Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey

[Izzylizzy]

And would mimic PRs handwriting so well hers was the only handwriting which could not be eliminated from being the writer.
And to what end?
I’m trying to convince you I’m a kidnapper while simultaneously trying, with the mimicked handwriting style, to frame PR for fake-kidnapping/killing her daughter to punish JR for…something??

The handwriting comparison surely showed some doozies/uncommon writing of certain letters.
Refresher @ 9:35 until end of video.

Also the touch DNA and DA Mary Lacey.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

The handwriting comparison surely showed some doozies/uncommon writing of certain letters.
Refresher @ 9:35 until end of video.

Also the touch DNA and DA Mary Lacey.

They’re bending the truth. The report doesn’t say exactly what they’re reporting. In any case, why doesn’t the boulder police use the available technology to seperate the dna? John Ramsey has been wanting them to seperate the dna for years. That way everyone will know if the dna is from one individual or a mixture.

 

[Slebby]

That’s because you’re probably normal. Crazy people are capable of anything. I’ve heard of men breaking into women’s homes to watch them sleeping for hours. In Australia, a man broke into peoples homes to molest and take photos of children sleeping. The police found the photos on his phone and had to publish the parts of the photos of the children’s rooms so that people could recognise furniture etc and come forward because they wouldn’t have known the man was in their homes molesting their kids while they were all sleeping. You’d be surprised what sexual perverts and child killers are capable of.

Are you saying the reason they took the time to write a lengthy fake ransom note about a fake kidnapping as punishment to JR for his business practices and/or the governments he serves, a fake kidnapping which was really a murder and SA or staged SA, but written mimicking PR’s handwriting to also frame her, was just because the perpetrator was “crazy”? And you see all this complexity as comparable to the “craziness” of a pervert molesting and taking photos of sleeping kids? Really?

 

[Chypre]

That’s because you’re probably normal. Crazy people are capable of anything. I’ve heard of men breaking into women’s homes to watch them sleeping for hours. In Australia, a man broke into peoples homes to molest and take photos of children sleeping. The police found the photos on his phone and had to publish the parts of the photos of the children’s rooms so that people could recognise furniture etc and come forward because they wouldn’t have known the man was in their homes molesting their kids while they were all sleeping. You’d be surprised what sexual perverts and child killers are capable of.

I think that's why I'm generous with intruder theory. So much experience working with or reading case files of just people under the neighborhood radar. Some insomniacs stay home and isolate themselves. Some creep.

 

[CloudedTruth]

There are certain things JR says that seem like lies due to shifting stories (and many that almost certainly are) but there are others that I’ve come to suspect occurred because he had very little idea about the day-to-day, nuts and bolts of running the house and children, but thought he did. (He reminds me of my FIL in this regard, who is otherwise a lovely man. )

So that would include things like 2 bikes or 3, what clothes JB was/wasn’t wearing, etc. Maybe even the bed wetting. Add on interviews that took place 7-18 months later, and those things he thought he knew are even more muddled.

The problem is it’s hard to distinguish after awhile:

- actual, conscious lies prompted by {whatever }
- lies of omission
- “confidently incorrect”
- genuine lapses in memory due to passage of time, etc.

I had somewhere I was going with this, I swear, but life intervened and now I’ve forgotten what that undoubtedly Very Profound Point was. (As an aside, when you’d forget what you were about to say during a conversation, my grandmother always responded with: “Musta been a lie!” Maybe there’s some truth to that.)

So this is just a stream of consciousness rumination in the end.

JR not being aware of the day-to-day life for his family is I think a very valid point. He worked a lot and took a lot of business trips. And he left pretty much everything to do with the kids and the house to Patsy. He provided the means ($$$$) for their life, but he wasn't very present.

But appearances were as important to him as they were to Patsy. It absolutely tracks with his personality that he would attempt to make it look like he was an involved father & husband, as I'm sure he was aware of what the truth of his uninvolvement would look like. It didn't fit the "perfect family" facade that they wanted / needed to present.

Ultimately, both he and Patsy are responsible for what happened. One was an absent parent who even when present had the mindset that the kids were the wife's responsibility. I recall the comment about Patsy's job being to make sure no one / nothing bothered John when he was home. The other parent was obsessed with living vicariously through her daughter, unable to see that pageant life had become an unhealthy obsession, and that focusing on outward beauty instead of teaching your two children the basics (like hygiene, responsibility, etc.) was not actual parenting. Whenever there were issues that needed parental attention like toileting for example, Patsy just seemed to throw her hands in the air and find an easy work around.....plastic on the mattress, pull up panties. She also failed at potty training the dog, so they just let the Barnhill's keep him. Raising children is hard work. I don't think either parent in this case were up to the task.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

Are you saying the reason they took the time to write a lengthy fake ransom note about a fake kidnapping as punishment to JR for his business practices and/or the governments he serves, a fake kidnapping which was really a murder and SA or staged SA, but written mimicking PR’s handwriting to also frame her, was just because the perpetrator was “crazy”? And you see all this complexity as comparable to the “craziness” of a pervert molesting and taking photos of sleeping kids? Really?

I’m saying crazy people are capable of anything. Crazy people aren’t comosrable because their brains aren’t normal. You’d have to be crazy to do to a child what was done to JonBenet. Often crazy people present as normal masking their true selves. I believe the ransom note was not written for its purpose but there are many truths in the note. first of all, the handwriting isn’t disguised in my opinion. It’s consistent throughout. Most people who don’t like writing by hand tend to write slightly differently after 2 1/2 pages as seen with the ransom note writings slight changes from start to finish. The ransom note was full of intentional, subtle cryptic clues. I think the killer enjoyed taunting John. So we have the intimacy of a hand written note which was the killers first clue. The second clue is the letter is address to Mr. Ramsey, which is formal and could indicate the persons employment position or social status was underneath John’s. The third clue is the foreign faction. The foreign faction could be describing johns business as it had expanded globally. Again the Mr Ramsey address could indicate the author of the ransom note was an employee and not someone with equal standing with in the company. The next clue is the asking for $118,000. There were employees owed the same amount who were fired by John. It’s also the smount of his annual bonus. Again linking the author of the note to johns business. Next he’s instructed to bring an attaché to the bank. In the walkthrough videos of the crime scene, there’s an attaché in the ramseys house. The killer has seen John at work with his attaché and the killer is resentful of it, resentful of johns wealth and success. The next clue is the warning of being monitored. This could indicate the killer was close to the family and has regular contact with them. The next clue is the admission there are two people watching over jonbenet. We know jonbenet had the dna of an unknown male. But the wrist and neck ligatures contained the dna of a different second male. That’s consistent with two men watching over jonbenet. They also admit they don’t like John and that indicates they know him well enough not to like him. Lots of people don’t like their boss so this could also tie the murderer to johns business. The next clue are the sentences don’t try to grow a brain John and fat cat and use use that good southern commonsense of yours. All sarcastic remarks indicating the person was feeling very bitter and defiant towards John. It was personal. The letter ends with victory because JonBenet was dead and the person felt he’d won, he’d been vindicated. SBTC is the final clue which no one knows what it stands for and can only guess. The ransom note was a way of gaining all the control and power and taking johns power away from him. He also says killing won’t be difficult. I believe the killer is very sadistic and killing a child wasn’t hard for him. The truthfulness in the ransom note is in the undertones of the note. The person inadvertently identified hinself and his ties to johns business. The letter is emotional indicating it’s personal.

 

[AppleTreeGreen]

MOO but if one if the parents did write the ransom note I think it would be more likely PR did wrote on her own accord just because I don’t see JR having the patience to direct a whole screenplay to pull off the hoax. For example, if he came off normally as emotionally detached from his family and more focused on work, like some commenters mentioned, than I could see him being the same way then and likely would have noted that ransoms note normally don’t say that much and then make PR rewrite it to be more succinct and fit on one page before LE got there. He probably would be less tolerant of such mistakes or slip ups if his overall goal was to get away with any involvement in JBR’s murder and the subsequent cover-up.

Also, if they did that write that letter I do wonder why they would pick the amount $118,000 for JBR’s ransom? Even if it was equal to around JR’s bonus amount did that seem like a lot of money to them? Weren’t they rich? Or at least had access to a lot of wealth with his company making revenue in the billions and his net worth estimated to be around 6 million in 1996? If they did indeed write RN why in their mind would they think this would be enough for a kidnapper? Particular one who is committing a state and possibly a federal crime by abducting their daughter and will probably have to use the ransom money to flee America or build a whole new identity for themselves? Worse, if not like he gets to keep it all to himself. According to the note he has 4 accomplices (2 with JBR and 2 watching the house). That means the kidnapper has to split the $118,000 five ways or he gains at least $23,600 after the exchange of the ransom money and JBR. Even in the 90s that is not enough money to start over, move abroad in luxury or even afford a good defense lawyer. What would be the point? For that much he could had just offered to clean and organize the Ramseys’ house in exchange of payment for the same amount.

They were about to fly on a private plane to their vacation home. As hostile as the RN is towards JR and the snide remarks of JR’s character don’t think it is likely that the kidnapper knew them personally and how much more wealth they could squeeze from them? Even JR said the ransom amount was basically nothing to him and his company earned in the billions. Wouldn’t a kidnapper want to hedge their bets by using to JBR to access it from them?


Just my thoughts or opinions on the RN and theories based on it

JonBenét Ramsey's dad reveals deepest regret over actions 4 days before murder

JONBENÉT Ramsey’s father fears he may have put a target on his family’s back by bragging about the success of his company in a newspaper article published just days before his daughter&…

www.the-sun.com

 

[Deleted member 187229]

JR not being aware of the day-to-day life for his family is I think a very valid point. He worked a lot and took a lot of business trips. And he left pretty much everything to do with the kids and the house to Patsy. He provided the means ($$$$) for their life, but he wasn't very present.

But appearances were as important to him as they were to Patsy. It absolutely tracks with his personality that he would attempt to make it look like he was an involved father & husband, as I'm sure he was aware of what the truth of his uninvolvement would look like. It didn't fit the "perfect family" facade that they wanted / needed to present.

Ultimately, both he and Patsy are responsible for what happened. One was an absent parent who even when present had the mindset that the kids were the wife's responsibility. I recall the comment about Patsy's job being to make sure no one / nothing bothered John when he was home. The other parent was obsessed with living vicariously through her daughter, unable to see that pageant life had become an unhealthy obsession, and that focusing on outward beauty instead of teaching your two children the basics (like hygiene, responsibility, etc.) was not actual parenting. Whenever there were issues that needed parental attention like toileting for example, Patsy just seemed to throw her hands in the air and find an easy work around.....plastic on the mattress, pull up panties. She also failed at potty training the dog, so they just let the Barnhill's keep him. Raising children is hard work. I don't think either parent in this case were up to the task.

That doesn’t make them murderers.

 

[borndem]

How many people, other than the Ramsey family, knew about the basement?

 

[Chimera]

I remember hearing rumblings also. I never knew whether they held any weight or not. We also have the boating story of JARs plot to have JBR killed I believe in a boating mishap.
WTH! There's a whole Lotta WTFs surrounding the family if these are true. I always thought JR pushed a narrative ect but one day it struck me how I all of a sudden saw the same type of behavior of a narcissist I had the misfortune of knowing and then I couldn't unsee it. It reminded me of an article I read about corporate psychopaths or something...There's something so arrogant about the gaslighting. Crazy enough, he wasn't my first or second suspect but maybe the apple didn't fall from the tree.
Who knows!!

Bbm.
This is the first time I've heard of this.
Wonder if JonBenet had started to 'talk' and he had to 'silence' her ?

There's the discussion about pageants and how they draw predators, and to some degree that might be on point, and I don't agree with having the children wear makeup, etc. ; but it sounds like this little six year old's danger came from within her own family ?
What a nightmare of an existence for her.
Omo.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

That doesn’t make them murderers.

I don't think the point of OP calling out poor parenting skills was to say "Aha" that makes them murderers. This was a continuation of a conversation regarding JR not knowing the ins and outs of his families daily life and also pointing out that there was a running theme of what looked good on the outside was crumbling on the inside.
Her point wasn't PR sucked at housekeeping therefore she killed JBR.

 

[AddieBoo]

I’m no particular fan of JR’s, but for me, it’s unhelpful to think about a case and its players in absolutes like this. I want to form an opinion / ideas based on either a) sourced facts and/or b) reasonable speculation (noted as such) based on those facts. I want to be able to change my mind or re-evaluate things if some new evidence comes along, or someone presents a novel theory accounting for the known facts. Being emotionally tied to one view precludes all that.

The broken basement window JR thought had been fixed and hadn’t been in months is an example of him not “knowing everything going on in the house”.

Anyway, people, even John Ramsey, contain multitudes.

I’m no particular fan of JR’s, but for me, it’s unhelpful to think about a case and its players in absolutes like this. I want to form an opinion / ideas based on either a) sourced facts and/or b) reasonable speculation (noted as such) based on those facts. I want to be able to change my mind or re-evaluate things if some new evidence comes along, or someone presents a novel theory accounting for the known facts. Being emotionally tied to one view precludes all that.

The broken basement window JR thought had been fixed and hadn’t been in months is an example of him not “knowing everything going on in the house”.

Anyway, people, even John Ramsey, contain

I’m no particular fan of JR’s, but for me, it’s unhelpful to think about a case and its players in absolutes like this. I want to form an opinion / ideas based on either a) sourced facts and/or b) reasonable speculation (noted as such) based on those facts. I want to be able to change my mind or re-evaluate things if some new evidence comes along, or someone presents a novel theory accounting for the known facts. Being emotionally tied to one view precludes all that.

The broken basement window JR thought had been fixed and hadn’t been in months is an example of him not “knowing everything going on in the house”.

Anyway, people, even John Ramsey, contain multitudes.

How about naivety? Ramsey, who has spent enormous amounts of monies for incredible amounts of resources, has quite simply out played Justice.
I believe his entire defense is based on strategy, spin, and the manufacturing and control of a public narrative. And what was his business? Computers….

I understand your logic in a conventional sense, but understanding money, power and contacts is base understanding for anything JR.
IMO.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

I don't think the point of OP calling out poor parenting skills was to say "Aha" that makes them murderers. This was a continuation of a conversation regarding JR not knowing the ins and outs of his families daily life and also pointing out that there was a running theme of what looked good on the outside was crumbling on the inside.
Her point wasn't PR sucked at housekeeping therefore she killed JBR.

I don’t think anything was crumbling. For all we know they were perfectly happy and comfortable with their roles. Patsy was enjoying being a mum and putting the kids in music lessons, sports and beauty pageants, John was a happy workaholic and was involved with the kids. He had his role, patsy had hers. They had a house keeper to do the cleaning, they did a lot of socialising. They had a lot of friends, got invited to a lot of places. They had a great life.

 

[borndem]

Welcome to Websleuths,
Outfit tracker !!​

​

 

[AddieBoo]

I remember seeing film clips of Patsy either arriving home or leaving for chemo treatments. She was always alone, always. John was never with her and no other family member accompanied her. That was very sad to me.
I have never believed that she hurt her child. She wasn't a perfect mother or person because none of us are. But she did love them and I have never felt that Patsy deserved the hatred and accusations that she had to endure.
This woman lost her child, and in the most horrific manner possible. Then was accused of the crime and vilified.
I hope Patsy is at peace now.

A most compassionate post…
Patsy Ramsey was a warrior. What she accomplished in the face of a cancer, remission, and reoccurrence is amazing. All the things she organized, lead, her kids, all their activities..managing a household….and as you mentioned, alone. Heartbreaking.

But there is nagging evidence of her participation, on whatever level, in the murder/coverup of her daughter.
I certainly don’t have it figured out - but IMO PR was a remarkable woman.

 

[CloudedTruth]

I don't think the point of OP calling out poor parenting skills was to say "Aha" that makes them murderers. This was a continuation of a conversation regarding JR not knowing the ins and outs of his families daily life and also pointing out that there was a running theme of what looked good on the outside was crumbling on the inside.
Her point wasn't PR sucked at housekeeping therefore she killed JBR.

Exactly, thank you.

 

[ShadyLady]

That’s the 1997 test. They did more testing in 1999! Morrissey revealed that it was Kathy Dressel, the CBI DNA analyst, who told him about the second spot of blood in JonBenet's underwear that had not yet been tested. He states that he told her to cut the dime-sized sample in half to test it, and that was when they discovered the nearly complete DNA profile. This testing was done in 1999. They sample was a mixture of jonbenets blood and an almost full dna profile of saliva and a match to the dna found under her fingernails and the longjohns. You can see for yourself here. Watch from 50:34, it’s Mitch Morrissey hinself stating it was an almost complete dna profile. He talks about telling Cathy to test the second blood spot and the dna results.

JR gets no pass about anything IMO. I think he knew everything going on in his house because he had to.
Wasn’t he having an affair when PR was going through chemo the first time? Disappearing three hours Christmas Day IIRC?
So much of the testimonies are incredibly inconsistent. That, IMO could have been strategy. All the lawyers, PR people, legal coaches…
JR strikes me as having high intelligence and though I agree with you, generally, about gender rolls 30 years ago.. with JR during interviews and depositions? No way.
MOO

Didnt he change his story on putting JBR to bed? First he read to her then he didnt?

 

[ShadyLady]

I’m no particular fan of JR’s, but for me, it’s unhelpful to think about a case and its players in absolutes like this. I want to form an opinion / ideas based on either a) sourced facts and/or b) reasonable speculation (noted as such) based on those facts. I want to be able to change my mind or re-evaluate things if some new evidence comes along, or someone presents a novel theory accounting for the known facts. Being emotionally tied to one view precludes all that.

The broken basement window JR thought had been fixed and hadn’t been in months is an example of him not “knowing everything going on in the house”.

Anyway, people, even John Ramsey, contain multitudes.

Really bothered me that when JR saw his daughter had been kidnapped....why didnt he immediately think of the basement window and check it right away. Knowing that was an easy entrance to the house?

And hard to believe BR did not wake up when Patsy was screaming for JR to come down....

 

[CloudedTruth]

I don’t think anything was crumbling. For all we know they were perfectly happy and comfortable with their roles. Patsy was enjoying being a mum and putting the kids in music lessons, sports and beauty pageants, John was a happy workaholic and was involved with the kids. He had his role, patsy had hers. They had a house keeper to do the cleaning, they did a lot of socialising. They had a lot of friends, got invited to a lot of places. They had a great life.

I think one of most poignant things we have learned in this case is that what things look like from the outside is rarely a true picture of what may be going on behind closed doors. This is one of the most classic cases of that very idea. As this case has unfolded over the years and layers have been pulled back allowing glimpses into the dynamics of this family, it has become abundantly clear that this was a family that was highly dysfunctional with a daughter as another commenter here pointed out, may very well have been in crisis.

John may have been a "happy workaholic" but that also meant that he was not as aware of what was going on in his own house as he should have been. Many of the people who had worked for them over the years assisting with child care and housekeeping spoke of being overwhelmed with the workload and underpaid as a result. The house often looked like a hoarder's den and that's with a housekeeper. John had recently gone off on Patsy for her poor (nonexistent?) housekeeping skills. That was after all her realm, her responsibility. And she was failing. There are signs that she was overwhelmed, signs that her husband should have seen.

The kids were essentially left to their own devices. Not expected to clean up after themselves, not being taught to respect their home. They had poor hygiene habits, poor toileting habits. They lived in a chaotic, messy, toxic environment. That's not healthy for anyone, let alone young kids who need guidance and positive examples to learn to follow.

Yes, the Ramseys socialized a lot. They had expensive toys, they took expensive holidays. It's all pretty glitzy on the surface, but is that really what makes people happy? By all accounts the marriage was more like a business arrangement than an actual marriage. John had to be told by friends when Patsy was very ill and fighting for her life that he needed to take a little time off and support her. She was flying to and from Baltimore all by herself and sick as a dog. Where was John? Working. I wonder how that made Patsy feel, that her husband was so caught up in working that it didn't even occur to him that maybe he could take a few days off here and there to be with her in the fight of her life so that she didn't have to be alone.

The had a big house filled with stuff. But a great life? That's not how I would describe it.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I don’t think anything was crumbling. For all we know they were perfectly happy and comfortable with their roles. Patsy was enjoying being a mum and putting the kids in music lessons, sports and beauty pageants, John was a happy workaholic and was involved with the kids. He had his role, patsy had hers. They had a house keeper to do the cleaning, they did a lot of socialising. They had a lot of friends, got invited to a lot of places. They had a great life.

Well that's your interpretation of a great life.
I think some people may question why her children werent taught toileting skills that may have been contributing to health problems but she put so much time into song and dance routines. Maybe they should have spent more time at home...
I don't judge PR in the least for a disorganized home but it was not in alignment with the image she portrayed. I think it is acceptable for one to question the two opposing Patsys. I think we all have come into contact with people who are not who they portray themselves to be and you have to wonder why? Does it make them a murderer? Nope but it is a false facade or pretense. I tend to avoid that personality type.