Patsy Ramsey

[chlban]

Exactly. Why would the intruder leave the body and the ransom note? If you still want the ransom, take the body with you. If you are going to leave the body then the ransom note is useless and just more evidence.

Exactly. That is why no matter how many times I try to look at this from a different POV, it always, always comes back to the RN. Missing child, dead or alive, and a Ransom Note? Sure. Dead child still in the house
and a RN? Not so much.

 

[Mama2JML]

Exactly. Why would the intruder leave the body and the ransom note?

To buy time? To mislead investigators? To "torture" the family? There are many possibilities. Who knows?...

Likewise, why would a parent compose a ransom note, but leave the body in the house?

If you still want the ransom, take the body with you. If you are going to leave the body then the ransom note is useless and just more evidence.

Maybe collecting the ransom was never really a goal? I tend to believe the perp's motive was driven by impulses unrelated to monetary gain, but I haven't completely ruled out a "kidnapping gone wrong" scenario.

I agree with you in this respect:

The RN is "just more evidence". ...regardless of WDI.

In this case, however, the RN does not implicate the family. JR and BR were "ruled out", and despite attempts to match the handwriting to that of Patsy Ramsey, not one of the experts consulted by the BPD identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author. It wasn't even a close call. This certainly does not "clear" her, but it establishes a measure of doubt.

 

[Detective Pinkie]

To buy time? To mislead investigators? To "torture" the family? There are many possibilities. Who knows?...

Likewise, why would a parent compose a ransom note, but leave the body in the house?

Maybe collecting the ransom was never really a goal? I tend to believe the perp's motive was driven by impulses unrelated to monetary gain, but I haven't completely ruled out a "kidnapping gone wrong" scenario.

I agree with you in this respect:

The RN is "just more evidence". ...regardless of WDI.

In this case, however, the RN does not implicate the family. JR and BR were "ruled out", and despite attempts to match the handwriting to that of Patsy Ramsey, not one of the experts consulted by the BPD identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author. It wasn't even a close call. This certainly does not "clear" her, but it establishes a measure of doubt.

Why would the Ramsey's write the note? "To buy time", "to mislead investigators" - that works for both sides. Also to mislead the other parent if they weren't both involved.
My opinion - to lead the investigation away from the house and the family. A dead child leads the police to look at the family first, a ransom note points to outside involvement.

Don't get me wrong, I have always been RDI but that ransom note was a sticking point for me too, for a long time. Then one day a poster here (I think Superdave) said that it was to draw police attention away from the house and "Ding" that light bulb lit up for me.

I actually started a thread a while ago for people to post about those elements of the case that their theory couldn't explain or was a speed hump for them. Doesn't mean you are going to swap sides, but you just can't explain it. I still have a few of those but I feel like those are the things that we can hash out here and maybe someone else has an explanation that works for you.

 

[bettybaby00]

Why would the Ramsey's write the note? "To buy time", "to mislead investigators" - that works for both sides. Also to mislead the other parent if they weren't both involved.

Completely agree.

My opinion - to lead the investigation away from the house and the family. A dead child leads the police to look at the family first, a ransom note points to outside involvement.

Agree again

Don't get me wrong, I have always been RDI but that ransom note was a sticking point for me too, for a long time. Then one day a poster here (I think Superdave) said that it was to draw police attention away from the house and "Ding" that light bulb lit up for me.

I actually started a thread a while ago for people to post about those elements of the case that their theory couldn't explain or was a speed hump for them. Doesn't mean you are going to swap sides, but you just can't explain it. I still have a few of those but I feel like those are the things that we can hash out here and maybe someone else has an explanation that works for you.

BBM

It's important to note that barring a confession, there will always be aspects of a case, or even pieces of evidence that don't seem to fit or make sense. Even when there is a confession, this can still hold true. Jodi Arias is a prime example.

 

[midwest mama]

I agree the ransom note was written to draw attention away from the house, with the purpose of giving the perp an opportunity to remove JB's body away from the house, as well as provide for a reason to find her dead. The note is constructed to provide an opportunity to take her body out while JR goes for the ransom money, IMO. I believe the note writer acted alone, and the intent was to fool and scare the other parent into co-operation with what appeared to be a kidnapping. I also believe JB was simply going to be taken out of the house in a car and a call to police when she was "picked up" would be to summon them to the pickup point, where she would still be in the car (along with some local debris). Because it would seem likely the finder would lift her up thinking she was alive, then could lay her in the car while making the call to police. That would account for any forensic evidence found in the car, and allow for her to have a proper burial. The problem was the phone call made to police at 5:52 a.m.

If it was Patsy acting alone, and JR told her to make the call, she would have had to go ahead with it, or else JR would have done it. Better she do it, and get the theatrics involved. If it was JR acting alone, PR made the call before he could get her stopped. Either one of those scenarios work. And there were accounts from them of it being JR's idea, and also of it being PR's idea.

Now, please bear with me as I think through some theoretical processes of how either of the two R's might have pulled it off.

If it was JR acting alone, and PR would not have made the call, he could have sequestered PR and Burke off somewhere safe, providing him complete opportunity to get JB's body out of the house and proceed with the ransom demands, even to the point of "talking" to someone while being monitored, which would have secured JB's death by the Faction. Of course, they would have collected the money before advising him of where he would go to "find" his daughter, thinking she was still alive. Which means he would only have to place the brown bag somewhere to leave forensic evidence, then could have just simply kept the money hidden away elsewhere to be used later. A multi-millionaire has no problem wielding hundreds and twenties as spending cash. He would later tell police he drove to the pickup place immediately, thinking JB to be alive and would not want to jeopardize that. But upon arriving and lifting her up to find her dead he would say he laid her into the car, so he could then make a call to police which would then set up the intruder kidnapping/murder. And, oh, he might have even produced another note from the kidnappers which he would have found at the money drop spot, with directions on where to find JB. Maybe some of those missing pages from the note pad?

If it was PR alone, she could have taken JB's body out of the house as soon as JR left to collect the ransom money, simply putting her in her car, waiting until JR had gotten home. Burke would have been told to stay in his room, where he would be safe, until JR returned. PR would say she received the call (at the house) from the kidnappers saying they saw him get the money, and JR would transfer the money into the brown paper bag. The "kidnappers" would have given instructions to Patsy for John alone to make the money drop and would be "exhausting". This would leave PR the opportunity to get another call from the "kidnappers" once they had picked up the money, with instructions where JB could be found. Instead, PR would be right behind JR, and she would abscond with the dropped money. JR would head home to await further instructions but come to learn PR was already involved. She would have driven to the "pick up" location, under the ruse of having gotten another call from the kidnappers once the money was delivered as to where she could find JB. Once there she would phone the police (and JR) to complete the picture. The only problem I have in this scenario, is what does she do with Burke when she would have to drive away to supposedly "pick up" JB? Of course, at this time, it should have been safe for her to call one of her good friends to come and stay with Burke, since the drop would have been made and JB should have been found safe.

All too far-fetched? Did I miss any major points? Of course, I don't think either of the R's would have thought far enough ahead to realize phone records might be checked and they did not think there would be a requirement from LE for an autopsy on a child who obviously was horribly strangled by someone from a kidnapping Foreign Faction. I believe the perp intended to set JB's death as an obvious strangling, with the clean up of the sexual assault and the head wound to not be discovered, in order to dismiss any thought of requiring an autopsy. And I believe that either of JB's parents would have assumed they had any connections they would have needed in place to make their plan work out the way they had intended....except for that call ending up being made when it was.

My bet would still be on JR, but then, there is the convincing work done on the ransom note by Cherokee on FFJ and supported by several top handwriting specialists. The one problem I have, though, is there was so little handwriting comparison made available to the public from JR. We should have been able to see as much from him as we saw from Patsy in order to make more assessments of our own. I would want to see more of JR's to see if at other times he was confused as to whether or not to use a single or double "s" in certain words, like his exemplar showed in his spelling of the word "occasions". Especially since the ransom note had 2 words with double "s" misused. And for anyone else who might wonder if JR actually could have written the note and has not seen it, you might find this interesting:
http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/07/some-handwriting-evidence.html

 

[Anti-K]

If the Ramseys had disposed of the body, then it would make sense that they would write a ransom note (although, not THIS note, not in THIS fashion) because they would have to explain why Jonbenet is missing (typically, one reports a kidnapping or a runaway, or a failure to return home). However, in this case there was no disposal, and hence, no reason for a (fake) ransom note.

The idea that the note was written to “draw police attention away from the house” only works until 1) the body is discovered in the house, and 2) it is discovered that the note was written in the house. These two facts negate the supposed intent and turns the former into a contradiction, and draws police attention into the house (and provides them with unnecessarily created self-incriminating evidence!).
Also, many RDI think that the Ramseys wanted to make it look like an inside job, which also contradicts the supposed intent (to draw police attention away from the house).

The ransom note could only buy time for the Ramseys up until the moment they report the kidnapping. Once they report the kidnapping the eyes of the police will be upon them, and their home, and probably the surrounding area. From that moment on they would be stuck with the police and the body, a situation they should have wanted to avoid if they did indeed create the note, because the body contradicts the note.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Without an identified suspect, it’s hard to say why an intruder would create, and leave the ransom note. I can think of and have several times posted a few possibilities, but we really just don’t know. Give us a suspect, we’ll give you the answer.

Examples of possible reasons: a kidnapper could have intended on murdering and hiding his victim in the house right from the get-go; a molester could have created the note as a means of hiding from himself and/or others his perverse desires and true motivation; a killer wishing to direct suspicion away from himself; a killer wishing to direct suspicion towards the occupants of the house; a killer wishing to create an enduring mystery; a killer hoping to create for the parents a sense of false hope mingled with hours of angst and pain reaching its peak when the body is discovered; a bored fantasist killing time while waiting for the Ramseys to return from the Whites; etc.

It’s actually pretty easy to come up with reasons why an intruder might have created and left the ransom note and the body in the house. But, the only reason why the Ramseys would do so is if they had disposed of the body and needed to explain the absence.

The body in the house contradicts the Ramsey intent, but it does not necessarily contradict an intruder’s intent (see above possibilities). The note draws police attention into the house because 1) it was written in the house, and 2) the body is in the house. This is bad if you’re a Ramsey, but it is very very good if you’re an intruder.
...

AK

 

[ukrberserker23]

I just wrote out a big reply, and it refused to let me post. Said I wasn't logged in, but I was, and am.

 

[midwest mama]

So, AK, do you then deduce, that IF the killer was a Ramsey, the note was written because there was an intent to remove JB's body from the house? And if so, do you agree the police being called in before this could be done was the snafu in this plan?

I can only believe the call came from one of them when it did if one of them was a killer acting alone, and the other did not comply with the note's directives of NOT calling the police. If they had been in collusion to protect Burke, I cannot believe they would have called police until they had succeeded in all activity it would have taken to make the ransom note appear to have been genuine.

If JB's killer was NOT a Ramsey, then I would agree with at least one of your reasons why there was both a note and a body in the house. All of them at least describe something a psychologically damaged person MIGHT do. At least you are not supposing JB's murder began as a robbery attempt gone awry.

Can we (collectively as either RDI or IDI), finally then, say we have moved beyond thinking a thief turned into a heinous killer and acknowledge there must have been some definite psychological disturbance in the mind of the killer?

 

[lawstudent]

While of course anything is possible, I don't see the note + body in the house to indicate psychological disturbance. Obviously, whoever did to her had some issues, but that particular inconsistency to me seems like the plan changed, most likely due to fear or feasibility issues. People who are 'disturbed', for lack of a better term, are not usually irrational in that particular manner. I've seen cases where people unconvincingly tried to fake being 'crazy', whether as a defense or to get a place to stay and some meds. For example, a man asking if he could be pregnant would not be a typical delusion of an actually ill person, but may be one offered by someone faking it. Actually ill people retain their very basic logic, and then twist it all around or become overwhelmed by certain emotions. There are obviously many different possible psychological conditions, but few of them cause the sort of thinking that a ransom note is a good way to explain the body lying next to them in the house. That requires the person to engage in a relatively high level of analysis, and yet completely miss the logical part of that scenario.

To me, the inconsistency could mean:

She was intended to be kidnapped (unlikely IMO) or at least removed after her death, but the plan fell apart.

There was some other plan of 'finding' the body or hiding it elsewhere some point, and the note would draw police attention away (and I suppose if it was one parent, the other parent's attention, possibly), but that also fell apart.

If I imagine any possible perpetrator panicking after killing her and trying to explain it away, the kidnapping thing just makes no sense. You may start thinking "oh, let's blame it on a predatory child snatcher, and leave some note that sounds written by someone evil who left the body because he wanted to make some sort of point or just horrify the parents." But to go into the detail about the money and all that - it's just a nonsensical direction to go in if you don't plan on removing the body. You could easily deflect blame by pinning it on some crazy child predator, or leaving a note about it being a botched kidnapping. But to make it seem purely financially motivated and then have her found in that condition - it is weird.

 

[Anti-K]

There is some sense in saying that the Ramsey’s, having faked a kidnapping, would not call the police until they managed to dispose of the body. And, from there we can reason that the one who made the call - Mrs Ramsey - must not have known about the body.
Of course, by the same logic we can eliminate Mr Ramsey because he, at minimum, allowed Mrs Ramsey to make the call and if he was the killer, and with the body in the house, he would have NEEDED to, by all means, prevent or somehow delay that call. Until he disposed of the body, nothing could have been more important.

To call the police is to give up the body, and after faking a kidnapping the Ramseys would not, could not, singly or together, allow the police to be called while the body was in the house; but the call was made and by all accounts the Ramseys were essentially in agreement about making the call. There was no discussion and no dissension. There was no delay. The call was made and if we can say that the person who made that call could not have known about the body, than we can say that neither Ramsey knew about the body.

All RDI theories – ALL of them – are complex because of this single conundrum: people don’t fake kidnappings if they don’t plan on getting rid of or haven’t already gotten rid of the body, and people don’t report (fake) kidnappings until after they’ve gotten rid of the body.

However, this conundrum vanishes when we posit IDI. In IDI, the Ramseys make the call without discussion, dissension or delay simply because they are panicked, did not read beyond the first page and believed themselves to be reporting a genuine kidnapping. KISS, and all that...
.

As an aside: JDI theorists generally have Mr Ramsey planning to dispose of the body while picking up or dropping off the money. Ideally, Mr Ramsey would have wanted to get rid of the body asap, before the Mrs and Burke were out of bed. Before the daylight hours. He would have wanted to, at minimum, move the body to the trunk of his car before Mrs and Burke were out of bed. Why would he risk moving it from the basement to the garage after they were awake, up and wandering around? For RDI, another layer of complexity is unnecessarily added.
...

AK

 

[Zzzz]

There is some sense in saying that the Ramsey’s, having faked a kidnapping, would not call the police until they managed to dispose of the body. And, from there we can reason that the one who made the call - Mrs Ramsey - must not have known about the body.
Of course, by the same logic we can eliminate Mr Ramsey because he, at minimum, allowed Mrs Ramsey to make the call and if he was the killer, and with the body in the house, he would have NEEDED to, by all means, prevent or somehow delay that call. Until he disposed of the body, nothing could have been more important.

To call the police is to give up the body, and after faking a kidnapping the Ramseys would not, could not, singly or together, allow the police to be called while the body was in the house; but the call was made and by all accounts the Ramseys were essentially in agreement about making the call. There was no discussion and no dissension. There was no delay. The call was made and if we can say that the person who made that call could not have known about the body, than we can say that neither Ramsey knew about the body.

All RDI theories – ALL of them – are complex because of this single conundrum: people don’t fake kidnappings if they don’t plan on getting rid of or haven’t already gotten rid of the body, and people don’t report (fake) kidnappings until after they’ve gotten rid of the body.

However, this conundrum vanishes when we posit IDI. In IDI, the Ramseys make the call without discussion, dissension or delay simply because they are panicked, did not read beyond the first page and believed themselves to be reporting a genuine kidnapping. KISS, and all that...
.

As an aside: JDI theorists generally have Mr Ramsey planning to dispose of the body while picking up or dropping off the money. Ideally, Mr Ramsey would have wanted to get rid of the body asap, before the Mrs and Burke were out of bed. Before the daylight hours. He would have wanted to, at minimum, move the body to the trunk of his car before Mrs and Burke were out of bed. Why would he risk moving it from the basement to the garage after they were awake, up and wandering around? For RDI, another layer of complexity is unnecessarily added.
...

AK

This is a good argument and makes sense. The body in the house does seem to eliminate JR, who could have disposed of it. PR had no excuse or opportunity to dispose of the body so the note was a way to move suspicion away from them (in her mind). But why make the note so long and convoluted? Maybe she thought it would seem more legit that way, but it just added more opportunity to match handwriting quirks. And why not stage an intruder scene better? Why not leave an outside door slightly ajar?

Another RDI conundrum is the death by asphyxiation. An accidental death by head blow and then a choking cord cover-up is more RDI believable than an accidental choking death followed by a skull-crashing blow. Choking takes longer and is death by intent.

But it really always comes back to the note written on paper from the house with a pen from the house. To think that an intruder took the time and risk to not only assault the victim in the house but to also write an extremely long note in the house (that was useless since JB was dead) is just not plausible.

 

[midwest mama]

This is a good argument and makes sense. The body in the house does seem to eliminate JR, who could have disposed of it. PR had no excuse or opportunity to dispose of the body so the note was a way to move suspicion away from them (in her mind). But why make the note so long and convoluted? Maybe she thought it would seem more legit that way, but it just added more opportunity to match handwriting quirks. And why not stage an intruder scene better? Why not leave an outside door slightly ajar?

Another RDI conundrum is the death by asphyxiation. An accidental death by head blow and then a choking cord cover-up is more RDI believable than an accidental choking death followed by a skull-crashing blow. Choking takes longer and is death by intent.

But it really always comes back to the note written on paper from the house with a pen from the house. To think that an intruder took the time and risk to not only assault the victim in the house but to also write an extremely long note in the house (that was useless since JB was dead) is just not plausible.

I cannot agree that JR can be eliminated due to the body being in the house, based on the thought he would have had an opportunity to at least hide it in a vehicle or take it out before PR and BR were awakened.

I can't imagine him stashing JB's body in the trunk of his Jaguar. No way, not his Jag. Putting her in the Jeep and taking her out prior to the morning wake up time, too risky in putting the garage door up and awakening PR during the process, or being seen by someone witnessing him out and about at a weird time.

Also, if he waited till later, with windows all around the Jeep, he wouldn't want to take the chance PR might have glanced around the garage looking for JB, and seen the white blanket lump in the car before he had a chance to drive off in it. His best option, IMO, would have been to keep her body sequestered in the WC until he got PR and BR out of the house before she could have looked into the basement

All the same would apply to PR if she had to wait for JR to leave the house going after the ransom money before she could dispose of the body, except she would have no problem putting JB's body in the Jag trunk if she would have needed to.

 

[Anti-K]

This is a good argument and makes sense. The body in the house does seem to eliminate JR, who could have disposed of it. PR had no excuse or opportunity to dispose of the body so the note was a way to move suspicion away from them (in her mind). But why make the note so long and convoluted? Maybe she thought it would seem more legit that way, but it just added more opportunity to match handwriting quirks. And why not stage an intruder scene better? Why not leave an outside door slightly ajar?

Another RDI conundrum is the death by asphyxiation. An accidental death by head blow and then a choking cord cover-up is more RDI believable than an accidental choking death followed by a skull-crashing blow. Choking takes longer and is death by intent.

But it really always comes back to the note written on paper from the house with a pen from the house. To think that an intruder took the time and risk to not only assault the victim in the house but to also write an extremely long note in the house (that was useless since JB was dead) is just not plausible.

Ah, but we can’t say that the note was useless because we don’t know the killer’s intent. If he wanted to terrorize the parents than the note was useful and successful, the same if his intent was to cast suspicion towards the house, or f he simply wanted to disguise his true motivation, or if he wanted to misdirect investigators, or to create an enduring mystery, etc. in all these instances the note becomes useful, and to a large degree successful.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

I cannot agree that JR can be eliminated due to the body being in the house, based on the thought he would have had an opportunity to at least hide it in a vehicle or take it out before PR and BR were awakened.

I can't imagine him stashing JB's body in the trunk of his Jaguar. No way, not his Jag. Putting her in the Jeep and taking her out prior to the morning wake up time, too risky in putting the garage door up and awakening PR during the process, or being seen by someone witnessing him out and about at a weird time.

Also, if he waited till later, with windows all around the Jeep, he wouldn't want to take the chance PR might have glanced around the garage looking for JB, and seen the white blanket lump in the car before he had a chance to drive off in it. His best option, IMO, would have been to keep her body sequestered in the WC until he got PR and BR out of the house before she could have looked into the basement

All the same would apply to PR if she had to wait for JR to leave the house going after the ransom money before she could dispose of the body, except she would have no problem putting JB's body in the Jag trunk if she would have needed to.

But, there is nothing that occurred that suggests any such plan was in effect. Mr Ramsey allowed, even agreed, to the 911 call – no discussion, no dissension, no delay. So, what you suggest cannot be true.
.

What you are doing here is offering reasons why the body was not disposed of. But, if they – or, one of them – felt that they could not risk such a task, there would have been no reason to even contemplate faking or reporting a kidnapping. No disposal = no kidnapping; no disposal = no reason to even think of a kidnapping.
...

AK

 

[Detective Pinkie]

But the Rs had time constraints. They had a plane to catch. They had to stick to the timeline. In my mind they ran out of time. In order to be believable they had to get up at a certain time to catch that plane and John had to have that shower. It was too late to move the body. I don't think they realised what it would look like to have the note and body in the same place. Either the note was meant to buy them time till they moved the body or to throw the guilt away from the family when JB was found (or both). There is also a possibility that they didn't want to dump her out in the cold.

The least plausible possibility, for me, is that an intruder sat in that house writing a practice note and then a 3 page final note. The above is far more easy for me to believe.

MOO.

 

[lawstudent]

As an aside: JDI theorists generally have Mr Ramsey planning to dispose of the body while picking up or dropping off the money. Ideally, Mr Ramsey would have wanted to get rid of the body asap, before the Mrs and Burke were out of bed. Before the daylight hours. He would have wanted to, at minimum, move the body to the trunk of his car before Mrs and Burke were out of bed. Why would he risk moving it from the basement to the garage after they were awake, up and wandering around? For RDI, another layer of complexity is unnecessarily added.
...

AK

The problem for me is that this is almost the only theory that has any logic to me. It's not that other scenarios aren't possible, but I could see that being the plan. I understand the whole "well why wouldn't he put her in the car, then?" But police would presumably say "are you sure she isn't hiding in the car/did the intruder steal your car/was the garage left open/can you drive to the police station?" There was a lot more chance of her being found in the car than in that wine cellar, IMO, from the perspective of the average person. The ransom note would deflect attention away from the house, in theory, but not necessarily the car. While obviously some disagree, I think it was entirely reasonable for the Ramseys to believe their house would not be searched or secured for some time. The "it was an obvious crime scene" from the beginning argument isn't strong, to me, at least in terms of how the situation might have been viewed before the age of trial by public opinion of parents. There would be clear risks to moving her body later on, but not necessarily any bigger risk than putting her in the car to begin with, if they thought police might leave them alone for a bit. Of course, police would probably watch any hand off, so for that reason, I don't find it a great theory. But maybe during the bank trip would have seemed feasible.

 

[gramcracker]

But, there is nothing that occurred that suggests any such plan was in effect. Mr Ramsey allowed, even agreed, to the 911 call – no discussion, no dissension, no delay. So, what you suggest cannot be true.

we have only their version of how the 911 call came about. the same people who said BR slept soundly through the event and the aftermath. which we know is not true. thank goodness for the enhanced tape which forced them to admit that BR was awake and asking questions

What you are doing here is offering reasons why the body was not disposed of. But, if they – or, one of them – felt that they could not risk such a task, there would have been no reason to even contemplate faking or reporting a kidnapping. No disposal = no kidnapping; no disposal = no reason to even think of a kidnapping.

no disposal/no kidnapping then leaves who as the POIs? the intruder/kidnapper scenario wasn't well thought out because there was no time to think; there was only time to do ... something ... anything. it was a desperate maneuver because they were backed into a corner. it truly was an either/or situation. either it was an intruder or it was them

 

[bettybaby00]

But the Rs had time constraints. They had a plane to catch. They had to stick to the timeline. In my mind they ran out of time. In order to be believable they had to get up at a certain time to catch that plane and John had to have that shower. It was too late to move the body. I don't think they realised what it would look like to have the note and body in the same place. Either the note was meant to buy them time till they moved the body or to throw the guilt away from the family when JB was found (or both). There is also a possibility that they didn't want to dump her out in the cold.

The least plausible possibility, for me, is that an intruder sat in that house writing a practice note and then a 3 page final note. The above is far more easy for me to believe.

MOO.

Agree. The timeline is an important aspect that can't be discounted IMO.

An intruder isn't going to want to spend a a long time in the house, regardless of motive. A pervert/pedophile would take his victim out of the house to perpetrate his crime. Additionally, a pedophile would likely strike again, and likely eventually be found through DNA. A kidnapper would have taken her out as well, even if he accidentally killed her during the process, b/ c he could still try to get the ransom. A grudge killing doesn't seem likely b/c too many people were ruled out.

 

[bettybaby00]

we have only their version of how the 911 call came about. the same people who said BR slept soundly through the event and the aftermath. which we know is not true. thank goodness for the enhanced tape which forced them to admit that BR was awake and asking questions

no disposal/no kidnapping then leaves who as the POIs? the intruder/kidnapper scenario wasn't well thought out because there was no time to think; there was only time to do ... something ... anything. it was a desperate maneuver because they were backed into a corner. it truly was an either/or situation. either it was an intruder or it was them

Completely agree.