JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

[louisa]

Hello Louisa. Remarkably intelligent theorising.

It is my sincere hope that some of that can be applied to the Ripper "case." If so, the rot may come to an abrupt halt.

Cheers.
LC

Hi Lynn

Thanks for your comments.

I used to be interested in the Ripper but then I realised that the actual killer was probably just Joe Schmoe, a nobody. If we were suddenly enlightened as to who the actual killer was we would probably never have heard of this person anyway.

For a while I though it was Koslowski but the m.o. wasn't quite right.

At least in the Ramsey murder there were only three viable suspects, which actually makes it more interesting because it turns it into more of a psychological case than a straightforward murder.

[louisa]

Right, but the Grand Jury reached its conclusion without knowing about the DNA evidence. Granted, the DNA "evidence" is garbage, given how poorly it was processed, as well as how contaminated the body and the scene were, but they didn't have everything presented to them. I don't know if this means it would have disqualified their judgment later if it had gone to trial, or not.

My friend asked a question while we watched the Schiller produced program on "Overlooked": why do they show photos of the basement labeled "Actual Crime Scene Photo" showing the blanket- covered body, if John had carried her upstairs? Did they take her back downstairs to take crime scene photos?
I said I thought it was just the blankets, but that the body wasn't under them.

Does anyone know anything about the crime scene photos?

Yes, the crime scene photo simply shows the blanket in the basement.

This might assist you. Scroll right down to the bottom of the page and you will see the crime scene photos of JBR after she was brought up from the basement.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sho...wers-to/page59

[Hannibal Hayes]

Watching the programme last night on More4, I thought a couple of things were odd: the woman who took the 911 call claimed to never have been asked about it.

She also said after Patsy had stopped talking, she heard something being said (can’t remember what it was) but what she said she heard wasn’t picked up at all on the enhanced audio. So, either she’s mistaken or her memory is playing tricks on her.

Either way, she’s now unreliable as what she thought was said, wasn't.

She seemed annoyed that she hadn’t been called as a witness but then said the case didn’t go to court & therefore witnesses weren’t needed. She’s obviously not under suspicion but seemed a bit over dramatic to me but I appreciate we only see minutes of what was probably an hour long interview.

Secondly, the broken window. I’m not an expert on this case but I was under the impression that there were no signs of forced entry? I can’t remember where the broken window was (I fell asleep at one point!) so that might explain it.

Surely it is/was routine for the Police to search the house under these circumstances?!

[Abby Normal]

Watching the programme last night on More4, I thought a couple of things were odd: the woman who took the 911 call claimed to never have been asked about it.

She also said after Patsy had stopped talking, she heard something being said (can’t remember what it was) but what she said she heard wasn’t picked up at all on the enhanced audio. So, either she’s mistaken or her memory is playing tricks on her.

Either way, she’s now unreliable as what she thought was said, wasn't.

She seemed annoyed that she hadn’t been called as a witness but then said the case didn’t go to court & therefore witnesses weren’t needed. She’s obviously not under suspicion but seemed a bit over dramatic to me but I appreciate we only see minutes of what was probably an hour long interview.

Secondly, the broken window. I’m not an expert on this case but I was under the impression that there were no signs of forced entry? I can’t remember where the broken window was (I fell asleep at one point!) so that might explain it.

Surely it is/was routine for the Police to search the house under these circumstances?!

Hi hh
The 911 operator said she heard pasty say (after patsy had thought she hung up) say something along the lines of, well now we've called police what next, in a totally different tone than frantic. She thought that something wasn't right at the time, and said she thought patsy was faking it. Apparently the recording picked up some noise after the call. Perhaps she heard correctly and the recording just didn't pick it up. I Beleive what the 911 operator said more than the "enhanced" sound stuff where they think they hear Burke saying something.

The broken window, was the same window in the basement where proponents of the intruder theory think more than likely the killer got in and or exited. John had broken the window earlier in the year when he locked himself out and other people knew he had done that. The glass had been replaced.
It really had nothing to do with it.

[Harry D]

Hello Harry. Thanks.

Who is suggesting psychopathy? I referred ONLY to a fit of pique. The rest--to use your word--was staging.

So you believe that the parents constructed a garrote and strangled their daughter to stage a cover-up? Because I don't think many well-adjusted nine year-olds would do such a thing. Then again, I don't believe that two traumatized, grief-stricken parents would do the same thing either.

[louisa]

Watching the programme last night on More4, I thought a couple of things were odd: the woman who took the 911 call claimed to never have been asked about it.

She also said after Patsy had stopped talking, she heard something being said (can’t remember what it was) but what she said she heard wasn’t picked up at all on the enhanced audio. So, either she’s mistaken or her memory is playing tricks on her.

Either way, she’s now unreliable as what she thought was said, wasn't.

She seemed annoyed that she hadn’t been called as a witness but then said the case didn’t go to court & therefore witnesses weren’t needed. She’s obviously not under suspicion but seemed a bit over dramatic to me but I appreciate we only see minutes of what was probably an hour long interview.

Secondly, the broken window. I’m not an expert on this case but I was under the impression that there were no signs of forced entry? I can’t remember where the broken window was (I fell asleep at one point!) so that might explain it.

Surely it is/was routine for the Police to search the house under these circumstances?!

The child had been 'kidnapped' so no real search was undertaken until the body was discovered and then the FBI were called.

I agree that Linda Archuletta, the despatcher was a non-starter. I can understand why she was not called to testify at the Grand Jury because, basically, she had nothing new or valid to say that was not already known.

I believe she simply wanted to be part of the story and either imagined or invented the part of the telephone call where she heard Patsy say "We've called the cops, now what?"

[Wickerman]

We just had another example in those Forensic Cases stories on tv.
An intruder burgles a home and rapes the pre-teen daughter in her bedroom while the parents are asleep in an adjoining room.

There is no shortage of cases of this type.
Wasn't there something like 38 registered sex offenders living in Boulder at the time?

[louisa]

So you believe that the parents constructed a garrote and strangled their daughter to stage a cover-up? Because I don't think many well-adjusted nine year-olds would do such a thing. Then again, I don't believe that two traumatized, grief-stricken parents would do the same thing either.

If you have been reading internet accounts of BR's behaviour he comes over as far from 'well adjusted'. I don't know where you get your information, Harry.

And I agree that the parents did not strangle JBR. The boy did both parts of the assault.

Other posters on some of the other forums seem to think the parents did the strangling but I disagree. The boy did it. The parents tried their best to cover for him and Patsy wrote the note.

[louisa]

We just had another example in those Forensic Cases stories on tv.
An intruder burgles a home and rapes the pre-teen daughter in her bedroom while the parents are asleep in an adjoining room.

There is no shortage of cases of this type.
Wasn't there something like 38 registered sex offenders living in Boulder at the time?

Give it a rest Wicksy. You're still trying to flog your outdated 'intruder' theory.

I have stated so many times before - JBR's murder was a one-off. The modus operandii will probably never be seen again in our lifetimes and beyond.

Try and remember some of the facts about the JBR murder.

There was no burglary.

JBR WAS NOT RAPED!!! (Although I know it fits your theory to believe that she was)

There is no real proof that she was even sexually molested by an adult.

The killer wrote a 3 page ransom note whilst on the premises, using materials from the kitchen. The note would have taken at least 30 minutes to write.

The 'kidnapper's' writing was almost identical to Patsy Ramsey's. What would be the chances of that happening?

He somehow got into a locked house and spent HOURS inside - in the darkness.

He molested a child without making a sound.

The head trauma preceded the strangulation by at least an hour which meant the perpetrator was on the premises for all of that time.

The 'kidnapper' forgot to bring a ransom note with him and had to find materials in the kitchen to use.

He also forgot to take his victim with him.

NO EVIDENCE OF AN INTRUDER WAS EVER FOUND.

I agree there are no shortages of rapes and murders - there always will be - but give me ONE that has all the same features as this case.
.

[Harry D]

If you have been reading internet accounts of BR's behaviour he comes over as far from 'well adjusted'. I don't know where you get your information, Harry.

Internet accounts, eh? Always the paragon of credibility.

Let's assume that BR struck JBR over the head. Why wouldn't the parents pretend she fell down the stairs, take her to the ED, and deal with the consequences. It's not like BR would've been indicted had the truth came out. No, what they did was create a torture device, strangle JBR's still warm body to the point that it sliced into her throat, and for good measure they penetrated her with a paintbrush. All this, they say, because they wanted to protect BR and maintain their social standing.... by turning their home into a crime scene and becoming murder suspects.

[Wickerman]

Give it a rest Wicksy. You're still trying to flog your outdated 'intruder' theory.

I have stated so many times before - JBR's murder was a one-off.

You seem to totally believe what you say, which is not surprising.
What is surprising is that you seem to think everybody else should believe what you say too.

There is more to this story than what 'you' say.

[louisa]

You seem to totally believe what you say, which is not surprising.
What is surprising is that you seem to think everybody else should believe what you say too.

There is more to this story than what 'you' say.

All I ask is that you stop flogging a dead horse.

The 'intruder' theory was abandoned years ago for being the nonsense it clearly was.

[Abby Normal]

Internet accounts, eh? Always the paragon of credibility.

Let's assume that BR struck JBR over the head. Why wouldn't the parents pretend she fell down the stairs, take her to the ED, and deal with the consequences. It's not like BR would've been indicted had the truth came out. No, what they did was create a torture device, strangle JBR's still warm body to the point that it sliced into her throat, and for good measure they penetrated her with a paintbrush. All this, they say, because they wanted to protect BR and maintain their social standing.... by turning their home into a crime scene and becoming murder suspects.

I agree with this mostly. However, if he was sexually abusing her with the paintbrush and or strangled her(which I do find unlikely), and the ramseys realized they couldn't make it look like an accident, then they might have written the note and rest of cover up.

[louisa]

Internet accounts, eh? Always the paragon of credibility.

Let's assume that BR struck JBR over the head. Why wouldn't the parents pretend she fell down the stairs, take her to the ED, and deal with the consequences. It's not like BR would've been indicted had the truth came out. No, what they did was create a torture device, strangle JBR's still warm body to the point that it sliced into her throat, and for good measure they penetrated her with a paintbrush. All this, they say, because they wanted to protect BR and maintain their social standing.... by turning their home into a crime scene and becoming murder suspects.

Harry - all I am asking of you is that you read my posts properly instead of quoting rubbish.

How do I make you understand that the JBR threads on other forums are buzzing with speculation? And a lot of these are people who have been studying the case for 20 years. When I say according to internet accounts I am talking about what people are saying about this case. You should take a look.

Your above post tells me that you still haven't got it - you haven't understood anything of my theory, maybe because you don't wish to?

I have lost count of the times I have stated what I think happened that night and it tends to coincide with a great many internet accounts - meaning what other people also think.

The head injury could NOT have been caused by the girl falling downstairs. Do you think you are the first person to have thought of this? It has been established that the section of broken skull corresponds exactly with the dimension of the edge of the flashlight. If somebody falls downstairs they usually break their necks and JBR's spine was not damaged in any way.

And what the heck is the point of torturing by garrotting somebody who is COMATOSE? You should join Websleuths where you can read up on the facts of the case.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions about what happened but it would be good for people to get the basic facts of the case right before they post.

This is another website of some interest....regarding Burke.

https://shakedowntitle.com/2016/12/07/jonbenet-ramsey-case-insights-1-burkes-knife/

[Harry D]

Harry - all I am asking of you is that you read my posts properly instead of quoting rubbish.

How do I make you understand that the JBR threads on other forums are buzzing with speculation? And a lot of these are people who have been studying the case for 20 years. When I say according to internet accounts I am talking about what people are saying about this case. You should take a look.

Your above post tells me that you still haven't got it - you haven't understood anything of my theory, maybe because you don't wish to?

I have lost count of the times I have stated what I think happened that night and it tends to coincide with a great many internet accounts - meaning what other people also think.

The head injury could NOT have been caused by the girl falling downstairs. Do you think you are the first person to have thought of this? It has been established that the section of broken skull corresponds exactly with the dimension of the edge of the flashlight. If somebody falls downstairs they usually break their necks and JBR's spine was not damaged in any way.

And what the heck is the point of torturing by garrotting somebody who is COMATOSE? You should join Websleuths where you can read up on the facts of the case.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions about what happened but it would be good for people to get the basic facts of the case right before they post.

This is another website of some interest....regarding Burke.

https://shakedowntitle.com/2016/12/0...-burkes-knife/

Louisa, with all due respect this thread doesn't revolve around you and your theory. The prevailing school of thought is that BR did it and the parents covered for him. I've already stated that hypothetically a nine year-old would be capable of striking and even strangling another child. Child killers, while rare, do exist but Burke does not fit the psychological profile. Most child killers have a terrible upbringing, usually victims of physical, psychological, or sexual abuse. People would have us believe that Burke was a mentally disturbed young boy who got away with brutally murdering his own sister and somehow fooled the police, fooled the grand jury, and never let anything slip. And on top of that, his psychopathic behavior has never manifested itself again in any substantial way. The alternative is that BR bashed JBR on the skull in a "fit of pique" and the parents took over to stage an intrusion... by viciously strangling JBR's still-warm body and molesting her corpse. And they did all this to protect their son and keep up appearances? Even though Burke was too young to be charged with any crime and PR doted on JBR. I'm not denying that Patsy wrote the ransom note, or that the answer to JBR's death lies with the family, but theories put forward aren't convincing enough to put it beyond reasonable doubt.