Flippy Esso: what do we know?

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by Toth
Psychics? I wonder if the nutcases will ever just drift off into obscurity or go after some other obsession.

"YOU WONDER" oh just tell us what "YOU WISH" ...!!!
Ok...so noted...SAVE ME "I Believe EVERYTHING COMES FROM SOMEWHERE!" ... where or where did this book/info come from?...
W H Y ?

 

[Toth]

Originally posted by sissi
That is a huge question Ivy, does the pineapple really play into this murder? Why would a killer feed Jonbenet pineapple ,and wait at least a few hours to kill her
Another idea would be to have a lure person,

I think it absurd to think someone who was about to do what he did to a little girl would give her a snack first.
I also think it absurd that there would be any sort of 'lure'...whoever did this is not the patient type to use a 'lure' he prefers 'ligature' to 'lure' anyway.
You go take a look at how deeply that ligature is embedded in the tiny neck and then ask yourself is that the work of someone who lets his victim have a snack first.

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by Toth
I think it absurd to think someone who was about to do what he did to a little girl would give her a snack first.
I also think it absurd that there would be any sort of 'lure'...whoever did this is not the patient type to use a 'lure' he prefers 'ligature' to 'lure' anyway.
You go take a look at how deeply that ligature is embedded in the tiny neck and then ask yourself is that the work of someone who lets his victim have a snack first.

Hum... maybe before you ask what you post...one should ask is the person-in-charge(CEO) thinking Straight OR Twisted; as in "twisted or straight thinking!".?

 

[Ivy]

Originally posted by Toth
I think it absurd to think someone who was about to do what he did to a little girl would give her a snack first.
I also think it absurd that there would be any sort of 'lure'...whoever did this is not the patient type to use a 'lure' he prefers 'ligature' to 'lure' anyway.
You go take a look at how deeply that ligature is embedded in the tiny neck and then ask yourself is that the work of someone who lets his victim have a snack first.

Tell that to the Ramseys, Toth. They're the ones who insist an intruder fed JonBenet pineapple a couple hours or so before he killed her.

 

[ajt400]

I think they actually just stated that they did not feed JBR the pineapple. Not that the intruder did. Who knows whats up with the pineapple....maybe that id just a red-herring. They must have deduced if we didn't feed JBR the pineapple, the person who took her must have.

 

[Jayelles]

Where abouts exactly were the pair of marks on her body? I know there is one mark on her face and a pair on her torso, but does anyone know the exact whereabouts on her torso? I'm not sure actually that the case snapper theory is viable. In my Samsonite case the pockets with snappers are on either side of the interior. That's quite a distance apart really. Unfortunately, the case is in the attic so I can't measure it. I also think my case is a bit bigger than the Ramsey case. I'm guessing it's about three feet wide, so allowing for the curve of the corners, the snappers would probably be about 4 feet apart, JonBenet was only 4 feet tall.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

Who the hell is Flippy? and why not DRAG his name through the mud. You say he is a known sexual offender? LOL Toth. I see sexual offenders should be protected!

There was only ONE sexual offender in this case, and it's one of the Ramsey's, plain and simple. The child was MOLESTED per Cyril Whect, the date of the murder and hours perhaps days prior to the crime. It's as simple as that.

 

[ajt400]

It's funny how you say their was a sexual offender, it was one of the Ramsey's, but you can't even say which one? Isn't that convenient? Having your theory have 2 suspects, that way you have one to fall back on....

 

[Jayelles]

Re Stranger Intruder, I have trouble with motive. Here's why:-

The Ramseys were wealthy and they lived in a big house - most likely (in the intruder's eyes) there would have been an alarm system in operation.

The Ramseys had a lot of friends and they entertained a lot - there could have been a host of people in the house, some might have been light sleepers and/or awake.

How would a stranger know there was a little child in the house? Do people randomly break into houses just to wander about? I think usually there is an incentive - like robbery. There was no evidence of robbery.

The Ramseys had lights on in the house. The house wasn't in total darkness and as it was Christmas night, there would have been more people than normal in the streets - coming from and going to parties.

It makes no sense that this crime was committed by an opportunist.

 

[Barbara]

Originally posted by ajt400
It's funny how you say their was a sexual offender, it was one of the Ramsey's, but you can't even say which one? Isn't that convenient? Having your theory have 2 suspects, that way you have one to fall back on....

The issue of "which Ramsey" was the offender/murderer, etc. is what has kept them out of jail for 7 years.

 

[sissi]

This is the reason so many think,those that do not believe it a Ramsey,the intruder was someone at the party on the 23rd.
The "throwing under the bus" was more of a fact finding excercise,not malice on the part of the Ramseys.
Who was this Santa who insisted on a party? Was Curralt ever questioned?
Did Jonbenet make a sudden cry for help by dialing 911 and was stopped by Fleet?
The check was to be on the counter,did a household member of the Pughs stop by for this check,let themselves in with a key?
Why did Glenn Myers come in ,uninvited ,over the dog barking?
Why did Simon run through the streets naked screaming he didn't kill Jonbenet?
Why did Wolf arrogantly refuse to cooperate with the police,and why did he and santa deny a relationship?
These are normal questions,an innocent family would have .

After watching the Smart program last night, it seems Boulder isn't the only egotistical PD,for God sakes this man had to take the really solid information elsewhere first. This is exactly what the Ramseys were up against,and sadly the deed was done,they had no hope of getting their child back,instead they had to push for finding a killer while the focus was always on them. There really was NO early investigation,regardless of what Thomas says,I know personally of one solid lead that sat for over a year before being given the good ole bpd cursory glance.

It is now possible to test smaller pieces of biological matter and get a DNA fingerprint. It has also become possible to get a DNA profile from matter which has degraded, or is not fresh. In addition, the tests are faster and the matching easier because there are more and more data banks.

Instead of insisting on new people,everyone should be screaming for those involved in this case to CHECK the developing data banks. Our guy is out there,we just need the system to find him.

IMO JMO

 

[ajt400]

Originally posted by Jayelles
Re Stranger Intruder, I have trouble with motive. Here's why:-

The Ramseys were wealthy and they lived in a big house - most likely (in the intruder's eyes) there would have been an alarm system in operation.

The Ramseys had a lot of friends and they entertained a lot - there could have been a host of people in the house, some might have been light sleepers and/or awake.

How would a stranger know there was a little child in the house? Do people randomly break into houses just to wander about? I think usually there is an incentive - like robbery. There was no evidence of robbery.

The Ramseys had lights on in the house. The house wasn't in total darkness and as it was Christmas night, there would have been more people than normal in the streets - coming from and going to parties.

It makes no sense that this crime was committed by an opportunist.

If a person is stalking someone, they will know particular intamate details about them. Everything listed above could be found out by someone who wanted to find them out. This is not that difficult...this was not a crime of opportunity, whoever did this knoew who they were targeting and why...

 

[ajt400]

Originally posted by Barbara
The issue of "which Ramsey" was the offender/murderer, etc. is what has kept them out of jail for 7 years.

You don't think that it has anything to do with the fact that their isn't enough evidence to convict them? It has to be one or the other,right? Now it's both of them?? That's even more convenient...

 

[ajt400]

Originally posted by sissi
This is the reason so many think,those that do not believe it a Ramsey,the intruder was someone at the party on the 23rd.
The "throwing under the bus" was more of a fact finding excercise,not malice on the part of the Ramseys.
Who was this Santa who insisted on a party? Was Curralt ever questioned?
Did Jonbenet make a sudden cry for help by dialing 911 and was stopped by Fleet?
The check was to be on the counter,did a household member of the Pughs stop by for this check,let themselves in with a key?
Why did Glenn Myers come in ,uninvited ,over the dog barking?
Why did Simon run through the streets naked screaming he didn't kill Jonbenet?
Why did Wolf arrogantly refuse to cooperate with the police,and why did he and santa deny a relationship?
These are normal questions,an innocent family would have .

After watching the Smart program last night, it seems Boulder isn't the only egotistical PD,for God sakes this man had to take the really solid information elsewhere first. This is exactly what the Ramseys were up against,and sadly the deed was done,they had no hope of getting their child back,instead they had to push for finding a killer while the focus was always on them. There really was NO early investigation,regardless of what Thomas says,I know personally of one solid lead that sat for over a year before being given the good ole bpd cursory glance.

It is now possible to test smaller pieces of biological matter and get a DNA fingerprint. It has also become possible to get a DNA profile from matter which has degraded, or is not fresh. In addition, the tests are faster and the matching easier because there are more and more data banks.

Instead of insisting on new people,everyone should be screaming for those involved in this case to CHECK the developing data banks. Our guy is out there,we just need the system to find him.

IMO JMO

I do agree that the answer to this case is in the file already....that no one has just really looked at it yet...I don't hold very much regard for Thomas as an investigator. All I can say is I sure hope none of my loved ones ever die in his town. We''' be sure never to find the killer!

 

[Ivy]

The pineapple isn't a red herring. Someone gave JonBenet pineapple a couple of hours before she died. Since none of the Ramseys admit to giving her any, the implication is loud and clear that it must have been an intruder who did, and Smit backs them up. JonBenet wasn't tall enough to have reached the pineapple in the fridge and anyway, her fingerprints were not on the bowl. Yep, must have been an intruder, all right.

John and Patsy insist that neither of them gave JonBenet pineapple after the family returned from the Whites'. In an interview, Burke said he didn't remember if JonBenet ate pineapple that night. LE assumed he was telling the truth.

Contradicting John and Patsy, who'd said JonBenet was asleep and was carried upstairs when they returned from the Whites', Burke said JonBenet walked upstairs. I think JonBenet walked upstairs, and later, Burke and JonBenet went back downstairs after their parents retired for the night. Then Burke took the pineapple from the fridge for JonBenet, who used her fingers to eat some from the bowl. It sounds innocent enough, but it would connect Burke to something that involved JonBenet a couple of hours before she died. The Ramseys didn't want that, just as they didn't want Burke connected with anything that happened after JonBenet's death, such as the 911 call.

If they'd known that Burke gave JonBenet pineapple and that the pineapple would show up in the autopsy, they wouldn't have lied to keep Burke out of the picture by insisting JonBenet was asleep when the family returned from the Whites' and had to be carried upstairs. John and Patsy would likely have said JonBenet was awake when they got home and wanted pineapple before she went to bed, and that they gave her some, which would also keep Burke out of the picture.

 

[ajt400]

So, if they would go to such instances to lie, why not get Burke's story straight before the police arrived? Why would it be so difficult for someone to have been wearing gloves to give her pineapple? So your saying it was either a midget or Burke that gave it to her....that just makes no sense

 

[Imon128]

There's a little mess, there, with the pineapple. Defining the actual time JB would have eaten the pineapple first, then how she would have got the pineapple into her digestive tract, and on and on. The pineapple issue needs resolved, IMO.

 

[ajt400]

That is a good point, is there a near exact time of death for her anyway? Lots of things about this case need to be resolved

 

[sissi]

There is only one way to explain the pineapple if it was part of the crime. It could only have been served by a person very acceptable to Jonbenet. For a moment,put her family aside as they would have no reason to lie about the pineapple,consider who would serve her,who would she expect to sit down with to have a snack and a morning conversation,who wouldn't seem out of place in the home? Either someone she expected,or someone normally there. That would point to Santa,LHP,White,or even Meyer bringing the dog in for a quick goodbye. Can this be expanded to the gardener,the photographer,and others she would not fear? If the pineapple was served to her,only these people could have sat and shared the snack. We really don't know if the pineapple played a part,however we can not consider the pineapple being served and shared with flippy,mcelroy,thomas aquinas,or any of the spooky stranges that have been considered. If the pineapple was served by the perp,the perp was WELL known to her. IMO JMO

 

[Ivy]

As I said in my last post, I don't think John and Patsy knew that Burke had given JonBenet pineapple a couple of hours before she died. If they'd known he had, and that the pineapple would show up in the autopsy, they would have cooked up a different story to tell LE, and they would have made sure to coach Burke about it so he would know what to say to keep himself out of the picture.

I don't think John and Patsy thought to coach Burke to say that JonBenet had been carried to bed. It probably didn't occur to them to, because if it hadn't been for pineapple being found in her digestive tract, LE might not have questioned Burke as to whether JonBenet was awake or asleep when the family returned from the Whites' or asked if he'd seen her eat pineapple.

ajt...a midget? Who said anything about a midget? Sure, an intruder could have worn gloves, but please explain why an intruder would feed JonBenet pineapple in the first place.. Even Toth, the Ramseys' most loyal and ardent supporter here, finds that idea ridiculous.