JonBenet Ramsey - a question for those who follow this story

[Princesspolly0110]

Okay I just had a client talking to me about this the other day...

I have a really messed up theory but here it goes.

I think patsy was having an affair. I think patsy then found out the other man her life was sexually advancing on Jon benet. I also think that Patsy's love interest was someone the family kmew. Maybe not well enough to be in and out of those house but well enough that Jon benet wouldn't think twice in trusting him. When patsy found out about the advances on Jon benet, she broke off the affair causing the lover to be irate. I think the man used the key provided by patsy for their affair, to get into the house, knowing the family would be out for Christmas festivities. I think he woke Jon benet up (and her knowing him would explain why she didn't cry or scream) offered her a snack (pineapple) and lured her down stairs. It would explain why she didn't fight against him getting out of bed and why there was no forced entry, it would also explain why she had a snack in her that her parents didn't feed her.

I'm crazy and I have too much time on my hands.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

The DNA they found on her panties were found on other articles of clothing so they believe it's the murderers and not from manufacturing. It's in the system but no hits. IMO it's been 20 years and that person isn't in the system and probably never will be. He was either a one and done criminal (which I highly doubt Bc of the brutality of the crime), he died before they started that system or he's so old he can't commit anymore crimes and won't make it into the system.

 

[DisneyMommyMichelle]

Oh wow, I haven't thought about this case in years. This was one of those cases that haunted you for awhile and then as the story died down in the media, I just forgot about it. I always thought it was the parents, both of them.

 

[lovin'fl]

Famous ME, Lee, said it isn't a DNA case. Not sure what he means.

Some of the CBS clips I have been seeing do show that it could be a good show for the folks who believe a family member did it. Also saw some interesting Dr Phil clips.

 

[lovin'fl]

The DNA they found on her panties were found on other articles of clothing so they believe it's the murderers and not from manufacturing. It's in the system but no hits. IMO it's been 20 years and that person isn't in the system and probably never will be. He was either a one and done criminal (which I highly doubt Bc of the brutality of the crime), he died before they started that system or he's so old he can't commit anymore crimes and won't make it into the system.

That DNA was not bodily fluids but skin cells.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

That DNA was not bodily fluids but skin cells.

Yes, it was touch DNA.

 

[lovin'fl]

Okay I just had a client talking to me about this the other day...

I have a really messed up theory but here it goes.

I think patsy was having an affair. I think patsy then found out the other man her life was sexually advancing on Jon benet. I also think that Patsy's love interest was someone the family kmew. Maybe not well enough to be in and out of those house but well enough that Jon benet wouldn't think twice in trusting him. When patsy found out about the advances on Jon benet, she broke off the affair causing the lover to be irate. I think the man used the key provided by patsy for their affair, to get into the house, knowing the family would be out for Christmas festivities. I think he woke Jon benet up (and her knowing him would explain why she didn't cry or scream) offered her a snack (pineapple) and lured her down stairs. It would explain why she didn't fight against him getting out of bed and why there was no forced entry, it would also explain why she had a snack in her that her parents didn't feed her.

I'm crazy and I have too much time on my hands.

First...Occam's Razor. Second, wouldn't he lure her with, say, candy instead of pineapple? And there was a half eaten bowl of pineapple on their breakfast table.

 

[lovin'fl]

Yes, it was touch DNA.

Many LE and lab techs touched those items. And family and servants and friends (she was at sleep over right

 

[Hikergirl]

That DNA was not bodily fluids but skin cells.

True, but it was found on the waist band of her leggings as well. So we could go with the theory that some man's DNA got onto the panties during manufacturing and then they also somehow got onto the leggings. Or we can go with the theory that when the murdered sexually assaulted JB his skin cells rubbed off onto her panties and also onto the waistband of her leggings, where he would most likely have put his hands to take them off.
I tend to believe the latter, it makes the most logical sense (to me). The fact that the PO were so quick to dismiss it also send up a red flag. They were looking for evidence against the parents, that DNA didn't fit so it was just brushed off. To me that speaks volumes.

 

[elphaba91]

The DNA they found on her panties were found on other articles of clothing so they believe it's the murderers and not from manufacturing. It's in the system but no hits. IMO it's been 20 years and that person isn't in the system and probably never will be. He was either a one and done criminal (which I highly doubt Bc of the brutality of the crime), he died before they started that system or he's so old he can't commit anymore crimes and won't make it into the system.

Never say never. Just recently a man dubbed the 'Chinese Jack the Ripper' was arrested for brutally raping and murdering 11 women/girls between 1988 and 2002. Like in this case, police had his DNA but no match until recently when his uncle was arrested for a minor crime and they realised he was related to the killer. http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/g...e/news-story/a653ced295be24f66a2fd008ec07a20d

 

[lovin'fl]

wonder if they put it in ancestry dna. i did that and it gave me hundreds of relatives...one 2nd cousin and many 3rd.
i am having lots of trouble with this site...freezing on me. takes forever to post...i am out

 

[cabanafrau]

wonder if they put it in ancestry dna. i did that and it gave me hundreds of relatives...one 2nd cousin and many 3rd.
i am having lots of trouble with this site...freezing on me. takes forever to post...i am out

No, LE uses a DNA database specifically established for criminal matters. There are strict protocols about who is added. It's common in cases for them to ask for DNA from the family to help them establish a map of any DNA they are examining, however the family's DNA and even that of the victim are not added to the database. They are merely used to help investigate the specific case involving the single specific victim. Here in Michigan it is a standard part of a criminal sentence that a DNA sample is ordered upon conviction and sentencing to prison. That's where the DNA database comparisons are made comes from.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

Never say never. Just recently a man dubbed the 'Chinese Jack the Ripper' was arrested for brutally raping and murdering 11 women/girls between 1988 and 2002. Like in this case, police had his DNA but no match until recently when his uncle was arrested for a minor crime and they realised he was related to the killer. http://www.news.com.au/world/asia/g...e/news-story/a653ced295be24f66a2fd008ec07a20d

I really hope so.

 

[cabanafrau]

Really you would think that DNA would solve the case. But still as they say, money does talk. And that they were very wealthy!

DNA doesn't solve nearly as many cases as a lot of people think it does. I highly doubt their wealth had any bearing on DNA not being able to indict them.

 

[pryncess527]

Because the killer DID write it in the house. It was written on John and Patsy's pad of paper (the indentation from the letter was still on the pad) and they'd even left a few lines of a practice note still on the pad. The pad and pen were both neatly put back where they were supposed to be. The note was left neatly at the bottom of the stairs Patsy would come down every morning, exactly where she would find it.

Key phrase in what I said . . . "after the murder"
If a person had been casing the joint, it's entirely possible the note was written before JBR died. I'm not sure how any of the facts you state above dispute that possibility.

 

[rigs32]

Really you would think that DNA would solve the case. But still as they say, money does talk. And that they were very wealthy!

Did you read my post about the realities of DNA? It's not as easy as CSI makes people think.

You also can't start testing everyone. It's very costly and time consuming to look for that needle in a haystack. And you can't compel someone to provide a sample for comparison without showing a judge you have probable cause to believe they are the source.

 

[lovin'fl]

 

[RainbowBrite]

Key phrase in what I said . . . "after the murder"
If a person had been casing the joint, it's entirely possible the note was written before JBR died. I'm not sure how any of the facts you state above dispute that possibility.

But does that really matter if it was written before or after she died? My point is, nobody except the Ramseys would feel comfortable enough to sit there and write such a long note on the Ramseys own pen and paper and then put everything back neatly. Even if they were in the house when the Ramseys weren't home, anyone could come home at any minute. Patsy or John could've forgotten something, their housekeeper could have shown up. Nobody would ever feel that confident. And the note was not folded, so it's unlikely they wrote it while in the house days before the murder and then took it with them.

 

[cabanafrau]

Did you read my post about the realities of DNA? It's not as easy as CSI makes people think.

You also can't start testing everyone. It's very costly and time consuming to look for that needle in a haystack. And you can't compel someone to provide a sample for comparison without showing a judge you have probable cause to believe they are the source.

It's so time and cost prohibitive that even in murder cases they generally decide which pieces of DNA evidence are most likely to yield results pointing to an assailant. Many times it's not even a certainty there is any DNA evidence present at all and the testing is generally run where they have good reason to suspect something is present. Many times it is, but even then the sample may not yield definitive information to connect to a specific person in any substantial way coming anywhere close to claim they are the source.

 

[pryncess527]

But does that really matter if it was written before or after she died? My point is, nobody except the Ramseys would feel comfortable enough to sit there and write such a long note on the Ramseys own pen and paper and then put everything back neatly. Even if they were in the house when the Ramseys weren't home, anyone could come home at any minute. Patsy or John could've forgotten something, their housekeeper could have shown up. Nobody would ever feel that confident. And the note was not folded, so it's unlikely they wrote it while in the house days before the murder and then took it with them.

I only asked the question in the first place because people in this thread were stating that it was unbelievable that the person would murder JBR and then take the time to compose a long note. I merely wondered why they were so sure JBR must have been dead when the note was written. Just because it was written in the house does not mean it had to be written after she died. Since some posters here took that as fact, I wondered what the basis for that fact was.

I'm less prepared than you to state that "nobody would ever feel that confident." I have no idea what delusions child murders live with.