Known rope in the house

[Whaleshark]

Pic taken from here:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/jonbenet-ramsey-case-documents-0

Look at this enlarged view of the ransom note. You can easily see what has been done to the letters of the words.

Each letter, each word is disguised after the words are written. There are added squiggles, extensions, curves, etc., to each letter to make the handwriting unfamiliar.

Up close like this you can clearly see how a lot of the words look like John Ramsey's handwriting, once you subtract the extra squiggles, curves, etc.

But we, of course, also see elements of Patsy's handwriting, especially her left-handed disquise handwriting, and style with how letters naturally touch others, and her swoops, angles, exclamations, and how she dots her i's.

Look at the 'w' of the word 'we' in the sentence "we monitor you getting".... in the third sentence from the bottom. You can plainly see how an extra up curve was added to the right side of the original 'w' to disguise it. Without that extra, it looks like one of John's w's. The 'y' in 'you getting' has an extra curl added at the end.

The handwriting is painstakingly disguised at each letter level to cover up the original handwriting.

Try removing the extra extension on the letters and then you can see how small, or different, the original handwriting really looks...

The 'W' in the first line, of "We are a group", has a lot of extended lines on it. The "T" in that, and the 'l's in "You will" -- extended letters that have extra lines to change the style and overall length of them....look closely.

Adding the rest of the pages enlarged -- look at each letter. Most letters altered -- everywhere there is a change in direction of a line, a pressure point, an added piece, is a disguise to the original letter.

Once you can start getting used to picking out where the alterations are to the letters, you will start to see...

 

[Chrishope]

The basement window was a potential point of entry and exit as were most doors and windows in the house.

Yes, in a strictly theoretical sense. Any window or door is a potential entry point.

This is why LE investigated doors and windows. Based on the evidence collected by LE, I do not think the basement window was used as an entry or exit place that night.

Based on LE's investigation, LE didn't think it was an entry/exit point either.

I can't be sure if FW viewed it as plausible or not. I'm not sure how completely FW investigated the window. As far as I know, FW didn't go outside, so he didn't know of the spider web. I don't know if he looked closely at the dirt on the sill, or looked up to see if the grate was in place or not. But if FW is willing to believe an intruder came in that window the night before why not let him think the intruder broke the window the night before?

But it doesn't matter what I think after the fact. What matters is what the stager of this crime scene thought at the moment of staging.

If the stagger thought his staging was believable why did he try to back-date the breaking of the glass? It's obvious the stagger didn't think the window looked like a POE, hence the back-dating.

 

[Chrishope]

No one needed John to suggest the window could be an entry point. As you say, any dummy would wonder about it. John needed for FW to see the possible entrance before he discovered the body. Dead body in basement. John discovers it. John looks suspicious. John needs an intruder.

I can see this to some extent.

I agree exactly. The window was an obvious, suspicious, possible place of entry. What is more, it was ready made for the stager. Since it was most likely already broken, why not use it especially when you know the body is going to be found in the basement?

Do you mean you think the window was "already broken" as in JR broke it during his summer break in? Because I don't think that's the case at all.

I agree that JR is letting FW know the window wasn't broken that night. But, his swearing and tapping himself on the forehead and his, "I should've fixed the damned thing.", tells me that he was also telling FW: "Damn, I shoulda fixed that broken window."

OK. But there is still the problem that there is no real need for the back-dating if FW is going to buy the idea that an intruder came in that way. He has to say something along the lines of "Shoulda fixed it" but he doesn't have to back-date the breakage at all to make FW think of an intruder.

No. I have several theories, the most probable, IMO, is BDI and John is trying
to get him off the hook.

Precisely. But if John is going to act like a man whose daughter has been kidnapped, then, a broken basement window is the least of his worries! So, why is John making a fuss about that broken window? When FW pointed it out, John should've said: "Yea, I broke it last summer." If John, as you say, knew his daughter's body was in that wine cellar (and I believe he did), then, it becomes obvious as to why he said: "Damn! I should've had that repaired."

But then we are back to the question - why the backdating?

If JR is trying to get FW to think intruder, the window being broke the night before works just as well as the window being broken months ago. (Better, actually, as it's scarcely believable that they lived with a broken window for months on end)

You've been arguing that it was obvious the window was not an entry or exit point. So, why would John have to claim he broke it the summer before so that police wouldn't think he staged it? As you say, with spider webs, grate in place, window sill dirt not disturbed, it should've been obvious it was an old break. The least he should've said was: "Yea, I broke that last summer", and then gone on.

It's obvious no one came in that way, but it's not obviously an old break. JR needed to backdate the breakage because otherwise the cops (and much less importantly FW) are going to assume JR broke it last night.

Let's say that the investigators belabored the point of how John came through the window.

OK.

Since John was totally all over the place about how he got through that window, I would say no.

I agree.

 

[Chrishope]

Will browse the Kolar book, but for now, here's this:

Fibers from Sham & Duvet
Where Found. A sham and duvet were found in the suitcase beneath the train room window.
Match to Fibers on JBR? "A CBI examiner issued a report indicating fibers from the pillow sham and comforter were found on JonBenet's shirt, on her vaginal area, on the duct tape from her hand, on the hand ligature and inside the body bag." This is the lab report referenced in the Carnes opinion: "A lab report indicated that fibers from the sham and duvet were found on the shirt that JonBenet was wearing when she was found in the wine cellar. (SMF P 147; PSMF P 147.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 32, p. 68).
Fibers on JBR Unmatched? However, it also has been reported “FBI analysis: FBI examiners said the fibers on JonBenet came from a source other than the pillow sham and comforter -- but none of them matched anything else in the house. "If the FBI examiner is right, the killer had to take that piece of material out with him," Smit said.”

CSI lab report backed by Carnes opinion vs. an unsubstantiated public report that Smit refers to in bolstering his intruder theory - which has been thoroughly debunked. However, IF the "reported" FBI report is true, I guess we can assume that whatever item caused those unmatched fiberst could have gone the same way of the other crime scene items we have been told are missing.

Thanks. I'll discount every lying word that comes out of LS's mouth.

As a side issue, it is interesting to me that the fibers from the sham/duvet are on JBR. Then they are in the body bag. That would have to be secondary transfer, which many believe can't account for PR's fibers. Somehow sham/duvet fibers can attach to JB's shirt, but PR fibers can't. Interesting.

 

[midwest mama]

Chrishope - Take a look at my post #297 - I added some info that Steve Thomas stated during his Wolf trial interview.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, you'd tell the police about the window, but if the cops looked around the house they'd see it anyway. There would be no need to tell them. It would occur -even to BPD- that someone might have come in through an open window.

The police have seen the broken window shortly after 6am. French and Riechenbach both look through the house, inside. Riechenbach walks around outside. What need is there to tell the police about a broken window that they have already seen? The police know the window is broken. They also know, after looking for just a few minutes, that the window was not used by an intruder.

Even if JR is pretending that he first knows of the broken window between 9-11 am, he still knows that the police have already seen it. If the police aren't making an issue of it, why bring it up?

It's not clear, to me, whether or not the police talked to JR about the window that morning. I don't recall anything from ST's book about JR being questioned about it by officers on the scene. It seems a natural enough question. Yet, as far as I know, the police didn't ask about it until April '97. By the time JR is first interviewed the police know of the story about forgetting the key and JR breaking in. Did they get the story from FW? Or did they get it from JR that morning? (If JR told the police the same story, that morning, that may account for why he and PR were not arrested)

If JR wants people (FW/LE) to consider that an intruder came in through the window -something blindingly obvious as a possibility, and at the same time completely implausible given the grate, the web, and the condition of the sill, then why not just say "Hey, there's a broken window. Maybe the kindappers came in that way". Why is there a need to "back date" the breaking of the glass? If anyone would be willing to believe the window was an entry point, why not also let them think it was broken the night before, by the intruder?

The reason of course is that it's obvious the window wasn't used as an entry/exit. Why then, is the glass broken? It's the "back dating" that is important.

Chrishope,
Duplicate Post.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, you'd tell the police about the window, but if the cops looked around the house they'd see it anyway. There would be no need to tell them. It would occur -even to BPD- that someone might have come in through an open window.

The police have seen the broken window shortly after 6am. French and Riechenbach both look through the house, inside. Riechenbach walks around outside. What need is there to tell the police about a broken window that they have already seen? The police know the window is broken. They also know, after looking for just a few minutes, that the window was not used by an intruder.

Even if JR is pretending that he first knows of the broken window between 9-11 am, he still knows that the police have already seen it. If the police aren't making an issue of it, why bring it up?

It's not clear, to me, whether or not the police talked to JR about the window that morning. I don't recall anything from ST's book about JR being questioned about it by officers on the scene. It seems a natural enough question. Yet, as far as I know, the police didn't ask about it until April '97. By the time JR is first interviewed the police know of the story about forgetting the key and JR breaking in. Did they get the story from FW? Or did they get it from JR that morning? (If JR told the police the same story, that morning, that may account for why he and PR were not arrested)

If JR wants people (FW/LE) to consider that an intruder came in through the window -something blindingly obvious as a possibility, and at the same time completely implausible given the grate, the web, and the condition of the sill, then why not just say "Hey, there's a broken window. Maybe the kindappers came in that way". Why is there a need to "back date" the breaking of the glass? If anyone would be willing to believe the window was an entry point, why not also let them think it was broken the night before, by the intruder?

The reason of course is that it's obvious the window wasn't used as an entry/exit. Why then, is the glass broken? It's the "back dating" that is important.

Chrishope,

The police have seen the broken window shortly after 6am.

You are humoring us obviously, having a laugh maybe? You have read the officers reports?

Why then, is the glass broken? It's the "back dating" that is important.

Nope, its the hole in the glass! JR is simply stating he was responsible for the hole, but he found the window OPEN, see below.


Perfect Murder/Perfect Town, excerpt

Right before 10:00 A.M., alone, John Ramsey went downstairs to the basement, where Officer French had searched for his daughter. In the room where his son Burke’s train set was kept, Ramsey found a broken -->open<-- window. He -->closed<-- it before going back upstairs.

Perfect Murder/Perfect Town, excerpt

John Fernie stayed on the ground floor while Ramsey led Fleet White down to the basement. In Burke’s train room, they looked at the broken window. Ramsey told White that some months ago, he’d found himself locked out of the house and had broken the window, unlatched it, and climbed through.

IMO, the important point, which seems to have been passed over, whilst parsing all the other items, is that JR closed the window.

I'm certain JR is not attempting to suggest that he climbed in that window, months prevously, and neglected to close the window, if he did, after playing with Burke that night he had another opportunity to close the window.

JR does not need to tell us he closed the window that is redundant. What I reckon JR is playing on is that an intruder could have opened the window by hand via the break, then entered?

Otherwise why guide FW past it so he can make his comments?

On the suitcase, a Samsonite I think. Now if that is rigid plastic, i.e. not leather, cloth etc, then I am more convinced its use might have been to hold JonBenet?


.

 

[midwest mama]

Chris' theory is the DocG theory. The DocG theory is JR did it, wrote the note, and Patsy is not part of it, and neither is Burke, and that JR planned to get them out of the house while he went through the literal motions of the RN and to get rid of the body.... since you asked....


....And, I would say, again, it would behoove more of us to consider the possibility that not only the wording, but the actual letters/words of the RN were written by both of them, not just one or the other.

Thanks for the reminder, Whaleshark. I, for one, am of the humble opinion at this point that JR is responsible for the demise of JB, but I do admit it is hard to give a total pass on Patsy's involvement in writing the note. As one of the posters stated, it's that darn 'q' that is the problem. I do believe the writer(s) were trying very hard to disguise the note, though, and that 'q' just might have gotten special attention because they knew this was a very specific trait of Patsy's.

If Patsy co-authored with John, she did it thinkingshe would be protecting Burke, if JR was able to convince her that he had found Burke doing the deeds. They both knew Burke had problems, didn't they? She might have even then been able to 'help' JR with some of the things he needed to do with JB's body to get it ready to become part of the charade. He could have easily convinced Patsy to go along with anything else he would have needed to do to pull off the 'kidnapping'.

But, by this point, I could understand that she might have wanted to make that early call to 911 because she just was too bonkers to wait it all out, and wanted JB 'found' by police before they had to go all through the hoops of the ransom note. Maybe in the midst of this hellish event, she remembered that Burke couldn't be prosecuted for any harm he did to JB, since Dr. Beuf might have filled her in on one of their visits for treatment. So, why not just circumvent the whole charade so she could get JB tended to. (Might even account for her desperate plea to Jesus to raise JB as he raised Lazarus.) But, it would look so awful for the R's to be involved in all of this, so why not just go along with JR's kidnapping plot in order to keep the family name untarnished? Patsy just wasn't able to even have a few seconds of clear thought in her mind as to how the 'staging' would have to be played out in order for JR to pull it off.

And she must not have known JR had not completed staging his 'intruder' entry. Once JR's gig was up, he had to come up with that lame summer broken window story, and Patsy would have gone along with it once she realized the kidnapping story had been compromised. In fact, if JR was still setting up the 'intruder' window when Patsy decided to go ahead with the call, all the more reason he couldn't get her stopped in time. He'd of heard her making the call, though, and bolted upstairs fast enough to get in on part of it.

Here's a thought: Burke was not a perpetrator, but a 'discoverer' when he heard JB scream. And JR managed to get Burke detached from the scene, sent back to his room, and made to believe that he really didn't see what he thought he saw, and could never tell anyone about it, because only Dad knew just what they would have to tell people to fix it. Children can be very easily manipulated by someone who has great authority over them.

Now, JR would have had to find Patsy (who could have fallen asleep anywhere in the house as she took a short 'rest' from trip preparations). She was the one known to be the rock solid sleeper. Jr has to involve her because he needs her help to "fix it", and also to assure evidence from her might show up, so he'd have a trump card over her if she ever caught on, and wanted to pin everything on him. So, JR has made Patsy believe Burke did it, "not meaning to kill her" (which he stated loudly enough for Patsy to hear again also).

JR made Burke believe that he would figure out how to make it right, but he must never, ever tell anything he saw or it would destroy his mother and family. It must always be their secret. He must always depend on what his Dad tells him to insure his future is safe. But Burke just really couldn't stay in his bed, (where JR sent him) once he heard his mother wailing that she had to call police. As his mother started the 911 call, he came down to join them in the kitchen - where the other things ensued. Jr had to round him up again, maybe this time even with more authoritative 'threats' in order to keep him in his room, until he could safely be removed from the scene.

A few of the puzzle pieces seem to fit now. And you have done an excellent job pointing out the 'fixes' on that ransom note. I discussed this with someone else just a while back, noticing particularly the way the a's were fixed. But you caught even more, and quite accurately, I think. It would be interesting if someone with savvy computer tech skills could take that note and 'clean' it up as you suggest. Heck, we just might even find out for sure who really wrote the note - especially since then someone might want to take another 'expert' look at it. Kolar knows a couple of them.

 

[Whaleshark]

I NEED TO POST THIS IN THE HANDWRITING THREAD....

If you take my post above, #301 -

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8400521&postcount=301"]http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8400521&postcount=301[/ame]:

TAKE MY POST AND ENLARGE THE RANSOM NOTE TO AT LEAST 200%.

You can see where original letters, strokes, and even i dots are written over, and you can see where the original letters and strokes end and the additional ones begin.

You can see where the words and strokes were written over, on top of, and added to.

It's plain as day.

Perhaps John's handwriting is original, and Patsy's is the overlay.

Try it now.

 

[Whaleshark]

A few of the puzzle pieces seem to fit now. And you have done an excellent job pointing out the 'fixes' on that ransom note.
I discussed this with someone else just a while back, noticing particularly the way the a's were fixed. But you caught even more, and quite accurately, I think.
It would be interesting if someone with savvy computer tech skills could take that note and 'clean' it up as you suggest. Heck, we just might even
find out for sure who really wrote the note - especially since then someone might want to take another 'expert' look at it. Kolar knows a couple of them.[/B]

Midwest Mama,

I can see every one of his letters at the 150-200% size.

I can see where his letters are written over, and/or altered, extended - without a doubt.

I need a way to demonstrate this with his original letters in one color and the added letters, writeover, and additional marks in another.
Computer program would be great, but may have to do it manually or something....

The original handwriting is John's.

Whether or not he, or Patsy wrote on top of it --

The original letters are John's.


Better yet -- amplify it to 400 %.

I feel like screaming it from the rooftops.

 

[Whaleshark]

Doublepost

 

[Bonnette]

WOW, Whaleshark, you are so right! I enlarged the note as you described, and it's amazing how much becomes evident. Thank you!

 

[learnin]

Yes, in a strictly theoretical sense. Any window or door is a potential entry point.

If the stagger thought his staging was believable why did he try to back-date the breaking of the glass? It's obvious the stagger didn't think the window looked like a POE, hence the back-dating.

Perhaps the window had been broken for some time as John said. Since it had been broken for a while, the stager couldn't stage a scene as if the glass had been broken that night because the housekeeper, kids friends, who knows, might have noticed it was broken before the crime and blow the whistle on the stager. Therefore, the stager simply used what was, already, available to him.

I believe the window was, indeed, broken before that night but I don't believe John broke it and climbed through there. I believe he concocted that story to reinforce to FW that a grown man could, indeed, crawl through that space.

I've marked the dimensions, of that window well, out on my garage floor and, let me tell you, that is a tight squeeze. If I came upon that window well, for the first time, I can tell you I would wonder if a grown man could negotiate that space and get himself into the window. I believe John concocted the story so that FW would think: "well, John got through there, so I suppose an intruder could get through there."

 

[UKGuy]

Perhaps the window had been broken for some time as John said. Since it had been broken for a while, the stager couldn't stage a scene as if the glass had been broken that night because the housekeeper, kids friends, who knows, might have noticed it was broken before the crime and blow the whistle on the stager. Therefore, the stager simply used what was, already, available to him.

I believe the window was, indeed, broken before that night but I don't believe John broke it and climbed through there. I believe he concocted that story to reinforce to FW that a grown man could, indeed, crawl through that space.

I've marked the dimensions, of that window well, out on my garage floor and, let me tell you, that is a tight squeeze. If I came upon that window well, for the first time, I can tell you I would wonder if a grown man could negotiate that space and get himself into the window. I believe John concocted the story so that FW would think: "well, John got through there, so I suppose an intruder could get through there."

learnin,
Bingo! Thats the staging affect.

And for those who are skeptical, remember John telling us how he found the window open so he closed it!

Its not Johns story that the window has been lying open and broken since he climbed in through it.

John wants you to infer someone else has unlatched that window that night!

So prior to LS being given a prayer lesson, intruder entry via the window was on the R's version of events list.

simples.

for emphasis had to add a quote by JR himself, courtesy of midwest mama:

In DOA, published in 2000, JR said "That entry point needs to be looked at...the pane is still broken and the -->window is open<--, with a large old Samsonite suitcase sitting under it. Odd, I think. This doesn't look right. This suitcase is not normally kept here.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Midwest Mama,

I can see every one of his letters at the 150-200% size.

I can see where his letters are written over, and/or altered, extended - without a doubt.

I need a way to demonstrate this with his original letters in one color and the added letters, writeover, and additional marks in another.
Computer program would be great, but may have to do it manually or something....

The original handwriting is John's.

Whether or not he, or Patsy wrote on top of it --

The original letters are John's.


Better yet -- amplify it to 400 %.

I feel like screaming it from the rooftops.

Whaleshark,
Nice observation. I've never bothered with the RN until now. So you reckon John wrote it, and Patsy embellished it?


.

 

[Chrishope]

Perhaps the window had been broken for some time as John said. Since it had been broken for a while, the stager couldn't stage a scene as if the glass had been broken that night because the housekeeper, kids friends, who knows, might have noticed it was broken before the crime and blow the whistle on the stager. Therefore, the stager simply used what was, already, available to him.

Very unlikely. If it had been broken for some time wouldn't LHP have known? She denies it was broken earlier. She was down the basement doing laundry regularly. I could see it being broken for a few days w/o her knowing, but weeks, months? Really?

I believe the window was, indeed, broken before that night but I don't believe John broke it and climbed through there. I believe he concocted that story to reinforce to FW that a grown man could, indeed, crawl through that space.

When do you figure the window was broken? How? And on what basis do you believe it was broken before that night?

You figure they lived with the bugs and mice, and the security issue, and the rain/snow, and the cold air? You believe that after the window was broken the glass was cleaned up, but not completely? They just left bits of glass laying there for "some time" despite it being a play area?

I've marked the dimensions, of that window well, out on my garage floor and, let me tell you, that is a tight squeeze. If I came upon that window well, for the first time, I can tell you I would wonder if a grown man could negotiate that space and get himself into the window. I believe John concocted the story so that FW would think: "well, John got through there, so I suppose an intruder could get through there."

So FW simultaneously has seen the window close enough to have concerns about the dimensions being large enough for a man to get through, yet not well enough (grate, dirt on sill) to know that no one actually did come in that way?

He's looked up and seen the grate in place and asks himself if that hole is big enough for an intruder, but doesn't ask himself why the grate is still in place?

Same with the window well and sill? He wonders if a man can get into the window well but doesn't ask himself why the dirt on the sill is very little disturbed?

If FW has looked at the window close enough to have doubts about it being big enough for an entry point, he's also been able to determine that no one actually did come in that way. So JR's story doesn't make the window as POE more plausible.

It's obvious that what JR is worried about is the fact that everyone who looks at the window knows no one came through there the night before. But they know the glass is broken, and they see bits of glass laying around. Unless JR can backdate the breakage, everyone will make the connection he doesn't want made - one of the Rs broke the window the night before to stage an intruder scenario, but the staging is incomplete.

 

[Chrishope]

Pic taken from here:

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/jonbenet-ramsey-case-documents-0

Look at this enlarged view of the ransom note. You can easily see what has been done to the letters of the words.

Each letter, each word is disguised after the words are written. There are added squiggles, extensions, curves, etc., to each letter to make the handwriting unfamiliar.

Up close like this you can clearly see how a lot of the words look like John Ramsey's handwriting, once you subtract the extra squiggles, curves, etc.

But we, of course, also see elements of Patsy's handwriting, especially her left-handed disquise handwriting, and style with how letters naturally touch others, and her swoops, angles, exclamations, and how she dots her i's.

Look at the 'w' of the word 'we' in the sentence "we monitor you getting".... in the third sentence from the bottom. You can plainly see how an extra up curve was added to the right side of the original 'w' to disguise it. Without that extra, it looks like one of John's w's. The 'y' in 'you getting' has an extra curl added at the end.

The handwriting is painstakingly disguised at each letter level to cover up the original handwriting.

Try removing the extra extension on the letters and then you can see how small, or different, the original handwriting really looks...

The 'W' in the first line, of "We are a group", has a lot of extended lines on it. The "T" in that, and the 'l's in "You will" -- extended letters that have extra lines to change the style and overall length of them....look closely.

Adding the rest of the pages enlarged -- look at each letter. Most letters altered -- everywhere there is a change in direction of a line, a pressure point, an added piece, is a disguise to the original letter.

Once you can start getting used to picking out where the alterations are to the letters, you will start to see...

Brilliant job! I can only enlarge once (is there a "tool" to enlarge ?) but even with only one enlargement I can see what you are talking about. The letters are altered, HENCE the sharpie. A sharpie let's one do this w/o it being obvious at normal size. A ballpoint wouldn't have worked so well for this technique. I had always wondered why a sharpie was used, as there were almost certainly normal ballpoints around the house, and most people would prefer a ballpoint.

 

[UKGuy]

Very unlikely. If it had been broken for some time wouldn't LHP have known? She denies it was broken earlier. She was down the basement doing laundry regularly. I could see it being broken for a few days w/o her knowing, but weeks, months? Really?



When do you figure the window was broken? How? And on what basis do you believe it was broken before that night?

You figure they lived with the bugs and mice, and the security issue, and the rain/snow, and the cold air? You believe that after the window was broken the glass was cleaned up, but not completely? They just left bits of glass laying there for "some time" despite it being a play area?





So FW simultaneously has seen the window close enough to have concerns about the dimensions being large enough for a man to get through, yet not well enough (grate, dirt on sill) to know that no one actually did come in that way?

He's looked up and seen the grate in place and asks himself if that hole is big enough for an intruder, but doesn't ask himself why the grate is still in place?

Same with the sill? He wonders if a man can get into the window well but doesn't ask himself why the dirt on the sill is very little disturbed?

If FW has looked at the window close enough to have doubts about it being big enough for an entry point, he's also been able to determine that no one actually did come in that way. So JR's story doesn't make the window as POE more plausible.

It's obvious that what JR is worried about is the fact that everyone who looks at the window knows no one came through there the night before. But they know the glass is broken, and they see bits of glass laying around. Unless JR can backdate the breakage, everyone will make the connection he doesn't want made - one of the Rs broke the window the night before to stage an intruder scenario, but the staging is incomplete.

Chrishope,

It's obvious that what JR is worried about is the fact that everyone who looks at the window knows no one came through there the night before. But they know the glass is broken, and they see bits of glass laying around. Unless JR can backdate the breakage, everyone will make the connection he doesn't want made - one of the Rs broke the window the night before to stage an intruder scenario, but the staging is incomplete.

JR is worried precisely because nobody has picked up on his staging. JR tells you he closed the window, Big Hint, get it?

.

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,


JR is worried precisely because nobody has picked up on his staging. JR tells you he closed the window, Big Hint, get it?

.

A window pane broken and glass still laying around and no one has picked up on the staging? Seriously? The problem is they have picked up on it - and it's incomplete. He needs desperately to explain the broken glass in conjunction with the grate in place, the web intact, and the dirt undisturbed.

He doesn't mention closing the window until the April '97 interview. By that time he's got LS working in his best interests. If he was concerned that no one picked up on his staging he certainly wouldn't close a window.

 

[learnin]

learnin,
Bingo! Thats the staging affect.

And for those who are skeptical, remember John telling us how he found the window open so he closed it!

Its not Johns story that the window has been lying open and broken since he climbed in through it.

John wants you to infer someone else has unlatched that window that night!

So prior to LS being given a prayer lesson, intruder entry via the window was on the R's version of events list.

simples.

for emphasis had to add a quote by JR himself, courtesy of midwest mama:




.

Precisely. It's what an attorney sometimes does in a courtroom. He'll lead a witness into the conclusion that the attorney wants.

John leads FW to the window, scratches his head and looks around at various items while he waits for FW to point out the obvious. When FW points out the obvious, John leads him a little further: "Damn it, I had to break the window when I locked myself out last summer." While FW is supposed to be thinking: "Well, there you go, broken window and John used this very window to gain access to a locked house, why not the kidnapper."

After this scenario is firmly in place, John leads FW to the body and the final conclusion. Kidnapper got skittish, killed JBR and made an exit out the window.