What do we really know about dec 24 .06

[Holdontoyourhat]

:waitasec: But was she found in the park with a RANSOM NOTE tacked to a nearby tree written on paper taken from her own home?

Sure, only it wasn't tacked to a tree. It was in a pathway leading to JBR. If the note was tacked on a tree instead of in the pathway, JBR may have been found first, and found sooner.

 

[IrishMist]

My claim that JBR's injuries compel a theory of sexual assault were in reference to JBR's injuries to her neck and wrists, not her personal injuries to which so much crass verbage is dedicated. JBR's head injury alone may suggest she fell at the park. Add the garrote neck injury and wrist ligature injuries, and it instantly changes to a criminal sexual assault and murder scenario, even without any personal injuries.

I don't think there were wrist injuries, Hold/Hat. In fact, I think the autopsy report said the wrist ligature was loosely tied.

ETA- This is from the autopsy report:


EXTERNAL EXAM:
The decedent is clothed in a long sleeved white knit collarless shirt, the mid anterior chest area of which contains an embroidered silver star decorated with silver sequins. Tied loosely around the right wrist, overlying the sleeve of the shirt is a white cord.

 

[IrishMist]

Hey Nuisance,

If JBR was found in a park with her exact same injuries, the crime would have the appearance of a sexual assault and murder. The motive for the sexual assault would appear to be personal gratification and/or revenge, and the motive for murder would seem to prevent JBR from becoming a witness.

Change the location from the park to the R's basement, and the motives become less clear. Everything then is opened up to wild speculation, and scandal (which sells, BTW).

An intruder's motives of personal gratification, revenge, and to prevent JBR from talking is a reality-based scenario.

An otherwise caring family member's sudden motivation based on an 'accident coverup' or 'fit of rage' contradicts the evidence because black duct tape and cord were only found on JBR, but were not found in the residence, and therefore suggests premeditation.

But the location is important! Because it happened in her home. Because of who was there, and how she was found, it matters!

And I don't think you can put so much weight on the remains of cord and duct tape not being found in the residence. It could easily have been the last of the cord, a piece of tape off of something else... or the last of the tape.
To me, that could go either way- IDI or RDI. She (Patsy) had all kinds of arts and crafts junk around there. The murderer had access to what was handy, that's all.

 

[Brefie]

Sure, only it wasn't tacked to a tree. It was in a pathway leading to JBR. If the note was tacked on a tree instead of in the pathway, JBR may have been found first, and found sooner.

But it wasn't.

It and she was found in her house, where her mother, father and brother were.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

But it wasn't.

It and she was found in her house, where her mother, father and brother were.

Exactly my point, thank you.

You can't assign added suspicion to a family member based only on the idea they lived in the same house!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

But the location is important! Because it happened in her home. Because of who was there, and how she was found, it matters!

And I don't think you can put so much weight on the remains of cord and duct tape not being found in the residence. It could easily have been the last of the cord, a piece of tape off of something else... or the last of the tape.
To me, that could go either way- IDI or RDI. She (Patsy) had all kinds of arts and crafts junk around there. The murderer had access to what was handy, that's all.

OK how many have black duct tape 'handy' in their house?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Exactly my point, thank you.

You can't assign added suspicion to a family member based only on the idea they lived in the same house!

Your point is lost on me

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Sure, only it wasn't tacked to a tree. It was in a pathway leading to JBR. If the note was tacked on a tree instead of in the pathway, JBR may have been found first, and found sooner.

But it wasn't.

It and she was found in her house, where her mother, father and brother were.

Exactly my point, thank you.

You can't assign added suspicion to a family member based only on the idea they lived in the same house!.

Your point is lost on me

It seems Briefe was trying to show that since JBR was in the same house as the rest of her family members, they become more suspicious. There is nothing suspicious about JBR's mother, father, or brother being in 'her house' that night. If you're still missing the point, please reread the last sentence more slowly.

 

[Brefie]

Exactly my point, thank you.

You can't assign added suspicion to a family member based only on the idea they lived in the same house!

LOL - you are joking right??

You can't suspect the family because they were the only people in the house that night?? Tell me you are not in LE????


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

LOL - you are joking right??

You can't suspect the family because they were the only people in the house that night?? Tell me you are not in LE????


:laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Right, you can't suspect a family member only because they were in the house that night. You need more than that. Do you think its a closed system, nobody in or out? No windows, no doors?

 

[Brefie]

Right, you can't suspect a family member only because they were in the house that night. You need more than that. Do you think its a closed system, nobody in or out? No windows, no doors?

No. But you start with that family. Once they have been eliminated you move out.

But thay cannot be eliminated.

 

[IrishMist]

OK how many have black duct tape 'handy' in their house?

I'd venture to say that more people than not! Most folks wouldn't have to go past the junk drawer in the kitchen.

But, if you look at the 9th picture down on the right (of the R's basement)
and the 6th picture down on the left-
You don't think you could find some piece of duct tape somewhere?
http://www.crimeshots.com/CrimeScene2.html

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'd venture to say that more people than not! Most folks wouldn't have to go past the junk drawer in the kitchen.

But, if you look at the 9th picture down on the right (of the R's basement)
and the 6th picture down on the left-
You don't think you could find some piece of duct tape somewhere?
http://www.crimeshots.com/CrimeScene2.html

I noticed you went from black duct tape to 'some piece of duct tape.' Most people who have duct tape have gray duct tape, not black. The fact that any evidence of additional cord or duct tape are missing from the house, certainly adds to the premeditated 'brought it with them' idea.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

No. But you start with that family. Once they have been eliminated you move out.

But thay cannot be eliminated.

Who says you have to eliminate the family as suspects before you 'move out'? Is this another nonexistent standard for LE?

 

[Brefie]

Who says you have to eliminate the family as suspects before you 'move out'? Is this another nonexistent standard for LE?

Well, it's actually neither here not there.

The family have not been eliminated. Which makes them murder suspects.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I noticed you went from black duct tape to 'some piece of duct tape.' Most people who have duct tape have gray duct tape, not black. The fact that any evidence of additional cord or duct tape are missing from the house, certainly adds to the premeditated 'brought it with them' idea.

If they were so on it as to bring the tape and cord with them, how did they not think to also bring the handle they need to implement the garrote? Why didn't they write the ransom note elsewhere with their own supplies and bring that with them? How could they have either left their flashlight behind or known the Ramseys had one they could use? So much of what was used to commit this crime appears to have been found on site. Considering the purchases Patsy had made at the hardware store, I don't think it's too far out of line to think that the tape and cord came from the Ramsey house too. I don't think it's too far out of line to think that the killer came from the Ramsey house as well. There's very good reason they haven't been eliminated as murder suspects.

 

[why_nutt]

Exactly my point, thank you.

You can't assign added suspicion to a family member based only on the idea they lived in the same house!

Oh, yes you can. If JonBenet were found a park, and the only person known to be in the area was a groundskeeper, the groundskeeper would be assigned added suspicion. If JonBenet were found in a closet in a library, and the only people known to be in the library during the time frame involved were two librarians, both would be assigned added suspicion. A major component of crime investigation is exploring who had control, or felt they had control, over the scene of the crime. The Ramseys had absolute control over the scene of JonBenet's death. They knew how sound traveled, they knew how light fell, they knew where every item involved should or should not belong, and they belonged in the house. Just as with the groundkeeper, or the librarians, they deserve to be suspected because they know more than other people how easy or difficult it would have been to kill JonBenet at the location she was found.

It is a simple fact that if JonBenet was killed by an intruder, the murder was unique in all of history, due to how much square area of house the crime took place over (spanning from the second floor of the house to the basement, and from the west side of the house to the east), and how long JonBenet's murder took. All murders of children inside their own homes, by intruders, have taken place in one room, and have taken mere minutes. All other children killed in their own homes have been killed by their parents, or relatives or family friends known to be in the house.

JonBenet's death was not unique, therefore it should be investigated as what it most likely is (death by parent) rather than what it has never been before (death by intruder with extensive body movement within the house).

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

If they were so on it as to bring the tape and cord with them, how did they not think to also bring the handle they need to implement the garrote? Why didn't they write the ransom note elsewhere with their own supplies and bring that with them? How could they have either left their flashlight behind or known the Ramseys had one they could use? So much of what was used to commit this crime appears to have been found on site. Considering the purchases Patsy had made at the hardware store, I don't think it's too far out of line to think that the tape and cord came from the Ramsey house too. I don't think it's too far out of line to think that the killer came from the Ramsey house as well. There's very good reason they haven't been eliminated as murder suspects.

Your post: "So much of what was used to commit this crime appears to have been found on site."

The crime: murder
What was used: cord, tape, paintbrush.
What was found on site: paintbrush.

So much of what was used to commit this crime was really brought in from the outside, huh.

 

[IrishMist]

I noticed you went from black duct tape to 'some piece of duct tape.'

You noticed no such thing.

To Quote myself:

It could easily have been the last of the cord, a piece of tape off of something else... or the last of the tape.

Your post: "So much of what was used to commit this crime appears to have been found on site."

The crime: murder
What was used: cord, tape, paintbrush.
What was found on site: paintbrush.

So much of what was used to commit this crime was really brought in from the outside, huh.

No one KNOWS where the cord or the tape came from. It could have been brought in. It could have been found on site.
YOU may believe it as your own opinion, but it has not been proven.

 

[aussiegran]

Oh, yes you can. If JonBenet were found a park, and the only person known to be in the area was a groundskeeper, the groundskeeper would be assigned added suspicion. If JonBenet were found in a closet in a library, and the only people known to be in the library during the time frame involved were two librarians, both would be assigned added suspicion. A major component of crime investigation is exploring who had control, or felt they had control, over the scene of the crime. The Ramseys had absolute control over the scene of JonBenet's death. They knew how sound traveled, they knew how light fell, they knew where every item involved should or should not belong, and they belonged in the house. Just as with the groundkeeper, or the librarians, they deserve to be suspected because they know more than other people how easy or difficult it would have been to kill JonBenet at the location she was found.

It is a simple fact that if JonBenet was killed by an intruder, the murder was unique in all of history, due to how much square area of house the crime took place over (spanning from the second floor of the house to the basement, and from the west side of the house to the east), and how long JonBenet's murder took. All murders of children inside their own homes, by intruders, have taken place in one room, and have taken mere minutes. All other children killed in their own homes have been killed by their parents, or relatives or family friends known to be in the house.

JonBenet's death was not unique, therefore it should be investigated as what it most likely is (death by parent) rather than what it has never been before (death by intruder with extensive body movement within the house).

great post why_nutt. I have spent a lot of time over the last week reading old threads about this it was very interesting. I was on the fence and hadnt studied much of this case but I do believe the murder was one of the ramseys.I am leaning towards a cover up for burke,but I am still reading .I hope someday the truth will come out either way.

...............