Ned's Final Theory-Lou Smit are you still reading here?

[jubie]

Jubie, if your daughter wet the bed, would you have changed the sheets, but cluttered it back up with dirty clothes, misplacing the pillow at the end of bed? This woman would have been frantic, but I can't imagine her returning things that "don't belong" especailly if she were staging. JB's room to me does not appear to be "staged" The basement, train room, and wine cellar has staging written all over it. I don't believe JB wet the bed that night

Actually my daughter does but we use Goodnights as it really is a matter of growing out of bedwetting so we don't have sheet issues so much.

Good points Ned, you're right. Thanks for the reminder about the condition of her bed.


Jubie

 

[jubie]

Why do you take the word of FW or Officer French(was he a detective?)One is a possible suspect who looked in the body room and found nothing and the other is the cop who missed the body in the first place. You take your facts from strange places which would get torn up in court.

John has lied again and again. Where has FW lied? The body was missed the first time because she was too far back in the room, that is until John moved her and discovered her just before he flicked on the light.

 

[Chrishope]

Why do you take the word of FW or Officer French(was he a detective?)One is a possible suspect who looked in the body room and found nothing and the other is the cop who missed the body in the first place. You take your facts from strange places which would get torn up in court.

Is FW a suspect by any detective not being payed by the Rs? The only people I know who consider him a suspect are those who absolutely refuse to believe it's possible the Rs killed their child.

French missed the body because he simply never opened the door. I'm not excusing him, it was a sloppy job of searching, but it's not as if he'd walked by her and didn't see her. It's not even as if he'd looked in the room and didn't see her.

It strikes me as odd that two people went into the basement shortly after the 911 call but neither mentions a chair blocking a door to the room both of them searched. I think it's JR's story that would get torn up.

 

[lovebites]

Imo for some reason John Ramsey must have gotten cold feet which led him to revise his staging plans. I think he initially had indeed opened the window to provide a "point of entry" for the mythical intruder. And maybe he then became afraid his fingerprints might be found on the window handle and implicate him, which is why he came up with the story of "finding the window open and then closing it".

Why would John be afraid that his prints would be found on a window in his own home? Although I have absolutely no aversion to RDI theories, it just doesn't make sense that the resident of a home would be afraid that their prints would be found anywhere in the house let alone on a window.

 

[coloradokares]

Why do you take the word of FW or Officer French(was he a detective?)One is a possible suspect who looked in the body room and found nothing and the other is the cop who missed the body in the first place. You take your facts from strange places which would get torn up in court.

Now you call an officer called at random not reliable?!?!? Gosh sakes we are taking the police's word...thats where we all went wrong. I mean we should take the word of whose fibers were found in the victims crotch and thats prudent. And officer and a friend rousted out of bed to come to the aid of friends. Nah they are liars and not trustworthy. Big brother and double speak has arrived my co sluethers.

 

[Nehemiah]

I looked for Mark Fuhrman's opinion and he said he thought it was intentional as well.

Where did you find his opinion? Would you mind to post a link? I've always wanted him to look into this case.

 

[BBB167893]

Fuhrman's made it clear he thinks it was an inside job. But I'm not aware of his "intentional" comments.

He may as well have said John, this is just a formality, we'll have this done in no time. I believe you are innocent and I am running this interview.

He practically did.

Lou Smit just does not believe they had anything to do with it and as S. Thomas said, LS had formed a close relationship with them when he should not have. His wife was going through cancer treatments at the same time as Patsy and he could relate to that. He probably is a very good detective. Just not in this case. IMO I mean I have never heard him address the inconsistencies in this case at all.

It's WORSE than that. I know of at least three different occasions where he refused to hear the opinions of other experts.

I think it was unprofessional of Smit not to be objective in this case.ST was open to anyone being guilty,but Smit allowed the R's to charm him over and decided they couldn't possibly be guilty(yea,and all little old ladies are nice, too @@)..but this is nothing more than the manipulativeness that mentally ill ppl tend to possess..the power and wit to charm the heck off of anyone they chose,when it's imperative they do so to save themselves.It's like this...from their point of view,they have no choice but to appear kind and normal and to use undue influence over ppl to get to the end result of what they want.(ST recognized it when he interveiwed PR).

We've all seen it.

 

[JMO8778]

http://www.whns.com/Global/story.asp?S=5290090

I hope this link works ! Would someone mind finding the research that was done on the stun gun?I tried to post that earlier and it didn't go where it was supposed to.
Anyway,here's what Fuhrman said,(this was in reference to the Karr fiasco when it was going on)just in case this doesn't work(or, you can google it yourself):

"I don't see much credibility at all",Mark Furhman,a former Los Angles police dept. homicide detective who had corresponded with some officers involved in the investigation,told FOX news."You'd think the killer could at least get right some of the details of the crime ...[and it] was not accidental,in fact,it was quite intentional".

(bold emphasis done by me).
(after testing it...the link goes to the main page,but it works if you type the address in)

something else said about JB's murder,bottom,same page:
Karr's description of the case as an accident also rang false to experts.
"It's hard to imagine a more intentional,deliberate murder",said Craig Silverman,a former Denver prosecutor,referring to JonBenet's skull fracture and strangulation.
"This has always been a case of deliberate murder".

 

[JMO8778]

Imo for some reason John Ramsey must have gotten cold feet which led him to revise his staging plans. I think he initially had indeed opened the window to provide a "point of entry" for the mythical intruder. And maybe he then became afraid his fingerprints might be found on the window handle and implicate him, which is why he came up with the story of "finding the window open and then closing it".

Why would John be afraid that his prints would be found on a window in his own home? Although I have absolutely no aversion to RDI theories, it just doesn't make sense that the resident of a home would be afraid that their prints would be found anywhere in the house let alone on a window.

I'm guessing under the stress of it all,he was overconcerned about his prints being found,but maybe with good reason ,as they would have been fresh.

 

[JMO8778]

We've all seen it.

I don't mean to reiterate then.I wish I could have posted and read more 10 yrs ago when this case first started,but back then I had 2 little kids and didn't have the time.The main thing that stuck out in my mind then was that ridiculous rambling ransom note,as well as the fact the R's weren't angry at the killer...that was just too strange and unbelievable.I also knew foreigners don't spell all that poorly,they usually just tend to get the verbs and plurals wrong,and the RN didn't reflect that in any way.If Karr had indeed written it,I bet he would have done a much more convincing job,since he was more well-traveled than the R's were.

 

[UKGuy]

Sorry,that was misleading the way I said it.I didn't mean up as in over her head,I meant up as in above her head, but level with the rest of her body,as if she were lying on a bed and her arms were tied or looped around the bedpost,yet level with the rest of her body.Because one thing that doesn't make sense to me(and I know ST had to leave out a few things so as not to totally give away the case, at least that's the way the book reads in a few areas),anyway,he says PR tied JB's hands in front,not behind,or else her arms would not have been in that overhead position when she was found.He makes it sound as if her hands were tied in front,level with her waist or so.Yet,she was found with them above her head.Did I read this wrong,or was there a 2nd staging,this time with her arms moved to above her head?If so, then obvioulsy this would have to have been b/f rigor mortis set in.
I thought maybe with the loops on the ends,they could have revised the staging to or from JB's arms being looped around something.(which was blacked out on the reports,or done b/f the last restaging).

JMO8778,
Rather than being the victim of a rage attack in the bathroom, JonBenet may have been lying on a bed.

She recieved multiple injuries, which display an intentionality, rather than a mindless assault, which has a uniformity surrounding its consequences e.g. black eyes, swoolen lips etc.

If JonBenet's hands had previously been tied to something then its likely some evidence would have been left of this, particularly on her wrists, but there are none.

I prefer to explain her raised ams as a defence mechanism against the blows that were landing on either side of her head, for those that adopt the head blow first theory, they should accept there was not one but many blows, and assuming this is correct, it is likely JonBenet would have been lying face down on a bed, or a couch etc, with her hands and arms around her head, attempting to ward off the blows?

One problem with this theory is that JonBenet's attacker continued with a manual strangulation, a ligature strangulation, and as per the unexplained marks on her body, usually wished away as stun gun markings, its likely JonBenet's body was whacked with some object, as she lay supine, arms around her head, with her attacker concentrating on hitting her body? Its not the severity, or simply the number, its the different types of assault.

Her attacker, whichever way you wish to sequence events, decided on different methods of assault, imo that cannot be explained by an irrational rage? e.g. she has abrasions and contusions on the front of her neck, the sides of her head, and a fissured fracture on the back of her head. I understand that the direction of the blow to the skull can be forensically determined from the resulting fissure pattern.

Then as per the lividity and her raised arms she was left lying there for an extended period of time!

Now any rage theorist cannot argue that JonBenet's killer did not know she was dead, if so, then I'm reminded here somewhat of the Monty Python dead parrot comedy sketch.

But at some point her killer returned to remove some evidence, and stage a crime-scene. Later this was revised to become the wine-cellar crime-scene.

I remember one poster who never got it when I suggested JonBenet was not being hidden in the wine-cellar because it was being staged e.g. apart from her barbie, the forensic evidence from the paint-tote tells you that this crime-scene goes beyond simply hiding a corpse!

Is it safe to assume that JonBenet was redressed and had her hair restyled upstairs, possibly encompassing a bedroom staging of some sort? Its difficult to imagine all this occurring down in the basement?

So there were a minimum of two different stagings, one that, if nothing else, cleans-up the upstairs crime-scene returning it to some kind of domestic banality, and the downstairs crime-scene which contains JonBenet's corpse wrapped in blankets, minus her barbie gown.

All the crime-scene photographs were taken long after JonBenet's corpse was discovered in the wine-cellar. The signifigance of this is that nobody knows what the original status of any household items was prior to the multiple searches, conducted by friends and law enforcement.

The chair blocking the door was not the only item to do so, there were other miscellaneous items, various household detritus, randomly placed in front of the door, one of which was the chair, which most people would recognize as actually being a small wooden stool, so its possible that others may have stepped over it, moved it aside, whatever, who knows, prior to the photographs being taken, just who did what with the chair?



.

 

[4sure]

It strikes me as odd that two people went into the basement shortly after the 911 call but neither mentions a chair blocking a door to the room both of them searched. I think it's JR's story that would get torn up.

It strikes me odd that two people went into the basement shortly after the 911 call and could not locate a missing childs body laying in a room 5 feet from them.

 

[4sure]

Now you call an officer called at random not reliable?!?!? Gosh sakes we are taking the police's word...thats where we all went wrong. I mean we should take the word of whose fibers were found in the victims crotch and thats prudent. And officer and a friend rousted out of bed to come to the aid of friends. Nah they are liars and not trustworthy. Big brother and double speak has arrived my co sluethers.

Confusing post at best coloradokares. In order to "take to word of whose fibers were found" we would be taking the "police's word". and that as you say is "where we all went wrong".

 

[rashomon]

Why would John be afraid that his prints would be found on a window in his own home? Although I have absolutely no aversion to RDI theories, it just doesn't make sense that the resident of a home would be afraid that their prints would be found anywhere in the house let alone on a window.

It could have been some impulsive 'better safe than sorry' action on John's part. Who knows, maybe he thought the police would be able to distinguish fresh fingerprints from older ones?

Why on earth did John Ramsey not tell the police at once that the basement window was open? (if it was open at all, that is). Assuming he was innocent, there is just no explanation for such a behavior.

He probably was down in the basement to look if he had left behind incriminating material. And he may have changed his staged scene and decided to closed the window. Perhaps he was afraid someone from outside may have watched him close the window and that's why he later came up with his little story.

 

[Chrishope]

It strikes me odd that two people went into the basement shortly after the 911 call and could not locate a missing childs body laying in a room 5 feet from them.

That strikes me as odd too. The cop didn't open the door, so that explains why he didn't see the body, though I'd still like an explanation as to why he didn't open the door.

FW may not have seen the body due to darkness.

The whole case is damn strange, but that doesn't let JR off the hook. He's the one who brought up the chair. We don't know of anyone else seeing the chair, though it's certainly possible. Then the chair is there for the CS photos - though none of us has seen these photos.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,
Rather than being the victim of a rage attack in the bathroom, JonBenet may have been lying on a bed.

She recieved multiple injuries, which display an intentionality, rather than a mindless assault, which has a uniformity surrounding its consequences e.g. black eyes, swoolen lips etc.

If JonBenet's hands had previously been tied to something then its likely some evidence would have been left of this, particularly on her wrists, but there are none.

I prefer to explain her raised ams as a defence mechanism against the blows that were landing on either side of her head, for those that adopt the head blow first theory, they should accept there was not one but many blows, and assuming this is correct, it is likely JonBenet would have been lying face down on a bed, or a couch etc, with her hands and arms around her head, attempting to ward off the blows?

One problem with this theory is that JonBenet's attacker continued with a manual strangulation, a ligature strangulation, and as per the unexplained marks on her body, usually wished away as stun gun markings, its likely JonBenet's body was whacked with some object, as she lay supine, arms around her head, with her attacker concentrating on hitting her body? Its not the severity, or simply the number, its the different types of assault.

Her attacker, whichever way you wish to sequence events, decided on different methods of assault, imo that cannot be explained by an irrational rage? e.g. she has abrasions and contusions on the front of her neck, the sides of her head, and a fissured fracture on the back of her head. I understand that the direction of the blow to the skull can be forensically determined from the resulting fissure pattern.

Then as per the lividity and her raised arms she was left lying there for an extended period of time!

Now any rage theorist cannot argue that JonBenet's killer did not know she was dead, if so, then I'm reminded here somewhat of the Monty Python dead parrot comedy sketch.

But at some point her killer returned to remove some evidence, and stage a crime-scene. Later this was revised to become the wine-cellar crime-scene.

I remember one poster who never got it when I suggested JonBenet was not being hidden in the wine-cellar because it was being staged e.g. apart from her barbie, the forensic evidence from the paint-tote tells you that this crime-scene goes beyond simply hiding a corpse!

Is it safe to assume that JonBenet was redressed and had her hair restyled upstairs, possibly encompassing a bedroom staging of some sort? Its difficult to imagine all this occurring down in the basement?

So there were a minimum of two different stagings, one that, if nothing else, cleans-up the upstairs crime-scene returning it to some kind of domestic banality, and the downstairs crime-scene which contains JonBenet's corpse wrapped in blankets, minus her barbie gown.

All the crime-scene photographs were taken long after JonBenet's corpse was discovered in the wine-cellar. The signifigance of this is that nobody knows what the original status of any household items was prior to the multiple searches, conducted by friends and law enforcement.

The chair blocking the door was not the only item to do so, there were other miscellaneous items, various household detritus, randomly placed in front of the door, one of which was the chair, which most people would recognize as actually being a small wooden stool, so its possible that others may have stepped over it, moved it aside, whatever, who knows, prior to the photographs being taken, just who did what with the chair?



.

UK,thank you so much,that makes a lot of sense,and I do get it.That was my feeling all along...that the poor child was intentionally badly beaten; no way it was an accident.It seems other descriptions just give the feeling that she had only a couple of injuries...the head wound and being strangled,well,plus the abrasions.I can only hope she passed out quickly and didn't feel much pain,but with the scream heard and the position of her arms,she must have felt something.It's so sad.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

If JonBenet's hands had previously been tied to something then its likely some evidence would have been left of this, particularly on her wrists, but there are none.

I do have one q here..her wrists were loosely tied..is it possible then that the extra loops were simply used to hook her loosely around a nearby object,as part of staging?

Then as per the lividity and her raised arms she was left lying there for an extended period of time!

Yea,that's why I don't get anyone saying this was AE play..I would think not,since likely in that case, her arms would have fallen waist side and not have been found over her head if she'd clawed at the rope.Also underneath her fingernails would have been her fresh dna,but even JR admits there was male dna (degraded though) under her nails.So which is it JR?
As well as I would think someone doing AE would do it on *themselves,not JB.Granted,I don't know a lot about it,but that sounds absurd.

Is it safe to assume that JonBenet was redressed and had her hair restyled upstairs, possibly encompassing a bedroom staging of some sort? Its difficult to imagine all this occurring down in the basement?

It would seem that way,since garland was found in her hair.

All the crime-scene photographs were taken long after JonBenet's corpse was discovered in the wine-cellar. The signifigance of this is that nobody knows what the original status of any household items was prior to the multiple searches, conducted by friends and law enforcement.

Do you have any opinion on what the abrasions came from?When I first saw the autopsy photos,I thought it could have been done from something hot,like a cigarette,or something used for a fireplace...but they aren't burns,so I don't buy the stun gun nonsense either.

The chair blocking the door was not the only item to do so, there were other miscellaneous items, various household detritus, randomly placed in front of the door, one of which was the chair, which most people would recognize as actually being a small wooden stool, so its possible that others may have stepped over it, moved it aside, whatever, who knows, prior to the photographs being taken, just who did what with the chair?

True,I've never tried to get into the specifics of that,other than it being apparent JR lied,seemingly to account for his prints.I'm not sure it's all that imprt,other then knowing he lied?

 

[rashomon]

It would seem that way,since garland was found in her hair.

The green garland was from the decorated stairs which led to the basement, and it seems that some of it got caught in JB's hair as her body was carried down.

 

[icedtea4me]

The green garland was from the decorated stairs which led to the basement, and it seems that some of it got caught in JB's hair as her body was carried down.

Then again, the artificial trees were stored in the "wine cellar", so maybe the garland was, too. Perhaps some stray strands of garland got into her hair in the basement rather than directly from the garland on the spiral staircase bannister itself. Did they find any strands of her hair caught in the garland?


-Tea

 

[4sure]

FW may not have seen the body due to darkness.

.

See this would be the exact thing I am talking about. FW is given reasonable excuses as possible explanations. Yet for JR the same people will go out of their way to make up the story that the evil criminal mastermind JR moved the body to the room later in the day.