JonBenet Ramsey - a question for those who follow this story

[pryncess527]

They said the garrote is a device that John had been familiar with in his military days if he had used his hands I think that is more personal and in his mind it could be like the garrote killed Jon Benet not his hands SBTC was from his military days also I think John had to go back to his military nightmare to pull the garrote off but did not want to see Jon Benet live as a vegetable you also have to remember they had all night to stage everything patsy was still in the clothes and makeup she wore the night before which everyone said is not the norm for Patsy

I find it hard to swallow that people of their means, would just accept that a vegetable was the only option so immediately, without the consult of a doctor. I honestly find the entire theory you've posted to be one of the most ludicrous and unbelievable scenarios floated. It may seem like a reasonable explanation to you, but our minds clearly work in very different ways.

 

[cabanafrau]

Can't they tell by the bruising if it was before or after...Wouldn't the evidence of asphyxiation be there or not regardless of the blow to the head?

Brain dead or not at the time of death I find it impossible to believe the parents covering up for an accidental death would cause that type of harm or that dramatic of staging to protect their child. How could any parent want their childs body mutilated in that manner. There are less severe ways to cover up a crime and I doubt frantic parents who just found their daughter killed by their son would even be able to come up with such an involved crime scene staging, let alone carry it out without making mistakes.

How can a flashlight cause a skull fracture that significant, but no bleeding or splatter. I don't by that.

Depending on how long the timeframe was between the head injury and the asphyxiation they may not be able to definitively point to all of the details and timing so precisely.

If you interpret the garrote and everything else following the head injury as a cover up you are left with an extreme set of psychological hurdles for a killer to make, particularly a parent.

She did have a head injury with a severe skull fracture that apparently didn't bleed, no matter what the weapon may have been. What I'd like to know is, was her DNA on the flashlight?

 

[Pixie Dust ✨]

I find it hard to swallow that people of their means, would just accept that a vegetable was the only option so immediately, without the consult of a doctor. I honestly find the entire theory you've posted to be one of the most ludicrous and unbelievable scenarios floated. It may seem like a reasonable explanation to you, but our minds clearly work in very different ways.

I'm with you. My mind, for example, works with punctuation.

 

[msjprincess]

Depending on how long the timeframe was between the head injury and the asphyxiation they may not be able to definitively point to all of the details and timing so precisely.

If you interpret the garrote and everything else following the head injury as a cover up you are left with an extreme set of psychological hurdles for a killer to make, particularly a parent.

She did have a head injury with a severe skull fracture that apparently didn't bleed, no matter what the weapon may have been. What I'd like to know is, was her DNA on the flashlight?

Nope. Even on that ridiculous CBS special Dr Spitz said that no DNA or blood was found on the flashlight.

 

[nugov2]

They said the garrote is a device that John had been familiar with in his military days if he had used his hands I think that is more personal and in his mind it could be like the garrote killed Jon Benet not his hands SBTC was from his military days also I think John had to go back to his military nightmare to pull the garrote off but did not want to see Jon Benet live as a vegetable you also have to remember they had all night to stage everything patsy was still in the clothes and makeup she wore the night before which everyone said is not the norm for Patsy

There was evidence the garrote was tightened and loosened multiple times. That she was tortured with it. That wasn't personal? Sorry I don't buy he went military and made a torture device to cover up an accidental death. Why not use his military experience to snap her neck and put her out of her misery instantly.

Why would you assume your child was a vegetable if there was no blood. I would assume she was unconscious and suffered a severe concussion before I went to the assumption she was brain dead and needed to be finished off. I would call 911 and be thinking my 9 year old child couldn't be capable of hitting my other child hard enough to kill her if he didn't even draw blood. I find it odd the parents immediately went to brain dead/lets cover this up over calling 911 and trying to help her.

 

[asta]

The DNA evidence speaks louder to me than any theories on behavior. But with that said I don't believe any parent would see their injured child and choose to finish off their death instead of seeking any help possible. I am not the Ramsey's but I would move heaven and earth to get whatever help possible if either of my daughters were injured. These theories of the parents killing her to finish off what Burke started are beyond barbaric.

 

[cabanafrau]

They said the garrote is a device that John had been familiar with in his military days if he had used his hands I think that is more personal and in his mind it could be like the garrote killed Jon Benet not his hands SBTC was from his military days also I think John had to go back to his military nightmare to pull the garrote off but did not want to see Jon Benet live as a vegetable you also have to remember they had all night to stage everything patsy was still in the clothes and makeup she wore the night before which everyone said is not the norm for Patsy

"They said"? Who is they? You think? What are your qualifications for having this opinion? "Could be"? Speculation. How do you possibly know what John Ramsey was thinking? "Everyone said"? Who is everyone and how do they have reason to know the norm for Patsy at such an early hour in her own home?

Just a few problems with your theory.

 

[CdnCarrie]

They said the garrote is a device that John had been familiar with in his military days if he had used his hands I think that is more personal and in his mind it could be like the garrote killed Jon Benet not his hands SBTC was from his military days also I think John had to go back to his military nightmare to pull the garrote off but did not want to see Jon Benet live as a vegetable you also have to remember they had all night to stage everything patsy was still in the clothes and makeup she wore the night before which everyone said is not the norm for Patsy

Punctuation is your friend. Holy run-on sentence!

 

[pryncess527]

John Ramsey served in the US Navy Civil Engineer Corps. I'm not sure the CEC spends a lot of time making garrotes.

 

[cabanafrau]

John Ramsey served in the US Navy Civil Engineer Corps. I'm not sure the CEC spends a lot of time making garrotes.

Maybe the really strong nine year old did that too?

 

[NHdisneylover]

In the 90's probably nothing nearby. Around here almost nothing is open after 5 or 9 on Christmas even gas stations. Unless they are right off an expressway exit I highly doubt anything nearby was open. Things were not open the way they are now.

I am still curious if anyone here knows if the authorities know if the ligature marks on her neck were made before or after she was killed.

Im sorry...the "friend" of the family whoring herself out on all these shows is a joke.

and in that area of Boulder---I would say pretty much no chance of finding one back in 1996

 

[RitaE]

So he used a garrote to "finish his daughter off" so it wouldn't be so personal. But had no qualms about sexually molesting her.....I guess to try and confuse the picture and stage the scene? Or do you think Burke (age 9) sexually molested the girl before John entered the picture? Possible I guess, but it would be way on the outliers of sexual capability in a young child.

 

[nugov2]

On a side note, I'm looking forward to the Amanda Knox documentary coming to Netflix they have been advertising during the CBS JBR mockumentary.

 

[RitaE]

I'll just add. The clothes have been discussed endlessly but in my opinion, Patsy Ramsey was a Southern Beauty Queen. She did NOT leave her bedroom without clothes and makeup in place. Ever.

No personal knowledge there, just my guess.

 

[pryncess527]

I'll just add. The clothes have been discussed endlessly but in my opinion, Patsy Ramsey was a Southern Beauty Queen. She did NOT leave her bedroom without clothes and makeup in place. Ever.

No personal knowledge there, just my guess.

Replace "bedroom" with "house" and I'd agree with you -- but there is no reason for us to beleive she planned to leave the house that way. It's not like she showered and put those clothes back on. She threw something on to go to the kitchen and make coffee and wake up the kids. We have no way of knowing what was normal or in character for her, even as a Southern Beauty Queen, when walking around her own home with no guests in the morning.

I have personally known more than one woman who might be called a Southern Beauty Queen, but they do exist in their own homes without their "faces on" ;p

 

[nugov2]

Here's another odd piece of supposed evidence. So the dna on the underwear was possibly from a factory worker. Nobody thinks it odd Patsy Ramsey wouldn't wash her childs underwear prior to giving them to her to wear. All these hypothetical situations presented all slant towards the ramseys. I find that highly suspicious. Patsy wearing the same clothes points to them covering up. DNA on underwear belonging to a stranger, family didn't wash underwear and the dna belongs to factory worker, family is covering up. The list of these things being skewed to make them look guilty are endless and IMO makes it less credible. To believe they did it we have to believe so many outlandish things took place that night. I can get past a few, but there are just way too many.

 

[cabanafrau]

So he used a garrote to "finish his daughter off" so it wouldn't be so personal. But had no qualms about sexually molesting her.....I guess to try and confuse the picture and stage the scene? Or do you think Burke (age 9) sexually molested the girl before John entered the picture? Possible I guess, but it would be way on the outliers of sexual capability in a young child.

Haven't had time for an in depth conversation with folks who really know their stuff about the psychology involved, but had a quick word with a friend who is a psychologist and also one of the top experts specializing in sexual abuse risk assessments, and who courts send defendants and parents in termination actions to for evaluations. A five minute down and dirty about the basic outline of a situation like this is that a person who is not a child sexual abuser is unlikely to stage a scene suggesting this type of sexual abuse this way. A parent who is not a child sexual abuser is even less likely to stage a cover up to suggest sexual abuse. A parent who loves their child enough to cover up something like this is even less likely to do so in a way that harms another of their children whom they presumably love just as much.

His feeling is that the garrote and the possible torture elements of the killing point to those being done for sexual gratification in and of their own accord.

 

[Disneychick75]

I just have a hard time believing her 9 year old brother did it. Also that her parents would cover it up if it was an accident. She was brutally murdered and molested. I can't imagine a family going to that length to cover up an accident.

JonBenet was not molested- at least not immediately prior to her death. That was brought out last night in the program. It is also what sealed it for me that Patsy and John could have covered up her accidental death.

No it doesn't make any sense at all. No parent is going to do what was done that child to cover for another child.

There are thousands of unsolved crimes. Most killers don't go bragging about it.

That show was the more biased thing I have ever seen. They went into trying to prove the Ramseys were guilty and ignoring other evidence.

They stated things that weren't even true like John leaving for over an hour and they way they described him searching the house is not how it happened. In all the interviews I've seen with Linda Arndt never once did she say that she asked to search the house together and start upstairs and John bolted for the basement. What a crock.

I read way back when that John had left the house for a period of time. It has been years but I remember thinking it odd that he would leave. Also, thought it was weird that he was calling his pilot. John wanted to get the heck out of there. I could understand going to a hotel or something but man your daughter has been murdered. Stay and help the police.

Burke had a bad temper. He had hit JonBenet with a golf club in the past. A friend interviewed last night said that Patsy told her that Burke got mad at JonBenet and hit her with the club. Past behavior is a good indicator of future behavior.

As for biased, Dr.Phil interviewing Burke was biased as well. Burke is weird and inappropriate in his interview and was that way during his interviews not long after JonBenet's murder.

We don't know who murdered that poor young girl and probably never will. We are all entitled to our opinions.

How did the murderer, if it was someone outside of the family, get into the house? It wasn't through the basement window.

 

[pryncess527]

So the dna on the underwear was possibly from a factory worker. Nobody thinks it odd Patsy Ramsey wouldn't wash her childs underwear prior to giving them to her to wear. All these hypothetical situations presented all slant towards the ramseys.

No, I don't think it's suspicious that she may not have washed the underwear. Frankly, people were a lot less aware/germphobic, etc back then and I'm not sure most people would have washed an unopened package of underwear. I'm also not prepared to make statements about what would or would not make the DNA go away -- washing might not always remove all DNA in every case.
I think the hypothetical situations only slant towards the Ramseys when that is what the reader wants to see.

Patsy wearing the same clothes points to them covering up.

Only if you refuse to even consider many of the other reasonable explanations put forward. In fact, I think a person covering up is more likely to dispose of the clothes they were wearing.

 

[MrJT]

John Ramsey served in the US Navy Civil Engineer Corps. I'm not sure the CEC spends a lot of time making garrotes.

I am glad that you mentioned this. I didn't know about his military service, but my thought regarding the Military Service post made me think of my time in the military. I served 20 years, and I don't know anything about garrotes, or any other specialized way to kill somebody.