The Wine Cellar

[Tawny]

If he wanted to ensure it was found, why hide it? If he had to bug out, not taking the kidnapped-turned-murdered with him, why did he leave the note?

 

[Mama2JML]

If he wanted to ensure it was found, why hide it?

In an attempt to delay discovery, to misdirect LE, to control, etc.?...

If he had to bug out, not taking the kidnapped-turned-murdered with him, why did he leave the note?

If he'd already written the note, why wouldn't he leave it? The same possibilities I listed above could also apply here; to delay discovery, to misdirect LE, to control, etc.

 

[Tawny]

Delay discovery to what end? If he were bugging out, why would he care when, where, and how she's found?

It makes zero logical sense.

 

[Mama2JML]

Delay discovery to what end? If he were bugging out, why would he care when, where, and how she's found?

It makes zero logical sense.

I'm not sure what you mean by 'bugging out', elaborate please.

-&-

What is the logic/reasoning you are trying to apply?

 

[UKGuy]

Perhaps the RN was meant to delay & misdirect, and the body was placed in the wine cellar to ensure she was found. Part of the fantasy? Maybe this was the perp's plan from the start. Or, maybe he did intend to take the victim with him, but changed his mind for any number of reasons. (I.e to avoid detection)

Mama2JML,
Why does an intruder need to bother with a RN at all, all that sitting around authoring a RN, increases the risk of being caught.

No JonBenet in the house tells its own story, when followed up with a ransom phone call, no RN is required.

There is no IDI explanation forthcoming as to why the said intruder did not remove JonBenet from the house, which is just as inconsistent as any staged kidnapping leaving JonBenet in the house!

Intruder plan of action: Enter Ramsey household remove JonBenet, dead or alive, relocate to the boot of awaiting car, then simply drive away. Next day phone ransom demands. Total time to execute less than fifteen minutes!

.

 

[Tawny]

Bugging out = Leaving in a hurry

The logic I'm trying to apply is why an intruder would do any of the things he supposedly did or did not do. Why would he hide a body in a dark room in the house he murdered her in? Why would he bother to leave a ransom note without taking the body?

 

[Anti-K]

If IDI, then it may have just come down to having nowhere to take her. It really could be that simple. Here are a few other possibilities (I’ve posted the following elsewhere, so some may want to skip over):

1. a kidnapper could have intended on murdering and hiding his victim in the house right from the get-go, possibly believing that the Ramseys would not call the police and that he could collect his money before the parents discovered the body (why would they look for it?). Murdering and hiding the body in the house relieves him of the risk of having to handle, transport, hide and return/dispose of his victim and reduces the risk of forensic evidence accruing.

2. a molester who happened to kill (as opposed to a killer who happened to molest) could have created the note as a means of hiding from himself and/or others his perverse desires and true motivation. Wiping, redressing, covering body and elements of a kidnapping (cord, tape, note) all could have been done as a means to misdirect. “We know that offenders are more reluctant to admit sexual motives than other types of motives (e.g., profit, revenge, anger, power). Some offenders may not even realize their true motivation. An offender may eventually request a ridiculously small ransom for a child he had abducted to molest in an apparent attempt to convince others, but primarily himself, that he is not a sex offender” http://www.missingkids.com/en_US/publications/NC70.pdf

3. a killer wishing to direct suspicion towards the occupants of the house (thus, away from himself)

4. a killer wishing to create an enduring mystery

5. 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

But, really, we don’t know. IMO we need an identified suspect if we hope to realistically answer this question.
...

AK

 

[Tawny]

And yet you repeatedly call RDI scenarios complicated and unrealistic.

 

[Anti-K]

And yet you repeatedly call RDI scenarios complicated and unrealistic.

What are the complications?
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

In each scenario we have a simple explanation for both note and body in house, although the simplest explanation of all is the one wherein the killer simply had nowhere to take his victim.

In these scenarios, while the note/body remain a contradiction, the killer’s intent and motives are not.

With RDI, not only is the note/body a contradiction but so is their supposed intent/motive (to explain a dead body in the house, to point suspicion outside the house, etc).

Removing the contradiction underlying intent/motive allows for a simpler explanation. Simpler doesn’t necessarily mean “not complex,” merely “less complex.”
...

AK

 

[Tawny]

I disagree. As is well known, I believe the simplest explanation is that a family member is responsible. IDI still has the complicated issue of who had the motive, opportunity, and wherewithal to do this, and then not bother to follow through with the threats, etc.

Removing the supposed contradiction of the ransom note removes ALL complications. With no ransom note, all we have is a sexually abused murder victim in the basement. Super simple.

 

[Anti-K]

I disagree. As is well known, I believe the simplest explanation is that a family member is responsible. IDI still has the complicated issue of who had the motive, opportunity, and wherewithal to do this, and then not bother to follow through with the threats, etc.

Removing the supposed contradiction of the ransom note removes ALL complications. With no ransom note, all we have is a sexually abused murder victim in the basement. Super simple.

Well, afaik, there is no realistic IDI suspect other than DNA-man. Identifying this person may be complicated (I don’t think it will ever be done), but this complication has nothing to do with what is being discussed: simple vs complex explanations for the evidence as we know it.
.

It is just your opinion that without the ransom note all we would have is a “sexually abused murder victim in the basement.”

We can remove the ransom note, but along with it goes the wrist ligatures, the tape, and probably the basement (because they are all elements of a fake kidnapping). And, why not the sexual assault while we’re at it?

Seriously.

I’m taking this to the “Something that has been bugging me...” thread, because it’s really been bugging me!  see here: http://tinyurl.com/opqusav
...

AK

 

[blefuscu]

If an IDI (which I don't believe they did) why leave the body in the house at all. Other people may not know about the wine cellar, but the Ramsays do. Even if I found a ransom note in my house you could bet your life I would search every single room multiple times immediately after phoning the police. I would want to be sure my child wasn't there somewhere. So why, if an intruder is leaving a ransom note, would they leave JB in the house? They won't get a ransom once she is found. That means that the ransom note isn't needed at all. And which intruder who has killed a child is going to hang around in the house writing an unnecessary ransom note there?

 

[InstantProof]

She's hidden from view but not really hidden. There must have been spots to hide a child besides laid out on the floor of a room. An intruder couldn't have expected the R's not to look in that room, and the R's were crazy if they though the police would ignore that room.

 

[andreww]

That morning I believe there were four searches done in that basement, one by officer French, one by another officer, one by Fleet White and one by John Ramsey. All but John either entered or attempted to enter that WC. So ask yourself why John never bothered to search that room?. Ask yourself how an intruder would have found that latch when the cops couldn't?. Ask yourself why a supposed intruder would have locked that door when they left?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CorallaroC]

good points Instantproof and Andreww. ITA. Eventhough it was stated more than once and by several people that the WC door had a high-up wood-block latch, appeared to be painted shut, and/or was difficult to find or distinguish in the MAZE of the basement floor plan ---- I would have expected a more thorough search by LE and others. Unless they were looking for places JB might have gone to HIDE. Maybe thats it, the original kidnapping illusion that was created made searches close off their minds to (seemlingly) illogical places to search. But I've often wondered if FW or Officer French had been accompanied downstairs, and shooed off by JR saying, no don't bother, thats a sealed-off room with no windows for an intruder. Just my speculation of course.But it's always sad to think that JonBenet's body laid in that awful windowless room for such a long time.

I wish we knew for sure if the WC was a COLD ROOM, or a hot-stuffy room as the R's seemed to suggest. If it was a hot stuffy moldy room as they say, then why would they call it the WINE CELLAR? If it was moldy too warm and very icky room, then WHY would there have been gifts for others placed in there. Why would the tree decorations have been placed there, if it was just an icky moldy place?

But the biggest question of all - why would JonBenet's body have been placed there?

lotsa theories, no real answers....

 

[CorallaroC]

just a PS - All these years later, the general public mind seems to be more educated about crime scenes and the things murderers tend to do to cover up their crime or at least try to fool investigators. With that in mind, I have often wondered IF the WC was truly a COLD PLACE in the house, and there was some hope that by placing her body there (but wrapped in a blanket, which would have done no good for a dead child, but would have only helped a killer make the body slow down decomp) IOW the Killer hoped to put her body ON ICE (like a makeshift morgue).

Im sure many people have wondered same. But my mind tends to keep going back to this. Even IF an intruder knew the location of the WC, would an intruder known whether or not the room stayed COLD?

 

[andreww]

just a PS - All these years later, the general public mind seems to be more educated about crime scenes and the things murderers tend to do to cover up their crime or at least try to fool investigators. With that in mind, I have often wondered IF the WC was truly a COLD PLACE in the house, and there was some hope that by placing her body there (but wrapped in a blanket, which would have done no good for a dead child, but would have only helped a killer make the body slow down decomp) IOW the Killer hoped to put her body ON ICE (like a makeshift morgue).

Im sure many people have wondered same. But my mind tends to keep going back to this. Even IF an intruder knew the location of the WC, would an intruder known whether or not the room stayed COLD?

I don't believe it was a wine cellar, just a room that was occasionally used to store wine. I really don't think the temperature in there really had anything to do with anything. That room was the most remote and hidden room in the house. This isn't a coincidence and it does tell you something about the killers state of mind that day. They did not want the body found, plain and simple, at least not until they wanted to be found. No coincidence that John found the body either. I believe that the game plan all along was to get the police there and thoroughly establish themselves as distraught victims. Once the cops bought in to that, the body could be discovered. I for one don't believe it was where John said it was. I believe it was in that room, but farther in and less conspicuous. I believe John pulled it out in to the open before he called for Fleet.

 

[Anti-K]

I’ve always called it The Windowless Room. Anyway...

I think that anyone who’s spent a few minutes looking at floor plans and photographs has quickly realized that the WC was an easy find. You go down the stairs and there it is, straight in front of you. It’s painfully obvious.

I realize that there are some people who say that they would have searched their house high and low if they woke up to find a ransom note and their child missing, but I think that most people would not do this. There’s a ransom note.

Your child has been kidnapped. You might look around to see how they got on or how they got out and was anything else taken or anything dropped, etc; but no one is going to look for their child (we all would now! But not before this case). Their child has been kidnapped.

So, I think the body was hidden well enough to prevent the parents from finding it, but not well enough to stop the police from finding it. Who could guess how inept they would be (they didn’t even notice the broken window in the basement!!!)?

If RDI, the body presented a massive problem for the Ramseys. They either needed to dispose of it or report it. Hiding it, calling the police and saying that it is not in the house – it’s been kidnapped! – and taking no steps to direct them towards or encouraging them to search the house seems to be the opposite of wanting them to find it.
...

AK

 

[andreww]

As I said in my previous post AK, I think they wanted to establish themselves as victims before revealing the body. I've always found the circumstances of John finding her to be odd. Him and Fleet were in the train room doing their search, Fleet is distracted and John is in the WC. Did he do a thorough search of the other rooms in between? No, he bypasses them and heads straight for that door. So if we assume RDI, then we know that John wanted the body found at that moment. Why wouldn't he have directed Fleet to start the search at the other end of the basement? I think it is evident that he did not want a witness when he opened the WC door. Why? Perhaps he didn't trust his acting skills? Or perhaps JBs body was not where he wanted it to be? Perhaps, knowing that they'd done a half job with the wrist ligatures, he wanted to fein the attempt to remove them, again distorting evidence. It is odd that upon finding here body he attempts to remove the loose wrist bindings but does nothing about the tight ligature around her neck isn't it? So many odd decisions made by John that day.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk