Jon Benet Ramsey

[Cruzer 1,995]

What amazes me is that note is the most obvious evidence indicating it was an intruder yet people want to say it was fabricated by the parents. The people that think that parents were involved, don't seem to explain why a rope with a garrote was used to very tightly wrap the girls neck and there was fragments of wood from the paintbrush in her privates too. How does that make things better for the parents? The cover up is even worse than the crime. Be better just to call for an ambulance and see it was an accident or son was upset but didn't mean to hurt her, but that's not what happened.

I will admit, I do have questions and pieces to still make sense of involving the family.

 

But as far as the note:

 

1. It was waaaaaaayyyyyyyy too long. Every professional profiler/criminal psychologist/investigator I've heard has stated over and over - ransom notes simply aren't 3 pages. Nor are they as detailed.

 

2. Will never be convinced the killer just randomly pulled a $118k figure out of his ass.

 

3. Have a hard time believing the killer broke into the house early - just casually lounged around for a while - took the time to rummage thru the house (discovering evidence of John's bonus amount) and then went full Charles Dickens in composing a David Copperfield length ransom note.

 

4. Then the strangest of all, with his note in hand and on the staircase, he kills her anyway.

 

Why leave the note behind then? At this point the note is useless, all it can do is tie you to the scene and murder. You're leaving your handwriting behind, hell - why not just sign it with your signature? ....... You keep mentioning 'diversion' as a reasonable explanation for the note.... The child is dead, at this point the only people who benefit from a diversion is the family.

[MDC 7,125]

I will admit, I do have even questions and pieces to still make sense of involving the family.

 

But as far as the note:

 

1. It was waaaaaaayyyyyyyy too long. Every professional profiler/criminal psychologist/investigator I've heard has stated over and over - ransom notes simply aren't 3 pages. Nor are they as detailed.

 

2. Will never be convinced the killer just randomly pulled a $118k figure out of his ass.

 

3. Have a hard time believing the killer broke into the house early - just casually lounged around for a while - took the time to rummage thru the house (discovering evidence of John's bonus amount) and then went full Charles Dickens in composing a David Copperfield length ransom note.

 

4. Then the strangest of all, with his note in hand and on the staircase, he kills her anyway.

 

Why leave the note behind then? At this point the note is useless, all it can do is tie you to the scene and murder. You're leaving your handwriting behind, hell - why not just sign it with your signature? ....... You keep mentioning 'diversion' as a reasonable explanation for the note.... The child is dead, at this point the only people who benefit from a diversion is the family.

Exactly.

[IGotWorms 4,057]

For most crimes, sure you lawyer up. Mistress turns up dead? Lawyer up. Kill someone with your car? Lawyer up. Your child is brutally murdered in your home? No, you answer every question they can throw at you and you tell the truth.

 

This pretty much proves you were never a cop. Not that anyone believed it, anyways.

[Gepetto 1,288]

Where is the rest of the duct tape roll? Where is the tip end of the paintbrush? - that the middle portion was used from to make the garrotte, and the tip end was never found. Where is the rest of the cord/rope? These were the murder weapons and the killer's favorite tools: duct tape and roll of cord - and these items were not found in the house. Maybe because the killer took those with them?

[IGotWorms 4,057]

Where is the rest of the duct tape roll? Where is the tip end of the paintbrush? - that the middle portion was used from to make the garrotte, and the tip end was never found. Where is the rest of the cord/rope? These were the murder weapons and the killer's favorite tools: duct tape and roll of cord - and these items were not found in the house. Maybe because the killer took those with them?

 

Where are you getting this from? You know who the killer is? Know his m.o.?

[Gepetto 1,288]

I will admit, I do have questions and pieces to still make sense of involving the family.

 

But as far as the note:

 

1. It was waaaaaaayyyyyyyy too long. Every professional profiler/criminal psychologist/investigator I've heard has stated over and over - ransom notes simply aren't 3 pages. Nor are they as detailed.

 

2. Will never be convinced the killer just randomly pulled a $118k figure out of his ass.

 

3. Have a hard time believing the killer broke into the house early - just casually lounged around for a while - took the time to rummage thru the house (discovering evidence of John's bonus amount) and then went full Charles Dickens in composing a David Copperfield length ransom note.

 

4. Then the strangest of all, with his note in hand and on the staircase, he kills her anyway.

 

Why leave the note behind then? At this point the note is useless, all it can do is tie you to the scene and murder. You're leaving your handwriting behind, hell - why not just sign it with your signature? ....... You keep mentioning 'diversion' as a reasonable explanation for the note.... The child is dead, at this point the only people who benefit from a diversion is the family.

 

Maybe the killer wanted to play it out and try to collect the money hoping the parents would not call the police or find her body down in that room in the basement.

[Gepetto 1,288]

 

Where are you getting this from? You know who the killer is? Know his m.o.?

 

I figure the killer normally used or uses a rope and garrote and duct tape to kill because that's what was used at the Ramsey's.

 

The source of the duct tape and rope were never found in that house.

[IGotWorms 4,057]

 

I figure the killer normally used or uses a rope and garrote and duct tape to kill because that's what was used at the Ramsey's.

 

Well that doesn't make sense.

 

I'm certainly willing to believe the outside killer theory but you've started from the proposition that it was definitely not the Ramseys. That proves nothing.

[Gepetto 1,288]

I have just read of other serial killers that repeat using the same type murder weapon.

[Gepetto 1,288]

 

Well that doesn't make sense.

 

I'm certainly willing to believe the outside killer theory but you've started from the proposition that it was definitely not the Ramseys. That proves nothing.

 

But don't you think it odd if the parents did it that the police never found the source of the duct tape and source of the rope in the home?

[IGotWorms 4,057]

I have just read of other serial killers that repeat using the same type murder weapon.

 

Well of course, everyone knows that. But unless you're saying you have some reason to believe it was a specific killer who liked using that weapon, it is meaningless.

 

Plus what's with the blow to the head? Somebody just really wanted to make sure she was dead?? She was five years old.

[IGotWorms 4,057]

 

But don't you think it odd if the parents did it that the police never found the source of the duct tape and source of the rope in the home?

 

Like they couldn't have dumped those items somewhere??

[Gepetto 1,288]

 

Well of course, everyone knows that. But unless you're saying you have some reason to believe it was a specific killer who liked using that weapon, it is meaningless.

 

Plus what's with the blow to the head? Somebody just really wanted to make sure she was dead?? She was five years old.

 

I don't know. You make a good point.

[Gepetto 1,288]

 

Like they couldn't have dumped those items somewhere??

 

Good point.

[Cruzer 1,995]

Maybe the killer wanted to play it out and try to collect the money hoping the parents would not call the police or find her body down in that room in the basement.

Well, maybe.

 

But the glaring problem with this theory is that the killer left her body behind... He has no idea if/when she would be found. How is he going to collect if they already found her? And doesn't he need time for them to sweat it out so that they may be inclined to pay? If so, you can't risk leaving the body behind, you have to know she will be found.

[MDC 7,125]

Well, maybe.

 

But the glaring problem with this theory is that the killer left her body behind... He has no idea if/when she would be found. How is he going to collect if they already found her? And doesn't he need time for them to sweat it out so that they may be inclined to pay? If so, you can't risk leaving the body behind, you have to know she will be found.

The other thing is, the kidnapper is going to try to collect a ransom without knowing if the parents know the kid is dead? Obviously the drop off becomes a sting if the parents know their girl is dead and the kidnappers therefore have nothing to sell.

[Cruzer 1,995]

But don't you think it odd if the parents did it that the police never found the source of the duct tape and source of the rope in the home?

Well not really... The only timeline we have is from the Ramseys themselves. They had all kinds of time do to whatever they needed before they "claimed" Patsy got up and discovered the stairwell note. And certainly before they called 9/11.

[Cruzer 1,995]

The other thing is, the kidnapper is going to try to collect a ransom without knowing if the parents know the kid is dead? Obviously the drop off becomes a sting if the parents know their girl is dead and the kidnappers therefore have nothing to sell.

I think both sides ask that assumptions are drawn, I concede this.

 

But one of them is that this "rogue" killer has to be the dumbest killer in the history of earth... Along your point, the killer knows she's dead. Why in the world leave trace evidence behind? This clown left a note, his handwriting, the murder weapon - and her body. He did everything but leave his card.

 

And then consider this:

 

1. The killer knew she was dead.

2. The killer knew he left her body.

3. The killer knew he left the note on the stairwell and would be discovered immediately.

4. The killer knew the panic and search would be on instantly.

5. The killer knew he only had so much time to get a ransom.

.

.

.

.

6. The killer, knowing he was on borrowed time, knowing his window to collect was going to shut at any moment - never even called the house to speak to the Ramseys, never made contact.... Isn't that whole point and process of a ransom? She was not discovered until 1:30 that afternoon - was he busy playing golf, meant to call later? When exactly was he planning on calling?

[Gepetto 1,288]

I think both sides ask that assumptions are drawn, I concede this.

 

But one of them is that this "rogue" killer has to be the dumbest killer in the history of earth... Along your point, the killer knows she's dead. Why in the world leave trace evidence behind? This clown left a note, his handwriting, the murder weapon - and her body. He did everything but leave his card.

 

And then consider this:

 

1. The killer knew she was dead.

2. The killer knew he left her body.

3. The killer knew he left the note on the stairwell and would be discovered immediately.

4. The killer knew the panic and search would be on instantly.

5. The killer knew he only had so much time to get a ransom.

.

.

.

.

6. The killer, knowing he was on borrowed time, knowing his window to collect was going to shut at any moment - never even called the house to speak to the Ramseys, never made contact.... Isn't that whole point and process of a ransom? She was not discovered until 1:30 that afternoon - was he busy playing golf, meant to call later? When exactly was he planning on calling?

 

He meant to call the next day, December 27th between 8 - 10 am to give time for John Ramsey to get the money. He said he (or they) would be monitoring him and if he gets the money early they may call sooner to arrange an earlier pick up of his daughter. He said don't call the police, and that he (or they) would be monitoring that as well. John Ramsey called the police, killer knows that, and killer then aborts the ransom plan.

[Gepetto 1,288]

Also, maybe the killer left the ransom note at the bottom of the stairs while he took JonBenet downstairs, so that if the parents wake up while he's there, they'll find a ransom note, and scream and run back upstairs to check her room, giving him at least a heads up (a scream) so that he can quickly exit the house and not get caught inside. Maybe after he killed her, he just didn't want to risk walking back up to get the note or he got nervous after she died and he just left as quick as he could. Maybe he planned to take her in the suitcase but it was too heavy, so he hid her behind the door in that cellar room and killed her to inflict pain on John Ramsey, and then quickly left. Because if she was too heavy and he had to abandon the ransom, he may have figured he couldn't extort John for money but he could still get at him by killing his daughter.

[Gepetto 1,288]

I think both sides ask that assumptions are drawn, I concede this.

 

But one of them is that this "rogue" killer has to be the dumbest killer in the history of earth... Along your point, the killer knows she's dead. Why in the world leave trace evidence behind? This clown left a note, his handwriting, the murder weapon - and her body. He did everything but leave his card.

 

And then consider this:

 

1. The killer knew she was dead.

2. The killer knew he left her body.

3. The killer knew he left the note on the stairwell and would be discovered immediately.

4. The killer knew the panic and search would be on instantly.

5. The killer knew he only had so much time to get a ransom.

.

.

.

.

6. The killer, knowing he was on borrowed time, knowing his window to collect was going to shut at any moment - never even called the house to speak to the Ramseys, never made contact.... Isn't that whole point and process of a ransom? She was not discovered until 1:30 that afternoon - was he busy playing golf, meant to call later? When exactly was he planning on calling?

 

Well I don't know if you can say the killer is dumb or smart, whoever it was got away with it. Maybe the killer was smart enough to leave all these confusing clues on purpose to make the investigation more difficult.

[MDC 7,125]

Also, maybe the killer left the ransom note at the bottom of the stairs while he took JonBenet downstairs, so that if the parents wake up while he's there, they'll find a ransom note, and scream and run back upstairs to check her room, giving him at least a heads up (a scream) so that he can quickly exit the house and not get caught inside. Maybe after he killed her, he just didn't want to risk walking back up to get the note or he got nervous after she died and he just left as quick as he could. Maybe he planned to take her in the suitcase but it was too heavy, so he hid her behind the door in that cellar room and killed her to inflict pain on John Ramsey, and then quickly left. Because if she was too heavy and he had to abandon the ransom, he may have figured he couldn't extort John for money but he could still get at him by killing his daughter.

A few lolz in here.

[Hardcore troubadour 14,930]

 

This pretty much proves you were never a cop. Not that anyone believed it, anyways.

Ha. Proves you never dealt with a criminal in your life.

[Cruzer 1,995]

He meant to call the next day, December 27th between 8 - 10 am to give time for John Ramsey to get the money. He said he (or they) would be monitoring him and if he gets the money early they may call sooner to arrange an earlier pick up of his daughter. He said don't call the police, and that he (or they) would be monitoring that as well. John Ramsey called the police, killer knows that, and killer then aborts the ransom plan.

Here's the problem with this story, it makes absolutely no sense - none. This angle is so ridiculous that it borders on absurdity.

 

- He meant to call the next day - bcoz he figured there was no way in hell they'd ever find her? He figured she'd stay hidden until they called the next day? He left the body there, did he really think they wouldn't search every inch and cranny of that house once a ransom note was found - really? That's so ridiculous that it's hard to type w/out laughing out loud.

 

- They would be monitoring - so they went thru the trouble of writing out a 3 pager, went to the trouble to set up a surveillance team and system, yet left it all to chance by leaving the body behind? Again, bcoz they figured they'd never actually search the house or look under the secret blanket hiding her body - really? Just how stupid are these people? The whole plan hinges on leverage and the family or cops not discovering the body you left for a day or so - it's amazing these people have enuff brains to tie their shoes.

[Cruzer 1,995]

A few lolz in here.

Yes, the masterminds behind this extravagant plan factored into the plot a "heads up scream."

Dear Gawd please tell me he's either sniffing glue or joking.

[MDC 7,125]

Yes, the masterminds behind this extravagant plan factored into the plot a "heads up scream."

Dear Gawd please tell me he's either sniffing glue or joking.

The heads up scream would enable the kidnappers to get in an out quickly! After composing their 3-page ransom note in the house.

[drobeski 3,061]

Where is the rest of the duct tape roll? Where is the tip end of the paintbrush? - that the middle portion was used from to make the garrotte, and the tip end was never found. Where is the rest of the cord/rope? These were the murder weapons and the killer's favorite tools: duct tape and roll of cord - and these items were not found in the house. Maybe because the killer took those with them?

the parents got rid of them ?

[Cruzer 1,995]

The heads up scream would enable the kidnappers to get in an out quickly! After composing their 3-page ransom note in the house.

I guess once the Heads Up Scream was enacted, the killer wasn't worried about being seen running or driving away from the house bcoz they had the Millennium Falcon waiting outside with an active Hyperdrive?

[Old School 360]

I guess once the Heads Up Scream was enacted, the killer wasn't worried about being seen running or driving away from the house bcoz they had the Millennium Falcon waiting outside with an active Hyperdrive?

i

 

You have absolutely no proof that didn't happen.

[MDC 7,125]

I guess once the Heads Up Scream was enacted, the killer wasn't worried about being seen running or driving away from the house bcoz they had the Millennium Falcon waiting outside with an active Hyperdrive?

He probably stayed just to enjoy the Heads Up Scream. After all, even if he could no longer extort John for money at least he could get at him by killing his daughter.

[Gepetto 1,288]

Forget that. Let us hear those of you that say the Ramseys did this. Explain it. What happened (including explaining the head wound, the strangulation, and the ransom note)? What was their motive?

[MDC 7,125]

Forget that. Let us hear those of you that say the Ramseys did this. Explain it. What happened (including explaining the head wound, the strangulation, and the ransom note)? What was their motive?

My guess is the dad was either molesting JBR or the son accidentally injured / killed her. Truly I do not know the motive, I just lean toward either the family doing it or hiring someone who did based on so many weird details.

 

I do know what didn't happen though. A kidnapper did not leave a ransom letter as a scream alarm. You should slap yourself for even typing such a dumb theory.

[Gepetto 1,288]

My guess is the dad was either molesting JBR or the son accidentally injured / killed her. Truly I do not know the motive, I just lean toward either the family doing it or hiring someone who did based on so many weird details.

 

 

It doesn't make sense that she would be strangled and head bashed by John Ramsey. Why would he kill her? and so brutally? Why would Patsy then go along with writing a ransom note and maintain her husband's innocence? That does not make sense.

 

Accidents don't include rope/garrotte and strangulation or ransom notes.

 

Talk about

[MDC 7,125]

 

It doesn't make sense that she would be strangled and head bashed by John Ramsey. Why would he kill her? and so brutally? Why would Patsy then go along with writing a ransom note and maintain her husband's innocence? That does not make sense.

 

Accidents don't include rope/garrotte and strangulation or ransom notes.

 

Talk about

I don't know the motives. Neither do you. I lean toward the family doing it because statistically the murderer in a case like this is likely to have known the victim. And there are way too many details in this case that make it highly unlikely that it was a botched kidnapping. If it weren't for the note I could buy that some pedo saw JBR on the pageant circuit and hunted her down. The note looks like a deliberate diversionary tactic and only someone who knew JBR would do that.

 

One thing we can all say with certainty though is that the note was not intended to elicit a Heads Up Scream. That is just retarded.

[IGotWorms 4,057]

My guess is the dad was either molesting JBR or the son accidentally injured / killed her. Truly I do not know the motive, I just lean toward either the family doing it or hiring someone who did based on so many weird details.

 

I do know what didn't happen though. A kidnapper did not leave a ransom letter as a scream alarm. You should slap yourself for even typing such a dumb theory.

If it was dad molesting her, something would've been unearthed to establish that motive. A doctor that was asking questions or whatever it would've been that precipitated the murder. Unless it was some of kind of bizarre shame or mercy type thing? Mom did it so she wouldn't have to endure it anymore? Just seems very far fetched. Also shouldn't there have been post mortem evidence of molestation?

 

Kinda weird he had another daughter die in an accident though. What are the odds of that? But I'm sure that was looked into, and I don't know the details of it but doesn't sound like it was anything suspicious.

 

I can see why the case has confounded the police. The son could make sense but how could he have possibly stuck with the story as a nine year old? Maybe someone else close to the family but then the parents would have a pretty focking good idea who and why would they ever withhold that?

[Cruzer 1,995]

- What kind of random, off the cuff killer uses a garrote? "If" a rogue killer did this, this was not his first rodeo. Guys who break into homes, write novel length ransom notes and bring a garrote have done this before.. Where was the rash of other crimes with like patterns in the area?

 

- This child was 6 years old, how dense can her skull be - how hard is it to crush the skull of a small child? Certainly a mother or slightly older brother could.

 

- 4 months. Your child is killed in your home and you wait 4 months to give an official statement - mind boggling.

[Gepetto 1,288]

It doesn't have to be random. The killer could have been a one time killer out to simply kill the daughter of the man he hates or was wronged by.

 

None of that explains everything found in that house and everything said to police and the evidence. Sure, it's possible to bash her skull by anyone, including someone outside the Ramsey's. I'm still waiting for some evidence or explanation implicating John, Burke, or Patsy.

[Gepetto 1,288]

So a one time killer couldn't use a garrotte? Well that would eliminate the Ramsey"s then.

[IGotWorms 4,057]

It doesn't have to be random. The killer could have been a one time killer out to simply kill the daughter of the man he hates or was wronged by.

Should be fairly easy to figure out who that is though. I'm sure they went through a list of "enemies"

[IGotWorms 4,057]

So a one time killer couldn't use a garrotte? Well that would eliminate the Ramsey"s then.

Unless it was done to "cover up" the bashed in skull. But that should've been fairly easy to determine if she was dead before strangled. Sounds like they came to the opposite conclusion