Evidence Against Patsy That Most People Have Never Read Before

[jubie]

Odd! :waitasec:


One of the things I find odd about the morning of the 26th was that JR headed straight for the basement.... as far as he was supposed to know JonBenet was last in her bedroom.

When asked to look more thoroughly wouldn't it make more sense to head to her bedroom? On hands and knees looking for ANYTHING?

Even heading outside to look around the house would make more sense. I mean surely if an intruder took her from her bedroom he'd want to get out as quickly as possible... again, as far as JR should have known the basement would be that last place to look.


Jubie

 

[Darlene733510]

I think that when FW went down to the basement the first time that the body was not in the wine cellar, and that is why he was so upset when JR found the body there.

When JR disappeared, he went to the basement and put it there. IMHO I don't think he ran up to another floor to get a blanket. I think the blanket was right there with JB. Why would he go and get a blanket, and then leave it in the wine cellar when he carried her upstairs. Why not just wrap her in it, and carry her up there.

I have a heavy duty clothes dryer. A child the size of JB could easily fit in there. Throw a blanket on top and it would not even be noticed. Some of the bruises could have been from putting her in, or taking her out. There are raised ridges in my dryer, 3 of them that are at least 16" long least 6 " high. I guess to see what I mean you will have to look inside your dryer.

R's probably had a commercial dryer, or one even larger than mine, because I remember that in part of the questioning it was stated that they used the washer and dryer down there for quilts, rugs, etc.

 

[sandraladeda]

Simple answer, the intruder was nude. And completely bald!
There's no way a person got into that house - was upstairs, downstairs and all around the house without leaving one footprint, one strand of hair, one piece of dirt from a shoe, one string of fabric or absolutely no evidence that person had been there.
Recently a repairman came to my house to fix the automatic garage door. He was here for less than half an hour. He left dusty footprints in the kitchen, the only room he entered and his pen in the garage on the shelf. No physical evidence left behind...impossible!
JMO

:laugh: Simple answer, the intruder was nude. And completely bald!

Thanks for that visual, azwriter!

Just wanted to say I am enjoying your posts, particularly your perspective as a trained journalist on the press release writing style of the ransom note.

Clearly, a nude, bald perp is the only IDI scenario which works, if anyone places any wieght on Locard's Exchange Principle - when any two objects come into contact (such as the perp and JBR), there is always transferance of material from each object onto the other...perhaps old Locard did not consider the bald, nude perp?

On the other hand, what would Locard make of the fibers from JR's shirt on JBR's genitals?

 

[Mitty]

I always thought it was normal for any amount of Ramsey clothing fibres to be found anywhere, since they lived there and had touched or brushed against things in the house. This is not proof that any of the three are murderers or were at the scene at the moment of death.

I agree....in my household, everyone's clothes are washed with everyone else's. So, in one load you might have my kids underwear, mine, my husbands, and any belonging to any friends who might have had a sleepover and forgot some items..ultimately ending up in my laundry. So if there were pubic hairs from my husband floating around in the load of laundry (or fibers from anything belonging to anyone who's laundry was in a shared load) which ended up landing on my daughters pair, which she ultimately would wear....if she would up dead and they found that trace evidence on her - would he be suspect?????

 

[LinasK]

I agree....in my household, everyone's clothes are washed with everyone else's. So, in one load you might have my kids underwear, mine, my husbands, and any belonging to any friends who might have had a sleepover and forgot some items..ultimately ending up in my laundry. So if there were pubic hairs from my husband floating around in the load of laundry (or fibers from anything belonging to anyone who's laundry was in a shared load) which ended up landing on my daughters pair, which she ultimately would wear....if she would up dead and they found that trace evidence on her - would he be suspect?????

Except that the pair JB was found in had never been washed, they were brand new straight out of the package.

 

[Mitty]

Except that the pair JB was found in had never been washed, they were brand new straight out of the package.

Ack! Who wears them straight out of the package?? That would present an interesting issue there...hadn't been exposed to the pile of family laundry... Is that a fact that has been proven? That's just odd, I always through the new ones in the wash first - they are so stiff and crisp right out of the package. Am I the only one who does that....?

 

[LillyRush]

*********************

It would appear to me the first commotion that occurred when John discovered Jonbenet was to call 911 for an ambulance. You don't call ambulances for a dead person.
If we are to believe John, he didn't even know Jonbenet was dead until he was told she was.
One would think Patsy would have rushed into the room with her friends upon the news her daughter has been found and that somebody needs to call 911.

That is not true, unless a medical professional is right there on the scene making an official proclamation that someone is dead. Ambulances get called all the time when there are deadly car accidents or when an elderly parent dies in the home (as someone used as an example earlier). Haven't you ever heard of DOA - Dead On Arrival? Certainly all those DOAs didn't just die on the way there in the ambulance or at the very second that they walked through the hospital doors?:waitasec: Sometimes people are in shock or they just don't know if they've completely checked all the vital signs accurately, therefore you call the professionals. It's not like people immediately pick up the county medical examiner's office when they 'think' someone might be dead. Even when pets die, assuming you have a regular veterenarian and are not just ready to plop your pet in a backyard grave, you can bring the pet in for them to check for sure. Common sense, would tell you to call for as much emergency help as you can get.

 

[aussiesheila]

Your question is one which btw IDIs have often sidestepped, for the RN sometimes served them to explain their varying scenarios: at one time they referred to several killers (pedophile ring) and the RN came in handy because it mentioned a 'group' of people, at another time when they focused on a lone pedophile, the RN was never mentioned in their posts. But they hardly ever tried to explain why a pedophile or a group of pedophiles would write a bogus ransom note at all.

rashomon, what are you saying? I am an IDI. I am the one who theorises there was a pedophile ring and I have never sidestepped the RN issue, having always maintained it was written (albeit under duress) by Patsy. My position is that the pedophiles were desperate that the fact that JonBenet had been (accidentally) killed during a session of sexual abuse at their hands, should not be discovered. I have always maintained there was a coverup mastermind who decided they should hide the body, stage a kidnapping and dump the body later somewhere in the mountains as the victim of a kidnapping gone wrong. I have always maintained that Patsy never undressed nor went to sleep in her own bed that night, that she let someone into the house that night who she thought JonBenet was going to be photographed with for a magazine article, that she fell asleep, was woken by that scream and was aware from that time that her daughter had been killed, that she wrote the note and put it there herself at the base of the stairs.

I believe my theory actually offers the best explanation for the long and rambling ransom note. It pretty clearly was written by Patsy, it is also pretty clear that Patsy couldn't have committed the actual murder. There are some people who won't agree with this but I believe they are in the minority. Most people seem to believe Patsy to be the most likely person to have written the note, most people feel she behaved strangely when the body was brought up from the basement, and most people feel instinctively that Patsy seems to be constantly lying, or at the very least hiding something; yet they almost all have difficulty imagining a scenario in which she committed the murder.

My theory explains that yes, she did write the note, yes she did know her daughter was already dead when John brought her up from the basement and yes she lied and deceived constantly; but no, she didn't commit the murder although she had a degree of complicity with it.

Just because other IDIs may have sidestepped the RN issue does not mean that you can dismiss all IDI theories with this criticism.

 

[aussiesheila]

Most imortantly, if there was an intruder, why weren't the intruder's fibers all over JB and the crime scene?

Well there were black fibres all over her crotch area and her inner thighs. Couldn't they have come from the black mask/balaclavas some pedophile intruders wore while they were molesting her prior to their killing her? And maybe those red fibres are consistent with those from a Santa suit?

 

[s_finch]

I think there's probably a large group of people (including myself) here that believe, they did not plan for the body to be found in the house originally. Rather, the Ramseys planned to fly away shortly after no ransom demand was made, and the body would be found somewhere outside the home some time later, with the Ramseys miles away in Michigan or Atlanta (not sure if I believe they intended to take the body with them in the plane). In the morning light, with events spinning out of control, John realizes that the plan isn't going to work, too much could go wrong, the police aren't going to go away, there's no way to get rid of the body without being found out, and he decides to "discover" the body in the basement.

The discovery of the body in the basement is what makes the ransom note, which was already bizarre and suspicious, superfluous, as well. It makes the case an even bigger head-scratcher, and gives ammunition to the IDI-ers: why would the Ramseys "stage" a kidnapping and then "find" the body in the basement? It makes no sense, so the Ramseys couldn't have done it. The simple fact is, the Ramseys (more likely John on his own) were forced to change the plan after things stopped going the way they anticipated.

Anyway, it explains a lot--why the police don't find the body during the first, cursory search, why Fleet White doesn't see it in the basement that morning, why John, of all the places to begin the search for "anything out of place" begins in the basement (not sure if I would be able to tell what is out of place in my basement), what John is doing during the time Linda Arndt loses track of him that morning, etc.

Karen

Who would leave for another state when their daughter is missing?? So the phone call doesn't come--it's not like they'd say, "Oh well, kidnappers had their chance, I'm outta here now" and head off. Course, I also wonder who'd try to head for another state within an hour of their daughter's body being found, but that's another can of worms.

If the R's had wanted to get rid of the body, they had several hours to do so before calling the cops. I agree with the poster who said JR was probably wondering "how long is it gonna take these idiots to find the body" and so he possibly went and moved it to a more prominent location, not knowing the Fleet had already been in the wine cellar.

 

[s_finch]

That is not true, unless a medical professional is right there on the scene making an official proclamation that someone is dead. Ambulances get called all the time when there are deadly car accidents or when an elderly parent dies in the home (as someone used as an example earlier). Haven't you ever heard of DOA - Dead On Arrival? Certainly all those DOAs didn't just die on the way there in the ambulance or at the very second that they walked through the hospital doors?:waitasec: Sometimes people are in shock or they just don't know if they've completely checked all the vital signs accurately, therefore you call the professionals. It's not like people immediately pick up the county medical examiner's office when they 'think' someone might be dead. Even when pets die, assuming you have a regular veterenarian and are not just ready to plop your pet in a backyard grave, you can bring the pet in for them to check for sure. Common sense, would tell you to call for as much emergency help as you can get.

I was an EMT about ten eons ago and yes, ambulances get called all the time when a body is dicovered. People can go into stages of shock and different kinds of seizures which make their breathing and pulse hard to detect to a layperson. So if you call 911 and tell them you've discovered a fresh body, they're gonna send the cops and an ambulance, just in case it's not a body but a still live person.

 

[JBean]

Who would leave for another state when their daughter is missing?? So the phone call doesn't come--it's not like they'd say, "Oh well, kidnappers had their chance, I'm outta here now" and head off. Course, I also wonder who'd try to head for another state within an hour of their daughter's body being found, but that's another can of worms.

snip.

After the murder of their daughter, Valerie Percy in 1966 in Illinois, the family , including her father Senator Charles Percy, went to California almost immediately after her murder. IIRC it was within 24 hours or so. They stayed in seclusion there for weeks. They cooperated with LE only through their "associates" and not directly. I know the LE was frustrated that they could not question them directly, but they used liasons for information.They are completely innocent people(fact, not my opinion). But many here would make them guilty because they left town immediately after their child was murdered.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon, what are you saying? I am an IDI. I am the one who theorises there was a pedophile ring and I have never sidestepped the RN issue, having always maintained it was written (albeit under duress) by Patsy.
...
Just because other IDIs may have sidestepped the RN issue does not mean that you can dismiss all IDI theories with this criticism.

Aussiesheila, you are the exception which confirms the rule, so to speak, for virtually all IDIs claim that no Ramsey wrote the note, and I was referring to this group when I wrote:

Your question is one which btw IDIs have often sidestepped, for the RN sometimes served them to explain their varying scenarios: at one time they referred to several killers (pedophile ring) and the RN came in handy because it mentioned a 'group' of people, at another time when they focused on a lone pedophile, the RN was never mentioned in their posts. But they hardly ever tried to explain why a pedophile or a group of pedophiles would write a bogus ransom note at all.

And it is a fact that this group of IDIs, for obvious reasons, are not intent on discussing the RN. For this note is so obviously a bogus note that it sticks out like a sore thumb even to the most naive layperson.
A faked RN and an intruder scenario don't fit together.

As for your theory: you are the only one I know who believes Patsy wrote the note to cover up for pedophiles who killed their daughter. Imo this would make sense only if you think Patsy pimped her daughter to these pedophiles.

 

[BBB167893]

"you are the only one I know who believes Patsy wrote the note to cover up for pedophiles who killed their daughter. Imo this would make sense only if you think Patsy pimped her daughter to these pedophiles."

Better make that TWO! My brother is in LOCK-STEP with this one!

"That would present an interesting issue there...hadn't been exposed to the pile of family laundry... Is that a fact that has been proven?"

I'm pretty sure, Mitty!

 

[Nova]

After the murder of their daughter, Valerie Percy in 1966 in Illinois, the family , including her father Senator Charles Percy, went to California almost immediately after her murder. IIRC it was within 24 hours or so. They stayed in seclusion there for weeks. They cooperated with LE only through their "associates" and not directly. I know the LE was frustrated that they could not question them directly, but they used liasons for information.They are completely innocent people(fact, not my opinion). But many here would make them guilty because they left town immediately after their child was murdered.

Point taken, JBean. But "24 hours or so" seems somewhat different than an hour and a few minutes.

I hesitate to draw too many conclusions about anyone based on his/her actions in the midst of shock and grief.

But the Rs' actions seem so paradoxical on the fateful day, even given that they were under tremendous stress.

On the one hand, they are so trusting of LE they call the police immediately and without reflection upon reading the note, despite the dire consequences threatened therein. This seems like people who are instinctively going to do what they are told by the police.

On the other hand, they don't wait for the police to arrive and give them instructions. They start calling their friends (again without apparent concern for threats in the RN). At some point, JR wanders off without a word to the officer on duty. Once the body is found, JR is making plane reservations, not turning to police to ask "What do we do now?" These seem like entirely different instincts.

Hmm...

 

[JBean]

Point taken, JBean. But "24 hours or so" seems somewhat different than an hour and a few minutes.

I hesitate to draw too many conclusions about anyone based on his/her actions in the midst of shock and grief.

But the Rs' actions seem so paradoxical on the fateful day, even given that they were under tremendous stress.

On the one hand, they are so trusting of LE they call the police immediately and without reflection upon reading the note, despite the dire consequences threatened therein. This seems like people who are instinctively going to do what they are told by the police.

On the other hand, they don't wait for the police to arrive and give them instructions. They start calling their friends (again without apparent concern for threats in the RN). At some point, JR wanders off without a word to the officer on duty. Once the body is found, JR is making plane reservations, not turning to police to ask "What do we do now?" These seem like entirely different instincts.

Hmm...

Hey Nova. Who knows, the Percy's may have left within a shorter period of time if they had already made plane arrangements and were ready to go prior to the murder of Valerie. To me it's not one hour or 24 hours as much as it that the Percy's left right away and did not even conduct interviews with the police personally, for the most part at the beginning.Around here that would make them guilty and suspicious. In reality it was just taken more as the actions of a grief stricken family that wanted to hide.Chuck Percy was wildly popular, which is one big difference between John and Charles. Perhaps that is why it is viewed differently. Don't know.
I do agree that the R's behavior was not what one would expect from most. I can take that a step further and say what I know of them, I don;t like them much.But I also think they always felt above the rules on many levels, which is the one consistency about them concerning their behavior. They didn't heed the "abductors" requests, nor did they heed many of the requests of LE. I think they typically marched to their own drum and in that respect, their behavior was quite normal for them.If that makes sense.


ETA: I do want to clarify that I am not comparing the Ramseys and the Percy's as similar families or similar types of people. The Percy's were pure class. But I am only comparing somewhat similar circumstances.

 

[sandraladeda]

Hey Nova. Who knows, the Percy's may have left within a shorter period of time if they had already made plane arrangements and were ready to go prior to the murder of Valerie. To me it's not one hour or 24 hours as much as it that the Percy's left right away and did not even conduct interviews with the police personally, for the most part at the beginning.Around here that would make them guilty and suspicious. In reality it was just taken more as the actions of a grief stricken family that wanted to hide.Chuck Percy was wildly popular, which is one big difference between John and Charles. Perhaps that is why it is viewed differently. Don't know.
I do agree that the R's behavior was not what one would expect from most. I can take that a step further and say what I know of them, I don;t like them much.But I also think they always felt above the rules on many levels, which is the one consistency about them concerning their behavior. They didn't heed the "abductors" requests, nor did they heed many of the requests of LE. I think they typically marched to their own drum and in that respect, their behavior was quite normal for them.If that makes sense.


ETA: I do want to clarify that I am not comparing the Ramseys and the Percy's as similar families or similar types of people. The Percy's were pure class. But I am only comparing somewhat similar circumstances.

I wonder if the Percys would be let off the hook so easily if that murder had occurred in 1996 instead of 1966. The mass media of 1996 made the JBR murder, and all the facts surrounding the case, household knowledge (even for this Canadian!) I doubt that would have been the case in 1966. also, by 1996, we considered ourselves to be such forensic and criminalistic experts, we had, after all, been watching Law and order for about 5 years by then, lol!

 

[JBean]

I wonder if the Percys would be let off the hook so easily if that murder had occurred in 1996 instead of 1966. The mass media of 1996 made the JBR murder, and all the facts surrounding the case, household knowledge (even for this Canadian!) I doubt that would have been the case in 1966. also, by 1996, we considered ourselves to be such forensic and criminalistic experts, we had, after all, been watching Law and order for about 5 years by then, lol!

LOL! Isn't that the truth. I will say since he was a potential candidate for the White House, it did get more coverage than most.But of course nothing can compare to what we see now.
But I think you just made a good IDI argument.

 

[sandraladeda]

But I think you just made a good IDI argument.

Noooooooo! Say it isn't soooooooooo!!!

 

[JBean]

Noooooooo! Say it isn't soooooooooo!!!

You're a good sport.