs as just the opposite: "It was always good to laugh at our problems when we could." Tra-la-la-la-la. They don't seem to know the difference or understand how others might perceive them. This emotional obtuseness, in company with deceit, one upmanship, extreme competitiveness, false perfection, manipulativeness, blaming others for one's transgressions, and excessive pursuit of approval, is characteristic of narcissism. I believe this disorder is central to what happened in the Ramsey house on Christmas night, but that's another discussion for another time.

Thank you, qft, for pulling so many related details together in such a cogent way. Thanks also for the enlighteningly creepy vignette from Hodges' book.

 

[Scandigirl]

Thanks, questfortrue and Meara, for sharing your interesting thought and anecdotes about the dynamics of John and Patsy's relationship- it really gets you thinking about so many different aspects, doesn't it?!

The way that they seemed to "play off each other" and share "insider" jokes makes me think of the ransom note, as I've always had a sort of gut instinct that it was full of words, phrases and instructions that were meant as much to be shared with each other, as for the benefit of the police. To me, phrases like "the journey will be long and exhausting" and "I advise you to be well rested", putting the money in "a brown paper bag" make me feel that these could be part of some kind of shared joke in some way between them, although I can't put my finger on anything more clearly than that? Just a feeling!

The more I delve into things, I know there is no evidence of it at all, but I'm wondering more and more if perhaps both John and Patsy could have suffered from some type of personality disorder, maybe Narcissism? I don't know enough about it to put labels on anything, but again, just an instinct that something was just "not quite right" with both of them. It's entirely possible that they had just simply never been officially diagnosed, but from all the anecdotes and what the public can see of their reactions and behaviour, it's entirely possible? Or at least one of them suffering from some type of disorder, and the other one having aspects of their personality that enables them to "feed off" the other? Again, just purely speculation!

Watching their interview clips, I always have the uncomfortable feeling that they are somehow almost play acting, or talking about something in a film, rather than a terrible event that's really happened to them. I don't know if I'm making sense to anyone, but it's as if they've already agreed together that JonBenet's death "had to happen" for some reason known between them, and they've already rationalised it to themselves... They've by-passed the grief stage, are comfortable with their "decision", but know that other people would expect them to appear grief-stricken, etc. To me, it's as if they're saying what they know they should say in the situation, without sincerely feeling it, as if they have already emotionally distanced themselves.

Sorry for rambling on, and hope any of it might make sense!

 

[Meara]

Hi again Meara! :wave:

Thanks so much again for your helpful reply, and explaining how the icons work! I'll be waving, laughing, frowning away to my heart's content now! Don't apologise for being busy- I'm exactly the same, and have to drop in and out quickly sometimes, then try to catch up!

Sorry if I pre empted an aspect of your theory, but it hasn't spoiled anything- I'm looking forward and intrigued to read your full conclusion in more detail tomorrow, when you have time!

Hey, look at that wave! Thanks for all you said and no, nothing's spoiled at all. I was excited to see where your thoughts were going.

* * * *
That's as far as I got the other night... I felt ready to post this smiley myself: :waiting: It was quite the week.

So, to continue...
I'm still finding this idea very persuasive, that the pad and papers were laid across the stair and became the basis for PR's improv about the RN (rather than a being a practice run). The stairs were an organizing place for her. She left her purses there for LHP to clean and set things there that needed to be taken upstairs. The bags to be loaded on the plane were gathered at the foot of the stairs (bizarrely, the phrase "staging area" comes to mind). I think a woman naturally finds the place in her house that best supports her main routines and sense of authority. For some it's the kitchen, for others it's the desk - what have you. For Patsy, it was the spiral staircase. :twocents:

This suggests to me that neither parent was trying to fool the other on the morning of the 26th. JR would have known PR used the stairs that way. Had he not known PR was involved in the murder and cover-up, she would have told a different story because her story about the RN on the stairs would have tipped him off. Could JR have writen the note to mislead PR and placed it on the stairs? Yes, but then we're back to the credibility problem. How likely was it that an intruder would have chosen that odd location or known PR used the spiral stairs to go down to the kitchen in the morning? JR would have concocted a more convincing scenario for Patsy. They were in on it together.

Part 1 talked about PR's dissembling. The wine glass story is significant because it shows not only how thrilled JR was, even 20 years on, with PR's skill at subterfuge but adds to the evidence that JR sought an illicit element in his romantic/sexual relationships. He apparently got bored with his first wife, had at least one affair in Atlanta (lasting for two years), began a relationship with PR before ending it (and evidently as a way of ending it), and was thought by coworkers in Boulder to be cheating on Patsy, due to his recurrent unexplained absences from work (and there must have been other factors to imply that. No one suggested he was sneaking off to church.).

The Rams had what appeared to be normal relationships with other couples. But JR's close relationships with men, like his relationships with women, share a dark element. Both Donald Stevens, fraternity brother and lifelong friend, and Jay Elowsky, his business partner in Pasta Jay's, have a history of domestic violence. (Curiously, Stevens was married to the Lt. Gov. of CO at the time of JBR's murder and during the first two years of the investigation. Hm.) For a fuller statement, see my post #889 on this thread: [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=10094301#post10094301"]Who molested/abused Jonbenet? - Page 36 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame].

Patsy seemed to enjoy flattering JR by doing power-trippy things for him and with him. Both of them appeared to have a private dark side, and the two meshed. IMO, they were drawn to each other by this mutually reinforcing dynamic. Here I'll quote questfortrue, whose elegant formulation bears repeating: But it [the wine glass story] also says something interesting about the dynamics between them: How alive and close both of them are in sutuations which call upon their manipulative selves.

That's it for now, Scandigirl, anticlimactic as warned, and with some of my other thoughts relocated to the reply to questfortrue. Thank you for your enthusiasm, interest, and contributions!

 

[UKGuy]

That little story about the start of PR’s and JR’s relationship caught my attention too, not just for the obvious ease PR lies and for the fact JR is wowed by her mastery of a situation. It enabled PR to defeat a rival easily in front of JR, ego strokes for PR here. But it also says something interesting about the dynamics between them: How alive and close both of them are in situations which call upon their best manipulative selves.

There's another story (Hodges book) about JR and PR “playing off” one another at what JP, photographer/past friend, termed her expense. She came to a party once at their house without her husband. JR met her at the door and gave her the male “once over” look/assessment JP felt really inappropriate, raving at how great she looked. Then JR called PR over and instead of PR leveling the awkwardness of the situation, PR joins him in raving over JP, reinforcing JP’s discomfort. A little private joke between JR and PR. So this is JP’s interpretation and one might not give it much weight, but it adds to the profile.

A third insight into JR amidst my rambling here. It involves his company, AG. JR merged his company with two other like distribution companies; he brought the fewest clients to the merger. He and the owner of one of the other two companies managed to oust the older owner of one of the companies out of the mix. Then JR is able to foist some of the bad rap for this upon the other guy and able to force him out as well, leaving only JR at the helm. While this extreme competitiveness in business works well and is acceptable, how does it play out in JR’s personal life? He selects a wife who is also able to demonstrate an unbridled push for perfection, to “top dog it” over others at the drop of a hat. And we can see this “seeming” perfection foisted upon JB.

People many times don’t become different in a crisis situation; they rely on their well-honed survival instincts. But it wasn’t enough to escape a “cover-up” indictment and who knows what else, JR and PR were intent on winning over the public. Imo, JR still cares deeply about whether he’s really “exonerated” in the public eye. (If he can’t have FW “fingered” in PW’s book, who else can he insinuate into the crime?) He wants to win that public relations aspect too. Count on it. JMHO

questfortrue,
ITA. A winner takes all mentality. That morning it all breaks down though, JR and PR are no longer certain the other is playing the same game?

PR knows JR is playing some game but she is not sure which one, because the staging had changed so much and JonBenet had not been found?

PR opts out of her role by going hysterical, JR vanishes to rearrange some evidence LOL.

.

 

[Scandigirl]

Hey, look at that wave! Thanks for all you said and no, nothing's spoiled at all. I was excited to see where your thoughts were going.

* * * *
That's as far as I got the other night... I felt ready to post this smiley myself: :waiting: It was quite the week.

So, to continue...
I'm still finding this idea very persuasive, that the pad and papers were laid across the stair and became the basis for PR's improv about the RN (rather than a being a practice run). The stairs were an organizing place for her. She left her purses there for LHP to clean and set things there that needed to be taken upstairs. The bags to be loaded on the plane were gathered at the foot of the stairs (bizarrely, the phrase "staging area" comes to mind). I think a woman naturally finds the place in her house that best supports her main routines and sense of authority. For some it's the kitchen, for others it's the desk - what have you. For Patsy, it was the spiral staircase. :twocents:

This suggests to me that neither parent was trying to fool the other on the morning of the 26th. JR would have known PR used the stairs that way. Had he not known PR was involved in the murder and cover-up, she would have told a different story because her story about the RN on the stairs would have tipped him off. Could JR have writen the note to mislead PR and placed it on the stairs? Yes, but then we're back to the credibility problem. How likely was it that an intruder would have chosen that odd location or known PR used the spiral stairs to go down to the kitchen in the morning? JR would have concocted a more convincing scenario for Patsy. They were in on it together.

Part 1 talked about PR's dissembling. The wine glass story is significant because it shows not only how thrilled JR was, even 20 years on, with PR's skill at subterfuge but adds to the evidence that JR sought an illicit element in his romantic/sexual relationships. He apparently got bored with his first wife, had at least one affair in Atlanta (lasting for two years), began a relationship with PR before ending it (and evidently as a way of ending it), and was thought by coworkers in Boulder to be cheating on Patsy, due to his recurrent unexplained absences from work (and there must have been other factors to imply that. No one suggested he was sneaking off to church.).

The Rams had what appeared to be normal relationships with other couples. But JR's close relationships with men, like his relationships with women, share a dark element. Both Donald Stevens, fraternity brother and lifelong friend, and Jay Elowsky, his business partner in Pasta Jay's, have a history of domestic violence. (Curiously, Stevens was married to the Lt. Gov. of CO at the time of JBR's murder and during the first two years of the investigation. Hm.) For a fuller statement, see my post #889 on this thread: Who molested/abused Jonbenet? - Page 36 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community.

Patsy seemed to enjoy flattering JR by doing power-trippy things for him and with him. Both of them appeared to have a private dark side, and the two meshed. IMO, they were drawn to each other by this mutually reinforcing dynamic. Here I'll quote questfortrue, whose elegant formulation bears repeating: But it [the wine glass story] also says something interesting about the dynamics between them: How alive and close both of them are in sutuations which call upon their manipulative selves.

That's it for now, Scandigirl, anticlimactic as warned, and with some of my other thoughts relocated to the reply to questfortrue. Thank you for your enthusiasm, interest, and contributions!

Hi Meara, thanks for another fascinating post, and sorry for my late response! It's not anti climactic at all, but exciting, as I feel sure that your clever theory about Patsy using her habit of leaving things on the stairs for inspiration when deliberately placing the ransom note there, makes perfect sense! and is very likely the jackpot- the truth of what really happened!

I hadn't thought of it before, but makes much more sense than the practice note idea... It must have been what the police were suspicious about, when questioning both Patsy and John! It's a pretty serious issue, because it really shows that the ransom note on the stairs can be traced directly to a habit/idea of Patsy's, if not her and John together. I agree that it shows also that they must have been "in on it" together- the placement of the note on the stairs must have been a private communication between John and Patsy, and also conveniently pointed the finger at LHP too, as a by-product, as she often communicated with Patsy via messages left on the stairs?

I also agree about John and Patsy's relationship dynamic- getting a private thrill out of encouraging each other's dark sides. I think they shared many dark secrets together, and also jokes at other people's expense.

 

[Scandigirl]

Sorry to post twice, but I didn't want to make one ridiculously long one...

Continuing the discussion of John and Patsy's dark sides- for me at least, there's a sinister feeling that there may even have been some kind of wider group involved somehow, either directly or indirectly... I'm not entirely sure what I mean, just a feeling, partly due to John and Patsy's strange distancing statements in their media interviews soon after it happened- things like "she's in a better place now", "we're not angry", John only wanting to know "why", whilst Patsy asking "who?" did it? etc.

A sudden idea to explore hit me thus evening when I finished work late in the evening (I work from home). Winter nights here in England are very dark and cold, and late in the evenings, hubby and I often like to snuggle in cosy pj's and slippers when we've finished working late... Sorry this is very boring, but there is a point I'm coming to!

Tonight, I didn't change although I wanted to, as we had a couple of acquaintances dropping by to drop some things off, and who might stay for a quick drink/coffee. So, I stayed fully dressed and decided to wait to remove my day's makeup after they had left. I'm not excessively vain, and I think probably many women would feel the same?

Patsy was known to be extremely image conscious, and I wondered if the reason she stayed fully dressed and made up all night on Christmas night, was because there was someone, or possibly a group of people, in their house that night after they returned home?

Otherwise,wouldn't she have changed into her nightwear and removed her makeup after a long, tiring day, once back at home, late in the evening, if only at home with her own husband and kids, who she would have presumably been relaxed and comfortable with?

John, being a man, (and going off the difference between me and my husband), might have been more likely to feel comfortable having a shower with other people in the house, as unlike Patsy, he didn't have hair and makeup etc to think about?

Many of us have seen Patsy staying dressed as an indication of her involvement in JB's murder (this may or may not be true), but could it also have been a real indication that there were others present that night? Not intruders breaking in, but people who were known, and let in and out quietly, with full knowledge?

This could be completely wrong. Sorry for rambling on, but just an idea?

 

[Anyhoo]

Sorry to post twice, but I didn't want to make one ridiculously long one...

Continuing the discussion of John and Patsy's dark sides- for me at least, there's a sinister feeling that there may even have been some kind of wider group involved somehow, either directly or indirectly... I'm not entirely sure what I mean, just a feeling, partly due to John and Patsy's strange distancing statements in their media interviews soon after it happened- things like "she's in a better place now", "we're not angry", John only wanting to know "why", whilst Patsy asking "who?" did it? etc.

A sudden idea to explore hit me thus evening when I finished work late in the evening (I work from home). Winter nights here in England are very dark and cold, and late in the evenings, hubby and I often like to snuggle in cosy pj's and slippers when we've finished working late... Sorry this is very boring, but there is a point I'm coming to!

Tonight, I didn't change although I wanted to, as we had a couple of acquaintances dropping by to drop some things off, and who might stay for a quick drink/coffee. So, I stayed fully dressed and decided to wait to remove my day's makeup after they had left. I'm not excessively vain, and I think probably many women would feel the same?

Patsy was known to be extremely image conscious, and I wondered if the reason she stayed fully dressed and made up all night on Christmas night, was because there was someone, or possibly a group of people, in their house that night after they returned home?

Otherwise,wouldn't she have changed into her nightwear and removed her makeup after a long, tiring day, once back at home, late in the evening, if only at home with her own husband and kids, who she would have presumably been relaxed and comfortable with?

John, being a man, (and going off the difference between me and my husband), might have been more likely to feel comfortable having a shower with other people in the house, as unlike Patsy, he didn't have hair and makeup etc to think about?

Many of us have seen Patsy staying dressed as an indication of her involvement in JB's murder (this may or may not be true), but could it also have been a real indication that there were others present that night? Not intruders breaking in, but people who were known, and let in and out quietly, with full knowledge?

This could be completely wrong. Sorry for rambling on, but just an idea?

That is a new point I had not thought of before. As someone here pointed out, we may be way off base in suggesting this scenario, but then again, taking the totality of the evidence (including the foreign DNA) this theory may explain the crime better than one of the "pure RDI" theories. I would certainly accept it much more than an IDI theory.

When I asked the question: 'What secrets were the Ramsey's keeping that led to the death of JB'?, I was indirectly referring to the scenario you are talking about. Also when I said the Ramsey's were not a normal family, this is what I meant. Could a normal family murder their daughter and stage a fake kidnapping afterwards? My answer to that question is No.

 

[Scandigirl]

That is a new point I had not thought of before. As someone here pointed out, we may be way off base in suggesting this scenario, but then again, taking the totality of the evidence (including the foreign DNA) this theory may explain the crime better than one of the "pure RDI" theories. I would certainly accept it much more than an IDI theory.

When I asked the question: 'What secrets were the Ramsey's keeping that led to the death of JB'?, I was indirectly referring to the scenario you are talking about. Also when I said the Ramsey's were not a normal family, this is what I meant. Could a normal family murder their daughter and stage a fake kidnapping afterwards? My answer to that question is No.

Hi Anyhoo,

I'm glad you think the idea about Patsy not getting changes has some merit, and is worth exploring. I was never convinced that the only reasons Patsy might have remained fully dressed in the same clothes and "made up" were either because she was too busy murdering her daughter and/or staging the crime scene, or she simply fell asleep.

The first option doesn't explain how she would have stayed so immaculate, and the second is, to me, unlikely. I agree that the Ramsey's don't seem to have been an "ordinary" family. I'm not sure if we're thinking along similar lines here, but I'm wondering if they could have belonged to some kind of cult, although not sure what type? This could be wrong, of course, and would maybe have come out by now, if so?

I know it seems like far-fetched conspiracy theory territory, but such things do happen, involving people from all works of life, and income levels. Based purely on gut instincts, I wonder if their friends, although not necessarily directly involved in JB's death, could have known something about the background and circumstances of the event?

Just going off the way they seemed to surround the Ramsey's afterwards (closing ranks?), even bizarrely apparently wiping kitchen surfaces down. Other things bother me, too, about the possible presence of other people: Burke saying that "someone" took JB "quietly" down to the basement (not necessarily either of his parents?), and the secret Santa visit... The Ramsey's seemed strangely accepting of JB's death afterwards, too, pointing out that they weren't angry, but asking "who" and "why"?

Patsy remaining dressed is not evidence, of course, but possibly could be a strong indication that someone else was there that night? And maybe not her immediate family, if she didn't feel comfortable enough to relax her usual "perfect" image?

Just my own thoughts and speculation, of course!