Ramsey case Log Out | Topics | Search
Moderators | Edit Profile

Zodiackiller.com Message Board » General Discussion » Crimes » Ramsey case « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Howard_davis
Username: Howard_davis

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 2:49 pm:   

I was told last year-and I will just post some of what he told me- by a person that has friends at the Pentagon and some police departments- as his work takes him to these kinds of places-that he was told by some connected to the Ramsey case that they affirmed that it was their professional opinion,based on some things they know, that it was the Ramsey boy that killed his sister or brought JB close to death,but they can't prove it at this time.
They believe that both parents probably did not kill JB,but they are covering up for their only child and possibly for any involvement by the parents in staging and the like.

His sister got all of the attention so this could have been at least part of the boy's motive.

We do know boys his age have murdered a sibling or friend,etc.

How much the parents staged (the suit case below the window-stun gun marks,etc.)can't be determined at this period in the investigation.

The mother is suspected of writing the ransom note and it could very well be that the father was forced to finish what his son had begun based on his past experience in the military.
ALL FYI
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 6:51 am:   

Howard,
How do they explain the DNA that didn't match the family?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Howard_davis
Username: Howard_davis

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 5:54 pm:   

BW,
Hi!
There is a great deal of public misconception when it comes to this now involved case along with the Ramsey's paid and bought spin people putting out information to the public,etc.

You will get a different perspective of the so-called DNA evidence if you carefully examine all the evidence.
PCR Amplification problems are very much a reality in some cases and I think it is here also!

For a general theory about Burke being involved see,"Did Burke Kill JonBenet by Troy Cowan... on Google.
There can be modifications to any such theory without serious compromise-in my view.

That ridiculous ransom note and it's contents and the evidnece surrounding it did it for me-along with other findings-early on.Patsy wrote it in my view.

John Ramsey had the knowledge and background to tie the knots found comprising the garrote,etc.
I believe that both parents were involved in staging big time!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Howard_davis
Username: Howard_davis

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 5:56 pm:   

Sorry-it's, Burke killed JonBenet Ramsey.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 8:03 pm:   

Howard, when I first heard about the case on the news they said JonBenet was found in a room in the basement. My first thought was that her brother may have accidently killed her if they were home alone and was afraid, so he hid her. But that was before the news about the way she was found. What would Burke have thought of his parents knowing they did something so bizarre and sick to cover up his crime. He would eventually learn of the details as he got older.

I haven't read the article yet.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Linda
Username: Linda

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 10:32 pm:   

I, too, have always felt there was almost no question that Patsy wrote the note. The handwriting analysis was extremely powerful and convincing - in addition, it was quite suspicious in the way that she found the note - before she even suspected anything was wrong, she was walking down the steps, noticed the paper, bent over and just took a quick glance at it - NOT touching it - read a few words and screamed for her husband... I believe she said she didn't touch it (that's why there were none of her fingerprints on it) because she knew ite was evidence. You don't just see a piece of paper on the ground and read it without picking it up - it's just not logical. You may read the first couple of words while it may be on the floor, but you'd certainly pick it up - in disbelief of what you were reading - and try to absorbe just WHAT you were reading.

Too, I've always felt that there was one of two scenarios: 1) Patsy had just lost her temper after she'd realized Jon Benet had wet the bed and may have accidentally injured her as she may have been scolding her or trying to get her cleaned up; or 2) She and Jon were covering up for someone they loved - namely - Burke. They certainly wisked Burke out of the house IMMEDIATELY before or right after the police got there; they lied about Burke being asleep when, after they enhanced the 911 call, they could hear Burke in the background - I believe it was confirmed to hear him say, "What did I do?" And additionally, do you remember when Patsy exclaimed quite emphatically to the investigator (I believe) when he started to question her about Burke, "DON'T EVEN GO THERE!"

I have never felt that either Patsy nor Jon could ever intentionally do anything to their children -they clearly love them both.... That Burke had fatally injured his sister could be the ONLY other reason they have always come on so adamant and strong that they did not have anything to do with JonBenet's death - they would clearly, and rightfully so, want to protect their young son.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 11:36 pm:   

I am so sorry that most of you believe the family had something to do with this crime.If you saw the latest report by Lou Smit you would then know they had "nothing" to do with it. The police there were worse than the ones who failed to catch the Zodiac.If the son did it then why didn't they find the stun gun that was used ? The palm print didn't match, nor did the DNA.It has been shown that the killer came in through the basement window,and used the suitcase to stand on,to leave. The white bear is believed to have been brought in by the perp.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Colette
Username: Colette

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 6:24 am:   

I agree Sandy. The killer of Jon Bennet was most likely the same guy that was trying to hurt another young girl in the same neighborhood but was scared off by her mother. In time that DNA will match someone really bad.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 6:47 pm:   

It all comes down to which expert one wants to believe. It is a fact that "parents" (they're really no more than sperm and egg donors, actually) can and do kill their own children for the most trivial of reasons, and just because one is rich doesn't therefore mean one is beyond reproach.

I've posted before on the problems I have with their extraordinarily odd behavior (especially the morning they reported her missing and were awaiting the ransom call), the lies and inconsistencies, and the ridiculous notion of a multi-page ransom note written by a group who never before or since abducted or killed anyone and who asked for a ransom in the bizarre amount of $118,000, which just so happened to be the exact size of John Ramsey's bonus that year (and this was the same group who also forgot to bring their own ransom note and wrote one using a pen and paper from the Ramsey home, and so very thoughtfully replaced the sharpie pen in the cup by the telephone, and who also put the note on the bottom step of the stairway instead of tacking it to the door so it would be noticed immediately!), so I won't go into all that again. What I will say, however, is that they would have had several hours in which to sanitize the house and stage the crime scene, and it's even possible that there was at least one other person involved that could very easily explain the DNA that didn't match anyone.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vallejo_dave
Username: Vallejo_dave

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 7:01 pm:   

Ed--You Rock!!!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 7:11 pm:   

Thanks, Dave, lol. My BS detector seriously overloaded after reading only a little about this case. The red flags went up and the sirens went off before the system blew, and I had to get another one! The Ramseys may not have killed JonBenet, but they sure as hell know who did and I have no doubt they covered it up.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Linda
Username: Linda

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 7:37 pm:   

I have no doubt that the Ramsey family was a loving family and would no more think of harming either of their children; however, in the best of families, accidents and/or issues that get slightly out of hand do happen. The ransom note is a key factor in narrowing down possible suspects - it reeks of questions and an insider's knowledge of this tragedy. The note has been analyzed as being written by Patsy (the handwriting, wording, phrases, etc.)...and yes, I do believe she did write the note. Would she cover up for a stranger - never; would she cover up for her husband - I don't think so; would she cover up for herself - possibly; would she cover up for her son - absolutely.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 04, 2006 - 7:20 pm:   

Unless they were all involved in something that ended up in JonBenet dying, accidentally or otherwise.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hawk
Username: Hawk

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 10:14 pm:   

Howard, This is one of the first cases i ever reseached, Susanne and i both have reseached it together, at which point she went to Atlanta and talked to the Ramseys personaly.

Trust me, the Ramseys had nothing to do with their little girls death. It was an intruder.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, May 10, 2006 - 8:04 pm:   

Was there a list of books from the Ramsey house with other inventory the police were interested in? I thought a long time ago there was a list.

I ask because in reading a book published that year, I found some wording very similar to wording in the ransom note. I personally believe that too much in the note was borrowed from movies etc. to have been written under pressure. I feel the note was written before JonBenet's murder.

Also, in the movie Speed, weren't the steps of the bus booby-trapped with a bomb? Perhaps that is why the note was put on the steps. As a threat.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Warren
Username: Warren

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 8:08 am:   

Book, I believe also that the letters of the so-called terrorist group's name came from the first letters of each line of a bible verse that was open on the coffee table.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 8:28 am:   

Hi Warren,
Wasn't that SBTC?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Warren
Username: Warren

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, May 11, 2006 - 2:38 pm:   

Yes, I believe that's it. Funny that I can't look at "SBTC" and somehow think of the Southern Baptist Convention, or Southwestern Bell Telephone. They're all over here down south.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Deoxys
Username: Deoxys

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Saturday, May 20, 2006 - 1:33 pm:   

I've posted this elsewhere and I know there was some discussion about it at Tom's BTK site. Since it is in a thread outside of Z discussion, I thought I'd share it here...

http://web.archive.org/web/20020216224828/http://r amseyfamily.com/barbie.html

The Ramsey family website shows two bound dolls, reportedly left on their property in 1997 after Jon Benet's murder. The one doll is bound from neck to feet in the same sadistic manner that one Dennis Rader used to kill Shirley Vian in 1977 (the victim slowly strangles herself when she is unable to hold her legs up). The tape binding is also very similar to ways in which Rader bound himself in photos I've seen.

I'm not up on the details of the Ramsey case and I'm not at all suggesting that Rader killed Jon Benet. I do, however, seriously wonder if Rader didn't become aware of this case through the media and make the 8-hour drive from Wichita to Boulder to provide his own sadistic commentary. Does anyone think that his interest wouldn't have been stoked by this high-profile case of a young girl being bound and strangled in the basement of her home? We know he already had his own doll collection to disrespect his own victims and enjoyed creating speculation about victims he most likely didn't kill.

Any thoughts?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 5:32 pm:   

Deoxys, I have been following this case from the start. I somehow missed seeing these dolls! I have read only part of the Ramsey book,it is just so sad. There are more sicko's than I would like to think out there on the loose.Just doing background checks on the few I have looked at, makes one think what in the heck is going on with all these sick people ? Did their parents do a lot of heavy drugs ? I am about to tell you something that for sure I will get bashed for. Before the corpse pictures of Jon B.R. came out in that "rag paper", someone posted pictures of her dead body in the basement on the net ! Beneath the pictures was a cryptogram 6 strange looking marks, I don't have them in front of me right now, but I remember that one was a upside down triangle,a circle with a dot in the center and I don't remember off the top of my head what the other four were. I didn't have a working computer at that time, or I would have gone to that site, made copy of it and called the police ! My granddaughter who lives out of state called to tell me about it. I asked her to discribe the marks and I drew them as she told them to me. She didn't have a printer. I asked her how she came across this site ? She said she was looking at serial killer sites and that it was there. Well I was hooked from then on. Did you know that the killer wrote about the Dirty Harry movie in his note ? Someone also left a stuffed bear in her room that was not there before she was put to bed. The stun gun marks were also a concern to me, because we had a killer just a few miles from my home about 5 yrs ago who used a stun gun on his victims. If you ever see the name Lou Smit / Ramsey case watch it he has a lot to say about the killer .
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Deoxys
Username: Deoxys

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Sunday, May 21, 2006 - 8:34 pm:   

Sandy,

I'm very sure Boulder has it's own collection of sickos, for sure. Someone familiar with the case informed me that a college student was investigated in relation to the dolls but I don't really know why or what became of this suspicion. It's not so much the dolls (could be anyone's commentary on Jon Benet being treated "like a Barbie doll") but the particular pattern of binding that immediately struck me.

I'm not sure what to make of the pics with the strange symbols. Were these symbols written on the picture itself or just included on the webpage under the pics? Either way, it's very strange. I quite honestly don't know enough about the case to make an educated guess about suspects.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Monday, May 22, 2006 - 2:42 pm:   

Deoxys, The symbols were just under the pictures is what I understood it to be.The way those dolls were tied,isn't that called a hog tie ? My grandaughter also said that she saw what looked like a baseball bat laying near her head. Anyone reading this remember anything like that in the rag mag that came out ?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Seagull
Username: Seagull

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, June 24, 2006 - 3:25 pm:   

JonBenet's mother Patsy died this morning of ovarian cancer. She had originally gotten the cancer in 1993, and had beaten it until recently. She was 49 years old.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 6:16 pm:   

She took the secret to the grave.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Chari
Username: Chari

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, June 27, 2006 - 8:15 pm:   

yes she did, and she will be judge for it
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, July 08, 2006 - 9:17 pm:   

Etphoto and Chari ,What facts do you have that make your case against Patsy ? what was the motive ? What past abuse where you able to find, that no one else has found ? Do you think that she cut off someone elses hand and made the print that was found ? Oh and she must have also used that same blood to put into her daughters panties ? Did you know that she and John both past the polygraph test 3 times ? It has been determined that the blow to her head had to be from a very strong "man",that no woman could hit that hard ? And why on earth would a mother have to use a stun gun to take her daughter out of her room ?I would be interested to know what makes you think this way ! How dare you both say that about a wonderfull lady that Patsy was. She is now with her daughter who she loved very much.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Sunday, July 09, 2006 - 12:22 am:   

Sandy, mothers are perfectly capable of killing their own children; Susan Smith is a perfect example of that. Even though she was eventually released due to misguided public opinion, Lindy Chamberlain was found guilty of murdering her baby daughter Azaria at Ayer's Rock.

Yes, there are some things that are consistent with the intruder theory, but there are just as many things that are consistent with Patsy being involved in a coverup. While she may not have murdered Jon Benet, it is a fact that she cannot be excluded as the person who wrote the obviously fake "ransom" note. There is also the fact that the note was written with a pen and paper from their own home, and it was 2˝ pages long at that! It's obvious the killer was very comfortable in that home, and also very familiar with the layout of the maze-like home. An intruder who followed Jon Benet home would not have taken the time to write a 2˝ page, rambling "ransom" note if she was already dead.

It is a fact that Patsy was wearing the same clothes she wore the night before when the police arrived in the morning, as if she hadn't slept all night. And the mystery of the pineapple is no mystery: a photograph of a bowl of pineapple on a table (along with a glass of tea with the tea bag still in it) was taken at the crime scene; Patsy denied putting it there, but it's obvious someone in that house did.

I don't buy the intruder theory, despite the fact that the tape and rope could not be matched to anything in the house. There's far too much evidence that someone in the family or someone known by them murdered Jon Benet, and the evidence cited for the intruder theory suggests that there was an "intruder," someone known by the Ramseys and let into the house; there was no sign of forced entry, and I don't buy the idea that the intruder found his way through the basement window and managed to find Jon Benet's room in that mazelike house without waking anyone.

Sorry, it all adds up to someone in that family or someone known by them murdered Jon Benet. And killers have been known to pass lie detector tests; that is why they are inadmissible as evidence in a court of law. They are far too easy to cheat.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 3:29 pm:   

Ed,

The fact that killers have been known to pass polygrahs (not lie detectors) doens't make be dismiss the fact Patsy supposedly passed her's. It was who gave her the test; someone hired by her lawyer. I agree with you. There is much more evidence to support Patsy was involved than an intruder. I'm glad you're thinking with your head unlike others who think with their hearts.

ET
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 3:43 pm:   

I've read way too many cases where parents savagely murder their own defenseless children, so I cannot just think (or feel), "She loved her daughter, a mother would never do that!" While there is evidence of an intruder, there is much that indicates one or more members of the Ramsey family were involved; the intruder scenario smacks of staging the scene of the crime after sanitizing it (although they did not do a very good job of that). They said and did way too many odd things for a couple who at first thought Jon Benet was kidnapped, and then discovered she was dead; they did not behave the way normal people do in such a situation. The evidence and their behavior, on the other hand, is indicative of guilt, and that is why Boulder PD presented their findings more than once to the grand jury in order to press charges against Patsy. They knew what they were doing and they had at least one of the culprits, they just didn't have enough evidence to make their case; that they were very inexperienced with murder cases is undoubtedly why they failed to prove their case.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 6:43 pm:   

I've heard from too many sources the Boulder police messed the crime scene up for me not to question that maybe they did. Normally, I dismiss those types of claims because they normally come from people who have never walked through a crime scene much less investigated one. Yet, the fact they were inexperienced at homicide investigations - for me at least - doesn't hold water. A homicide is a crime that has evidence like any other crime. Evidence is evidence and gets handled no different if it results from a robbery, burglary or homicide. Be leary when hearing the rant "the cops screwed up a crime scene". It is normaly made by the defense team in the pre-trail spin. Again. I've heard and read from numerous sources Boulder's handling of the crime scene will make no "How Too" books. So most of my comments are made for general investigations. No crime scene is investigated perfectly and even cases that are polluted with evidence contains mistakes.

ET
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 6:52 pm:   

The crime scene was not secured, and apparently friends and neighbors just tooled around the house before they decided to secure it. Who knows what was disturbed and what incriminating evidence was destroyed either through chance or design by well-meaning friends?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 7:49 pm:   

Ed,

If memory serves me correctly that is the same thing I heard. My guess is once the house itself was considered a crime scene it was secured. It probably took a little longer that usual to determine that in fact a crime did occur there and it wasn't a simple "kid walked away from home" case. I've been to dezons of "I can't find my child" scenes and thank goddnes none of them ever turned out to be a crime scene. Most were the kid left the house (yes, even late a night) before alerting their parents. Most of those incidents involved friends and nieghbors helping in the search or consoling the parents before the child was found. If any of those incidents turned out to be a crime scene I'm sure someone doing their best Monday Morning Quarterbacking impersonation would have called me an idiot for letting people walk through a crime scene. Its rare a crime scene is not contaminated somewhat before it is secure. Normally, the person discovering the crime
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Wednesday, July 12, 2006 - 7:52 pm:   

whoops . . . contaminates it. Other culprits could be the responding officers themselves or emergency medical personnel.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 3:21 pm:   

There has been a arrest in the Ramsey case ! John Mark Karr has been arrested in this case. He is a 2nd grade teacher who came from Georgia. News break from Boulder DA ,Thursday 2pm Mt. time.Ed if you knew the facts of how she was killed, and about the parents back ground. This was not the kind of crime that parents like this would do. The proof is in the pudding so to speak.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Weeza
Username: Weeza

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 3:23 pm:   

Yup, I made a new thread about him today
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

James78
Username: James78

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, August 16, 2006 - 5:53 pm:   

It was hard to tell either way what happened, but the facts will hopefully come out now.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Breakout
Username: Breakout

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 6:18 am:   

Steve Huff has some good info up at
www.crimeblog.us
I suspect Steve will post some insightful info soon since this Karr guy has ties to Conyers, GA and Steve lives in Roswell.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vscantu
Username: Vscantu

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:02 am:   

Uh, oh. I was afraid this guy sounded like a "false confessor". Kind of like that crackpot "Zociac confessor" that wrote Tom the fake Zodiac letter, "fingerprints", etc. a few years back. Wasn't he also living in Thailand? Oh, no, he was nicknamed the "Singapore Slinger", wasn't he? Ed, help me out.

Anyway, here's a quote from the story in today's MSNBC article about the JonBennet case.
[Suwat, the head of Thailands' immigration police said this about "the confessor" John Karr];

"“He said it was second-degree murder. He said it was unintentional,” Suwat said. He said Karr told Thai interrogators that he picked JonBenet up at her school and brought her to the family’s basement."

Picked JonBenet up from school?! Brought her to the family's basement?!

I think not!

Her father said yesterday he doesn't know this man, Karr. And he's known police have been investigating him for months now. If Karr had indeed dropped her off from school the day she was murdered, I think both parents would know him. And he would have been investigated soon after the murder. His DNA would have been taken immedeately & would have been identified as soon as the tests were available.

And for sure he didn't bring her from school to the family's basement.
Unless there is a MASSIVE language or quote error, I think we have a 'false confessor' on our hands.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_stout
Username: Tom_stout

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:11 am:   

At this point there should be no doubt that Karr is the perp. There's a DNA match and he confessed to details only the killer would know.
He reminds me of Norman Bates.

To those who accused the parents of this awful crime. You owe the parents a public apology!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vscantu
Username: Vscantu

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:14 am:   

Wow, a DNA match? I hadn't heard that in all the hours of reporting on many TV stations & national news web sites since the case broke yesterday.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_stout
Username: Tom_stout

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:17 am:   

Rule one in the art of cross-examination.
Never ask a question you don't know the answer to.
Yes it was reported there was a DNA match.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vscantu
Username: Vscantu

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 8:54 am:   

Hey Tom Stout: Do you mind telling us where it has been reported that there is a DNA match to John Karr?

I've still been checking many national TV news channels & web sites this morning- NO DNA match reported.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_stout
Username: Tom_stout

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 9:07 am:   

Yesterday evening MSNBC reported there was a DNA match. It appears they have stopped reporting this.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 9:48 am:   

I heard on CNN that there hasn't been a match on the DNA yet. Everything so far has been wishy washy about where he was on the night the killing,the yrs he was in Petaluma,his age is 41 then its 42. CNN has said that the exwife claims Karr was with her and the family on 12/25/96 in Georgia. My take is he is not the sicko who did this !We will just have to sit tight and see.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_stout
Username: Tom_stout

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:10 am:   

Yesterday MSNBC reported there was a DNA match (I see poster "Linda" saw the same report on the other thread)and he had confessed to details only the perp would know. I saw the Ramsey family attorney say Karr had been charged with the murder.
Today MSNBC reports that DNA tests are in process and Karr has not been charged.
The Boulder DA is sure sticking their neck out. I would hope this implies they have the evidence and are holding back for other reasons. If not, it is yet another horrible blunder by Boulder authorities and main stream news media.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vscantu
Username: Vscantu

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:23 am:   

Yeah, Sandy, I agree, he looks like a 1st-class phoney to me. If he was with his then-wife in Georgia on that Christmas day (and presumably evening) in 1996, when JonBenet was killed, there's no way he could be the murderer.

UNLESS he snuck out of bed on Christmas night, drove to the airport, took a quick Concord flight to Colorado; then drove from the Colorado airport to the Ramsey home, committed the murder & wrote that long, drawn-out, infamous ransom note using Patsy's notepad & pen, then quickly drove back to the Colorado airport, caught a red-eye return flight on that Concord, landed in Georgia & sped back from the airport to his home, then snuck into bed before his then-wife could notice. Sounds reasonable to me.

But you'd think the cops would already have done their homework on this angle.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_stout
Username: Tom_stout

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:51 am:   

I'm not so quick to write him off. He claims he poisoned JonBenet. The autopsy says she was not poisoned. That sure looks like a police "Key" to me. Only the killer would know she was poisoned with tainted pineapple.
Boulder authorites are going out on a limb already riding a reputation of incompetence. They must have encountered a few false confessions over the years. Why over react now?
This implies to me they have something big up their sleeve.
I'll keep my fingers crossed that they got the perp.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ubpclaw
Username: Ubpclaw

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 10:57 am:   

They swabbed him for DNA but havent released the results. He will be swabbed again when he is extradited here to America. He didnt "confess" to parts of the crime only the killer would know, he was corresponding with someone who had produced a documentary on the crime and in their discussions brought up details that hadnt been released which is one of the ways they became interested in him as a suspect (also, the letters he sent to Patsy Ramsey apologizing for her murder).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vscantu
Username: Vscantu

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 3:25 pm:   

I doubt the 'authorities' would have kept it a secret if JonBenet had indeed been poisoned or drugged. That method-of-operation would have been too obvious a way for the public to help catch the killer.

Also I must say: If John & Patsey Ramsey were innocent, they are the most "guilty acting" accused innocent people I have ever seen or heard of.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Oklahoma_mike
Username: Oklahoma_mike

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 3:40 pm:   

My bet: this is not the guy. Boulder DA hinted very strongly today that they arrested him before they were really ready for fear he would disappear or hurt someone else. The DA talked out of both sides of her mouth ("sometimes this happens, but I am not saying it happened in this case, but it happens in some cases, but don't think I mean it applies to this case, . . .").
The weakness in the case: no known connection to Boulder or the Ramsey family. Whoever did it had confidence in their knowledge of the family schedule and some knowledge of the house, plus the $118,000 ransom figure, exactly John Ramsey's recent bonus, how did Karr know about all that back in Georgia and Alabama? His ex-wife divorced him after he was arrested for child pornography. Why would she lie about a false alabi? IF it was an intruder (and I have been leaning that way the past 2 years)they had good burgular skills. Does Karr have any history of burglary or window peeping? I want answers to these and other questions before I decide he did it.
Of course, if the DNA matches, I'll be proven wrong about Karr.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 5:32 pm:   

The professor'S name who recieved the 100's of emails from Karr was Michael Tracy. Karr used a aka in those emails. Jerry Bell from the Denver post said that there has not been a DNA test done on Karr, they haven't even checked his handwriting as of this morning.Karr said he drugged her then raped her, that he loved her.I could have sworn that I read she had not been raped.His idea of love is way out there.The police had to take a long look at this guy not only because he was on the run from Sonoma county as being a perv.But because of his obsession with the case, and writing Patsy.The person who killed her has a hatred for females.He had to have gone through Johns desk , ( he spent a long time in the home)unless he knew somehow how much money John had recieved.John or Patsy wouldn't have been stupid and put that amount as a ransom.Who ever did it has killed before, he had to have broken into homes many times to be that at ease with it. This was not a first time killer in my book.I hope that this is the guy because if it isn't then the real killer is out there somewhere.Karrs story just stinks of lies, when asked a direct question he didn't have a answer.I understand that if you commit a crime in Bangkok, they handcuff you to a roll bar on a truck, parade you through the town, then shoot you.I am sure he knew that and descided he wanted out of there.He knew enough about the case to make the claim he was the killer.I have to go with my gut feeling which is, he wasn't the guy.I hope I am wrong because if she was drugged and didn't feel anything, that would be a kinder way of what she went through.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vscantu
Username: Vscantu

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 6:00 pm:   

The "Singapore Slinger" strikes again!

Here is the damning evidence proving he's a deranged phoney which came from his own mouth:

1) Said "I didn't kill anybody. It was an accident."

There's no way the true perpetrator would say he "didn't kill anybody." JonBenet was smashed over her little head with a large, solid object which caused a 10-inch gash. She also was strangled with a rope (fashioned into a garrote) which was twisted many times around to purposely cut off her air. Sound like an 'accident' to you?


2) Says he had sex with her.

Wrong again, bozo! According to the autopsy report, there was no sign at all of intercourse, or even any semen found in her body. She did have a small, 1 cm. scrape or contusion on her vagina- totally inconsistent with a 45lb. little girl being penetrated by a full-grown (if slender) man.

3) Says he drugged her.

The autopsy report showed ablolutely no sign of of any drugs or alcohol in her system.

4) Claims he drove her home from school that day to her families' basement.

"That day" was Christmas Day- no one has school then- least of all the affluent daughter of a millionaire.

So to quote a famous game show host:

"Wrong answer! Thank you very much for playing our game. We have some lovely parting gifts for you at the door!"

I just wish the 'authorities' had done their homework better before arresting this clown.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sandy
Username: Sandy

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 6:19 pm:   

Vscantu, Thanks for clearing that up.He was a flight risk so they had to arrest him just in case he did it.Also I hope to protect other children from this creep. I can't wait to hear what else he has to say.More than likely he will be put in a mental ward, I hope for the rest of his life. Anyone know how tall or short he is ? He may get lucky if he is short, and get the judge who won't put away short people because they can't protect them selves in jail. ( True story )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 17, 2006 - 6:31 pm:   

19 year old John Mark Karr married 13 year old Quientana Shotts in 1984. The following year she filed for annulment.
In 1989 at the age of 24 he married 16 year old Lara Knutson. That year twin girls died at birth. They later had three children together all born at home who are now ages 13,14 & 15. She filed for divorce in 2001 and it became final in 2002.
This information from the Associated Press.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 6:00 am:   

When I saw them bringing Karr throught the crowd it reminded me of when they brought Lee Harvey Oswald through the police station. Only Oswald was shot. Maybe it was Karr's looks that reminded me of Oswald.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Warren
Username: Warren

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 8:04 am:   

Why does Henry Lee Lucas spring to mind?

Yes, Book, he does remind one of LHO, who looked different in every picture.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Seagull
Username: Seagull

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 10:50 am:   

Court TV commented that Karr didn't look like he was dressed in his own clothing. They were very ill fitting. I think he had on Pee Wee Herman's pants!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 2:12 pm:   

The older photo reminded me of Oswald as well. Incidentally, so does Delaware's Senator Joe Biden.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 2:26 pm:   

John Mark Karr is the Lee Harvey Oswald of pedophiles.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vscantu
Username: Vscantu

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 4:45 pm:   

Yes, Johno, but many claim JFK's supposed killer, Oswald, was just a patsy. In this case, I think JonBenet's killer was also a patsy- Patsy Ramsey! Wakka-wakka.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vallejo_dave
Username: Vallejo_dave

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 4:45 pm:   

Hope he changes that blue polo shirt before he gets to Colo!

He brings to mind Richard Randolph Carr in D.

He reminded me of LHO too. Maybe he's a Patsy!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, August 18, 2006 - 8:45 pm:   

He might also be called the James Earl Ray of pedophiles the way he gets around.
In his embellished resume http://www.job4teacher.com/Candidates/JohnKarr.htm l
he claims to have worked in south America, the Netherlands, South Korea, Germany and prestigious schools in the USA and claims to have visited London, Paris, Amsterdam, Zurich, Milan, Osaka, Seoul, sydney, Singapore, Taipei and Istanbul.

But he did in fact travel quite extensively on little or no budget and I'm wondering how he did it and who funded him.
He had very little means of support.
His last known jobs after he moved to California with his wife and three kids in 2000 are as a subtitute teacher in Sonoma and Napa Counties until he was arrested for child porn in April 2001. He spent six months in jail while awaiting sentencing on those charges and was released in October 2001 before he was sentenced. He fled and his whereabouts for the next few years are sketchy until he shows up in Honduras in the summer of 2004.

He worked at Southwest school in La Esperanza, Honduras for a brief time and quit but found another teaching job in the same town at the La Esperanza school for the 2004-2005 school year at $300 a month. At the end of the school year he quit and left no forwarding address.
His whereabouts are sketchy again until June of 2006 when he shows up in Bankok, Thailand arriving from Penang, Malaysia on his fifth visit to Thailand where he looks for work. He begins teaching second grade in the international school system in Bankok on August 15 and the next day he is arrested.

His extensive travels remind me of when James Earl Ray, who was an escaped convict from a Missouri prison, shows up in Memphis a year later and kills Martin Luther King Jr. Then he's captured two months later in London after traveling through Canada and Europe.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 6:20 am:   

More info on the ransom note.

Karr had written "I shall be the conqueror" in a friends High School yearbook in block letters. "SBTC" with an "I"
CNN this morning reported it.

Definition of conqueror: "someone who is victorious by force of arms."
Wasn't the word "Victory" in the ransom note?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 7:38 am:   

Reference for dictionary definition for conqueror.
http://lookwayup.com/lwu.exe/lwu/d;w=conqueror/n/7177921
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 8:44 am:   

Bookworm, here's something you might be able to extract some data from: it's a listing of USENET posts made by John Karr, purportedly representing an organization called "PowerWurks," which he evidently attempted to use as a means of introducing himself to young children. Note that all the posts were made early in 1996.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Warren
Username: Warren

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 9:03 am:   

Great find, Doug!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 11:38 am:   

Thanks, Warren--I didn't exactly find it myself, but was led there by some remark I saw in a news article, although this particular link is much more comprehensive. Obviously the guy's a child molester trolling for victims. One classic way they do this is to seek out kids who have emotional problems, or problems adjusting, and offer them empathy, among other things. Notice how he repeatedly promises complete confidentiality--good for him, no doubt!

Now, all these posts were made in 1996. I'm wondering if someone in the Boulder area eventually responded and that became his connection to the city.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 1:39 pm:   

Doug, I put a link to more info on his PowerWurks posts in the other JonBenet thread. I ment to put it here to go along with the links you posted about that site but I put it in the other thread by mistake.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, August 19, 2006 - 2:34 pm:   

Thanks, Johno!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Thursday, August 31, 2006 - 3:16 pm:   

So many odd things surround this case from the very begining.
Bill McReynolds was the man who played Santa at the Ramsey's Christmas party in 1996. His wife Janet was a drama critic who coincidently had written a play in 1976 based on a true story out if Indiana about the murder of a young girl who was tortured, sexually abused and murdered in a basement. In a further coincidence what probably inspired her to write the play was the McReynolds' own daughter was abduced in 1974 when she was 9 years old and forced to watch another girl being molested before both were released.
In a further coincidence that abduction happend on a December 26th.
No one was ever apprehended in that case.

Another odd twist in the murder of JonBenet was the 1997 arrest of 46 year old photographer Randy Simons in Genoa, Colorado. Almost all of the portrait pictures of JonBenet Ramsey that we have seen were taken by him. Lincoln County sheriif's picked him up walking naked through his nieghborhood. Before the deputies even had a chance to ask him what he was doing he blurted out that he did not kill JonBenet Ramsey.

Another arrest that raised eyebrows in child beauty pageant circles that drew interest from investigators in the Ramsey muder happend in 1998 in West Monroe, Louisiana when 43 year old David Haynes who was a child beauty pageant director was arrested for showing sex videos to teenagers. It just further bolstered the image of how creepy these beauty pageants are in their sexualization of little kids by making them up to be mini-adults in sexy costumes and the creepy and questionable people associated with such pageants.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Warren
Username: Warren

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, September 01, 2006 - 6:50 am:   

Creepy as hell, Johno.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Friday, September 01, 2006 - 7:00 am:   

You can pretty much bet that if you go to a child beauty pageant you're going to find lots of pedophiles involved. The proficient ones end up becoming really adept at insinuating themselves into situations where they have access to children, and they build their entire lives around it. The only thing rare about the Ramsey killer is that not only does he appear to be a pedophile, he's a sexual sadist as well--the two don't necessarily go together.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Saturday, September 02, 2006 - 5:04 am:   

True Douglas, if you describe to the stranger theory. Personally, I'll stick to the percentages and fix my beliefs on an inside job.

ET
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, September 02, 2006 - 7:17 am:   

I don't think there's much percentage in that scenario either. If the DNA evidence excludes Karr, it excludes the normal inmates of the house as well.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Saturday, September 02, 2006 - 9:31 am:   

Douglas,

Valid point.

ET
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Saturday, September 02, 2006 - 10:07 am:   

Given the little girl's visibility in those beauty pageants she might well have been stalked by some pedo/sexual sadist type who had the skill, the desperation and the cojones to enter her parents' house and take advantage of the fact that the house was huge, virtually soundproof from floor to floor, and easy to move around in. The ransom note, obviously contrived, affords not only some getaway time, but deflects attention from the killer by the people in his own circle of acquaintance, to whom he might have revealed an interest in JonBenet.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Bookworm
Username: Bookworm

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Sunday, September 03, 2006 - 8:05 pm:   

Reading John Douglas's Mindhunter, it seems to me that whoever did this to JonBenet had fantasied about how he did it, before that night. Bottom line I don't think this was covering up an act of child abuse by a parent.

John Ramsey's other daughter Beth was killed on the way to an Art Museum in a "car" accident with a bakery truck. Ironically there were paint brushes used in JonBenet's murder. Could be a stalker. Bakery/pastry similar to "Pasty R"
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Linda
Username: Linda

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 5:20 am:   

I'm not convinced that the DNA that they found was from the person that committed the crime. Wasn't there just a very small amount of DNA under the one nail and a very minute trace mixed in a small amount of bloodstain on the undies? Couldn't JonBenet have come into some type of contact with another male sometime during the day (or even the day before), had some DNA under her nails and then while changing her underwear or using the bathroom, touched the underwear in such a manner as to leave a small amount of the DNA from her nails on them?

Doug - Not quite sure I follow you in how the ransom note would afford some get-away time. To me, if it's an outsider, the note would have had to have been written prior to an attempted kidnapping - mainly because of its length. I can't imagine a kidnapper taking time to write 1 or 2 drafts and then a final 3 page note (using paper and pen from the house) and feel comfortable that there would be enough time without being discovered.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 7:56 am:   

Linda, I didn't mean getaway time from the house, but rather, from the area. It looks to me as if the staging was done to conceal motive--you might liken it to Zodiac killing Paul Stine to mask the true intent behind the first three events. Understanding motive can help the authorities narrow their focus in searching for the killer. And of course, if you're looking at it from that perspective, it tends to point toward a local intruder, who would have more reason to fear in that regard.

The trouble with DNA analysis is that you can work with minuscule quantities of DNA--theoretically a single cell will get you an entire profile. The specimens they retrieved don't necessarily belong to the killer.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Monday, September 04, 2006 - 4:55 pm:   

Linda, there is absolutely no doubt the "ransom" note was written in the Ramsey's house. The pad the paper came from was theirs, and it was written with a sharpie pen that came from a cup under the phone (and the killer very thoughtfully replaced it after finishing the note too, btw). That means that the killer(s) took his/her/their time composing that rambling 2˝ page note, and it was obviously done as an afterthought, since a kidnapper(s) would have brought a prepared ransom note with them (or mailed it later).

The fact that the killer(s) spent much time in the house leisurely writing that rambling note indicates that he/she/they had a great deal of comfort in the Ramsey home. A killer who managed to somehow get in without leaving any sign of forced entry, perhaps intending to abduct JBR but accidentally killing her instead, would not casually write a "ransom" note of such length. He/she/they would be in constant fear of discovery and would have fled the scene of the crime as soon as possible after writing a brief note, if anything at all.

The fact that the note demanded a ransom of $118,000 has never been satisfactorily explained. John Ramsey's Christmas bonus was in that amount (or close to it), and how many people could possibly have known that? While there are some aspects of the crime that points to an intruder, there are so many more that point to John & Patsy Ramsey, thus my theory that the "intruder" (if there was one) was someone known to them and who killed JBR, and they helped sanitize the crime scene.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Linda
Username: Linda

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 12:30 am:   

Doug - thanks for your explanation. And you're right, motive certainly would help narrow the focus in searching for the killer.

One thing that I think has always been a confusion in trying to explain a possible motive is whether or not she was hit in the head first or whether or not she was strangled first. I'm not sure that the autopsy really was clear on that - was it? I just don't believe that, if someone inside the house did it, it was sexually motivated, and believe that the head injury occurred as the result of an accident - and the strangulation intended as a cover-up to protect a member of the family.

Ed - as you've indicated, the ransom note almost certainly points to an insider as the writer. If the ransom note was written by an insider, I can't think of anyone who was outside of the immediate family that they would stage the crime for...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 5:19 am:   

The strangulation and the head injury were supposed to have taken place in very close proximity--that being opined because there's very little bleeding from the head wound. The autopsy report associates the two, but declares that the strangling was the actual cause of death. This really militates against it being something done by the parents to cover up an accident, or something unintentional. Assume the strangulation had gone first. Few people can see Mrs. Ramsey strangling her daughter with a garrotte in a fit of rage or as punishment for some offense. Conversely, assuming that the blow had come first, and had been accidental (it's a massive blow that required considerable force to deliver) and the parents "panicked," they would have had only a few moments to make the decision to cover up their mistake by staging a bizarre sexual assault and garrotting the still-living child--not that's something your average loving mother would consider even after lengthy deliberation.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 12:47 pm:   

Doug, that's why I suggest at least one more person was involved. The Ramseys didn't necessarily kill their daughter, but someone known to them did, and they helped cover it up and spent the night sanitizing the crime scene and concocting the bizarre ransom note and so on. So many things point directly at the Ramseys (as I've outlined before), and yet, there are things that point to an intruder, such as the stun gun, the rope and the duct tape, none of which could be linked to the Ramseys.

Of course, one has to ask, why would a friend bring these things into their home in the first place? As bizarre as the crime is and suspicious as the Ramsey's behavior was before, during and after the 12-26-1996, I wondered if kiddie porn was somehow involved, but something went wrong and they accidentally killed (or thought they killed) her and so had to cover it up.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 12:53 pm:   

Ed,

Are you suggesting that somehow kiddie porn was involved and that JonBenet was the subject of kiddie porn? Interesting. The Ramseys didn't need the money and to my knowledge no kiddie porn has ever turned up with JonBenet being the model in it. I too believe the Ramseys were involved but I doubt they are covering the murder up for someone else. Hell, that would have to be a pretty close friend.

ET
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 1:20 pm:   

Et: at this point, anything is a possibility. I'm not suggesting they did it for money, but for themselves (or their friends). The beauty pageants JBR was in, where those little girls are made to look like adult women, look like kiddie porn to me; in some cases, the parents even go as far as taping their daughters' baby fat to give them hourglass figures. While I don't know if that happened to JBR or not, that's just sick.

Either way, I'd guess this was the first time they wanted to take pics, but since she was murdered, none (or very few) were taken and no doubt later destroyed. That would explain why no pics of JBR have turned up.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 2:32 pm:   

Ed, can you imagine a scenario where a third party comes into the Ramsey's home, bludgeons their daughter into a state of permanent vegetable status, if not death, strangles her with a garrotte, and the parents end up conspiring with the third party to cover up the crime? I can't. It doesn't mean it couldn't have happened. But I think it's on a very low, low order of probability.

Perhaps the parents were whacked? But if that were so, you'd expect to see some kind of whacked behavior both before and after the event. People don't just get whacko all of a sudden and then lapse back into a normal state forever. And generally there's only one whacko at a time; not two or three working in such great harmony that the cops can't trip them up with contradictions.

What's more likely is that you've got a pedo/sexual sadist combination who is very bold, very desperate, very brazen, and has access to a huge house (almost 8,000 square feet--four times the size of my own modest dwelling). You ought to read those Karr e-mails if you haven't already. He's obviously not the killer, but he's got a fantastic imagination, and lays out some pretty good scenarios for how things might have gone down.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 2:34 pm:   

Remember, too, we saw the same "kiddie porn" hypotheses with Ed Smart, and we know how that one turned out!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 4:08 pm:   

Doug, for my idea to be plausible, JBR would have been stunned first. As you pointed out, there was very little bleeding from the head wound, which one would imagine would be atypical if it were the first blow delivered, thus, she was stunned first. In fact, for a stun gun to deliver the electrical burns on JBR's neck, it was proven scientifically that she had to be alive when it happened.

If that is the case, they may have thought the stun gun killed her (and it may have come very close), so they concocted the "intruder" scenario (since there was at least one more person involved in this theory), so they smashed her skull and strangled her (which is what truly killed her).

Either way, it's just a theory that attempts to explain the Ramsey's behavior and the evidence that seems to point to an intruder, and I don't expect it to be perfect. And I have yet to see another theory that explains both sets of evidence (there may be one out there already for all I know).
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Johno
Username: Johno

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 4:56 pm:   

There is no evidence that a stun gun was used on her. There were marks that seemed like they were made by a stun gun but that was never established by the medical examiner. They were theorized to have been made by metal buttons on the pajamas.
The eight inch gash on the head was not believed to have been cause by being hit with a blunt object but was more consistant with being smashed into a sink or floor.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jim_t
Username: Jim_t

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 5:24 pm:   

thanks Johno, I wondered why they kept showing pictures on the TV shows of a bathroom with the toilet taken apart. They never mentioned anything just showed a collage of pictures! They must of beleived that there was evidence of blood somewhere around the toilet. Also the Ramseys didnt turn on their Alarms that nite, probably the only time that year.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Vallejo_dave
Username: Vallejo_dave

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 5:47 pm:   

Hey, I thought this was a Zodiac message board!

Any how--I had a guy here who thinks Jon Benet wet the bed, and Patsy may have freaked out, because they had a flight to Michigan in the AM.

Just wanted to relay that---I know nothing about the case.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Oklahoma_mike
Username: Oklahoma_mike

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 8:38 pm:   

Douglas, I find myself in very close agreement with your arguments. I originally thought the Ramsey's had something to do with it, but I now know the DA and Boulder PD were pursuing that idea almost totally to the exclusion of any others so of course all the information released pointed to the parents. With revelations in recent years I have changed my opinion and vote with the intruder theory. The fact another young girl was attacked in her bedroom in Boulder 9 months later and perhaps saved by intervention of her father shows a pattern. The fact she went to dance class where young Miss Ramsey also did strengthens the idea. But when DNA ruled out all members of the Ramsey family I had to let go of my favorite theories: that she was killed either by brother Burke or one of her older half-siblings who perpahs arrived earlier than we think (either big half-sister was jealous or big-halfbrother was a pedophile). Those are the ONLY people the farents MIGHT actually cover up for, another child. But the DNA has ruled against any of those people and I must declare they had nothing to do with it.
For those who say statistics tell the tale, and that the odds thus point to an inside job remember this: statistics is NOT EVIDENCE. Statistics is a very useful tool which allows us to understand trends and tendencies, but statistics tells us nothing about indivudual data points. For example, I can graph the trends of the stock market and predict where it will go, and statistics says I can. But if statistics were facts I would be exceedingly wealthy (which I am not). If you go to the track and bet on the favorite horse to win, statistics says you will come out ahead in the long run. But about each individual race, it predicts nothing. Try it if you don't believe me. Betting on the favorite is smart. But you won't always win. Odds say a family member did it. But odds are not always right.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ed_neil
Username: Ed_neil

Registered: 5-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 10:31 pm:   

Johno, those stun gun marks were behind her ear, if I am not mistaken, and the pics of them sure look like burn marks of some sort.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jim_t
Username: Jim_t

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 10:40 pm:   

The brown marks were behind the ear and also on the wrist. Does anyone think the intruder entered the Ramseys house before they returned from the Christmas party. JBR was asleep in their car and was carried to bed at around 10:30. The next day they were going to fly to Atlanta and Patsy woke up early and discovered JBR was missing and the ransom note and then called 911.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 10:49 pm:   

I've been fighting the "paradigm" thing for quite some time now. "Serial killers don't change their M.O." "A killer doesn't go from guns and knives to bombs." Heck, Zodiac himself went from guns and knives to bomb threats. But some people are enamored of the conventional wisdom. In many cases it's a convenient substitute for actual thought.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Tuesday, September 05, 2006 - 11:08 pm:   

The killer probably could have gotten into the house either before or after the family arrived home; either way he would have had plenty of time to do what he did. The key thing here is the size of the house. It would be very hard to pull such a thing off in a typical family dwelling.

I believe there was a similar situation in the Smart kidnapping--a very large house, with the parents' quarters more-or-less isolated from those of the kids.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Jim_t
Username: Jim_t

Registered: 7-2006
Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 9:14 am:   

The bedroom accross from JBR the bed ruffling had been moved or bent in a way that looked like someone had hid under it. The intruder may have hidden under the bed waiting for the Ramseys to come home.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Etphoto
Username: Etphoto

Registered: 6-2006
Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 11:04 am:   

Or someone moved or bent it while searching for JonBenet. Don't forget Jim, family and friends spent several hours searching for her before she was found murdered. I'm sure that the bed you are refering to was searched several times and the bed ruffling was moved in the process.

ET
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ratman
Username: Ratman

Registered: 8-2006
Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 6:27 pm:   

That has always been one of the most troubling problems in this case, is that the house had been searched at least once by John Ramsey and a friend but when requested to search again John went 'almost straight to the room JB was in, brought upstairs so Patsy could cover her with her body, hold her, and beg the Lord to raise her from the dead'.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Douglas_oswell
Username: Douglas_oswell

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 6:37 pm:   

Ratman, that's not my understanding of how things went. I believe it was the police who did the first search of the house--when they got to the so-called "wine cellar" they opened the door and looked inside, but not being able to locate the light switch (it was in an odd place) assumed that nothing was there. Later Mr. Ramsey was asked to search the house, and he decided to start in the basement. Based on the layout of the house, the "wine cellar" wouldn't have been the first place he looked in the basement, but it would have logically been among the first.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Tom_voigt
Username: Tom_voigt

Registered: 4-2006
Posted on Wednesday, September 06, 2006 - 6:49 pm:   

Let's continue this discussion here.

Topics | Last Day | Last Week | Tree View | Search | Help/Instructions | Program Credits Administration