Why the Ramsays?

[Camper]

SD :clap::clap::clap::clap:
:clap::clap::clap::clap:

My claps comes from where I started out, defending the R's and looking, learning, thinking, watching, checking, reading, listening carefully, reading carefully, and my conclusion, arriving finally after my 10 year long trip at my destination.

My theory with timeline has been given to a person that I call 'My Last Resort' for JonBenet justice.

Now I just mostly wait and watch. As Judge Marilyn says, I'm done, stick a fork in me I'm done

.

 

[BBB167893]

Last resort?

This should be interesting.

 

[Eagle1]

Quoting last sentences of your post:

"While we're at it, here's a question for the DA:

if your criticism against the police is that they haven't been objective, why hire a man who has PROVEN he is not objective, and is, in fact, proud of it?"

I looked at previous posts and still can't figure out exactly who you mean. Not Smit?

As we've discussed before, let's remember, we've all "studied the case" and most of us haven't changed our minds from our original impression, so one person changing their mind doesn't prove a thing!

Nobody's proved anything.

 

[Camper]

Last resort?

This should be interesting.

--->>>SD tiny misquote by you, the reference was to 'MY' last resort.

You can have your own, as can everyone else who studied this case.

.

 

[BBB167893]

Quoting last sentences of your post:

"While we're at it, here's a question for the DA:

if your criticism against the police is that they haven't been objective, why hire a man who has PROVEN he is not objective, and is, in fact, proud of it?"

I looked at previous posts and still can't figure out exactly who you mean. Not Smit?

That's exactly wbo I mean!

Although, I suppose I shouldn't say he's "proud" of it. He denies he's on their side, of course, saying things like, "If evidence pointing to them shows up," badda-dee, badda-da, but there's an old saying:

Actions speak louder than words. So yes, I mean him.

It's not just me, either.

Even Bill Wise had was struck by him. He said that it was one thing to say that there is insufficient evidence to charge the Ramseys, but it is another thing altogether to say they couldn't have done it.

Tom Haney is a damn fine detective, with a good record of solving homicides. Smit has nothing but respect for him. Haney said that Smit had lost his objectivity, and that with all the evidence pointing to the Ramseys, it didn't make sense to say that they were innocent.

 

[Eagle1]

Many of us say "I'm getting tired of hearing...." so I'm joining the club, very tired of hearing "No forensic evidence of an intruder" as if that proves anything. A skilled one wouldn't leave forensic evidence!

Not saying there was or wasn't an intruder, just that "No forensic evidence of" one doesn't prove anything either way. So could we churck that phrase? I have a hunch the plan all along was to make it look like an inside job, and JR's saying that, none of us has ever really explained. Did he know in advance, as in the movie that 4SURE has cited, Stepford Wives, the original version in the 1970's? Men in this town had to let their wives be sacrificed and replaced with robots by the Mens' Association, or they wouldn't be allowed to make a living. I guess if they'd moved to another town, the organization would have contacted their counterparts there. When asked why, the leader said, "Because we can." Was JR having to knowingly sacrifice JonBenet to some such organization?

I don't know how reliable "Reverse Speech" is, but some said that according to that kind of technology, JR had said, "So now we must hate you." Which could also be a perversion of the Bible, Jesus' words that whoever follows Him has to put Him first if loved ones are objectors, or "hate" them, not meaning the same as it means today. He wouldn't have told them to hate as we understand hatred, anyone, ever.

 

[Chrishope]

I hear that Twighlight Zone music again.

 

[BBB167893]

A skilled one wouldn't leave forensic evidence!

A skilled intruder wouldn't camp out for hours, either.

You never did answer my original question, Eagle1:

if your criticism against the police is that they haven't been objective, why hire a man who has PROVEN he is not objective, and is, in fact, proud of it?

 

[icedtea4me]

Many of us say "I'm getting tired of hearing...." so I'm joining the club, very tired of hearing "No forensic evidence of an intruder" as if that proves anything. A skilled one wouldn't leave forensic evidence!

Not saying there was or wasn't an intruder, just that "No forensic evidence of" one doesn't prove anything either way. So could we churck that phrase? I have a hunch the plan all along was to make it look like an inside job, and JR's saying that, none of us has ever really explained. Did he know in advance, as in the movie that 4SURE has cited, Stepford Wives, the original version in the 1970's? Men in this town had to let their wives be sacrificed and replaced with robots by the Mens' Association, or they wouldn't be allowed to make a living. I guess if they'd moved to another town, the organization would have contacted their counterparts there. When asked why, the leader said, "Because we can." Was JR having to knowingly sacrifice JonBenet to some such organization?

I don't know how reliable "Reverse Speech" is, but some said that according to that kind of technology, JR had said, "So now we must hate you." Which could also be a perversion of the Bible, Jesus' words that whoever follows Him has to put Him first if loved ones are objectors, or "hate" them, not meaning the same as it means today. He wouldn't have told them to hate as we understand hatred, anyone, ever.

??????


-Tea

 

[Eagle1]

That's a good question, Why the Ramseys? Which I've been asking all along too. Can anyone think of some possible reasons, so that we could make a numbered list?

SuperDave, you didn't ask your question of me specifically, but the answer would be "Don't know" because, sorry, I've forgotten, by the time I came to a spot to post. Um, something about the police not being objective, and I wasn't the one who said that.

But Why the Ramseys?

 

[Charlie]

The testimony regarding Burkes boot was not my editing. It was a fact. They tried to stop that line of questioning however point made. He in fact owned a pair of them. Patsy purchased them herself for Burke. Glad to see you accepted Melindas partial palm print. No we cannot prove that another pair of hi teks never were in that basement on a pole even yet. But at some point when there is no prints or evidence that works to put an intruder there.... you have to consider the only one who could have done this to JonBenet was someone who was at least present to get it done. Nothing sinister about Burke having that print there. He lived there for Petes Sake. Only thing is it eleminates that possibility of an intruder yet again. So far in 10 years nothing has placed an intruder there on that night. Believe me I want to believe an intruder did this. It fits better in my view of the world than trying to think that not only did the parent(s) do this they lied about it all these years. Patsy went to her grave without a confession of knowledge or guilt if she in fact participated in any way.

I agree. The ramseys footprints and fibers etc are not indicitive of guilt because they lived there. However the fact there are no foreign footprints or fibers suggests that there was no intruder, therefore you have to conclude it was someone within the house.

Many of us say "I'm getting tired of hearing...." so I'm joining the club, very tired of hearing "No forensic evidence of an intruder" as if that proves anything. A skilled one wouldn't leave forensic evidence!

I honestly done believe someone can commit a murder and not leave forensic evidence esp considering the "intruder" would have spent a great deal of time within the ramsey house that fateful night.

Id love to hear any IDI arguments about the following
1. Why would a parent call friends over to the house when a ransom note threatens decapitation of their daughter if this occured. I'm sorry but no innocent person would do this, there is no reason or rationale to this behavior. Its BS to say the rams needed advice or comfort because at the end of the day any parent would rather their child be safe then selfish enough to have comfort from a friend when it posed such risk to thier child.

2. Why would john see an open basement window and not report it for months after? Lets remember that an intruder came into his house and took his child yet he doesnt report a broken window...cmon

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Good questions, Charlie, if I may add to your #1 - why would the parents of a kidnapped child not only call friends over when the note says calling anyone will result in their daughter's beheading, but also allow their other child to leave the house (with FW no less, someone they later threw under the bus), not knowing who these kidnappers are or where they might be? How could they risk the chance that their other child would be kidnapped and/or beheaded as well? I really don't think people who had a ransom note and believed it was the real thing would jeopardize the safety of BOTH of their children like that. Either they knew that RN was fake, or they're so selfish that they don't care about their kids' safety.

 

[JMO8778]

2. Why would john see an open basement window and not report it for months after? Lets remember that an intruder came into his house and took his child yet he doesnt report a broken window...cmon

In DOI,JR says he found the window open and closed it,and noticed a strange vehicle in the alley (yet didn't report either at the time).He also makes the comment that he didn't know FW had been in the basement earlier that morning.
Why would he say those things?I don't think he would have not reported either the strange car or a broken window,if it had been a real kidnapping scenerio.This tells me that JR was in on the cover-up.
My guess is that JR broke the window AFTER FW had been in the basement that morning.FW had went down and saw no broken window.(Remember,there was no sign of forced entry earlier,per Officer French I beleive).FW later goes down with JR(at the time JR finds the body),and JR points out the window and says he broke it several months ago when he locked himself out.At this point,FW knows that isn't true and he either: keeps quiet about it (out of confusion,as he's trying to figure out wth is going on);confronts JR,as he knows he's lying,(or mistaken);and/or is confused and says 'I was down here earlier and that window wasn't broken'.
My guess is it's one of the last two,if not both.At that point,JR is in shock that FW knows it's a lie...he panics and decides he'd better find the body ASAP..so he does.
I'm not fully convinced JR intended to find JB's body right then, (when he went to the basement at 1pm with FW),as some have speculated.His description of it sounds very casual..he 'tapped his forehead and made the comment to FW about having to break it to get in'.He may have just wanted to simply point out the window to someone at that point(to show a possible means of entry for an intruder).But then when FW confronted him...he panicked.He may have just wanted to point it out in hopes that FW would mention it to LE(and /or JR would have a witness to the broken window and the story to go along with it..casting less suspicion on himself)..b/c I don't beleive JR would have wanted to point it out to LE himself,seeing as he broke it himself..that might sound too suspicious.
So back to: why didn't JR report the broken window or the 'strange car' to LE at the time,(if in fact there was a strange car)??Because he wanted to cast suspicion on FLEET WHITE(and/or whomever could have been in the supposed 'strange car').If you look at JR's words in DOI,I don't think there is much room for doubt.One of the things I noticed Mark Fuhrman does to figure out a murder is to look at what was said and WHY it was said...JR was making excuses and saying that he didn't know FW had been down there earlier..so that points to JR breaking the window after FW had been down there,and then trying to turn FW into a suspect.IF that didn't pan out,then he always had the 'strange car' to rely on as a backup.
Same way with the ransom note, IMO.It not only cast suspicion on the housekeeper,but on jeff merrick and a friend of his(thus the '2 gentlemen' in the note).The R's were trying to leave room for more than one suspect;in case nothing panned out with one,then they could point out another to LE.
My guess is that JR probably didn't intend to find the body at all himself...he wanted LE to find it,and he brought FW to the basement to point out the broken window to someone.But when FW says it wasn't broken earlier..JR panics and figures he'd better find JB asap...as an 'intruder' had been there,per the recently broken window.(And at that point,he wanted to make FW out as a suspect as well).
I think JR was hoping the house would be searched thouroughly,the broken window spotted ,and thus the basement thouroughly searched and JB would be found.Any thoughts on any of this?????

 

[JMO8778]

Another thought that comes to mind is that Arndt noticed JR was very nervous when she saw him again,after she'd lost track of him for awhile.Was that b/c JR was afraid maybe someone had heard him breaking the window,and had someone possibly seen him go to the basement right b/f that??
Also,could some of the broken glass have been hidden in JR's golf bag? Perhaps that why he was asking for it..

 

[Chrishope]

That's a good question, Why the Ramseys? Which I've been asking all along too. Can anyone think of some possible reasons, so that we could make a numbered list?

SuperDave, you didn't ask your question of me specifically, but the answer would be "Don't know" because, sorry, I've forgotten, by the time I came to a spot to post. Um, something about the police not being objective, and I wasn't the one who said that.

But Why the Ramseys?

Let's start with the fact that when a child is found dead in her own home the odds are 12:1 that one or both parents were involved. (Wecht - don't recall the page number)

Next, lets move on to the note. No kidnapper would leave the body behind, along with the note. Kidnappers will kill, but you can't collect ransom if the family finds the body. People are kinda funny about paying ransom when they know their kid is already dead. Therefore, it wasn't a kidnapping, but rather, a fake RN.

Another thing about the note is that it's too long and wordy to be a real RN. Real RNs say something like - "Have the girl. Will call. Get ready $1 million." The author wrote a short story, so we know it isn't a real RN.

What sort of Intruder would have a reason to leave a fake ransom note?
None. A disgruntled revenge killer would leave a revenge note - if he left a note at all. A paedophile wouldn't leave a note. A burglar wouldn't leave a note.

The notion that the killer left riddles in the note for JR to figue out is believed only by gullible IDIs who've been watching too many reruns of Batman. There wasn't any Riddler leaving clues.

The purpose of the note is to point away from what really happened, and to point away from the Ramseys. There is sufficient text analysis on the net that any IDI can read- assuming a genuine interest in figuring out the case, vs defending the Ramseys. I won't go through the text analysis because it's very easy to find and read for yourself.

PR's handwriting is a damn good match for the RN.

The RN was written on paper, and using a sharpie marker, from the R's home. IDI's like to say that is because the killer didn't want the police to trace the paper back to him. But, the paper was ordinary stuff available at any drug store, dept. store, stationer's, dollar store, etc. Likewise with the sharpies. How could police even begin to trace it to a specific individual? There must be literally thousands of homes in bolder with the same writing pads, and same sharpies. The police would need probable cause to get a warrant to search someone's house. The only likely suspects to search are the one's that were searched - and police didn't find any matching writing tablet or sharpie. The simplest explanation is that the note was written with material from the house because it was written by someone who lived there. They didn't want to be seen leaving and then returning from the all night stationer's, so they used what was at hand.

As you can see, you don't even have to get beyond the ransom note to see why many people suspect the Ramseys. And there's plenty besides the RN to lead one to suspect them.

 

[Chrishope]

Good questions, Charlie, if I may add to your #1 - why would the parents of a kidnapped child not only call friends over when the note says calling anyone will result in their daughter's beheading, but also allow their other child to leave the house (with FW no less, someone they later threw under the bus), not knowing who these kidnappers are or where they might be? How could they risk the chance that their other child would be kidnapped and/or beheaded as well? I really don't think people who had a ransom note and believed it was the real thing would jeopardize the safety of BOTH of their children like that. Either they knew that RN was fake, or they're so selfish that they don't care about their kids' safety.

I'm RDI but I've never found this argument very convincing. FW was a trusted friend. JB had already been "kidnapped" so it was unlikely that another kidnapping would occur. I see nothing wrong with letting Burke to the the Whites.

 

[Chrishope]

In DOI,JR says he found the window open and closed it,and noticed a strange vehicle in the alley (yet didn't report either at the time).He also makes the comment that he didn't know FW had been in the basement earlier that morning.
Why would he say those things?I don't think he would have not reported either the strange car or a broken window,if it had been a real kidnapping scenerio.This tells me that JR was in on the cover-up.
My guess is that JR broke the window AFTER FW had been in the basement that morning.FW had went down and saw no broken window.(Remember,there was no sign of forced entry earlier,per Officer French I beleive).FW later goes down with JR(at the time JR finds the body),and JR points out the window and says he broke it several months ago when he locked himself out.At this point,FW knows that isn't true and he either: keeps quiet about it (out of confusion,as he's trying to figure out wth is going on);confronts JR,as he knows he's lying,(or mistaken);and/or is confused and says 'I was down here earlier and that window wasn't broken'.
My guess is it's one of the last two,if not both.At that point,JR is in shock that FW knows it's a lie...he panics and decides he'd better find the body ASAP..so he does.
I'm not fully convinced JR intended to find JB's body right then, (when he went to the basement at 1pm with FW),as some have speculated.His description of it sounds very casual..he 'tapped his forehead and made the comment to FW about having to break it to get in'.He may have just wanted to simply point out the window to someone at that point(to show a possible means of entry for an intruder).But then when FW confronted him...he panicked.He may have just wanted to point it out in hopes that FW would mention it to LE(and /or JR would have a witness to the broken window and the story to go along with it..casting less suspicion on himself)..b/c I don't beleive JR would have wanted to point it out to LE himself,seeing as he broke it himself..that might sound too suspicious.
So back to: why didn't JR report the broken window or the 'strange car' to LE at the time,(if in fact there was a strange car)??Because he wanted to cast suspicion on FLEET WHITE(and/or whomever could have been in the supposed 'strange car').If you look at JR's words in DOI,I don't think there is much room for doubt.One of the things I noticed Mark Fuhrman does to figure out a murder is to look at what was said and WHY it was said...JR was making excuses and saying that he didn't know FW had been down there earlier..so that points to JR breaking the window after FW had been down there,and then trying to turn FW into a suspect.IF that didn't pan out,then he always had the 'strange car' to rely on as a backup.
Same way with the ransom note, IMO.It not only cast suspicion on the housekeeper,but on jeff merrick and a friend of his(thus the '2 gentlemen' in the note).The R's were trying to leave room for more than one suspect;in case nothing panned out with one,then they could point out another to LE.
My guess is that JR probably didn't intend to find the body at all himself...he wanted LE to find it,and he brought FW to the basement to point out the broken window to someone.But when FW says it wasn't broken earlier..JR panics and figures he'd better find JB asap...as an 'intruder' had been there,per the recently broken window.(And at that point,he wanted to make FW out as a suspect as well).
I think JR was hoping the house would be searched thouroughly,the broken window spotted ,and thus the basement thouroughly searched and JB would be found.Any thoughts on any of this?????

Pretty good theory. It explains why he found the body, and why it had to be right then.

I know we've discussed the time of the glass breaking before. I still find it hard to believe he could break glass w/o alerting the police upstairs. Maybe it's possible, and besides, he had nothing to loose.

 

[Chrishope]

Another thought that comes to mind is that Arndt noticed JR was very nervous when she saw him again,after she'd lost track of him for awhile.Was that b/c JR was afraid maybe someone had heard him breaking the window,and had someone possibly seen him go to the basement right b/f that??
Also,could some of the broken glass have been hidden in JR's golf bag? Perhaps that why he was asking for it..

That would be a good place to put it.

 

[icedtea4me]

The purpose of the note is to point away from what really happened, and to point away from the Ramseys.

So it would seem if the note is read in a left-brained concrete kind of manner. Personally, I think quite a bit is revealed even in the first line. You have the "Listen carefully!", not "Read carefully!" The "Listen carefully" makes it sound like the note writer is right there physically in front of John telling him this. Then there's the "We (I, the note writer and you, John) are a group of (two) individuals that represent (speak for) a small foreign (her French-sounding name) faction/factim (JonBenet). I used "factim" because the way the "o" and the "n" are formed they appear to make the letter "m".


-Tea

 

[Charlie]

I'm RDI but I've never found this argument very convincing. FW was a trusted friend. JB had already been "kidnapped" so it was unlikely that another kidnapping would occur. I see nothing wrong with letting Burke to the the Whites.

Agreed, FW was considered a trusted friend i can see the rationale of the ramseys palming off Burke to them. Howvere LHP was considered "trusted" yet Patsy immediatly suspected her of involvement in the kidnapping so from the ramsey p.o.v everyone they knew were now considered potential suspects including fleet. Why couldnt somone have sat with burke in his room and entertained him during that day, upstairs far enough away from the drama going on down stairs. the only drama was really waiting for the infamous phone call, finding JB's body was a surprise something noone anticipated. So perhaps the rams knew that JBs body would be recovered and didnt want burke to be subjected to that. Its a hard call and imo shouldnt be used as a point of indicating rams guilt, hell theyre are plenty more we can look at