JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

[Wickerman]

Det. Bob Whitson (Ret), wrote sixteen pages concerning one of his prime suspects:
(These are the hilights in Paraphrase)

There were 20 stranger rapes in Boulder from 1990 to 1996, investigations determined there were two separate offenders. No-one was arrested for these cases until after the JB murder.
One offender was eventually identified through DNA taken from three crime scenes. This offender always wore gloves, different gloves, but always gloves. In fact it was from one of these gloves he left at a scene that the police got their first break.
- The gloves he used were always fabric (unidentified fibers left at the Ramsey house).
- Under a plea bargain he admitted to 23 rapes, or attempted rapes overall.
- The accused was an avid mountain climber and owned several climbing ropes (rope in a bag left at the Ramsey house).
- He always carried a variety of equipment with him that he might need on his nightly escapades; cord, tape, rope, knife, etc.
- Accused admitted to casing a house in the days prior to breaking in, in some cases the house was occupied when he broke in and molested/raped his victim.
- All victims swore that he threatened them saying: "keep f**king still, keep f**king quiet, or I'll knock you out then f**king rape you". or "Shut the f**k up or I'll beat the **** out of you". (Bruises & head wound on JB)
- He always wore a nylon stocking over his face, and bound his victims hands.
- In some cases he would perform vaginal sex on them, sometimes oral sex, and sometimes digital sex.
- Among the accused possessions was found a cattle prod, which is a two-pronged electrical discharge weapon used to stun cattle, similar to a tazer.
- This weapon was damaged when found so could not be accessed to be the source of the wounds to JB.
- Accused displayed psychopathic and sadistic behaviour towards his victims.
Injustice, Whitson, 2012, pp.127-143.

Whitson bought a new cattle prod of the same type as the accused owned, the electrodes matched closely the wounds on JonBenet.
The accused cannot be named as that may negatively impact any future charges.

[louisa]

I'm disappointed. Is that all you've got? Sections copied & pasted from Whitson's biased book?

There's no point in reading any of that claptrap because it doesn't apply. In any large town in the USA you are going to get rapes and murders.

(Reminder to all: Whitson is the bungling cop who allowed all and sundry to tramp through the Ramseys home after the ransom note was found).

I can see I'm going to have to remind you of something

Murderers have their own modus operandii (distinct pattern or methods of working).

The person who you think murdererd JonBenet had a definite modus operandii - a totally bizarre one that made no sense to anyone.

Isn't it strange to think that this same person has NEVER done anything remotely like it again? Never been seen or heard of since this case, and there has never been another murder or kidnapping with remotely similar features anywhere else in the world?

[Abby Normal]

Det. Bob Whitson (Ret), wrote sixteen pages concerning one of his prime suspects:
(These are the hilights in Paraphrase)

There were 20 stranger rapes in Boulder from 1990 to 1996, investigations determined there were two separate offenders. No-one was arrested for these cases until after the JB murder.
One offender was eventually identified through DNA taken from three crime scenes. This offender always wore gloves, different gloves, but always gloves. In fact it was from one of these gloves he left at a scene that the police got their first break.
- The gloves he used were always fabric (unidentified fibers left at the Ramsey house).
- Under a plea bargain he admitted to 23 rapes, or attempted rapes overall.
- The accused was an avid mountain climber and owned several climbing ropes (rope in a bag left at the Ramsey house).
- He always carried a variety of equipment with him that he might need on his nightly escapades; cord, tape, rope, knife, etc.
- Accused admitted to casing a house in the days prior to breaking in, in some cases the house was occupied when he broke in and molested/raped his victim.
- All victims swore that he threatened them saying: "keep f**king still, keep f**king quiet, or I'll knock you out then f**king rape you". or "Shut the f**k up or I'll beat the **** out of you". (Bruises & head wound on JB)
- He always wore a nylon stocking over his face, and bound his victims hands.
- In some cases he would perform vaginal sex on them, sometimes oral sex, and sometimes digital sex.
- Among the accused possessions was found a cattle prod, which is a two-pronged electrical discharge weapon used to stun cattle, similar to a tazer.
- This weapon was damaged when found so could not be accessed to be the source of the wounds to JB.
- Accused displayed psychopathic and sadistic behaviour towards his victims.
Injustice, Whitson, 2012, pp.127-143.

Whitson bought a new cattle prod of the same type as the accused owned, the electrodes matched closely the wounds on JonBenet.
The accused cannot be named as that may negatively impact any future charges.

hi wick
thanks for posting. I dont think this is our guy. this sounds more like a hot prowl rapist. were looking for a pedophile abductor.

I previously asked you to refresh my memory of similar breakins in the neighborhood that happened around the time of her murder. These involved a breakin and sexual assault (and I believe Murder?) of young girls? can you refresh me on those?

[Wickerman]

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...AUTION-GRAPHIC!

The hair caught in the knot shows how close the perpetrator had to be while assembling the garrote.
If the scene was being staged the garrote could have been made at the kitchen table. No-one staging the scene needs to crouch so close to the body to tie a knot, no-one that is except the real perpetrator.

What this trapped hair suggests is the killer crouched so close that he was probably sat on her back. Which raises the question, was JonBenet still alive and moving? Did he have to hold her down by sitting on her while he assembled the device to torture her with.

JB's hair was bushy and loose and with him being anxious to keep her down and tie the knot he managed to trap some hair. Once the garrote was assembled and around her throat he pulls it tight, then slackens off, then tight again.
At some point JB tries to pick at the garrote with her fingers leaving the half-moon scratch marks on her throat just above the garrote line, and skin traces under her finger nails.

The perpetrator whacks her with some blunt instrument because she refuses to lay still, and she falls limp. Then he pulls the garrote very tight to finish her off.
How he proceeded to sexually assault her, by what means, orally or digitally can not be determined.
[That is one interpretation of the evidence]

[Wickerman]

I previously asked you to refresh my memory of similar breakins in the neighborhood that happened around the time of her murder. These involved a breakin and sexual assault (and I believe Murder?) of young girls? can you refresh me on those?

Yes I looked, it must have been detailed out on a video or maybe a website, because I couldn't find the details again. I recall them saying nothing significant was taken, the break-ins appeared to be practice runs for something.
I hadn't forgotten, I just couldn't locate it again.

[Wickerman]

Abby.

Whitson provides some details about that attempted rape that followed JB's murder, a few months later.

The girl was 14 years old, she was asleep in her bed and her mother in an adjacent room, the father was out of town. At about 3:10 am the offender placed his hand over the victims mouth, called her by her formal first name and said, "Don't scream. I know who you are. I'll hurt you . . . If I was here to hurt you, I would have knocked you out."

The offender digitally penetrated her and attempted to perform oral sex on her, but she was wearing a one-piece body suit. The offender pulled at the body suit, the mother woke up and called to her daughter, who did not respond. The mother went to her bedroom, the offender ran passed her in the passage and out of a second story door, which led to a roof 13ft off the ground - he jumped down and escaped.

Whitson thinks the offender was his previously mentioned suspect (post #646 above).
There was a dog in the house but it was kept downstairs, yet it did not react. It was believed the offender climbed the outside of the house, he came in the same way he left.
As stated previously, Whitson's suspect was a rock-climber.

[Abby Normal]

Abby.

Whitson provides some details about that attempted rape that followed JB's murder, a few months later.

The girl was 14 years old, she was asleep in her bed and her mother in an adjacent room, the father was out of town. At about 3:10 am the offender placed his hand over the victims mouth, called her by her formal first name and said, "Don't scream. I know who you are. I'll hurt you . . . If I was here to hurt you, I would have knocked you out."

The offender digitally penetrated her and attempted to perform oral sex on her, but she was wearing a one-piece body suit. The offender pulled at the body suit, the mother woke up and called to her daughter, who did not respond. The mother went to her bedroom, the offender ran passed her in the passage and out of a second story door, which led to a roof 13ft off the ground - he jumped down and escaped.

Whitson thinks the offender was his previously mentioned suspect (post #646 above).
There was a dog in the house but it was kept downstairs, yet it did not react. It was believed the offender climbed the outside of the house, he came in the same way he left.
As stated previously, Whitson's suspect was a rock-climber.

Ok thanks Wicky.

[Wickerman]

Another contentious piece of evidence is the question of which came first, the blow to the head, or the final strangulation.

Experts in pathology are divided on the issue so it is likely to remain unresolved. However, when the garrote is pulled very tight as it was on JonBenet, this constricts both the carotid artery, carrying blood to the brain, and at the same time the jugular veins, which carry blood away from the brain.

The result of a complete restriction of these veins & arteries is to stop the flow of blood in both directions.
Which means that even if the blow to the head came first, there will be no appreciable blood loss into the brain if the garrote was applied almost immediately.
This is a fact the pathologists have not pointed out.

Only a very small amount of blood was found to eminate from the head wound internally within the brain. Which indicates that even if her heart did continue to beat for a brief time after the head wound, the garrote prevented the blood from entering the brain.

The marks around the neck indicate there were several attempts at strangulation, which is a form of torture. Only the last pull on the cord truly caused the strangulation which terminated her life.
One estimate offered a time of 20 to 60 minutes between the head wound and the final strangulation, this is wholly inaccurate and not corroborated by any other pathologist.
The time between both assaults can be measured in seconds to minutes, but no more.

[Wickerman]

Abby.
This doesn't tell much but..

"It was determined that there had been more than 100 burglaries in the Ramseys' neighborhood in the months before JonBenét's murder. There were 38 registered sex offenders living within a two-mile (3 km) radius of the Ramseys' home"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_JonBen%C3%A9t_Ramsey

[Wickerman]

I have found it was an investigation by CBS corespondent Erin Moriarty who came up with the 100 burglaries and 38 registered sex offenders.
I'm trying to locate an article by her on-line, no joy yet.


Here's a link that discusses the later attempted rape of that 14 yr old, they call her either Amy or Lucy.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/jonbenet-ramsey/T1MBIP891IALGDPAD

[louisa]

I expect that in any district or big town in the USA you're going to get a high percentage of weirdos and paedos, living.

But my point is that NONE of them had the same, or even similar, M.O. as the one supposed to have killed JonBenet.

You show me one that is not only a kidnapper, but also a murderer AND a sex fiend.

[louisa]

Another contentious piece of evidence is the question of which came first, the blow to the head, or the final strangulation.

Experts in pathology are divided on the issue so it is likely to remain unresolved. However, when the garrote is pulled very tight as it was on JonBenet, this constricts both the carotid artery, carrying blood to the brain, and at the same time the jugular veins, which carry blood away from the brain.

The result of a complete restriction of these veins & arteries is to stop the flow of blood in both directions.
Which means that even if the blow to the head came first, there will be no appreciable blood loss into the brain if the garrote was applied almost immediately.
This is a fact the pathologists have not pointed out.

Only a very small amount of blood was found to eminate from the head wound internally within the brain. Which indicates that even if her heart did continue to beat for a brief time after the head wound, the garrote prevented the blood from entering the brain.

The marks around the neck indicate there were several attempts at strangulation, which is a form of torture. Only the last pull on the cord truly caused the strangulation which terminated her life.
One estimate offered a time of 20 to 60 minutes between the head wound and the final strangulation, this is wholly inaccurate and not corroborated by any other pathologist.
The time between both assaults can be measured in seconds to minutes, but no more.

It is an established fact that JonBenet had her head trauma BEFORE she was strangled.

Whichever way you look at it there is NO WAY that your scenario would work.

Even if this unknown person was someone who got his thrills from this strangulation method - he is hardly likely to be doing it on the premises when he could have easily taken the child away to his own home, or somewhere safe where he knew he would not be disturbed. He could have taken his time with her.

And then there's the matter of NO physical evidence of this unknown person who committed these vile sex acts - NO SEMEN, nothing!

There is always a transference of DNA between victim and attacker. It would be a highly unusual thing if there wasn't, possibly unheard of.

And you are asking people to believe this theory?!

[louisa]

The hair caught in the knot shows how close the perpetrator had to be while assembling the garrote.

If the scene was being staged the garrote could have been made at the kitchen table. No-one staging the scene needs to crouch so close to the body to tie a knot, no-one that is except the real perpetrator.

How wrong you are! The scene was staged once the body was put into the basement room. The person used what was handy - and Patsy's paintbox happened to be right at hand!

JonBenet was comatose when the person did this. The person who strangled her is actually the one who killed her because the blow on the head had already rendered her unconscious.

And of course the perpetrator had to be close to JB when garrotting her! Behind her so they wouldn't have to look at JonBenet's face.

What this trapped hair suggests is the killer crouched so close that he was probably sat on her back. Which raises the question, was JonBenet still alive and moving? Did he have to hold her down by sitting on her while he assembled the device to torture her with.

JB's hair was bushy and loose and with him being anxious to keep her down and tie the knot he managed to trap some hair. Once the garrote was assembled and around her throat he pulls it tight, then slackens off, then tight again.
At some point JB tries to pick at the garrote with her fingers leaving the half-moon scratch marks on her throat just above the garrote line, and skin traces under her finger nails.

The perpetrator whacks her with some blunt instrument because she refuses to lay still, and she falls limp. Then he pulls the garrote very tight to finish her off.
How he proceeded to sexually assault her, by what means, orally or digitally can not be determined.
[That is one interpretation of the evidence]

And then you go and leave out the most intriguing part......

How did he manage NOT to leave a trace of himself? He would not have been wearing gloves if he was out for thrills. He left none of his own hair, skin cells, semen, sweat, ANYTHING!

Yet tons of Ramseys DNA was on JB because her mother had thoughtfully thrown herself across her daughter's body when it was laid on the ground. John had picked her up and carried her from the basement.

[louisa]

I've actually started to lean back to Burke being the perpetrator again.

It's just all so much more likely. Conjecture, yes...... but far more likely than any other scenario.

In this scenario we must assume that the Ramsey's son Burke was intensely jealous of his popular and pretty little sister.

Burke already had behavioural problems and I believe was having counselling for some of it. He may have been weirder than we know.

Christmas night - Burke and JonBenet go down to the kitchen and Burke gets the bowl of pineapple. They both eat some. Maybe Burke gets annoyed with JB and hits her with the flashlight, rendering her unconscious. Whether he thinks she is dead at this point is another piece of conjecture.

In tests it has been proven that a 9 year old boy is completely able to hit a human skull (with a flashlight) and crush it in the very same way that JB's was.

He takes her down to the basement room where he performs some weird sexual things. A 9 year old is probably sexually curious and strips off her longjohns. We know the rest. The garrotting is something he may have seen in weird magazines. Kids read some macabre things these days.

Patsy, who never got undressed but was preparing for the next day's trip, probably packing suitcases, wonders what is going on and goes downstairs.

That could be when the scream occurred (if indeed there was a scream) - Patsy discovering her daughter's body.

Then the cover-up begins. The parents do not want to lose another child (one of John's other daughters died a couple of years beforehand in a tragic car accident) - so they wonder what they should do.

Burke must be protected at all costs. A kidnapping scenario is decided upon and the note is written.

I don't think anything was properly thought through at this time because of the amount of raw emotion and panic that was going on.

This scenario would explain why the couple supported eachother on TV interviews and were so determined that the truth should never come out.

Burke was whisked away at the first available opportunity. It could be the reason the Ramseys called their friends immediately, they wanted them to take Burke out of the house.

[Harry D]

That's why they allowed Burke back to school unsupervised not along after the murder?