Comments
1 - 20 of 162 Comments Last updated May 2, 2013
First Prev
of 9
Next Last
Tasha

Hunter, OK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Feb 15, 2006
 

Judged:

2

2

2

I think that JonBenet's parents killed her. I think that her mom was jealous that her daughter was getting all the attention and decided to kill her.
Alexis

Nashville, TN

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Mar 8, 2006
 

Judged:

2

1

1

If she was jealous she shouldn't of put her in beauty pageants! She was a pretty little girl and of course was gonna get alot of attention. Hert mom was a dumb old B*tch!
tia

Brooklyn, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Mar 9, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

that's funny but i think it it true i really want to find out who did it!!!
jen

Fort Dodge, IA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Mar 15, 2006
 

Judged:

2

1

1

i think her parents did kill her. because if everyone would pay attention to all the informationand look at all the evidence her dad had messed up by picking her up he just destoyrd eveything just like he wanted so no one could find out they killed their own little girl. and her mom is just stupid for being jealus anyways of course jonbenet is pretty and yes she is gonna get a lot of attention. i would love to find out why her parents would do such a thing to a cute little girl that they brought in to this world.

Since: Jan 06

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Mar 27, 2006
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Someone killed JonBenet - and after 6 years of going after the parents, the investigators have changed direction and are looking for an intruder.

The killer used a stun gun -- the ramseys didn't have one, none wasfound in the house -- the killer carried it in and out with him.

The killer wrte a LONG ransom note -- and the handwriting didn't belong to anyone in the family.

The killer used flat white nylon cord to make a garrote -- and that matched nothing in the house. Where is the rest?

The killer used black duct tape -- made in November in NC so it was fairly new. It matched nothing in the Ramsey house and no one ever saw them with any tape like that.

The killer had Hi-Tec boots -- the Ramseys didnot.

The killer left his DNA under her nails and in her panties -- it didn't belong to the parents.

The killer is still out there -- maybe still in Boulder. Please do't let him put other babies in danger by simply going for the parents when the evidence points elsewhere.
Little

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Mar 27, 2006
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Where is the proof that the Ramseys did not compose the note, that they did not dispose of the cord and tape, that the DNA belongs to the person responsible for JonBenet's death, that the Hi-Tec boot print is linked to anyone associated with her death, and that JonBenet was stun gunned? There just isn't any proof of those assertions.

The only item that's not guesswork or spin is that the killer is still out there.
your wrrrooonnnggg

Downingtown, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Mar 30, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Little wrote:
Where is the proof that the Ramseys did not compose the note, that they did not dispose of the cord and tape, that the DNA belongs to the person responsible for JonBenet's death, that the Hi-Tec boot print is linked to anyone associated with her death, and that JonBenet was stun gunned? There just isn't any proof of those assertions.

The only item that's not guesswork or spin is that the killer is still out there.
There is no motive that would have caused the girls own parents to kill her on christmas eve. The mother was the one entering her daughter in beauty pagents, she wansn't jealous of a 6 year old baby. The person who murdered Jonbenet knew the father. He did not particularly like the father. He knew they had money and there was a reason why they asked for $118,000. It just doesn't make enough sense for the parents to be the killers. I have been researching this topic for a long time now, and things just dont add up. It was someone outside of the family. Someone that knew them, maybe not very well, but well enough. The police department did a horrible job investigating and if Denver police department had interveined, the turnout could have been different. It's ashame what happened to this little girl, but her parents were not the ones who did it. I want proof. Cold hard proof before i hear anyone else say it was her parents. You can't give me the proof, then stop accusing innocent people.
Little

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Mar 30, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Well, proof is the optimum word here.

Incidentally, my pointing out that there is no proof that the note could not have been composed by people who lived in the home and had access to every item is not accusing them, it's pointing out a fact.

I too think it is quite out of the realm that JonBenet was purposely killed by either of her parents.

As for accusing innocent people, there's a lot of that going around. Only one person can be responsible. Until there is some "proof" that it was someone inside or outside the family unit I will keep my options open if you don't mind. And even if you do mind it really doesn't matter to me.

You are right about things not adding up, although I can only assume we are using different calculation.

There are a lot of people who have done their homework, documented and catalogued information in this case. I dare say they take their work seriously and it will take someone who can debate and constructively contribute to a discussion to earn their interest in an opinion.
Sabrina

Middleville, NY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Apr 1, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Her parents killed her. That's why in the morning her father went down and 'contaminated' the evidence. When he really just contaminated his own evienece..If he hadn't gone down, his DNA would be on her. And they would know it was him. But by bring her upstairs it makes it seem like there is no DNA evidence. And her mom was jealous because JonBenet was living her dream.
So Sad in California

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Apr 3, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I just hope that this little girls killer is dying of guilt. No matter what God knows the truth and she is now an angel.
Michelle

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Apr 8, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

"The killer used a stun gun -- the ramseys didn't have one, none wasfound in the house -- the killer carried it in and out with him."

Actually, the marks aren't from a stun gun. Forensic pathologists have said that they don't resemble stun gun marks at all. But they DO look like the kind of mark being thrown against the wall above her bed would leave.

"The killer wrte a LONG ransom note -- and the handwriting didn't belong to anyone in the family."

Actually, the writing was a match for Patsy's. The killer would have had to sit down, and write this note, which btw had been practised. The note mentions the amount of Mr. Ramsey's recent bonus, which only someone who had seen his paycheck or bank account would have known.

"The killer used flat white nylon cord to make a garrote -- and that matched nothing in the house. Where is the rest?"

Look at JonBenet's cowgirl costume. The rest of the flat nylon cord is in Patsy Ramsey's sewing kit. It was used to make the white trim.

"The killer used black duct tape -- made in November in NC so it was fairly new. It matched nothing in the Ramsey house and no one ever saw them with any tape like that."

Actually, that kind of tape is sold to artists, like Patsy. There was some of it on the back of a painting that Patsy had taken out of the house quickly. You don't think the Ramseys could dispose of a roll of duct tape?

"The killer had Hi-Tec boots -- the Ramseys didnot."

The son did.

"The killer left his DNA under her nails and in her panties -- it didn't belong to the parents."

What the report really said is that it wasn't a conclusive match. The parents took great care to mess up all the fiber evidence. There is evidence JonBenet was sexually abused, but this does not mean there was an intruder in the house, or that the sexual abuser killed her.

It means that JonBenet's parents, in addition to covering up their daughter's murder, also allowed someone to sexually molest her, and are protecting that person.

Note the brother's complete lack of surprise at seeing his dead sister's body under the Christmas tree.

"The killer is still out there -- maybe still in Boulder. Please do't let him put other babies in danger by simply going for the parents when the evidence points elsewhere."

There was no intruder. The DNA either belongs to the brother, or to someone the Ramseys actually allowed to take advantage of their daugher, probably for money.

An intruder isn't likely to change his victim's clothes, clean her up, or feed her pineapple beforehand, nor write a long note afterwards instead of getting out of there fast.

Nor is he likely to leave the body behind, if his victim is dead. He's more likely to take it with him and stash it where it will never be found.
Leia

Middleboro, MA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Apr 9, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

No I think it was her brother Burke because he was jealouse that she was getting all the attention or it was John Ramsey's e wife becuase she was jealose that he left her and now his new daughter is a beauty queen at the age of 6!
SONIA WILLIAMS

UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Apr 11, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I STARTED STUDYING THIS CASE LAST DEC THIS IS SO SAD SHE WAS BEAUTIFULI HOPE THEY CATCH THEM AT 1ST I THOUGHT PATSY WAS GUILTY NOW I THINK THE HOUSE WAS SO BIG THERE WAS AN INTRUDOR I HAVE SEEN PATRY WRITING IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE THE WRITING ON THE NOTE
kiki

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Apr 11, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I think her parents killed her because it sounds really suspicious. I think she was a cute innocente little gir. She didn't deserve to be killed.I hope soon they find out who really murdered her.

Since: Jan 06

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Apr 14, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Sabrina wrote:
Her parents killed her. That's why in the morning her father went down and 'contaminated' the evidence. When he really just contaminated his own evienece..If he hadn't gone down, his DNA would be on her. And they would know it was him. But by bring her upstairs it makes it seem like there is no DNA evidence. And her mom was jealous because JonBenet was living her dream.
He found her body 7 hours after he had his wife call 911. He found her body after a detective told him and his friend to search the house.

A man's DNA ws found on the body - mixed with her blood in her panties -- and it didn't belong to the father.

Patsy wasn't jealous of her daughter - she was proud.

Why so vicious and ready to condemn the parents? The EVIDENCE points to an intruder. A federal judge said so and the Boulder DA agreed.

Please look at the case again -- get the facts before you hurt innocent people and let a killer go free.
Little

Grove City, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Apr 15, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

The federal judge made her ruling based only on Lou Smit's thoughts on the case. Surely anyone who has followed this case would have to agree that his opinions are hardly unbiased. The findings of the BPD were not included, and this federal judge's ruling was based upon a very limited scope of the case brought before her. The Ramsey attorney has made his reputation on his admittedly excellent skills in civil court.

Agreed here: "Please look at the case again -- get the facts before you hurt innocent people and let a killer go free."

Both sides would be well-advised to consider this.
Autumn

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Apr 15, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Can anyone put the evidence into a scenario that explains why normal, wealthy, loving parents killed their daughter and conspired to cover it up?

This wasn't an accident, this child was violently murdered after some possible form of sexual assault. The method of strangulation was slow and very painful to this small little girl, it was also consistent with a struggle due to the scratches on her neck and her own skin being found under her fingernails along with the unidentified male DNA. The head wound shows that she received it at or near death, there wasn't enough time between the supposed accident that caused a head wound that needed to be covered up and the child's death to take the time it took to make that garrotte. The swelling of the head wound proves that it happened at or right before TOD. If this is a sex game with a parent, the parent would have complete control with the garrotte, and if she was accidentally killed playing sex games and they wanted to cover it up, they wouldn't need to hit her on the head too. It doesn't make sense.
No matter how hard you look at the BPD's case against the parents, you can't find a scenario that fits with the evidence. They said it was a bed wetting episode and Patsy freaked. OK so lets take JBR's sheets and get a urine sample. Wait there isn't any urine on them, so we are supposed to believe Patsy killed her daughter cause she might wet the bed? Then there is the JBR didn't want to wear the outfit her mom picked out scenario. Let's examine that with one question. What did JBR wear to the Whites that night? Hmm. well, she wore what she wanted to wear, not what her mom wanted her to wear, so who controlled who in their relationship? The person who wrote that ransom note and killed JBR is a person who needs to be in control. Patsy's actions that night and before this crime show you that she didn't have that need. Whoever killed JonBenet would have made her wear whatever they wanted her to wear. John Ramsey never showed one bit of interest in what his children wore and Patsy was able to throw an unexpected party two days before Christmas and there are plenty of other instances in their home where she made decisions everyday without John's permission. A man that controls his house the way this killer would need to. Would have had more of a role in what his family was doing or how his money was being spent and they definitely would need his permission to do what Patsy and the children did freely on a daily basis. If you look at their houses, the way they were decorated said Patsy made the decisions concerning the way the house looked not John...
No parent would need to use a garrotte or any other weapon to control their child. Ask anybody who was abused by their parents as a child the fear is constant.

Just maybe a teenager in an abusive home might be a threat and maybe someone might feel the need to control them with such a device as they have size and weight to contend with, but not this tiny six year old girl. It just doesn't make sense that these parents would use this manner of death. This child was not afraid to tell her Mom NO! about her outfit, because she was not afraid of the consequences of her actions in doing so.. But you say she took the child to a party then woke her up in the middle of the night strangled and bashed her head in, then wrote a calm 3 page ransom note wiped finger prints off items in her own home where her finger prints were expected to be then fixed her make up and made an academy award winning 911 call??? That may be Lifetime movie of the week worthy, but in Reality, it just doesn't make sense. Think of the 911 call you clearly hear Patsy saying please help me Jesus in the background.
She isn't saying please forgive me Jesus.. She is asking for help and that tells me she still had hope...
Autumn

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Apr 15, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Let's say the motive was ransom by an intruder. Maybe JBR wasn't really supposed to die. 118,000.00 is a lot of money to your average person, but not to the Ramsey's. If I were going to ask for ransom from a wealthy family if money is my real motive. Then I am going to ask for as much as I think I can get without the parents notifying police. 118,000.00 should have been easy for the man of a billion dollar company to come up with quickly. The note writer makes a point of telling them to bring the money home and be rested for the ransom drop. The note writer also says that they will call tomorrow. Based on those statements the writer is saying bring the money home and get some rest before the ransom drop. It makes it seem that tomorrow would be the 27th then since the note only gives an hour and a half for John Ramsey to get the money and get some rest before the call on the 26th and that time frame is only if the writer knew what time the Ramsey's would be waking up and finding the note. Otherwise it's an even shorter time frame for the instructions to be followed to the letter, before an 8 or 10 am call on the 26th. The note writer is so detailed and specific on the getting of the ransom money, but you might think it doesn't occur to the writer that most banks don't even open until 8:00 am or later, unless of course the Ramsey's have until the 27th to get it. So that must be it. The writer is telling John that he has until the 27th to come up with the ransom demand. Why is the note written to John and not both Ramsey's, Maybe it is because John was a bigger threat to the kidnapper and he wanted John out of the house since the kidnapper felt confident that he could handle Patsy if the need arose. Remember how the note seemed to reveal familiarity of the writer to certain movies like Ransom, speed and dirty Harry. What do all of those movies have in common? The good guy always outsmarts the bad guy, So removing John the main threat or "the good guy" by sending him out of the house makes more sense than having Patsy leave. Meanwhile the kidnapper/killer is in the basement holding JonBenet
controlling her with the garrotte thinking that the Ramsey's will gets the ransom without thinking to search the house for JBR since no kidnapper has ever held anyone in the persons own house and when the family goes to sleep or tries to get the rest that was suggested the kidnapper takes the ransom and leaves the child and everybody is happy. That could be the perfect kidnapping. Now ask yourself this, what would your child do if they were being held by a stranger in a dingy basement room. Remembering that it is possible if a stun gun was used on her in her bedroom and she was carried down while stunned she may not have recognized where she was being held. Now imagine that scared little girl suddenly hears her mom screaming from upstairs and starts fighting the abductor to get to her mom. The abductor begins twisting the garrotte in an effort to control the child, but the child fights harder and harder the killer keeps twisting the garrotte, eventually he grabs something within his reach and whacks the child on the head to subdue her quickly. knocking JBR unconscious, he places her on the blanket covers her with it & puts tape over her mouth to prevent her from screaming if she wakes up and maybe he then realizes that JBR is not breathing. He has killed her. Now he Panics hurriedly cleans up the death scene removing most of the items he brought with and quietly exits the house.
Autumn

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Apr 16, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1


[QUOTE who="Michelle
Actually, the marks aren't from a stun gun. Forensic pathologists have said that they don't resemble stun gun marks at all. But they DO look like the kind of mark being thrown against the wall above her bed would leave.

Actually, the writing was a match for Patsy's. The killer would have had to sit down, and write this note, which btw had been practiced. The note mentions the amount of Mr. Ramsey's recent bonus, which only someone who had seen his paycheck or bank account would have known.

Look at JonBenet's cowgirl costume. The rest of the flat nylon cord is in Patsy Ramsey's sewing kit. It was used to make the white trim.

Actually, that kind of tape is sold to artists, like Patsy. There was some of it on the back of a painting that Patsy had taken out of the house quickly. You don't think the Ramsey's could dispose of a roll of duct tape?

"The killer had Hi-Tech boots -- the Ramsey's did not."

The son did.

What the report really said is that it wasn't a conclusive match. The parents took great care to mess up all the fiber evidence. There is evidence JonBenet was sexually abused, but this does not mean there was an intruder in the house, or that the sexual abuser killed her.

It means that JonBenet's parents, in addition to covering up their daughter's murder, also allowed someone to sexually molest her, and are protecting that person.

Note the brother's complete lack of surprise at seeing his dead sister's body under the Christmas tree.

"The killer is still out there -- maybe still in Boulder. Please do't let him put other babies in danger by simply going for the parents when the evidence points elsewhere."

There was no intruder. The DNA either belongs to the brother, or to someone the Ramsey's actually allowed to take advantage of their daughter, probably for money.

An intruder isn't likely to change his victim's clothe, clean her up, or feed her pineapple beforehand, nor write a long note afterwards instead of getting out of there fast.

Nor is he likely to leave the body behind, if his victim is dead. He's more likely to take it with him and stash it where it will never be found.[/QUOTE]

LMAO Michelle,
Where are you getting your information from??? Everything you wrote above is wrong!
#1 I have never heard {before your post} that those marks could have been made by throwing JonBenet at the wall above her bed. That is the stupidest reason I have heard so far to try to explain them. Just so you know scientific evidence overrules speculation. I have seen numerous photos of deceased individuals that died with those same marks and you can trust me on this none of them died from being thrown against the wall above JBR's bed. However, they were all stun gunned!

#2 The writing was NOT a match for Patsy and we know that because if it was she would have already been arrested. I believe Patsy Ramsey scored a 2 out of 10 for being a match. 10 being perfect of course.

#3 Patsy's sewing kit??? Patsy didn't make JonBenet's outfits, she had a lady who made JonBenet's pageant costumes, but I have not seen one thing that say's Patsy Ramsey sewed anything for JonBenet to wear...
Autumn

AOL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Apr 16, 2006
 

Judged:

1

1

1

#4 The duct tape you refer to on the back of a painting was taken by police and analyzed it was NOT from the same roll. No other black duct tape was found anywhere in the Ramsey's homes, cars, plane or boat. I can think of plenty of uses for duct tape, but apparently the Ramsey's hadn't recently used the stuff and we know that, because none was found anywhere that could be connected to either of the Ramsey's
http://www.octanecreative.com/ducttape/duckvs...

#5 Show me where Burkes Hi tech boots are listed on the investigator's list of items taken from the Ramsey's houses, cars, plane and boat during police searches. I've never seen a pair of hi- tech hiking boots listed anywhere pertaining to the Ramsey's except the prints that were found in the basement and the police speculation that they belonged to Burke. There is not one piece of evidence that shows that Burke EVER owned a pair of hi-tech boot's and can I just add that the hi tech prints found weren't even Burkes size.

#6 Not a conclusive match, is what you are worried about. Guess what I'm not a conclusive match either neither are the other billions of people who didn't kill JonBenet. The DNA is NOT a match for the Ramsey's and neither is the hair and If you are worried about the fibers get over it. They lived in the house I'd be more worried if they didn't transfer fibers .... There is no proof of prior sexual abuse only speculation. JonBenet's Dr. saw her often and saw no signs of any abuse. Not to mention that parents who are abusing their children don't usually rush them to the doctors for the sniffles. Abusive parents usually avoid taking the child in for medical reasons for fear of discovery....

#7 Covering up for a pedophile they let molest JonBenet? Really why did they let him molest her? Was their 7 million dollar bank accounts not enough they needed to sell their daughter to a child molester for some extra cash??? Oh and BTW if she was molested with their permission I can almost guarantee that there would be no doubt at all that she had been being abused. You are seriously lacking a rational though process in regards to this case.....

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 9
Next Last

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.

Other Recent JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
What kind of instrument yields this type of wound? 22 min Undrtheradar 76
Note-odd detail? 7 hr Note 418
Lou Smit window video 16 hr Just Wondering 1
Jeffrey MacDonald Is Guilty (Sep '08) Mon Bunny 7,468
Jonbenet's "Secret Santa..." Mon Count 27
The London Letter Mon Bee 2
Doc Miller to be on Boyles 2/1/13 (Feb '13) Aug 21 Rupert 33

Search the JonBenet Ramsey Forum:
•••