JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

[tji]

Hi Abby

What do you think the chances of it being an outside intruder?
One of the things I find interesting is that apparently the Ramsey's gave the police the names of four people who they thought could have done it.
To me with the ransome and bonus amount, Jon must MUST have known that the killer would have to be close enough to him to know how much he made. I would think that this would narrow down the list considerably, unless there was some way which his bonus amount was available public somehow. Do you know any way which this is possible?

I don't rule it out Abby, however I just can't get away from the house. I think if it was an outside intruder they would have to have been a very close member of the inner circle. I have tried not to put forward information that can't be corroborated, however at the very least the Ramsey's muddied the waters from the start.

I do think the amount could be significant, I suppose we need to know who would know the amount, was it an amount given to many of them rather than specific to John himself, was it a regular amount given yearly

Or it could have been given as a subconscious amount. If it was one of the parents, is it possible they are going to put down an amount they know they have.

Two of the people on the list were a former nanny and the local Santa. How would they know his bonus amount?

Bill Reynolds wife placed herself in the house near the spiral staircase 2 days before the murder, I suppose it could be said they could have seen information laying about, thin I guess but I imagine the Police would have to look into it. (I mean seeing the amount of bonus and escalating to murder)
Again I guess the former nanny would know if the bonus was not a 1 time event.

I guess the question is how many people would know his bonus amount and how would they have known it?[/QUOTE]

Yeah I think it would be an important point if the Police could have narrowed it down, the fact that they didn't may mean it was more accessible than first thought.

Tracy

[Shelley]

Two of the people on the list were a former nanny and the local Santa. How would they know his bonus amount?

I guess the question is how many people would know his bonus amount and how would they have known it?

Just to point out this, that people do talk. However, i understood that even Patsy Ramsey was not aware of her husband's, John that is, his payments or the bonus he received, i have no personal reason to disbelieve her given that when she called 9 11 and was distraught some time later, and for a period, which can be understood, that she made several bungling mistakes namely that of the 9 11 call of where she had not hung up the telephone properly and the police still taped seconds of the call after she thought she had hung up the phone, not really the actions of a woman guilty of a terrible crime of her daughter is it now, to be so sloppy especially in view that they ( The Ramsey's ) denied Burke was awake during the call to the police, not a smart thing to do i wouldn't have thought.

Besides, have you ever considered Burke to be just innocent in the crime scene, seems as a 9 yr old left no traceable dna to himself. Usually criminals are far too busy directing the incriminating evidences, even circumstantial ones, *away from themselves*, like the killer did with the copycat ransom note with Patsy's * and hence * bit, oh and i did notice what was before the *and* as well, so i have good *reasons* to believe it was indeed a copycat couple of words used. Leans largely towards death in that note, not really a ransom note at all, so no wonder the police pick up that it isn't a standard Ransom Note, after all they have good reasons with their work and evidence, i guess that's why they are typically the ones that handle the cases in the first place, them and not anyone else. So no i have to disagree with Tracy's ( that is tji ) that the killer was altogether THAT intelligent, deflects incrimination towards Patsy then leaves dna practically all over the show, his nasty horrific show of sheer terror. Very sloppy don't you think, if you bother to * CHECK IT * properly. But that's your choice entirely Abby as long as you have a friend with you, maybe it's Tracy, and have a chit chat and personal disagreements with well anyone or anything, with what you both think in your heads together, including an autopsy report, or an Detective's report, or even an FBI report, your choice (s) entirely, and not forgetting and your privilege of course. You can obviously take the choice to ignore my post or any possible valuable links i put up involving credibility of this JonBenet Ramsey case.

Just one thing, with having said all that above, don't expect me to *believe* your friend tji aka Tracy or yourself that you are possibly right when you just get an notion in your heads without a backup of common sense or without good reason regarding case evidences for doing so, i will not be interested at all and move in a different direction ~ that's the way it goes sometimes folks on these boards. I'm just being fair & square and to the point, just so you know me Abby. Ok.

[tji]

So no i have to disagree with Tracy's ( that is tji ) that the killer was altogether THAT intelligent, deflects incrimination towards Patsy then leaves dna practically all over the show, his nasty horrific show of sheer terror.

Shelley are you reading the same posts as the rest of us?

Very sloppy don't you think, if you bother to * CHECK IT * properly.

Oh the irony

[Abby Normal]

Just to point out this, that people do talk. However, i understood that even Patsy Ramsey was not aware of her husband's, John that is, his payments or the bonus he received, i have no personal reason to disbelieve her given that when she called 9 11 and was distraught some time later, and for a period, which can be understood, that she made several bungling mistakes namely that of the 9 11 call of where she had not hung up the telephone properly and the police still taped seconds of the call after she thought she had hung up the phone, not really the actions of a woman guilty of a terrible crime of her daughter is it now, to be so sloppy especially in view that they ( The Ramsey's ) denied Burke was awake during the call to the police, not a smart thing to do i wouldn't have thought.

Besides, have you ever considered Burke to be just innocent in the crime scene, seems as a 9 yr old left no traceable dna to himself. Usually criminals are far too busy directing the incriminating evidences, even circumstantial ones, *away from themselves*, like the killer did with the copycat ransom note with Patsy's * and hence * bit, oh and i did notice what was before the *and* as well, so i have good *reasons* to believe it was indeed a copycat couple of words used. Leans largely towards death in that note, not really a ransom note at all, so no wonder the police pick up that it isn't a standard Ransom Note, after all they have good reasons with their work and evidence, i guess that's why they are typically the ones that handle the cases in the first place, them and not anyone else. So no i have to disagree with Tracy's ( that is tji ) that the killer was altogether THAT intelligent, deflects incrimination towards Patsy then leaves dna practically all over the show, his nasty horrific show of sheer terror. Very sloppy don't you think, if you bother to * CHECK IT * properly. But that's your choice entirely Abby as long as you have a friend with you, maybe it's Tracy, and have a chit chat and personal disagreements with well anyone or anything, with what you both think in your heads together, including an autopsy report, or an Detective's report, or even an FBI report, your choice (s) entirely, and not forgetting and your privilege of course. You can obviously take the choice to ignore my post or any possible valuable links i put up involving credibility of this JonBenet Ramsey case.

Just one thing, with having said all that above, don't expect me to *believe* your friend tji aka Tracy or yourself that you are possibly right when you just get an notion in your heads without a backup of common sense or without good reason regarding case evidences for doing so, i will not be interested at all and move in a different direction ~ that's the way it goes sometimes folks on these boards. I'm just being fair & square and to the point, just so you know me Abby. Ok.

Hello Shelley
Let me start out by saying I had originally leaned towards someone/s in the Ramsey family as being responsible for jonbenets murder. However, after recent re looking into the case I've gone the other way and now think its about 50/50 between the Ramsey's and the outside intruder theories. I keep an open mind and my views can change.

Re: patsy Ramsey not knowing her husbands bonus amount. I find it highly unlikely. Do you really think that it's more likely that an outside intruder would know his bonus amount and his wife would not?


Also, Thank you for providing all the links. I have actually been checking them out.

[Ghost]

Does anyone find it odd that about the first thing that Patsy Ramsey does is call the police, even though the ransom note tells them not to do that? One could see that as suggesting she already knew the ransom note was not real.

[Tom_Wescott]

This case was solved some years ago and the lead investigator, A. James Kolar, published the book detailing it. It's called Foreign Faction.

Yours truly

Tom Wescott

[Batman]

Never let your wife know the amount of your bonus check when you ask her to write a fake ransom note.

The fact is the case is a mess and the law enforcement botched it from the beginning because they had never encountered anything like this before. So it left a lot to be desired.

FBI's Douglas was hired and did a pretty convincing job of demolishing the bed wetting motive and long term assault. However in the same book he predicted the Boston Strangler, deSalvo, was not the killer, but DNA sinced has confirmed he was.

Apart from the bonus check, the Ramsey's can be heard to be talking with someone else in the background of a the police phone call. It is likely to be their son.

Pineapple was found in her stomach. Her fingerprints and the sons where found on the bowl.

I speculate that the Ramsey's know who her killer was, but didn't kill her themselves but did cover up who did it.

[Dictionary Brown]

I have been casually interested in this case (and thought it was likely an intruder or some other third party) but had not heard of the book "Foreign Faction" before this thread, so it has been very interesting reading up on it.

Having Burke be the one ultimately responsible seems implausible at first, but almost exclusively because of our reflexive reaction that a nine year old would not be capable of killing. I don't believe he wrote the ransom note, but Burke as the culprit does answer some nagging questions. I had not known that he was in psychiatric care and apparently was still under care at least until 1999.

I also hadn't heard of the "feces on Jonbenet's chocolate box" information until now. (I'm still sketchy on what actually happened.) Apparently both children were still wetting and defecating their beds and themselves. Does anyone know if this is true? If so, I would say it is strong evidence that both were sexually abused. It would also be more plausible that they could be sexually abusing each other, if they were already in an abusive environment.

The use of a garrote has always been a puzzle, and to me pointed to a physically weak killer. Perhaps it was a game or an escalated fight that ended after Burke tied the cord around her neck and tightened it until she passed out.

The ransom note is of course a major clue, as well as the Ramseys reaction to it. The fact that they weren't anxiously awaiting the ransom call, and were not panicked when it did not come, is a giant red flag. I believe Patsy wrote the ransom note.

It's possible that either Patsy or John were the killer/killers and/or abusers. It's possible that one would stand by the other if they murdered or accidentally killed Jonbenet. It's hard to imagine those scenarios, but definitely possible. But with Burke as the culprit, Patsy and John's reactions and their working together to stage the scene could be motivated by not wanting to lose their last child. That would be a powerful, inarguable motive. If Burke indeed was responsible, he would have been taken away by authorities and lived in an institution for years. So, hypothetically, the situation is: you've lost one child, do you want to lose both? To me, that seems to be a plausible motive to stage the scene, and as I said before, explains some lingering unanswered questions.

Hmm...

[Abby Normal]

This case was solved some years ago and the lead investigator, A. James Kolar, published the book detailing it. It's called Foreign Faction.

Yours truly

Tom Wescott

that Burke did it and the parents covered it up?

[Abby Normal]

I would not be shocked if Burke sexually assaulted her and then killed her and the parents covered it up.

Other than his young age of course, what I have trouble with is that apparently the experts concluded that the blow to the head came after the garroting and when she was probably already dead or dying. I would find it hard to believe that he could have fashioned a garrot like the one used.
Now if the garrot had already been made and he found it like that and then used it on her- then it would be more believable.

Also, whats the deal with the suitcase? it appears that it was filled with some of her stuff and was sitting under the basement window. did an intruder use that as part of the kidnapping plot, bringing her belongings, using it to climb out of the window? or was that also part of the staging along with the ransome note by the parents?

[Ausgirl]

I believe the suitcase contained a pillow 'sham' (decorative pillow case) and a duvet identified as belonging to John Junior, (which had a dried sample of his 'DNA' on it..to put it delicately) and was used by him when he travelled back and forth from college.

It also contained a Dr Suess book, the title of which to the best of my knowledge has never been released.

It was under the window because (if I recall correctly) Frank White put it there, as well as placing the bit of broken glass on top of it.

[Ausgirl]

I personally don't believe this case is 'solved'. I think Kolar released a fairly plausible theory.

[sdreid]

At least it's good to know that the Grand Jury couldn't be bought off.

[Dictionary Brown]

Okay, I just ordered "Foreign Faction" on Amazon, and watched the A&E Investigative Reports on YouTube last night. I don't believe I've ever seen video footage from inside the house before, so that was very interesting.

The basement window is a lot bigger and lower than I had originally thought, and Bill Kurtis made a good observation when he noted that an intruder could have simply left through the ground floor doors. I had been thinking about the possibility that an intruder couldn't get her out the window, and killed her instead. But the window is surprisingly accessible.

Of course, escaping with the kidnappee through a basement window and up through a grate is pretty silly when you consider that a kidnapper could have easily left the house on the ground floor carrying JonBenet. It's clear, like they said in the TV program, that the basement was the destination, not the escape route.

It is fascinating to read the grand jury documents.

They accuse both parents not of murder, but of putting JonBenet in a dangerous situation and assisting the murderer, which appears to line up with the Burke theory. I'm not sure how they came up up with the first degree murder charge though, unless that's the default legal status of any unsolved murder.

[Batman]

What are they protecting Burke from exactly?