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

[CloudedTruth]

I don’t believe anything written in Linda Hoffman Pufh’s book. I don’t believe John went off at patsy for being a lousy housekeeper. But if he did that means nothing. They’d been married for 20 years, I’m pretty sure he knew exactly what patsy was like. You can’t judge what state their house was in all the time based on a few Christmas photos and a crime scene video. Whose house doesn’t get messy over Christmas. As for John having to be told by friends to be more supportive of patsy during her cancer treatment, I take that with a grain of salt. Often people will say anything to make money. Often people invent stories to make money. I don’t think gossip proves anything about the ramseys private life. I prefer to stick to the facts of the case.

Patsy was a lousy housekeeper, Linda Hoffman Pugh was not the only one to notice it or reference it. Even Nedra chastised Patsy for it. John liked order & discipline, he was in the Navy. Having your shortcomings pointed out to you in any manner can be upsetting, whether you've been married for 1 year or 20 years it does mean something when your spouse feels the need to call you out.

We know from other accounts of former housekeeper's and Nedra that the house was messy normally, unless she was throwing a party. And then she had hired help cleaning up and decorating. The kids were not taught to clean up after themselves, they left clothing and toys wherever they felt like. They didn't even have dirty clothes hampers. Food containers were left open after they got what they wanted. Former housekeepers speak of how overwhelmed they were at the amount of work that needed to be done every time they were there. John even mentions how Patsy would leave her clothes lying around when she took them off. It's all pretty well documented.

John having to be told he needed to be more supportive is not gossip, nor was it invented. It was noticed by more than one person in their inner circle, and it was someone John worked with who pulled him aside and told him he needed to step it up. It was not tabloid fodder that anyone got paid to say.

We all speculate at times:

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.

 

[CloudedTruth]

I've read a lot but said nothing in this forum, but this post ^ motivates me to share my own pov on some of what we have.

From the way the indictment was worded, we can read between the lines and see that the "child abuse" charges were broad catch-all charges to blame someone but were not really based on actual child abuse that was committed by the Ramseys in the traditional sense.

Instead, the so-called "child abuse" that they theorize is that the Ramsey's were supposed to protect their daughter, and someone killed her, so each Ramsey's failure to prevent it is a form of child abuse. It's word games, to blame someone without having any specifics to say what they did wrong - she died, so it must be the parents' fault.

The "accessory" charge is similar semantics, a broad catch-all charge that it's the Ramseys' fault that the investigation didn't turning up the killer(s). Therefore, they have somehow been helpers (aka "accessories") to the killers, not that they necessarily knew or intended to do so.

It's telling that there was no indictment for any actual actions the R's may have done, not for killing or death or the like, only a charge to blame for what they didn't somehow keep from happening (or make happen).

And with such broad charges, it's easy to see how those who saw what they really had (or, didn't have) as evidence to take to trial all figured this case would never convict anyone in an actual trial. It was a multi-year dead end, lacking anything solid, apparently.

As for how to work with the evidence, we just have surmising, guessing, opinions, and debate now. New evidence is unlikely to appear.

There IS one thing that could make a difference at this point and that's via the DNA that they have, and haven't yet properly identified. They have that evidence, it is what it is, and it just awaits better testing. And there are TWO different avenues there, if either the technology OR the databases (two separate and huge factors) evolve far enough where we can discover who else was in the mix at some point. Just finding that person changes everything, because then they can pursue why was it THAT person's DNA, when it might have been left on JBR, who else that implicates, and how it changes the story.

Until that question ("whose DNA?") is answered, I don't think this case can ever progress much beyond the endless debate we have in this forum that is opinions and perspectives of sleuths from afar, each with their own biases and pov's and their own way to word it. It's a good lively discussion, but imo it's a rehash of the same stuff that's been said for over 20 years.

This is very specific IMO. It speaks in no uncertain terms to knowledge and intent. These are legitimate legal charges, not word games.

On or between Dec. 25 and Dec. 26, 1996 in Boulder County, Colo., John Bennett Ramsey did unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of Murder in the First Degree and Child Abuse Resulting in Death.

 

[GRT]

 

[CloudedTruth]

The Ramseys were cleared too, but that doesn't stop the speculation that they were somehow involved.

Until the murderer is caught -- which is looking less likely as the decades pass -- law enforcement (and others) will continue to look at all the evidence, motive, and opportunity.

They will continue to look at the Ramseys and the Whites, and all the others they've been looking at.

They may not call any of them suspects or persons of interest anymore. But they haven't forgotten about them.

And let's remember -- the Whites were not destitute. FW was a wealthy oil man.

The Ramseys were "cleared" by DA Mary Lacy in what amounted to a PR stunt based upon her lack of a clear understanding of the DNA. Her letter is not legally binding and the case is still open and being actively investigated. They have never been cleared by police.

 

[GRT]

The Ramseys were "cleared" by DA Mary Lacy in what amounted to a PR stunt based upon her lack of a clear understanding of the DNA. Her letter is not legally binding and the case is still open and being actively investigated. They have never been cleared by police.

Realistically, no one is cleared because no one has been convicted.

The BPD said the Whites were considered "witnesses" not "suspects" but how quickly do you think that would change if the DNA on JBR's panties was found to be FW's using the new advanced technology?

When the investigators today look at the case, does anyone think they don't look at the evidence that contains the Whites? Of course they do. Just as they look at the evidence that contains the Ramseys.

It's a word game.

No one is cleared.

 

[Charlot123]

Practical question, are you going to buy/read whatever comes as the result of his DNA testing?

Me neither.

 

[AppleTreeGreen]

Let's go with your reasoning. First of all, PR said she didn't read the note- RED FLAG
Second, the 911 call should have sounded like" My daughter has been kidnapped, they are threatening to kill her if I call the police. Please come through the back alley, dear God, don't make your presence known or they will kill her!!"

Isn’t what you wrote the same or similar to the scenario and points I had already posted, and now bolded, below?

It is not my intent to make excuses for them but from my understanding of the RN they already risked condemning their daughter to an excruciating death by beheading when they called 911. They were warned that the two men watching over her disliked John to the point they would have no problem executing their daughter. In the hypothetical that the abduction was real, what did JR and PR think would happen when the police car pulled up and it is reported back to JBR’s

Worse, PR didn’t even pass that warning off to LE before she hung up on 911. It could have helped them out and their daughter (which is why I think it is valid that people view their behavior as suspicious or question their motives)

PR said she didn't read the note- RED FLAG

If PR didn’t read the RN than that would make more sense for why she called her friends and asked them to come over. Based on what I read from a transcript 1997 police interview, according to PR interview with LE in 1997, she immediately began to panic and run up the stairs upon realizing the RN she discovered was in reference to her daughter. She says that once she discovers that JBR is not in her bed she becomes frantic and calls 911 after being told to do so by John who is now reading the note. When asked, she does state she recalls reading the note but not word for word. As a result, it is possible that in her distressed and Immediately after calling 911 she calls PW and Barbara and tells informs them that JBR has been kidnapped and she needs them both to come over. This may seem odd or suspicious to some, but if PR is genuinely experiencing hysteria in this moment than it makes sense that she would call on her support system to be with her. Additionally, it seems quite possible that in her frantic state, which is noted by the first responding police officers, she may not have fully comprehended or perhaps even remembered the RN’s threats before reaching out to them. The Whites arrive basically at the same as the police who upon being greeted by a distressed and overwhelmed PR at the front door, corrals everyone into the sunroom before he even starts. Arndt also notes PR’s distressed state as she can barely even talk or answer questions when the detective arrives a few hours later, collapses twice in front of her (once to pray and a second time when JBR is found later) and when she refers her to the hospital to seek proper medical attention as she becomes emotionally and psychologically overwhelmed. PW also gives insight into how overwhelmed and hurt PR was during the before and after JBR was discovered in a Vanity Fair article. With that in mind, if both Patsy’s affect is real and genuine and so too the authenticity of the RN, I think it is quite possible that PR didn’t purposely intend to be non-compliant with its directives or risk her daughter’s safety from harm and her return home to them when the other couples came over. Rather she was so overwhelmed mentally and physically she wasn’t even fully aware of she her responses, what they were in opposition to or the impact the letter warns they can have.

JMO

https://juror13lw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/linda-arndt-jan-8-1997-report.pdf

http://www.acandyrose.com/1997BPD-Patsy-Interview-Complete.htm

MISSING INNOCENCE | Vanity Fair

The Christmas-night murder of six-year-old beauty-pageant winner JonBenet Ramsey in Boulder, Colorado, shocked the country and turned her millionaire parents, John and Patsy, into suspects. With sources deep inside the investigation and among Ramsey relatives and friends, ANN LOUISE BARDACH...

archive.vanityfair.com

 

[Tower]

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

RSBM
Kids often don’t wake up, even in emergencies. I don’t think that’s peculiar at all, if that is really what happened. My kids have never once woken to alarms or emergencies in the few occasions we’ve had something happen at night. It’s a bit terrifying how deeply they can sleep.

Sound the Alarm: Researchers Determine More Effective Ways to Awaken Children and Their Families During a House Fire

When residential fires happen at night while families are sleeping, deaths are more likely to occur. Smoke alarms are important for preventing these deaths, yet research has shown that many pre-teenage children don’t wake up to traditional high-frequency tone alarms. Researchers from the Center...

www.nationwidechildrens.org

 

[CloudedTruth]

Realistically, no one is cleared because no one has been convicted.

The BPD said the Whites were considered "witnesses" not "suspects" but how quickly do you think that would change if the DNA on JBR's panties was found to be FW's using the new advanced technology?

When the investigators today look at the case, does anyone think they don't look at the evidence that contains the Whites? Of course they do. Just as they look at the evidence that contains the Ramseys.

It's a word game.

No one is cleared.

The Whites' gave DNA samples a long time ago. If it were Fleet's DNA in her panties, he would've been arrested a long time ago.

 

[GRT]

The Whites' gave DNA samples a long time ago. If it were Fleet's DNA in her panties, he would've been arrested a long time ago.

The problem as I understand it is that the DNA on her clothing is "composite DNA" that couldn't be separated at the time of testing. Being a composite means it's from more than one individual.

It didn't match anyone's DNA -- not the Ramseys, not the Whites, not the Town Santa that was paying unhealthy attention to JBR.

If it were possible now to separate the DNA, which is what JR keeps pushing for, the separated results could match any of those who were formerly tested. That means JR could be a match, Patsy or Burke could be a match, and Fleet White could also be a match.

As of now, however, separating it has been impossible but with technology getting better, maybe they'll be able to do it one day soon.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Isn’t what you wrote the same or similar to the scenario and points I had already posted, and now bolded, below?





If PR didn’t read the RN than that would make more sense for why she called her friends and asked them to come over. Based on what I read from a transcript 1997 police interview, according to PR interview with LE in 1997, she immediately began to panic and run up the stairs upon realizing the RN she discovered was in reference to her daughter. She says that once she discovers that JBR is not in her bed she becomes frantic and calls 911 after being told to do so by John who is now reading the note. When asked, she does state she recalls reading the note but not word for word. As a result, it is possible that in her distressed and Immediately after calling 911 she calls PW and Barbara and tells informs them that JBR has been kidnapped and she needs them both to come over. This may seem odd or suspicious to some, but if PR is genuinely experiencing hysteria in this moment than it makes sense that she would call on her support system to be with her. Additionally, it seems quite possible that in her frantic state, which is noted by the first responding police officers, she may not have fully comprehended or perhaps even remembered the RN’s threats before reaching out to them. The Whites arrive basically at the same as the police who upon being greeted by a distressed and overwhelmed PR at the front door, corrals everyone into the sunroom before he even starts. Arndt also notes PR’s distressed state as she can barely even talk or answer questions when the detective arrives a few hours later, collapses twice in front of her (once to pray and a second time when JBR is found later) and when she refers her to the hospital to seek proper medical attention as she becomes emotionally and psychologically overwhelmed. PW also gives insight into how overwhelmed and hurt PR was during the before and after JBR was discovered in a Vanity Fair article. With that in mind, if both Patsy’s affect is real and genuine and so too the authenticity of the RN, I think it is quite possible that PR didn’t purposely intend to be non-compliant with its directives or risk her daughter’s safety from harm and her return home to them when the other couples came over. Rather she was so overwhelmed mentally and physically she wasn’t even fully aware of she her responses, what they were in opposition to or the impact the letter warns they can have.

JMO

https://juror13lw.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/linda-arndt-jan-8-1997-report.pdf

http://www.acandyrose.com/1997BPD-Patsy-Interview-Complete.htm

MISSING INNOCENCE | Vanity Fair

The Christmas-night murder of six-year-old beauty-pageant winner JonBenet Ramsey in Boulder, Colorado, shocked the country and turned her millionaire parents, John and Patsy, into suspects. With sources deep inside the investigation and among Ramsey relatives and friends, ANN LOUISE BARDACH...

archive.vanityfair.com

Yes. Sorry! My wording was poor. I was responding to why it looked guilty as you stated and how could it not.
I don't believe she didn't read the note.
I think that defies the response one would have at finding a ransom note. Wouldn't you initially feel utter disbelief? I admit, I am a fast reader so it's hard for me not to think she at least didn't skim through the pages. In reality, or I should say my reality, that note seems like a hoax, I might even think someone was playing a trick on me and continue to read. I understand what PR stated to LE but without that RN being there, they were sunk with a dead child in their house. That is the only concrete thing that directs attention away from them.

 

[Tower]

I can think of a few reasons.
He had a daughter the same age that he may have been comfortable helping. My ex was very hands on with childcare. That generation of men had different expectations put on them then their fathers. All my friends husband's changed diapers, bathed, and dressed their children.
He was aware or PRs illness and may have stepped in to help when he was around. After all, he and his wife were good friends of the Ramseys. I would.
Think they would have offered to help in some way.
It was known that JBR asked anyone to assist her in the bathroom.My question would be why the focus on Fleet White . My understanding is that Patsy's father was in charge of watching the children while she was undergoing therapy.. If you're going to point the finger at someand he spent more time with the kids in his charge.

I am a huge fan of dads being very involved with their kids. My work-from-home husband was with our kids their whole lives while I worked 10-hour shifts and we never had them in daycare.

But I do think it’s very different to wipe a 6-year-old. Handing her wet wipes and coaching her through it may even be appropriate, but I don’t think any opposite-sex caregiver other than the child’s own father should be wiping 6-year-olds. She is too vulnerable. Just my own personal bias.

As someone brought up recently on this or a related thread, it is extremely confusing and contradictory for PR and Dr. Beuf to tell JBR not to let anyone touch her in her bathing suit zone (I’m paraphrasing) while FW and/or her grandfather are wiping her. How is she supposed to logically make sense of that at age 6? If this happened as reported, she was extremely vulnerable to grooming and SA.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I am a huge fan of dads being very involved with their kids. My work-from-home husband was with our kids their whole lives while I worked 10-hour shifts and we never had them in daycare.

But I do think it’s very different to wipe a 6-year-old. Handing her wet wipes and coaching her through it may even be appropriate, but I don’t think any opposite-sex caregiver other than the child’s own father should be wiping 6-year-olds. She is too vulnerable. Just my own personal bias.

As someone brought up recently on this or a related thread, it is extremely confusing and contradictory for PR and Dr. Beuf to tell JBR not to let anyone touch her in her bathing suit zone (I’m paraphrasing) while FW and/or her grandfather are wiping her. How is she supposed to logically make sense of that at age 6? If this happened as reported, she was extremely vulnerable to grooming and SA.

I agree but if the parent isn't there and leaves the responsibility to someone else, what would you do?
My son refused to wipe himself well past the age in which he was capable and I was none to pleased to do it at that point but didn't have much choice.
I think I finally had to tell him he would have to sit all day or wipe his own bum. Lol
This does go back to the parent imo as you should know who is wiping your child's bum for them if they can't or won't do it.

 

[303gmf]

P

He could be one of those three perps in the Ramsey`s house and also try find him today. I `m still guessing the three were John `s ex-employees were from the Philippines , and were fired and why they wanted John `s Christmas bonus money. ' In finding the

​

I agree but if the parent isn't there and leaves the responsibility to someone else, what would you do?
My son refused to wipe himself well past the age in which he was capable and I was none to pleased to do it at that point but didn't have much choice.
I think I finally had to tell him he would have to sit all day or wipe his own bum. Lol
This does go back to the parent imo as you should know who is wiping your child's bum for them if they can't or won't do it.

A 6 year old that needs bathroom help?
Way beyond the age necessary, 2 daughters and 5 grandchildren here, none need help past 3
Definitely NOT having neighbors or friends help

 

[Tower]

I agree but if the parent isn't there and leaves the responsibility to someone else, what would you do?
My son refused to wipe himself well past the age in which he was capable and I was none to pleased to do it at that point but didn't have much choice.
I think I finally had to tell him he would have to sit all day or wipe his own bum. Lol
This does go back to the parent imo as you should know who is wiping your child's bum for them if they can't or won't do it.

I think the choices are coach her to do it herself or she stays dirty. Agreeing to wipe her, if you’re a man, even a close family friend, seems shockingly naive. A grown man in 1996 would know that’s a bad idea. Jmo

 

[CloudedTruth]

I agree but if the parent isn't there and leaves the responsibility to someone else, what would you do?
My son refused to wipe himself well past the age in which he was capable and I was none to pleased to do it at that point but didn't have much choice.
I think I finally had to tell him he would have to sit all day or wipe his own bum. Lol
This does go back to the parent imo as you should know who is wiping your child's bum for them if they can't or won't do it.

I agree too, but IMO the Ramseys put their friend Fleet in a very uncomfortable and unfair position. They left their daughter in his care at times, knowing that she had toileting issues. Was it discussed with him or her? If she was there for several hours, chances are she's going to need to use the bathroom. What was he supposed to do in that situation? I wonder what John would've said / done if Fleet called him at his office and said, "JonBenet needs to be wiped, how fast can you get here"?

 

[Val1943]

The killers are properly dead and cremated hopefully this case can be solved like this one

DNA evidence helps identify woman’s killer 36 years after her death​

How genetic genealogy cracked the case

https://www.cnn.com/2024/12/08/us/tracy-whitney-cold-case-dna-evidence/index.html

 

[highfastflyer]

“Cynic” has an excellent podcast “A Rebuttal to Ramsey Misinformation”on Bitchute. Highly recommend.

Thanks for linking to this. While the information in the Cynic podcast is accurate, it shouldn’t surprise anyone who is familiar with the case. Clearly the Netflix coverage is yet another attempt for JR & team to a) continue to promote themselves as victims so as to gain/keep public support, b) continue to spread one sided or misinformation on the facts to sow doubt on the investigation, and c) continue pushing DNA as a venue for resolution when they (as WS Tricia alludes) know it’s a red herring that leads nowhere.

Cynic adds an appendix at the end discussing the RN, although not part of the Netflix doc, because it’s such a crucial portion of the case.

It should be clear to any familiar observer (and is also my opinion) that the Ramseys were involved and culpable at some level in the events of 25/26 Dec 1996 that resulted in what happened to JonBenet….and have successfully corrupted any attempt at being held responsible for doing so. What exactly they did…to what level…is not becoming any clearer as the decades past and likely never will.

What I find interesting in declaring a belief of “RDI”, or the clear innuendo that Cynic has in the JR doc rebuttal, is that these statements, beliefs always leave out the evil, sadistic, animalistic inhuman way that JonBenet was sexually assaulted and tortured during that evenings events. Anyone who hasn’t, should listen to ‘The Consult’, experienced FBI profilers who go through every detail of what was done to JonBenets body, and what kind of person it takes to do those unspeakable things. Yes, fathers and mothers have killed daughters. But not this way. JR, PR, nor BR did not do those things. My opinion, and also the opinion of multiple lifetime agents of the FBI with decades of experience in gross sexual torture and molestation cases.

Very convenient to leave that portion of the discussion out, for the RDI accuser camp. They did something. A lot of things. But according to the FBI, not that.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I think the choices are coach her to do it herself or she stays dirty. Agreeing to wipe her, if you’re a man, even a close family friend, seems shockingly naive. A grown man in 1996 would know that’s a bad idea. Jmo

While I agree, I feel that's an unfair predicament to put someone in.
My friend and I exchanged babysitting duties with eachother. We both had boys that probably needed help toileting at some point. Were we wrong to do this? Should no one ever help a child that is not yours? Is it only wrong because he was the opposite sex? Daycare people all over the world are put in this position of trust with poeples children. It's kind of tough to leave a kid to their own devices when you are unsure of the amount of fecal matter they may have on them.
Six was far too old but if people were used to stepping up for PR from the time she was 3 years old, he was probably considered a trusted adult.
He then was put in the parenting position to say " I'm not doing this for you". Not necessarily naive but put in a situation of saying no to doing what he always had done for her.
Again, not saying it was a good practice but who is to say he didn't try to teach her. If his intentions were noble, he wouldn't have been thrilled to do it IMO.

 

[cenazoic]

To me, at 6, a little girl should not be tended in her toilet duties by an adult male if there is a female available.

Sorry if this has been covered already, but can you provide a source for Fleet actually changing / cleaning JB? I’ve been looking, but the closest I’ve found was in Steve Thomas’ book, pp 675-676, Kindle ed.):

“[Nedra Paugh] said that the child did not wipe properly after a bowel movement, and quite often an adult would have to wash her bottom and change her undies. ….
“The grandmother also mentioned two occasions when the little girl had gone to play with her best friend, Daphne White, and had come home with Fleet White carrying her soiled underwear, saying that JonBenét had had an accident and was wearing a pair of Daphne’s panties.”