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

[Global Justice Ops]

Of course it's solvable. This was far from a perfect murder, closer to a perfect botching of the investigation.

"If we monitor you getting the money early," - ransom note excerpt.


If the perpetrators planned to use surveillance after the would be kidnapping, it makes sense they would use it in the hours maybe even days leading up to it

 

[andreww]

You Know its a little funny that the Ramseys tried to pin this on their housekeeper within minutes of finding the not. I guess they weren't buying the whole SFF story either. So did they already know the note was BS?

 

[tovarisch]

You say the intruder knew the family habits. But this was Christmas day, and there are no habits. Every Christmas is different. Kids stay up later. It's far from habitual.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No habits ? Oh, andreww...There were habits, or life style if you like, that had significant negative role and the intruder (s) had knowledge of :

not using security system and surveillance cameras, ever (line was not cut before entering)

children sleeping on the separate level, unsupervised (had been in every space/room on the second level and the basement)

spiral staircase used to decent from the master bedroom (note)

possibly even knew parents sleep through all night on sleeping pills (phone line was not cut)

I believe I`m not speculating when saying FBI suggested that crime was prepared AT LEAST one year ahead. Everybody knows it, right?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Something that has bothered me a lot about this case is that a case has been made that it had to be one of the R's because people just don't go into people's house and steal or murder children.
Well to be honest, with all the children who have gone missing from their beds or taken from their homes at night, I just don't think that can be said anymore.
I was watching this case on tv where the dad stopped he abductor of his 5 yr old dd.

I think if you are looking at probabilities of motive for this case one has to be that someone wanted to take her away. That they wanted her and went in and got her. That something could have changed while they were there and so they brought her down to the basement maybe to escape through the window they came in and realized that would not work and then they were too nervous about bringing her back up where they could be discovered.

They could have completed the task there and left her there knowing she would not be found for a while. Meanwhile they had already left the note on the stairs before going up to get her. so that is why it was still there.

I have to look at all the possibilities that can make sense in this case. Not just the ones that are urban legend or crazy off the wall theories that have no facts or evidence to back them up.
For me the reasonable scenarios have to be disproved first before we can start with scenarios that have no fact behind them. IMO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

You say the intruder knew the family habits. But this was Christmas day, and there are no habits. Every Christmas is different. Kids stay up later. It's far from habitual.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There are absolute habits on Christmas. They had to know that the R's were leaving so they could get in while they were gone. Christmas may not be a typical 364 day but it has typical routines for each family.

I don't think this person knew the family in a family way but as an observer on the fringe. Someone who was planning this a long time.

 

[Global Justice Ops]

I think the killer had killed before. The degree of violence plus the language of the ransom note shows that the perpetrator is experienced and not afraid to commit murder.

 

[andreww]

Something that has bothered me a lot about this case is that a case has been made that it had to be one of the R's because people just don't go into people's house and steal or murder children.
Well to be honest, with all the children who have gone missing from their beds or taken from their homes at night, I just don't think that can be said anymore.
I was watching this case on tv where the dad stopped he abductor of his 5 yr old dd.

I think if you are looking at probabilities of motive for this case one has to be that someone wanted to take her away. That they wanted her and went in and got her. That something could have changed while they were there and so they brought her down to the basement maybe to escape through the window they came in and realized that would not work and then they were too nervous about bringing her back up where they could be discovered.

They could have completed the task there and left her there knowing she would not be found for a while. Meanwhile they had already left the note on the stairs before going up to get her. so that is why it was still there.

I have to look at all the possibilities that can make sense in this case. Not just the ones that are urban legend or crazy off the wall theories that have no facts or evidence to back them up.
For me the reasonable scenarios have to be disproved first before we can start with scenarios that have no fact behind them. IMO

Yes, kids get abducted from their beds. But, never has a three page rambling ransom note been written whilst sitting in the victim's living room. The parents decline to assist LE for four months. There is no obvious sign of exit or entry in to the house. Fibres from the parents clothing is found on the body and duct tape. I could go on and on, but I would bet my life that the Ramseys are resoponsible.

 

[andreww]

I think the killer had killed before. The degree of violence plus the language of the ransom note shows that the perpetrator is experienced and not afraid to commit murder.[/QUOTE]

Or that He & She watched a lot of movies.

 

[Mama2JML]

Something that has bothered me a lot about this case is that a case has been made that it had to be one of the R's because people just don't go into people's house and steal or murder children.
Well to be honest, with all the children who have gone missing from their beds or taken from their homes at night, I just don't think that can be said anymore.

Right, but this has never been a valid argument.

I was watching this case on tv where the dad stopped he abductor of his 5 yr old dd.

Horrifying. Thankfully this recent case had a happy ending.

I think if you are looking at probabilities of motive for this case one has to be that someone wanted to take her away. That they wanted her and went in and got her. That something could have changed while they were there and so they brought her down to the basement maybe to escape through the window they came in and realized that would not work and then they were too nervous about bringing her back up where they could be discovered.

They could have completed the task there and left her there knowing she would not be found for a while. Meanwhile they had already left the note on the stairs before going up to get her. so that is why it was still there.

Seems plausible, IMO.

I have to look at all the possibilities that can make sense in this case. Not just the ones that are urban legend or crazy off the wall theories that have no facts or evidence to back them up.

For me the reasonable scenarios have to be disproved first before we can start with scenarios that have no fact behind them. IMO

BBM

Absolutely. The facts and evidence should dictate one's theory. Not the opposite. We all look back and realize the investigation seemed to be doomed from the get go.

We have some hope to cling to, though. If Linda Arndt can change her mind, then anything is possible. LOL. I just pray the BPD has some high quality detectives still interested in seeking justice for JonBenét.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elannia]

The thing is for all of those that are IDI, why did the R's not cooperate with LE, wait 4 months to actually talk to police, etc.... 18 years later, here we are still, no one in the family is still looking for her "killer". And we all know why. If you are innocent you dont hide from the police, say I just dont remember, I just dont know, etc. So yes if you under an umbrella of suspicion maybe thats why R's. You didnt cooperate with police and help them find your 6 year olds killer, who was brutally bashed on the head, sexually assualted, strangled. So tell me what innocent parent just lets their daughters murderer walk free all these years. And a big thank you to AH who just swept this away and said the GJ returned no indictment(which in fact they had as we found out last October)

 

[Mama2JML]

The thing is for all of those that are IDI, why did the R's not cooperate with LE, wait 4 months to actually talk to police, etc....

We all know this is not exactly (not even nearly, IMO) a factual representation of the Ramseys cooperation, or lack thereof, with LE, AND our perceptions of the Ramseys behavior are vastly different. I imagine we have different POVs when it comes to LEs actions as well.

18 years later, here we are still, no one in the family is still looking for her "killer".

What makes you think so? I am confident the opposite is true.

And we all know why. If you are innocent you dont hide from the police, say I just dont remember, I just dont know, etc. So yes if you under an umbrella of suspicion maybe thats why R's. You didnt cooperate with police and help them find your 6 year olds killer, who was brutally bashed on the head, sexually assualted, strangled. So tell me what innocent parent just lets their daughters murderer walk free all these years. And a big thank you to AH who just swept this away and said the GJ returned no indictment(which in fact they had as we found out last October)

Unfortunately, we don't see eye-to-eye when it comes to this specific topic, and I don't believe debating the issue will get us anywhere. I am really not interested in converting RDIs to IDIs. If you'd like to discuss evidence, regardless of where it leads, I'm game.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[andreww]

We all know this is not exactly (not even nearly, IMO) a factual representation of the Ramseys cooperation, or lack thereof, with LE, AND our perceptions of the Ramseys behavior are vastly different. I imagine we have different POVs when it comes to LEs actions as well.

The Ramsey's say they didn't talk to LE because they felt that they were suspects. Well guess what, people that are in the house at the time of the murder are always suspects. If you are innocent, you tell the truth, get yourself off that list, and allow the cops to look elsewhere. Guilty or not, stalling for four months allowed a potential killer a lot of time to make himself scarce and cover his tracks. I will always hold John and Patsy 100% responsible for LE not being able to close this case. The question you have to ask yourself is did they really ever want it closed?

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

Something that has bothered me a lot about this case is that a case has been made that it had to be one of the R's because people just don't go into people's house and steal or murder children.
Well to be honest, with all the children who have gone missing from their beds or taken from their homes at night, I just don't think that can be said anymore.
I was watching this case on tv where the dad stopped he abductor of his 5 yr old dd.

I think if you are looking at probabilities of motive for this case one has to be that someone wanted to take her away. That they wanted her and went in and got her. That something could have changed while they were there and so they brought her down to the basement maybe to escape through the window they came in and realized that would not work and then they were too nervous about bringing her back up where they could be discovered.

They could have completed the task there and left her there knowing she would not be found for a while. Meanwhile they had already left the note on the stairs before going up to get her. so that is why it was still there.

I have to look at all the possibilities that can make sense in this case. Not just the ones that are urban legend or crazy off the wall theories that have no facts or evidence to back them up.
For me the reasonable scenarios have to be disproved first before we can start with scenarios that have no fact behind them. IMO

Personally, I think you're comparing apples to oranges when you compare JBR & liken this case to all the missing & abducted children we see on the news.
You see, JBR was never abducted. She was murdered inside her home.
Check out stats about that & see who likely commits those murders.

Moo

 

[Mama2JML]

The Ramsey's say they didn't talk to LE because they felt that they were suspects. Well guess what, people that are in the house at the time of the murder are always suspects. If you are innocent, you tell the truth, get yourself off that list, and allow the cops to look elsewhere. Guilty or not, stalling for four months allowed a potential killer a lot of time to make himself scarce and cover his tracks. I will always hold John and Patsy 100% responsible for LE not being able to close this case. The question you have to ask yourself is did they really ever want it closed?

Long before the April of '97 interviews, the Ramseys were questioned by police; on the 26th, 27th, and the 28th of Dec. 1996. They sought counsel, then followed the advice of counsel. Regardless, none of this proves guilt or innocence, but surely you agree this was smart?...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tovarisch]

ScarlettScarpetta is right saying that we need to try to eliminated the motives that most unlikely applicable to the case, although all of the possible motives seam somewhat fit in the crime:
money
pedophile
political
personal hate, envy

My first opinion will be about money motive, and I see it like the most weakest among others. Ransom was in deed left behind, but body left almost next to it. With the professional proper search , dogs or not, JB`s body would have been discovered in 15-30 minutes. The killers did not know that the discovery will take 8 hours. They still left the ransom and the dead girl in the same house. Why? My opinion it was not money the motive. The ransom money request of 118,000 was an implication of their knowledge of the family matters. They played the game with Ramsey. My opinion they ridiculed JR. By the theory of probability of statistics what was the chance that the same number of 118,000 would come up twice in the same family, as a big life changing events in the period of 10 months in between ? February 1996- respectable annual bonus, and then re- surfaced December 1996-in the ransom for the dead daughter. Is it only me who could not believe that it`s a coincidence. If it was not for showing their knowledge about John`s military oriented business, than What was so special about this bonus?

 

[andreww]

Yes, but it's not a coincidence if the Ramsey's wrote the note, is it? Remember, that $118,000 was paid over a year long period, so he never got a lump sum of that amount. So who would possibly know that?

The $118,000 is actually a stupid amount. Given the Ramsey's wealth and the value of their business, a real kidnapper would likely have asked for a figure far greater than that. The note, and the $118,000 figure was used simply to cast a veil of suspicion on Johns business associates. Nothing more. Most people see right through it, some obviously don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Mama2JML]

Yes, but it's not a coincidence if the Ramsey's wrote the note, is it? Remember, that $118,000 was paid over a year long period, so he never got a lump sum of that amount. So who would possibly know that?

The $118,000 is actually a stupid amount. Given the Ramsey's wealth and the value of their business, a real kidnapper would likely have asked for a figure far greater than that. The note, and the $118,000 figure was used simply to cast a veil of suspicion on Johns business associates. Nothing more. Most people see right through it, some obviously don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The "bonus" wasn't really a bonus; it was deferred compensation, AND the net amount (~$118,220 +/- some change) was paid, in full, February of 1996.

 

[Moab]

The "bonus" wasn't really a bonus; it was deferred compensation, AND the net amount (~$118,220 +/- some change) was paid, in full, February of 1996.

From a LKL interview John said it was a bonus.
KING:
"Any thoughts as to why. I think you mentioned last night $118,000 -- that's the bonus you got for the year?"

JOHN:
"Well, it happened to be very close to my annual bonus that I'd received in February I think it was of '96. I don't know if that's significant or not or, if that's a clue. It means something to the killer, 118,$118,000 means something to the killer."

 

[tovarisch]

Yes, but it's not a coincidence if the Ramsey's wrote the note, is it? Remember, that $118,000 was paid over a year long period, so he never got a lump sum of that amount. So who would possibly know that?

The $118,000 is actually a stupid amount. Given the Ramsey's wealth and the value of their business, a real kidnapper would likely have asked for a figure far greater than that. The note, and the $118,000 figure was used simply to cast a veil of suspicion on Johns business associates. Nothing more. Most people see right through it, some obviously don't.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Right, absolutely right that a real killer for money would not asked for this, as you say, stupid amount.

Now, the more stupid thing would be for Ramsey to exposed for the whole world Mr. Ramsey`s bonus for his achievements in serving defense contracts and reaching billion in sales. Being military person, high officer, do you really think ANY military person would think it`s a good idea, after killing his daughter, second thing in their mind-to disclose to the whole world his bonus, to attract attention to his business worldwide, business that was very military oriented ? He was not selling donuts, comprehend, andreww ?

 

[Mama2JML]

Right, absolutely right that a real killer for money would not asked for this, as you say, stupid amount.

Now, the more stupid thing would be for Ramsey to exposed for the whole world Mr. Ramsey`s bonus for his achievements in serving defense contracts and reaching billion in sales. Being military person, high officer, do you really think ANY military person would think it`s a good idea, after killing his daughter, second thing in their mind-to disclose to the whole world his bonus, to attract attention to his business worldwide, business that was very military oriented ? He was not selling donuts, comprehend, andreww ?

If the "odd" amount being very close to the payout of John's 1995 deferred comp./"bonus" that was listed on every pay stub in 1996 wasn't enough to connect the Ramseys to the murder, then the broken paintbrush, needless as it was, and the placement of an unused portion in Patsy's paint tote would surely cause LE to narrow in on the Ramseys. Why would a Ramsey do these things? Why would an intruder?

Fortunately, this disaster of an investigation yielded much tangible, testable evidence, but a paralyzing problem continues to impede any salvaged chance at resolution: EGO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk