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

#61    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

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

Posted 21 March 2013 - 06:42 AM

Oh, and, re the McCann case: yes there was the same level of vitriol and cruel accusation of the McCann parents. But really, the mystery of Madeline McCann dramatically underscores (IMO) the non-sensical nature of Jonbenet Ramsey's murder. Abduction by a paedophile for sexual exploitation happens very much like Madelaine's disappearance than JBR's murder. The child is taken--quickly and directly--from the family residence and spirited away, far off the premises. Note Madelaine's abductor did not take her out of the family's hotel room and leave a ransom note--not a hastily scribbled one, let alone a 3-page one, written in the hotel room on stationary in the room, demanding some unlikely odd amount like $118,000. To top it off, the body was not discovered soon after, in some remote, in-feequently used utility room of the hotel--the body revealing homicide by elaborate strangulation with a device put together with odd objects lying around the room that would take a half hour to make, and a savage club wound to the skull AND the child's vagina mutilated by a sharp stick, possibly, and not one drop of semen anywhere.  Madelaine's disappearance is a million times more consistent than JBR's murder with BOTH/EITHER a paedophile abduction OR parents covering up an accidental death of their child resulting from overly aggressive disciplining. Yet I never suspected for one minute the McCanns were guilty of harming Madelaine or being involved in any way with her disappearance. The McCanns behaved far more predictably as innocent victims of a parent's worst nightmare than the Ramseys did.


#62    dekker87

dekker87

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,369 posts
  • Joined:08 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:england

Posted 21 March 2013 - 09:18 AM

thanks AM - you've given me a wealth of information there to get my head around...i'm getting more and more sucked into this case...and the more i know the less i know! as you say it just doesn't add up...however you want to throw the dice...

i'm gonna try thinking totally outside the box on this for a while, whilst also trying to absorb as many of the confirmed facts as possible and see what potential scenarios i come up with...

from  your knowledge of this case it appears you have invested an awful lot of time and effort into this...


#63    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

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

Posted 22 March 2013 - 01:46 AM

View Postdekker87, on 21 March 2013 - 09:18 AM, said:

thanks AM - you've given me a wealth of information there to get my head around...i'm getting more and more sucked into this case...and the more i know the less i know! as you say it just doesn't add up...however you want to throw the dice...

i'm gonna try thinking totally outside the box on this for a while, whilst also trying to absorb as many of the confirmed facts as possible and see what potential scenarios i come up with...

from  your knowledge of this case it appears you have invested an awful lot of time and effort into this...

Oh gosh I'm hardly an expert! You have to remember this murder happened in 1996. That means people have had over 16 years to mull over this case, and I would wager this may be the most "mulled over" crime mystery in the true crime buffs world (especially on the Internet). Compared to a whole bunch of JBR obsessives, I weigh in as a rank amateur! I read a couple of books on the case, an article or two, and learned the rest from following hundreds of discussions. There are tons of folks who know a million times more than I do about this. There's a lot of misinformation out there too, so it can be confusing. You're right though...I have invested an embarrassing amount of time on the JBR mystery. Like so many people captivated by this case, I got kind of obsessed w/ it too. I don't think it's just that this was a beautiful blonde girl born to wealthy white parents. I think it's really because of what we've been talking about here the last two days. This is the most, or one of the most, bizarre cases in crime history. The culmination of the collected facts too often seem to contradict each other, and no matter which way one (objective one) looks at every angle, none of it adds up...none of it makes any sense. Laci Peterson's murder and OJ Simpson's trial captivated worldwide attention too and had people talking for years. But unlike JBR's murder, the Laci Peterson and Nicole Brown-Ron Goldman murders were never much of a mystery--not to most of the world. The evidence in both those cases, the circumstantial as well as the forensic, didn't leave much doubt as to what happened. JBR's murder is very different. There's never been a case like this. I read in an article a few years ago that there is no other abduction/murder where both a written random demand and a grotesque, horrific, molestation scene discovered in the house of the victim within a short time of one another. To this day, people seem to be pretty evenly divided about what happened, with a fevered pitch of emotion on either side.


#64    regi

regi

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,945 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 22 March 2013 - 01:50 PM

View PostAntilles, on 19 March 2013 - 12:26 PM, said:

Well regi, that article was about the findings by a US District Court judge. I don't know how much more to the point you can be.

Well, Antilles, that's your point, not mine. I get it that the DNA is reported as 'foreign' and 'unknown'... it doesn't match the Ramsey's.
My 'point' is about my questions re: what the evidence/DNA is, and where it was collected from.
As far as I'm concerned, that article is vague in that regard.
I want to know what specimen showed male DNA, and from where it was collected.
What are the biological specimens which offered DNA...male DNA?
Was it the fingernail scrapings, or some other specimen, and where was it collected from?
It makes a big difference whether or not that hair collected from the blanket was pubic or axilliary, and they don't seem to know. Maybe a determination isn't possible, but it matters, and then it matters where on that blanket it was collected from.
Those hairs on the Duct tape that they say is 'alleged' beaver...is it possible those were from a paintbrush? I don't think they're morons, but the case isn't solved, and there's the bristle part of a paintbrush missing from the scene. (The wood handle was used in the garrotte, and the rest wasn't located.)
And what about those other "dark animal" hairs. Are those from that same alleged beaver, or some other animal...if some other animal, then what animal, and why didn't they identify it?

Edited by regi, 22 March 2013 - 01:57 PM.


#65    regi

regi

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,945 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2012
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Texas

Posted 22 March 2013 - 04:08 PM

View PostAaronsmom, on 21 March 2013 - 06:42 AM, said:

Oh, and, re the McCann case: yes there was the same level of vitriol and cruel accusation of the McCann parents. But really, the mystery of Madeline McCann dramatically underscores (IMO) the non-sensical nature of Jonbenet Ramsey's murder. Abduction by a paedophile for sexual exploitation happens very much like Madelaine's disappearance than JBR's murder. The child is taken--quickly and directly--from the family residence and spirited away, far off the premises. Note Madelaine's abductor did not take her out of the family's hotel room and leave a ransom note--not a hastily scribbled one, let alone a 3-page one, written in the hotel room on stationary in the room, demanding some unlikely odd amount like $118,000. To top it off, the body was not discovered soon after, in some remote, in-feequently used utility room of the hotel--the body revealing homicide by elaborate strangulation with a device put together with odd objects lying around the room that would take a half hour to make, and a savage club wound to the skull AND the child's vagina mutilated by a sharp stick, possibly, and not one drop of semen anywhere.  Madelaine's disappearance is a million times more consistent than JBR's murder with BOTH/EITHER a paedophile abduction OR parents covering up an accidental death of their child resulting from overly aggressive disciplining. Yet I never suspected for one minute the McCanns were guilty of harming Madelaine or being involved in any way with her disappearance. The McCanns behaved far more predictably as innocent victims of a parent's worst nightmare than the Ramseys did.

I wholeheartedly agree! The McCann case is a far, far cry than what we see in this case.
For the life of me, I don't know why the McCann's were vilified so- I think it was partly because they admittedly left their young children unattended- but there was never a question in my own mind but that their child was abducted!
The perp took notice of Madeline, kept watch of her family, and then seized the opportunity to take her.
Regardless of whether or not her parents were reckless...or careless...they aren't to blame; blame should be placed soley on the perp who took her!

You mention another aspect of the Ramsey case that never correlated with me, and that's the fact that JonBonet had a serious head injury together that elaborate strangulation. Yes, the method was time-consuming, and...needless to say, unnecessary. And since some of the items used for the garrotte were from the home, then that part of the crime appears to be spontaneous.
Now, spontaneous and time-consuming doesn't correlate, either, not when it occurs in the victim's home where others are present.
That perp had to have been comfortable.

The evidence is that there's marks 'consistent with' a stun gun...
There's was Duct tape over her mouth...
Her hands were tied above her head...
So, when and why would such a serious head injury occur under those circumstances?

Then there's the question of sexual assault. It's strange that there's even a question about it.
The motive isn't clear.
If the perp wanted to kidnap for ransom, then what stopped him? Even if she was injured during the kidnapping, no one would know that but the kidnapper, so what's the reason for the rest of it... of which, the only conclusive facts are that she had a serious head injury and was strangled?
If the note was brought before hand, then why was it left?
Whether it was before or after, the note appears to be a ruse.


#66    dekker87

dekker87

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,369 posts
  • Joined:08 Oct 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:england

Posted 22 March 2013 - 04:39 PM

View Postregi, on 22 March 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

I wholeheartedly agree! The McCann case is a far, far cry than what we see in this case.
For the life of me, I don't know why the McCann's were vilified so- I think it was partly because they admittedly left their young children unattended- but there was never a question in my own mind but that their child was abducted!
The perp took notice of Madeline, kept watch of her family, and then seized the opportunity to take her.
Regardless of whether or not her parents were reckless...or careless...they aren't to blame; blame should be placed soley on the perp who took her!

You mention another aspect of the Ramsey case that never correlated with me, and that's the fact that JonBonet had a serious head injury together that elaborate strangulation. Yes, the method was time-consuming, and...needless to say, unnecessary. And since some of the items used for the garrotte were from the home, then that part of the crime appears to be spontaneous.
Now, spontaneous and time-consuming doesn't correlate, either, not when it occurs in the victim's home where others are present.
That perp had to have been comfortable.

The evidence is that there's marks 'consistent with' a stun gun...
There's was Duct tape over her mouth...
Her hands were tied above her head...
So, when and why would such a serious head injury occur under those circumstances?

Then there's the question of sexual assault. It's strange that there's even a question about it.
The motive isn't clear.
If the perp wanted to kidnap for ransom, then what stopped him? Even if she was injured during the kidnapping, no one would know that but the kidnapper, so what's the reason for the rest of it... of which, the only conclusive facts are that she had a serious head injury and was strangled?
If the note was brought before hand, then why was it left?
Whether it was before or after, the note appears to be a ruse.

the McCanns were vilified because they are middle class, articulate and educated...and yet 'failed' to look after their kids...it's a british class thing that probably doesn't translate very well....

we don't celebrate success like you do in the states...it's kind of like that crabs in a barrel ghetto analogy....

Edited by dekker87, 22 March 2013 - 04:40 PM.


#67    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

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

Posted 22 March 2013 - 08:10 PM

First, McCann case: I read a lot of vitriole toward the McCanns at the time Maddy went missing. Most of it had to do with them being affluent AND leaving their children unattended in their cottage or suite. Like they were too cheap to pay a sitter. But that's a narrow view of things. The parents were dining outdoors in a plaza near the suite. It was within sight of the adults. They were in a small resort town in Portugal,  in a vacation resort ffor upper middle class. They felt safe. They had one adult going in to check on the kids every 1/2 hr.  With those conditions, I would think it reasonable to feel one's kids are safe. I grew up in a small town where people only locked the doors if they were really away from home or were in bed for the night. When I was Maddy's age, I recall my mother putting me down for a nap and sometimes I woke up and she wasn't there. She was either hanging laundry out in the backyard, or popped over occassionly next door to have coffee with a neighbor. The windows in both homes were open, and the houses were in close proximity. I'm sure mom felt confident that if I cried or called fr her, she would hear it. When I was younger, I also vaguely remember her placing me in the playpen she put in the yard, or my stroller, on a warm day while she was inside cleaning or cooking. All the neighborhood kids played outside unsupervised, even when we were very small. People felt safe in this little town. Yet, it's not like paedophile abductions were unheard of then... just not thought of in small towns. But anything could have happened. And my parents were reasonably good parents. We were never physically disciplined other than a light paddling on the butt occasionally. I can imagine though what some might have said had one of us got snatched from the house or in the yard. No doubt some people would suspect I was a victim of fatal child abuse and my body hidden somewhere to cover up the crime. Or had my body been found somewhere, molested, some would probably denounce my parents for leaving me alone in the house or the yard. I don't think it's fair to trash a parent for not having his or her kids in eyesight every second, or for leaving a door unlocked I. A small, quiet town. Millions of people do this all the time. Maybe one in a few million times, something totally tragic and extremely unlikely will happen. It's cruel and horribly harsh to come down on a couple of poor parents like a sledgehammer because they didn't allow for some completely freakish, tragic thing to happen, like one is expected to foresee any possible terrible event, even those so implausible, the odds against are astronomical.

The McCanns were the most unlikely suspects of child abuse or parental neglect. Their behavior after Maddy disappeared was totally consistent with what one would expect of innocent victims of an abducted child. They stayed in the area for weeks while the investigation ensued. They didn't leave town within a day. They cooperated fully with investigators. There was no ransom note that was suspect of being a ruse. If anything, Madelaine's disappearance starkly contrasts with the Ramsey crime, highlighting how night and day they are.

Oops! I need to put the rest of my reply on another post. Stay tuned..


#68    Aaronsmom

Aaronsmom

    Astral Projection

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

Posted 22 March 2013 - 10:20 PM

There are cases I've heard of that were cover-ups of a fatal child abuse injury in which horrible things were done to the corpse/near-dead-victim in an effort to simulate a paedophile abduction-murder. Things like a fake strangulation and/or faked sexual assault. I know of no case in which a parent was suspected of writing a mock ransom note to cover-up a child fatality resulting from physically assaulting the child, or a tragic accident. What parent would be so bold and so dumb to do that? Give police a writing sample? Even if the parent thought he could disguise his hand-writing enough to fool LE? Further, what person in that situation would stage an abduction-for-ransom, then hide
the body in the house? Surely even a dim-witted parent would think the police would search every inch of the house--if only to look for evidence. In a cover-up, a guilty parent/s would try getting rid of the body a good ways away from the house, no matter how horrible the thought of it seemed.
What possible advantage would be gained by staging an abduction-for-ransom AND a grisly rape-murder???  A person would have to be a raving lunatic to do that. Neither of the Ramseys seemed raving mad or like dullards.

On the other hand, what criminal would do that either? If it was an abduction-for-ransom and say the child was fatally injured in the attempted abduction. Many criminologists believe this may have happened in the Lindbergh baby abduction. Note the abductor/s followed up on trying to collect a ransom. If a criminal goes to all the trouble to write a ransom letter--inside the victim's home and spend an hour writing it--and to get inside the house to nab the child--why not proceed with the ransom collection anyway? No one is going to know the child is dead, so the parents will still be motivated to pay the ransom. Craziest of all, though, if the abductor lost his nerve and decide to scratch the mission, wouldn't he just leave the child or body in the house and scram? What motive could he/she have for staging a sadistic, complex murder in the basement? A strangulation that, as has been pointed out, would have to have taken a very long time with that elaborate strangulation device with all those knots and handles made from found objects on hand? Yes, the idea of impulse and creating a bizarre device that would take a long time to make are indeed diametrically opposed. They contradict one another.

And if it was a sex crime, why wouldn't the paedophile commit the assault and leave quickly, or leave fast with the victim? There is absolutely no advantage in  slowing things down by writing up a lengthy and unprecedented ransom letter IN THE VICTIM'S home. None of it adds up to make a cohesive picture. Each fact, each scrap of evidence, seems to contradict another.  There isn't one theory that explains all the details in this case. Each one seems equally flawed as another.


#69    CuriousLittleOne

CuriousLittleOne

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 389 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 27 April 2013 - 05:04 PM

View Postdekker87, on 22 March 2013 - 04:39 PM, said:

the McCanns were vilified because they are middle class, articulate and educated...and yet 'failed' to look after their kids...it's a british class thing that probably doesn't translate very well....

we don't celebrate success like you do in the states...it's kind of like that crabs in a barrel ghetto analogy....


as above really, thats how our society are these days, in my opinion, the parents are at fault, and im still not convinced that they did not do it as Shannon matthews case shows,

Shannon Louise Matthews (born 9 September 1998) is a British girl who disappeared on the afternoon of 19 February 2008 in Dewsbury, West Yorkshire, England.[1] The search for her became a major missing person police operation which was compared to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.[2] She was found on 14 March 2008 at a house in Batley Carr, a short distance from Dewsbury. The house belonged to 39-year-old Michael Donovan, uncle of Craig Meehan - the boyfriend of her mother, Karen.
Donovan - also known as Paul Drake - was arrested at the scene, and charged with kidnapping and false imprisonment.[3][4] Matthews's mother was charged with child neglect and perverting the course of justice on 8 April 2008. The joint trial of Donovan and Karen Matthews at Leeds Crown Court commenced on 11 November 2008[5] and concluded on 4 December with both defendants found guilty of kidnapping, false imprisonment, and perverting the course of justice.[6] They were both given eight-year prison sentences.[7] Karen Matthews's boyfriend Meehan was convicted on several accounts of possessing child pornography, discovered on his computer during the investigation, but otherwise unrelated to the kidnapping.[8]




http://en.wikipedia....hannon_Matthews



but on topic, this poor little girl.......i believe ... that there is a possibility that the house was "scoped out" maybe???? prior, if the house was known before then the killer needed to not bring in any other tools as he knew they were where they were, and he could have got in by the broken window and snooped around either a previous night, or when the family were out....... i assume there was no alarm system in the house?

according to : http://jonbenetramse... of an Intruder

Ramseys "have indicated that their house was not secure during the night of December 25, 1997, (was it a regular thing to leave the house not secure of did it just lapse that night???, most alarms blink or sound when they are turned on and off, if the house was being watched , the killer/s would know what times the family went to sleep and could guarentee pretty much when they would go to bed...)and that they had not turned their security alarm on. and "at least seven windows and one door were found "open" on the morning of December 26, 1997. (SMF P 126; PSMF P 126.)" (Carnes 2003:86) "The term "open" was not defined. It is, therefore, not clear if the entrances were ajar or unlocked."

hummm, so now im thinking did they close all the doors as a routine at nighttime, if they did then it would be quite interesting........


but what really confuses me is the double knickers...why so big, why 2 ? wearing 2 hardly stops a little ones accidents

Edited by CuriousLittleOne, 27 April 2013 - 05:52 PM.

Posted Image

#70    Antilles

Antilles

    NCC-1701

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,178 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:2nd star from the left

Posted 28 April 2013 - 06:39 AM

The only reason I can think of is that Patsy really, really didn't want JonBenet wetting the bed. That, to me, is a reason to believe her story and in her innocence. You wouldn't kill your child because she wet your bed, then dress her in diapers/whatever. And no-one ever accused Patsy of being stupid or mentally unbalanced.


#71    CuriousLittleOne

CuriousLittleOne

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 389 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 28 April 2013 - 07:44 AM

on this site: http://b.heart.50meg.../ramsey/Images/

just wondering who this man is???

http://b.heart.50meg...es/2-8-2002.jpg
http://b.heart.50meg...es/2-9-2002.jpg

Posted Image

#72    CuriousLittleOne

CuriousLittleOne

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 389 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 28 April 2013 - 07:48 AM

View PostAntilles, on 28 April 2013 - 06:39 AM, said:

The only reason I can think of is that Patsy really, really didn't want JonBenet wetting the bed. That, to me, is a reason to believe her story and in her innocence. You wouldn't kill your child because she wet your bed, then dress her in diapers/whatever. And no-one ever accused Patsy of being stupid or mentally unbalanced.

but two layers of thin cotton or whatever the knickers were made of hardly stop or absorb the liquid???? i can partly see where you are comming from and i dont believe the mother did it.

Posted Image

#73    CuriousLittleOne

CuriousLittleOne

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 389 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 28 April 2013 - 11:16 AM

anyone seen this documentary?



nice one for newbies to sink into and get facts

Posted Image

#74    CuriousLittleOne

CuriousLittleOne

    Extraterrestrial Entity

  • Member
  • PipPipPip
  • 389 posts
  • Joined:31 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:UK

Posted 28 April 2013 - 02:06 PM

or this one?

*snip*

Edited by Saru, 29 April 2013 - 09:22 AM.
Video removed due to content / copyright

Posted Image

#75    Antilles

Antilles

    NCC-1701

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,178 posts
  • Joined:23 Jul 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:2nd star from the left

Posted 29 April 2013 - 11:14 AM

View PostCuriousLittleOne, on 28 April 2013 - 11:16 AM, said:

anyone seen this documentary?



nice one for newbies to sink into and get facts

Thanks for the vid. It still remains so obvious that the Boulder Police destroyed any pertinent evidence and in that way, set the Ramseys up as prime suspects.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users