Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Sig Turner

Sig's Forbidden Theory on the JBR Murder

77 posts in this topic

So far, I have been banned from three popular internet crime forums for apparent "unorthodoxy" and "thoughtcrime" after posting this theory which suggest that John and Patsy Ramsey were not the perpetrators of this heinous crime. It seems that in the world of internet sleuthing, it is heresy to suggest that the Ramseys had nothing to do with the death of their beloved daughter.

Sig's Theory (Here's what happened...)

This terrible crime was a burglary gone awry.

There are two perps: one male, one female, both young adults.

One of the perps is acquainted with the Ramseys, probably through her parents. She had heard that the Ramseys were leaving for holiday in Michigan over the Christmas break.

The female perp has a male friend, a latent sociopath and pedophile. For quite some time, this toxic upper middle class couple have been burglarizing homes in the area for fun and drug money.

It is Christmas Night, and the female perp is on the phone with the male perp. She sees the Ramsey's car pulling out of the driveway and mistakenly believes they are headed for the airport. They are, in fact, merely on their way to visit friends just a few blocks away. She tells the male perp to hurry on over so they can burgle the Ramsey home together.

However, by the time the male perp gets there and they break into the residence, the Ramseys have returned home from their Christmas visit. Indeed, the perps have barely made it through the living room when the realize that the Ramseys are about to walk through the front door. They quickly hide in the basement where they wait for the family to go to sleep. They are down there for a few hours. They try to escape through the grated egress but mistakenly believe it to be barred shut. Once they think the coast is clear, they ascend the basement stairs to make their way out. However, as they proceed through the kitchen they encounter JonBenet who has just bounded down the stairs from her second floor bedroom, perhaps to have a snack of pineapple, perhaps believing she had just heard Santa stirring about downstairs. Jonbenet recognizes the female perp who she knows by name. The perps quickly whisk her down the basement, perhaps knocking her out with a stun gun.

Down in the basement, the male perp starts talking about murdering the child in order to shut her up. Perhaps he has a lengthy criminal record and fears his next conviction will get him an extended prison sentence. Perhaps he is the darling son of a politician, judge, or law enforcement officer and cannot bear the shame of getting arrested. Whatever the reason, the male perp is dead set on not going to prison, and the crystal meth he's on is making him all the more psychotic. The female perp, who knows the child and is not nearly as sociopathic as her accomplice, tries to persuade him to kidnap the child instead. She goes upstairs where she finds pad and pen and sets to writing a ransom note, stealing lines from crime movies in a flimsy attempt to sound like a believable kidnapper and political radical. Unfortunately, by the time the female finishes the two and a half page note and returns to the basement, her sociopathic accomplice has already brutally murdered the child. She screams upon seeing the body. The scream is heard by neighbors as it bellows out the window of the grated egress. However, it is not heard by John and Patsy Ramsey who are fast asleep on the the third floor. The perps eventually make their way out of the residence, leaving the body of Jon Benet in the basement.

End of story.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem is that if a scream is loud enough to be heard by the nieghbours, then it's loud enough to be heard by the parents.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem is that if a scream is loud enough to be heard by the nieghbours, then it's loud enough to be heard by the parents.

Not necessarily. It all depends on acoustics.

It is also quite possible that there was no scream as this has never been a solid piece of evidence.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This "theory" relies on a lot of what-ifs. Could you explain how you came to this conclusion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This "theory" relies on a lot of what-ifs. Could you explain how you came to this conclusion?

Actually, it relies on logical inference, beginning with the ransom note which should not exist if any of the following were true:

A.) Kidnappers did it. Kidnappers would have taken JonBenet (or the body) with them in order to collect the ransom. This is the whole point of kidnapping.

B.) An obsessed homicidal pedophile did it. There would have been no reason to write such an extensive ransom note. He would have simply left the body and got out of there as soon as possible.

C.) The Ramseys did it. If John and/or Patsy killed JonBenet and wanted to make it look like a kidnapping, they would have dumped the body someplace far removed from the home.

Ergo, if the initial raison d'être for the perpetrators was not kidnapping, pedophilia, or filicide, then what could it have been? The most probable answer is burglary. They were there to burgle the Ramsey home and were discovered by JonBenet who could identify at least one of them to police. This explains the seeming schizophrenia of writing a two and a half page ransom note and then killing the intended hostage: These were not really kidnappers and they were not really murderers, but they became both once they were caught off guard by someone who could identify them, and were then not sure of their next move. Obviously, one of the perps was in favor of kidnapping, while the other decided upon murder.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are too many what ifs here. Show me some real proof. Yes I think that someone in the family does know something. But DNA has cleared the family.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, it relies on logical inference, beginning with the ransom note which should not exist if any of the following were true:

A.) Kidnappers did it. Kidnappers would have taken JonBenet (or the body) with them in order to collect the ransom. This is the whole point of kidnapping.

B.) An obsessed homicidal pedophile did it. There would have been no reason to write such an extensive ransom note. He would have simply left the body and got out of there as soon as possible.

C.) The Ramseys did it. If John and/or Patsy killed JonBenet and wanted to make it look like a kidnapping, they would have dumped the body someplace far removed from the home.

Ergo, if the initial raison d'être for the perpetrators was not kidnapping, pedophilia, or filicide, then what could it have been? The most probable answer is burglary. They were there to burgle the Ramsey home and were discovered by JonBenet who could identify at least one of them to police. This explains the seeming schizophrenia of writing a two and a half page ransom note and then killing the intended hostage: These were not really kidnappers and they were not really murderers, but they became both once they were caught off guard by someone who could identify them, and were then not sure of their next move. Obviously, one of the perps was in favor of kidnapping, while the other decided upon murder.

I am not bashing you, as I think out of the box most of the time, and I like when others do, as well. Your scenario mentioned in the OP... I just wonder at how you came to this particular conclusion.. What made you choose this particular scenario? ie., 2 people instead of one, etc.. Could it not have just been a pedophile who broke in, abused her, killed her (either by accident or on purpose), panicked, wrote the note, then fled? Or a pedophile who knew exactly what he intended to do to her, realized afterward that he hadn't thought the whole thing through before he enacted his plan and wrote a note? One thing I've learned is that not everyone (this includes homicidal pedophiles or murderous parents for that matter) will react to things in ways that make sense to others... For example: One mother may cry her eyes out if something happened to one of her children, while another will remain dry eyed and not shed tears publicly. We all know how we THINK we'd react, or what would make sense in any given situation, but we don't know for sure unless faced with it. Are we then to make assumptions about how a homicidal pedophile would react after committing such a horrible act? I'm saying that just because it may not make sense that a pedophile would kill her and then take the time to leave a note, it doesn't mean that one wouldn't do just that. I think it would have to depend on that particular person's mindset and quite a few other variables which we cannot even begin to fathom lest we actually had her killer in custody and could have psychological evaluations performed on him, etc. I'm wondering at your reasoning as to why your scenario has two people, instead of one, or even three... I'm wondering why you assume it would be a female who knew the family well enough to be recognized by Jon Benet along with a pedophile... Your scenario just sounds like a far-fetched fiction based on a factual event, rather than anything that is backed up with real facts, unless you are privy to actual events which occurred there (because you were there or know someone who was?).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not bashing you, as I think out of the box most of the time, and I like when others do, as well.

First off, I do not want you or anyone else to agree with me just for the sake of being friendly. I welcome all thoughtful challenges to this theory. After all, how can anyone have any confidence in a theory that has not been tested?

Your scenario mentioned in the OP... I just wonder at how you came to this particular conclusion.. What made you choose this particular scenario? ie., 2 people instead of one, etc..

I suspect very strongly that there were at least two (but no more than three) perps because the evidence suggests that there were. Indeed, the extensive ransom note vis-a-vis the body in the basement suggests that there were two minds at work, and that they were not on the same page. What is more, the ransom note was written by a woman, and yet the DNA of an unidentified male was discovered with the body.

Could it not have just been a pedophile who broke in, abused her, killed her (either by accident or on purpose), panicked, wrote the note, then fled?

Not likely. As mentioned earlier, such a perp would not have wasted so much time and energy writing a two and a half page ransom note. He would have simply fled.

Or a pedophile who knew exactly what he intended to do to her, realized afterward that he hadn't thought the whole thing through before he enacted his plan and wrote a note?

To be sure, all people are both rational and irrational. However, there are limits to just how irrational an otherwise rational person will behave, even in high-stress situations. What we are looking at with the extensive ransom note vis-a-vis the body being left in the basement is acute schizophrenia if this was indeed the act of single person; but schizophrenics are far too disorganized not to leave a slew of clues behind. In short, if this was the work of a schizophrenic, he would have been caught by now. No, this was the work of two people who suddenly found themselves in a situation which they did not anticipate and were not in agreement on how best to handle.

One thing I've learned is that not everyone (this includes homicidal pedophiles or murderous parents for that matter) will react to things in ways that make sense to others... For example: One mother may cry her eyes out if something happened to one of her children, while another will remain dry eyed and not shed tears publicly. We all know how we THINK we'd react, or what would make sense in any given situation, but we don't know for sure unless faced with it. Are we then to make assumptions about how a homicidal pedophile would react after committing such a horrible act? I'm saying that just because it may not make sense that a pedophile would kill her and then take the time to leave a note, it doesn't mean that one wouldn't do just that. I think it would have to depend on that particular person's mindset and quite a few other variables which we cannot even begin to fathom lest we actually had her killer in custody and could have psychological evaluations performed on him, etc. I'm wondering at your reasoning as to why your scenario has two people, instead of one, or even three... I'm wondering why you assume it would be a female who knew the family well enough to be recognized by Jon Benet along with a pedophile... Your scenario just sounds like a far-fetched fiction based on a factual event, rather than anything that is backed up with real facts, unless you are privy to actual events which occurred there (because you were there or know someone who was?).

Try not to be so timid with your inferences, dear. The behavior of most people is fairly predictable most of the time. Any dog can tell you that much. Remember, it is probability, not possibility, that is our essential tool. Yes, it is possible that this crime was committed by a pedophile with his pants on backwards; it is just not very probable. Let us first follow the path of what is likely and see where it leads us. If it takes us nowhere, then we go back and delve into the realm of the unlikely.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW: Your next question should be:

"It is a quantum leap, both morally and criminally, between burglarizing a home and murdering a child. Obviously, at least one of the perps was devoid of any moral compass whatsoever, but why would he risk a first-degree murder conviction over a burglary conviction? After all, a burglary conviction, especially a first-time burglary conviction, would likely result in a brief period of incarceration, perhaps even a mere term of non-custodial probation, while such a heinous murder could very easily garner a sentence of death (even in Colorado) if not a sentence of 'life without parole'?"

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer (and yet another question):

The perp who killed JonBenet was either of the following:

A.) A career criminal with an extensive criminal history, who feared an extended term of incarceration should he be charged and convicted of yet another felony offense.

B.) Someone for whom the mere shame of being arrested for burglarizing the Ramsey household was seemingly as unbearable in his immediate psychological perception as a charge of child murder.

Which do you think the more likely and why?

Edited by Sig Turner

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are too many what ifs here. Show me some real proof. Yes I think that someone in the family does know something. But DNA has cleared the family.

The solution to any mystery begins with asking "what if." We have to start somewhere.

What makes you think someone in the family "knows something"? What do they know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far, I have been banned from three popular internet crime forums for apparent "unorthodoxy" and "thoughtcrime" after posting this theory which suggest that John and Patsy Ramsey were not the perpetrators of this heinous crime. It seems that in the world of internet sleuthing, it is heresy to suggest that the Ramseys had nothing to do with the death of their beloved daughter.

Sig's Theory (Here's what happened...)

This terrible crime was a burglary gone awry.

There are two perps: one male, one female, both young adults.

One of the perps is acquainted with the Ramseys, probably through her parents. She had heard that the Ramseys were leaving for holiday in Michigan over the Christmas break.

The female perp has a male friend, a latent sociopath and pedophile. For quite some time, this toxic upper middle class couple have been burglarizing homes in the area for fun and drug money.

It is Christmas Night, and the female perp is on the phone with the male perp. She sees the Ramsey's car pulling out of the driveway and mistakenly believes they are headed for the airport. They are, in fact, merely on their way to visit friends just a few blocks away. She tells the male perp to hurry on over so they can burgle the Ramsey home together.

However, by the time the male perp gets there and they break into the residence, the Ramseys have returned home from their Christmas visit. Indeed, the perps have barely made it through the living room when the realize that the Ramseys are about to walk through the front door. They quickly hide in the basement where they wait for the family to go to sleep. They are down there for a few hours. They try to escape through the grated egress but mistakenly believe it to be barred shut. Once they think the coast is clear, they ascend the basement stairs to make their way out. However, as they proceed through the kitchen they encounter JonBenet who has just bounded down the stairs from her second floor bedroom, perhaps to have a snack of pineapple, perhaps believing she had just heard Santa stirring about downstairs. Jonbenet recognizes the female perp who she knows by name. The perps quickly whisk her down the basement, perhaps knocking her out with a stun gun.

Down in the basement, the male perp starts talking about murdering the child in order to shut her up. Perhaps he has a lengthy criminal record and fears his next conviction will get him an extended prison sentence. Perhaps he is the darling son of a politician, judge, or law enforcement officer and cannot bear the shame of getting arrested. Whatever the reason, the male perp is dead set on not going to prison, and the crystal meth he's on is making him all the more psychotic. The female perp, who knows the child and is not nearly as sociopathic as her accomplice, tries to persuade him to kidnap the child instead. She goes upstairs where she finds pad and pen and sets to writing a ransom note, stealing lines from crime movies in a flimsy attempt to sound like a believable kidnapper and political radical. Unfortunately, by the time the female finishes the two and a half page note and returns to the basement, her sociopathic accomplice has already brutally murdered the child. She screams upon seeing the body. The scream is heard by neighbors as it bellows out the window of the grated egress. However, it is not heard by John and Patsy Ramsey who are fast asleep on the the third floor. The perps eventually make their way out of the residence, leaving the body of Jon Benet in the basement.

End of story.

I like your theory and could see it happening that way.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To be honest, I rarely think of this case anymore. I am, however, glad that there are people like you, Sig, who are still willing to think things through - however outlandish your ideas may or may not prove to be - to get at the truth. JonBenet Ramsey deserves that, at least, no matter what one may think of her parents. I will continue to follow this thread to see where it leads, though I have no input myself.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have never believed that the Ramseys killed Jon-Benet and your theory is sensible.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

My problem is that if a scream is loud enough to be heard by the nieghbours, then it's loud enough to be heard by the parents.

this, but is there any chance that their (the parents) systems were contaminated with alchohol as they were in a very deep sleep??????

i very much enjoyed this view, im not so sure on the whole 2 people thing tho, surely there would be more evidence of two??? but the story makes sense as the alarm system was not activated for whatever reason that fateful night

what i want to know is how close are these neighbors??? so close that they were snooping around lol?

Edited by CuriousLittleOne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you asked, curious one. :yes:

http://www.examiner....nts-to-intruder

2003 US District Judge Julie Carnes.

Yes, a neighbor could have heard screams because of a vent leading out of the basement. No, the Ramseys could not have heard any screams 3 storeys above.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Experiments have demonstrated that the vent from the basement may have amplified the scream so that it could have been heard outside the house, but not three stories up, in the defendant's bedroom," Carnes wrote in her ruling.

well thats me shut up :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are too many what ifs here. Show me some real proof. Yes I think that someone in the family does know something. But DNA has cleared the family.

That's not quite true if you're referencing the DNA on the underwear. It is touch DNA which means it could have come from the factory or the packagers etc. The Ramsey's did this and the only way we are ever going to know specifics is if Burke ever steps forward. And no, I don't believe he did it. I'm a Patsy did it but John caused her to...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the Ramseys did not kill their daughter.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, the Ramseys did not kill their daughter.

And I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You know, Sig, you have some points of interest there. I can't say I agree with everything but from my own experience with burglaries, I have to agree. My home has been burglarized twice. Each time it turned out to be young people associated with the neighborhood whose parents I knew and who were on drugs. That would also explain why there were several personal references to the Ramsey's lives; one the military assignation and the other what is perceived as being close to John's bonus amount. I'm thinking here, maybe not personal friends with the Ramsey's but perhaps related to the help; e.g., a house cleaner might have had access to that information. So that brings me not to them but to their kids perhaps?

Two people really does explain why a long note talking about a kidnap and then a murdered child left on the premises. Although I don't know how you arrived at the fact a female wrote it. Where are you getting one was a female at all? Just because one might have had more of an instinct to kill than the other doesn't make one a female.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about the burglary theory a long time, and in the end, I rejected it. The JBR murder simply does NOT match any type of burglary gone awry I have ever heard of (or that experts in LE ever heard of, as they did explore that possibility). In the most extreme cases of burglaries gone awry, people in the home, or people returning home and surprising the thief/s, ended up murdered, or critically injured. In some cases, sexual assault/s occurred. There is no case on record where anything close to the JBR murder occurred. Who sits down to write a 3-page ransom note IN THE HOUSE in the progress of a burglary? In what planned abduction does anyone do that?

All people who worked in the Ramsey home in some capacity--sitters, house cleaners, gardeners, home repairs--at any time, past to the present, were closely scrutinized, and all were ruled out. Neighbors, close friends, family members, colleagues of John Ramsey, registered sex offenders, business competitors, even local homeless people--all were investigated and all ruled out. There were only a few people who knew the amount of JR's bonus, and there is no kidnapping for ransom case where the abductor demanded such an odd amount as $118k. Anyone who knew the Ramseys at all knew JR was a multi-millionaire. It only makes sense that a ransom demand would be a lot more than $118k. A million, $500,000, $250,000...if less than that, maybe $100,000. But $118k? It defies all reason unless it was someone who knew the bonus amount--someone maybe who got a lot less and was jealous or outraged. That narrowed it down to maybe two people--both of whom were investigated and cleared. The really disturbing aspect of the ransom amount is it has the distinct impression of someone trying deliberately to steer LE to fingering the 1 or 2 person/s who would be in the category of jealous or outraged associate. Who would deliberately try to frame someone? A person who hates the intended framee? Or the true culprit who wants to direct suspicion away from him/her to someone else? Someone specific?

But neither is any parental murder of a child resulting from an accident or an episode of disciplining gone way overboard fit with the circumstances of JBR's murder. There is nothing in JBR's murder that fits with any known crime scenario, past or present.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Usually the MO of burglary don't always end up killing, somehow there are some sinister to it, such as Ramsey's family knew this people and there could be some sort of socio clash and personal dislike between them which could happen to raptured someone's ego, which could lead to retaliation/execution style or some sorts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

one thing that sticks in my mind , is whoever killed her , knew the layout of the house, inside out.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.