Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Family Innocent in Jonbenet Ramsey Murder


  • Please log in to reply
909 replies to this topic

#106    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 643 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2011
  • Gender:Female

Posted 29 October 2013 - 04:07 AM

Vincennes, your point about the forensic evidence that is strangely lacking. The perp/s was in the house a long time. He/they had contact with many parts of the house and numerous objects in the house. He/they had extensive, intimate contact with the victim. There should have been forensic evidence--hairs, clothing fibers, fingerprints, bodily fluids--teeming everywhere, overrunning the place. Yet, there was a bizarre absence of outside family having been in the home or having contact with JBR. That's a big problem for the intruder theory, which was a major issue for the doubters of the Ramseys. And it's more than puzzling. But there's the question of what evidence was lost or contaminated by the crime scene being violated and the whole home overrun by a mob of ppl that morning, all because the BPD bungled the entire investigation from the moment the first responder went to the door, which is why I very much doubt there will ever be answers.


#107    Vincennes

Vincennes

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

Posted 29 October 2013 - 02:09 PM

View Postregi, on 28 October 2013 - 11:33 PM, said:

:lol:
Wasn't that a news lady who went on and on with her commentary about all the violence- except the report she was reading from was actually about violins... :lol:
(Hey, I've never known you hesitate to put your thoughts out there and that's what counts!)
Speaking of which...
I've recently come across some brow-raising statements attributed to the maid! :huh:


I'm currently looking for John Douglas' book, The Cases That Haunt Us because this case is one of those he analyzes.
  Yes, that's the one from SNL.  My favorite was her commentary on BUSTing little children...... which ended with her apology' cuz the article was about bussing.   :w00t:

It was just recently I went back and went over the maid's comments and actions.  I found them to be really, really strange for someone who Patti had been good to and who knew they were in such a grieving state.  Along with the fact the Ramsey's have been proven not to have been involved, So what she said about Patti most probably wasn't true at all. Why?  

IMO there had to be come type of personal involvement / envy of the Ramsey's on the part of the perp.  I can't think that the bonus amount of the military comments were just thought up by someone who didn't know them at all... It's also hard to believe anyone went there for the purpose of killing the child right in the house with the R's present.  However, even though I'm totally with you, the stun gun proves they were there for a kidnapping purpose, there still could have been two of them with the one in the basement killing her while the other composed the note.


#108    Vincennes

Vincennes

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

Posted 29 October 2013 - 02:14 PM

View PostAaronsmom, on 29 October 2013 - 04:07 AM, said:

Vincennes, your point about the forensic evidence that is strangely lacking. The perp/s was in the house a long time. He/they had contact with many parts of the house and numerous objects in the house. He/they had extensive, intimate contact with the victim. There should have been forensic evidence--hairs, clothing fibers, fingerprints, bodily fluids--teeming everywhere, overrunning the place. Yet, there was a bizarre absence of outside family having been in the home or having contact with JBR. That's a big problem for the intruder theory, which was a major issue for the doubters of the Ramseys. And it's more than puzzling. But there's the question of what evidence was lost or contaminated by the crime scene being violated and the whole home overrun by a mob of ppl that morning, all because the BPD bungled the entire investigation from the moment the first responder went to the door, which is why I very much doubt there will ever be answers.

Not only that, they fought the Det. Schmidt every step of the way when he made so many critical findings.  I don't know if anyone here ever reads the "Enquirer" which in this case I did because I was so interested in it.  They found later that the DA who was in office at the time was actually feeding negative information to the "Enquirer."  Isn't this really a tragedy on top of a tragedy.


#109    regi

regi

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,512 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 29 October 2013 - 05:06 PM

View PostVincennes, on 29 October 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

Yes, that's the one from SNL.  My favorite was her commentary on BUSTing little children...... which ended with her apology' cuz the article was about bussing.   :w00t:
:lol:
Oh, that's too danged funny! :tsu:
Btw, the "Never mind" character was Emily Litella. She squinted her eyes and wrinkled her nose as she smiled and apologically said simply... "Never mind." :lol:

View PostVincennes, on 29 October 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

It was just recently I went back and went over the maid's comments and actions.  I found them to be really, really strange for someone who Patti had been good to and who knew they were in such a grieving state.  Along with the fact the Ramsey's have been proven not to have been involved, So what she said about Patti most probably wasn't true at all. Why?  

I agree. My immediate impression was where did that come from?! And certainly, why? :hmm:


#110    Vincennes

Vincennes

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,023 posts
  • Joined:12 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:USA

Posted 29 October 2013 - 07:34 PM

View Postregi, on 29 October 2013 - 05:06 PM, said:

:lol:
Oh, that's too danged funny! :tsu:
Btw, the "Never mind" character was Emily Litella. She squinted her eyes and wrinkled her nose as she smiled and apologically said simply... "Never mind." :lol:

I agree. My immediate impression was where did that come from?! And certainly, why? :hmm:

Sorry !  Again, I have to say,  "Never mind"   :blush:

Thanks for your agreeing that you too see something of a conflict. That's what really makes me think, she wasn't grateful to Patti when she gave her that money, she only resented her more.  I  don't suspect her personal involvement in it.  I'm sure even the BPD checked that one out and probably the alcoholic husband too.  However, someone said to me once stating gossip was like taking a feather pillow outside and splitting it open in the wind. An evil comment could work the same way.   The maid and her husband did not live in the most upscale of neighborhoods.  If she made statements around people or her husband did in a bar.  Who knows who could have heard it .  I would wonder if she could have had older teenagers around her and then look to their friends.  I say that from the age determined by the linguistic specialist re. the note.  I would then hang her by her thumbs to remember if any of them (e.g., nephew perhaps)  had ever dropped her off or picked her up there.  Came inside for a moment to wait ??  

But the BPD probably won't be hiring me.  SNL either... :su

Edited by Vincennes, 29 October 2013 - 07:44 PM.


#111    regi

regi

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,512 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 27 November 2013 - 02:57 PM

I finally picked up the book The Cases That Haunt Us, published in 2000, so that I could learn John Douglas' opinions on this case and I had bit of a surprise which explains some of his comments I'd previously found confusing.
Douglas wrote: "Contrary to what has been reported, I was not called upon to do a profile of the killer and have never done so. I never had all of the material I would need for that. I saw it as my role with the attorneys to do an assessment of whether their clients were involved, and with the police to give them the benefit of my experience in analyzing and researching thousands of homicide investigations."

I haven't read the entire chapter, but so far I know that Douglas did offer analysis of the note and of course, the opinion that the Ramsey's were not involved.

(Back later with more facts and details. :tu: )


#112    ronron1alpha

ronron1alpha

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 24 posts
  • Joined:28 Sep 2013

Posted 22 December 2013 - 04:37 AM

Omg didn't know I got reply from this post. Dressed how ever bandage & ALL. Sicoo will find it all the same.  That was my PO mode for open conversation of putting your teens on the street corner for a car wash funds for school. God rest their souls.  Let's make it a better place to live!


#113    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 643 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2011
  • Gender:Female

Posted 31 December 2013 - 06:04 AM

View Postmfrmboy, on 08 November 2012 - 02:15 PM, said:

I have always thought it odd that they said it was the Ramsey's fault because they dressed her up or she was a pagent girl.  Pedofiles are attracted to children and if the child looks like an adult wouldnt that be a turn off for them ?
I've never thought it had anything to do with the makeup and dresses.

I also think it's a gross leap to blame the Ramseys on the basis of entering JBR in beauty pageants. For one thing, look how many little girls have been and still are in the pageants. How many of these contestants have been targeted by paedophiles? How many crimes like JBR's murder have there been of little girl contestants? I haven't heard of one, have you? That would indicate that a parent putting her child in a beauty pageant competition isn't baitin a pedophile to come after the kid. Secondly, none of us know what the motive of the murder was. There appear to be two very different motives at work: one, a kidnap for ransom, two, a sexual molestation murder by a crazed killer. The murder suggests two very different criminals acting in tandem but at cross purposes, or one criminal with multiple personality disorder. Neither seem like likely scenarios. Yet the crime took place as it did. Whatever, I can't see how PR putting JBR in beauty pageants could invite this type of bizarre crime that fits no one explanation.


#114    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 643 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2011
  • Gender:Female

Posted 31 December 2013 - 06:18 AM

View PostVincennes, on 29 October 2013 - 02:14 PM, said:



Not only that, they fought the Det. Schmidt every step of the way when he made so many critical findings.  I don't know if anyone here ever reads the "Enquirer" which in this case I did because I was so interested in it.  They found later that the DA who was in office at the time was actually feeding negative information to the "Enquirer."  Isn't this really a tragedy on top of a tragedy.

Yes, I read that somewhere too...that it appears the DA's office was leaking inside info about the investigation to a media source....maybe the Enquirer. Not only is that as unethical as LE can get, but what a gross disservice to the investigation. Someone who worked in Alex Hunter's office may have been selling the info; I know the Enquirer buys info, and pays handsomely, too. I can't think of another reason someone in the DA's office would leak info. Certainly it damaged the case severely. Unless the leaker was trying deliberately to damage the case so it could never be effectively prosecuted.


#115    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 643 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2011
  • Gender:Female

Posted 31 December 2013 - 06:34 AM

View PostVincennes, on 29 October 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

It was just recently I went back and went over the maid's comments and actions.  I found them to be really, really strange for someone who Patti had been good to and who knew they were in such a grieving state.  Along with the fact the Ramsey's have been proven not to have been involved, So what she said about Patti most probably wasn't true at all. Why?  

IMO there had to be come type of personal involvement / envy of the Ramsey's on the part of the perp.  I can't think that the bonus amount of the military comments were just thought up by someone who didn't know them at all... It's also hard to believe anyone went there for the purpose of killing the child right in the house with the R's present.  However, even though I'm totally with you, the stun gun proves they were there for a kidnapping purpose, there still could have been two of them with the one in the basement killing her while the other composed the note.

I don't know if there was more than one perp, though certainly that's possible. But I do agree the crime is more than a straight-out kidnap for ransom or paedophile murder. Whoever is behind this acted out of deep rage/jealousy/hatred against the Ramseys--or one of the Ramseys. John? Seems like it. Patsy? Maybe. That "ransom letter" is way too personal to be a straight demand for money. And really angry and contemptuous. And the crime against JBR? About as brutal, sadistic and rageful as it gets. Who hated one or both of the Ramseys that much?


#116    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 643 posts
  • Joined:11 May 2011
  • Gender:Female

Posted 31 December 2013 - 06:35 AM

View PostVincennes, on 29 October 2013 - 02:09 PM, said:

It was just recently I went back and went over the maid's comments and actions.  I found them to be really, really strange for someone who Patti had been good to and who knew they were in such a grieving state.  Along with the fact the Ramsey's have been proven not to have been involved, So what she said about Patti most probably wasn't true at all. Why?  

IMO there had to be come type of personal involvement / envy of the Ramsey's on the part of the perp.  I can't think that the bonus amount of the military comments were just thought up by someone who didn't know them at all... It's also hard to believe anyone went there for the purpose of killing the child right in the house with the R's present.  However, even though I'm totally with you, the stun gun proves they were there for a kidnapping purpose, there still could have been two of them with the one in the basement killing her while the other composed the note.

I don't know if there was more than one perp, though certainly that's possible. But I do agree the crime is more than a straight-out kidnap for ransom or paedophile murder. Whoever is behind this acted out of deep rage/jealousy/hatred against the Ramseys--or one of the Ramseys. John? Seems like it. Patsy? Maybe. That "ransom letter" is way too personal to be a straight demand for money. And really angry and contemptuous. And the crime against JBR? About as brutal, sadistic and rageful as it gets. Who hated one or both of the Ramseys that much?


#117    regi

regi

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,512 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 01 January 2014 - 12:00 PM

View PostAaronsmom, on 31 December 2013 - 06:35 AM, said:

I do agree the crime is more than a straight-out kidnap for ransom or paedophile murder.

That's how it appears to John Douglas and it's the reason he says we haven't seen a similar case. He wrote "...this was not the work of a serial killer. This is not someone who killed for the fulfillment and satisfaction of exerting manipulation, domination, and control over a victim of opportunity. This was an inexperienced, mission-oriented offender. So there is no particular reason to believe he would repeat the same signature crime over and over."


#118    regi

regi

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,512 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 02 January 2014 - 02:02 AM

Based on the evidence Douglas was presented with, he believes "JonBonet's killer was a white male, relatively young, who had a personal grudge against John Ramsey and intended to carry it out by defiling and robbing him of the most valuable thing in the world to him."
(He believes the perp entered the house when the family was out, and- in consideration of the items it's believed and/or determined that the offender brought with him- a stun gun, roll of duct tape, and a spool of cord)... "his intention was to incapacitate JonBenet, abduct her, and molest her. This was a personal-cause crime rather than a criminal enterprise. The ransom consideration was secondary and may not have even occurred to the UNSUB until he was in the house."

..."...maybe he brought a briefer ransom note with him, but when he had the time, he altered his plan and wrote a note on the Ramsey's own paper that was laying out on the counter, getting out more of his anger and resentment."

..."The high risk for the intruder would have been mitigated by the complexity of the physical layout of the house."

It appears (by what Douglas writes) that perhaps the most perplexing aspect of the crime is why the offender garroted JonBenet in the basement.
The autopsy findings suggest that the strangulation was first. "The official cause of death was listed as asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma."
Douglas spedcualtes that "whether he intended to or not, his tightening of the neck ligature either killed her or nearly did so. When he realized what he had done, he panicked and finished off the job with a blow to the head. Then, instead of removing her from the house, he fled in panic."
He added that that "is only one possibility. Another would be that this actually was an intended kidnapping, planned by one or more teens or young adults who had been inside the house and had seen John's pay stubbs."

Re: the molestation, he wrote "The digital penetration...would have represented the young man's casual experimentation while he had the opportunity. This would not be rare. Again, when he realized he had killed or nearly killed his victim, he would have panicked and fled."

Douglas closes by stating "The fact remains, I'm not sure who killed JonBenet Ramsey, and the fact that her killer has not been found and charged represents a terrible injustice. That injustice will only be compounded if the wrong people are accused. I always said that having a child murdered was the worst possible thing that could happen to a person. I guess I was wrong. having that happen and then being blamed for it is even worse."

Edited by regi, 02 January 2014 - 02:06 AM.


#119    Sig Turner

Sig Turner

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 103 posts
  • Joined:08 Nov 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 05 January 2014 - 11:07 PM

View Postregi, on 01 January 2014 - 12:00 PM, said:

That's how it appears to John Douglas and it's the reason he says we haven't seen a similar case. He wrote "...this was not the work of a serial killer. This is not someone who killed for the fulfillment and satisfaction of exerting manipulation, domination, and control over a victim of opportunity. This was an inexperienced, mission-oriented offender. So there is no particular reason to believe he would repeat the same signature crime over and over."

I agree with Douglas' profile of the killer to the extent that the killer was a young, white male, and an inexperienced killer who may likely never kill again.  However, I disagree with Douglas' profile in regards to the killer's motivation.   This was most likely a burglary gone bad.  The killer, and his female accomplice who wrote the ransom note, had thought that the Ramseys had already left to vacation in Michigan.   They did not think anyone was home at the time they broke into the Ramsey residence (probably using a house key).   They were caught off-guard by JonBenet who came to down the stairs thinking it was Santa Claus whom she heard fumbling about.   Instead, she discovered two intruders, at least one of whom she knew by name.  

Whoever the killer was, he had some very desperate reason to silence JonBenet.   Perhaps, the killer was on parole and could not accept being returned to prison for an extended sentence as a persistent offender, which is what a subsequent burglary conviction may have entailed for him.   More likely, the killer had no prior arrest record and feared personal disgrace and some overwhelming upset of his life plans.   This upset may have entailed the loss of a scholarship at CU, being expelled from law school, or even being terminated in disgrace from the Boulder Police Department, on top of being incarcerated on a burglary conviction.   The most glaring aspect of the murder is the degree of overkill presented.  Whoever it was that killed JonBenet was desperate to make absolutely certain that she was dead.

That there is reportedly little physical evidence of intruders having committed this crime is troubling, even though the crime scene was badly trampled underfoot thanks to the incompetency of BPD first responders.   JonBenet was certainly not killed by either of her parents, nor by her brother.  This much is obviated by the language of the protracted ransom note and the body of the intended hostage being left in the basement (to say nothing of the degree of overkill presented).   Therefore, there had to be at least one intruder, and it appears that there was most likely a minimum of two: one male, one female.   That there can be so little forensic evidence discovered at the scene either means that there is information about the case that is not being released to the public, or that the crime scene investigators did a thoroughly incompetent job of processing the crime scene.   Worse still, there is the possibility that evidence was deliberately destroyed by a member of the BPD who was both involved in the investigation of the murder and involved in the murder itself, either directly or to the extent of covering up for a close relative they knew to be involved.

Edited by Sig Turner, 05 January 2014 - 11:19 PM.


#120    regi

regi

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,512 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 06 January 2014 - 01:34 AM

View PostSig Turner, on 05 January 2014 - 11:07 PM, said:

I agree with Douglas' profile of the killer to the extent that the killer was a young, white male, and an inexperienced killer who may likely never kill again.  However, I disagree with Douglas' profile in regards to the killer's motivation.   This was most likely a burglary gone bad.  murder

There are two immediate reasons I strongly disagree. 1) the motive for the note is entirely disregarded, and 2) the presence of the note indicates that the perp was in the house before the murder occurred and the language suggests intention.

Edit: There're actually three reasons in that reply!

Edited by regi, 06 January 2014 - 02:31 AM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users