What do the profilers say?

[Camper]

Advance planning yes or no?

Question remains, when was the note written?

Note written PRIOR to the MURDER, no wrinkles AFTER the murder, just where was the note kept while the murder was a happening activity?

Note written AFTER the MURDER, NO wrinkles, it was just put on the stairs, near where it was written.

 

[narlacat]

I think it was the latter. Written afterwards to explain some kind of tragic accident. I don't think Jonbenet's death was premeditated.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but there was only a print of Patsy's on the note right?
Wouldn't you think the note would have been crumpled from the Ramsey's reading it frantically.....I've never believed John's story that he crouched down to read it.

 

[UKGuy]

Advance planning yes or no?

Question remains, when was the note written?

Note written PRIOR to the MURDER, no wrinkles AFTER the murder, just where was the note kept while the murder was a happening activity?

Note written AFTER the MURDER, NO wrinkles, it was just put on the stairs, near where it was written.

If there was advanced planning then surely all those little touches and bouts of amnesia we associate with JR and PR account of events, would not be required, since explanations would have been supplied courtesy of forethought, and forward planning.

Lets take the RN, as Roger L Depue opines: "You will ... be ... denied burial" - more likely said by a female than a male. Also suggests the victim is dead. If the victim is still alive, burial would be the least of anyone's concerns.

So proprietary knowledge that JonBenet is already dead suggests the author wrote the note after she was killed and not before.

Now the writing pad, and the sharpie pen were all found in the kitchen area. The pen used to write the note was not close to where the pad was found, but in a cup next to the kitchen phone.

So I would suggest the person who originally placed JonBenet's body in the basement, returned to the kitchen area, possibly even sat on the stairs and looking at the phone, with a future 911 call in mind, constructed the note, then laid it out on the stairs.

LHP stated that Patsy would change purses once a week. She would lay it out on the spiral staircase, and LHP would clean it out and put it away in Patsy's closet.

So Patsy has a record of using the spiral staircase as both a medium for delegation and communication.

So only someone who also has this knowledge and either wishes to frame Patsy, or contrary to the emphasis in the RN upon JR, direct it towards Patsy so that she has a rationale for discovering the RN.

I believe there were no Ramsey fingerprints found on the RN, just those of various LEA. Contrast that with the R's willingness to fling themselves upon JonBenet once she is discovered!

So imo the planning was post mortem, and ad hoc, probably done on different occassions by different parties, because in all likelyhood, someone balked at dumping her body outdoors away from the house. So she was cleaned up, redressed, moved into the wine-cellar, complete with her barbie gown and day of the week size-12 underwear.

Day of the week underclothes were very important to Patsy, LHP stated that both Burke and JonBenet's underclothes had them. Clothes are a central aspect to Paty's personality, and it is via choice in clothes that JonBenet learns to exercise her autonomy, and as I've mentioned in another thread its probably through fashion, pageants, and designer clothes that some unobserved clues and links may be lurking.

So with all the elements , RN , sharpie pen, writing pad, all to be found in the kitchen area, along with JonBenet's body not so further away in the basement, and the phone close on the wall for the 911 call, its difficult not to conclude that the RN was written after JonBenet's death.

 

[deanws]

Great post UkGuy.

 

[Karole28]

then again we only have Patsy's word that the note was found, or "found" on the stairs.

 

[narlacat]

QUOTE>>Contrast that with the R's willingness to fling themselves upon JonBenet once she is discovered!<<

And contrast that with the way the R's just walked out and left Jonbenet lying under the tree that day. No wailing Patsy having to be dragged away.

 

[rashomon]

The first thing a profiler - or any good investigator - is going to do is look at the basic facts of the crime. Forget for the time being this was a "wealthy" family. A "good looking family." Like it or not it can cloud your objectivity. As it did the police in the beginning who treated the Ramseys with kid gloves, neglecting to separate them and interview them that day (police 101!) thereby forever affecting the prosecution of the case.

Ok. BASIC facts of the case:

*Parents claim child was kidnapped for ransom on Christmas night but child was discovered DEAD in the family home. No ransom was ever sought by any kidnapper. Child was never abducted. Child had been beaten and sexually molested. Ransom note is bogus.* (and there are actually people who wonder why the Ramseys were SUSPECTS??)


Now, a few more pertinent facts of the case profilers look carefully at:

1. Parents call 911 the early morning hours the morning after Christmas.

2. Parents claim their 6 yr. old daughter was kidnapped and the kidnapper
left a kidnap note behind.

3. "Ransom" note claims kidnapper(s) will call with instructions.

4. Kidnappers never call.

5. FBI looks at the so-called "ransom" note during this time and are very
suspicious. Red flags are raised with the note for a number of reasons.

6. Hours after police arrive the child claimed to have been kidnapped for
ransom by her parents - is found DEAD in the home.

7. Child is HIDDEN in a small room in the basement.

8. Child is laid on blankets and wrapped in a blanket.

9. Child's favorite nightie is lying nearby.

10. This crime occured on the MOST unlikely night of any during the year
for a crime like this to occur - Christmas night. A night when guests are
not unlikely to be present in a mansion like the Ramsey's.

11. No forced entry point was found.

12. Child was eventually, through autopsy, discovered to have been beaten
and sexually molested.

13. There was obvious staging in the crime. In fact, the FBI said there was
even "staging within staging".

14. Perp would have to have known the maze of a layout of the home to
have done what was done - undetected.

15. Paper and pen used to write the note was discovered to have come
right from within the home itself. The pen was even placed BACK in the
pen cup. There were "practice" pages perp wrote before her/his final
copy.

16. Perp would have to know dog was not in home that night and that the
Ramseys WERE going to be home - even though they were leaving
very early the next morning for a vacation.

17. Mrs. Ramsey greeted the first responding officer that morning dressed
in the same clothes she'd been wearing the night before. Being a
multi-millionaire beauty queen known to be very conscientious about
her appearance - and in her own words - because she was to meet
Melinda's fiance that day - wanted to "make a good impression" - this
fact of wearing the same clothes the night before is highly suspect.
Suspicion that she never went to bed that night.

18. Patsy's claim of time-line that morning does not fit. Time she claims
to have rolled out of bed and done all the things she claims she did
before making the 911 call at 5:52am is not believable.

19. Lies Ramseys eventually got caught in regarding Burke being "awake" or
"asleep" that morning. No need to lie AT ALL if they are all innocent.

20. Police officer's observations of the Ramsey's those crucial hours that
morning from the 911 call till the discovery of the dead body. Police
felt something was hinky. Police noted in their police reports that the
Ramseys acted more as if a "death" had occured than the claimed
kidnapping by them. (Schiller states there IS validity to this....)

This was a familial homicide. The fact that the Ramseys were wealthy and beautiful and well-connected - kept them out of the clinker.
And a little girls brutal death goes unavenged. :furious:

This is a first-class summary of the basics of that case, K777 angel.
And only getting back to those basics will help finding JonBenet's killer.
Swimming around in the waters muddied by the person(s) responsible for JB's death won't.
Nine years ago today, JonBenet was found murdered her own home.
The person(s) responsible for ther death have gone scot-free so far.
Shame on the Boulder DA's office and all the persons who have dirtied their hands by not allowing justice for JonBenet to prevail!

 

[aussiesheila]

I believe some corrections are in order with respect to the above stated 19 BASIC facts:


Fact 10 should read simply "This crime occured on Christmas night"

The rest is personal conjecture




Fact 14 should read "Perp would have to have known the maze of a layout of the home to have done what was done"

what is "- undetected." supposed to mean?





Fact 19 is a non-fact

It has NEVER been proven that the Ramseys LIED regarding Burke being "awake" or "asleep" that morning.




If you make these corrections there is just not enough factual evidence listed here for you to draw the conclusion stated at the end of your post, K777angel.

 

[BlueCrab]

Fact 19 is a non-fact

It has NEVER been proven that the Ramseys LIED regarding Burke being "awake" or "asleep" that morning.

aussiesheila,

Each of the three Ramseys -- John, Patsy, and Burke -- lied in separate police interviews about Burke being upstairs asleep in bed until finally awakened at 7:00 AM and taken to the White's house. All three Ramseys told the same story, which revealed a Ramsey conspiracy to lie about Burke's whereabouts prior to the 911 call at 5:52 AM.

The cops, with Burke's voice on the enhanced 911 tape, trapped the Ramseys by not letting them know they had Burke's voice on the 911 call until all three Ramseys had been individually interviewed. After the 1998 interviews were complete with respect to trapping the three Ramseys and locking in their responses about Burke's whereabouts at 5:52 AM, the cops told them they had Burke's voice on the 911 tape. All three were busted!

Shortly thereafter Burke changed his story and said he had been faking sleep -- but that's totally irrelevant. The 911 tape proves Burke was DOWNSTAIRS at 5:52 AM, not upstairs faking sleep. So even Burke's revised story is a lie.

BlueCrab

 

[Camper]

I may have lost track on this thread, not reading as much as I used to.

BUT, concerning the story that all three 'presented', IF IF the young one was indeed innocent, WHAT did he know and WHEN did he know it? WHAT else was he told by HIS parents, in order to have him on the same page number as they were?

The young boy certainly was HUSTLED outta the house in quick order the morning of the 26th.




.
Edited to add: Then the Ramseys proceeded to file a number of lawsuits protecting Burkes innocence, WHY sue IF IF he were in fact guilty? We or at least I, get a mixed message about that. Suing in fact IF IF he were guilty is an obviou coverup lie.


.

.

 

[BlueCrab]

Then the Ramseys proceeded to file a number of lawsuits protecting Burkes innocence, WHY sue IF IF he were in fact guilty? We or at least I, get a mixed message about that.

Camper,

I don't get any mixed messages about the lawsuits. Whether it's football or the coverup of a crime, the best defense is a good offense.

 

[BlueCrab]

BUT, concerning the story that all three 'presented', IF IF the young one was indeed innocent, WHAT did he know and WHEN did he know it? WHAT else was he told by HIS parents, in order to have him on the same page number as they were?

Camper,

It would be nice to have more information in regard to the conversations among John, Patsy, and Burke at 5:52 AM that morning, but we already have the most important fact -- they were lying even before the investigation got underway.

The only way all three Ramseys could have been on the same page was because of a conspiracy to lie about Burke's whereabouts during the 911 call at 5:52 AM. The enhanced 911 call blew the lid off that conspiratorial lie when it revealed Burke's voice, proving Burke was in the kitchen and not upstairs in bed.

With the conspiratorial lie proven during the police interviews, what credibility is left in regard to whatever else the Ramseys claimed happened that morning? There is no credibility left. Nothing they say can be relied upon as being the truth.

BlueCrab

 

[Camper]

Well, the bigger question would be, WHEN did Burke wake up, er WHEN did he ever go to sleep, er WAS he awake all night?

It is possible that he was awake, and he could still be either guilty or not guilty of unintentional accidental murder by death, huh, hmmm.

The pancake batter stays lumpy, when the R's sue over his innocence and collect money, IF he is guilty by degree and/or covering for another family member or friend.

Someone in the family knew the HOW TO - to make an EA device, and why whip one up at the last minute to cover up the accidental death? If the EA device was a family heirloom, where was it on December the 23rd, when the 911 call was made?

The scarf (that JR put into the casket with JonBenet, and tucked it lovingly around her shoulders and neck) hangs heavily in my scenario about who did what to whom.

IF IF 'that' scarf matches the unidentified fibres found on her body, and 'that' scarf had never been near JonBenet before her death, (DOI says it was beautiful new silk scarf that JR had recently purchased - how recent?)a great big hmmm remains, why bury it with her?? Ans: To get rid of vital evidence known only to the killer or the cover up person.



.
============================================================
============================================================
Camper - Edited to add a brain phart: What if the note was discovered on the stairs early on, and all the words were on the three pages, and the note was just recopied to cover the handwriting of the first person who wrote it?

You have to admit WE have NEVER thought of this before, perhaps that was why the young one was indeed awake, but told to be asleep etc. Hmmm. I would have to go along with BC's theory then that an overnight sleepover friend of Burke may have scooted out the unlocked door that morning in the hustle and such.
============================================================
============================================================


.

 

[UKGuy]

You may already be familiar with Steven Huff, and his blog, he also writes for other online websites.

He is currently requesting leads and favorite theories as to who killed JonBenet. He contrasts and compares Riley Fox's homicide with that of JonBenet's, and just to be a little controversial, it gets you noticed after all, he proposes Joseph Edward Duncan III, as a prime candidate but falls back on Michael Helgoth, since it seems to make more sense to him.

He says he shares a zip code with some of Patsy's relatives, and has an anecdote regarding Burke, e.g. how his escaping being run over resulted in a side remark: "Damn, you nearly killed the other one". Or how Burke attended the Lovett School in the Atlanta area. he will tell you how he was told about Patsy being referred to as "the Killer Lady." etc etc. Cryptically he suggests he has many more anecdotes to share, but possibly not via his public blog though!

You can read his profile on the JonBenet homicide here;
Titled:
JonBenet Would be 15, Now...
http://www.planethuff.com/darkside/

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

aussiesheila,

Each of the three Ramseys -- John, Patsy, and Burke -- lied in separate police interviews about Burke being upstairs asleep in bed until finally awakened at 7:00 AM and taken to the White's house. All three Ramseys told the same story, which revealed a Ramsey conspiracy to lie about Burke's whereabouts prior to the 911 call at 5:52 AM.

BlueCrab

These are the main theories that I lean towards at the moment:

The BDI theory.
Pretty much any of the theories that involve Burke interest me.

The PDI theory.
In this theory I see Patsy happening upon JonBenet being molested by John and lashing out, accidently connecting with JonBenet instead of John or some variation on that theme.

PR, JR, and BR were in the same house as JBR's body. That fact alone has caused them to each have a violent and deviant personality applied to them. They've inherited murderous, pedophilic, criminal personalities without any basis in factual events, aside from the murder itself.

So far, the only facts supporting a violent deviant personality hidden by a family member are:

1. JBR's prior sexual abuse. Even if true, it can't even be connected to anyone in the house.
2. BR striking JBR with a golf club. This can't even be established as non-accidental.
3. The lies told by the R's during the investigation. Even if true, they don't do very much to support an argument for a hidden violent and deviant family member.

If RDI, then...

...the family member/killer must have a really violent, deviant side that they are able to hide both before and after the murder, so as not to reveal their identity.

...the family member/author of the RN was able to handwrite 3 pages without revealing their identity, desipte the fact their handwriting can be readily sampled and compared, due to their proximity to the crime.

...the family member/killer effectively managed the crime scene so as not to positively link themselves to the murder, despite the fact they live in the same house.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anyway, there's really no argument for a violent, or even a deviant, family member, is there.

Not only that, but the chances a family member could involve so much stuff in the murder without revealing their identity is so remote I'm surprised its even considered.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I think the killer has revealed their identity through evidence left from the crime, and money and privelege has helped them cover it up.

 

[Nehemiah]

I just have three comments, and they are random thoughts.

As a part of a former job, I interviewed many kids regarding sexual abuse. Kids, in general, either outright tell the truth during interviews, or are very easily tripped up if lying. Even though at times I can be of the BDI persuasion, I cannot for the life of me believe that BR would be able to hold to a concocted storyline.

Secondly, if BDI, I don't think HE knows that HDI (he did it). I think that it was some type of accidental killing, with the parents covering up to protect him from the truth. Kind of like a Santa Claus fantasy, where parents go along with their kids just to keep it going. In my mind, this would explain the reasoning for the BDI lawsuits.

And I have now forgotten my third comment...

 

[Becba]

As Wecht put it, you don't have a ransome note and a dead child, you don't have a dead child and a ransome note.

John Douglas profiled for the Ramseys and admitted it was done based on info provided by the Ramseys, his profiling was done before the autopsy results were completely released.
For those thaty don't believe in profiling at least use common sence.
A sexual predator is not a kidnapper. A sexual predator satisfies himself and moves on.
She had been previously abused. Do you think she was abused and then later abused and killed by an intruder? The abuse of that night was almost the same kind of abuse she had previously experienced. Not deep penetration.
And if you think the abuser was a friend or neighbor, why the heck would they stick around long enough to wipe her down and write a loooong ransom note (which tried every way to deflect attention from the ramseys) without any worry they would be found with JonBenet dead?

 

[UKGuy]

As Wecht put it, you don't have a ransome note and a dead child, you don't have a dead child and a ransome note.

John Douglas profiled for the Ramseys and admitted it was done based on info provided by the Ramseys, his profiling was done before the autopsy results were completely released.
For those thaty don't believe in profiling at least use common sence.
A sexual predator is not a kidnapper. A sexual predator satisfies himself and moves on.
She had been previously abused. Do you think she was abused and then later abused and killed by an intruder? The abuse of that night was almost the same kind of abuse she had previously experienced. Not deep penetration.
And if you think the abuser was a friend or neighbor, why the heck would they stick around long enough to wipe her down and write a loooong ransom note (which tried every way to deflect attention from the ramseys) without any worry they would be found with JonBenet dead?

Becba:
Although I understand the point you are making, this "A sexual predator is not a kidnapper" is not strictly correct.

If you google on this name "Erick Thomas Knapp" you will find he abducted and raped two girls, aged 13, and 7, from their homes. Then he RETURNED them, also he duct taped them and used a knife to threaten them. There are other similar instances, excepting that some girls were murdered.

BDI as it is proposed imo is not a testable hypothesis, it imports external agents to explain away missing evidence. So in essence is really a special case of an IDI.

That PDI or JDI is entirely plausible, there is enough circumstancial evidence to implicate them, but its not a smoking gun.

JonBenet's death is unlikely to be the result of an accident, since you really dont need an extended coverup and staging to conceal an accident, whats worse, to be found guilty of 1st degree murder, or responsible for a death by neglect? By staging from an accident you run the risk of the former becoming a reality!

So by elimination its one of a RDI or IDI, and currently RDI has it, although I would NEVER rule out the possibility of an IDI, and in that instance it would probably need a sherlock holmes, columbo, CSI combination to explain just how clever the Intruder was!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

She had been previously abused. Do you think she was abused and then later abused and killed by an intruder? The abuse of that night was almost the same kind of abuse she had previously experienced.

The idea she'd been previously abused is an opinion that you present here as fact. I thought I should point out that its not fact at all, but a tenuous opinion at best.

Just thought I'd point out also that the "abuse of that night was almost the same kind of abuse" is another opinion you seem to have come up with all on your own.