JonBenet Ramsey - a question for those who follow this story

[pryncess527]

I do not agree with the post that you were responding to, but these pageants were not playing dress up. It was pretty appalling back then, to be honest. The children were tanned, had their hair done, and had all kinds of makeup that made them look like miniature adults, and it was just creepy.

I agree with you. Though sadly, this world is far from being a thing of the past

I don't think it's literally a fate worse than death, but it is a far cry from playing dress up, IMHO. And I think it is a large reason why the public was eager to believe the Ramsey's played a role in this -- it was easy to paint Patsy as a person who saw her daughter as more a doll to control than a person. As much as I hate child beauty pageants, I don't think that narrative was fair, but I do think it was easy to sell.

 

[AppleDumpling]

It's just so sad and unsettling to me that the case has gone unsolved. Poor JonBenet deserves justice and I'm afraid she may never get it. It will be interesting to hear what Burke has to say, but I doubt there will be any new information revealed.

The thing that stands out most to me is the odd ransom note, which I know has been analyzed again and again. If there was an intruder whose original plan was to kidnap JB, and the motive was money and/or some kind of vengeance against John Ramsey, as the note implies, why would this person/s kill her and then leave the body in the house?

If the intent was to kill her from the beginning then the note makes no sense. If she was killed accidentally during a kidnapping attempt, then why the note, the string around her neck, the underwear, etc. It's all very bizarre.

 

[CdnCarrie]

I do not agree with the post that you were responding to, but these pageants were not playing dress up. It was pretty appalling back then, to be honest. The children were tanned, had their hair done, and had all kinds of makeup that made them look like miniature adults, and it was just creepy.

Wow girls had their hair done. Creepy.

 

[Hikergirl]

It's just so sad and unsettling to me that the case has gone unsolved. Poor JonBenet deserves justice and I'm afraid she may never get it. It will be interesting to hear what Burke has to say, but I doubt there will be any new information revealed.

The thing that stands out most to me is the odd ransom note, which I know has been analyzed again and again. If there was an intruder whose original plan was to kidnap JB, and the motive was money and/or some kind of vengeance against John Ramsey, as the note implies, why would this person/s kill her and then leave the body in the house?

If the intent was to kill her from the beginning then the note makes no sense. If she was killed accidentally during a kidnapping attempt, then why the note, the string around her neck, the underwear, etc. It's all very bizarre.

I don't think you an apply logic to a person who murders and tortures a little girl like that.
My best guess is that there was a plan to kidnap and it went wrong. Or maybe the plan was to kill her all along and make everyone believe it was a kidnapping. Maybe they did plan to take her body out of the house but something happened where they couldn't. The note was left before the murder but the killer maybe forgot about it, or panicked after he killed Jonbenet and just left. Or it was the plan all along to leave it. Who knows, I can't imagine what they were thinking and why they did the things they did because I'm not a deranged killer.


I was wondering one thing that maybe those of you that have followed the case can answer. When they found the DNA of the unknown person in her panties and on her leggings did they also find DNA of any family members in the same areas? I wouldn't be surprised if they did find their DNA on her or her clothing, but I haven't read anything that says along with the unknown persons DNA, they also found known persons' DNA.

 

[cabanafrau]

Wow girls had their hair done. Creepy.

Honestly, the child pageant stuff seems more than a little extreme to me too, but different strokes and all that. I don't feel the choice to enter the child in pageants correlates to a likelihood the parent(s) killed her. IMO if the pageant world had any bearing on the murder I think some type of obsessed stalker scenario would be more likely -- if the pageant participation had any correlation to her murder.

Strictly speaking statistically, a child murdered in their home is more likely to have been killed by a family member -- or even moreso by the (non related) significant other of a parent or someone with close enough association to the family to be present with open access to the child. The flipside to the high statistical probability that a child killed in the home in these kinds of circumstances being most likely to be killed by a parent or family member is that more often than not those same family members are most likely the people to have the strongest emotional attachment to the child and a very vested interest in the child's wellbeing. Both strong probabilities speak to very different assailants, so clearly direct, objective evidence should rule.

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

Wow girls had their hair done. Creepy.

Actually they look very creepy. They wear more make up in one day than I have in my lifetime. They dance with skimpy little clothes, gyrating their hips in mock sexual motions. Yes, the pageants are creepy.

And, yes, at the time, many people believed that a pedophile had something to do with the crime. Or that the poor little girl turned on her mother because she was sick and tired of looking like a street walker. (No, I don't mean to be mean. That is what many people believed.)

 

[Nancyg56]

Wow girls had their hair done. Creepy.

Perhaps I was not graphic enough. The little girls were made up to look like adults in beauty contests. 5 and 6 year old children were getting their hair bleached and dyed. Their teeth were bleached. They wore clothing that was revealing, and not in the way little kids wear bathing suits and little dresses. No. These kids wore provocative clothing and were paraded around in front of adults as if they were a side show. Children were under tremendous pressure to be more beautiful and talented than the next kid, and not as they were singing Chim Chim Cherree. It was very creepy. This was not little girls pretending to be their favorite Princess, perched in BBB getting pixie dust in their hair. This was the old Miss America pageants that people complain objectify women, but the contestants were not young women who chose to model a bathing suit in high heels. These were little girls in a very adult environment who had no choice.

I like to see kids play dress up. L

 

[Nancyg56]

Actually they look very creepy. They wear more make up in one day than I have in my lifetime. They dance with skimpy little clothes, gyrating their hips in mock sexual motions. Yes, the pageants are creepy.

And, yes, at the time, many people believed that a pedophile had something to do with the crime. Or that the poor little girl turned on her mother because she was sick and tired of looking like a street walker. (No, I don't mean to be mean. That is what many people believed.)

I remember. The entire thing was bizarre.

 

[cabanafrau]

But that quote has nothing to do with why I quoted that excerpt from his book. I was answering the question with whether or not the pineapple was fresh, I just happened to quote the excerpt in its entirety. The context just isn't there to prove that I somehow used incomplete/incompetent sources.

You don't have to trust anything, I don't trust everything I read about this case either.

My point is I would not trust anything said by the author of that statement because it's beyond problematic. You may well feel differently.

When juries are empaneled they are instructed there is no set rules for determining whether you believe what a witness says and they are free to accept all, none or any part of what a witness says. There may well be accurate things in the author's writings. As they say, even a broken clock is right twice a day. For me that statement is so off the mark that I credit the author with being a fabricator or an idiot, neither of which encourages me to accept what they have to say as credible. If I were a juror the entire panel might see that differently than I do and accept what the author says as credible and rely on it. That's what their observation and common sense says is correct and that's appropriate for them. It could never be so for me. We would both be correct in our opinions because we arrived at them from our honest assessment of the witness' testimony.

 

[mi*vida*loca]

Did the parents ever take polygraph tests?

 

[cabanafrau]

Did the parents ever take polygraph tests?

I can't say factually, but I would put money on no.

 

[msjprincess]

Did the parents ever take polygraph tests?

They took 2 privately administered tests. http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2000/25arams.html

 

[cabanafrau]

They took 2 privately administered tests. http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/2000/25arams.html

That's pretty shocking. Shocking at all that their attorney allowed it, particularly knowing at the start that independent was going to be effectively meaningless anyway.

 

[msjprincess]

That's pretty shocking. Shocking at all that their attorney allowed it, particularly knowing at the start that independent was going to be effectively meaningless anyway.

I agree. It's pointless, if you pass people say they're unreliable, if you fail people will say you're guilty.

 

[sunshinehighway]

That's pretty shocking. Shocking at all that their attorney allowed it, particularly knowing at the start that independent was going to be effectively meaningless anyway.

I agree. It's pointless, if you pass people say they're unreliable, if you fail people will say you're guilty.

It looks like there was a huge breakdown between them and the police and that only hurt the investigation. I can't really blame them though. If the police were leaking all those false stories and making it pretty clear that they believed the Ramseys were involved, it's hard to fault them for not trusting the police.
It's easy to look at it and say well there's something wrong because they didn't cooperate but I don't know that I would have either.

 

[Kellykins1218]

I think child beauty pageants are stupid but to complain about 5 & 6 year olds wearing "revealing" clothes is ridiculous. They don't really have anything to reveal.

 

[cabanafrau]

It looks like there was a huge breakdown between them and the police and that only hurt the investigation. I can't really blame them though. If the police were leaking all those false stories and making it pretty clear that they believed the Ramseys were involved, it's hard to fault them for not trusting the police.
It's easy to look at it and say well there's something wrong because they didn't cooperate but I don't know that I would have either.

Rational, not under stress or emotional duress me says, no, I absolutely would not take one. Realizing I would be neither rational or stress free were I the parent of a murdered child, I can't say absolutely 100-percent I would not. Times having changed significantly from the time of the case, it's increasingly doubtful an attorney would consider it.

I would love to be able to talk in depth to their attorney about how the testing came about. Make no mistake, he's an excellent attorney and it was either done at the insistence of his clients or he had darned good reasoning behind suggesting it.

 

[cabanafrau]

I think child beauty pageants are stupid but to complain about 5 & 6 year olds wearing "revealing" clothes is ridiculous. They don't really have anything to reveal.

I see your point, and agree to the point that they are being observed by those with normal sex drives and appropriate behaviors. As a former dance mom I have seen things that I absolutely thought exposed children to risk -- particularly at the large, hotel dance conventions.

 

[Nancyg56]

I think child beauty pageants are stupid but to complain about 5 & 6 year olds wearing "revealing" clothes is ridiculous. They don't really have anything to reveal.

In the normal sense, no. But when you consider these little girls were dressed as adults, and were rehearsed to act like adults. and many times mimmicing provocative mannerisms, I don't know. For me, it was not okay.

Little kids dressed like little kids, acting like little kids. Yeah, nothing to reveal. Little girls with a LOT of makeup, bleached teeth, dyed hair, and skimpy clothes...it is not even in the same ballpark in my opinion.

 

[MaryLovesPoohBear]

In the normal sense, no. But when you consider these little girls were dressed as adults, and were rehearsed to act like adults. and many times mimmicing provocative mannerisms, I don't know. For me, it was not okay.

Little kids dressed like little kids, acting like little kids. Yeah, nothing to reveal. Little girls with a LOT of makeup, bleached teeth, dyed hair, and skimpy clothes...it is not even in the same ballpark in my opinion.

Especially when they are taught to gyrate their hips in the way that they are. Or look over their shoulder in a "come hither" look. Oh, or the pouty lips.

Some things are just wrong. I don't care how much money you have or if you wanted to be a beauty queen but didn't make it. It is just wrong.