Why leave a ransom note but not take ...
First Prev
of 12
Next Last
Taylur

Lone Jack, MO

#237 Dec 24, 2013
The interview is also discussed on this thread.
I figured it might be of interest to you, AK.

http://m.topix.com/forum/news/jonbenet-ramsey...
Rupert

Palm Desert, CA

#238 Dec 24, 2013
Why pineapple? Why not grapefruit? If there is an innocent explanation about the pineapple, then why oh why have we not heard of it yet? Regardless RDI or IDI, I think the pineapple means something. The Ramseys did say that an intruder could have force fed her pineapple. So they could have said Burke might have had some with JonBenet later as well. The pineapple evidence turned up later, subsequent to the Ramseys statement that she was asleep when they got home and they took her straight to bed. I will not discount the pineapple. If RDI, very well they lied. If IDI, it tells us something about the perp. Why pineapple?
Rupe

Since: Feb 12

Pearl City, HI

#240 Dec 25, 2013
Odra Noel wrote:
The entire case hinges on the pineapple.
Not really. There is the Ransom Note, the garrote, and the autopsy reports. Along with that, we have the police observation of "No footprints in the snow" and a timetable of when the Ramsey family left the White's house to the time of the 911 call.

Also, you have the fact that Patsy was wearing the same clothes she wore the night before, and was in full makeup when the police arrived.

Someone in the Ramsey family did it. If it was Burke, he had to have help with the coverup. As I see it, John and Patsy knew exactly what happened,
CC
Delta88

Lansing, MI

#241 Dec 25, 2013
The pineapple is useless in solving the case. She ate some, we know that. She must have eaten it from about 1/2 hour to 2 hours prior to her death.

The only connection we can make is that JR and PR, who are telling the police what they did upon returning home, didn't incorporate the pineapple into the story. There is really no reason to think the pineapple played any part in events leading to her murder.

There are two reasons the parents didn't include the pineapple in their story they told the police. 1. Both PR and JR were ignorant of JB eating pineapple. She may have simply grabbed a piece upon returning home, she might have got up later and had some with Burke. Burke may have brought a few pieces up to her in her room. The possible scenarios are many. The parents may have lied about taking her straight to bed, but that doesn't mean they knew about JB eating pineapple.

Or, 2. One of the parents knew about the pineapple and the other didn't. The one who knew naturally couldn't tell the other about it, thus it's not part of the story told to the police.

The bottom line is there is absolutely no way to connect the pineapple to the murder. We have no idea how she came to consume some pineapple after returning home from the party. It can't help us determine who the killer was.

If JR/PR were working together on the coverup, and even one knew of the pineapple consumption, it surely would have been part of the story they told the police. So, either both JR and PR are ignorant of the pineapple consumption, or one is ignorant and the other knows, but can't reveal knowing about it.

The pineapple is a dead end. It can't help solve the case, at least not without additional info about the situation in which she ate it. We don't have that info, and probably never will.

Since: Feb 12

Pearl City, HI

#242 Dec 25, 2013
Hi D88,
BTW, I owned one as a teen. It was a great car!

The pineapple is important to this case. The Rams never disputed that the Whites did not serve pineapple at their home. THAT, combined with the FACT that there was a bowl that contained some pineapple in it on the dining table is evidence enough, that JBR died in the home, which I think everyone will concede to.

Now, the parents say that JBR was sleeping when they returned home, and JR carried her up to her bed, then they went to bed. Either they were lying, or SOMETIME after they went to bed, JBR went to the dining table to eat the pineapple. JBR didn't have a history of sleepwalking, so either the bowl of pineapple had to be out on the dining table, OR, someone had to take it out of the refrigerator to put it in the bowl. AFTER JBR ate the pineapple, between 30 minutes and 2 hours, she was murdered. I think it would be safe to say, that the murder had to take place between 12 midnight that night, and 6AM that morning. In that time period, the murderer strangled JBR, beat her on the head with a blunt object, wrote the ransom note, and changed her clothes, then hid her body in the basement after wrapping it up with the blanket. THEN, if an intruder, he left the scene without leaving a trace of evidence except for some specks of DNA so microscopic that they could not get a full profile.

I must say, to even THINK there was an intruder is preposterous.
CC
snow tire

Carrollton, TX

#243 Dec 25, 2013
what about my bike?
not for two
snow

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#244 Dec 25, 2013
Taylur wrote:
<quoted text>
So what you're saying to me is that the fingerprints on the bowl of fresh pineapple found partially digested in Patsy's murdered daughter has no importance. I can somewhat understand where you're coming from, but it was fresh pineapple. And about the dishes being washed, LP stated that the Ramseys had a hard time keeping up with dishes. So I find your theory highly improbable.
"I always came in the side door, and I'd walk right into the kitchen and not know where to start. Dishes all over. If they had Ovaltine, the jar would still be open. I always had to wipe the peanut butter off the counter. "
The bowl was not dirty, nor would someone put pineapple into a dirty bowl. Patsy's figerprints were found on the bowl that she claimed no knowledge of. I have yet to hear one of you that are disputing the pineapple tell me why she lied. What's the reasoning?
The lie has not been proven; it is simply your interpretation of the evidence and it is that interpretation that is being debated.

Mrs Ramsey’s fingerprint, as I recall, it is a single print, only proves that Mrs Ramsey touched the bowl. It doesn’t prove that she knew anything about pineapple being put in it, and it doesn’t prove that she had anything to do with the set up (bowl/spoon/glass).

“Dishes all over,” LHP said. So, who knows how long that bowl had been out or how much time had passed since Mrs Ramsey last touched it.

Burke’s fingerprint is also on the bowl. One print from mother and one print from son, iirc. Did they balance the bowl between them, one finger each, or is it just that all other prints were smudged, smeared, obscured and otherwise useless?

“When a report reads "no prints,"…… means no prints of evidentiary value were preserved. It does not mean that the item was wiped down, or that no one had ever touched or handled it...…The term "no prints" does not mean that there were no marks or smears - it means that if any markings were present, they lacked sufficient detail to be of evidentiary value.”("Fingerprints: What They Can & Cannot Do!," The Print, Volume 10, number 7, June 1994, pp. 1-3.)

So, what lie does that one fingerprint reveal? None.
...

AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#245 Dec 25, 2013
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
The pineapple evidence is VERY crucial in this case. The reason is the timeline. Unless JBR was awake when they got home, it doesn't fit. No stranger would be able to feed JBR pineapple, so that basically knocks out the intruder theory.
CC
She didn’t have to be awake when she got home, she could have woken up later in the night and eaten it on her own without anyone knowing about it. Then, she went back to sleep.
...

AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#246 Dec 25, 2013
Taylur wrote:
The interview is also discussed on this thread.
I figured it might be of interest to you, AK.
http://m.topix.com/forum/news/jonbenet-ramsey...
Yes, thank you. I already have this interview and many others saved to my hard drive. I re-read the relevant portions as a prelude to engaging in this discussion.
...

AK
Butrt R

Germany

#247 Dec 25, 2013
I was there in Bouder,
So what do you want to know??

Check the kitchen door...
BR
docG

Pittsburgh, PA

#248 Dec 25, 2013
Taylur wrote:
<quoted text>
I can't even make sense of your dribble. If they were or were not in it together they would have a reason to lie. If they were innocent there is no reason. That's common sense. People lie out of guilt or to cover up a mistake. Yet again common sense. They lied about the pineapple, finding the body, the bed wetting, locking the doors, etc... Because it would poke holes in the Ramseys self made image. They made themselves out to be the victim from the start. That became only more apparent through out the investigation. I don't care if you're IDI, RDI, BDI, whatever. If the Ramsey's were guilty why would they lie? Why would they not spill everything in hopes of catching the killer of their daughter?
Taylur, you are assuming ahead of time that they lied and then basing your conclusions on that assumption. So in effect you are saying: since we know they lied, we know they lied. Well we don't know "they" (i.e. both Patsy AND John) lied. That's what we are trying to determine. And sorry, but there was no reason for them to lie about what happened when they arrived in the house after the party, and no reason to lie about when JonBenet went to bed and no reason to lie about her eating pineapple. If they are both innocent then there would have been no reason to lie about any of that. And if they are both guilty, then they would have gotten their story together before being questioned and there would have been no reason for them to deny feeding her pineapple. "Yes, JonBenet had a pineapple snack before we put her to bed." How would that be incriminating? How would that look suspicious?

It's only if one is innocent and other is guilty, and the guilty party is the one who served JonBenet the pineapple, that there would be a reason for the guilty party to lie. And that would explain why neither remembered anything about any pineapple. Because one was innocent and knew nothing about it, and the other was guilty and didn't want anyone to know he was the last person to be with her before she was murdered.

I'm sorry, but this just basic logic 101. Why is it so hard to understand?

Since: Feb 12

Pearl City, HI

#249 Dec 26, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
She didn’t have to be awake when she got home, she could have woken up later in the night and eaten it on her own without anyone knowing about it. Then, she went back to sleep.
...
AK
For that to happen, the pineapple would have had to already be on the dining table, because JBR could not open the door to the walk-in refrigerator. Leaving pineapple out at room temperature would increase the amount of acid, and decrease the taste a little, although it can be out for a few hours without spoiling.
CC.
icedtea4me

Saint Louis, MO

#250 Dec 26, 2013
Didn't John state that the alarm system had been turned off that night? If true, what physically impeded the intruder from carrying JonBenet out one of the doors?

Since: Feb 12

Pearl City, HI

#251 Dec 26, 2013
icedtea4me wrote:
Didn't John state that the alarm system had been turned off that night? If true, what physically impeded the intruder from carrying JonBenet out one of the doors?
There was no intruder. There is no evidence that definitively supports an intruder, and the intruder tale was created by Lou Smit and the Rams themselves.
CC

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#252 Dec 26, 2013
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
There was no intruder. There is no evidence that definitively supports an intruder, and the intruder tale was created by Lou Smit and the Rams themselves.
CC
You are correct. NOTHING would have impeded a intruder in carrying the body out of the house, except there was no intruder.

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#253 Dec 26, 2013
icedtea4me wrote:
Didn't John state that the alarm system had been turned off that night? If true, what physically impeded the intruder from carrying JonBenet out one of the doors?
It not only wasn't on that night, they didn't use it anymore, at least when the family was at home. JR stated that it would keep going off and waking them up (or some such thing). I don't know if the system was really faulty, or if the dog would set off the motion detectors, or maybe the kids getting up at night would set them off.

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#254 Dec 26, 2013
Bakatari wrote:
<quoted text>
For that to happen, the pineapple would have had to already be on the dining table, because JBR could not open the door to the walk-in refrigerator. Leaving pineapple out at room temperature would increase the amount of acid, and decrease the taste a little, although it can be out for a few hours without spoiling.
CC.
Exactly. And, maybe that’s the reason that Jonbenet only ate a small piece – the pineapple had been left out for hours and it didn’t taste good. So, she went back to bed and fell asleep.
...

AK

Since: Oct 08

Grande Prairie, Canada

#255 Dec 26, 2013
icedtea4me wrote:
Didn't John state that the alarm system had been turned off that night? If true, what physically impeded the intruder from carrying JonBenet out one of the doors?
The intruder probably never intended to remove his victim from the house.
...

AK

Since: Feb 12

Pearl City, HI

#257 Dec 26, 2013
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly. And, maybe that’s the reason that Jonbenet only ate a small piece – the pineapple had been left out for hours and it didn’t taste good. So, she went back to bed and fell asleep.
...
AK
Not sure about that. We don't know how much pineapple was left in the bowl, and we don't know how much was found in her small intestines. One thing for sure though, is almost everything fits in Steve Thomas' theory. JBR's bladder was empty, which means she urinated shortly before dying.
CC

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 12
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.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
New movie on the JonBenet Ramsey case 3 hr MakeTheArrest 98
What are all the old posters? Capricorn, Dan, T... 4 hr MakeTheArrest 13
Alex Hunter refused to indict a case BEFORE Jon... (Jan '13) 7 hr robert 23
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 11 hr icu2 315
Do you think that... 13 hr berrytea333 248
how many lawyers did ramseys have? 13 hr sheriffwydell 3
An interesting post about Patsy Ramsey (May '09) 13 hr okay1234 9
More from around the web