Intruder theories only - RDI theories not allowed! *READ FIRST POST* #2

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I don't talk about it much and don't discuss the case on this site, but some on here know my brother in law disappeared 3 1/2 years ago. His disappearance was what I consider an escalated event.

Jr had had drug and alcohol problems most of his life but he had been sober for 5 years before his disappearance. During his substance abuse problems he had been in a serious accident which permanently affected his leg and since his job required some dexterity, the leg problems limited him.

But for those 5 years he was sober he had steady freelance work. But then the work dried up, he took a drink and re-injured his bad leg which further limited his mobility and ability to get a job. Everyone knew he was drinking again, but only the family knew that when he started pad locking the garage or shed that it meant he was using drugs again.

He was last seen parked on the side of the road drinking. He has never been found but his vehicle was. It was in a rocky, mountainous area he would not have been able to navigate with his bad leg. His wallet, keys, pants and a gun were found in his vehicle. The vehicle was wedged on a boulder, something Jr would never have done.

Why I consider this an escalating event is because circumstances escalated to create a situation that probably would not have naturally evolved without the stressors. If Jr had not started drinking again, he wouldn't have hurt his leg worse. If work hadn't dried up, he probably wouldn't have started drinking and doing drugs again. If he hadn't begun abusing again, he probably wouldn't be missing under what are very suspicious circumstances. I know I'm being simplistic...like I said, I don't like discussing the case. I hope you are getting my point.

I JBR's death was an escalated event too.
The sexual assault was the Main Event that night and as a result of something that happened during that assault, JBR was killed. I know that sounds like I consider accidental death as a possibility but I don't. The sex game was dangerous so at the very least the sexual assault on her deliberately put her life in danger.

So we have a sexual assault which resulted in a death. We have staging and evidence tampering as a result of the death. I don't believe the death would have occurred if not for the sexual assault. And obviously the evidence tampering and staging wouldn't have occurred unless there had been an unexpected death. In other words, things escalated based on each step events took that night.

Im very sorry for this young man. I hope that in the end there is a good outcome.

I do thank you for sharing. It is not easy to put yourself out there. I am so sorry for all your family has been through.

 

[Mama2JML]

Who needs more money than a drug addict? $118,000 should buy you plenty of heroin.

True. Was money a motive, initially? Maybe, but it doesn't seem like the primary motive to me.

 

[2 percent]

I just don't see escalation in the same way I guess. What I see in your post is a message of someone who slowly lost control of their life..
I don't see how that relates to the R's

Losing control means outside influences take control away from you. That was the start of Jr's problems but ultimately his own choices of drinking, drugs, etc escalated into dangerous behavior which greatly increased the probability of exactly what happened. I'm afraid we are not expecting a good outcome. He had problems with family and his wife but was devoted to his children and never would abandon them. Plus, there was still a lot of money in his wallet...Not something an addict would leave behind.

Again, I think the Ramsey case started a sex game with a little girl. For whatever reason she died during the game. Escalation by definition means things get worse and worse as time goes on. The sexual assault was bad, the death worse and having to create a scene to account for the child's death during a sex game was the most difficult part, trying to manipulate evidence where you can to promote the story you want.

 

[Mama2JML]

OCD - Your trying to use OCD to explain the overstaging and repetition in the ransome note. There are better explanations for that.

No, that's not exactly what I am trying to portray. If we consider the ransom note, his pre-occupation with the victim(s), the article about AG (marked with red ink), stalking, and/or other crime scene behavior, then it is plausible to surmise the perp exhibited some characteristics consistent with OCD.

Saying your right, though.....OCD would limit the suspect list severly. Should not be difficult to find an OCD sufferer amongst the Ramsey's acquaintance.

I disagree.

This criminal shows a very poor understanding of crime, IMHO. One of us could have done a far better job and left less evidence. I don't think this person had the slightest knowledge of how a crime is committed.

What, specifically, makes you think so?

Narcissistic? Did the killer ever once use the word "I" in the ransom note? I think only in reference to saying he was a "representative" to the foreign faction. A narcissist would have have used less "we" and more "I". Compare the Zodiac letters to this note. Zodiac is in love with the word "I".

He seems pretty brazen & confident to me. Also, have you considered the "fat cat" author might think rather highly of himself, but those who know him & those with whom he associates might disagree?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Losing control means outside influences take control away from you. That was the start of Jr's problems but ultimately his own choices of drinking, drugs, etc escalated into dangerous behavior which greatly increased the probability of exactly what happened. I'm afraid we are not expecting a good outcome. He had problems with family and his wife but was devoted to his children and never would abandon them. Plus, there was still a lot of money in his wallet...Not something an addict would leave behind.

Again, I think the Ramsey case started a sex game with a little girl. For whatever reason she died during the game. Escalation by definition means things get worse and worse as time goes on. The sexual assault was bad, the death worse and having to create a scene to account for the child's death during a sex game was the most difficult part, trying to manipulate evidence where you can to promote the story you want.

I think that it was a sexual attack from a predator. Not a game. So that is where we differ.

I took out the Quote about Jr because no matter what I think, I did not know him and in a small snippet don't want to upset or offend you or make a snap comment about it.

I don't usually put things with other things. I think each crime is different and because one person did something one way does not mean another did not do it differently. because the odds are in one favor does not mean that this killer did not do something against the odds.

This is very simple for me. I see a person who wanted JBR. He also wanted to hurt JR. Someone close enough to want to make it personal.

 

[THE BUNK]

He seems pretty brazen & confident to me. Also, have you considered the "fat cat" author might think rather highly of himself, but those who know him & those with whom he associates might disagree?

He called himself a "fat cat", not a genius. Interestingly "fat cat" is a derogatory term for a rich person.

I think the person wishes he had the financial resources but obviously does not have them. Hence his need to risk committing this crime. So in essence I do agree with you that the author has designs on being something that he is not...namely a person of wealth. Something that other peers including himself obviously notice that he isn't.

He wasn't brazen enough to kill both children. He chose the weakest person in the family to kill.
Nor was he brazen enough to use a knife which would have ensured death.
He wasn't brazen enough to take the body and attempt to cash in on the ransom note.
He wasn't brazen enough to go after Jon Ramsey outside of his home. Attempt to kill him in his car outside of work.
He also wasn't brazen enough to boast this crime later.
He wasn't brazen enough to commit crimes with the same M.O. after.
He wasn't brazen enough to break into the house. He needed a window that was broken already or a key to enter the house.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

He called himself a "fat cat", not a genius. Interestingly "fat cat" is a derogatory term for a rich person.

I think the person wishes he had the financial resources but obviously does not have them. Hence his need to risk committing this crime. So in essence I do agree with you that the author has designs on being something that he is not...namely a person of wealth. Something that other peers including himself obviously notice that he isn't.

He wasn't brazen enough to kill both children. He chose the weakest person in the family to kill.
Nor was he brazen enough to use a knife which would have ensured death.
He wasn't brazen enough to take the body and attempt to cash in on the ransom note.
He wasn't brazen enough to go after Jon Ramsey outside of his home. Attempt to kill him in his car outside of work.
He also wasn't brazen enough to boast this crime later.
He wasn't brazen enough to commit crimes with the same M.O. after.
He wasn't brazen enough to break into the house. He needed a window that was broken already or a key to enter the house.

Fat cat can just mean the man in charge.

 

[THE BUNK]

No, that's not exactly what I am trying to portray. If we consider the ransom note, his pre-occupation with the victim(s), the article about AG (marked with red ink), stalking, and/or other crime scene behavior, then it is plausible to surmise the perp exhibited some characteristics consistent with OCD.

Pre-Occupation?? He never mentioned Jonbenet's name once in the letter.

What stalking? What proof was there that this guy stalked the Ramsey's before the 26th? There's little to no preamble to this case.

What, specifically, makes you think so?

All you need to do this crime is enter the house while everyone's sleeping.
Locate Jonbenet's bedroom.
Cover her mouth and carry her out of her bed.
Run like hell out of the front door to your car.
Go to your hideout/home
Do whatever it is you want to do to young Jonbenet.

No DNA, No body, No handwriting, No murder weapon. A crime with no evidence. Much like the Ainsberg kidnapping.Ask any criminal and they will tell you that's how it's done.

Crimes like abduction require quickness. You take what it is you want and leave.

I used to shoplift in my teens. Did I dawdle around the department store? No I moved quickly, took what I want and exited the department store.

Originally Posted by THE BUNK
Saying your right, though.....OCD would limit the suspect list severly. Should not be difficult to find an OCD sufferer amongst the Ramsey's acquaintance.
I disagree.

I'm pretty sure if you spent a week with Patsy Ramsey she could tell you which person is having an affair, doing drugs, who's having money troubles and who's suffering from OCD. Word travels fast via neighborhood gossip.

 

[2 percent]

I think that it was a sexual attack from a predator. Not a game. So that is where we differ.

No, we really don't. Just because I called it a game doesn't mean it isn't assault. As a matter of fact I called it an assault in my posts as well as a game. I also think a sexual predator assaulted her otherwise what is the point of being sexual with a child?

I took out the Quote about Jr because no matter what I think, I did not know him and in a small snippet don't want to upset or offend you or make a snap comment about it.

I appreciate that. Thank you.

This is very simple for me. I see a person who wanted JBR. He also wanted to hurt JR. Someone close enough to want to make it personal.

I have to say I've never understood the logic that someone would hurt a child to get to their parent. Except in the case of a spouse trying to hurt the other spouse by killing the child(ren), of course.

But someone going to the trouble of breaking in and killing/taking JB just to hurt JR? No. I don't buy it. I think it would take an immense amount of hate to transfer that kind of murderous feeling to a little girl and that person, by sheer hatred alone, would probably be smoked out fairly easily. And nothing about this case especially the RN, which is the only communication between JR and the kidnapper, seems personal to me. It all seems so contrived and fake.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

No, we really don't. Just because I called it a game doesn't mean it isn't assault. As a matter of fact I called it an assault in my posts as well as a game. I also think a sexual predator assaulted her otherwise what is the point of being sexual with a child?



I appreciate that. Thank you.



I have to say I've never understood the logic that someone would hurt a child to get to their parent. Except in the case of a spouse trying to hurt the other spouse by killing the child(ren), of course.

But someone going to the trouble of breaking in and killing/taking JB just to hurt JR? No. I don't buy it. I think it would take an immense amount of hate to transfer that kind of murderous feeling to a little girl and that person, by sheer hatred alone, would probably be smoked out fairly easily. And nothing about this case especially the RN, which is the only communication between JR and the kidnapper, seems personal to me. It all seems so contrived and fake.

I don't think they hurt her to GET to JR. I think they hurt her and loved that it would also hurt him. But I believe the she was their main objective.

 

[THE BUNK]

This is very simple for me. I see a person who wanted JBR. He also wanted to hurt JR. Someone close enough to want to make it personal

If he wants her then why kill her? He could take her very easily and keep her forever like that Castro fellow in Cleveland. He could keep her forever with nobody knowing.

He also doesn't have to kill her after molesting her. If Jonbenet is unconcious how the heck is she going to tell who molested her? This guy could break into the house indefinitely and rape her every week.

Or even more importantly...if he knows the Ramsey's so well, he already has the best access to Jonbenet in the first place. If he has a frigging key he can legitimately go into the house and become "acquainted" with her and molest her without any of the family even knowing.

 

[THE BUNK]

He also wanted to hurt JR.

Why because the note was written to him?

To me that's one of the big red herrings in this case. The note was written to John Ramsey because he was the one that had the $118,000 bonus. The killer had two choices...Patsy or John.....why the heck would he write to Patsy?

I would also argue the practice note was written to both.

Hurting John Ramsey and killing him are not mutually exclusive. If John Ramsey is the bane of his existence then why not kill John Ramsey, too? Especially if he's the only guy who can identify you!!!!

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Many pedophiles want a child, and then kill them. That is nothing new. They would know that if they did not someone could always name them or identify them.

The note is written in a very dramatic crazy way that says to me this was someone who knew them in some capacity.

 

[THE BUNK]

I don't think they hurt her to GET to JR. I think they hurt her and loved that it would also hurt him. But I believe the she was their main objective.

"They"?

More than one person had a grudge against Jon Ramsey??

Coincidental that they found one another....or were they man and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend?

--would also hurt him--
Why try to hide the body? Why not put in plain sight for the shock value?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

"They"?

More than one person had a grudge against Jon Ramsey??

Coincidental that they found one another....or were they man and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend? s

They is just a way to say an unnamed person. People can have lots of people with grudges against them and never even know it. Who knows how many people had grudges against JR.

 

[THE BUNK]

They is just a way to say an unnamed person. People can have lots of people with grudges against them and never even know it. Who knows how many people had grudges against JR.

Not many, since John Ramsey could not produce a viable suspect amongst them.

Just because your rich doesn't mean people hate you. It's what you do with your wealth and what you've done to obtain it that causes anger. Unless you believe John Ramsey is involved in unethical or illegal practices, I can't imagine why he would have such an enemy. And why such an enemy would not reveal himself verbally.

How many enemies do you have, Scarlett? Mama? How many people can you think of that would do such an act to one of your children out of pure hatred?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Not many, since John Ramsey could not produce a viable suspect amongst them.

Just because your rich doesn't mean people hate you. It's what you do with your wealth and what you've done to obtain it that causes anger. Unless you believe John Ramsey is involved in unethical or illegal practices, I can't imagine why he would have such an enemy. And why such an enemy would not reveal himself verbally.

That doesn't mean anything. Like I said before, You may not be aware of people that would have something against you. When you are wealthy and powerful there is at least a few people that have something against you.

Some people just hate people with money.

 

[THE BUNK]

Many pedophiles want a child, and then kill them. That is nothing new. They would know that if they did not someone could always name them or identify them.

That's because the child can identify them. Wearing a mask solves that problem.

Most pedophiles don't wear masks, because they have to entice the kid first. Masks would scare them off. This intruder does not have that risk. Unless you believe that Jonbenet knows him as well.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Not necessarily. They could speak and be identified, Smell a certain way and be identified, have markings that identify them.

There is nothing to argue about there. Children are killed by pedophiles. I have no idea of the statistics but a search of the forum will reveal proof of children that were killed by pedophiles.

 

[lawstudent]

Some sexual predators like to kill their victims, other do it out of fear, others would never do it. I don't see that as determinative in any way, but I don't get the head bash regardless. I can't think of many children killed via a head bash by sexual predators. Almost always strangling.