Evidence of IDI...?

[tumble]

The intruder? Who knows? There's no logical reason, if the Ramseys are guilty, for them to deny she had pineapple either, so I can't see how it points at all to guilt. I think the pineapple is way overblown. Maybe they forgot. Maybe she got some herself with a chair or other tool. Maybe the intruder brought the pineapple with him, put it in a bowl, and gave her some. It just doesn't prove anything.

Agree that is doesn't prove anything. But doesn't those details bother you?
Accepting such a thing as an intruder bringing pineapple with him sound just so strange.
Isn't it easier to think that the R's just lied saying they went to bed straight away and forgetting about the pineapple until asked later about it.

 

[Chrishope]

It makes no sense she'd sit at the table with a stranger and eat pineapple while the rest of her family was sleeping.

One way it makes sense, from an IDI point of view, is that the intruder was dressed as Santa -recall JBR made statements that she was to get a secret visit from Santa. I can see a 6 year old sitting down to have pineapple with Santa. Then Santa tells her he has a suprise for her in the basement. ...

 

[Peter Hamilton]

Crishope your intruder theory scenario doesn't wash re the window--Nuisanceposter already answered it,see post # 56--You must have missed it: the spider-web was unbroken,spider experts say it could not have respun another web--therefore,no intruder thru the window--if you're going to play "devil's advocate" you cannot omit some of the most important facts of the case--omitting facts weaken your argument

 

[Details]

Found innocent?

Here it is - pretty strong statement from a judge - not the normal "insufficient evidence" - http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-04-05-ramsey-case_x.htm

U.S. District Court Judge Julie Carnes in Atlanta said in the ruling this week there was no evidence showing the parents killed JonBenet and considerable evidence that an intruder killed the child.

And this link is the one I was referring to - http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/12/16/48hours/main661569.shtml

Boulder police brushed aside the thousands of leads that came in, and dismissed the possibility that an intruder had somehow slipped inside the house and committed the murder. Instead, they leaked information to the media -- sometimes fabricated information, charges of and sexual abuse -- to put pressure on the Ramseys.
...
Now, eight years later, 48 Hours reports that investigators are no longer focusing on the Ramsey family.

Detectives working for the Boulder district attorney now believe that one, possibly two, intruders entered the Ramsey home and killed JonBenet and they are finally concentrating their efforts on the underside of Boulder that was largely ignored during the initial investigation.
...
"There's a Dance West school where the victim of the assault in our case, the one that we investigated, and the Ramsey girl, both attended," says Peterson, who now believes Jon Benet was first targeted at that dance studio because of what happened to his client, just nine months after JonBenet was murdered.

Like JonBenet, she took lessons at Dance West. And like JonBenet, another girl, who is identified as "Amy," was attacked and sexually assaulted at night in her own bedroom on Sept. 14, 1997.

That night, Amy's father was out of town. After catching a movie, Amy and her mother returned home late. What they didn't know when they entered the house was that there was already an intruder inside.

Amy's father, who asked that his identity be obscured, agreed to talk about what happened that night: "My feeling is he got into the house while they were out and hid inside the house, so he would have been in there for perhaps four to six hours, hiding."
...
By the time the Boulder police arrived, the man was long gone. Because the intruder had gotten in and out of the house so easily, Amy's father began to think this wasn't the first time he had done something like this.
(Details: Maybe related, maybe not, but another intruder who got into a house and spent some serious time in there, undetected.)

 

[tumble]

Crishope your intruder theory scenario doesn't wash re the window--Nuisanceposter already answered it,see post # 56--You must have missed it: the spider-web was unbroken,spider experts say it could not have respun another web--therefore,no intruder thru the window--if you're going to play "devil's advocate" you cannot omit some of the most important facts of the case--omitting facts weaken your argument

Right, if it was an intruder he entered through an open door or someone let him in. What is bothersome about this is that LS who tried to find arguments for an intruder with all info he had chose to prove the basement window story. Which leads me to believe that he couldn't come up with any open doors.

And for someone letting the intruder in at least one R is not telling the whole story.

 

[Details]

It proves one thing - JBR had pineapple approximately 2 hours before dying.

There is one logical reason for the Ramseys to deny she had pineapple -IF (please note I said IF) they are guilty - and that is because their story is that they didn't see JBR after she'd been put to bed.

Of course we don't know - IF it was an intruder- how long it took to do all this. Maybe he sensed everyone was sound asleep by 10:30, and killed her by 11. If she'd had pineapple at the White's party, just before leaving, that would fit.

If they were guilty, there would be no reason to deny the pineapple - it doesn't harm their story in any way. Unless pineapple is some kind of pedophile aphrodesiac, they had zero reason to deny it - even to go back and change their story to remember the pineapple - no reason at all in the world to hide it. So I just don't see it as even relevant.

Ask me exactly what I myself ate and did last night, and my memory is already fuzzy - it just wasn't a particularly memorable night - and I haven't been awakened to a ransom note and a dead daughter!

And maybe they're telling the truth - whoever did this is very odd - a pedophile might have given her a nice yummy treat (while making sure not to leave fingerprints) as part of what he saw as a date with his love, or to keep her quiet.

 

[Details]

Agree that is doesn't prove anything. But doesn't those details bother you?
Accepting such a thing as an intruder bringing pineapple with him sound just so strange.
Isn't it easier to think that the R's just lied saying they went to bed straight away and forgetting about the pineapple until asked later about it.

Karr has a reason for the intruder to bring pineapple - he claims he found out she liked it, shared some with her before. Pedophiles are just so strange. Or the Ramsey's forgot, and weren't thinking clearly that morning (wonder why....).

Nope, this isn't the type of detail that bothers me - a flaw in a story in an area that doesn't implicate any type of guilt; about something with several alternative possibilities; on a trivial enough subject that a memory lapse is quite understandable.

 

[tumble]

Karr has a reason for the intruder to bring pineapple - he claims he found out she liked it, shared some with her before. Pedophiles are just so strange. Or the Ramsey's forgot, and weren't thinking clearly that morning (wonder why....).

Nope, this isn't the type of detail that bothers me - a flaw in a story in an area that doesn't implicate any type of guilt; about something with several alternative possibilities; on a trivial enough subject that a memory lapse is quite understandable.

It isn't really just that they forgot. They could have changed their story when they remembered. If they wanted to find their daugters killer why not come clean about such a little slip of mind that they actually had some pineapple before they went to bed.
Not coming clean implicates guilt doesn't it?

Have you tried to understand the other scenario with the intruder bringing pineapple to JBR?

 

[Details]

It isn't really just that they forgot. They could have changed their story when they remembered. If they wanted to find their daugters killer why not come clean about such a little slip of mind that they actually had some pineapple before they went to bed.
Not coming clean implicates guilt doesn't it?

Have you tried to understand the other scenario with the intruder bringing pineapple to JBR?

Only if they were lying - and maybe not even then, when the police early on decided that only the Ramseys were possible suspects. Maybe they weren't lying. Maybe they flat out forgot - haven't you ever been sure of something that you know you did or did not do, and found out through hard evidence later that you were wrong? I have. Maybe the pineapple was from the party, and JBR was killed quickly. Or maybe it was the intruder - not that hard for me to believe, depending on what story he was putting forth to JBR.

If they're innocent - which I figure has to be the default explanation until it fails the reasonable doubt test - they're in shock that morning. It's horrible - it should be a pleasant Christmas holiday day (not Christmas day, but one of the nice days you have off, can play with your kids, nothing to do but enjoy your Christmas presents), and you are woken up to this kind of horror! I just can see forgetting (if in fact it happened), whether or not you gave your daughter some pineapple, only remembering that you got home and all went to bed.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

If they were guilty, there would be no reason to deny the pineapple - it doesn't harm their story in any way. Unless pineapple is some kind of pedophile aphrodesiac, they had zero reason to deny it - even to go back and change their story to remember the pineapple - no reason at all in the world to hide it. So I just don't see it as even relevant.

Ask me exactly what I myself ate and did last night, and my memory is already fuzzy - it just wasn't a particularly memorable night - and I haven't been awakened to a ransom note and a dead daughter!

And maybe they're telling the truth - whoever did this is very odd - a pedophile might have given her a nice yummy treat (while making sure not to leave fingerprints) as part of what he saw as a date with his love, or to keep her quiet.

Their official statement is that they carried a sleeping JonBenet from the car to bed and did not see her after that at all. (Burke contradicted this)
If they did in fact feed her the pineapple at some point after 10PM, then they were lying....and if they were lying about that, what else did they lie about?
I personally think the pineapple bit spooked Patsy...she simply said it didn't make sense. I think her being spooked by it is what caused the denial...and by then they couldn't change their story without inviting even more questions.

JonBenet did eat pineapple from that bowl shortly before her death. This is important.

I think one gives too much leeway to "a child's naive ways" to think she'd be woken up during the night by a stranger...lead down to the kitchen and eat pineapple with him before going down to the basement with him....and that she'd be ok with all of this.
It could not have been a stranger.

 

[Chrishope]

Crishope your intruder theory scenario doesn't wash re the window--Nuisanceposter already answered it,see post # 56--You must have missed it: the spider-web was unbroken,spider experts say it could not have respun another web--therefore,no intruder thru the window--if you're going to play "devil's advocate" you cannot omit some of the most important facts of the case--omitting facts weaken your argument

I thought the IDI folks had an answer for that - the 1 hour rebuild. That's why I didn't bother with it.

Anyway, if I'm playing devil's advocate it's for the RDI folks to find the problems with IDI - which you've done.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

Only if they were lying - and maybe not even then, when the police early on decided that only the Ramseys were possible suspects. Maybe they weren't lying. Maybe they flat out forgot - haven't you ever been sure of something that you know you did or did not do, and found out through hard evidence later that you were wrong? I have. Maybe the pineapple was from the party, and JBR was killed quickly. Or maybe it was the intruder - not that hard for me to believe, depending on what story he was putting forth to JBR.

So Patsy forgot the bowl belonged to her and her family? It had her's and Burke's prints on it?

Burke was the one who recognized the bowl...I believe Patsy at first denied it was theirs.

Why deny you own one of your own bowls?

 

[InnocentBystander]

Maybe that was used to smash her in the head? The bowl looked big in the picture if I recall correctly.

 

[Chrishope]

Back to the grate. Not playing devils advoacte with this post -

Why would an intruder, familiar with the layout, crawl out a basement window rather than simply leave by the door? The door is faster, and if neighbors see the intruder leaving, they may not think much of it - just a guest leaving. If cops see the intruder coming out the door, they don't think much of it either, or if they do question it, there's a good chance of talking your way out of it.

Coming out the basement window, if a neighbor sees you, they call the cops. If the cops see you, they detain you. So why leave through the basement window?

Because you have to get out quick, and you can't go back upstairs. Maybe Patsy is coming down to make coffee at 5:30 or 5:45 and the intruder hears her. He has to leave through the window. Maybe if the scream the neighbor heard is JBR's, the intruder figures he's woken the entire house and goes out the window.

My problem with this is why did he stop to put the grate back in place?

 

[Details]

...I think one gives too much leeway to "a child's naive ways" to think she'd be woken up during the night by a stranger...lead down to the kitchen and eat pineapple with him before going down to the basement with him....and that she'd be ok with all of this.
It could not have been a stranger.

Hi little girl, here's my knife, here's my gun, I'm going to kill your mommy and daddy unless you keep absolutely quiet!

Hi little girl, I'm one of santa's elves, let's go down and have a snack, and I'll show you the reindeer!

and so on and so forth. Tell Elizabeth Smart's family that a stranger can't quietly get a kid to go with them...and plenty of other very sad families know this as well. Whether by threat or by guile, it can be done.

 

[TexMex]

Hi little girl, here's my knife, here's my gun, I'm going to kill your mommy and daddy unless you keep absolutely quiet!

Hi little girl, I'm one of santa's elves, let's go down and have a snack, and I'll show you the reindeer!

and so on and so forth. Tell Elizabeth Smart's family that a stranger can't quietly get a kid to go with them...and plenty of other very sad families know this as well. Whether by threat or by guile, it can be done.

Well said.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Back to the grate. Not playing devils advoacte with this post -

Why would an intruder, familiar with the layout, crawl out a basement window rather than simply leave by the door? The door is faster, and if neighbors see the intruder leaving, they may not think much of it - just a guest leaving. If cops see the intruder coming out the door, they don't think much of it either, or if they do question it, there's a good chance of talking your way out of it.

Coming out the basement window, if a neighbor sees you, they call the cops. If the cops see you, they detain you. So why leave through the basement window?

Because you have to get out quick, and you can't go back upstairs. Maybe Patsy is coming down to make coffee at 5:30 or 5:45 and the intruder hears her. He has to leave through the window. Maybe if the scream the neighbor heard is JBR's, the intruder figures he's woken the entire house and goes out the window.

My problem with this is why did he stop to put the grate back in place?

No one went out through that window. Not only was the grate in place and a spider web intact, but the door to that room was blocked by a chair outside the door. In order to escape from that window, the perp would have had to place that chair back in front of the door after he went through it. Now who's gonna do all that?

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

Hi little girl, here's my knife, here's my gun, I'm going to kill your mommy and daddy unless you keep absolutely quiet!

Hi little girl, I'm one of santa's elves, let's go down and have a snack, and I'll show you the reindeer!

and so on and so forth. Tell Elizabeth Smart's family that a stranger can't quietly get a kid to go with them...and plenty of other very sad families know this as well. Whether by threat or by guile, it can be done.

The "typical intruder theory" involves a hostile intruder who forcibly takes her from her bed and down through the house. Things like the pineapple and such are typically left out.

If someone came into the house and managed to deceive her on the other hand...it would suggest someone she'd seen before and was comfortable with.

In Elizabeth Smart's case...the kidnapper managed to get her out of the house quietly because he was threatening her already with a knife (which she thought was a gun).

In Jonbenet's case...her intruder would have to be casual, no threats. Especially if she went down with him and had a snack with him.
This intruder in turn had to be very comfortable in the Ramsey house, and unconcerned with anyone waking up...after all, once he had her...he actually stayed in the house rather than trying to take her out with him.

 

[Chrishope]

No one went out through that window. Not only was the grate in place and a spider web intact, but the door to that room was blocked by a chair outside the door. In order to escape from that window, the perp would have had to place that chair back in front of the door after he went through it. Now who's gonna do all that?

I agree. No one went out that window.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

-The cord was tied with a fixed knot and not a noose knot, and it was "built" on her neck with no signs of struggle from JB. Her wrists show no signs of struggle. The tape shows no signs of struggle.

Which knot are you talking about, the one on the stick or the one at the other end that was embedded in the deep furrow around her neck. You know, the deep forrow with the large hemorrhage?