AngieM

AOL

#21 Dec 24, 2008
Henri, I really appreciate your posts. Even though we disagree I respect your opinion and hope I can learn a thing or two from you.

I have no interest in shooting you down in flames but have a question: If an intruder killed Jonbenet and took the panties as a souvenier or to remove evidence, why would he even bother putting a new pair on her? Rape and murder victims are often found naked. It's hard to imagine why an intruder who, after the crime should be focused on fleeing, would instead return to Jonbenets bathroom to get clothes to redress her in. If you can help me understand your thought process I'd appreciate it.
Henri McPhee

Bristol, UK

#22 Dec 24, 2008
Iím a little bit wary about being too definite, or certain, about some of my theories with regard to the Ramsey case. I wouldnít like to have to explain my theories in a courtroom, or even on TV. I hope they arenít strange beliefs. I really need some effective evidence to back it all up.

I just think you have to be a bit careful about always blaming these child murders on the parents. Itís not always the parents. Iím fully convinced itís not the parents in the Ramsey case, the MacDonald case, the Madeleine McCann case and the Midyette case. Iím not at all sure that the Darlie Routier case was a safe verdict.

There was some kind of professor doctor in this country a few years ago who always use to blame the parents for these cot deaths, or SIDS as I think itís known in America. He had doctor colleagues who agreed with him. They all have now been largely discredited by other doctors after several legal tangles and legal scandals in this country.

I developed my theories with regard to the Ramsey case many moons ago. I tried to get inside the boots of the JonBenet murderer, and I attempted to work out his criminal mentality. This can be difficult as Iíve never murdered anybody, and I donít have much wide and practical experience of it.

I tried to imagine how I would go about it if I was to try and murder JonBenet. The first thing I would do would be to carefully plan it, and research the house to see if there were any unlocked doors or easy point of entry. If I had been given a key by the Ramseys that would be just great.

I would then plan it so that suspicion was diverted away from me and on to the Ramseys. I might leave a suitcase by a basement window in order to confuse everybody. I might arrange a strange party that night so that I could have a bit of fun murdering JonBenet, and take her to that party for an hour or two.

I might leave a ransom note imitating Patsyís handwriting so that no tracker dogs would be called for to sniff around the back gardens.

I would of course wear some kind of gloves, like any clever criminal, in order not to leave any fingerprints.. That might well be some kind of close fitting latex glove.

Personally, I would plan it so that JonBenetís panties were substituted. A murderer canít be too careful. I would think that if JonBenetís original panties had been found by the Boulder cops those panties would lead directly to the murderer if examined by any competent DNA lab. Personally, I think that panty substitution was planned before the murder.

It wasn't a souvenir.It was to destroy incriminating evidence against him.

I agree that he wouldnít want to keep going up and down the stairs looking for a spare set of JonBenetís panties. He would want to be in and out of there as quickly as possible. So quickly in fact that he might have left behind an incriminating flashlight and Santa Bear.

I agree the lack of an edit facility can be difficult on this Topix forum when you are in a hurry. On some other forums they even correct all your spelling mistakes. I notice at the top of the page there is now a new search facility. Thatís useful because it can sometimes take me hours to find something I posted a year ago on this forum.
Rashomon

Germany

#23 Dec 24, 2008
From the Bonita papers:

"When specifically discussing the crime, he [Burke] related that he did not hear any noises that night and that he was asleep, but he admitted that he usually hears when someone opens the refrigerator door downstairs. Dr. Bernhard asked what he thought happened to his sister. Burke, showing the first signs of irritation during the interview, responded, "I know what happened, she was killed.Ē Burke's explanation to the doctor was ďsomeone took her quietly and took her down in the basement took a knife out or hit her on the head." He said that the only thing he asked his dad was "where did you find her body", a highly unusual query from a child considering the possible questions a child might ask about the death of a sibling.

Dr. Bernhard felt there needed to be more follow-up with Burke in the discussion of sexual contact. The only show of emotion by Burke, other than the irritation with the questions about the actual crime, was when Dr. Bernhard began to ask about uncomfortable touching. Burke picked up a board game and put it on his head an action indicating anxiety or discomfort with these types of questions and that there was more that he was not telling her. Dr. Bernhard asked Burke if he had any secrets, and he said,ďprobably, if I did, I wouldn't tell you, because then
it wouldnít be a secret."
AngieM

AOL

#24 Dec 29, 2008
Hi Henri,

I agree with you that not all child murders are perpetrated by the parents. I believe there is enough reasonable doubt int he Routier case that it should be overturned.

Also, while I believe in my heart that the Ramseys are guilty, I would not vote to convict them if I were sitting on the jury. The crime scene was totally screwed up which was the root of the problem.

So yes I agree that in all child homicides, the parents are not always to blame. I do feel that Jonbenets parents were either involved or helped cover for the killer. Their behavior is just too bizarre for words.
Nelly

AOL

#25 Dec 29, 2008
AngieM wrote:
Hi Henri,
I agree with you that not all child murders are perpetrated by the parents. I believe there is enough reasonable doubt int he Routier case that it should be overturned.
Also, while I believe in my heart that the Ramseys are guilty, I would not vote to convict them if I were sitting on the jury. The crime scene was totally screwed up which was the root of the problem.
So yes I agree that in all child homicides, the parents are not always to blame. I do feel that Jonbenets parents were either involved or helped cover for the killer. Their behavior is just too bizarre for words.
I have never been able to reconcile JR's tampering with the scene in the basement...especially since he was able to say what FW and John Fernie were doing down there, and what went on before LA sent them down there,,,so shock is not an option. That said, do you think his tampering with the scene is what screwed up the case? Or, are you one of those who puts it all at the feet of the cops?
JR said he tried to untie the BANGLE-LIKE wristcords because he "couldn't stand seeing her like that", yet the garrote was so tight her neck looked like an egg cup and he saw nothing wrong about THAT? In my book, the man DELIBERATELY tampered with the scene and he knows it!
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#26 Dec 29, 2008
>Their original story
I don't think there have been any changes at all in what JR, PR or BR have said.
>he will never talk.
He talked to the police, to social workers, to the grand jury... what more talking do you want?

>A 9 year-old boy from a less financial family,
... would have been questioned.
The police DID question Burke Ramsey both lawfully and unlawfully. They also observed and listened to the questioning by the social workers.
The police and social workers felt that Burke Ramsey had no fear of his parents and they made no attempt to have him removed from the home.
joejam

Sulphur, OK

#27 Dec 29, 2008
would he really bash her head in so hard that it cracked the skull in to? Was he to young to know it would not kill her? I mean come on. Someone killed this child and they meant it...to crack her skull in to two pieces.......
jahazafat

Portage, MI

#28 Dec 30, 2008
Every child with a cracked skull is not the victim of a criminal act. Head injuries are common in children due to their size and proportions. Statistics show most such trauma is accidental in nature. Falling off a bike, swing set, down stairs, in a car accident, or sports are common causes.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10632244

http://guest1.altec.org/ndsp/traumatic_brain_...

The only thing that would make Burke Ramsey incapable of inflicting the initial head trauma and brain injury is if he were dead or a quadriplegic. He is alive and doing nothing to help victims of murder, doing nothing to help look for his sisterís killer, just like his father John Ramsey.

Burke Ramsey changed his initial account of JonBenet walking upstairs, not being carried by her parents. Why? The report about him being asleep during the 911 call has also been altered. Why? The truth never changes but lies are made to accommodate circumstances. Burke was questioned at by police on 12/26 but his lawyers had this interview expuged. Why? What could he have possibly said?

http://www.geocities.com/pinker44
AngieM

AOL

#29 Dec 30, 2008
Nelly asked "I have never been able to reconcile JR's tampering with the scene in the basement...especially since he was able to say what FW and John Fernie were doing down there, and what went on before LA sent them down there,,,so shock is not an option. That said, do you think his tampering with the scene is what screwed up the case? Or, are you one of those who puts it all at the feet of the cops? "

I think it's a combination of both. The cops did not secure the crime scene...that is an unfortunate fact.....and that gave the Ramseys many opportunities to tamper with the evidence. John tampered with evidence int he basement and with the body. Patsy also threw herself on the body which could explain any hair and fibers of hers. None of that would have happened if the scene was secured. But I am not blaming the cops...just pointing out that they unknowingly gave the suspects an opportunity they shouldn't have had.
Right On The Money

New York, NY

#30 Dec 30, 2008
AngieM wrote:
Nelly asked "I have never been able to reconcile JR's tampering with the scene in the basement...especially since he was able to say what FW and John Fernie were doing down there, and what went on before LA sent them down there,,,so shock is not an option. That said, do you think his tampering with the scene is what screwed up the case? Or, are you one of those who puts it all at the feet of the cops? "
I think it's a combination of both. The cops did not secure the crime scene...that is an unfortunate fact.....and that gave the Ramseys many opportunities to tamper with the evidence. John tampered with evidence int he basement and with the body. Patsy also threw herself on the body which could explain any hair and fibers of hers. None of that would have happened if the scene was secured. But I am not blaming the cops...just pointing out that they unknowingly gave the suspects an opportunity they shouldn't have had.
patsy throwing herself on the body may explain fibers on the body at that time, BUT IT DOES NOT explain the fibers from her sweater underneath the tape that was STILL IN THE BASEMENT.
Right On The Money

New York, NY

#31 Dec 30, 2008
Nelly wrote:
<quoted text>
I have never been able to reconcile JR's tampering with the scene in the basement...especially since he was able to say what FW and John Fernie were doing down there, and what went on before LA sent them down there,,,so shock is not an option. That said, do you think his tampering with the scene is what screwed up the case? Or, are you one of those who puts it all at the feet of the cops?
JR said he tried to untie the BANGLE-LIKE wristcords because he "couldn't stand seeing her like that", yet the garrote was so tight her neck looked like an egg cup and he saw nothing wrong about THAT? In my book, the man DELIBERATELY tampered with the scene and he knows it!
Exactly Nelly. The rope was so tight around her neck it left its mark, and yet he disregards that and goes for the rope that is ludicrously loose on her hands. I think there was something like 17 inches between the hands.
Right On The Money

New York, NY

#32 Dec 30, 2008
AngieM wrote:
Hi Henri,
I agree with you that not all child murders are perpetrated by the parents. I believe there is enough reasonable doubt int he Routier case that it should be overturned.
Also, while I believe in my heart that the Ramseys are guilty, I would not vote to convict them if I were sitting on the jury. The crime scene was totally screwed up which was the root of the problem.
So yes I agree that in all child homicides, the parents are not always to blame. I do feel that Jonbenets parents were either involved or helped cover for the killer. Their behavior is just too bizarre for words.
There was more evidence to convict in this case than in the Scott Peterson case. I would have voted to convict Ms. Patsy Ramsey, absolutely.
Nelly

AOL

#33 Dec 30, 2008
Right On The Money wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly Nelly. The rope was so tight around her neck it left its mark, and yet he disregards that and goes for the rope that is ludicrously loose on her hands. I think there was something like 17 inches between the hands.
Hi RO:D Yep, the fact that JR was so lucid when he went to the basement (retelling the actions and words of FW and Linda Arndt before that and after that), tells me he knew what he was going to "find", and then once he 'found' her, took precious time to attempt to unknot those LOOSE wristcords that probably would have revealed HIM as the one who tied them. Her hands were not behind her back or in any position that was gruesome to look at, so his comment that he couldn't stand seeing her like that contradicts the REAL picture! The neck was grotesquely distorted, NOT her wrists.
He tied her up, IMO, then tried to untie/unstage her when it nolonger worked as a kidnapping gone wrong. Too many hours passed..at 6am, if discovered, would have made the scene more believable...by 1pm it looked stupid and staged.

Same thing about admitting he broke the window, since cops didn't catch it and question it, he decided to take it out of the equation.
AngieM

AOL

#34 Dec 31, 2008
Right on the Money said:
"There was more evidence to convict in this case than in the Scott Peterson case. I would have voted to convict Ms. Patsy Ramsey, absolutely. "

That's true but the problem Scott Peterson had was that there was no one else to blame it on. In the Ramsey case, if they were ever charged, Patsy could say "I didn't do it-it must have been John" and John could say "I didn't do it, it must have been Patsy'.

I am not a lawyer, but lawyers I have discussed this with say that is the #1 problem with this case....it could have been either parent or both....and because both were known to be in the house, each has the opportunity to blame the other. It should still have gone to a jury imo, but did stand a good chance they would be acquitted. The unsourced DNA alone could raise reasonable doubt and acquittal....then even if one confessed you run into double jeopardy issues.
FoolsGold

Bonita Springs, FL

#35 Dec 31, 2008
jahazafat wrote:
Burke Ramsey changed his initial account of JonBenet walking upstairs, not being carried by her parents. Why? The report about him being asleep during the 911 call has also been altered. Why?
Because he was nine years old! The cop who questioned him about the walked versus carried felt there was nothing deceptive about the manner in which Burke was relating the event; just a simple mis-statement by a nine year old. The parents reasonably thought Burke was asleep at the time; instead he was in his bed, resting quietly but not asleep, but this was unknown to the parents at the time.

Since: Mar 08

Location hidden

#36 Jan 1, 2009
FoolsGold wrote:
<quoted text>Because he was nine years old! The cop who questioned him about the walked versus carried felt there was nothing deceptive about the manner in which Burke was relating the event; just a simple mis-statement by a nine year old. The parents reasonably thought Burke was asleep at the time; instead he was in his bed, resting quietly but not asleep, but this was unknown to the parents at the time.
Right. Burke was "resting quietly" in bed while his parents were allegedly running around screaming, yelling and crying. It makes perfect sense that a kid would just lay there in bed nice and calmly while all of that commotion was going on. Come on.
Nelly

AOL

#37 Jan 1, 2009
thewhitewitchone wrote:
<quoted text>
Right. Burke was "resting quietly" in bed while his parents were allegedly running around screaming, yelling and crying. It makes perfect sense that a kid would just lay there in bed nice and calmly while all of that commotion was going on. Come on.
LOL WW! Yes, Burke was resting quietly because he's supposedly an idiot/genius. On one hand, he's a verrrrry slow 9 year old that can't remember the night before, and on the other hand, he's a bright star attending a highly esteemed college in Indiana. I would have to think Purdue has "special" classes for the likes of BR and other slow goers.
Brother! No wonder Burke doesn't speak--he can't! lololol
AngieM

AOL

#38 Jan 2, 2009
Thewhitewichone said: "Right. Burke was "resting quietly" in bed while his parents were allegedly running around screaming, yelling and crying. It makes perfect sense that a kid would just lay there in bed nice and calmly while all of that commotion was going on. Come on. "

I actually don't find Burke's behavior unusual. I was also an introverted child and can remember pretending to be asleep when my parents would fight or when visitors came who I didn't want to talk to. I pretended to be asleep or sick because as a child those types of situations were stressful to me. My mom was also an extroverted Patsy Ramsey type who would try to direct me to talk to company. "Tell them what you're doing in school, tell them about your soccer team". Things like that. I can see an introverted child being very overwhelmed by a mother like Patsy so that was probably Burke's defense mechanism.

I also believe that Burke had nothing to do with this crime.
koldkase

Smyrna, GA

#39 Jan 2, 2009
FoolsGold wrote:
<quoted text>Because he was nine years old! The cop who questioned him about the walked versus carried felt there was nothing deceptive about the manner in which Burke was relating the event; just a simple mis-statement by a nine year old. The parents reasonably thought Burke was asleep at the time; instead he was in his bed, resting quietly but not asleep, but this was unknown to the parents at the time.
JFI, Burke was a few weeks from being 10 years old, BTW, so it's more accurate to say he was 10 than 9. One year of growth at that age is a lot, though I concede he was still a young child. He was also much larger than JonBenet, comparatively. So there's that, just to be accurate on the facts that are relevant to the case.

As for Burke's "misstatement", we don't really know for a fact that he was the one making the "misstatement", do we? That's the problem with this case: between the three people in the home that night, we've gotten so many versions of events, how can anyone know what truly happened?

There is ONE TRUTH. People who tell the truth don't change it to ANOTHER TRUTH. The Ramseys changed their stories as often as they told them.

I know their excuses. That doesn't change the fact that their stories changed many times. It makes for a lot of confusion. End result: case cold.
koldkase

Smyrna, GA

#40 Jan 2, 2009
Oh, sorry, phone rang, got distracted and ended up posting "JFI" at the beginning of my last post, which was supposed to be "JFYI"-just for your information. I don't usually post corrections, but the placement and crazy way that came out, I thought you might wonder who I was addressing, FoolsGold.:-D

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What I believe is close to what happened 7 min Rangette 66
Karr's Christmas Message 19 hr Legal__Eagle 47
Chief Kolar's AMA on Reddit 19 hr Legal__Eagle 187
John Ramsey Role 19 hr Legal__Eagle 64
ICU2 's Child Trafficking 19 hr ICU2 176
SBTC--Victory Tue gotgum 38
Patsy's Ritual Abuse of JonBenet (Oct '08) Apr 30 Just Wondering 707
More from around the web