The actual vs. desired outcome

[BOESP]

There are far more ABFDE certified document examiners who dont say PR wrote the note than who do. ....

Holdon, would you source the above statement please? I've read a lot about this case and don't recall reading anything that supports your above statement. Solace was kind enough to provide names and statements to support a consensus that QDEs for the LE investigative team officially said Patsy could not be eliminated; some privately stated they believed she wrote the ransom note.

It is obvious to amateur and professionals who visit this board that any rebuttal by the Ramsey defense team will always be in favor of the accused. That bias has to be considered along with the QDE statements. Blanket statements without support weakens arguments for the Ramseys' innocence.

 

[BOESP]

...
the crime scene points to the parents,no one is arbitrarily saying anything.
and what about the past abuse? you keep avoiding that....

JMO, that "past abuse" is one of the few things I'm still cloudy on. I can't decide what the manner of abuse was and who would have done it. Digital penetration is the conclusion many of the professionals came up with. I see three choices (in no particular order):

1. Patsy and the "corporal cleaning" as suggested by Steve Thomas's theory.
2. John, by molestation for gratification.
3. An Intruder seeking gratification but an Intruder known to the Ramsey family.

Maybe some of you all can think of other possibilities. The thing I see is when compared to the evidence in the public domain and applied to the above three possibilities, the greater weight lies with one and two above.

 

[BOESP]

Yeah, but not that clearly.

Chet Ubowski, ABFDE member: "the evidence falls short of that necessary to support a definite conclusion."

Gideon Epstein, ABFDE member: "Strong indications is not a definitive conclusion

Tom Miller, Not a ABFDE member: "the handwriting is probably that of Patsy Ramsey."

Cina Wong, Not a ABFDE member: ""'100 percent certain' Mrs. Ramsey wrote the Ransom Note.

Its an interesting flip flop between ABFDE member and not a ABFDE member, as far as their certainty is concerned. The further into ABFDE member CDE you get, the fewer PR conclusions you get. In fact, is there even one ABFDE member CDE that concluded PR wrote the note?

Holdon, the above suggests there is a good possibility Patsy wrote the note. These folks had no reason to want to frame Patsy or John that I can see. In fact, they concluded it very unlikely John Ramsey wrote the note.

Have you found the link from the defense team QDE's that says Patsy didn't write the note? Please don't suggest the "four out of five" rating. That won't work because it is a Lin Wood on-the-fly statement designed to disguise the fact he wanted the uninformed to believe Patsy didn't write the ransom note. What else would one expect from a defense lawyer?

It would be nice if you applied the same methodology to both sides of this case instead of using it only against what you call "RDI" arguments.

 

[Rino]

The kidnapping part, the two gentlemen, and 'you will be denied her remains' parts I think were valid early on. The ransom part was never valid, IMO. The perp wanted JBR for good, and something went wrong between the time the note was written and placed on the stairs and the time JBR was instead sexually assaulted and killed.

If the perp wanted her for good, why deny them her remains based upon an invalid ransom demand? Why even leave a RN if the intention was not to return her?

After quite a lengthy time to write and rewrite the note, which was not consistant with a kidnapping for keeps, you think the perp snapped and decided to sexually assult her resulting in death after placing the note. He was so close to being the proud owner of her and he blew it?

 

[JMO8778]

If the perp wanted her for good, why deny them her remains based upon an invalid ransom demand? Why even leave a RN if the intention was not to return her?

After quite a lengthy time to write and rewrite the note, which was not consistant with a kidnapping for keeps, you think the perp snapped and decided to sexually assult her resulting in death after placing the note. He was so close to being the proud owner of her and he blew it?

Indeed,an intruder who was **that close** to having her for good wouldn't suddenly decide to just go down to the basement instead.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO, that "past abuse" is one of the few things I'm still cloudy on. I can't decide what the manner of abuse was and who would have done it. Digital penetration is the conclusion many of the professionals came up with. I see three choices (in no particular order):

1. Patsy and the "corporal cleaning" as suggested by Steve Thomas's theory.
2. John, by molestation for gratification.
3. An Intruder seeking gratification but an Intruder known to the Ramsey family.

Maybe some of you all can think of other possibilities. The thing I see is when compared to the evidence in the public domain and applied to the above three possibilities, the greater weight lies with one and two above.

that's the way I see it,too,and those are the only choices I can come up with.perhaps it was a mix of one or two things,or maybe even all three?
I do think Patsy was corporally cleaning her.I think Thomas had talked to enough ppl and had enough inside info on it to make an informed decision about it.
I also think JR was molesting her.The fact he was trying to account for his underwear fibers near her bed in DOI makes that hard to deny,IMO.I don't know if his fiber evidence on JB is the result of molestation,or just from him leaning over her during some of the staging(perhaps he put her arms over her head).
I think perhaps,due to the contents of the suitcase,that JAR could have been molesting her as well.
I don't know about Patsy's father.Some have said he babysat the kids,and that him leaving on standby so close to Christmas was b/c the R's were upset with him.
So who knows..it could be any number of things,but I don't see the chronic evidence being from a one-time unknown intruder.The infiltrate into her cells had to happen over time,as well as the loss of most of her hymen.

 

[Rino]

Btw JM, I love One Tin Soldier Every time I read your posts it's stuck in my head for a while, a good stuck:dance:

 

[JMO8778]

Btw JM, I love One Tin Soldier Every time I read your posts it's stuck in my head for a while, a good stuck:dance:

thanx !

 

[BOESP]

....
So who knows..it could be any number of things,but I don't see the chronic evidence being from a one-time unknown intruder.The infiltrate into her cells had to happen over time,as well as the loss of most of her hymen.

You made an important observation: acute abuse versus chronic abuse. If the acute sexual abuse is related to her death, it suggests the perpetrator of the chronic abuse probably had something to do with JonBenet's death too. In my mind, that eliminates the chances of an unknown Intruder.

So who are the best candidates for chronic abuse: you suggested Don Paugh and John Andrew Ramsey might be possibilites; then there's John; there's Patsy, based on Steve Thomas's theory; then there is someone with access to the Ramsey home who would not mind sneaking in and staying all day and into the night (based on the hypothesis someone hid-out in the Ramsey home while the Ramseys were at the Whites). That would have to be someone who also had access to JonBenet on say the 22nd through 24th of December, based on the published professional opinions that estimated the time of the chronic injury.

That narrows down the suspect pool to people who had access to JonBenet during a limited time period and who could have possibly done the deed without notice by either parent or by being missed by their family or friends.

I haven't seen any convincing evidence there was an Intruder but will assume for discussion if it were an Intruder they had a key.

I can not see an Intruder risking their all on Christmas to only molest JonBenet via digital penetration. Nope, intruding molesters do not fit that pattern. People bent on retribution or revenge do not take the time to "kidnap" one child and then leave them wrapped in a blanket in the basement. Molesters don't "lightly" molest on the premises then decide to inflict head damage and strangulation -- either action would have killed JonBenet if there was a presumed motive for molestation and murder.

Who had means and opportunity? I guess I should mention motive too but motives are not always preplanned nor is the outcome intentional.

 

[BOESP]

Btw JM, I love One Tin Soldier Every time I read your posts it's stuck in my head for a while, a good stuck:dance:

The words seem to fit this case too.

 

[Ames]

Indeed,an intruder who was **that close** to having her for good wouldn't suddenly decide to just go down to the basement instead.

Yep, and the front door, would have been a heck of alot closer to get to, than the cellar. Not to mention that the front door didn't have an obstacle course leading to it, like the cellar did. The "intruder" just by passed the front door, in favor of the WC. Makes NO SENSE!

 

[JMO8778]

You made an important observation: acute abuse versus chronic abuse. If the acute sexual abuse is related to her death, it suggests the perpetrator of the chronic abuse probably had something to do with JonBenet's death too. In my mind, that eliminates the chances of an unknown Intruder.

Indeed it does.
Holdon keeps pushing the intruder theory,and not only does it not fit the evidence at hand,it doesn't explain the long term damage done to her.Holdon says she was sexually assaulted just prior to her death,but how can he explain the long term damage that was done? It doesn't fit a one time intruder.

So who are the best candidates for chronic abuse: you suggested Don Paugh and John Andrew Ramsey might be possibilites; then there's John; there's Patsy, based on Steve Thomas's theory; then there is someone with access to the Ramsey home who would not mind sneaking in and staying all day and into the night (based on the hypothesis someone hid-out in the Ramsey home while the Ramseys were at the Whites). That would have to be someone who also had access to JonBenet on say the 22nd through 24th of December, based on the published professional opinions that estimated the time of the chronic injury.

I think it was Wecht that said she had an injury about 72 hrs old,yes.(I think that was an abrasion?)
But I think the hymen damage would have to be more long-term than that,UK,can you help us out here on that?You're more informed on it than I am,thx.

Who had means and opportunity? I guess I should mention motive too but motives are not always preplanned nor is the outcome intentional.

right on.I can't help but think that,for whatever reason,Patsy did the initial damage-ie head injury and manual strangulation,and that 911 wasn't called due to what would have been found,relating to long term sexual abuse.(and or it could have been Patsy not wanting JB to tell anyone she'd manually strangled her,etc,not to mention she'd have a heck of a time trying to explain those marks on her neck).

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

If the perp wanted her for good, why deny them her remains based upon an invalid ransom demand? Why even leave a RN if the intention was not to return her?

After quite a lengthy time to write and rewrite the note, which was not consistant with a kidnapping for keeps, you think the perp snapped and decided to sexually assult her resulting in death after placing the note. He was so close to being the proud owner of her and he blew it?

Proud owner? You're probably more right than you know. Because whoever would take JBR for whatever reason would be gaining a blond hair blue eyed American girl with some training in poise and grace.

 

[Rino]

Proud owner? You're probably more right than you know. Because whoever would take JBR for whatever reason would be gaining a blond hair blue eyed American girl with some training in poise and grace.

But no one did. Becuase no one wanted her, no one kidnapped her and there is no credible evidence that anyone tried to.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

But no one did. Becuase no one wanted her, no one kidnapped her and there is no credible evidence that anyone tried to.

'no one wanted her' is an assumption.

'no one kidnapped her' is false. She was kidnapped from her bed as evidenced by cord fiber found in her bed, and by witness testimony. She was later sexually assaulted and then murdered (as opposed to 'sexual assault that resulted in her death')

There IS credible evidence that a crime took place where JBR was the victim. The nature of the crime has not yet been fully determined. So again the idea that no one tried to kidnap her is an assumption.

 

[UKGuy]

Indeed it does.
Holdon keeps pushing the intruder theory,and not only does it not fit the evidence at hand,it doesn't explain the long term damage done to her.Holdon says she was sexually assaulted just prior to her death,but how can he explain the long term damage that was done? It doesn't fit a one time intruder.
I think it was Wecht that said she had an injury about 72 hrs old,yes.(I think that was an abrasion?)
But I think the hymen damage would have to be more long-term than that,UK,can you help us out here on that?You're more informed on it than I am,thx.

right on.I can't help but think that,for whatever reason,Patsy did the initial damage-ie head injury and manual strangulation,and that 911 wasn't called due to what would have been found,relating to long term sexual abuse.(and or it could have been Patsy not wanting JB to tell anyone she'd manually strangled her,etc,not to mention she'd have a heck of a time trying to explain those marks on her neck).

JMO8778,

But I think the hymen damage would have to be more long-term than that,UK,can you help us out here on that?You're more informed on it than I am,thx.

Well, you need look no further than Steve Thomas' book Chapter 24. Where he writes

In mid-September, a panel of pediatric experts from around the country reached one of the major conclusions of the investigation--that JonBenet had suffered vaginal trauma prior to the day she was killed

Just how coincidental is that? And, same chapter:

We gathered affidavits stating in clear language that there were injuries consistent with prior trauma and sexual abuse ... There was chronic abuse... Past violation of the vagina...Evidence of both acute and chronic sexual abuse In other words, the doctors were saying it had happened before.

JonBenet's hymen was eroded and her vaginal entrance was unnaturally enlarged for a six-year old girl. Add to that Coroner Meyer's remarks and its difficult to avoid concluding she was the victim of sexual molestation? Now JonBenet may have been physically punished for wetting the bed etc, but what does her vagina have to do with wetting the bed? Also corporal punishement is no reason to deny a child medical assistance or construct elaborate staging, common sense suggests something else is being covered up? A lot of the evidence can be explained by assuming that JonBenet's death was initially staged in her bedroom, she may have been indecently posed, after a staged sexual assault, but this was later abandonded and various items of staging were removed to the basement and the guest bedroom, in short there was a cleanup, followed by the wine-cellar staging? Also rather than her death being a consequence of a sexual assault, it could be that her head injury was accidental, occuring during some sexual activity?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

no way.why bother with the 118,000 nonsense anyway.that was just part of the R's plan to cast suspicion on someone who had access to JR's bonus info.
btw,that theory is the same hogwash JR proposes in DOI (o my,what a coincidence).



do you really think no one has a single ounce of common sense and can't see the truth in this case????
the crime scene points to the parents,no one is arbitrarily saying anything.
and what about the past abuse? you keep avoiding that....

Deciding the parents are guilty, and then fashioning the circumstances around that idea to make it all work, isn't very objective. Its more like lynch-mob mentality.

The chronic abuse idea, crass as it is, is probably along the lines of the hardware store cord purchase idea. Its just something RDI has concocted because it helps make it all work. And just like the cord purchase, there's no corroborating evidence to back it up. No witnesses, no quotes from JBR, no ER visits, no events or testimony from JBR's life. Trips to the nurses or doctors office, and mystery 911 calls, amount to $2.29 on a receipt.

Only after-the-fact armchair experts with autopsy photos and text. Many hired by the tabloids. Never personally examined or interviewed JBR in life or death. There are experts who say that without an interview you can't ever establish abuse, because there are other causes for chronic medical conditions besides abuse.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778, Well, you need look no further than Steve Thomas' book Chapter 24. Where he writes Just how coincidental is that? And, same chapter: JonBenet's hymen was eroded and her vaginal entrance was unnaturally enlarged for a six-year old girl.

yes,but what I'm saying is,that would require more than just a one time 72 hour old injury,right?

Add to that Coroner Meyer's remarks and its difficult to avoid concluding she was the victim of sexual molestation? Now JonBenet may have been physically punished for wetting the bed etc, but what does her vagina have to do with wetting the bed?

Thomas thought she was violently wiped,a result of Patsy being angry when cleaning her up.But maybe there was much more daily punishment going on than just violently wiping her?

Also corporal punishement is no reason to deny a child medical assistance or construct elaborate staging, common sense suggests something else is being covered up?

I would be of that opinion,yes.for one,you wouldn't stage an accident as a murder,why make it appear worse than it is? and why add the sexual elements to it if none are needed,it seems out of place?

A lot of the evidence can be explained by assuming that JonBenet's death was initially staged in her bedroom, she may have been indecently posed, after a staged sexual assault, but this was later abandonded and various items of staging were removed to the basement and the guest bedroom, in short there was a cleanup, followed by the wine-cellar staging?

I tend to think the body shows restaging,yes.
are you talking about the sack of rope as to what was put in the guest bedroom? I didn't know there was a guest room,I thought it was JAR's room.

Also rather than her death being a consequence of a sexual assault, it could be that her head injury was accidental, occuring during some sexual activity?

...IMO,no,I don't think so.I just have a really hard time equating the term 'accident' with an 8 1/2 in. head injury that literally split her skull in half.
I'm just kind of literal like that.

 

[JMO8778]

She was kidnapped from her bed as evidenced by cord fiber found in her bed,

I think the cord was cut on her bed,with BR's knife,which was later found in the basement nearby.And only 2 ppl knew where it was hidden,PR and LHP.

and by witness testimony.

what witness?The R's couldn't keep their lies straight,they're hardly reliable witnesses.no one saw an 'intruder' take her.

There IS credible evidence that a crime took place where JBR was the victim.

and in her own home at that!

 

[JMO8778]

Deciding the parents are guilty, and then fashioning the circumstances around that idea to make it all work, isn't very objective. Its more like lynch-mob mentality.

wow Holdon,none of us has done that.the evidence fits the parents,from RN right down to the fiber evidence and pineapple.that's just such a silly comment,it really is.

The chronic abuse idea, crass as it is, is probably along the lines of the hardware store cord purchase idea. Its just something RDI has concocted because it helps make it all work. And just like the cord purchase, there's no corroborating evidence to back it up. No witnesses, no quotes from JBR, no ER visits, no events or testimony from JBR's life. Trips to the nurses or doctors office, and mystery 911 calls, amount to $2.29 on a receipt.

surely you jest.pathology reports and the examinations of her body don't lie.her body told the truth about what happened,from the head injury right down to the sexual abuse.

There are experts who say that without an interview you can't ever establish abuse, because there are other causes for chronic medical conditions besides abuse.

for what reason would she be enlarged 2x the size for a girl her age? for what reason would she have an internal abrasion/injury and chronic infiltrate into the cells? it speaks for itself.