Literal hypothetical scenario

[tuppence]

IMO, that's correct. That's the effect the note had. It delayed the finding of JonBenet. Combine that with the "wait for my call or we'll behead her" thing and you have a complete multi-purpose note. Its placement essentially suppressed finding JonBenet, and its content suppressed calling the police.

sorry but I think in a normal household the note would not have delayed the finding of the body much at all. Certainly not enough to justify all the time spent writing it. Most parents would quickly look everywhere since its about the only thing they could do while waiting for the police.

Also If I was worried about getting caught that thing would be short and sweet. oh and I wouldn't have spent all that time staging her too.

 

[Thinkoflaura]

Hypothetically, its the middle of the night, you are member of a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction that does not respect the U.S., and for whatever reason, you just killed a 6 year old in her parents' Colorado home. What is on your mind?

Following your post-crime rules, if I had committed the murder I would do the following:
1) GET OUT of the house with the body without being seen.

2) DUMP THE BODY FAR AWAY from the crimescene. Disposing of the body where it will never be found or will take many months to find, thus leading to much decomposition. CO hills would make great dumping places. Thus, it would be considered a kidnapping gone bad forever probably. A missing beautiful child, think of the mental anguish to the family.. always wondering who did it, where they went, and IF THEY WOULD RETURN FOR ANOTHER FAMILY MEMBER.. Security everywhere, searching the world for a kidnapper/ killer.

3) Leave as little evidence behind as possible, including no handwriting.

4) Leave the US and get back to my home country or seek asylum in a country which had very limited extradition to the USA and had ties to my home country.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Following your post-crime rules, if I had committed the murder I would do the following:
1) GET OUT of the house with the body without being seen.

2) DUMP THE BODY FAR AWAY from the crimescene. Disposing of the body where it will never be found or will take many months to find, thus leading to much decomposition. CO hills would make great dumping places. Thus, it would be considered a kidnapping gone bad forever probably. A missing beautiful child, think of the mental anguish to the family.. always wondering who did it, where they went, and IF THEY WOULD RETURN FOR ANOTHER FAMILY MEMBER.. Security everywhere, searching the world for a kidnapper/ killer.

3) Leave as little evidence behind as possible, including no handwriting.

4) Leave the US and get back to my home country or seek asylum in a country which had very limited extradition to the USA and had ties to my home country.

Doesn't dumping the body mean you have to take it with you? Bad idea.

Aren't you a member of a foreign faction, and don't really care if you leave a big handwriting sample?

 

[tipper]

Hypothetically, its the middle of the night, you are member of a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction that does not respect the U.S., and for whatever reason, you just killed a 6 year old in her parents' Colorado home. What is on your mind?

Okay, I'll play.

I had a great plan and x unfortunately happened to screw it up. I peal out of there through the door I came in, not stopping to pick up the note (I carried her down the front stairs). I know they can't connect me to the paper and pen I wrote the note with (while they were gone) and there is no way for them to connect me to the handwriting. But I'm still freaked and am trying to think of a plausible way to hightail it out of town. However, over the next two news cycles it becomes clear that the parents have become the prime suspects. Big joke! The BPD has become my cover! Who'd have thought it... Over the next 9 years I spend a lot of time at Websleuths following the case. I love reading all the poster's theories. Some have come close but most have it 'way wrong. I feel pretty safe.

 

[Thinkoflaura]

Doesn't dumping the body mean you have to take it with you? Bad idea.

Aren't you a member of a foreign faction, and don't really care if you leave a big handwriting sample?

First mistake in this scenario is the absence of a traditional weapon being used- where's the gun or at least a large knife? If the security system had been activated, if the dog had been in the house, if anyone had been awake, chances are, I would have needed the gun or knife.

Taking a 45 pound child out of a house in the middle of the night may seem like a bad idea to you but not to me. IF the kidnapping note had already been written, which you didn't state in the initial hypothesis, but I guess it would have had to be for the " foreign faction" to be called such, I would have treated it as a kidnapping.

I think it can be successfully argued by forensics that there is evidence of her being in rooms leading to or ajacent to the wine cellar room indicating injury, like the urine release at the time of death, and possibly other body fluids, but I doubt they could prove death without her body, because there was not enough blood or other proof of loss of life, so a kidnapping would have worked to the intruder's advantage.

Dumping the body in a very remote location would have given me time to get far away from the crimescene and out of the country, and I could watch the show unfold. The parental agony of a kidnapped child would be prolonged and would add to my sense of " victory".

IF your foreign intruder got into the house and wrote a hugely long ransom note, I would say the person didn't have leaving or being caught on his or her mind, so what's a tiny child going to hinder in the way of escape?

There were 2 children sleeping in their beds- why not slit each of their throats as they slept, then looked for the person I really hated- John Ramsey and killed him in his bed? The entire family could have been wiped out in less than 10 minutes. Why perpetrate an elaborate staged scene with blankets wrapped around the body, a nightgown, a bowl of pineapple, etc?

My thoughts are and always have been that an intruder, foreign or domestic, would not have gone through the maze of the house, straight to JonBenet's room, carried her to the room which was not known to the housekeeper, and choked her, penetrated her vagina with a broken paintbrush, and then administered a terrifically forceful head blow. It's overkill.
So is the staging.

 

[Lacy Wood]

I never said 'the motive' either. I said 'evident motive.'

Holdontoyourhat: Please check your words in your 6:17 post:

"IMO, the only evident motive in this case is the "literal motive" found in the ransom note." (Posted by Holdontoyourhat 6:17PM today/Monday)

These are the words you expressed. I agree you didn't say "the motive" and you actually said "the only evident motive" in that statement. My point was about using the note as the basis to suggest motive. I suggest what virtually all law enforcment and most others have concluded: The note should not be taken seriously. It had a purpose other than the words and thoughts expressed. Certainly, you are free to think differently.

(I will leave the last word for you as this thread seems a bit weird.)

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I suggest what virtually all law enforcment and most others have concluded: The note should not be taken seriously. It had a purpose other than the words and thoughts expressed. Certainly, you are free to think differently.

With all due respect, note that 'virtually all law enforcement and most others' have not apparently produced a viable suspect in this case.

I checked on the 'literal motive' and found out something not too surprising: there are in fact many foreign factions that don't like the US, are morally against personal wealth-building, and sometimes kill in the name of their belief.

The driving emotions under the literal motive would be hatred and envy. While there may be alterior motives involved in the murder, the author wanted the reader to associate wealth ("you're not the only fat cat") with punishment ("so killing wont be difficult").

 

[IrishMist]

"We respect your business, but not the country it serves."

Hatred and envy, and yet "they" respect his business?

One of the problems I see with all of this is that the Ramsey's aren't all that. THEY might of thought they were, but, really, all they were were big fish in a little pond.

I have a real hard time seeing a foreign faction going through that much trouble to pick the R's out of all the people they would have had to choose from.

That egotism is one of the (many) reasons that I suspect the parents wrote the note.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

"We respect your business, but not the country it serves."

Hatred and envy, and yet "they" respect his business?

One of the problems I see with all of this is that the Ramsey's aren't all that. THEY might of thought they were, but, really, all they were were big fish in a little pond.

I have a real hard time seeing a foreign faction going through that much trouble to pick the R's out of all the people they would have had to choose from.

That egotism is one of the (many) reasons that I suspect the parents wrote the note.

"You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult."

This sentence raises more questions and could provide more answers than any other. With this sentence, the author expressed disapproval of personal wealth. The author then basically stated that killing people in the name of this belief would be easy.

This sentence is not just an expression that frowns a little bit on rich people. I read it to be a threat to kill based on a philosophical idea or some idea of social justice.

This clearly gives the murder an attribute of a hate crime directed squarly at the affluent.

 

[Voice of Reason]

"You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult."

This sentence raises more questions and could provide more answers than any other. With this sentence, the author expressed disapproval of personal wealth. The author then basically stated that killing people in the name of this belief would be easy.

This sentence is not just an expression that frowns a little bit on rich people. I read it to be a threat to kill based on a philosophical idea or some idea of social justice.

This clearly gives the murder an attribute of a hate crime directed squarly at the affluent.

That's one way to look at it. To me, it sounds like something straight out of a movie. That's a tough-guy line. "Don't think you're such a hot shot. I could kill you, and I wouldn't even blink."

 

[Lesleegp]

Let me say I am not trying to be a smart alec here. I really need clarification. How can you have a literal hypothetical scenario? Aren't those two words opposites to an extent?

 

[Jayelles]

Let me say I am not trying to be a smart alec here. I really need clarification. How can you have a literal hypothetical scenario? Aren't those two words opposites to an extent?

I see where you are coming from, but I think the adjective "literal" is being applied to "hypothetical scenario" and not just to "scenario".

Kind of like a "small grand piano" rather than a "small, grand piano".

 

[IrishMist]

"You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult."

This sentence raises more questions and could provide more answers than any other. With this sentence, the author expressed disapproval of personal wealth. The author then basically stated that killing people in the name of this belief would be easy.

This sentence is not just an expression that frowns a little bit on rich people. I read it to be a threat to kill based on a philosophical idea or some idea of social justice.

This clearly gives the murder an attribute of a hate crime directed squarly at the affluent.

My point being that maybe the Ramsey's thought they were big shots, big enough that that would be a good reason for a "bad guy" to target them...
But in reality, there are so many more people with so much more money...

Big fish in a small pond. That's all they were.

 

[Toltec]

David Westerfield entered through an unlocked garage door and walked upstairs to Danielle's room while the family slept.

My theory is that he punched her in the mouth (knocking her teeth out) rendering her unconscious and then carrying her to his home between 2:30 - 3:00am.

He did not leave any evidence behind.

Why couldn't this foreign-faction/kidnappers do the same?

If this was a group of individuals that represented a foreign faction...then why only ONE participate in this murder of JonBenet?

Foreigners do not consider FEMALES as important as MALES. If they really were serious about kidnapping for ransom...they would have taken Burke.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

That's one way to look at it. To me, it sounds like something straight out of a movie. That's a tough-guy line. "Don't think you're such a hot shot. I could kill you, and I wouldn't even blink."

More like out of some socialist diatribe on western capitalism. 'Fat cat' aka 'capitalist pig'. Didn't the author end the note with the revolutionary term "Victory!"?