JonBenet Ramsey Case

[mariab]

I agree that when you study Patsy Ramsey, it seems impossible she'd kill her daughter. In fact, there is much to admire in her life. But she was definitely involved in the cover-up of the murder and therefore likely responsible for the death itself.

Huh? “There's much to admire in Patsy Ramsey's life“? Such as what? She took part in a few beauty pageants, married a rich guy, and decorated a house in a ghastly frilly fashion? And she raised a girl who couldn't even read or write her own name at age 6, but was having her hair regularly bleached by her mother? There are witnessed statements by a frustrated John Ramsey complaining that Patsy Ramsey was spending ridiculous amounts of his money on that house and on costumes for the beauty pageants forced on her daughter.
Patsy Ramsey's psychological profile is a casebook study for Munchausen's by proxy. And please recall how many times Jonbenèt visited her pediatrician in the year prior to her death, always on Mondays. (Which is considered as a red light for ongoing child abuse.)

Errata, regarding to the difficulty of establishing which came first, the head injury or strangulation, there are 2 possible scenarios:
1) Jonbenèt was hit on the head either by her mother (in a fit or rage or as part of ongoing abuse) or by her brother Burke (accidentally or in a kids' fight), her parents panicked, and staged the garrotting and the ransom letter.
2) Jonbenèt got strangled during abuse by one of the parents, she might have fainted, which caused the perp to panic, hit her on the head, then stage the garrotting as an attempt to hide an earlier strangulation.
There are significant details that hint to both scenarios:
- There were no petechial hemorragies in her eyes to indicate death by strangulation, and expert witnesses claimed that the way the garrotte was arranged, if it had been used on her it would have separated most of her hair from her head (as some of her hair was caught inside of the rope, also visible in the autopsy photos).Thus it's safe to say that the head trauma was her (very slow) cause of death.
- Apart from the peri-mortem attack with the paint brush, there were past traces of semi-healed injuries consistent with chronic minor sexual assault, which, combined with the frequent visits to the pediatrician (who was a friend of the Ramseys and refused to make his medical records available), raises suspicions for her having been abused by one of the parents.

The lit I'd recommend is the book by Steven Thomas (the detective initially in charge of the investigation), Perfect murder, perfect town, the book written by the medical examiner, and, if you can find it, the book written by the Ramsey's cleaning lady.

There are TONS of circumstantial evidence which points at the parents: It appears that the murder scene was initially staged in Jonbenèt's bed, then transfered to the little room in the basement after Jonbenèt's clothes were changed, while it appears that the body was washed peri-mortem, John Ramsey confessed of having broken the basement window himself, the Ramseys changed their stories pertaining to the fact that Jonbenèt was awake late at night before her death (a fact corroborated by her brother Burke), the Ramseys refuse the fact that their daughter ate pineapple shortly before her death, the ransom note was written with Patsy's pen on Patsy's paper and Patsy's handwriting was the only one who could not be excluded as the author of the ransom note, Patsy was wearing the exact same clothes as the night before, which hints that she didn't go to bed on the night of the murder, there was no stunt gun (the postmortem artifacts which a detective hired by the Ramseys characterized as coming from a stunt gun are consistent with Patsy's rings), and so on.

[Errata]

Hi Errata,

You're correct in that your knowledge of the case is very limited. It seems though you have a sincere interest and there's a couple of good books I could recommend (and a few you should stay away from). John Ramsey has a new book coming out soon, by the way. I agree that when you study Patsy Ramsey, it seems impossible she'd kill her daughter. In fact, there is much to admire in her life. But she was definitely involved in the cover-up of the murder and therefore likely responsible for the death itself.

Yours truly,

Tom Wescott

Its funny, but there are two cases I have purposefully tried to limit my knowledge of, one is this case and the other is the West Memphis Three. I took a class in college on sociology and crime, and for our final project we were each given three or four cases that we were required to interpret in a specific fashion, assigned by the professor. I got this case, the West Memphis Three, and Sacco and Vanzetti. Case summaries, crime scene photos and autopsy photos and results.

And I gotta admit that I was in no way prepared for those photos, and I think that my professor was wrong to include them. In the end this was not a criminology class but a sociology class. I was going to be a social scientist, not an investigator. Sacco and Vanzetti was fine, even if there had been pictures, gruesome photos from long ago are easy. Easier. Pictures of nude violated children on a slab and dissected like the fetal pigs from freshman biology... I threw up. And in the end, I didn't need the autopsy results for the final project, and had I gotten any other assignment there couldn't even be a justification to include the pictures. It was an extremely unpleasant experience I probably didn't need to have, certainly didn't need to have at 19. When I voiced my objection, I was told that I should have informed him that I had a photographic memory if I wanted "special treatment" because of it, and pointed me to students with disabilities. (thanks so much)

But I still feel certain compulsions about it. It's not good for me, having seen that, to delve more deeply. I'm just not emotionally equipped, for any number of normal things much less horrors. And even over the just the past couple of days I have had those photos in my mind almost constantly, with every awful detail intact. But sometimes I still feel the need to poke at it, like at a raw sore. And I shouldn't. And I'm sorry I indulged in it. I know how the child died, but that isn't enough to form a theory as to a perpetrator. Even the school project didn't require finding the killer, just who society would blame. That doesn't make me an expert, and while having been alive at the time apparently is enough to qualify me to have an opinion, it doesn't give me an educated one.

I know that little girl was deliberately murdered, but I don't know who did it. And in truth I don't want to know. I want someone to know, I want justice for that child. But I think I've absorbed too much ugliness, and don't have anywhere near enough power to want that information in my brain. Mea Culpa.

[mariab]

The DNA evidence, from what I have read, comes from 2 separate samples... one was on the band on the longjohns, and the other from a spot of blood on the underpants. And I think it seems that this also is consistent with dna collected from under her fingernails. Am I wrong here or what?

From what I've read, the 2 separate DNA samples come from a blood spot on her underpants and from under her fingernails, and they're not consistent with each other. It's important to know that the body might have been washed peri-mortem and that the long johns she had on were not hers. (They were several sizes too big.) There were fibers on her pointing to her having been handled by the parents in the clothes she was found wearing in death. These fibers are consistent with the read sweater her mother was wearing both in the night of the murder and on the morning after, plus also fibers consistent with her father's pants.

[tji]

Maria

- There were no petechial hemorragies in her eyes to indicate death by strangulation,

Autopsy Findings Regarding Petechial Hemorrhages
"In the lateral aspect of the left lower eyelid on the inner conjunctival surface is a 1 mm in maximum dimension petechial hemorrhage."
"Very fine, less than 1 mm petechial hemorrhages are present on the skin of the upper eyelids bilaterally as well as on the lateral left cheek."
"On everting the left upper eyelid there are much smaller, less than 1 mm petechial hemorrhages located on the conjunctival surface."
"Possible petechial hemorrhages located on the conjunctival surface."
"Possible petechial hemorrhages are also seen on the conjunctival surfaces of the right upper and lower eyelids, but livor mortis on this side of the face makes definite identification difficult."

- Apart from the peri-mortem attack with the paint brush, there were past traces of semi-healed injuries consistent with chronic minor sexual assault, which, combined with the frequent visits to the pediatrician (who was a friend of the Ramseys and refused to make his medical records available), raises suspicions for her having been abused by one of the parents.

No Evidence of Chronic Abuse. "No evidence, however, suggests that she was the victim of chronic sexual abuse(SMF P 50; PSMF P 50.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 12).

It appears that the murder scene was initially staged in Jonbenèt's bed, then transfered to the little room in the basement after Jonbenèt's clothes were changed,

There was only one marbling type effect on the body showing that Jonbenet was not moved after being killed. It is highly doubtful she was killed anywhere other than where she was found.

while it appears that the body was washed peri-mortem,

Her body wasn't washed, just the pubic area was consistent of being wiped down with a cloth.



Hi Rob

It is very confusing, depending on whether the author sees the parents guilty or innocent is how they put forward the 'evidence'

From what I have read the amount of DNA is that of which could be left from a cough/sneeze. Investigators traced the underwear back to the factory they were made and opened up new samples. They found human DNA in some. Now this doesn't answer the question as to who's DNA it is for you but it shows why the case is so confusing. There is no way of knowing who handled the underwear and the DNA was very degraded and not a lot of it.

However it is also put forward by the defence team that the DNA was mingled with JonBenet's blood and could have DNA markers the same of those under her fingertips which would the mean the DNA in the underwear would have had to have had to have been deposited within the hours of her death and very likely by her killer.

We then go on to find that the DNA has been typed and it is male and Caucasian which would rule out Asian factory workers.
However then it is shown that no authority has ever admitted to the Caucasian part just the male,and only media people are flouting the Caucasian part.

For me personally I think what shows is the letter (as I wrote earlier), the fact that the room was so hard to find and the fact she was found wrapped in her favourite (or at least one that was used on her bed) blanket, points to a family member to me.


Tracy

[mariab]

Don't know what you're quoting, Tracy, but the quote “Possible petechial hemorrhages located on the conjunctival surface.“ isn't even medical. What on earth is “possible petechial hemorrhages“? They're either there or not.

The book by forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht discusses the absence of petechial hemorraghes and the evidence of past traces of semi-healed injuries in her genitalia consistent with chronic minor sexual assault. The autopsy reports consistent with traces of past sexual assault used to be available on the internet until a few years ago, and I recall reading them.

The blanket she was found wrapped in and the suitcase positioned under the basement window belonged to her step brother, John Andrew Ramsey.

[robhouse]

From what I have read (and I am going from memory here as I am at work), the DNA sample on her longjohns was something like 10-20 times larger than the samples found in packaged clothing from the asian factory worker, AND it matched the DNA taken from a blood spot in her underwear, and was male DNA, not identified with any member of the family. And I think it also may match the DNA found under the fingernails, but I am not sure.

RH

[tji]

Seriously Maria?!

Don't know what you're quoting, Tracy, but the quote “Possible petechial hemorrhages located on the conjunctival surface.“ isn't even medical. What on earth is “possible petechial hemorrhages“? They're either there or not.

I am quoting the autopsy report, by you know, the person who performed it - Dr John Meyer. I think he would know more than Cyrill Wecht who didn't have never even had access to the slides etc originally and in case you missed it first time round...Meyer performed the autopsy, so I am thinking he would know about the petechial haemorrhaging than Cyril or you, don't you?

The book by forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht discusses the absence of petechial hemorraghes and the evidence of past traces of semi-healed injuries in her genitalia consistent with chronic minor sexual assault. The autopsy reports consistent with traces of past sexual assault used to be available on the internet until a few years ago, and I recall reading them.

see above. As for the results of the autopsy, they are still on the internet if you bothered to look -

Injuries Consistent with Sexual Assault. "both parties agree the autopsy report reveals injury to JonBenet's genitalia consistent with a sexual assault shortly before her death. (SMF P 48; PSMF P 48.)" (Carnes 2003:21).

Bleeding in Genital Area. "The bleeding in JonBenet's genital area indicates she was alive when she was assaulted. (SMF P 48; PSMF P 48.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 12).
Wooden Shards Found in Vagina. "Her hymen was torn and material consistent with wooden shards from the paintbrush used to make the garrote were found in her vagina. (SMF P 48-49; PMSF P 48-49.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 12).

No Evidence of Chronic Abuse. "No evidence, however, suggests that she was the victim of chronic sexual abuse. (SMF P 50; PSMF P 50.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 12).

Pubic Area "Wiped Down." "Boulder County Coroner John Meyer, who conducted the autopsy on 6-year-old JonBenet, said the child's pubic area showed evidence consistent with having been wiped by a cloth" RMN 11/7/98.


Tracy

[tji]

Hi Rob

It is a little confusing Rob, the same 'evidence' is getting used by both sides to strengthen their stand so it gets to the point were you don't know what is truth and what is media hype.

I remember reading it was a minute amount, that of a cough or sneeze but I don't personally recall an exact amount.

As for it being the same as the DNA under the fingernails, if I read correctly there are markers that are the same but not conclusive for a match. (will try and find the exact information).

I do remember that it was conclusively male and not a match to any of the 60 people they tested. (I am assuming family and friends)

I think the problem of contamination is a huge one in this case so trusting the forensics is a problem for a lot of people.

Tracy

[robhouse]

Hi Tracy,

The issue is apparently that the DNA from a spot of blood on the underwear matches surface DNA scraped more recently from two locations on the long underwear. I think, as you say, that there are markers that match the DNA under the fingernails, but it is not enough for a conclusive match. However, the DNA collected from three different places was apparently conclusive enough for the Boulder DA to exonerate any family members.

No one here has really answered this, which is my the main thing I think that suggests an intruder or someone outside the family as the killer.

I am of the opinion that many of the books on the subject are contaminated by being prejudiced in one way or the other. But I do think there is general agreement among the experts that the DNA evidence suggests an unknown male as the killer.

RH

[robhouse]

It is a little confusing Rob, the same 'evidence' is getting used by both sides to strengthen their stand so it gets to the point were you don't know what is truth and what is media hype.

Hi again Tracy,

Just to clarify... I think in the past there was much more media hype, and argument by both sides than there is now. Many books were written proposing various theories, and "using" the same evidence to bolster each case as you say. The press generally crucified the Ramsey's and spread a lot of false information. Despite various suspicious things (such as those posted by Tom Wescott) I think the general consensus NOW among those who actually have worked the investigation is that the Ramsey's are cleared.

RH

[mariab]

I am of the opinion that many of the books on the subject are contaminated by being prejudiced in one way or the other.

I don't disagree with the above.

But I do think there is general agreement among the experts that the DNA evidence suggests an unknown male as the killer.

I need to repeat myself: From what I've read it looks like the DNA evidence is inconclusive, but we have fibers relating both parents to the body dressed as she was found in death. Fibers consistent (among else) with the red sweater the mother was wearing in the night of the murder AND on the next day, when the police was called to her house.

Despite various suspicious things (such as those posted by Tom Wescott) I think the general consensus NOW among those who actually have worked the investigation is that the Ramsey's are cleared.

Quite the opposite, if you consider the local politics between the Boulder DA bureau and John Ramsey's influential lawyers, as well as the fact that after a new DA was elected (in the fall of 2010) the case was re-opened to investigation.

[tji]

Uh-oh Maria's ignoring me again, must mean I am right....again, she only answers when she thinks she can prove me wrong


Hi Rob

Me personally, I still think there are too many questions that need answering before ruling out the Ramsey's.

One thing I would say in Patsy's defence is I would have thought being a devout Christian she would have made a 'death bed' confession, no-one can believe they would get into heaven with that hanging over their head.

I think we can agree there are definite questions to be asked about the DNA found, but the majority of information we get is second hand and from the media.

Are you of the opinion it was an intruder killing?


Tracy

[robhouse]

Hello Maria,

Well I think we need a refresh... i.e. I think we need to have the modern up-to-date information on the DNA because the Ramsey's were cleared in 2008 I believe. So I don't know if the "inconclusive" status you read was from books prior to that date. As I said, the conclusion was reached by a MATCH between DNA from a blood sample and surface DNA found in a different location. (The DNA sampling method used to extract the DNA from the long underwear was not available until recently.)

I am not interested in the politics of the case, especially the politics of the case circa 1996 and thereabouts... I am interested in hearing the facts of the case as they stand today. I am talking about post-2008 info.

Do you have info on the DNA that I haven't read? I am not trying to be rude, but no one has really posted any specific info in response to this.

Rob H

[robhouse]

Me personally, I still think there are too many questions that need answering before ruling out the Ramsey's. ...

I think we can agree there are definite questions to be asked about the DNA found, but the majority of information we get is second hand and from the media.

Are you of the opinion it was an intruder killing?

Hi Tracy,
From what little I have read, it seems like an intruder to me. Yes, of course there are still questions and unknowns... But if the DNA evidence I have read is accurate, then it must suggest an unknown male killer. And therefore, Patsy must be innocent. All the so-called anomalies or suspicious things like no footprints in possibly non-existant snow or spiderwebs maybe across grates etc do not matter if the DNA evidence is accurate and conclusive.

RH

RH

[mariab]

I'm not ignoring anyone and I'm not implying anyone is being rude. I can only say that the internet sites where the police reports and the autopsy reports were posted years ago (when I used to be interested in this case) are not available anymore and I have NOT ONE MINUTE to conduct an internet search on this presently. I've just finished polishing a 400p German book manuscript to go to the editor's (working on this 10 hours/day during the “holidays“), I'm in the process of planning my moving to Chicago and starting writing a second book, I'm taking care of some complicated search in the Arbeter Fraint, plus planning to attempt some research on Tumblety (or at least on the Pinkerton agency) from Chicago, so it's safe to say my plate is full.

Hello Maria,
Well I think we need a refresh... i.e. I think we need to have the modern up-to-date information on the DNA because the Ramsey's were cleared in 2008 I believe. So I don't know if the "inconclusive" status you read was from books prior to that date. I am not interested in the politics of the case, especially the politics of the case circa 1996 and thereabouts... I am interested in hearing the facts of the case as they stand today. I am talking about post-2008 info.

They were not exactly “cleared“, just spoken clear by the precedent DA, which aparently was seeking a pretext to close this case due to political pressure, and the DNA came handy. The book Perfect murder, prefect town, despite having been written in the 1990s, is still relevant on this particular aspect of the case. The same with Steven Thomas' book.

Do you have info on the DNA that I haven't read? I am not trying to be rude, but no one has really posted any specific info in response to this.

I'm not quite clear of what and where you all have read about the DNA, but I'll readily admit I haven't given too much attention to the DNA aspect of the case, since I personally consider it irrelevant and am convinced of the parents' involvement in a cover up and most plausibly in an accidental murder.
I'm afraid that this case will remain unsolved. Even if re-opened in 2010, I doubt that anything new will come out of this. Burke has lawyered up and refuses to testify, while the evidence is too old and compromised. In some fashion, this is not too different from the Ripper case.