What does Linda Arndt know?

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I appreciate that.

I know you are not an intruder theory person, But for me so far, I still see that possibility.

Those tan fibers while you say could be from transfer could also have been from someone else there so that goes into my Maybe column.

 

[Chrishope]

It may be that the public has just not been given knowledge about those tan fibers. Check out the search warrants. Some tan work-type gloves were found and confiscated. Iirc, John Ramsey also wore tan pants to the White's party.

Good point. They may be sourced, just not publicly.

I'll admit to being the person who adamantly believes Patsy would not have put JonBenet outside but it is not based on feelings. I have previously stated why. Regardless, the body was found inside the house so anyone who speculates on it woulda/shoulda/coulda been put outside is making an illogical assumption that seems to be made up to fit their theory. My belief has no bearing on whether it was Patsy or some other insider who did it. Regardless, the body was found inside, carefully wrapped with a favorite nightgown beside her. That's a fact. That fact is supported by statistics that indicate it most likely was "an inside job" (to quote John Ramsey).

My comment wasn't directed at you, even though you and I had discussed that point recently. I've heard it many times over the years, from many different posters.

I must have missed your reasons why from before. The fact that it was found inside allows one to interpret it either way - it was found inside because it was meant to be found inside, or it was found inside because it had not yet been dumped.

I'd say dumping the body is a pretty logical assumption (though admittedly an assumption, not a fact) given that a kidnapping is more plausible when the body is missing.

My belief is Patsy was involved, which is supported by the Grand Jury true bill. ...

Gotta give you the point on that one.

... My belief, based on my analysis of what I have read and seen from Patsy is she would never have allowed her daughter to be subject to the ravages of weather and animals, not to mention the risk of getting caught disposing of the body. The goal, in my opinion, was get it hidden where it wouldn't be found quickly then blame it on the kidnapper.

I can see your point, and that's the vexing thing about the case, what seems likely to one person seems very unlikely to another.

My theory, as you already know, is that kidnapping/murder by intruder is only plausible if there appeared to be a kidnapping. With the body in the house, obviously there was no kidnapping, hence no intruder.

 

[Chrishope]

It is possible. You may feel it is improbable that is fine but it is certainly possible.
Did the police not find the paper in the house the note was written on? Does that make sense? You are trying to fake a kidnapping so you go write the note on paper and then leave it there for them to find. Then they call the police to have them search the house.

If you are looking for a cover up its not there. They left too much that would point directly at them.
If they had done this and written the note the body would not have been there in the morning. They would have disposed of it.

If you are trying to cover something up you make a good effort you don't leave the body in your basement and call the police for them to find her. That right there is improbable.

It is problematic that the rest of the tablet was not destroyed. (Is here a fireplace in the house?)

One reason it would be written on Ramsey stationary (well, just a tablet, doesn't really merit the term stationary) is that it was all that was available to the Ramsey who wrote it.

Yet, as you point out, it is foolish to leave the tablet for the police to find.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I have to work this from the things that make sense. To me the paper pad being in the house just does not fit for me. The supposed clean up is shotty. IT just makes more sense to me if it was them, and they were trying to get away with murder, Getting the body out of the house is the easiest way to do that.

I don't believe a parent who garrotes her child would have any issue putting them outside, in fact that kind of ability, to do something to a child to me would make it easier to get the body out and be rid of it.

 

[Chrishope]

So your point is that the Ramsey's can't be guilty because they weren't efficient enough when the covered up the crime.
They haven't been charged, much less convicted, of any crime. Seems to me they were efficient enough.

As I stated in another post, I think they either ran out of time or just didn't want to touch JB's body. I don't think the body had to be disposed of for the Ramseys to be guilty. On the flip side, it totally makes sense that an intruder would leave the body of their kidnap victim behind....so if Patsy and John were trying to cover up a crime and blame it on kidnapping intruders who accidentally/purposefully killed JB they most certainly would leave her in the house.

I don't see how he/she/they could have run out of time. The call to the police didn't need to be made that day. The RN says the ransom call will come tomorrow which I think is obviously the 27th.

Whoever did this didn't have a problem cracking her skull, garotting her, not to mention a savage molestation. Hard, for me at least, to believe they suddenly got squeamish about touching the body.

Again, if you are trying to float the notion that you know your daughter was kidnapped but you don't know she's dead, you most certainly would leave the body where it is in a fairly hidden place. You have to call the police when there is a ransom note otherwise you look hinky, so calling the police was a must.

Well, if the dogs had been used the body would have been discovered in 15 minutes. Or if the officers responding to the 911 call who searched the house had simply reached up and turned a wooden block, the body would have been found in 15 minutes. So it really wasn't hidden very well. Basically to call the police is to have it found in the house which imo is not going to help float the intruder/kidnapper turned murderer scenario.

 

[Chrishope]

I have to work this from the things that make sense. To me the paper pad being in the house just does not fit for me. The supposed clean up is shotty. IT just makes more sense to me if it was them, and they were trying to get away with murder, Getting the body out of the house is the easiest way to do that.

I agree completely. It's one of the head shaking things. How anyone could believe that the plan was to float a kidnap scenario with the body in the house is perplexing to me.

I don't believe a parent who garrotes her child would have any issue putting them outside, in fact that kind of ability, to do something to a child to me would make it easier to get the body out and be rid of it.

I don't buy the idea either, but then, I don't think PR was involved so I don't have to entertain the idea that PR tells JR what he can/can't do when their freedom (and possibility of execution) is on the line.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

So you believe it was JR alone?

 

[Chrishope]

So you believe it was JR alone?

Yes. JR, working alone.

http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012_07_01_archive.html I can't take any credit for the theory. This is what I think happened, with one or two very minor quibbles.

 

[BOESP]

<respectfully snipped>My theory, as you already know, is that kidnapping/murder by intruder is only plausible if there appeared to be a kidnapping. With the body in the house, obviously there was no kidnapping, hence no intruder.

I don't discount the possibility of your theory at all. But its unlikely that speculating whether or not Patsy might have put the body outside for whatever reason will help determine who-done-it.

The staging and staging-within-staging was designed to hopefully fool investigators into thinking JonBenet had been kidnapped by an unknown Intruder or there had been a kidnapping-gone-wrong, and to cover up the physical damage to her body.

:angel: That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :angel:
​

 

[DeeDee249]

I don't.
But I'm sorry, that has to be one of the most ridiculous things I've heard so far. The most traceable thing about a handwritten note is the handwriting. Unless you wrote it on the rarest of papers that can be traced to one person who wrote with a pen so distinguishable it can be narrowed down to a single pen, you're safe.

Again with the improbable just to deflect from the Ramseys....

In this case, we also have a practice note found on the same pad. And Patsy admitted to writing the practice note, saying it was really a practice party invitation. However, the handwriting on the practice note (consisting of the salutation) matched the RN. I do not recall seeing where LE questioned Patsy as to why that was.
The ink on the RN was tested and found to match the Sharpie found in the pen cup in the R kitchen. While it may also match some OTHER Sharpie somewhere is possible, but not plausible. The R pen is a match, so to me, Ockham's Razor tells me that is the pen that wrote the note.

 

[Chrishope]

I don't discount the possibility of your theory at all.​

Nor do I discount yours. PDI has a lot going for it.

But its unlikely that speculating whether or not Patsy might have put the body outside for whatever reason will help determine who-done-it.

Agreed.

The staging and staging-within-staging was designed to hopefully fool someone into thinking JonBenet had been kidnapped or there had been a kidnapping-gone-wrong.

:angel: That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :angel:

That's the thing, I don't see the "kidnapping gone wrong" scenario as being even minimally plausible. That leaves me with the kidnapping, which isn't very plausible, imo, with the body in the home.

The problem I struggled with for years was the seeming cross-staging of a sexually motivated murder and a kidnapping. It was Doc's theory that made me realize there is not any sex murder staging. There is sex murder hiding. (Also otg's posts on that point) The staging is about kidnapping, which is easier to believe if the body isn't in the basement.

 

[BOESP]

That's the thing, I don't see the "kidnapping gone wrong" scenario as being even minimally plausible. That leaves me with the kidnapping, which isn't very plausible, imo, with the body in the home.

The problem I struggled with for years was the seeming cross-staging of a sexually motivated murder and a kidnapping. It was Doc's theory that made me realize there is not any sex murder staging. There is sex murder hiding. (Also otg's posts on that point) The staging is about kidnapping, which is easier to believe if the body isn't in the basement.

If investigators had found the body (yeah, I know that John is who actually found it ) then a kidnapping-gone-wrong might explain why the body was left in the house instead of taken away by the kidnapper. Since John found it, the kidnapping-gone-wrong still explained it.

At this point, I still believe Steve Thomas's theory fits best with what I've learned, closely followed by the possibility Burke was involved in some way (but I am on the fence about what type involvement that might have been).

ETA: I think a lot of the misunderstandings center on the fact the stager(s) was ignorant of what real homicide and/or kidnapping would look like. It was staged by someone who didn't know what they were doing but thought they could fool the investigators. Add to that the panic and emotional aspect and, frankly, the stager really screwed up.

Our problem is that one can't understand the un-understandable.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I don't discount the possibility of your theory at all. But its unlikely that speculating whether or not Patsy might have put the body outside for whatever reason will help determine who-done-it.

The staging and staging-within-staging was designed to hopefully fool investigators into thinking JonBenet had been kidnapped by an unknown Intruder or there had been a kidnapping-gone-wrong, and to cover up the physical damage to her body.

:angel: That's my story and I'm sticking to it. :angel:
​

Well in that I don't believe Patsy had anything to do with this, I don't see her letting her baby go if she was dead. I think if patsy knew that child was dead they would have found her rocking that body on the floor when the police walked in. There is no way, That I think that Patsy knew JBR was down there dead and left her there.

I don't see anything that points me to John either. I have read the theories and the facts people use to support it, I just don't see it. I don't see this kind of violence and torture at the hands of her father with no prior abuse against him. Nothing that says he is a monster.

Because a monster did this. Not a normal person but a deviate.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

In this case, we also have a practice note found on the same pad. And Patsy admitted to writing the practice note, saying it was really a practice party invitation. However, the handwriting on the practice note (consisting of the salutation) matched the RN. I do not recall seeing where LE questioned Patsy as to why that was.
The ink on the RN was tested and found to match the Sharpie found in the pen cup in the R kitchen. While it may also match some OTHER Sharpie somewhere is possible, but not plausible. The R pen is a match, so to me, Ockham's Razor tells me that is the pen that wrote the note.

I don't think Sharpies in themselves are unique. I think that a pack of them or a pallet of them would all be reasonably the same.

 

[DeeDee249]

I don't think Sharpies in themselves are unique. I think that a pack of them or a pallet of them would all be reasonably the same.

True, but the note matched the sharpie in the house, as well as the paper coming from the house. The chances of it having been written with some other sharpie are so slim as to be unrealistic. In this case, as in many others, it is the totality of evidence that point to a killer from inside the home that night.

 

[2 percent]

I don't see how he/she/they could have run out of time. The call to the police didn't need to be made that day. The RN says the ransom call will come tomorrow which I think is obviously the 27th.

If the parents aren't guilty, I agree that they may wait until the kidnappers have called. But I believe we are dealing with people who are framing a crime. Most want to get police involvement over with as fast as possible. There's an old (police) wives tale that when you question suspects always look for the one who is sleepy and relaxed. Because the guilty are nervous up until the police questioning and then they relax enough to sometimes go to sleep. Not scientific and probably not even true.

However, it doesn't mean that murderers don't have their own timeline. If it were me, I wouldn't stage a crime scene and then wait an entire day to call the police. I certainly wouldn't be thinking waiting would make me look less guilty either. I would be thinking once the police heard my very young daughter was missing and I waited a day to call them...well, that's more suspicious than what did happen. And remember, the stage acting of the parents was "panic", Patsy crying and John restless, and that doesn't fit with waiting a day.

To sum up I think they had an overall plan of action but the details weren't ironed out because the cover up wasn't premeditated. And I do think they ran out of time simply because for both parents to stage like I think they did, they would have to argue, debate and agree to their plan for a good long time before executing it.

Whoever did this didn't have a problem cracking her skull, garotting her, not to mention a savage molestation. Hard, for me at least, to believe they suddenly got squeamish about touching the body.

I'm inclined to Wecht's theory so I think the molestation was the only deliberate act. I think her death and head injury were unintentional, accidental.

Having a live sexual plaything lying there is very different than an accidental dead body. Yeah, I think they could have gotten squeamish...especially if it was the parent that didn't participate in either the molestation or the death.

Well, if the dogs had been used the body would have been discovered in 15 minutes. Or if the officers responding to the 911 call who searched the house had simply reached up and turned a wooden block, the body would have been found in 15 minutes. So it really wasn't hidden very well. Basically to call the police is to have it found in the house which imo is not going to help float the intruder/kidnapper turned murderer scenario.

Hiding the body wasn't really my point, sorry for the confusion.
I only meant the body had to be "fairly hidden" so the family could claim she wasn't where they expected. In other words, she couldn't be found in her room, the living room, kitchen, stairs, etc. Anywhere the family would normally tread would hurt their frame.

 

[2 percent]

In this case, we also have a practice note found on the same pad. And Patsy admitted to writing the practice note, saying it was really a practice party invitation. However, the handwriting on the practice note (consisting of the salutation) matched the RN. I do not recall seeing where LE questioned Patsy as to why that was.
The ink on the RN was tested and found to match the Sharpie found in the pen cup in the R kitchen. While it may also match some OTHER Sharpie somewhere is possible, but not plausible. The R pen is a match, so to me, Ockham's Razor tells me that is the pen that wrote the note.

How is the Sharpie in the Ramsey house different from every other Sharpie of that kind?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

True, but the note matched the sharpie in the house, as well as the paper coming from the house. The chances of it having been written with some other sharpie are so slim as to be unrealistic. In this case, as in many others, it is the totality of evidence that point to a killer from inside the home that night.

I think the point I was making is that it was not unique. And I don't know if Sharpies can be matched? Same width, same ink, Same label.

I just don't think that means anything.

The paper coming from the house says to me it was not Patsy. It is just not logical. Not if you are hiding something. There is no way I see Patsy involved in this crime. Too much does not fit.

 

[Chrishope]

If the parents aren't guilty, I agree that they may wait until the kidnappers have called. But I believe we are dealing with people who are framing a crime.

No doubt about it. The crime of murder is being framed as a kidnapping.
Kidnapping temds to be more believable when it appears the victim was actually kidnapped. As soon as the body is found, it ceases to be a plausible kidnapping. In addition, JR goes to some trouble to be sure the police know that all the doors and windows were locked, and that he himself (supposedly) broke the basement window. Add to that the grate and spider web and we have a murdered girl, and no indication of an intruder. This isn't how one makes the police believe an IDI.

Most want to get police involvement over with as fast as possible. There's an old (police) wives tale that when you question suspects always look for the one who is sleepy and relaxed. Because the guilty are nervous up until the police questioning and then they relax enough to sometimes go to sleep. Not scientific and probably not even true.

The sooner the police arrive, the sooner we have a dead girl and no indication of an intruder. I don't really see that rushing the 911 call serves the culprit(s) very well.

However, it doesn't mean that murderers don't have their own timeline. If it were me, I wouldn't stage a crime scene and then wait an entire day to call the police. I certainly wouldn't be thinking waiting would make me look less guilty either. I would be thinking once the police heard my very young daughter was missing and I waited a day to call them...well, that's more suspicious than what did happen. And remember, the stage acting of the parents was "panic", Patsy crying and John restless, and that doesn't fit with waiting a day.

But I wouldn't want them to find the body and no evidence of an intruder either. So what to do? If they are going to make the kidnap scenario work, they need to dump the body. But the 911 call is made before the body is dumped. Why? Either he (they) planned to have the police find the body along with no intruder evidence and risk being arrested immediately, or there was a plan to dump the body which hadn't been put into effect yet. IMO, it's much more plausible that the body was to be dumped but that could not happen in the middle of the night (neighbors, innocent parent if there was one). That's why the note warns over and over not to contact police - it gives the culprit(s) an excuse not to make that 911 call.

To sum up I think they had an overall plan of action but the details weren't ironed out because the cover up wasn't premeditated. And I do think they ran out of time simply because for both parents to stage like I think they did, they would have to argue, debate and agree to their plan for a good long time before executing it.

I agree, the planning was done on the fly because the death was accidental.

I'm inclined to Wecht's theory so I think the molestation was the only deliberate act. I think her death and head injury were unintentional, accidental.

For Wecht to be correct the garotte had to be different than the one found on the body. As found, the garotte couldn't be an effective EA device as it does not release easily.

Having a live sexual plaything lying there is very different than an accidental dead body. Yeah, I think they could have gotten squeamish...especially if it was the parent that didn't participate in either the molestation or the death.

So you think only one parent was involved?

Hiding the body wasn't really my point, sorry for the confusion.
I only meant the body had to be "fairly hidden" so the family could claim she wasn't where they expected. In other words, she couldn't be found in her room, the living room, kitchen, stairs, etc. Anywhere the family would normally tread would hurt their frame.

I understand, but they had to anticipate the body being found quickly and no matter when it's found, the kidnap scenario, imo, evaporates completely.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

[/B]No doubt about it. The crime of murder is being framed as a kidnapping.
Kidnapping temds to be more believable when it appears the victim was actually kidnapped. As soon as the body is found, it ceases to be a plausible kidnapping. In addition, JR goes to some trouble to be sure the police know that all the doors and windows were locked, and that he himself (supposedly) broke the basement window. Add to that the grate and spider web and we have a murdered girl, and no indication of an intruder. This isn't how one makes the police believe an IDI.




The sooner the police arrive, the sooner we have a dead girl and no indication of an intruder. I don't really see that rushing the 911 call serves the culprit(s) very well.



But I wouldn't want them to find the body and no evidence of an intruder either. So what to do? If they are going to make the kidnap scenario work, they need to dump the body. But the 911 call is made before the body is dumped. Why? Either he (they) planned to have the police find the body along with no intruder evidence and risk being arrested immediately, or there was a plan to dump the body which hadn't been put into effect yet. IMO, it's much more plausible that the body was to be dumped but that could not happen in the middle of the night (neighbors, innocent parent if there was one). That's why the note warns over and over not to contact police - it gives the culprit(s) an excuse not to make that 911 call.



I agree, the planning was done on the fly because the death was accidental.



For Wecht to be correct the garotte had to be different than the one found on the body. As found, the garotte couldn't be an effective EA device as it does not release easily.



So you think only one parent was involved?




I understand, but they had to anticipate the body being found quickly and no matter when it's found, the kidnap scenario, imo, evaporates completely.

You have great posts. Really gives me a lot to ponder..

I was wondering when you have time, if you would not mind looking at another case that just bothers me as much as JBR?

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=196945&highlight=carol+ann+dougherty
I plan to do some sleuthing on this this fall and curious to what you think about it and where may be a good place to start.