I can't find a hole in this theory...

[sandover]

Police tests WERE conclusive- a scream from the basement could be heard from the parents' third-floor bedroom as well as from the home of the neighbor across the street. This presumes a scream in the basement. But as JB's room was 1 floor below her parents' room, and the open stairwell was right near there, her scream would have carried to their room. I don't know if the scream theory was tested in the kitchen or anywhere else.

The neighbor who "heard" JB's scream later said it may not have been a scream but just a "negative energy" emanating from the house. The witness was inconsistent and a bit off her rocker. The "scream" is not evidence.

 

[sandover]

The staging wasn't done elaborately, but quite clumsily. Just think of the ransom note written with pen and paper from the home, wrist ties whose looseness made them unfunctional, etc.
This 'clumsiness' itself indicates that the stager's mind wasn't functioning in a rational manner. No surprise, given the circumstances.
This type of staging is in sync with a parent whose mind was frantically running in a 'panic' mode, trying to misdirect LE, and who had no other option than to use material from the home to stage the scene.

Spend some time with DocG's JDI theory. Actually, the killer's mind was quite rational: my daughter is going to tell on me for sexually abusing her, so I have to kill her and make it look like someone else did it. I also have to get rid of the body, so law enforcement can't be notified; therefore, I need to write a ransom note that gets my wife and son out of the house and gives me a day to dispose of the body before involving police.

JR was smart and would have figured out that that's what he had to do within minutes (assuming his decision to kill JB was spontaneous or just barely "planned" before being carried out). He then carried out his plan which worked even when a major component went wrong!

To make this a PDI theory, you have to bend over backwards to find any sense in what PR or the Ramseys as a couple did. So to justify this people say, "She was in a panic, she wasn't being rational." That nothing makes sense is seen as evidence of the truth of a theory that makes no sense.

 

[Chrishope]

It's actually an advantage that the scream (sorry, negative energy) isn't conclusive, because then there is no need to make up anything to explain silencing JB.

 

[rashomon]

As for the so-called handwriting evidence, it's garbage.

You call the handwriting experts' testimony "garbage" then?

I've come up with equally convincing comparisons using John's exemplars.

How do you explain that, as opposed to Patsy, John Ramsey was ruled out by the experts?

The fibers could easily have been transferred to the "crucial locations" via the victim herself, who'd been in intimate contact with Patsy all day.

You have to look at the totality of the evidence and continually ask yourself the 'probability question': how likely is it that fibers from Patsy's jacket would end up in locations directly connected with JonBenet's violent death? Fiber evidence is always about where exactly the fibers were found.

As for Patsy "lying" about JonBenet being asleep and the splayed fingers bit, this tells us very little as it depends too much on interpretation. Someone biased against Patsy will obviously interpret it differently from someone defending her. And what does it matter whether JonBenet was asleep at that time, what relevance does it have to the case?

The relevance is crucial. For a person who is asleep cannot eat pineapple.
Even Lou Smit racked his brain over that, calling the pineapple evidence the "big bugaboo".

Burke Ramsey testified that JonBenet had been awake when they arrived home and that she walked up the stairs. This is in sync with the pineapple evidence but contradicts John and Patsy's story.
Contradictory testimonies are a red flag. They indicate that either somebody (unintentionally) got it wrong or (intentionally) presented it wrong (= lied).

 

[rashomon]

Spend some time with DocG's JDI theory.

I know DocG's JDI theory quite well, and recall quite a few controversial discussions with this poster (a few years ago on other JBR forums).

 

[UKGuy]

You call the handwriting experts' testimony "garbage" then?

How do you explain that, as opposed to Patsy, John Ramsey was ruled out by the experts?


You have to look at the totality of the evidence and continually ask yourself the 'probability question': how likely is it that fibers from Patsy's jacket would end up in locations directly connected with JonBenet's violent death? Fiber evidence is always about where exactly the fibers were found.


The relevance is crucial. For a person who is asleep cannot eat pineapple.
Even Lou Smit racked his brain over that, calling the pineapple evidence the "big bugaboo".

Burke Ramsey testified that JonBenet had been awake when they arrived home and that she walked up the stairs. This is in sync with the pineapple evidence but contradicts John and Patsy's story.
Contradictory testimonies are a red flag. They indicate that either somebody (unintentionally) got it wrong or (intentionally) presented it wrong (= lied).

rashomon,
I never thought I'd see you contesting an untestable theory, you know like Freudian Psychoanalysis. As contrasted with this theory, e.g. all swans are white, once upon a time it was considered unquestionably true.

Aspects of docg's theory depend on future events, you know like Rasputin, or Astrology where things are predicted?

There are so many holes in the theory, those that hold it, simply sidestep all the annoying inconveniences, alike Pasy disowning her own tableware that made up the pineapple scene. Why would she do that?

Then there are the size-12's again why the fairy tale about placing them into JonBenet's underwear drawer. Then there is her fibers embedded into the garrote, found on the duct tape and in the paint-tote, all items associated directly with a homicide. And since JR's fibers are to found on JonBenet's genitals, mixed in with her blood. You know these never wafted in on the cool Boulder air, landing by accident on JonBenet, just as she was being wiped down. So is it one rule for JR and another for PR?

So in this futuristic theory what was JR's role in the staging, what was its function or purpose, is all the forensic evidence accounted for, or are there holes?

For example, lets consider the Ransom Note, has this been demonstrated to be genuine, a bona fide Ransom Note? And why does JR leave all the practice notes behind? Since this is the major premise in this theory. Or is it simply an assumption, e.g. speculation, alike JR's intended future behaviour, which is, well, untestable, some might suggest even pseudo-scientific. You know a bit like Atlantis that fabled civilization, situated somewhere not in the future but in the past?

Can you imagine JR walking into a bank demanding, was it $118, 000, I forget, and asking the manager not to tell anyone, yet federal statute mandates any transactions over $10,000 are automatically communicated, immediately, to the FBI electronically?



I can't find a hole in this theory... Sure, LOL!





.

 

[dodie20]

Like so much else in this case, the scream is inconclusive. It's not clear whether the person reporting it actually heard a scream that night or not. All sorts of tests were done to learn if Patsy could have heard a scream from the basement and they were, of course, just like everything else about this case: inconclusive.

Since so much of the "evidence" is inconclusive, i.e., no help at all, I decided to focus ONLY on the known facts, i.e., what is NOT inconclusive. And on that basis I feel very strongly that I was able to determine who was responsible for this crime. As for most of the other evidence, it might help us to think through what might have happened, but we can't really rely on it.

The scream may be inconclusive, but that doesn't mean the witness originally lied or was mistaken. Also, I don't really see people building theories around an inconclusive scream. What I see, is the exact opposite. JB was viciously abused, strangled, and bashed, and IMO, it's reasonable to think she went down fighting for her life. The report of the scream, is what makes sense. Anyway, I'd like to read all of the witness's statements, so I guess I'll go back to some older threads. MOO.

 

[Chrishope]

You call the handwriting experts' testimony "garbage" then?

How do you explain that, as opposed to Patsy, John Ramsey was ruled out by the experts?


You have to look at the totality of the evidence and continually ask yourself the 'probability question': how likely is it that fibers from Patsy's jacket would end up in locations directly connected with JonBenet's violent death? Fiber evidence is always about where exactly the fibers were found.


The relevance is crucial. For a person who is asleep cannot eat pineapple.
Even Lou Smit racked his brain over that, calling the pineapple evidence the "big bugaboo".

Burke Ramsey testified that JonBenet had been awake when they arrived home and that she walked up the stairs. This is in sync with the pineapple evidence but contradicts John and Patsy's story.
Contradictory testimonies are a red flag. They indicate that either somebody (unintentionally) got it wrong or (intentionally) presented it wrong (= lied).

You have to look at the totality of the evidence and continually ask yourself the 'probability question': how likely is it that fibers from Patsy's jacket would end up in locations directly connected with JonBenet's violent death? Fiber evidence is always about where exactly the fibers were found.

No, it's about location, and how it got there. I'd think secondary transfer is quite likely in this case. (I'll be misunderstood, even with this disclaimer, but I'm not saying it was secondary transfer, just that it easily could be)

The fibers could be in locations connected with JB's death because JB was in contact with PR at various times during the day. Through primary transfer from PR, JB may have had red jacket fibers on her clothes, and she may have had red jacket fibers in her hair.

Through secondary transfer, the fibers could have been deposited in the "locations connected with her death", since JB was in all those locations connected with her death. The fibers could also be transferred to the killer's hands, and then to the objects.

Slipping the garrotte over hear head could have contacted fibers already in her hair.

The fibers may be EINTWINED in the garrotte because the killer transferred them from his (or her) hands as he (or she) fashioned the garrotte, wrapping the cord around the paint brush a few times, and making a knot that would stay tight after pulling.

Or, it may all be from primary transfer. Or it may be some of each.

Inconclusive.

 

[InstantProof]

Based on this thread a scenario that makes sense to me is that John was planning the whole kidnapping with Patsy involved and she drew the line somewhere and called 911 out of anger and against Johns wishes. I think she would want an open casket/ proper burial for her daughter, at the very least, and that probably wasn't going to happen unless they got the police there to find the body. So she gets on the phone and rather than throw John (and herself) under the bus she says there's a ransom note, kidnappers etc even if it makes no sense. The police can sort it out. Except that they can't, and so they stick with their story.

 

[midwest mama]

Based on this thread a scenario that makes sense to me is that John was planning the whole kidnapping with Patsy involved and she drew the line somewhere and called 911 out of anger and against Johns wishes. I think she would want an open casket/ proper burial for her daughter, at the very least, and that probably wasn't going to happen unless they got the police there to find the body. So she gets on the phone and rather than throw John (and herself) under the bus she says there's a ransom note, kidnappers etc even if it makes no sense. The police can sort it out. Except that they can't, and so they stick with their story.

And, Voila!, they're home free..........for now. :curses::burn:

 

[DeeDee249]

It's actually an advantage that the scream (sorry, negative energy) isn't conclusive, because then there is no need to make up anything to explain silencing JB.

She flip-flopped again, later admitting she did actually hear a scream. Possibly she was "leaned on" to retract her original statement. I do know she was so shaken up by being mixed up in all this that they moved away shortly after. Personally I believe she heard a scream that woke her up. But I will say that her changing her story twice doesn't help her credibility.

 

[Chrishope]

She flip-flopped again, later admitting she did actually hear a scream. Possibly she was "leaned on" to retract her original statement. I do know she was so shaken up by being mixed up in all this that they moved away shortly after. Personally I believe she heard a scream that woke her up. But I will say that her changing her story twice doesn't help her credibility.

You're right, it doesn't help her credibility. She might well have heard a scream, or she might be a total flake.

There real problem is people feel compelled to weave the scream into their theory of the case. Assuming it was JBR screaming, we don't know what caused the scream. So we end up convincing ourselves of some scenario that may not have happened.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
I never thought I'd see you contesting an untestable theory, you know like Freudian Psychoanalysis. As contrasted with this theory, e.g. all swans are white, once upon a time it was considered unquestionably true.

My focus has always been on the evidence.
The point I'm trying to make is that a theory has to be built on the evidence, instead of first constructing one's favorite theory and then looking for evidence that fits in (while disregarding the rest that does not fit in).
You commented on such disregarding of evidence:

Then there are the size-12's again why the fairy tale about placing them into JonBenet's underwear drawer. Then there is her fibers embedded into the garrote, found on the duct tape and in the paint-tote, all items associated directly with a homicide. And since JR's fibers are to found on JonBenet's genitals, mixed in with her blood. You know these never wafted in on the cool Boulder air, landing by accident on JonBenet, just as she was being wiped down. So is it one rule for JR and another for PR?

This is a typical example: Patsy's fibers found in these location are played down, while the fiber evidence against John is regarded as valid.
(One can also come across the opposite with PDIs that give John a pass).

But the evidence tells us that fibers from both Patsy's and John's clothes were found in incriminating locations.
So the most likely explanation is that both were involved.
The intricate question is in what each of them was involved.

The evidence implicates Patsy Ramsey as the main stager of the scene, but the stager of a scene needn't necessarily have been the killer.
For the stager could have covered up for somebody else.

One gets quite a few variables, and this is what makes the JBR case so complex:
Was the stager also the killer? (not necessarily)
If JonBenet was the victim of chronic sexual abuse - who was her abuser?
Was her abuser also her killer? (not necessarily)

Or is it simply an assumption, e.g. speculation, alike JR's intended future behaviour, which is, well, untestable, some might suggest even pseudo-scientific.
Can you imagine JR walking into a bank demanding, was it $118, 000, I forget, and asking the manager not to tell anyone, yet federal statute mandates any transactions over $10,000 are automatically communicated, immediately, to the FBI electronically?

No, I can't imagine that.

That is the major weakness of DocG' theory: it contains far too many purely speculative and highly improbable elements.

This does not mean John can be given a pass. For the fiber evidence does link him to the tragic events on that night.

 

[OpenMind4U]

The case is certainly complex. But what makes the case so difficult to understand, and has always made it impossible to prosecute, is quite simple. The police were called in before 6AM, while the body was still in the house. The phoney ransom note was then handed over to the police despite the fact that it was written using in-house materials and the writer(s), whether Patsy or John or both, had his and/or her handwriting all over it. With the police on the scene, the Ramseys would have had no way of removing the body without being detected.

Given there was no reason for them to call the police so early, since they could easily have cancelled their travel plans, due to "illness," it's hard to understand why they would have done so before getting the body out of the house, so their kidnap staging would be believable.

Regardless of what YOU might think, a good defense lawyer would easily get any case against the Ramseys dismissed on this basis, since there would have been no reason for them to call the police that early if they'd been staging a phoney kidnapping. So something is VERY wrong with the idea that the two of them were collaborating on the kidnap/intruder staging.

Regardless of any other evidence you might want to think of, in order to make a case you HAVE to get beyond this fundamental problem. That's what I think I've done. But if you have a better solution, by all means share it. Otherwise we continue to go in circles, recycling the same old arguments over and over endlessly. How boring!

JDI scenario. JBR already dead, placed in blanket, in WC. JR needs to get PR and BR out of the house to buy the time, to get rid of JBR body. How to explain PR the absence of JBR in the morning? How to explain other members of his family and his friends that JBR is gone? JR, as the 'problem-solving' CEO, got an idea. He writes the following 'kidnapping' note: 'Mr. Ramsey, you're a scambag and it's time to PAY! We have your daughter! In exchange for your daughter, you must do the following. Take your wife and son to airport IMMIDIETLY. Upon arrival, go to public phone and call 123-4567. You'll get instruction for the next step. If you'll do exectly what we said - you'll be able to go on vacation with your daughter as was planned. One wrong move - and your daughter is DEAD.'


Not boring?:woohoo:

 

[UKGuy]

Oh, because she'd just murdered her daughter, naturally. Disowning her tableware is tantamount to a confession in your book, so why bother with any other aspect of the case, you got her! As I recall she said it wasn't the kind of spoon she would have used. That's it.



Well, I recall a story about some DNA mixed with her blood, which HAS to be from the killer, right? You think like Mary Lacy and Lou Smit, jumping to conclusions and assuming things are simpler than they really are.



Oh yes, many holes. What about all the unsourced fibers, what about the Hi Tec boot, what about the butler door, etc., etc.?




You need to inform yourself about this case. There was only one so-called "practice note," which read only "Mr. and Mrs. |." Yes that was it. If the plan I've outlined could have been carried out John could easily have destroyed it before the police were called in.



My speculations about John's plan are clearly labeled as such, and not central to the case I've made, which is not based on speculation but fact.



This is the first interesting thing you've said so far. I really don't know what John had in mind or what the situation was. He was the CEO of a billion dollar business, so he might have had an arrangement with the bank and may already have made large cash transactions, as he traveled a great deal. It's possible he had a somewhat different plan in mind, possibly dumping the body before going to the bank, as has already been suggested by someone else. That would have been riskier than the plan I outlined, but the whole thing would have been a huge risk for him.

As I stress on my blog, the basic case against John can be made without speculating at all, period. it's possible his plan would never have worked. But he did have a plan, that much is certain.

Oh, because she'd just murdered her daughter, naturally. Disowning her tableware is tantamount to a confession in your book, so why bother with any other aspect of the case, you got her! As I recall she said it wasn't the kind of spoon she would have used. That's

This is a example of you sidestepping the evidence. I am not requesting your opinon about any other theory, only how your JDI theory specifically explains it away?

Oh yes, many holes. What about all the unsourced fibers, what about the Hi Tec boot, what about the butler door, etc., etc.?

Nobody is concerned about all the other fibers to be found in the R's house simply those found at the basement crime-scene. Once again you fail to offer any valid explanation for the forensic evidence.

You need to inform yourself about this case. There was only one so-called "practice note," which read only "Mr. and Mrs. |." Yes that was it. If the plan I've outlined could have been carried out John could easily have destroyed it before the police were called in

And the police arrived, and the notes were not destroyed, did John just give up, once Patsy decided to dial 911?

My speculations about John's plan are clearly labeled as such, and not central to the case I've made, which is not based on speculation but fact.

Nowhere do you demonstrate that the Ransom Note is genuine, and not in fact staged. The Ransom Note underpins your theory, what evidence do you have that shows everyone that in fact it was not staging, but a bona fide Ransom Note, authored by John, or is it simply speculation?

As I stress on my blog, the basic case against John can be made without speculating at all, period. it's possible his plan would never have worked. But he did have a plan, that much is certain.

Your theory fails to explain the presence of forensic evidence, and the behaviour of Patsy. Everyone and their dog knows JR had a plan. It was just not the one outlined in your theory.


.

 

[UKGuy]

JDI scenario. JBR already dead, placed in blanket, in WC. JR needs to get PR and BR out of the house to buy the time, to get rid of JBR body. How to explain PR the absence of JBR in the morning? How to explain other members of his family and his friends that JBR is gone? JR, as the 'problem-solving' CEO, got an idea. He writes the following 'kidnapping' note: 'Mr. Ramsey, you're a scambag and it's time to PAY! We have your daughter! In exchange for your daughter, you must do the following. Take your wife and son to airport IMMIDIETLY. Upon arrival, go to public phone and call 123-4567. You'll get instruction for the next step. If you'll do exectly what we said - you'll be able to go on vacation with your daughter as was planned. One wrong move - and your daughter is DEAD.'


Not boring?:woohoo:

OpenMind4U,
Wow, we have another JDI theory, how clever Burke and Patsy are relocated, no issue about arrest. This sounds better than docg's version.


.

 

[dodie20]

Like so much else in this case, the scream is inconclusive. It's not clear whether the person reporting it actually heard a scream that night or not. All sorts of tests were done to learn if Patsy could have heard a scream from the basement and they were, of course, just like everything else about this case: inconclusive.

Since so much of the "evidence" is inconclusive, i.e., no help at all, I decided to focus ONLY on the known facts, i.e., what is NOT inconclusive. And on that basis I feel very strongly that I was able to determine who was responsible for this crime. As for most of the other evidence, it might help us to think through what might have happened, but we can't really rely on it.

ok, I've been doing some back reading, and this is something I noticed. The woman who claimed she heard the scream, woke her husband up, and He was the neighbor who reported the metal on concrete noise. I couldn't find where he had been discredited, so since his wife is the one who woke him up, IMO, his story lends credence to her original statement. I mean, what are the odds that she woke up for no reason, imagined a scream, but then he heard, the late night metal on concrete noise? Also, another neighbor noticed the flashlight lighting, and another neighbor noticed a sunroom light turned off, for the 1st time ever. So, when all of these statements are put together, the neighborhood noticed a lot of unusual goings on that night moo.

 

[OpenMind4U]

OpenMind4U,
Wow, we have another JDI theory, how clever Burke and Patsy are relocated, no issue about arrest. This sounds better than docg's version.


.

:floorlaugh:...and cheap! not even $118k needed...plus plane is right there, isn't?...ooooo, problem to find the public phone booth....

 

[Chrishope]

The case is certainly complex. But what makes the case so difficult to understand, and has always made it impossible to prosecute, is quite simple. The police were called in before 6AM, while the body was still in the house. The phoney ransom note was then handed over to the police despite the fact that it was written using in-house materials and the writer(s), whether Patsy or John or both, had his and/or her handwriting all over it. With the police on the scene, the Ramseys would have had no way of removing the body without being detected.

Given there was no reason for them to call the police so early, since they could easily have cancelled their travel plans, due to "illness," it's hard to understand why they would have done so before getting the body out of the house, so their kidnap staging would be believable.

Regardless of what YOU might think, a good defense lawyer would easily get any case against the Ramseys dismissed on this basis, since there would have been no reason for them to call the police that early if they'd been staging a phoney kidnapping. So something is VERY wrong with the idea that the two of them were collaborating on the kidnap/intruder staging.

Regardless of any other evidence you might want to think of, in order to make a case you HAVE to get beyond this fundamental problem. That's what I think I've done. But if you have a better solution, by all means share it.

Otherwise we continue to go in circles, recycling the same old arguments over and over endlessly. How boring!

Some BDIs believe the plan was to let the cops find both the RN and the body.

The thinking (if that word can be used) is that A) it's better than leaving her naked in her bed and calling the cops, and B) the cops will just shrug their shoulders and say "So, there's a minor inconsistency, let's just ignore it".

Of course there is also C) the Rs are narcissists and therefore just assume their plan is superior, despite the contradiction.

Don't loose hope doc, most RDIs have considered that the original plan was to dump the body. The note makes that obvious. So most have gotten half way there.

 

[OpenMind4U]

ok, I've been doing some back reading, and this is something I noticed. The woman who claimed she heard the scream, woke her husband up, and He was the neighbor who reported the metal on concrete noise. I couldn't find where he had been discredited, so since his wife is the one who woke him up, IMO, his story lends credence to her original statement. I mean, what are the odds that she woke up for no reason, imagined a scream, but then he heard, the late night metal on concrete noise? Also, another neighbor noticed the flashlight lighting, and another neighbor noticed a sunroom light turned off, for the 1st time ever. So, when all of these statements are put together, the neighborhood noticed a lot of unusual goings on that night moo.

You're correct. From Kolar's book (lately, I'm refering to Kolar book a lot because it's trully awesome book!) you'll learn a lot about how much effort LE made by 'filtering' Ramsey's neighborhood. One neighbor, next to Ramsey, has two (2) large dogs. Usually, these dogs are always barking if any activities going on at Ramsey house. Even when children plays outside - these dogs would bark....but these dogs were a sleep quietly on the night of December 25-26.:what: