Happenings of December 26

[UKGuy]

Do the Ramsey's have a story that they say could explain the note the murder?

At first I thought it made no sense b/c the kidnappers would want to get the body out of the house. But why? They planned on kidnapping her and keeping them under surveillance to make sure they didn't go to the authorities. That brings to mind their being in a nondescript van down the road.

But as long as the Ramsey were cooperating, why even hide? One of the kidnappers could have walked in the front door. Then I thought, wouldn't it be logical for them to hold her hostage in the house where they could eavesdrop and hear about any plans to get marked bills or contact the authorities? There was a good chance the Ramsey's would search the house, but if the kidnapper heard them coming, he'd just put a gun to the bound JBR's head. Sure he'd feel cornered the basement of a house, but it's actually better for the kidnapper than to be in their van parked in some public park. At some point the kidnapper would have to do the exchange and face the Ramsey's.

If this scenario were true, the kidnapper may have heard the frantic 911 call, initiate the already-configured garrote, and climbed out the window.

I am not saying I think this scenario is likely, but it's the kind of nightmare that would have gone through my mind if I had seen the ransom note, which is why I cannot understand her loud call to the police. She even said "Police!" at the beginning of the call. It's the opposite of what you'd want to do if you believed a note that said they'll kill her if you call the police but return her for a modest sum of money.

CircuitGuy,
Any intruder who had gained entry to the house could quite easily have left with JonBenet, dead or alive. A dead JonBenet still has monetary value since the kidnapper could still take the ransom money, leaving the R's with a dead JonBenet.

Another clue is that JonBenet was placed into the wine-cellar, something no intruder would know exists, never mind considers why it must be a good idea to move her there?

There is also no forensic evidence linking to anyone outside of the Ramsey household. depite all the staging, the redressing, cleaning her body, applying retraints and a ligature and paintbrush handle. Still no linking forensic evidence. All three Ramseys are linked to forensic evidence found in the wine-cellar.

I think some kind of prior staging was enacted, say in her bedroom. Later someone suggested this was too risky, all the family would become prime suspects. So they moved JonBenet and accompanying forensic evidence down to the wine-cellar and cleaned her bedroom up, or wherever she had been located?

Whatever scenario the R's constructed they always have to assume JonBenet will be found. So they have to stage a crime-scene that will match their version of events. A proper staged abduction with JonBenet left miles away at a deposit site is a high risk strategy, not least is the R's car being recorded or seen, or even forensic traces left behind.

So it appears the R's constructed the wine-cellar staging to offer an explanation for JonBenet's death and her body being moved from upstairs, e.g. kidnapping.

For the R's JonBenet found in the basement is much the same as her being found miles away. They still have to do a staging. So they hoped they had done enough to avoid forensically connecting themselves with her death.

As such its not a proper crime-scene, its a place that contains forensic evidence that you would not want connected to an abduction. The R's had the opportunity to remove the other artifacts, simply creating a location where the intruder dumped JonBenet, but they never!

So the wine-cellar really serves as a place to hide JonBenet and related forensic evidence, whilst creating the illusion of an abduction.

.

 

[CircuitGuy]

JR did everything. PR and BR were not involved in the murder, or cover up. JR planned to get PR/BR out of the house, then he'd dump the body somewhere while pretending to be delivering the ransom. He bet on PR not calling the police, but she did. That is why PR does everything the RN says not to do - because she didn't read it carefully, and she's not in on the cover-up.

It hard even to guess what was in PR's mind, but IMHO PR failing to read the note carefully does not explain her doing everything the RN says not to do. Suppose it just said, "We took JBR. We will call you and tell you where to deliver $118k, and we'll return her unharmed." I still wouldn't understand the frantic calls to the police. OTOH who knows how people would react in that situation. It doesn't add up to me though.

Your scenario is logical from JR's standpoint. You're saying he murdered his daughter without prior planning for whatever sick reason and then needed to work out a coverup after he did it. You're saying he wrote a random note that would cause a reasonable person to get the family out of the house while JR delivered the ransom. BR, however, wigged out and spoiled the plan. Is that correct?

We know the scenario that you outlined (Intruders in the basement, killing JB when they heard the 911 call) could not be true, because we know she was killed around midnight. Give it an hour either way, and there is still no way she died a few minutes after the 911 call was made.

I was not aware of this fact. That almost proves, then, that ransom was not the motive. If a real kidnapper had left her there around midnight, he or she would have known that there's a good chance the parents would search the house, find the body, and not pay the ransom.

Your scenario is plausible: He would suggest a modest amount of money so he could (at his option) destroy it, claim the kidnappers took it, and not be set back financially too badly. All the talk of surveillance was to encourage PR and BR to leave the house and not contact the authorities. He could have then dumped JBR's body anywhere and needed only to avoid leaving any evidence in his car and to avoid any witnesses. That's pretty hard but a reasonable plan if he killed her without premeditation and wanted any plan to get away with it.

Your story is plausible. It requires JR to have acted without a plan that we know of and PR to have acted irrationally after finding the RN (clearly plausible).

 

[CircuitGuy]

So it appears the R's constructed the wine-cellar staging to offer an explanation for JonBenet's death and her body being moved from upstairs, e.g. kidnapping.

What is the constructed explanation of her death?

As such its not a proper crime-scene, its a place that contains forensic evidence that you would not want connected to an abduction. The R's had the opportunity to remove the other artifacts, simply creating a location where the intruder dumped JonBenet, but they never!

but never what? I'm interested in what words you may have omitted.

 

[UKGuy]

What is the constructed explanation of her death?


but never what? I'm interested in what words you may have omitted.

CircuitGuy,

What is the constructed explanation of her death?

The ligature paintbrush handle attached to her neck. This is a visible sign of how she died.

Its staging overkill, no intruder need apply such a device, all they need do is manually strangle JonBenet to arrive at the same result.

but never what? I'm interested in what words you may have omitted.

There are two categories of forensic evidence available in the wine-cellar. One is that of JonBenet herself, the second is artifacts that either belonged to JonBenet or were linked to her.

Some of those objects are the Pink Barbie Nightgown and the Barbie Doll. These are not objects that any intruder need worry about or relocate to the wine-cellar.

This suggests that the wine-cellar is not the primary crime-scene. Its only a crime-scene because JonBenet was discovered there. An analogy might be the Long Island Murders where the deceased were deposited, but the homicide took place elsewhere.

The importance of the latter point lies in considering what the paln was, since the person placing JonBenet into the wine-cellar cannot guarantee that she will not be found, if the police conduct a search.

So the accompanying forensic evidence should have been removed to make the idea of an abduction more realistic. That this was not done suggests staging an abduction was not the real goal, since other accompanying evidence contradicts this.

That is, would the intruder redress JonBenet in size-12 underwear, cleanup her body, redress her in longjohns, move her down to the wine-cellar, apply a ligature, wrap her in a blanket, return back upstairs for her Pink Barbie Nightgown and Barbie Doll, dropping these beside JonBenet, then leave the house?

I am proposing that the contents of the wine-cellar represent a prior staged crime-scene, and that at most the R's were intent on simply removing incriminating forensic evidence. That was the most that they could do, since they would always be suspects, regardless of the scenario undertaken.

That is, the prior crime-scene was cleaned up up and some of its contents moved to the wine-cellar. Similarly with JonBenet, but who moved JonBenet. This is explained by the Ransom Note, i.e. a Foreign Faction.

The R's were expecting the house to be searched this is why the Partially Opened Christmas gifts, her Nightgown and Doll are found in the wine-cellar. These are all clues in a previous setting which if left in full view would alert non-ramsey searchers!

.

 

[Chrishope]

It hard even to guess what was in PR's mind, but IMHO PR failing to read the note carefully does not explain her doing everything the RN says not to do. Suppose it just said, "We took JBR. We will call you and tell you where to deliver $118k, and we'll return her unharmed." I still wouldn't understand the frantic calls to the police. OTOH who knows how people would react in that situation. It doesn't add up to me though.

Your scenario is logical from JR's standpoint. You're saying he murdered his daughter without prior planning for whatever sick reason and then needed to work out a coverup after he did it. You're saying he wrote a random note that would cause a reasonable person to get the family out of the house while JR delivered the ransom. BR, however, wigged out and spoiled the plan. Is that correct?

PR wigged out, yes. The link in my prior post is to a website that explains it in detail.

I was not aware of this fact. That almost proves, then, that ransom was not the motive. If a real kidnapper had left her there around midnight, he or she would have known that there's a good chance the parents would search the house, find the body, and not pay the ransom.

Absolutely.

Your scenario is plausible: He would suggest a modest amount of money so he could (at his option) destroy it, claim the kidnappers took it, and not be set back financially too badly. All the talk of surveillance was to encourage PR and BR to leave the house and not contact the authorities. He could have then dumped JBR's body anywhere and needed only to avoid leaving any evidence in his car and to avoid any witnesses. That's pretty hard but a reasonable plan if he killed her without premeditation and wanted any plan to get away with it.

You got it.

Your story is plausible. It requires JR to have acted without a plan that we know of and PR to have acted irrationally after finding the RN (clearly plausible).

 

[CircuitGuy]

Bear with me b/c I'm new to this and very confused by parts of your post.

The ligature paintbrush handle attached to her neck. This is a visible sign of how she died.

Its staging overkill, no intruder need apply such a device, all they need do is manually strangle JonBenet to arrive at the same result.

Who did they do this overdone staging?

There are two categories of forensic evidence available in the wine-cellar. One is that of JonBenet herself, the second is artifacts that either belonged to JonBenet or were linked to her.

Some of those objects are the Pink Barbie Nightgown and the Barbie Doll. These are not objects that any intruder need worry about or relocate to the wine-cellar.

This suggests that the wine-cellar is not the primary crime-scene.

This makes sense to me.

The importance of the latter point lies in considering what the paln was, since the person placing JonBenet into the wine-cellar cannot guarantee that she will not be found, if the police conduct a search.

So the accompanying forensic evidence should have been removed to make the idea of an abduction more realistic. That this was not done suggests staging an abduction was not the real goal, since other accompanying evidence contradicts this.

That is, would the intruder redress JonBenet in size-12 underwear, cleanup her body, redress her in longjohns, move her down to the wine-cellar, apply a ligature, wrap her in a blanket, return back upstairs for her Pink Barbie Nightgown and Barbie Doll, dropping these beside JonBenet, then leave the house?

Right. It makes no sense at all, either for a real intruder or someone in the family who murdered her. Why would anyone do that?

I am proposing that the contents of the wine-cellar represent a prior staged crime-scene, and that at most the R's were intent on simply removing incriminating forensic evidence. That was the most that they could do, since they would always be suspects, regardless of the scenario undertaken.

That is, the prior crime-scene was cleaned up up and some of its contents moved to the wine-cellar. Similarly with JonBenet, but who moved JonBenet. This is explained by the Ransom Note, i.e. a Foreign Faction.

I'm very confused by this. Are you saying the Ramsey's moved the body to the basement and created the bogus RN to draw law enforcement attention away from the scene where the murder took place? Are you saying they knew the RN made no sense, but they hoped it might confuse LE?

The R's were expecting the house to be searched this is why the Partially Opened Christmas gifts, her Nightgown and Doll are found in the wine-cellar. These are all clues in a previous setting which if left in full view would alert non-ramsey searchers!

How does the doll and nightgown help? Don't they just make it look more premeditated or more staged?

How do the partially opened gifts help? I don't see how they even relate to the case. Why weren't they full opened on Christmas?

 

[UKGuy]

Bear with me b/c I'm new to this and very confused by parts of your post.


Who did they do this overdone staging?


This makes sense to me.


Right. It makes no sense at all, either for a real intruder or someone in the family who murdered her. Why would anyone do that?


I'm very confused by this. Are you saying the Ramsey's moved the body to the basement and created the bogus RN to draw law enforcement attention away from the scene where the murder took place? Are you saying they knew the RN made no sense, but they hoped it might confuse LE?


How does the doll and nightgown help? Don't they just make it look more premeditated or more staged?

How do the partially opened gifts help? I don't see how they even relate to the case. Why weren't they full opened on Christmas?

CircuitGuy,

Who did they do this overdone staging?

This is what amateurs tend to do. They overplay aspects of crime-scene staging, in the R's case, they are hoping people will not look much beyond the ligature.

I'm very confused by this. Are you saying the Ramsey's moved the body to the basement and created the bogus RN to draw law enforcement attention away from the scene where the murder took place?

Absolutely and allow the removal of forensic evidence from the Primary Crime-Scene.

Are you saying they knew the RN made no sense, but they hoped it might confuse LE?

Moving JonBenet without a Ransom Note asks the question who moved her. The Ransom Note is designed to answer this question, a fictional Foreign Faction moved her, whilst the R's lay asleep in bed.

The Ransom Note is only nonsense once JonBenet is discovered in the house, at this point the R's hoped to have generated a degree of plausible deniability. With no real links to the Primary Crime-Scene, and most of the critical forensic evidence removed, they hoped no charges could stick, it worked as they were to be treated as victims not suspects.

How does the doll and nightgown help? Don't they just make it look more premeditated or more staged?

They certainly do not help the R's, they are like the size-12 underwear, they should not be in the wine-cellar, no intruder cares about those objects. If the case is RDI placing those objects in the wine-cellar removes them from public view, and any suspect observations, thats why they are all in there.

How do the partially opened gifts help? I don't see how they even relate to the case. Why weren't they full opened on Christmas?

They do not help, they are dumped in the wine-cellar for the same reason JonBenet is in there: to be hidden from public view. No JonBenet means abduction and no artifacts means no suspicious eyeballs.

The wine-cellar is simply a forensic dump-site, to repeat, the wine-cellar is not a real staged crime-scene, only JonBenet's person was staged, i.e. redressed etc. There is no master plan regarding what was placed into the wine-cellar its function is to keep the artifacts and JonBenet out of public view.

.

 

[Chrishope]

CircuitGuy

The Rs were treated as victims, not suspects, because the police were told to treat them that way, not because it didn't appear that they were involved.

The RN makes no sense with the body in the house.

Moving the body from the bedroom (or wherever things may have started) leaves police with most of the same evidence - it's simply been relocated from one room to another.

There is still a dead body. There is still a barbie nightgown, there is still a white blanket, etc. etc.

No detective in his right mind believes a Small Foreign Faction (SFF) killed JB, then moved her from her room to the Wine Cellar (WC), then left a RN. If the SFF was going to kidnap her, why didn't they take her? If they were going to kill her and leave her in the house, why the RN? The RN, imo, does not provide the Rs with plausible deniability with regard to moving her, or killing her.

Calling the police with the body in the house was a virtual guarantee that the body would be found. So, with the body in the house, no matter what room it's in, we have most of the same evidence, including a dead body, and 3 people who can be verified to be in the house the night of the murder.

It seems much more likely, at least to me, that the body was not placed in the WC to hide her from the police, but rather to hide her from other family members.

It also seems likely, to me, that the RN does not explain why she's moved from her bedroom, or why she's dead. The RN is an attempt to explain her disappearance as a kidnapping.

Of course, she hadn't disappeared. Either there was a plan to dump the body; a plan that had not been able to be completed because of the unexpected 911 call, OR JR and PR figured the police would think a SFF came in and killed her, then moved her from her room to the WC.

I leave it to you to decide which is more plausible.

 

[InstantProof]

Your scenario is plausible: He would suggest a modest amount of money so he could (at his option) destroy it, claim the kidnappers took it, and not be set back financially too badly.

After all it was only his bonus.

As for Patsy, I think it's perfectly reasonable to just read a couple of lines and then react (look for child, call 911), I think it's what I would have done. I posted a couple pages back that I thought there was a reason the RN only speaks to and revolves around John, if he wrote it to trick Patsy this would be a good way to insist that he take care of everything.
My only problem with this theory is Patsy looks suspicious in terms of the writing style of the RN, and she seems to be lying about JB sleeping when they got home, BR sleeping the next morning, also she didn't hear anything but the neighbors did?

 

[Chrishope]

After all it was only his bonus.

As for Patsy, I think it's perfectly reasonable to just read a couple of lines and then react (look for child, call 911), I think it's what I would have done. I posted a couple pages back that I thought there was a reason the RN only speaks to and revolves around John, if he wrote it to trick Patsy this would be a good way to insist that he take care of everything.
My only problem with this theory is Patsy looks suspicious in terms of the writing style of the RN, and she seems to be lying about JB sleeping when they got home, BR sleeping the next morning, also she didn't hear anything but the neighbors did?

There is also the fact that she looked at the cops through splayed fingers, in addition to the problems you've listed. I have no explanation for that, other than to say it seems suspicious.

Take a look at Doc's blog, specifically the posts about the handwriting and see if you still think it looks/sounds like PR's writing style.

On JB sleeping, she either lied, or Burke is wrong. It's possible for a 9 year old to be mistaken about what happened. It's also possible that PR lied just to avoid having to answer a bunch of questions about what they did between arriving home and the time JB went to bed - if she ever did. Consider that by the time PR is saying they carried JB to bed it has been 4 months since the murder, JR has managed to have himself "ruled out" by the handwriting "experts" and PR is now the prime suspect.

She does seem to be lying about BR being up. He's on the tape, or at least we assume that because seemingly credible people - Kolar/Thomas tell us it's true. Other people have posted some possible explanations. We do need to be suspicious about this.

If I recall correctly, the sound tests done in the basement showed that the sound couldn't be heard on the 3rd floor bedroom, but could be heard across the street. I may be wrong, and if so someone with a better memory for details will tell us.

I don't think any theory can answer every question and erase every doubt.

 

[DeeDee249]

There is also the fact that she looked at the cops through splayed fingers, in addition to the problems you've listed. I have no explanation for that, other than to say it seems suspicious.

Take a look at Doc's blog, specifically the posts about the handwriting and see if you still think it looks/sounds like PR's writing style.

On JB sleeping, she either lied, or Burke is wrong. It's possible for a 9 year old to be mistaken about what happened. It's also possible that PR lied just to avoid having to answer a bunch of questions about what they did between arriving home and the time JB went to bed - if she ever did. Consider that by the time PR is saying they carried JB to bed it has been 4 months since the murder, JR has managed to have himself "ruled out" by the handwriting "experts" and PR is now the prime suspect.

She does seem to be lying about BR being up. He's on the tape, or at least we assume that because seemingly credible people - Kolar/Thomas tell us it's true. Other people have posted some possible explanations. We do need to be suspicious about this.

If I recall correctly, the sound tests done in the basement showed that the sound couldn't be heard on the 3rd floor bedroom, but could be heard across the street. I may be wrong, and if so someone with a better memory for details will tell us.

I don't think any theory can answer every question and erase every doubt.

In PMPT (both the movie and book) detectives testing the scream in the basement determined that it COULD be heard from the parents' 3rd floor bedroom. It could also be heard across the street. Police felt this was a real indication that the parents were involved because a parent hearing that scream would come running.
A 9-year old can be mistaken about some things, but I believe a boy that age (and he was turning 10 in 2 weeks) would not be mixed up about whether his sister walked into the house awake (as he said she did_) or was carried in asleep (as his parents claim). Remember the parents already lied about whether BR owned any Hi-Tecs (he told police he did, and some of his friends also told police he did) and they lied about him being awake for the 911 call (later admitting that he was, in fact, awake). I tend to believe BR's version of events after they arrived home.

 

[Chelly]

Was JB sexually assaulted in her bed, hit on the head in her bed, redressed in her bed, then carried to the basement to the carpeted area outside the WC where the ligature was applied and she was killed?

 

[CircuitGuy]

They do not help, they are dumped in the wine-cellar for the same reason JonBenet is in there: to be hidden from public view. No JonBenet means abduction and no artifacts means no suspicious eyeballs.

The wine-cellar is simply a forensic dump-site, to repeat, the wine-cellar is not a real staged crime-scene, only JonBenet's person was staged, i.e. redressed etc. There is no master plan regarding what was placed into the wine-cellar its function is to keep the artifacts and JonBenet out of public view.

Your post was very helpful, but I do not understand how putting items in the wine cellar removes them from public view. You're saying they redressed JBR and moved her there so they could clean the sheets and remove other evidence from her bedroom or wherever the actual murder took place. Any other items dumped in the WC would get extra attention. If they truly didn't want people to see those items, wouldn't they have dumpted them somewhere completely different, such as the attic, the spare bedroom, etc? Putting things near the body doesn't keep them out of public view.

 

[CircuitGuy]

There is also the fact that she looked at the cops through splayed fingers, in addition to the problems you've listed. I have no explanation for that, other than to say it seems suspicious.

What does splayed fingers mean?

Thanks!

 

[CircuitGuy]

and they lied about him being awake for the 911 call (later admitting that he was, in fact, awake).

I thought the only evidence we had of that was the enhanced audio that few have heard? They actually admitted he was there!?

All the other things, even whether JBR was asleep when they got home, seem like trivial details that could be missed or confused with other nights. But whether he was there during that call isn't something you could just get mixed up about! Did they really admit he was there?

 

[UKGuy]

Your post was very helpful, but I do not understand how putting items in the wine cellar removes them from public view. You're saying they redressed JBR and moved her there so they could clean the sheets and remove other evidence from her bedroom or wherever the actual murder took place. Any other items dumped in the WC would get extra attention. If they truly didn't want people to see those items, wouldn't they have dumpted them somewhere completely different, such as the attic, the spare bedroom, etc? Putting things near the body doesn't keep them out of public view.

CircuitGuy,
Curious that you ask that, since if there was some kind of masterplan, you might expect the forensic evidence to have been dealt with a little more carefully?

Consider her former underwear, i.e. size-6 underwear, allegedly vanished, does that not suggest two different approaches to the forensic evidence?

Why remove some but not all?

To answer your question. It was not intended that nobody should ever see the forensic items, just that they are not in immediate public view. Partially Opened Christmas gifts and a bloodstained Nightgown lying about might result in some awkward questions, with respect to an abduction scenario. Bear in mind the R's deliberately called friends over, so they knew there would be lots of eyeballs surveying the house.

Most of the theories agree its RDI, and its simply a matter of interpretating the forensic evidence. e.g. I interpret the RN as a means to explain why JonBenet has been moved, whereas DocG interprets it as a means to move JonBenet from the house. My basic theory is consistent with most other theories, including DocG's, its just that they have not noticed yet.

There are two basic types of theory one where JonBenet is to be dumped outdoors, the other where she is to be staged indoors. The former is like a Columbo movie where you work backwards from the conclusion, conveniently dealing with any inconsistencies by offering ad-hoc reasons why they might exist. The latter theory moves forward from the R's arriving back from the White's, noting the inconsistencies, and attempting to explain them in terms of the R's behaviour that night, concluding with JonBenet being dumped into the wine-cellar, this being seen as the R's best game plan?

Consider DocG's theory: why does JR ligature asphyxiate JonBenet, whats all that about, if he intends to dump her outdoors, why redress her, why does she need clean size-12's? Surely the kidnapper can just dump her naked, evidentially sexually assaulted, then there is no requirement for a risky cleanup and redressing?

in DocG's theory you have a similar outcome to other theories. Presuming JR would dump JonBenet somewhere where she could never be found, along with the rest of the forensic evidence in the wine-cellar. Then everyone would be asking why did the kidnapper not return JonBenet, where is the ransom money, since presumably none of it would ever circulate again?

So the finger of suspicion would eventually return to the Ramsey's.


.

 

[Chrishope]

What does splayed fingers mean?

Thanks!

It's when someone holds their hand over their face, but spreads their fingers so they can see other people. PR is reported to have looked at the police this way.

 

[Chrishope]

I thought the only evidence we had of that was the enhanced audio that few have heard? They actually admitted he was there!?

All the other things, even whether JBR was asleep when they got home, seem like trivial details that could be missed or confused with other nights. But whether he was there during that call isn't something you could just get mixed up about! Did they really admit he was there?

I believe they didn't actually admit it, but rather asked the police if they really had it on tape.

Is it evidence of a 3 way conspiracy? Or is a detail that was confused? Was Patsy taking careful notes during the 911 call?

 

[Chrishope]

In PMPT (both the movie and book) detectives testing the scream in the basement determined that it COULD be heard from the parents' 3rd floor bedroom. It could also be heard across the street. Police felt this was a real indication that the parents were involved because a parent hearing that scream would come running.
A 9-year old can be mistaken about some things, but I believe a boy that age (and he was turning 10 in 2 weeks) would not be mixed up about whether his sister walked into the house awake (as he said she did_) or was carried in asleep (as his parents claim). Remember the parents already lied about whether BR owned any Hi-Tecs (he told police he did, and some of his friends also told police he did) and they lied about him being awake for the 911 call (later admitting that he was, in fact, awake). I tend to believe BR's version of events after they arrived home.

Thank you DeeDee.

CircuitGuy should get the full story about the scream. The neighbor who heard the scream first said that it may not have been an actual scream. She said it may have been "negative energy". After detectives went over the story with her repeatedly, she settled on it being an audible scream.

Other neighbors also claim to have heard a scream.

The husband of the woman who reported the scream (or possibly negative energy) said he herd a sound "like metal scraping on concrete".

Did the sounds come from the Ramsey home? No one really knows.

 

[Nom de plume]

Thank you DeeDee.

CircuitGuy should get the full story about the scream. The neighbor who heard the scream first said that it may not have been an actual scream. She said it may have been "negative energy". After detectives went over the story with her repeatedly, she settled on it being an audible scream.

Other neighbors also claim to have heard a scream.

The husband of the woman who reported the scream (or possibly negative energy) said he herd a sound "like metal scraping on concrete".

Did the sounds come from the Ramsey home? No one really knows.

Have to disagree with you on this one. IIRC, Melody Stanton initially said she heard a young girl scream between 12am and 2am. Her bedroom window was open 6-8 in. She woke her husband up and asked if he heard it. He said no, but he did then hear what he thought was metal scraping on concrete, as you said.

Later, MS recanted her story and said she didn't hear a scream, later adding that it may have just been "negative energy". IMO, this change in story probably happened after the RST talked to her and "convinced" her she didn't really hear anything.

Also, IIRC, the neighbor that saw the lights in the butler's pantry claimed to have heard the scream also.