Did Jon-Benet Ramsay's brother kill her?

[TellyKNeasuss]

I disagree, because I think the timeline/narrative is a bit backwards.

I suspect the intruder was someone close enough to the family that his fingerprints would not be suspicious, anywhere. I suspect he probably had a key, and used it.

I think he cooked up the idea to kidnap the little girl, let himself into the house, found the paper and wrote the note.
Then he went looking for her; but I think the plan went awry when she found HIM. He was already jumpy and on edge, so he freaked and clocked her with something -possibly the flashlight, especially if he was using it to navigate the household.
He realized he'd lost his note, the little girl was unconscious, he had no clue what to do next and really muddied the water just trying to figure out how to get back to the original plan.
I think he molested her, then decided that things were just FUBAR, so he killed her, tossed a blanket over her and ran for the hills.

Terrible thing is: the muddy waters have made it impossible at this point to really determine who or exactly how it was done at this stage. No matter who we offer up, there will always be room for reasonable doubt.

In the meantime the killer is likely still out there, and quite possibly has made other victims -or will before it's all over.

Interesting. Though if he was a friend of the family, he would have been someone that JBR might have recognized. Wouldn't that mean that the plan would have had to have included killing her?

 

[DragonLady]

Interesting. Though if he was a friend of the family, he would have been someone that JBR might have recognized. Wouldn't that mean that the plan would have had to have included killing her?

Eventually, maybe. But I think when she saw him she screamed, and that's when everything started going wrong.

I think he expected to sneak in, find her sleeping, tape up her mouth, and walk off with her. Whatever he planned after that probably wasn't good -and I doubt he ever expected to get any kind of ransom.

 

[LTC8K6]

Does it take talent and smarts to not only leave no trace behind but also be completely confident that you aren't leaving any trace behind? After all, the intruder left behind the ransom note, the notepad, the pen, and the strangulation device; 4 items which the intruder handled that he could have taken with him without any problem but felt no qualms about leaving behind. If the flashlight was used, that would make 5 items. He also went to the trouble of putting JBR's underpants and leggings back on and covering her with a blanket, all things that were absolutely unnecessary and would have provided some risk of leaving a trace behind if he hadn't taken any precautions. To me, to have done all this and been confident of leaving no evidence behind reflects some amount of forethought.

I think a pair of gloves covers all of that, though.

 

[LTC8K6]

Why carry the bedding down to the basement? Why not just carry Jonbenet?

 

[DragonLady]

Wouldn't that mean that the plan would have had to have included killing her?

Thinking about that a bit more.... Refresh my memory, but wasn't she strangled with something he put together in the house? If so, then I think he intended to kidnap her alive, and I don't think it was ransom he was wanting. Either way, killing her probably was the intended end of the road.

 

[DragonLady]

I think a pair of gloves covers all of that, though.

Maybe, but I would think writing three pages wearing gloves would be difficult. Further, I believe there was some evidence of him, somewhere. I just don't think it was entirely unexpected, so he escaped being considered as a suspect.

A tutor? A person that helped with the pageants? A coworker who visited now and then? A friend-of-a-friend?

Someone on the outskirts, but known to be in the house, so that whatever evidence he left wasn't examined closely enough.

 

[DragonLady]

Why carry the bedding down to the basement? Why not just carry Jonbenet?

I don't know. Maybe he wrapped her up to make her easier to carry? Maybe he carried the blanket down before hand to make it easier to hide her in the back of a vehicle? Maybe he felt badly about killing her, and it was an act of conscience?

 

[LTC8K6]

Isn't the ransom note the most dumbest thing?
What killer/s hang around to write a three page essay asking for ransom and also why bother not kidnapping the child dead or not?
Whoever killed her that to me is the strange part.

I find the ransom note very odd, I find the pineapple info odd, the flashlight odd, and the missing part of the paintbrush odd.

I think that the strangulation occurred when Jonbenet was alive due to the marks on her neck.

Possibly the garrote was used initially in some sort of torture game? Where it was tightened until Jonbenet passed out, and then released so she would recover? Then she was eventually strangled to death with it.

As far as the term "bizarre"...well whoever killed Jonbenet is a bizarre person, so that fact that we see bizarre actions is to be expected.

I had not seen this pic before. Is this in fact her hand? If so, what are the marks from?

http://i0.wp.com/www.nationalenquir...16/05/jonbenet-ramsey-murder-confession-6.jpg

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I think a pair of gloves covers all of that, though.

Would you feel confident doing everything that the intruder that wearing gloves made it impossible for you to leave any trace of yourself?

 

[LTC8K6]

http://i12.tinypic.com/2qwhfzc.jpg

http://i0.wp.com/www.nationalenquir...16/05/jonbenet-ramsey-murder-confession-6.jpg

Well, one of these pics is altered.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I think that the strangulation occurred when Jonbenet was alive due to the marks on her neck.

Possibly the garrote was used initially in some sort of torture game? Where it was tightened until Jonbenet passed out, and then released so she would recover? Then she was eventually strangled to death with it.

It is my understanding that she probably never regained consciousness after the blow to the head. If this is true, there was nothing to be gained by torture.

 

[LTC8K6]

Would you feel confident doing everything that the intruder that wearing gloves made it impossible for you to leave any trace of yourself?

If I were a criminal, probably yes. They generally are not very smart.

 

[LTC8K6]

It is my understanding that she probably never regained consciousness after the blow to the head. If this is true, there was nothing to be gained by torture.

I believe there are fingernail marks on her neck where she struggled to remove the garrote.

So I think she was alive at least at some point while the garrote was being used on her.

 

[marplots]

http://i12.tinypic.com/2qwhfzc.jpg

http://i0.wp.com/www.nationalenquir...16/05/jonbenet-ramsey-murder-confession-6.jpg

Well, one of these pics is altered.

A little black light, a few filters... and a few hours with PhotoShop.

 

[LTC8K6]

I don't know. Maybe he wrapped her up to make her easier to carry? Maybe he carried the blanket down before hand to make it easier to hide her in the back of a vehicle? Maybe he felt badly about killing her, and it was an act of conscience?

But this blanket was apparently left in the dryer, it was not actually from the bed. So it was retrieved from the dryer and then taken to the basement. There was also one of her pink nightgowns with it, which was also apparently in the dryer.

https://adriaen22.files.wordpress.com/2015/02/jonbenet-pink-nightgown-e1424939633723.jpg

I suppose it's possible that the perp did indeed get the blanket out of the dryer, and picked up the nightgown accidentally along with it.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I believe there are fingernail marks on her neck where she struggled to remove the garrote.

Were the marks definitively identified as fingernail scratches?

So I think she was alive at least at some point while the garrote was being used on her.

She was alive. The coroner ruled that the strangulation killed her, but that she would have eventually died from the head injury.

 

[Segnosaur]

Why carry the bedding down to the basement? Why not just carry Jonbenet?

Well, if the initial goal was to get her out of the house (as some including myself believe), having a blanket to cover her makes some sense. Although it is night, there is no guarantee the street will be empty, and seeing a stranger carrying a neighbor's kid will arouse more suspicion than someone carrying a blanket.

I believe there are fingernail marks on her neck where she struggled to remove the garrote.
So I think she was alive at least at some point while the garrote was being used on her.

There was also hemoraging where the garrote was applied, so yes, she was likely alive when strangled.

Possibly the garrote was used initially in some sort of torture game? Where it was tightened until Jonbenet passed out, and then released so she would recover?

Could be. Or it could also be that the killer had an infatuation with the idea of strangling someone to death (it happens... killers get fetishes like that), and wanted to see what it was like to actually carry it out.

Then she was eventually strangled to death with it.

I don't think anyone knows for sure the exact order of events. (I don't think the autopsy report definitively rules either way.)

One line of thought was that she was strangled first, then finished with a blow to the head. (This theory was put forward as an explanation why there was little blood... the strangulation limited blood flow to the head.)

Another line of thought is that she was struck first (but the blow didn't pierce the skin), then strangled a little later (perhaps after waiting a while for her to wake up after the blow).

 

[Henri McPhee]

Or the wrong assumptions.


Here's the overview of the options from websleuths in all its glory:

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682461/December 26

They even quote a certain Henrietta McPhee on one page.

John Douglas doesn't think it was a kidnapping.

Part of the trouble is that these JonBenet internet forums is that they tend to be biased. It's just the same in the Jeffrey MacDonald case forums. I have been banned on several forums in the past, I don't think for any good or fair reason. Jameson's forum was always an intruder did it forum, but even Jameson thinks that Fleet White is innocent and she quite likes Fleet's pal Spade. That's absurdly credulous.

The FBI was mentioned by Judge Carnes in her 2003 ruling as arranging a media campaign against the Ramseys. That might include Fox News and CBS.

There was an FBI man from Denver who turned up on the day JonBenet's body was discovered, I think called Ron Walker, who made some silly remark that Patsy looked at him through splayed hands. I'm not suggesting Ron Walker was involved in the Lockheed Martin child sex ring, but the FBI's work in the Jeffrey MacDonald case included fabricated evidence and forensic fraud. Malone of the FBI is still under investigation by the Department of Justice for his bad police work and false testimony in many cases. The FBI needs to up its game and employ professional criminal investigators.

There is a bit about this matter from a recent internet posting:

"Sig wrote:
New rules at WS for discussing the JonBenet case:
"From now on, we will only discuss people who were in the house the night JonBenet died.
Kolar's book is THE handbook of facts and common sense conclusions in the JBR case.
Unless you can find something the police have not, we will discuss the only viable people in this case: John, Patsy, or Burke.
I am not stopping you from discussing your theory, just from discussing your theory at WS"
Well, at least ol' Pigface is no longer making a pretense of being unbiased.
Looks like Fleet White's personal friend Tricia, of Windchime pedo fame, has finally found a way to gag the few members left who stubbornly remain curious about her friend White's role in this case."

 

[Segnosaur]

Isn't the ransom note the most dumbest thing?
What killer/s hang around to write a three page essay asking for ransom

Simple answer... he didn't. He wrote the note before hand, with the initial goal of kidnapping her, but his plans changed for some reason (maybe she struggled more than he expected.)

and also why bother not kidnapping the child dead or not?

Once the child was dead, he could have left her behind because he was frazzled (killing someone would probably put most people on edge), or because he achieved his primary goal (causing harm) and didn't want to run the risk of accidentally being seen by a neighbor carrying a dead body around.

Whoever killed her that to me is the strange part.

Violent crimes are often strange. Things that may seem weird to you and me may seem quite reasonable to the killer.

After all, why did Jack the Ripper dissect bodies in the streets after his kills? I'm sure to Jack he had a reasonable explanation for his actions, but as a bystander we're left with just guesses and feelings that "its strange".

If we ever identified the JonBenet killer, we might find that he hated the Ramseys because they fired his dad, or that John ran over his dog. We might find that he got his ideas from watching 80s action movies, or watched snuff films. Until then we can only guess at his motives and reasons for his actions.

 

[Henri McPhee]

This is how the Ramsey case author Schiller in PMPT described the tunnel vision FBI man Ron Walker. The problem with Walker is that, like the Boulder Police Department, he jumped to conclusions and disregarded leads and suspects. You assume nothing in a murder investigation. It was never a complete investigation. It never went further than the Ramseys. Now it is Burke. The FBI never moved "outward in circles" as they are supposed to do so:

"At Boulder police headquarters, Det. Sgt. Larry Mason got a page from the Ramsey house: "We've got a body."

"Oh, *******," Mason said, half aloud. "Ron," he told FBI Special Agent Ron Walker, "it's a homicide."

Walker, an experienced FBI profiler, knew that finding JonBenet's body in her own home meant there had probably never been a kidnapping. In the case of a homicide where the dead child is found in the parents' home, the FBI's standard procedure is to investigate the parents and the immediate family first and then move outward in circles."

Edited by jsfisher: 

Edited for compliance with Rule 10 of the Membership Agreement. Naughty words get masked completely.