"We Didn't Mean for This to Happen"

  • #121
Toltec said:
Well this sexual abuse by Daddy Paugh got out of hand on the 23d of December. He got his grimy hands on his precious granddaughter and made her cry. By the 24th of December he was flying back to Atlanta...STANDBY!!!
That is something that sticks in my mind... why don't we know more about "Daddy Paugh."
The R's had a video recorder set up for Christmas morning, yet there is no tape. I've heard the excuses, but none of them wash for me. It was Christmas morning in a family that did everything "just right."
So that leads me to wonder who was in the house that Christmas morning that the R's don't want to admit was there?
 
  • #122
rashomon said:
An "extensive area of scalp hemorrhage" would seem pretty much blood to me.
Just like so many things in this case and the reason why we trying to figure it out, it is open to interpretation. They just could not determine the time line. We even heard one doctor from Denver say that there are other cases where extreme damage was done to the skull yet little loss of blood. Good grief!

I kind of think either the garroting came first or they were simultaneous.

I just picked up a large Maglite in the store today and got thinking. It seemed very reasonable to me that the Maglite could do the job. The head of the Maglite is very heavy and fits the hole in the skull as well. I think it was the Maglite. I also think I know why it was left but had no finger prints. It was a house hold item, so why would it have finger prints just like bowls that contain pineapple? Simply because it WAS the weapon. The bowl was innocent. But it would be difficult to get rid of or hide the Maglite, just like the bowl. I think someone figured that the cops could conclude scientifically that the Maglite head fits the injury exactly. So they took no chances and wiped it down thoroughly inside and out.

I don't know if the autopsy was really that good. Why more bungling?
 
  • #123
I think I remember the Maglite being on the kitchen bench...
If it was the murder weapon why leave it on the bench like that??
I know it's a pretty big thing to try and get rid of but why leave it there...why not in the back of a cupboard in the laundry...or somewhere like the garage so as not to draw attention to it...
I've never understood why the bowl of pineapple was left there either...was it because in the R's panic they just plain forgot it?
The bowl being on the table with PR's prints on it makes it hard to believe there was an intruder...even a familiar intruder, I mean really....its the middle of the night, it's dark...why would JBR have felt comfortable doing that?? well comfortable enough not to scream out etc...even if it was someone she knew well....she had her own flashlight because she was scared at night...
Did the bowl get left there because they didn't realise the autopsy report would show pineapple in her system?
 
  • #124
narlacat said:
I think I remember the Maglite being on the kitchen bench...
If it was the murder weapon why leave it on the bench like that??
I know it's a pretty big thing to try and get rid of but why leave it there...why not in the back of a cupboard in the laundry...or somewhere like the garage so as not to draw attention to it...
I've never understood why the bowl of pineapple was left there either...was it because in the R's panic they just plain forgot it?
The bowl being on the table with PR's prints on it makes it hard to believe there was an intruder...even a familiar intruder, I mean really....its the middle of the night, it's dark...why would JBR have felt comfortable doing that?? well comfortable enough not to scream out etc...even if it was someone she knew well....she had her own flashlight because she was scared at night...
Did the bowl get left there because they didn't realise the autopsy report would show pineapple in her system?
Ah, there you got me going again. Why wasn't it put away? Maybe it was planted or left as a subtle hint by our mastermind intruder. I mean, things like the pineapple. Subtle clues of Leopold & Loeb or just a few clues that did not get cleaned up. Wiping clean the Maglite sounds like a professional clean up.

If the Maglite was the weapon, then it would get special attention. It would be wiped very clean. The bowl is not the weapon, so it was just overlooked in all the haste and tension of that night. To me it was wiped clean inside and out because = it was the weapon. The baseball bat at the back might very well have been placed there to just confuse.
 
  • #125
narlacat said:
I think I remember the Maglite being on the kitchen bench...
If it was the murder weapon why leave it on the bench like that??
I know it's a pretty big thing to try and get rid of but why leave it there...why not in the back of a cupboard in the laundry...or somewhere like the garage so as not to draw attention to it...
I've never understood why the bowl of pineapple was left there either...was it because in the R's panic they just plain forgot it?
The bowl being on the table with PR's prints on it makes it hard to believe there was an intruder...even a familiar intruder, I mean really....its the middle of the night, it's dark...why would JBR have felt comfortable doing that?? well comfortable enough not to scream out etc...even if it was someone she knew well....she had her own flashlight because she was scared at night...
Did the bowl get left there because they didn't realise the autopsy report would show pineapple in her system?

narlacat,

I tend to agree with you. Its unlikely given the attention to staging that the murder weapon would be left on display if it could have been concealed.

That the maglite was wiped clean suggests, as others have hinted, that another Ramsey may have been in the house at some point and it was this persons fingerprints that were being removed?

I would interpret the pineapple scene as benign, it illustrates normal household activity, and tells us that JonBenet was still alive at some point.

But there is a lacuna in the crime-scene, or a piece missing from the jigsaw due to the staging, and an attempt to place things back, e.g. maglite.

There is no forensic evidence to indicate there was an intruder, the crime-scene prior to JonBenet's death is that of people comfortable and relaxing after xmas celebrations, probably preparing for a vacation flight.

When we try to join the dots , so to speak, I feel we are connecting probable staging upstairs with activity downstairs, and more staging in the wine-cellar.

The bowl of pineapple was overlooked because it likely played no part in JonBenet's homicide, just as when Burke stated he saw JonBenet walk up the steps into the house on returning from the Whites, this was also similarly overlooked.

JonBenet supposedly being placed in bed with a Red top then a White Gap top tells you there is ad-hoc staging going on, even more striking is that it is an explanation as to why she is still wearing some day clothing, and not say her Barbie Nightdress, that is she was intended to be redressed at least twice.

So you could conclude she was killed whilst wearing her day clothes, then she was washed down, and redressed, with her hair being restyled to match this particular staging, later all this was revised again down in the wine-cellar.

If the above general outline seems coherent, even if the details are wrong, then it suggests collusion between at least two people, if this were PR and JR, then it would rule out JR acting after the event simply covering up PR's traces as has been suggested.


If JonBenet had died as the result of an accident, then for parents looking for some rationale or explanation to present to the world then the truth would be ideal, and generally there is no murder trial for accidental death.

So to choose to enact multiple stagings within the Ramsey household suggests what is being covered up may be more than an accidental or a common homicide?
 
  • #126
rashomon said:
An "extensive area of scalp hemorrhage" would seem pretty much blood to me.
It probably was a lot of blood, but as head wounds go, it was not a lot of blood. Steve Thomas was wrong to call it a massive haemorrhage; it was quite a small amount of blood for that size of skull bone fracture and surrounding brain tissue injury.
 
  • #127
Toltec said:
Well this sexual abuse by Daddy Paugh got out of hand on the 23d of December. He got his grimy hands on his precious granddaughter and made her cry. By the 24th of December he was flying back to Atlanta...STANDBY!!!
If this is accurate information and he did actually fly back to Atlanta December 24th then he could not have been in the Ramsey basement on the night of the 25th/26th and I will remove him from my list of suspects for that night.

Please can you give your source for this information Toltec. Thanks
 
  • #128
Maybe you could research it Aussie, it's your theory.
And it's full of holes as usual, let's just make it up as we go along...:rolleyes:
 
  • #129
aussiesheila said:
If this is accurate information and he did actually fly back to Atlanta December 24th then he could not have been in the Ramsey basement on the night of the 25th/26th and I will remove him from my list of suspects for that night.

Please can you give your source for this information Toltec. Thanks

Might have read it in PMPT....

GPP did not kill JonBenet....
 
  • #130
AussieSheila, a few years back, someone did a lot of detailed research on whether JAR could have been in Boulder at the time we are discussing, and came to the conclusion it was possible. Not saying I have any opinion about it.

Police did ask for, I think hair samples from JAR and his pal. I forget exactly what kind of samples. Maybe pubic hair too. Because the ATM picture didn't really prove it was JAR at a certain time, which was used as an alibi that he was in Atlanta. It only showed the top of a baseball cap, not anyone's face.

I'm not suspecting JAR or taking sides, Just thought you might like to know. Trying to remember who did such a job and then left us, think it was MJenn.
 
  • #131
PR is quoted, by her sister Pam as saying "Couldn't you fix this for me?" and SOMETHING LIKE...."We didn't mean for this to happen," when Pam had finally convinced her to lie down for a while. She would get up to greet each visitor arriving, people Pam didn't know. Pg. 53 of paperback PMPT.

Was PR ever asked what this sentence meant?

What do we think it could mean? (Obviously "we" could just mean John and I, or, any-number-of others and I didn't mean for this to happen.)

In my opinion, PR saying this is a major clue that points to what actually happened. We, as in both JR and PR, did not mean for this to happen. What it means to me is that JR and PR had involved their daughter in something that they did not expect would lead to her sudden death. It indicates that JBR's death was accidental and not intended to happen. It also indicates the parent's indirect involvement in the death of their daughter, and strongly implies that they know how their daughter really died and who killed her, but they are hiding it.
 
  • #132
In my opinion, PR saying this is a major clue that points to what actually happened. We, as in both JR and PR, did not mean for this to happen. What it means to me is that JR and PR had involved their daughter in something that they did not expect would lead to her sudden death. It indicates that JBR's death was accidental and not intended to happen. It also indicates the parent's indirect involvement in the death of their daughter, and strongly implies that they know how their daughter really died and who killed her, but they are hiding it.


What I always found very interesting about JR's TV appearances was that even if he always was blah blah-ing about an intruder he always said he wants to know why,why but never WHO.So in the back of his mind,yes,he always knew who but I am not sure if he ever figured out why,maybe cause he wasn't present when it happened?(BDI or PDI).Of course ,this doesn't mean he wasn't part of the cover-up cause I am pretty sure he was.
 
  • #133
What I always found very interesting about JR's TV appearances was that even if he always was blah blah-ing about an intruder he always said he wants to know why,why but never WHO.So in the back of his mind,yes,he always knew who but I am not sure if he ever figured out why,maybe cause he wasn't present when it happened?(BDI or PDI).Of course ,this doesn't mean he wasn't part of the cover-up cause I am pretty sure he was.

Excellent point! Taken with Patsy's comment "we didn't mean for this to happen" and JAR's comment about the perp being shown "forgiveness" and I think it paints a pretty good picture of a family that KNOWS WHO.
 
  • #134
Excellent point! Taken with Patsy's comment "we didn't mean for this to happen" and JAR's comment about the perp being shown "forgiveness" and I think it paints a pretty good picture of a family that KNOWS WHO.

and all this points to BDI IMO.
you would forgive your little brother cause he probably (?) didn't mean it,but your psycho stepmom?not that easy IMO
same re JR....he would have blamed and probably hated PR for it if PDI...but if it was Burke I can understand his behavior.maybe "we didn't mean for this to happen" means "I still can't understand what led to something like this and what we did wrong as parents"

:twocents:
 
  • #135
and all this points to BDI IMO.
you would forgive your little brother cause he probably (?) didn't mean it,but your psycho stepmom?not that easy IMO
same re JR....he would have blamed and probably hated PR for it if PDI...but if it was Burke I can understand his behavior.maybe "we didn't mean for this to happen" means "I still can't understand what led to something like this and what we did wrong as parents"

:twocents:

madeleine,

mmm, reminds me of the 911 call: We are not talking to you.

BDI also explains away all the police inaction and injunctions to treat the R's as victims not suspects, allow Pamela to raid the house for whatever, whilst wearing a police jacket, then retire to MacDonalds, What?

I'll bet this is what Kolar was getting at in his book regarding those medical self help books, i.e. that his way of saying the children had issues?

Or: Everyone involved knows who did it, e.g. BDI, but are under legal restraint to say so.


.
.
 
  • #136
BDI explains it all -- parental behavior, White behavior, much of the LE behavior, legal aspects, silence or denial on the part of those who figure it out, otherwise inexplicable evidence... All is understandable when this one fact is accepted. But closed eyes and minds will not, cannot, see.

Sad, but unfortunately, IMO, true.
.
 
  • #137
IMO BDI is also the main reason why the ones involved (BPD,DA office,etc) don't even bother anymore,they know he can't be charged.
WE wanna know the truth.But what do THEY gain from it?Nothing.They won't ever have a prosecutable case,they have to admit all the mistakes that have been made in the beginning.So I guess it's convenient for everybody that this case remains cold,unsolved and it's very easy for them to throw the "we wait for a DNA match" line in our faces...they don't win anything(cause if BDI there's nothing for them to win anyway,no DA will be the towns hero cause he can't bring the perp to justice) but they don't LOSE again either.
 
  • #138
BDI explains it all -- parental behavior, White behavior, much of the LE behavior, legal aspects, silence or denial on the part of those who figure it out, otherwise inexplicable evidence... All is understandable when this one fact is accepted. But closed eyes and minds will not,a cannot, see.

Sad, but unfortunately, IMO, true.
.

otg, I agree with your post wholeheartedly but I have a few nagging doubts. I can't see Burke doing the staging and I have no reasonable doubt that Patsy wrote the note.

Neither can I imagine not calling 911 no matter who did it. There is still a piece or two missing before my mind will be satisfied.
 
  • #139
otg, I agree with your post wholeheartedly but I have a few nagging doubts. I can't see Burke doing the staging and I have no reasonable doubt that Patsy wrote the note.

Neither can I imagine not calling 911 no matter who did it. There is still a piece or two missing before my mind will be satisfied.

BOESP,
It was the parents who did the staging their forensic traces are all over the wine-cellar crime-scene, Burke's is not.

BDI is the best explanation to date. It explains nearly everything, except for the usual arcane details.

We have a motive, an opportunity, and a method, and if Kolar is to be believed it all started in the breakfast bar?

My only reservation is the head bash, it just seems out of place. Apparently there is prior chronic abuse, but no need for prior head bashing.

Other than that it is obviously RDI, it could be any one of them, but given the surrounding evidence BDI seems to fit the bill.


.
 
  • #140
I guess I am in a minority of this forum because I don't think BDI at all. Are people here suggesting that nine-year-old BR hit his sister in the head with such force that it fractured her skull from the front to the back? That's a lot of force. A nine-year-old would be capable of that much force I have no doubt but it would have to be very intensional, not an accident. You don't hit someone hard enough to do that kind of damage by accident. You do it purposefully, with the intent to 'at least' hurt, if not kill. Like I said, I don't see it, but it is possible. That would make BR a child psychopath that he murdered his own sister.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
110
Guests online
2,949
Total visitors
3,059

Forum statistics

Threads
632,578
Messages
18,628,662
Members
243,198
Latest member
ghghhh13
Back
Top