What small foreign faction?

[joeskidbeck]

Among the conflicting signals in the ransom note is this: Lots of things suggest an "inside job" (as JR himself admitted). The author of the note seems to know a lot about JR. Especially his business. And yet, the author does *not* seem to know him personally, because he (she?) mistakenly refers to his "southern charm". Which suggests the author knows OF JR, and has been given information ABOUT JR, and yet doesn't actually know him. I know this has been observed many times before, but it is relevant here. It would fit this being a *corporate/political* type of crime. And it would also match the claim made that the author(s) "represent* someone (a sff). They have been given info about Ramsey but have misconstrued one aspect of it. Of course, the blooper about John's "southern charm" counts against Patsy-wrote-it theories - although there are ways around it.

BBM

I realize that MurriFlower has already explained that the phrase was "Southern common sense", but I want to address how that would implicate Patsy in the writing of the ransom note. It was common knowledge in the Ramsey family and friends that Johns FIL, Don and also, Patsy would tease him about his lack of "Southern common sense", so you see, this phrase points directly at Patsy or possibly her father.

ETA: either that or someone very close to this family wrote the note as they knew about the phrase!

 

[SunnieRN]

Do we actually know that this paintbrush WAS from the set that PR bought only a few months previously? The pictures of the stick (supposedly a paintbrush from the 'tote' containing PR's painting equipment) looked very old and weatherbeaten to have been hers. The fact that it was broken BOTH ENDS is curious, especially as the remains of the broken shards from only ONE END were found.

I'd like to suggest that it was more likely an old brush left by the house painter who also left the tins of paint in the winecellar?

Cathy, JR and PR denied owning almost anything and everything during the investigation. This included a ceramic bowl the pineapple was in and the flashlight, despite the fact that the drawer in which 'theirs' was kept was open and empty.

Don't you think Patsy would have denied at one point or another that the brush was hers?

I respectfully TOTALLY disagree with your suggestion. You seem to want to stir the waters here IMHO.

 

[SunnieRN]

BBM

I realize that MurriFlower has already explained that the phrase was "Southern common sense", but I want to address how that would implicate Patsy in the writing of the ransom note. It was common knowledge in the Ramsey family and friends that Johns FIL, Don and also, Patsy would tease him about his lack of "Southern common sense", so you see, this phrase points directly at Patsy or possibly her father.

ETA: either that or someone very close to this family wrote the note as they knew about the phrase!

Also maybe since the trial copy was addressed to them both, she got carried away. After all, she was fairly hysterical or well rehearsed by the time LE and friends arrived!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

PMPT Page 454

"The detectives felt that in every scenario, JonBenet spent the final moments of her life just outside the wine cellar door, where the police had found wooden shards from the broken paintbrush that was tied to the cord at one end of the noose. That was also where they found Patsy's paint tote. The tote contained the unused portion of the paint- brush and additional brushes similar to the one used in the murder. After JonBenet was murdered, the police surmised, her body was taken inside the windowless room."

------------------------


Police found JBR, the garrote handle, wooden shards and a piece of paintbrush all within a few feet from each other, in the basement. Police searched for the other piece but never found it.

Prima facie says the paintbrush was broken twice as part of the crime, and that whoever broke it removed one piece from the area. They discarded the end with the bristles according to the paint tote photo.

The purpose for breaking the paintbrush was probably to create a weapon that is pointed at both ends.

Who is going to want a pointed weapon, and be willing to break a stick twice to get one? An intruder who breaks it while the R's aren't there, intending to threaten JBR with it later? Or a parent with no apparent critial need for a dual-pointed handle (as JBR was already dead), and yet willing to make noise in the middle of the night?

ETA the handle is about 4 1/2" long and 3/8" in diameter according to photo.

 

[DeeDee249]

Do we actually know that this paintbrush WAS from the set that PR bought only a few months previously? The pictures of the stick (supposedly a paintbrush from the 'tote' containing PR's painting equipment) looked very old and weatherbeaten to have been hers. The fact that it was broken BOTH ENDS is curious, especially as the remains of the broken shards from only ONE END were found.

I'd like to suggest that it was more likely an old brush left by the house painter who also left the tins of paint in the winecellar?

This brush wasn't the kind of paintbrush a house painter would use. This brush was an artist's brush, used for oil or acrylic painting. Just because Patsy bought a set of new brushes doesn't mean she didn't have any old ones in that tote. I was an art teacher. I kept brushes a LONG time, even if I had newer ones, and that was because some brushes just had a good "feel" on the paper or canvas. My husband, an illustrator and portrait painter, has some brushes that he used in art school, over 45 years ago.

 

[joeskidbeck]

Cathy, JR and PR denied owning almost anything and everything during the investigation. This included a ceramic bowl the pineapple was in and the flashlight, despite the fact that the drawer in which 'theirs' was kept was open and empty.

Don't you think Patsy would have denied at one point or another that the brush was hers?

I respectfully TOTALLY disagree with your suggestion. You seem to want to stir the waters here IMHO.

Sunnie, I don't know if the quotes are messed up again, but it was MurriFlower in the quote you addressed and not CathyR. I may be wrong, but I have had the quotes to mess up on me before.
Becky

 

[joeskidbeck]

PMPT Page 454

"The detectives felt that in every scenario, JonBenet spent the final moments of her life just outside the wine cellar door, where the police had found wooden shards from the broken paintbrush that was tied to the cord at one end of the noose. That was also where they found Patsy's paint tote. The tote contained the unused portion of the paint- brush and additional brushes similar to the one used in the murder. After JonBenet was murdered, the police surmised, her body was taken inside the windowless room."

------------------------


Police found JBR, the garrote handle, wooden shards and a piece of paintbrush all within a few feet from each other, in the basement. Police searched for the other piece but never found it.

Prima facie says the paintbrush was broken twice as part of the crime, and that whoever broke it removed one piece from the area. They discarded the end with the bristles according to the paint tote photo.

The purpose for breaking the paintbrush was probably to create a weapon that is pointed at both ends.

Who is going to want a pointed weapon, and be willing to break a stick twice to get one? An intruder who breaks it while the R's aren't there, intending to threaten JBR with it later? Or a parent with no apparent critial need for a dual-pointed handle (as JBR was already dead), and yet willing to make noise in the middle of the night?

ETA the handle is about 4 1/2" long and 3/8" in diameter according to photo.

I see nothing about this post that promotes a foreign faction as being the killers. Whatever the reason for the paintbrush, the fact that it was made in Korea is not it. Also, for the noise factor in breaking it, why in the world would the Ramseys care if it made a loud noise when it broke? As for doing more damage if broken, that's exactly what they needed to cover the previous molestation.

 

[MurriFlower]

This brush wasn't the kind of paintbrush a house painter would use. This brush was an artist's brush, used for oil or acrylic painting. Just because Patsy bought a set of new brushes doesn't mean she didn't have any old ones in that tote. I was an art teacher. I kept brushes a LONG time, even if I had newer ones, and that was because some brushes just had a good "feel" on the paper or canvas. My husband, an illustrator and portrait painter, has some brushes that he used in art school, over 45 years ago.

Ok, well we know when PR bought the brushes because she had just started art classes. I expect there would have been a receipt from the store if BPD had given this the attention they gave to attempting to source the other evidence (cord and tape) to the Rs. The store would have known if the brush was part of this set as they most likely would have had new sets still just like it. It struck me when I first saw the stick that it looked very old and worn, like it had been left out in the weather and had (like you said above) been in use for years rather than months.

 

[DeeDee249]

Ok, well we know when PR bought the brushes because she had just started art classes. I expect there would have been a receipt from the store if BPD had given this the attention they gave to attempting to source the other evidence (cord and tape) to the Rs. The store would have known if the brush was part of this set as they most likely would have had new sets still just like it. It struck me when I first saw the stick that it looked very old and worn, like it had been left out in the weather and had (like you said above) been in use for years rather than months.

Patsy probably wouldn't have kept a receipt like that- it unlikely an artist's brush would malfunction or need to be returned. I don't keep receipts for most everyday purchases. As there were other brushes in the tote that Patsy herself says held her art supplies, no need to speculate where it came from. While I agree the brush looks old, you'd be surprised how quickly a brush like that can look old when splattered with dried paint. However, I stand behind my comment that she would likely have had a mix of old and new supplies. Old paint tubes, too- the only reason to throw them out is if they dry out. Now, if a forensic study had been done on the brush as far as analyzing the PAINT on the brush against the paint Patsy owned, we'd be a little closer to whether or not some free-range Koreans brought the brush with them. All the way from Korea. sigh....

 

[UKGuy]

Or, the brush had been broken on one end sometime before the crime (days/weeks/months). If it was used to cause damage to JBR, it may have been selected because it was broken, and would do more damage than an unbroken brush. An already broken brush is likely to leave behind "befringement" material.

Chrishope,

Yes, entirely possible, but then the wear and tear on the old broken end would distingusih it from the newly broken part, and there would be no discussion of a missing piece?

.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I see nothing about this post that promotes a foreign faction as being the killers. Whatever the reason for the paintbrush, the fact that it was made in Korea is not it. Also, for the noise factor in breaking it, why in the world would the Ramseys care if it made a loud noise when it broke? As for doing more damage if broken, that's exactly what they needed to cover the previous molestation.

I imagine you're right. If the R's didn't care about leaving 1500 characters of their own personal handwriting then they didn't care about snapping off a 3/8" paintbrush twice.

Although...it would be more believable for an intruder to do all these things:

Who would sooner leave a bunch of their own handwriting, someone who lived there or someone who didn't? Someone who didn't.

Who is more likely to make a stick pointed at both ends to be used in crime, someone making a weapon or someone making a prop? Someone making a weapon.

Who would most likely deposit some skin cells on an item of clothing twice, the skin cell owner or someone else? The skin cell owner.

Who is more likely to sexually assault, strangle, and bludgeon a 6 year old girl, an overt criminal or a straight-laced CEO? An overt criminal.

RDI is a low-percentage shot.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I imagine you're right. If the R's didn't care about leaving 1500 characters of their own personal handwriting then they didn't care about snapping off a 3/8" paintbrush twice.

Although...it would be more believable for an intruder to do all these things:

Who would sooner leave a bunch of their own handwriting, someone who lived there or someone who didn't? Someone who didn't.
Someone guilty of murder and desperate to direct LE elsewhere

Who is more likely to make a stick pointed at both ends to be used in crime, someone making a weapon or someone making a prop? Someone making a weapon. A murder trying to make a crime look like an altogether different kind of crime

Who would most likely deposit some skin cells on an item of clothing twice, the skin cell owner or someone else? The skin cell owner.
FOR SURE, THE SKIN CELL OWNER-PROVE WHO IT IS

Who is more likely to sexually assault, strangle, and bludgeon a 6 year old girl, an overt criminal or a straight-laced CEO? An overt criminal. The person who accidentally bashed her head in and had to hide the fact the she had habitually been sexually molested.

RDI is a low-percentage shot.

IDI is a ZERO percentage shot!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I find the paintbrush a very odd item of evidence in this crime. It is conceivable, I think, that it was broken twice in order to isolate the word "Korea". Why the remainder of the brush has not been found is very mysterious. But did anyone really look for it?

This seems to be the case, that it was broken to still display "Korea". It likely the reason the paintbrush was selected in the first place over about a dozen easier to find objects.

Interesting is that whoever has the missing piece would be able to prove they were there and did it, right? Why not take the bristle-end? Probably because it sheds. The intruder wouldn't want shedding material in his pocket.

A killer who takes an item, like a trophy, is not unheard of to say the least.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I personally don't believe she was sexually assaulted with that paintbrush.

I agree, because if she were to the extent claimed was needed to coverup chronic abuse, the coroner would say there are severe acute injuries masking scar tissue.

The autopsy certainly doesn't describe severe injuries that would be expected from a broken stick being used to mask prior injuries. Not in the least.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

What is heavens name does the remains of Koreans have to do with the death of Jon Benet?

If I said that on Dec 25, 1996 the US and South Korea were 'denying the remains' of 24 NK inflitrators for 'a proper burial,' I wouldn't be wrong.

The 24 NK infiltrators were cremated without NK permission, and were returned to NK 3 days later.

There was this international diplomatic crisis happening at the exact same time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 29 December, a North Korean official issued an official apology:

"The spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK is authorized to express deep regret for the submarine incident in the coastal waters of Kangnung, South Korea, in September 1996 that caused the tragic loss of human life. The DPRK will make efforts to ensure that such an incident will not recur and will work with others for durable peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula." (20)

On 30 December, the ROK Government returned the cremated remains of the infiltrators to North Korea at Panmunjon.

North Korea threatened to retaliate over the incident, and in October 1996, a South Korean diplomat, Choi Duk Keun, was found poisoned in Vladivostok by a substance similar to that carried on the submarine. By 29 December, however, the North issued an official statement expressing "deep regret" over the submarine incident, although it did not issue a direct apology. In return, the South Korean government returned the cremated remains of the infiltrators to the North via Panmunjom on 30 December.

North Korea


North Korea has not been conclusively linked to any international terrorist attacks since 1987. North Korea is best known for its involvement in the 1987 midair bombing of KAL Flight 858 and the 1983 Rangoon bombing aimed at South Korean Government officials. A North Korean spokesman in November 1995 stated that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) opposed "all kinds of terrorism" and "any assistance to it." There is no conclusive evidence the DPRK conducted any act of terrorism since 1987. The Republic of Korea, however, suspects that North Korean agents were involved in the murder of a South Korean official in Vladivostok on 1 October 1996, which shortly followed a North Korean warning that it would retaliate if Seoul did not return the bodies of several North Korean infiltrators killed in South Korea.

 

[slug]

But surely if it was something to do with Korea they would have had a more genralized RN.
something like,
we are a small forign faction we have taken your daughter we want __________
will be in touch.
the Koreans could have taken any child at all and asked for the govenment to pay there ransom.
At the end of the day i can't understand if IDI why they did not take her away from the house.

 

[SunnieRN]

If I said that on Dec 25, 1996 the US and South Korea were 'denying the remains' of 24 NK inflitrators for 'a proper burial,' I wouldn't be wrong.

The 24 NK infiltrators were cremated without NK permission, and were returned to NK 3 days later.

There was this international diplomatic crisis happening at the exact same time.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 29 December, a North Korean official issued an official apology:

"The spokesman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the DPRK is authorized to express deep regret for the submarine incident in the coastal waters of Kangnung, South Korea, in September 1996 that caused the tragic loss of human life. The DPRK will make efforts to ensure that such an incident will not recur and will work with others for durable peace and stability on the Korean Peninsula." (20)

On 30 December, the ROK Government returned the cremated remains of the infiltrators to North Korea at Panmunjon.

North Korea threatened to retaliate over the incident, and in October 1996, a South Korean diplomat, Choi Duk Keun, was found poisoned in Vladivostok by a substance similar to that carried on the submarine. By 29 December, however, the North issued an official statement expressing "deep regret" over the submarine incident, although it did not issue a direct apology. In return, the South Korean government returned the cremated remains of the infiltrators to the North via Panmunjom on 30 December.

North Korea


North Korea has not been conclusively linked to any international terrorist attacks since 1987. North Korea is best known for its involvement in the 1987 midair bombing of KAL Flight 858 and the 1983 Rangoon bombing aimed at South Korean Government officials. A North Korean spokesman in November 1995 stated that the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) opposed "all kinds of terrorism" and "any assistance to it." There is no conclusive evidence the DPRK conducted any act of terrorism since 1987. The Republic of Korea, however, suspects that North Korean agents were involved in the murder of a South Korean official in Vladivostok on 1 October 1996, which shortly followed a North Korean warning that it would retaliate if Seoul did not return the bodies of several North Korean infiltrators killed in South Korea.

Wow, HOTYH you are totally reaching here!! You can believe and try hard to convince others that Koreans came all the way to Boulder, CO, to kill a 6 year old girl, whose father had NOTHING to do with the whole scandel, killed her, wrote an epic of a ransom note, that most experts deny is even a real ransom note, got away without EVER being seen, heard or a trace PROVEN to be from them, but you can't believe a Ramsey could kill Jon Benet....

Bye the way, they supposedly did this because North and South Korea were fighting over remains? Absurd! This is of course imho.

I wonder what it is that motivates your strong opinions and need to defend the Ramseys so strongly. I sincerely would be interesting in knowing. I honestly have no ability to understand, but am interested in trying to.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Wow, HOTYH you are totally reaching here!! You can believe and try hard to convince others that Koreans came all the way to Boulder, CO, to kill a 6 year old girl, whose father had NOTHING to do with the whole scandel, killed her, wrote an epic of a ransom note, that most experts deny is even a real ransom note, got away without EVER being seen, heard or a trace PROVEN to be from them, but you can't believe a Ramsey could kill Jon Benet....

Bye the way, they supposedly did this because North and South Korea were fighting over remains? Absurd! This is of course imho.

I wonder what it is that motivates your strong opinions and need to defend the Ramseys so strongly. I sincerely would be interesting in knowing. I honestly have no ability to understand, but am interested in trying to.

my bold

Settle down...no need to get worked up. After all, its been 14 years!

I think you're conveniently forgetting what the ransom note said:

We respect your business but not the country that it serves.
You will be denied her remains for a proper burial.
Use that good southern common sense of yours.
Victory!
You're not the only fat cat...

This is all political innuendo and I suppose we're going to ignore a political firefight that was occuring at the exact same time over the exact same subject. Somehow that seems par for the course, like ignoring strange DNA all over a small child.

JR said the perp may have spoken out against capitalism, and I can't think of any country more apt to speak out against capitalism. Just my :twocents:.

BTW isolating this North and South Korean dispute as if the US wasn't involved is terribly uninformed.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Wow, HOTYH you are totally reaching here!! You can believe and try hard to convince others that Koreans came all the way to Boulder, CO, to kill a 6 year old girl, whose father had NOTHING to do with the whole scandel, killed her, wrote an epic of a ransom note, that most experts deny is even a real ransom note, got away without EVER being seen, heard or a trace PROVEN to be from them, but you can't believe a Ramsey could kill Jon Benet....

I dont know that Koreans came all the way to Boulder. Maybe they were already there.
I dont know it was to kill a 6 year old girl. Maybe they wanted to kidnap her.
I don't know that JR had nothing to do with the scandal. Probably not.
I don't know they got away without being seen, heard, or without leaving a trace. Maybe lots of people saw and heard them but didn't recognize anything. I say they did leave a trace or two.

Its like this post is filled with all these assumptions...and putting words in my mouth. I'm not trying hard to convince people of these things that you posted.

 

[DeeDee249]

Well, they certainly weren't "denied her remains for proper burial". There she was, all wrapped up in the basement after all! No kidnapping at all.