I still have an open mind as to how this happened and who did it

[DeeDee249]

In the dysfunctional families children are very often taught that whatever happens in the family, stays in the family. You just don't talk about it. It is something very difficult to overcome, even when the child grows up and becomes an adult.

Especially if that child/now adult was involved in any of it...

 

[KKazoo87]

Amateur novelist; a few things to consider:

In an RDI scenario the ransom note would make perfect sense if not for the body being in the house. The body in the house contradicts the ransom note. Oddly, this contradiction is a reason many RDI (as I’ve known and understand them) commonly cite for their belief: no kidnapper would leave both note and body.

However, this contradiction actually goes towards disproving RDI, as it is not reasonable to fake a kidnapping, and then call the police before disposing of the body (it is reasonable to create self-incriminating evidence and give it to the police; it is not reasonable to create a scene indicative of an inside job when you’re trying to direct suspicion away... ).

As to why an intruder would leave both note and body, several possibilities present themselves; examples:

1. a kidnapper could have intended on murdering and hiding his victim in the house right from the get-go, possibly believing that the Ramseys would not call the police and that he could collect his money before the parents discovered the body (why would they look for it?). Murdering and hiding the body in the house relieves him of the risk of having to handle, transport, hide and return/dispose of his victim and reduces the risk of forensic evidence accruing.

2. a molester who happened to kill (as opposed to a killer who happened to molest) could have created the note as a means of hiding from himself and/or others his perverse desires and true motivation. Wiping, redressing, covering body and elements of a kidnapping (cord, tape, note) all could have been done as a means to misdirect. <quote> “We know that offenders are more reluctant to admit sexual motives than other types of motives (e.g., profit, revenge, anger, power). Some offenders may not even realize their true motivation. An offender may eventually request a ridiculously small ransom for a child he had abducted to molest in an apparent attempt to convince others, but primarily himself, that he is not a sex offender” <unquote> <1>

3. a killer wishing to direct suspicion towards the occupants of the house (thus, away from himself)

4. a killer wishing to create an enduring mystery

5. a killer hoping to create for the parents a sense of false hope mingled with hours of angst and pain reaching its peak when the body is discovered

6. Virtually any reason you can think of for a Ramsey to write the note with the body in the house works just as well for an intruder; the possibilities are endless and it is a blatant error of reason to say otherwise. The claim that there was “no purpose whatsoever” for an intruder to leave a phony (or real) ransom note is false.

<1> Child Molesters Who Abduct: Summary of the Case in Point Series” Edited by Kenneth V. Lanning and Ann Wolbert Burgess http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/publications/NC70.pdf
...

AK

BBM. I think the ransom note was more for the police, to explain WHY they would eventually find a dead body in the house. I also think it was written by Patsy, so this is all JMO. How were JR and PR supposed to dump the body? If they left the house in the wee hours of the night they risk someone seeing them, and there goes their "we slept through everything" excuse. If they left in the morning, they would risk having to move past police and family friends. Either way there would be many questions as to why they, or one of them, left. So what do you do with the dead child in the basement where, IMO, all the evidence points toward your family? You write a ridiculous note to place blame elsewhere. And if you're as lucky as the Ramsey's, it works.

 

[DeeDee249]

BBM. I think the ransom note was more for the police, to explain WHY they would eventually find a dead body in the house. I also think it was written by Patsy, so this is all JMO. How were JR and PR supposed to dump the body? If they left the house in the wee hours of the night they risk someone seeing them, and there goes their "we slept through everything" excuse. If they left in the morning, they would risk having to move past police and family friends. Either way there would be many questions as to why they, or one of them, left. So what do you do with the dead child in the basement where, IMO, all the evidence points toward your family? You write a ridiculous note to place blame elsewhere. And if you're as lucky as the Ramsey's, it works.

I totally agree. And on a night like Christmas, many people ARE up late...cleaning up after holiday festivities, hosting parties, arriving home late from parties, etc. A neighbor DID report seeing what they described as "strange, moving lights" through the Rs kitchen window around midnight. I believe this was someone walking around with that flashlight, also found in the kitchen area.
For those who may have missed Kolar's latest discussion on Websleuths radio, he mentioned that there had been some testing done on the flashlight that linked it to the skull injury. He did not elaborate, but I have always felt the flashlight was used as the bludgeon, and it seems LE may agree.

 

[Hexe]

Has there ever been anyone who faked a kidnapping but then called the police without first disposing of the body?

Well, Ramseys caught themselves in a trap, kind of. They were supposed to leave early and head to the airport, as they had that trip to Lake Michigan planned and many people knew about it. A sudden change of plans would look suspicious. So they made their story fit that, saying that they had found the note on the stairs, immediately after they woke up, in the early morning.

And that was the trap. This story did not leave much of time to dispose of the JB's body. Of course they could try their luck and put her in the trash container, but Patsy would never allow her little beauty queen to be found in such a place. They could not just jump in the car and drive JB away, because they would be toast if noticed by anyone. I suppose they thought that they would have been able to smuggle her out somehow during the day, but then discovered it was not possible and decided to "make a discovery".

 

[eileenhawkeye]

No kidnapper; just an intruder otherwise motivated (see post 14, above).

.

Has there ever been anyone who faked a kidnapping but then called the police without first disposing of the body?
...

AK

There probably have been. But most likely, those parents were arrested immediately afterwards, their names disappearing into obscurity, and that's why we can't name them off the tops of our heads.

 

[Amateur Novelist]

I totally agree. And on a night like Christmas, many people ARE up late...cleaning up after holiday festivities, hosting parties, arriving home late from parties, etc. A neighbor DID report seeing what they described as "strange, moving lights" through the Rs kitchen window around midnight. I believe this was someone walking around with that flashlight, also found in the kitchen area.
For those who may have missed Kolar's latest discussion on Websleuths radio, he mentioned that there had been some testing done on the flashlight that linked it to the skull injury. He did not elaborate, but I have always felt the flashlight was used as the bludgeon, and it seems LE may agree.

I recall reading about the flashlight observations that night / very early AM but I do not remember if there was a timeframe established when this was said to have happened. If this was reported, was the time established when this was observed? I guess if this was a RDI thread, it could have happened as part of the crime activity or as part of staging when writing the RN. If this was an IDI thread, this could be explained as part of the crime activity or for writing the RN. It seems as though much in this case can be interpreted a multitude of ways which can be explained to be consistent with one's own beliefs as to what happened (if they are strong either way).

Would it be fair to characterize the R's actions as relatively passive concerning finding the murderer? I don't have any insight as to what their hired people were instructed to do, but I think that finding the responsible party / parties would consume me. They seemed to try to move forward and get on with their lives. Perhaps they were strong, more forgiving, or worst of all, involved.

 

[KKazoo87]

I totally agree. And on a night like Christmas, many people ARE up late...cleaning up after holiday festivities, hosting parties, arriving home late from parties, etc. A neighbor DID report seeing what they described as "strange, moving lights" through the Rs kitchen window around midnight. I believe this was someone walking around with that flashlight, also found in the kitchen area.
For those who may have missed Kolar's latest discussion on Websleuths radio, he mentioned that there had been some testing done on the flashlight that linked it to the skull injury. He did not elaborate, but I have always felt the flashlight was used as the bludgeon, and it seems LE may agree.

Thank you for this! I hadn't heard about that so I went to listen. I really hope he does add a few chapters to his book. Wow!

 

[Amateur Novelist]

I totally agree. And on a night like Christmas, many people ARE up late...cleaning up after holiday festivities, hosting parties, arriving home late from parties, etc. A neighbor DID report seeing what they described as "strange, moving lights" through the Rs kitchen window around midnight. I believe this was someone walking around with that flashlight, also found in the kitchen area.
For those who may have missed Kolar's latest discussion on Websleuths radio, he mentioned that there had been some testing done on the flashlight that linked it to the skull injury. He did not elaborate, but I have always felt the flashlight was used as the bludgeon, and it seems LE may agree.

Thanks for the latest on the flashlight. I recall that the flashlight was wiped clean of prints and the batteries were changed and were also free of prints. If an IDI, why would the flashlight have been left behind? I think that the R's said that they may have had a flashlight like the one that was found but did not confirm that it was their flashlight.

 

[gramcracker]

Has there ever been anyone who faked a kidnapping but then called the police without first disposing of the body?

the FBI said this case was unique in every way. they recognized immediately that it was staged and advised BPD to "look to the parents"

Well, Ramseys caught themselves in a trap, kind of. They were supposed to leave early and head to the airport, as they had that trip to Lake Michigan planned and many people knew about it. A sudden change of plans would look suspicious. So they made their story fit that, saying that they had found the note on the stairs, immediately after they woke up, in the early morning.

And that was the trap. This story did not leave much of time to dispose of the JB's body. Of course they could try their luck and put her in the trash container, but Patsy would never allow her little beauty queen to be found in such a place. They could not just jump in the car and drive JB away, because they would be toast if noticed by anyone. I suppose they thought that they would have been able to smuggle her out somehow during the day, but then discovered it was not possible and decided to "make a discovery".

exactly. a big-time trap. a stranger abduction w/o a RN locked them into staying in town during a search and investigation which would be nation-wide news. a stranger abduction w/ a RN and no call from the kidnapper locked them into staying in town waiting for a later call, during a search and investigation which would be nation-wide news

besides the chances of being seen, they couldn't leave to dispose of JB's remains in either scenario because of snow/frost on the ground: tire tracks in the driveway. ITA that PR wouldn't go for a disposal; JR, yes

"finding" JB was the only way to create a quick resolution which would allow them to leave town immediately (or so they thought)

 

[Anti-K]

BBM. I think the ransom note was more for the police, to explain WHY they would eventually find a dead body in the house. I also think it was written by Patsy, so this is all JMO. How were JR and PR supposed to dump the body? If they left the house in the wee hours of the night they risk someone seeing them, and there goes their "we slept through everything" excuse. If they left in the morning, they would risk having to move past police and family friends. Either way there would be many questions as to why they, or one of them, left. So what do you do with the dead child in the basement where, IMO, all the evidence points toward your family? You write a ridiculous note to place blame elsewhere. And if you're as lucky as the Ramsey's, it works.

I also tend to think that the ransom note was intended for the police. Yes, I am IDI, but I sometimes entertain the idea that this note was intended for the police and that the Ramseys were sort of like the mailman. But, that’s another story...

I completely understand how dumping the body would be problematic. So, don’t dump it, but don’t fake a kidnapping, either! Fake something else, something that explains what needed to be explained – a dead body in the house.

A lot of this evidence that supposed points to the family comes as a result of the supposed fake kidnapping, and much of it could have been eliminated by simply not faking a kidnapping.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Well, Ramseys caught themselves in a trap, kind of. They were supposed to leave early and head to the airport, as they had that trip to Lake Michigan planned and many people knew about it. A sudden change of plans would look suspicious. So they made their story fit that, saying that they had found the note on the stairs, immediately after they woke up, in the early morning.

And that was the trap. This story did not leave much of time to dispose of the JB's body. Of course they could try their luck and put her in the trash container, but Patsy would never allow her little beauty queen to be found in such a place. They could not just jump in the car and drive JB away, because they would be toast if noticed by anyone. I suppose they thought that they would have been able to smuggle her out somehow during the day, but then discovered it was not possible and decided to "make a discovery".

The sudden change of plans happened regardless. So, how could this be an issue? They just call whoever needed to be called and say, “We aren’t going to make it. Something’s happened, we can’t talk about it right now.”

Anyway, the problem is that no one has ever faked a kidnapping to explain a dead body that wasn’t kidnapped. If they couldn’t dispose of the body than a fake kidnapping probably never would have even occurred to them; why would it?
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

There probably have been. But most likely, those parents were arrested immediately afterwards, their names disappearing into obscurity, and that's why we can't name them off the tops of our heads.

Why do you say that there probably have been? Why would anyone do such a bizarre thing? It’s easy enough to find people who’ve faked kidnappings after disposing of the body, it would be unusual and strange for someone to do the opposite and that’s the sort of thing that usually gets noticed and that is more likely to be remembered.
...

AK

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Why do you say that there probably have been? Why would anyone do such a bizarre thing? It’s easy enough to find people who’ve faked kidnappings after disposing of the body, it would be unusual and strange for someone to do the opposite and that’s the sort of thing that usually gets noticed and that is more likely to be remembered.
...

AK

There are 2000 children murdered every year...It just seems to me, that there has to be a few cases where the parents claim the child was abducted, but the body is found inside the house. Also, there are plenty of cases w/ odd circumstances that aren't well known.

I've thought of a few examples: Baby Elaina..Her mother and mother's boyfriend claimed that she was abducted, and they found her body in the garage of the same house she was reported missing from. Another little boy, Carnel Chamberlain, was reported missing, and they found his body buried underneath his house. So those are both cases, where the parent(s) claimed the child was abducted, and never disposed of the body.

 

[Junebug99]

Another thing I have wondered, why would the Ramseys say the doors were locked? Wouldn't explaining the point of entry of the perp be important? Many people who fake break ins, make sure they have an obvious point of entry. Like, we forgot to lock a door. And why not hide the body where it can't be found? Trunk of a car? Something to by them time. And why give themselves away with the ransom amount? That doesn't make sense. Patsy knew John wasn't from the south. So what was the point of saying use your good southern common sense John.

 

[Anti-K]

There are 2000 children murdered every year...It just seems to me, that there has to be a few cases where the parents claim the child was abducted, but the body is found inside the house. Also, there are plenty of cases w/ odd circumstances that aren't well known.

I've thought of a few examples: Baby Elaina..Her mother and mother's boyfriend claimed that she was abducted, and they found her body in the garage of the same house she was reported missing from. Another little boy, Carnel Chamberlain, was reported missing, and they found his body buried underneath his house. So those are both cases, where the parent(s) claimed the child was abducted, and never disposed of the body.

Yes, I’m aware of this crime. Thank you.

However, this child was reported missing NOT kidnapped; yes, there is a difference.

Also, she was found hidden in a box covered by a tarp in the garage of a home owned by her mother’s boyfriend (or owned by someone in the boyfriend’s family; I forget which). Although this was the last house she was known to have been seen in while alive, it was not her own home or the garage of her own home.

Carnel Chamberlain was not reported kidnapped. He was reported missing. He was, iirc, buried under the porch or house. IIRC, the person who reported him missing (his mother) was not involved in his murder.
...

AK

 

[Hexe]

The sudden change of plans happened regardless. So, how could this be an issue? They just call whoever needed to be called and say, &#8220;We aren&#8217;t going to make it. Something&#8217;s happened, we can&#8217;t talk about it right now.&#8221;

Yes, but that sudden change was made after they "discovered" JonBenet was gone. That's absolutely normal (though, they tried to leave Boulder in spite of their kid being gone, no?). But if they changed their plans last minute and then their child would get kidnapped, that would be suspicious. And would turn the attention of the LE at them, because it would be almost impossible for an outside person to know about such a sudden change of plans. Basically, it would be screaming "an inside job!" to high Heaven.

Anyway, the problem is that no one has ever faked a kidnapping to explain a dead body that wasn&#8217;t kidnapped. If they couldn&#8217;t dispose of the body than a fake kidnapping probably never would have even occurred to them; why would it?

That goes only wth the assumption that they knew from a get go the disposal would have been impossible. What if they didn't? What if they thought that after reported kidnapping the police would get into a wild goose chase after the mysterious (and non-existing) kidnappers, leaving them enough of time and opportunity to smuggle JB's body out of the house? You see, John was dumb enough to think he would be allowed to leave Boulder. Maybe that was their plan? To smuggle JonBenet out in a suitcase, pack into the plane and dump somewhere away from Colorado?
(How big was that suitcase from the basement? Would JB fit in there?)

Ramseys did not see many things. They wrote the ransom note on their own pad, with their own pen and they did not get rid of it afterwards. They redressed JonBenet, putting on her fresh panties from the pack that was allegedly wrapped as a gift, somewhere in basement. That was something the intruder could not know, that there were clean panties. They also used the brush handle to build the garotte, but they put the remain of the brush neatly back in the Patsy's paint tray. Again, something an intruder would not do, unless he was an OCD sufferer. With all these things done wrong, underestimating the difficulty of smuggling the body out is not that improbable.

 

[gramcracker]

:goodpost:

 

[TroyinTX]

Another thing I have wondered, why would the Ramseys say the doors were locked? Wouldn't explaining the point of entry of the perp be important? Many people who fake break ins, make sure they have an obvious point of entry. Like, we forgot to lock a door. And why not hide the body where it can't be found? Trunk of a car? Something to by them time. And why give themselves away with the ransom amount? That doesn't make sense. Patsy knew John wasn't from the south. So what was the point of saying use your good southern common sense John.

IMO, it the Ramsey's were trying to plant suspicion away from themselves and to someone that they were acquainted with and several things point to this: the ransom amount, the location of the body, John stating he thought it was an inside job. Saying the doors were locked was just another part of this because later they stated there were several keys to the house out there. This along with the other things, lead to someone in their inner circle being involved. I think that was their intention.

Because face it, NO unknown intruder came into the house, wrote a ransom note with a pad a paper from the home, knew details of John and his bonus amount, and made their way to the remote basement location. Whether you think R's were responsible or not, I cannot fathom how someone can think this was just some random perp who had no knowledge of the Ramsey's at all.

 

[Anti-K]

Thanks for the latest on the flashlight. I recall that the flashlight was wiped clean of prints and the batteries were changed and were also free of prints. If an IDI, why would the flashlight have been left behind? I think that the R's said that they may have had a flashlight like the one that was found but did not confirm that it was their flashlight.

“When a report reads "no prints,"… … means no prints of evidentiary value were preserved. It does not mean that the item was wiped down, or that no one had ever touched or handled it... …The term "no prints" does not mean that there were no marks or smears - it means that if any markings were present, they lacked sufficient detail to be of evidentiary value.” <1>

Kolar says that the flashlight was, “processed for latent prints inside and out, but nothing could be lifted from its surfaces.” <2>

Kolar also claims (p. 50) that the Ramseys admitted that “they may have owned a similar style of flashlight.” He says that the Ramseys identification of the flashlight may have been thrown off due to the “fingerprint powder depicted in the photograph of the flashlight” that was shown to them.

Kolar also claims that Fernie and LHP later identified the flashlight as belonging to the Ramseys. He says that both had seen it in the home “before the kidnapping.”

In his book, Thomas offers three theories to explain the flashlight, 1) it belonged to the family, 2) it was left behind by an intruder, and 3) it was left behind by “some cop.” He writes, “That it bore no fingerprints was consistent with a piece of equipment being handled in cold weather by a cop wearing gloves.” <3> Of course, this doesn’t explain the absence of prints on the flashlight. Still, when a report reads “no prints” it simply means that no prints of evidentiary value were found (consider the pineapple bowl with only one print each from mother and son, but we know that bowl wasn’t put there while being balanced on one finger, or between the two of them using one finger each! No, the other prints were probably smudged or something and simply didn’t provide anything usable.).

<1>"Fingerprints: What They Can & Cannot Do!" The Print, Volume 10, number 7, June 1994, pp. 1-3.
<2> Foreign Faction; p. 49
<3> Jonbenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation; p. 240
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Yes, but that sudden change was made after they "discovered" JonBenet was gone. That's absolutely normal (though, they tried to leave Boulder in spite of their kid being gone, no?). But if they changed their plans last minute and then their child would get kidnapped, that would be suspicious. And would turn the attention of the LE at them, because it would be almost impossible for an outside person to know about such a sudden change of plans. Basically, it would be screaming "an inside job!" to high Heaven.



That goes only wth the assumption that they knew from a get go the disposal would have been impossible. What if they didn't? What if they thought that after reported kidnapping the police would get into a wild goose chase after the mysterious (and non-existing) kidnappers, leaving them enough of time and opportunity to smuggle JB's body out of the house? You see, John was dumb enough to think he would be allowed to leave Boulder. Maybe that was their plan? To smuggle JonBenet out in a suitcase, pack into the plane and dump somewhere away from Colorado?
(How big was that suitcase from the basement? Would JB fit in there?)

Ramseys did not see many things. They wrote the ransom note on their own pad, with their own pen and they did not get rid of it afterwards. They redressed JonBenet, putting on her fresh panties from the pack that was allegedly wrapped as a gift, somewhere in basement. That was something the intruder could not know, that there were clean panties. They also used the brush handle to build the garotte, but they put the remain of the brush neatly back in the Patsy's paint tray. Again, something an intruder would not do, unless he was an OCD sufferer. With all these things done wrong, underestimating the difficulty of smuggling the body out is not that improbable.

I’m a little confused about how or why you think a sudden change of plans would be a problem, and I’m not sure what you mean by “last minute.” I mean, the kids dead since the middle of the night. In the morning, regardless of how they decide to deal with it – fake kidnapping, fake accident, etc – they simply call whoever needs to be called – before or after body discovery. In other words they just do whatever it is that they really did do. What is suspicious about that?

...

Disposal was not impossible; disposal was risky. They may have decided to forego the risk. That’s fine, but once you decide to forego the risk than you no longer have reporting a kidnapping as a viable option. You now have to explain the body in the house. A kidnapping does not do that.

If they planned to dispose of the body, in a suitcase or whatever than there is no reason for the body to be in the basement. It should be in the car and ready to go. Why take it to the basement first?

If the Ramseys used the notepad, but didn’t dispose of it, used the paintbrush, breaking it and putting part of it in the tray, etc then they committed several unnecessary self-incriminating acts. However, these are acts that an intruder could commit without fear of incrimination.

As far as I know the victim being changed into fresh panties, etc is primarily forum conjecture. The panties she had on were large, but not clean or fresh; they had urine and blood on them and so she was obviously wearing them before as well as after death.

...

Nice to see another fan of Twin Peaks.
...

AK