My crazy theory...

[UKGuy]

This is why I think Jillybeans' theory is worth serious consideration. If Patsy was truly having a psychotic episode, she wouldn't have consciously tried to conceal evidence in her mentally unstable state. It would also explain the ransom note; rather than being a red herring meant to distract police, it was the work of a person with a loose grip on reality who wasn't making sense to begin with. Perhaps John tried to quickly stage the scene (e.g., the flashlight) once he realized what had happened but before police arrived. Heck, Burke says in one of his interviews that his mom was "going psycho" that morning -- it may have been a more literal expression than he knew.

I think it could also account for why John didn't turn on Patsy, which some people here have hypothesized that he would have if he suspected her of the crime but was not involved in the murder itself. It may have been that he could dissociate the "real" Patsy from the psychotic Patsy who committed the crimes. It may have been that after losing two daughters, the idea of locking up his mentally ill wife while knowing that she was Stage 4 cancer survivor was too much for him to handle. As usual, MOO.

retrometro,
Sure Patsy might have had a psychotic episode, might be she was a psychopath, she had no problem dumping Burke for JonBenet when things never worked out?

Patsy described raising her children as a 'Project', I'm not sure if she applied 'milestones', but dumping Burke I'm certain led to resentment on his part.

Patsy left Burke and JonBenet to their own devices, so they would play about in their bedrooms. Careful thought should allow you to recognize this made JonBenet a virtual prisoner in her own house with pageants and shopping trips as her main escape?

None of JR, BR or PR needed to restrain JonBenet to make her compliant,i.e. she was no physical threat to any of them, e.g. her killer was no Ted Bundy!

So it looks as if JonBenet was injured in anger, possibly with the flashlight, with the rest being staging, applied by any or all of the remaining residents?

JR, BR and PR have left forensic markers in the wine-cellar, these markers should not be there if they were not involved.

So the bottom line is: the case could be PDI with JR helping out with the staging, yet Patsy retained enough sanity to compose the mother of all ransom notes, complete with french phrases, which no American criminal would ever use.

Patsy never changed out of her previous night's clothing, yet John did, same with Burke. Also JonBenet's pink pajama bottoms, worn the night before, are missing, these can be seen in her Christmas morning photos.

In one of these photos Burke makes an appearance wearing, from memory, Blue pajama bottoms, yet I have never seen any analysis of fibers from these pajama bottoms being matched with any fibers found on JonBenet, e.g. they might look dark/black in contrast with the background material, or JonBenet's thighs?

Since Burke wore those pajama bottoms the night before and he and JonBenet shared a bedroom, possibly a bed then fibers from his clothing should be on JonBenet's nightclothes, remember Patsy says she was trying to dress JonBenet for bed with the previous nights nightclothes. There have been no reports on this aspect made public, yet I'm certain the analysis was carried out as JR's shirt was identified as having contributed fibers to the wine-cellar crime-scene?

I wonder what Patsy would have thought about narrative theory being applied to the death of JonBenet, with her being a literature graduate, etc?

.

 

[Beltonian]

UKGuy, welcome back!

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy, welcome back!

Beltonian,
Thanks, what was meant to be a short break, meant once the virus arrived, I had little time for internet stuff.

 

[Beltonian]

I was thinking to myself - hope UKGuy is ok, long time no posts from him!

Did you get Covid?

 

[neesaki]

retrometro,
Sure Patsy might have had a psychotic episode, might be she was a psychopath, she had no problem dumping Burke for JonBenet when things never worked out?

Patsy described raising her children as a 'Project', I'm not sure if she applied 'milestones', but dumping Burke I'm certain led to resentment on his part.

Patsy left Burke and JonBenet to their own devices, so they would play about in their bedrooms. Careful thought should allow you to recognize this made JonBenet a virtual prisoner in her own house with pageants and shopping trips as her main escape?

None of JR, BR or PR needed to restrain JonBenet to make her compliant,i.e. she was no physical threat to any of them, e.g. her killer was no Ted Bundy!

So it looks as if JonBenet was injured in anger, possibly with the flashlight, with the rest being staging, applied by any or all of the remaining residents?

JR, BR and PR have left forensic markers in the wine-cellar, these markers should not be there if they were not involved.

So the bottom line is: the case could be PDI with JR helping out with the staging, yet Patsy retained enough sanity to compose the mother of all ransom notes, complete with french phrases, which no American criminal would ever use.

Patsy never changed out of her previous night's clothing, yet John did, same with Burke. Also JonBenet's pink pajama bottoms, worn the night before, are missing, these can be seen in her Christmas morning photos.

In one of these photos Burke makes an appearance wearing, from memory, Blue pajama bottoms, yet I have never seen any analysis of fibers from these pajama bottoms being matched with any fibers found on JonBenet, e.g. they might look dark/black in contrast with the background material, or JonBenet's thighs?

Since Burke wore those pajama bottoms the night before and he and JonBenet shared a bedroom, possibly a bed then fibers from his clothing should be on JonBenet's nightclothes, remember Patsy says she was trying to dress JonBenet for bed with the previous nights nightclothes. There have been no reports on this aspect made public, yet I'm certain the analysis was carried out as JR's shirt was identified as having contributed fibers to the wine-cellar crime-scene?

I wonder what Patsy would have thought about narrative theory being applied to the death of JonBenet, with her being a literature graduate, etc?

.

Burke and JonBenet slept in the same bedroom? I’ve never heard this before.

 

[UKGuy]

Burke and JonBenet slept in the same bedroom? I’ve never heard this before.

neesaki,

Boulder Police Department Patsy Interview , Excerpt

ST: Do you know which bed that Burke normally slept in, in his room. Was it the . . .

PR: First one in, the . . .

ST: Okay.

PR: Right as you go in the door.

ST: And if, on occasion, JonBenet would go sleep in Burke’s room would she get into the other bed.

PR: She’d be in, yeah.

ST: Okay. Um, what would cause that? That she got scared at night or . . .

PR: No, just, I mean, that happened very seldom and uh, I think, oh, I think one time when I reading to Burke and, she and Burke in Burke’s room and she feel asleep in that bed so I just let her sleep there or something, but I didn’t, you know, usually I’d get her back in her bed cause she would, occasionally wet the bed and her bed had a plastic wrap on it and that one didn’t so I . . .

ST: Move her to the other bed.

Patsy says one ponytail was normal, not two!

ST: Did JonBenet normally sleep in addition to her jewelry with any hair ties in her hair.

PR: Usually, uh, a rubberband.

ST: Pulled back into a single ponytail.

PR: Back, ponytail, yeah.

TT: Burke ever sleep over in her room at all? In the spare bed?

PR: A time or two.

TT: And she’d sleep in Burke’s room every once and a while too?

PR: Every once and while.

That's shorthand for regular.

According to the Bonita Papers (and Patsy) JonBenet slept in Burke's room Christmas Eve. The exact quote is in one of her interviews, she just says it out of the blue, probably to deflect.

From memory the National Enquirer reported this too. So it it is out there.

Bottom line is JonBenet and Burke were in and out of each others bedroom, sharing beds and suchlike, the housekeeper alleges she walked in on JonBenet and Burke under the sheets, with JonBenet telling her to "Go away" or words to that effect.

.

 

[UKGuy]

I was thinking to myself - hope UKGuy is ok, long time no posts from him!

Did you get Covid?

Beltonian,
Thankfully no Covid, but it looks like it will not be going away anytime soon, unless they find a vaccine it remains a killer!

Just dealing with family and work issues took up a lot of time, the internet did not seem so important, now that the virus seems to be receding I'm back browsing online.

.

 

[neesaki]

neesaki,

Boulder Police Department Patsy Interview , Excerpt


Patsy says one ponytail was normal, not two!




That's shorthand for regular.

According to the Bonita Papers (and Patsy) JonBenet slept in Burke's room Christmas Eve. The exact quote is in one of her interviews, she just says it out of the blue, probably to deflect.

From memory the National Enquirer reported this too. So it it is out there.

Bottom line is JonBenet and Burke were in and out of each others bedroom, sharing beds and suchlike, the housekeeper alleges she walked in on JonBenet and Burke under the sheets, with JonBenet telling her to "Go away" or words to that effect.

.

Oh ok, thank you very much for the clarification. I do now recall about the housekeeper walking in like that. There was so much strangeness going on in that house I can’t keep up with it.

 

[UKGuy]

Oh ok, thank you very much for the clarification. I do now recall about the housekeeper walking in like that. There was so much strangeness going on in that house I can’t keep up with it.

neesaki,

Yes so strange it was probably normal, there is quote in one of her interviews where Patsy states she is not a "Good Housewife", something to do with when JonBenet's pillowcase was usually washed, and Patsy's answer is basically that's the housekeepers job.

The takeaway is that Patsy knew full well what JonBenet and Burke were doing, and given JonBenet was definitely in therapy, get that 6-years old and seeing a therapist, this might be why the GJ hit her with child neglect charges.

That is she knew, some of her adult friends also knew as their children gossiped, and its this aspect Boulder residents do not want aired to this day!

.

 

[sloane7777]

Hello All! This is my first time posting on any forum about Jonbenet but I've been studying this case for years. I was in high school when this happened and I can still remember my shock and horror that this precious child was killed on Christmas. Now that I have children of my own, I look back at some of the interviews done by the Ramsey's and I can't understand their lack of emotion and, even more telling, their constant defense of themselves. Furthermore, I have had a very traumatic loss on a young person in my family and no one, I mean no one, in my family acted like they did. The medication excuse doesn't fly with me because I was also put on heavy medication and I still grieved. At the very least, I cried, I talked about my loved one that I lost suddenly, and I couldn't hear his name without breaking down for at least a year. I know people grieve differently, but these people seemed almost aloof, almost disassociated from what happened. Furthermore, I have heard that there may be a lot of evidence not released to the public. I don't think we truly know everything (not even close) having to do with this case and some of what we think we know is probably not correct.
Anyway, I would like to give my amateur theory and I would like to know what you all think. So, here goes...
#1- I believe Patsy is solely responsible for this murder. I do not believe it was an accident. I think it was premeditated murder perpetrated by a very sick person who was having delusions/psychosis. I think she had decided to send JB off to heaven on Christmas day. I do not believe anything was staged.
#2- I believe Patsy was also responsible for the present and past vaginal trauma. This happens more than people realize. Again, I think PR was probably very sick and having "episodes". Remember PR was hospitalized a couple of years before this due to psychological issues.
#3- John only realized what was going on when Patsy gave him the note. It was a coded, secret message to John. It displayed her contempt towards him and some inside messages, or hints, that we will never understand. John only kept with the charade in order to protect his mentally ill wife who he had neglected to find help for. Remember he always claimed that he felt responsible for the death. *Also, there is an older post on WS about all the similarities in the letter and in Patsy's favorite book, The Prime of Mrs. Jean Brodie. This is what actually started me researching this theory. (ex: She fed JB "happiness" before her death- "happiness" in the book is pineapples in cream)
#4- Remember the sign off Victory! S.B.T.C? I believe Patsy thought she now had victory over John, or perhaps over death itself. She had managed to send JB to heaven so that she will live on forever and will be with PR when she eventually succumbs to cancer. I also believe that Patsy had already decided the four things she would bury with her child. S= scarf, B= bracelet, T= tiara, C= cross. Each one of these things had meaning to Patsy. If you look at JB's injuries, they certainly match up with SBTC: A scarf represents strangulation, a Bracelet represents the wrist bindings, a tiara represents the head bash, and the cross represents the "punctures" (I believe the coroner had identified them as punctures and not stun gun marks). I know this out there, but remember the big cross that Patsy got from the Native Americans to help heal her cancer, I believe that the measurements from the bottom of the cross to one of the arms of the cross would be a very similar measurement to the 3mm puncture wounds found on JB. Look at the pictures and see what you all think.

I have a lot of circumstantial evidence and solid evidence (such as Patsy's fibers in the ligature, EVERYTHING used in the murder belonged to PR, PR's signature all over the murder), however, I definitely can't fit it all here. I'm just going to include a few more things about my crazy theory that might be important:

* Remember she gave her a bracelet with her name and the date "12-25-96". I think she knew that would be her daughter's death date.
*I also believe that JB's body was posed, like an angel on the wall. The wrist ligatures fit in with this perfectly. Others have stated this before and it would make a lot of sense. I believe she was then taken down and wrapped in a blanket.
* Patsy's cancer treatments were difficult for her (obviously). She may have been suffering from psychosis as a side effect from ovarian cancer (this is a real thing). It would be sad if she had been displaying symptoms and John did nothing to help his wife. Remember he was very busy and worked a lot. Maybe she had cried out for help and no one took it seriously? Remember the housekeeper had noticed major mood swings before the time of JB's death. I think PR was having some type of mental episode, killed her daughter, then possibly came back to reality and "found" the note. Perhaps she was off of her meds during the holidays and got back on them right after? Also, think about the 911 call from their house on the 23rd. Perhaps this had something to do with PRs erratic behavior. Who knows what may have gone on at that party or in the days leading up to the murder. Maybe everyone feels a bit responsible for not helping the woman.
* Many people close to the case think PR murdered her daughter. A firm hired to do a psychological profile on Patsy says that she was having delusions and phychosis. All of this seems to be a manic, yet premeditated, religious-fueled episode. IMO.
*Patsy frequently has said things such as, "well, now she's in a better place" and "she won't have to know the pain of having cancer." These are very odd statements from the parent of a dead child. This may be her giving us her motive.
* Perhaps after her episode(?) and now on meds, she didn't even realize that she was the one who did this. Maybe she started believing her own lie that an intruder did it.
I know most people will find this theory crazy, but to me, this is the only one that fits all of the evidence. Let me know what you all think!!

This actually happened with me and My grandmother who had pancreatic cancer ( as a matter of fact she and Patsy shared like personalities to the T ) but she was delusional about a scarf I'd brought back that I borrowed from her, she insisted that it wasn't the same scarf and got downright homicidal it was so out of the blue and scared me really badly it was about a week after the scarf incident we found out she had cancer , the Dr. explained it could get worse and to prep the house ( hide guns , knives and scissors ) This could have easily happened I'm still in the BDI camp but this motive I agree with!!!!

 

[Jillybeans82]

I want to thank all of you for your replies to my post.
Yeah, I agree that there were a lot of strange things going on in that home. Nothing would really surprise me about the family at this point.

 

[wonderllama]

In reference to the SBTC thing...I really struggle with ANY attempts to explain what it means because it just reeks of confirmation bias.

I think the family did it, no issues there, but having said that, 99% of us here think that and so we are trying to fit SBTC into our version of the story so that it makes sense.

Why else would we be looking at bible verses to try and fit it into our theories.

There are so many other clues and bits of evidence that point to the family without needing to fit something else into the already confused jigsaw puzzle.

I know we have a big thread on SBTC, but for me, it's some bloody tenuous "clue".

 

[fr brown]

In reference to the SBTC thing...I really struggle with ANY attempts to explain what it means because it just reeks of confirmation bias.

I think the family did it, no issues there, but having said that, 99% of us here think that and so we are trying to fit SBTC into our version of the story so that it makes sense.

Why else would we be looking at bible verses to try and fit it into our theories.

There are so many other clues and bits of evidence that point to the family without needing to fit something else into the already confused jigsaw puzzle.

I know we have a big thread on SBTC, but for me, it's some bloody tenuous "clue".

You misunderstand the argument. I suspect you are assuming that the argument is that Patsy wanted to use the letters SBTC for some reason and went looking for them in the Bible. That would be impossible. It's the other way around. Bible first, signoff second.

Foster wasn't combing the Bible for "SBTC"; he noticed that the Bible was opened to a psalm whose first four lines started with a C, a T, a B, and an S. He checked to see how often adjacent lines or words started with these letters, backwards or forwards. Nowhere else in that Bible does that occur. Their rarity isn't why Patsy picked those letters, of course. It just means that it's very unlikely that the Bible was open to that psalm by chance. Probability theory.

There's no reason to assume that Patsy attributed any significance to SBTC. She may have, but I suspect she just found them striking; those initial letters really jump out of the page. Or maybe she thought SBTC sounded like a foreign faction. I suggest you go look at the thread and post I referenced and see what you think.

Rather than trying to fit it into my "Patsy did it" theory, I realize that an intruder could have plucked those letters out of an open Bible (or opened it himself since it was bookmarked there). The problem is that neither Ramsey has ever suggested that as a possibility. In fact, nobody on the Ramsey team has ever mentioned Psalm 35 and its relationship to SBTC. They usually take every opportunity to ridicule Don Foster. Their silence speaks volumes.

 

[UKGuy]

You misunderstand the argument. I suspect you are assuming that the argument is that Patsy wanted to use the letters SBTC for some reason and went looking for them in the Bible. That would be impossible. It's the other way around. Bible first, signoff second.

Foster wasn't combing the Bible for "SBTC"; he noticed that the Bible was opened to a psalm whose first four lines started with a C, a T, a B, and an S. He checked to see how often adjacent lines or words started with these letters, backwards or forwards. Nowhere else in that Bible does that occur. Their rarity isn't why Patsy picked those letters, of course. It just means that it's very unlikely that the Bible was open to that psalm by chance. Probability theory.

There's no reason to assume that Patsy attributed any significance to SBTC. She may have, but I suspect she just found them striking; those initial letters really jump out of the page. Or maybe she thought SBTC sounded like a foreign faction. I suggest you go look at the thread and post I referenced and see what you think.

Rather than trying to fit it into my "Patsy did it" theory, I realize that an intruder could have plucked those letters out of an open Bible (or opened it himself since it was bookmarked there). The problem is that neither Ramsey has ever suggested that as a possibility. In fact, nobody on the Ramsey team has ever mentioned Psalm 35 and its relationship to SBTC. They usually take every opportunity to ridicule Don Foster. Their silence speaks volumes.

fr brown,

Foster wasn't combing the Bible for "SBTC"; he noticed that the Bible was opened to a psalm whose first four lines started with a C, a T, a B, and an S.

The approximate probability will be 1 divided by the number of pages.

Patsy may have authored the RN with a religious fundamentalist Foreign Faction in mind, think Koresh ...

SBTC might simply be staged context for the ransom note, precisely to encourage religious interpretation, and hence not any domestic theories employing SBTC?

.

 

[wonderllama]

You misunderstand the argument. I suspect you are assuming that the argument is that Patsy wanted to use the letters SBTC for some reason and went looking for them in the Bible. That would be impossible. It's the other way around. Bible first, signoff second.

Foster wasn't combing the Bible for "SBTC"; he noticed that the Bible was opened to a psalm whose first four lines started with a C, a T, a B, and an S. He checked to see how often adjacent lines or words started with these letters, backwards or forwards. Nowhere else in that Bible does that occur. Their rarity isn't why Patsy picked those letters, of course. It just means that it's very unlikely that the Bible was open to that psalm by chance. Probability theory.

There's no reason to assume that Patsy attributed any significance to SBTC. She may have, but I suspect she just found them striking; those initial letters really jump out of the page. Or maybe she thought SBTC sounded like a foreign faction. I suggest you go look at the thread and post I referenced and see what you think.

Rather than trying to fit it into my "Patsy did it" theory, I realize that an intruder could have plucked those letters out of an open Bible (or opened it himself since it was bookmarked there). The problem is that neither Ramsey has ever suggested that as a possibility. In fact, nobody on the Ramsey team has ever mentioned Psalm 35 and its relationship to SBTC. They usually take every opportunity to ridicule Don Foster. Their silence speaks volumes.

I promise I've read a lot on this case

I certainly wouldn't pay much attention to the Ramsey's when it comes to giving a character witness on anyone.

SBTC = Red Herring

And sure, I'm guessing, but after 24 years, if we're still taking a stab at what it could stand for and thinking it is significant, we're either wasting our time or kidding ourselves on its importance.

 

[fr brown]

I promise I've read a lot on this case

I certainly wouldn't pay much attention to the Ramsey's when it comes to giving a character witness on anyone.

SBTC = Red Herring

And sure, I'm guessing, but after 24 years, if we're still taking a stab at what it could stand for and thinking it is significant, we're either wasting our time or kidding ourselves on its importance.

<modsnip>

If the Bible had been closed, if the ribbon bookmark had been elsewhere, "SBTC" in Psalm 35 would have no significance at all.

<modsnip> the real question is: why was the Bible left open there in that obvious way? It was striking enough that the crime scene photographer took a close-up photo of it. We have a partial answer in Patsy's interview responses. She acts like she's not sure what she's looking at, but she thinks it looks like a Bible. "Are there different kinds of Bibles?" she asks. But she also says that they have lots of Bibles so is she saying those Bibles might all be copies of the same one? Anyway, she says, she doesn't read that one (even though it was a wedding present and sits next to her bedroom on a desk with a view of the Flatirons and it's a cool Bible, full of really interesting information for Bible nerds like her). She reads a "red one." John, on the other hand, sits at that desk and reads that Bible a lot. Oddly, Patsy never asks why the police are asking all these questions about this Bible. I would be asking the police if they had found something in that Bible.

So why did she leave it open there like that with the ribbon bookmark neatly draped over the page? I can only speculate about that. Psalm 35 is a twin to her special psalm, Psalm 57, the one God used to speak to her before her first cancer treatment (as she tells us in DOI and John tells us in TOSOS). When I was reading Psalm 57, I found that same Psalm 35 story about lions who dig pits and spread nets over them to catch pursuers, but who fall into those pits themselves. I always envision a roadrunner handing the lion an anvil when I read this in Psalm 35 (beep, beep). Sure enough, in the NIV Study Bible, Psalm 57 contains cross-references to Psalm 35.

If I thought God had saved my life with a particular psalm, I would read that psalm a lot. I would also follow the cross-references. It's likely that Patsy had perused Psalm 35 in the NIV Study Bible before December 25, 1996. But why was it open there? I don't think anymore that Patsy was doing it for a religious reason. I mean, she might use "SBTC" for a personal reason, but she'd put the bookmark elsewhere and close the Bible. She's not stupid.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I think that John may have talked to someone about Psalm 57 and how God had sent Patsy a message through it promising to save her life. Patsy, I wager, knew John had done this. At some point, if she needed to, she would spring the trap and point out the similarities between Psalm 57 and Psalm 35. If she was lucky, someone would have told the police about having that conversation with John. She's already emphasized that only John read that Bible and she knows that the police think Psalm 35 is significant. She was setting John up, but she needed to do it in such a way that he wouldn't realize it until it was too late.

 

[fr brown]

<modsnip> the real question is: why was the Bible left open there in that obvious way? It was striking enough that the crime scene photographer took a close-up photo of it. We have a partial answer in Patsy's interview responses. She acts like she's not sure what she's looking at, but she thinks it looks like a Bible. "Are there different kinds of Bibles?" she asks. But she also says that they have lots of Bibles so is she saying those Bibles might all be copies of the same one? Anyway, she says, she doesn't read that one (even though it was a wedding present and sits next to her bedroom on a desk with a view of the Flatirons and it's a cool Bible, full of really interesting information for Bible nerds like her). She reads a "red one." John, on the other hand, sits at that desk and reads that Bible a lot. Oddly, Patsy never asks why the police are asking all these questions about this Bible. I would be asking the police if they had found something in that Bible.

So why did she leave it open there like that with the ribbon bookmark neatly draped over the page? I can only speculate about that. Psalm 35 is a twin to her special psalm, Psalm 57, the one God used to speak to her before her first cancer treatment (as she tells us in DOI and John tells us in TOSOS). When I was reading Psalm 57, I found that same Psalm 35 story about lions who dig pits and spread nets over them to catch pursuers, but who fall into those pits themselves. I always envision a roadrunner handing the lion an anvil when I read this in Psalm 35 (beep, beep). Sure enough, in the NIV Study Bible, Psalm 57 contains cross-references to Psalm 35.

If I thought God had saved my life with a particular psalm, I would read that psalm a lot. I would also follow the cross-references. It's likely that Patsy had perused Psalm 35 in the NIV Study Bible before December 25, 1996. But why was it open there? I don't think anymore that Patsy was doing it for a religious reason. I mean, she might use "SBTC" for a personal reason, but she'd put the bookmark elsewhere and close the Bible. She's not stupid.

I'm going out on a limb here, but I think that John may have talked to someone about Psalm 57 and how God had sent Patsy a message through it promising to save her life. Patsy, I wager, knew John had done this. At some point, if she needed to, she would spring the trap and point out the similarities between Psalm 57 and Psalm 35. If she was lucky, someone would have told the police about having that conversation with John. She's already emphasized that only John read that Bible and she knows that the police think Psalm 35 is significant. She was setting John up, but she needed to do it in such a way that he wouldn't realize it until it was too late.

So I'm taking it as a given that it's not a coincidence that the ransom note was signed S.B.T.C and the Bible was open to the only psalm in a 2000-page Bible that had contiguous lines starting with those letters. (I've opened my copy at random 50 times in a row and I've never opened it to Psalm 35. Then I got bored. So there's that. It wasn't a coincidence.)

But why leave the Bible conspicuously open there? Why not just make sure the bookmark is in Deuteronomy or something and close the book? Nobody's ever going to find SBTC in that Bible unless they do an electronic search. Even then, I think, it would be hard because you wouldn't know what to look for. So Patsy left it open there to draw attention. I hypothesize that it was part of framing John, along with his bonus and his expressions and movies he's watched and talked about and his club, and the fibers from his wool shirt and the conspicuously displayed, wiped flashlight. And probably other things which we haven't picked up on because they were too subtle. (Oh yeah, there's one other thing I know about....)

I think Patsy must have come up with this over a period of time; she probably started thinking about it in the summer. But what might have inspired this weird Bible business? Is there something else like it out there? That's when Agatha Christie's The A.B.C. Murders popped into my head. In that book, Poirot receives letters signed "A.B.C." which foretell crimes. Someone named Ascher gets killed in Andover, someone named Barnard in Bexhill, and someone named Clarke in Churston. Next to each victim is an ABC Rail Guide. The police get a tip that a traveling salesman with black-outs has been in the vicinity of each crime. There's an unopened box of ABC Rail Guides and other incriminating evidence when his apartment is searched, but the twist is that the traveling salesman has been framed by some "random stranger" he's met, who is an heir to one of the victims.

Not a perfect parallel, but close enough to have inspired. It seems like Patsy was a Christie fan. She had a Murder on the Orient Express poster in her basement.

 

[fr brown]

So I'm taking it as a given that it's not a coincidence that the ransom note was signed S.B.T.C and the Bible was open to the only psalm in a 2000-page Bible that had contiguous lines starting with those letters. (I've opened my copy at random 50 times in a row and I've never opened it to Psalm 35. Then I got bored. So there's that. It wasn't a coincidence.)

But why leave the Bible conspicuously open there? Why not just make sure the bookmark is in Deuteronomy or something and close the book? Nobody's ever going to find SBTC in that Bible unless they do an electronic search. Even then, I think, it would be hard because you wouldn't know what to look for. So Patsy left it open there to draw attention. I hypothesize that it was part of framing John, along with his bonus and his expressions and movies he's watched and talked about and his club, and the fibers from his wool shirt and the conspicuously displayed, wiped flashlight. And probably other things which we haven't picked up on because they were too subtle. (Oh yeah, there's one other thing I know about....)

I think Patsy must have come up with this over a period of time; she probably started thinking about it in the summer. But what might have inspired this weird Bible business? Is there something else like it out there? That's when Agatha Christie's The A.B.C. Murders popped into my head. In that book, Poirot receives letters signed "A.B.C." which foretell crimes. Someone named Ascher gets killed in Andover, someone named Barnard in Bexhill, and someone named Clarke in Churston. Next to each victim is an ABC Rail Guide. The police get a tip that a traveling salesman with black-outs has been in the vicinity of each crime. There's an unopened box of ABC Rail Guides and other incriminating evidence when his apartment is searched, but the twist is that the traveling salesman has been framed by some "random stranger" he's met, who is an heir to one of the victims.

Not a perfect parallel, but close enough to have inspired. It seems like Patsy was a Christie fan. She had a Murder on the Orient Express poster in her basement.

I forgot the open Webster's New Collegiate Dictionary with the page corner folded up to point to "incest." That was in the first floor study. Another big open book, 1500+ pages.

Add that to the open Bible, the flashlight, the fibers from John's shirt, the ransom note, the one other thing, and any other clues Patsy left that were too subtle for ordinary humans to pick up on.

 

[fr brown]

The only book that mentions Psalm 35 and SBTC is Steve Thomas' JonBenet. And the only place to see what Psalm 35 looks like in the Ramsey Bible is the thread and post on FFJ I mentioned earlier in this thread.

Looking at that is the only way to know what I'm talking about.

 

[fr brown]

The only book that mentions Psalm 35 and SBTC is Steve Thomas' JonBenet. And the only place to see what Psalm 35 looks like in the Ramsey Bible is the thread and post on FFJ I mentioned earlier in this thread.

Looking at that is the only way to know what I'm talking about.

That thread and post: post #403 on the FFJ thread "John Ramsey's New Book -- The Other Side of Suffering." The included photo is from fr brown's NIV Study Bible, the same Bible that was open on the 3rd floor desk in the alcove off the Ramseys' bedroom.