Patsy Ramsey

[gramcracker]

^^^ that is my understanding as well. so my first thought was "what is the source for that?"

 

[Chewy]

It's interesting how the interpretations can go down. No one gets angry and points the finger at FW for not having a rock solid memory of what happened that day.

That's because they don't expect him to because he was just a witness on a crime scene. But because people think the Ramseys did it and covered it up, ever single discrepancy is called a lie or a manipulation.

And if there was a reason to believe that this is true it would make sense to me. But as I've pointed out, if they were innocent, then the events of that morning would be completely shocking and mind blowing to them. Not just a child hurt or found dead and calling the cops, but the child missing and a ransom note.

Even without the ransom note, the child missing would be a huge mind blowing shock. So I don't put too much weight in what they remembered and I don't attack them as being liars for not remembering things.

That's why I like to go back to the details of the case. IMO the window being the source of entry for both JR and the alleged perpetrator seems very very unlikely to me. You could argue that perhaps the perpetrator walked around the house finding a weak spot to gain entry, and then happened up the same window that JR used. However this seems very unlikely IMO because they wouldn't know if once they had gotten into the basement they would then have access to the upstairs part of the house. The door to the room they entered could have been bolted from the outside.

So this doesn't seem like the entry to me. And it doesn't seem like the exit. It seems staged to make it look that way. And why would someone stage an entry? Cops point out that people generally stage a scene to make people think that someone from the outside got in when it was an inside job.


That staging IMO points to the Ramseys or to someone who had access to their home.


As far as the bowl with the spoon, it's my understanding that the spoon in the bowl is a larger serving spoon that an adult wouldn't use if they had set the table. So it looks like a child put it together.

The other thing I don't understand about the vitriol towards the parents is the idea that BR had done it and the parents covered it up. I could have sympathy for parents in that situation. Perhaps it was an accident and they want to cover it up so their son doesn't go to jail or be tainted for the rest of their lives. Perhaps they had no way of thinking the media would blow it to the levels they did and once they got into it, they couldn't get out of the mess. But why hatred and hostility for a parent in that situation?

 

[TaylurRose02]

It's interesting how the interpretations can go down. No one gets angry and points the finger at FW for not having a rock solid memory of what happened that day.

That's because they don't expect him to because he was just a witness on a crime scene. But because people think the Ramseys did it and covered it up, ever single discrepancy is called a lie or a manipulation.

And if there was a reason to believe that this is true it would make sense to me. But as I've pointed out, if they were innocent, then the events of that morning would be completely shocking and mind blowing to them. Not just a child hurt or found dead and calling the cops, but the child missing and a ransom note.

Even without the ransom note, the child missing would be a huge mind blowing shock. So I don't put too much weight in what they remembered and I don't attack them as being liars for not remembering things.

That's why I like to go back to the details of the case. IMO the window being the source of entry for both JR and the alleged perpetrator seems very very unlikely to me. You could argue that perhaps the perpetrator walked around the house finding a weak spot to gain entry, and then happened up the same window that JR used. However this seems very unlikely IMO because they wouldn't know if once they had gotten into the basement they would then have access to the upstairs part of the house. The door to the room they entered could have been bolted from the outside.

So this doesn't seem like the entry to me. And it doesn't seem like the exit. It seems staged to make it look that way. And why would someone stage an entry? Cops point out that people generally stage a scene to make people think that someone from the outside got in when it was an inside job.


That staging IMO points to the Ramseys or to someone who had access to their home.


As far as the bowl with the spoon, it's my understanding that the spoon in the bowl is a larger serving spoon that an adult wouldn't use if they had set the table. So it looks like a child put it together.

The other thing I don't understand about the vitriol towards the parents is the idea that BR had done it and the parents covered it up. I could have sympathy for parents in that situation. Perhaps it was an accident and they want to cover it up so their son doesn't go to jail or be tainted for the rest of their lives. Perhaps they had no way of thinking the media would blow it to the levels they did and once they got into it, they couldn't get out of the mess. But why hatred and hostility for a parent in that situation?

I do understand your point about trauma causing memory loss, but it's not that they just forget. They continually add bits and pieces to fit whatever picture they are trying to paint like with the crab and the Whites being involved. The forgetting and remembering bit happened a lot throughout the crime, and honestly it's up to each person to decide if they are being deceitful. That's just that. It doesn't make one person's view better than the other.

I will admit there's parts of the crime that don't fit RDI. Just like there's parts of the crime that don't fit IDI. If they were innocent, I'm sure they were shocked. But I don't think innocent people make rules for interrogation. I don't think innocent people pick and choose conditions of a polygraph. I don't think innocent people seal medical records. I don't think innocent people would have so much variation in the same story. They didn't act like parents of a murdered victim. They acted like they had something to hide. Actions speak louder than words and the Ramsey's actions spoke volumes to me.

I agree that the window isn't the POI for anyone. It does look staged by the Ramsey's or someone with a vast knowledge of the home and family.

That's a good point about the pineapple, but both of the parents said JB wouldn't have gotten it herself. John said he didn't think she would have gotten up in the middle of the night to eat as well. Patsy said she couldn't have reached the bowl. So either the parents are lying or JB didn't get the pineapple herself.

I've never been on the BDI train, but anything is possible. I just don't see a child exerting that much force. Nor do I see the parents doing what they did with BDI as the motive. I see more of Patsy mistakenly hurting her and covering it up in a religiously dominate panic.
"I had unconsciously woven death into the fabric of our Christmas celebration...for a split second, I had a horrible feeling. The beautiful doll with golden hair looking like JonBenet lying in a coffin! I was so shocked that I caught my breath. I had to blink several times. It was a momentarily but, horrible feeling." This section of text out of DOI explains the state of mind I feel Patsy has and how dominate religion is within it.

 

[Anti-K]

~RSBM~

Hi, AK,
I’m not meaning to sound grumpy about your last comments, but I felt I’d be remiss if I didn’t call your attention to something which made me flinch. This is about FW’s testimony in a depo. AFAIK, FW’s testimony in the depo from the Wolf case is still sealed. (BTW, it is marked as “sealed” on the ACR website.) If this depo info can’t be verified by anyone, and if it’s alleged to have been obtained “questionably” and published illegally, it does make me uncomfortable to see it brought forward on this forum. I can’t speak for anyone else here; just my thoughts.

I do get your point about people forgetting details as time passes.

BBM
The source is the Carnes Decision:
The Whites arrived at defendant's home at approximately 6:00 a.m., and Mr. White, alone, searched the basement within fifteen minutes of arrival. (SMF 23; PSMF 23.) Mr. White testified that when he began his search, the lights were already on in the basement and the door in the hallway leading to the basement "wine cellar" room was opened. (SMF 25; PSMF 25; White Dep. at 147, 151-52.) He further testified that a window in the basement playroom was broken. (SMF 26; PSMF 26; White Dep. at 28, 152
Page 12

& 154.) Under the broken window, Mr. White states there was a suitcase, along with a broken shard of glass. (SMF 27; PSMF 27; White Dep. at 28-29, 156-59, & 265.) He does not, however, remember whether the window was opened or closed. 11 (SMF 28; PSMF 28; White Dep. at 153.)
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

double post. oops

 

[Anti-K]

^^^ that is my understanding as well. so my first thought was "what is the source for that?"

The source is Carnes; see above.
...

AK

 

[Frigga]

It's interesting how the interpretations can go down. No one gets angry and points the finger at FW for not having a rock solid memory of what happened that day.

That's because they don't expect him to because he was just a witness on a crime scene. But because people think the Ramseys did it and covered it up, ever single discrepancy is called a lie or a manipulation.

And if there was a reason to believe that this is true it would make sense to me. But as I've pointed out, if they were innocent, then the events of that morning would be completely shocking and mind blowing to them. Not just a child hurt or found dead and calling the cops, but the child missing and a ransom note.

Even without the ransom note, the child missing would be a huge mind blowing shock. So I don't put too much weight in what they remembered and I don't attack them as being liars for not remembering things.

That's why I like to go back to the details of the case. IMO the window being the source of entry for both JR and the alleged perpetrator seems very very unlikely to me. You could argue that perhaps the perpetrator walked around the house finding a weak spot to gain entry, and then happened up the same window that JR used. However this seems very unlikely IMO because they wouldn't know if once they had gotten into the basement they would then have access to the upstairs part of the house. The door to the room they entered could have been bolted from the outside.

So this doesn't seem like the entry to me. And it doesn't seem like the exit. It seems staged to make it look that way. And why would someone stage an entry? Cops point out that people generally stage a scene to make people think that someone from the outside got in when it was an inside job.


That staging IMO points to the Ramseys or to someone who had access to their home.


As far as the bowl with the spoon, it's my understanding that the spoon in the bowl is a larger serving spoon that an adult wouldn't use if they had set the table. So it looks like a child put it together.

The other thing I don't understand about the vitriol towards the parents is the idea that BR had done it and the parents covered it up. I could have sympathy for parents in that situation. Perhaps it was an accident and they want to cover it up so their son doesn't go to jail or be tainted for the rest of their lives. Perhaps they had no way of thinking the media would blow it to the levels they did and once they got into it, they couldn't get out of the mess. But why hatred and hostility for a parent in that situation?

BBM I wonder if you would feel this same sense of understanding and compassion if you were one of the friends or employee's having had the finger pointed at by the Ramsey's as a possible child murderer/ sexual sadist.

 

[TaylurRose02]

Does anyone know if FW saw the same chair JR moved and then put back at the train room door? I'm doing some digging and the only sources I'm finding say that neither French or White reported the chair. Has anyone found any contradictory information?

 

[questfortrue]

BBM
The source is the Carnes Decision:
The Whites arrived at defendant's home at approximately 6:00 a.m., and Mr. White, alone, searched the basement within fifteen minutes of arrival. (SMF 23; PSMF 23.) Mr. White testified that when he began his search, the lights were already on in the basement and the door in the hallway leading to the basement "wine cellar" room was opened. (SMF 25; PSMF 25; White Dep. at 147, 151-52.) He further testified that a window in the basement playroom was broken. (SMF 26; PSMF 26; White Dep. at 28, 152
Page 12

& 154.) Under the broken window, Mr. White states there was a suitcase, along with a broken shard of glass. (SMF 27; PSMF 27; White Dep. at 28-29, 156-59, & 265.) He does not, however, remember whether the window was opened or closed. 11 (SMF 28; PSMF 28; White Dep. at 153.)
...

AK

Yes, I did know this was from the Wolf V. Ramsey case presided over by Judge Carnes. Strictly my opinion, but I do not see that quotes from that civil liability case serve a purpose in evaluating evidence from the criminal case. MK, prosecuting attorney on the GJ, said this about Carnes’s decision on the Abrams Report, July 2003:

KANE: Well I think as you said at the top of the show, the federal court was making a ruling based on the civil case and the civil case presented the evidence that had been gathered in discovery in that case. And given what was agreed to by both parties in the presentation of facts to the court, I think that the court made the right decision. I guess the bigger question then is were the facts presented to the court in the context of the civil case consistent with the facts that were developed in the police case, and I don’t think you can draw that correlation, because there was no access that the parties had been given to information that had been contained in the police files.

We’ll likely have to agree to disagree on Carnes quotes. For those unfamiliar with the Carnes case, here is the link to a thread at FFJ: http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...t-Judge-Carnes-Decision-A-Documented-Rebuttal

Does anyone know if FW saw the same chair JR moved and then put back at the train room door? I'm doing some digging and the only sources I'm finding say that neither French or White reported the chair. Has anyone found any contradictory information?

Not that I've heard. In fact Kolar documents that discrepancy.

 

[Meara]

Hi, Meara,
I assume you’re looking for an answer beyond consistency is not an R strong suit? 

The whole window story always appeared to me as a “staging” story supplied fantastically by JR, before he’d really thought it all the way through. So with that bias upfront, my response reflects mho.

In the first interview (1997), JR tells the interviewers that he came upon the window and estimated it was open a little 1/8”: But the window was open, about an eighth of an inch, and just kind latched it. So I went back down with Fleet, we looked around for some glass again, still didn’t see any glass. And I told him that I thought that the break came from when I did that last summer.

JR then tells the interviewers in 1998, ( LS, intruder theorist, is among the interviewers) that the window was open 1” before he closed it and latched it. What JR did not know or remember at the time was that FW had been in the basement between 6:30 and 7:00 am and found the window closed and unlatched. FW did not see the window as open, according to Kolar. It’s also notable that JR took FW to this room to witness the broken window when the two of them searched the basement. JR leaves FW there to ponder this for a moment, while he dashes to the WC and finds JB.

JR seems to be embellishing his broken window story as he considers it over the years. Maybe an 1” opening sounds more believable than 1/8”? IDK. If there is one piece of evidence of desperate staging, or a desperate story, this has to be in my top 5. moo

From the interviews, uncertainty of JR in parentheses: The whole story about how during the previous summer (or it could have been 2 or 3 times he had to get in the home this way) JR came by cab (he thinks) maybe car (no that wasn’t it) and took off his suit, except for his shirt, (but maybe he left his shirt on) then kicked out a hole with his shoe, reached in and unlatched the window - seems to me like an attempt to create a logical opening for the intruder.

BTW, neither PR nor JR can figure out if the window was ever repaired. And neither LHP nor the gardener ever remember that broken window.

In year 2000 DOI was published. In DOI JR wrote that he finds the pane broken and the window open. He also sees the Samsonite suitcase there, right under it. JR muses “maybe this is how the kidnapper got in and out of our house.” He does not say in DOI that he forgot to mention this broken window to LE at the time, and it was 4 months later it was brought up.

So my apologies, that I cannot find logic in the story. Perhaps someone else can. Except from JR's story about entering through this window, we once again witness JR in his skivvies, as it just so frequently happens to him in his times of trial. moo :scared: mho

:giggle:
And the one time he was dressed, in Atlanta, the burglar locked him in the bathroom. That the guy was a petty thief doesn't mean he lacked insight.

Thanks for all of this, qft, and especially the reminder that FW found the window closed. Is this a clue that JR closed the window before 6:00 AM? Or is he lying about all of it? Why?

And here we pause for a brief explanatory reflection from Paul Brady....

Paul Brady - Nobody Knows - YouTube

You're probably right; JR meant to suggest an intruder entry, even though there were better ways to do that. The "I had to break in" story is completely unconvincing. Quite apart from the underwear-with-shoes-and-socks scenario, what father breaks a window in the room where his son and friends play and doesn't make sure the glass shards get cleaned up? :notgood:

 

[Anti-K]

It's interesting how the interpretations can go down. No one gets angry and points the finger at FW for not having a rock solid memory of what happened that day.

That's because they don't expect him to because he was just a witness on a crime scene. But because people think the Ramseys did it and covered it up, ever single discrepancy is called a lie or a manipulation.

And if there was a reason to believe that this is true it would make sense to me. But as I've pointed out, if they were innocent, then the events of that morning would be completely shocking and mind blowing to them. Not just a child hurt or found dead and calling the cops, but the child missing and a ransom note.

Even without the ransom note, the child missing would be a huge mind blowing shock. So I don't put too much weight in what they remembered and I don't attack them as being liars for not remembering things.

That's why I like to go back to the details of the case. IMO the window being the source of entry for both JR and the alleged perpetrator seems very very unlikely to me. You could argue that perhaps the perpetrator walked around the house finding a weak spot to gain entry, and then happened up the same window that JR used. However this seems very unlikely IMO because they wouldn't know if once they had gotten into the basement they would then have access to the upstairs part of the house. The door to the room they entered could have been bolted from the outside.

So this doesn't seem like the entry to me. And it doesn't seem like the exit. It seems staged to make it look that way. And why would someone stage an entry? Cops point out that people generally stage a scene to make people think that someone from the outside got in when it was an inside job.


That staging IMO points to the Ramseys or to someone who had access to their home.


As far as the bowl with the spoon, it's my understanding that the spoon in the bowl is a larger serving spoon that an adult wouldn't use if they had set the table. So it looks like a child put it together.

The other thing I don't understand about the vitriol towards the parents is the idea that BR had done it and the parents covered it up. I could have sympathy for parents in that situation. Perhaps it was an accident and they want to cover it up so their son doesn't go to jail or be tainted for the rest of their lives. Perhaps they had no way of thinking the media would blow it to the levels they did and once they got into it, they couldn't get out of the mess. But why hatred and hostility for a parent in that situation?

I don’t understand what it is about the window that seems staged to you.
Smit does argue in his deposition that there were indications that the intruder may have tested other windows for possible entry.

The basement window in question seems to me a perfect and the likeliest entry point for someone wishing to surreptitiously break into the house. I think the concern that an intruder would not know if he would be able to access the rest of the house from this entry point to be unreasonable. Of course he’d be able to access the rest of the house (doors are generally locked from the inside - the basement window side).

So, what is about the window that seems staged to you? And, if someone were to stage an entry point why wouldn’t they stage an obvious one? Iy just seems senseless to stage something that no one’s going to notice.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Yes, I did know this was from the Wolf V. Ramsey case presided over by Judge Carnes. Strictly my opinion, but I do not see that quotes from that civil liability case serve a purpose in evaluating evidence from the criminal case. MK, prosecuting attorney on the GJ, said this about Carnes’s decision on the Abrams Report, July 2003:

KANE: Well I think as you said at the top of the show, the federal court was making a ruling based on the civil case and the civil case presented the evidence that had been gathered in discovery in that case. And given what was agreed to by both parties in the presentation of facts to the court, I think that the court made the right decision. I guess the bigger question then is were the facts presented to the court in the context of the civil case consistent with the facts that were developed in the police case, and I don’t think you can draw that correlation, because there was no access that the parties had been given to information that had been contained in the police files.

We’ll likely have to agree to disagree on Carnes quotes. For those unfamiliar with the Carnes case, here is the link to a thread at FFJ: http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...t-Judge-Carnes-Decision-A-Documented-Rebuttal




Not that I've heard. In fact Kolar documents that discrepancy.

The claim is White’s as stated in his deposition. We know this from Carnes (I’ve also seen the deposition). Your opinion of Carnes is not relevant as we are only talking about the Carnes Decision. We are talking about what White is reported to have said in his deposition: he does not remember if the window was open or closed.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

BBM

:giggle:
And the one time he was dressed, in Atlanta, the burglar locked him in the bathroom. That the guy was a petty thief doesn't mean he lacked insight.

Thanks for all of this, qft, and especially the reminder that FW found the window closed. Is this a clue that JR closed the window before 6:00 AM? Or is he lying about all of it? Why?

And here we pause for a brief explanatory reflection from Paul Brady....

Paul Brady - Nobody Knows - YouTube

You're probably right; JR meant to suggest an intruder entry, even though there were better ways to do that. The "I had to break in" story is completely unconvincing. Quite apart from the underwear-with-shoes-and-socks scenario, what father breaks a window in the room where his son and friends play and doesn't make sure the glass shards get cleaned up? :notgood:

White does not remember if the window was open or closed; see above.
...

AK

 

[otg]

I don't know that JR would be thinking about the broken window as way to keep the basement cooler to slow decomp. I just don't think, in the chaos of that horrible night- that he'd be thinking that. I DO think that one of the reasons he had to find her was because police did NOT. I think that possibly in the beginning the plan was to hide her body in a place no one would find her...then after police left, they'd call police to say she had been found- dead- because the kidnappers had been watching the house and saw police arrive along with the rest of the neighborhood. And they'd been told not to call anyone so....

When it became apparent police were NOT going to leave them alone in the house after all, that they were going to have to leave her behind in the basement undiscovered and decomposing while the police sealed the crime scene- to be found by cadaver dogs after neighbor's complained about the smell...well I think it is obvious why JR rushed to the basement as soon as Arndt suggested he "take another look around".

I totally agree with you on this, DeeDee. I just can't see that planning to dispose of the body either before the police arrived, or after, were very good options (as others have speculated). I think their plan was to "discover" it after police had packed up and left. It may have been hidden better earlier (when FW looked in and didn't see it), and was moved closer to the WC door during John's absence because it was beginning to look like the police were going to take up permanent residence until it was found. It may not have been the best of plans, but it was the best of the options available to them with the situation they had. (And of course -- it worked.)

 

[otg]

I haven’t logged in for a while, but I try to keep up with new posts when I get a chance. So forgive me for not having “thanked” a lot of the many, many excellent posts. But I’ll just post a few thoughts that occurred to me as I was reading today.

In reading the various accounts of the “open” window in the basement, I noticed a discrepancy John’s account that I hadn’t noticed before. If the window in question was normally left open because of the heat in the basement from the boiler, why did John have to break the glass to unlatch it when he was locked out without his keys or garage door opener? And if it had happened on previous occasions (as he said at one time, IIRC), why would he not leave something under the window (a table, a chair, a stepladder) that would make getting in easier for such occasions?

Personally, I don’t think the original plan was to make it look like an unknown intruder did this, or that the entry point was the basement window. All the doors (according to them) were locked, the alarm was not on, and there were no signs of a break-in -- suggesting someone with a key had done it. John’s own words to Det. Arndt when he laid JonBenet’s body down on the floor were, “I think it was an inside job.” (Really? Who uses that kind of term in the context of finding a dead family member?) He certainly wasn’t suggesting someone in the family had done it. At another point while leaning over her dead body, he said to Arndt that he didn’t think the person responsible meant to kill her. How would he know at that point what the intent of the killer was?

I think the plan was to blame it on the Pughs, or to at least throw suspicion on them. I also think the odd amount asked for in the RN was somehow intended to cast suspicion on them as well. Patsy had already agreed to loan LHP $2,000. With that and the $118,000 asked for in the RN, I think the total was supposed to be something that would further point to the Pughs. Maybe, LHP had mentioned at one time that they were $120,000 in debt?

It wasn’t until later when Smit was brought in and started pointing to an unknown intruder that the Ramseys jumped on that bandwagon. I think it was Smit who first described the ligature as “complicated” (indicating someone skilled at making the device and the knots), and then later John added the “professional” descriptor to it.

 

[Meara]

BBM
White does not remember if the window was open or closed; see above.
...

AK

AK, we may disagree, but it didn't come out of thin air.

Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Kindle edition, p. 44:

Alone, he went down to the basement.... He started in Burke's train and hobby room, where he saw a suitcase sitting under a broken window. .....Then he moved the suitcase a few feet to get a closer look at the window. White said he was sure the window was closed but unlatched.


IIRC, Schiller had access to police files.

 

[Anti-K]

I haven’t logged in for a while, but I try to keep up with new posts when I get a chance. So forgive me for not having “thanked” a lot of the many, many excellent posts. But I’ll just post a few thoughts that occurred to me as I was reading today.

In reading the various accounts of the “open” window in the basement, I noticed a discrepancy John’s account that I hadn’t noticed before. If the window in question was normally left open because of the heat in the basement from the boiler, why did John have to break the glass to unlatch it when he was locked out without his keys or garage door opener? And if it had happened on previous occasions (as he said at one time, IIRC), why would he not leave something under the window (a table, a chair, a stepladder) that would make getting in easier for such occasions?

Personally, I don’t think the original plan was to make it look like an unknown intruder did this, or that the entry point was the basement window. All the doors (according to them) were locked, the alarm was not on, and there were no signs of a break-in -- suggesting someone with a key had done it. John’s own words to Det. Arndt when he laid JonBenet’s body down on the floor were, “I think it was an inside job.” (Really? Who uses that kind of term in the context of finding a dead family member?) He certainly wasn’t suggesting someone in the family had done it. At another point while leaning over her dead body, he said to Arndt that he didn’t think the person responsible meant to kill her. How would he know at that point what the intent of the killer was?

I think the plan was to blame it on the Pughs, or to at least throw suspicion on them. I also think the odd amount asked for in the RN was somehow intended to cast suspicion on them as well. Patsy had already agreed to loan LHP $2,000. With that and the $118,000 asked for in the RN, I think the total was supposed to be something that would further point to the Pughs. Maybe, LHP had mentioned at one time that they were $120,000 in debt?

It wasn’t until later when Smit was brought in and started pointing to an unknown intruder that the Ramseys jumped on that bandwagon. I think it was Smit who first described the ligature as “complicated” (indicating someone skilled at making the device and the knots), and then later John added the “professional” descriptor to it.

It was not said that that window was always, or mostly left open. Mr Ramsey said,
Sometimes it would get opened to let cool air in
6 because that basement could get real hot in
7 winter.

He broke into the house in the summer, as I recall. Regardless of the season, obviously the window was not open on that occasion.

Why wouldn’t he leave something under the window to step onto? Because he didn’t think there would be a next time; because the thought never occurred to him; because he intended to but never got around to it; because he did, but someone moved it on him; because there was nothing there when he came through the first time so he didn’t think it would matter if there was something there for the next time; etc....
.

If RDI, than the Ramseys would have needed to show the authorities that an intruder entered the home and saying that the doors were locked contradicts that need. Intentionally creating the impression of an inside job unnecessarily directs an investigation towards themselves, which contradicts their need to point the investigation away from them.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

AK, we may disagree, but it didn't come out of thin air.

Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Kindle edition, p. 44:

Alone, he went down to the basement.... He started in Burke's train and hobby room, where he saw a suitcase sitting under a broken window. .....Then he moved the suitcase a few feet to get a closer look at the window. White said he was sure the window was closed but unlatched.


IIRC, Schiller had access to police files.

Thank you. Yes, I ‘m aware that there are sources wherein White is said to have reported that the window was closed. These reports may or may not be true, all I know is that in his deposition he claims to not remember one way or the other. I think that this throws those other reports – PMPT, etc – into question. The depo is White’s own words, the other reports are not. Who do we believe? Provisionally, I go with the depos.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

"stupidest criminals of all time"?

nah.

a small sampling to disprove the above assertion:

World's Dumbest Criminal - YouTube

10 Dumbest Criminals - YouTube

http://www.criminaljusticeschools.com/blog/21-dumbest-criminals-of-the-21st-century-so-far/

Yeah, these are the sorts of people I had in mind. Thanks. But, I think the Ramseys would have to have been even dumber than these guys.
...

AK

 

[Linda7NJ]

Thank you. Yes, I ‘m aware that there are sources wherein White is said to have reported that the window was closed. These reports may or may not be true, all I know is that in his deposition he claims to not remember one way or the other. I think that this throws those other reports – PMPT, etc – into question. The depo is White’s own words, the other reports are not. Who do we believe? Provisionally, I go with the depos.

...



AK

I go with people with no motive to lie, as a general rule. Someone that behaves as if they have nothing to hide.

I don't put my faith in the one whose stories change and are embroidered over time to benefit them and people those that aren't forth coming.

I tend to go with the earliest version as it's closest to the event in time and before memories of the mundane fade.







Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk