JonBenet Ramsey Case

#252
#252
Sandvol said:
"The only way it is plausible to think the note writer didn't want the police to see the note is if an intruder did write the note (and commited the crime). But since it is not plausible to think anyone other than Patsy wrote the note it is not plausible that the note was not meant to be seen by law enforcement. The note is the only thing between the Ramsey's and capital murder. The body was strung up in their basement. How do they explain a (their) cold dead baby in a (their) damn basement? The note is all Patsy could come up with. And again, if the police don't see it, capital murder, of your own child. Death penalty."

Let's backtrack. From your paragraph above you believe Patsy wrote the ransom note to stage a phony kidnapping? Is that correct?
Click to expand...

Patsy wrote it with Jon's help. She killed the daughter, and Jon didn't turn patsy in because he had been sexually abusing Jon benet over the years and didn't want her talking about it.
 
#255
#255
Sandvol said:
To stage a phony kidnapping?
Click to expand...

To stall investigators. It gave them more time to come up with a plan and gave misdirection to the case. It also gave her the chance to claim insanity should she have been charged with the crime. What "sane" person would write something like that?
 
#256
#256
davethevol said:
To stall investigators. It gave them more time to come up with a plan and gave misdirection to the case. It also gave her the chance to claim insanity should she have been charged with the crime. What "sane" person would write something like that?
Click to expand...

To stall and give misdirection to the case because the police would be looking for phony kidnappers? Is that what you mean? And, then she could claim insanity because only someone insane would stage a kidnapping without getting rid of the body?
 
#257
#257
Sandvol said:
To stall and give misdirection to the case because the police would be looking for phony kidnappers? Is that what you mean? And, then she could claim insanity because only someone insane would stage a kidnapping without getting rid of the body?
Click to expand...

Yes to the first. The note served 2 purposes. Red herring and an insurance policy should the police have arrested Patsy. It would have been used to claim insanity to avoid a death sentence.
 
#258
#258
davethevol said:
Yes to the first. The note served 2 purposes. Red herring and an insurance policy should the police have arrested Patsy. It would have been used to claim insanity to avoid a death sentence.
Click to expand...

But Patsy is the one who called the police first thing in the morning, not John. And, did exactly what the note said not to do. There is simply no logical reason why someone would stage a phony kidnapping, with the intention of removing the body from the house prior to calling the police, and then circumvent the staging by calling the police before the body had been removed -- and then handing over an obviously phony note written in her own hand unless she was insane. That just doesn't work for me. Patsy Ramsey had a journalism degree from the University of West Virginia. And, I don't know if you've read any of her accounts or her book "The Death of Innocence", but those are not the writings of an insane person. To me it is much more plausible to believe that the person who didn't call the police is the one who wrote the phony note and staged the phony kidnapping and never intended for the note to be seen by the police because the note instructed John Ramsey not to call the police. And, of course he wrote the note to himself because he wanted his wife to understand that the kidnapper wanted him to be in control of delivering the ransom and getting their daughter back knowing full well that his daughter was dead because he did it. And, somehow mysteriously he would make sure the note would disappear.
 
#259
#259
The theory espoused by Dave is close to the truth imo. The note was a red herring in a sense. Because it was not directly related to the death. It was concocted after the death, during the cover up.

But it is important because it illuminated the culprit in ultra violet light. Someone involved with the crime wrote the note. The note contains personal information known only to the family. The note was written in Patsy's notebook. The note was written at the home. The home was the crime scene. No strangers entered the home (crime scene). Unlikely a stranger commited the crime.
More importantly, the note allows for the possibility of a kidnapper. But the ridiculous nature (coupled with the facts of the case) of the note removes all plausibilty of a kidnapper.

John may or may not have been abusing the child, but he had some reason for not turning on his wife and turning her in. Patsy appears to be imploring John to side with her in the "use your good southern common sense" part of the ransom note. John may not even know exactly how the crime occurred. But he knows who did it. So to involve himself in the cover up he either really was guilty of molestation or he just could not bring himself to turn his wife in. Who knows.
 
#260
#260
PimpVol said:
The theory espoused by Dave is close to the truth imo. The note was a red herring in a sense. Because it was not directly related to the death. It was concocted after the death, during the cover up.

But it is important because it illuminated the culprit in ultra violet light. Someone involved with the crime wrote the note. The note contains personal information known only to the family. The note was written in Patsy's notebook. The note was written at the home. The home was the crime scene. No strangers entered the home (crime scene). Unlikely a stranger commited the crime.
More importantly, the note allows for the possibility of a kidnapper. But the ridiculous nature (coupled with the facts of the case) of the note removes all plausibilty of a kidnapper.

John may or may not have been abusing the child, but he had some reason for not turning on his wife and turning her in. Patsy appears to be imploring John to side with her in the "use your good southern common sense" part of the ransom note. John may not even know exactly how the crime occurred. But he knows who did it. So to involve himself in the cover up he either really was guilty of molestation or he just could not bring himself to turn his wife in. Who knows.
Click to expand...

The fact that the note was written on her own pad and with her own pen to me logically points away from Patsy because why would someone purposely incriminate themselves? And, John's use of the phrase "use your good southern common sense" was to make sure the note connected with Patsy because he knew that was a common phrase for her because he wanted to do everything he could to insure she wouldn't call the police. But other phrases in the note like "electronic counter measures", "100 percent" and "proper burial" were phrases that John picked up during his career in the Navy.
 
#261
#261
Sandvol said:
But Patsy is the one who called the police first thing in the morning, not John. And, did exactly what the note said not to do. There is simply no logical reason why someone would stage a phony kidnapping, with the intention of removing the body from the house prior to calling the police, and then circumvent the staging by calling the police before the body had been removed -- and then handing over an obviously phony note written in her own hand unless she was insane. That just doesn't work for me. Patsy Ramsey had a journalism degree from the University of West Virginia. And, I don't know if you've read any of her accounts or her book "The Death of Innocence", but those are not the writings of an insane person. To me it is much more plausible to believe that the person who didn't call the police is the one who wrote the phony note and staged the phony kidnapping and never intended for the note to be seen by the police because the note instructed John Ramsey not to call the police. And, of course he wrote the note to himself because he wanted his wife to understand that the kidnapper wanted him to be in control of delivering the ransom and getting their daughter back knowing full well that his daughter was dead because he did it. And, somehow mysteriously he would make sure the note would disappear.
Click to expand...
Nope. John knew the police were coming. He was right there when Patsy called them. He could have gotten rid of the note whenever he needed to. Had he needed to. But he didn't. Because what he needed WAS for the police to see the note. If they did not, it becomes a simple case of murder. Remember the dead baby, strung up in the basement? How do you explain that tied up baby if it is NOT a kidnapping (which it really wasn't, of course)?

The police HAD to see the note plain and simple. Or the body had to be Off of the property. If the two (body & note) are present @ the home when the police arrive to begin investigating, you don't have a kidnapping. You have a murder case. It became a murder case as soon as John found the body, and brought it upstairs.
 
#262
#262
mcompton said:
I thought Craig James did it...dammit
Click to expand...

Looks like he's been cleared.
wc_wkjb_p1.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#263
#263
Sandvol said:
The fact that the note was written on her own pad and with her own pen to me logically points away from Patsy because why would someone purposely incriminate themselves? And, John's use of the phrase "use your good southern common sense" was to make sure the note connected with Patsy because he knew that was a common phrase for her because he wanted to do everything he could to insure she wouldn't call the police. But other phrases in the note like "electronic counter measures", "100 percent" and "proper burial" were phrases that John picked up during his career in the Navy.
Click to expand...

Using her own notepad was an error that she apparently got away with. She may not have even realized the importance of it until later on, when it was "too late" so to to speak. But her real concern was "decriminalizing" herself when she wrote the note. And that took up most, if not all of her mind that morning.
And you keep failing to admit that Patsy wrote the note. She wrote it. How do you think John forged his wife's handwriting? No one else has proposed that, have they?

The multiple false starts at writing the note (8 missing pages) indicate Patsy started the note over a few times and then John may have helped coach her through it. The both of them have to be involved in the crime in some way. But we will never really know the specifics. The twenty year anniversary is in a couple of years. Sure there will be all sorts of "new" evidence. Probably get this thread bumped again too.
 
#264
#264
PimpVol said:
Nope. John knew the police were coming. He was right there when Patsy called them. He could have gotten rid of the note whenever he needed to. Had he needed to. But he didn't. Because what he needed WAS for the police to see the note. If they did not, it becomes a simple case of murder. Remember the dead baby, strung up in the basement? How do you explain that tied up baby if it is NOT a kidnapping (which it really wasn't, of course)?

The police HAD to see the note plain and simple. Or the body had to be Off of the property. If the two (body & note) are present @ the home when the police arrive to begin investigating, you don't have a kidnapping. You have a murder case. It became a murder case as soon as John found the body, and brought it upstairs.
Click to expand...

Nope, Patsy didn't call the police? He couldn't get rid of the note once Patsy saw it. She also mentioned it in her police call. What he needed and wanted her to do based on the note but didn't account for her panic because he is a sociopath was to not call the police so he could get her and Burke away somewhere "safe" (of course they weren't safe around him), so he would then have time to get rid of the body and let him deliver the phony ransom and somehow "lose" the note, and then let her know he delivered the ransom and tell her the kidnappers insisted he return the note, and then when their daughter was never returned they would then call the police. Of course by that time John would have gotten rid of the body, the note, the money, and finished staging the house. Then he would have his wife, his son, and possibly neighbors to verify there was a note and also the withdrawal from his bank as proof.
 
#265
#265
Here's a theory for you to mull over. JonBenet told her mother what her father had been doing to her. Patsy didn't want to believe it. She got angry and lashed out at the little girl, killing her in a fit of rage/denial. The mixture of her guilt and anger had her making stupid mistakes(for someone trying to get away with a crime). John realized what had happenned. He realized that while his wife might go down for murder, he would go down as well for child molestation. So he took over the efforts to try and cover up the crime, but by that point, Patsy had done too much damage to hide everything.

So it's entirely possible Patsy committed the crime with John participating in a cover up to try and keep his own crimes secret.

Possibilities are infinite, so anyone convinced they "know" what happenned is a fool. Unless you were there and committed the crime, arguing that "this" is what happenned makes you look moronic.
 
#266
#266
Weezer said:
Here's a theory for you to mull over. JonBenet told her mother what her father had been doing to her. Patsy didn't want to believe it. She got angry and lashed out at the little girl, killing her in a fit of rage/denial. The mixture of her guilt and anger had her making stupid mistakes(for someone trying to get away with a crime). John realized what had happenned. He realized that while his wife might go down for murder, he would go down as well for child molestation. So he took over the efforts to try and cover up the crime, but by that point, Patsy had done too much damage to hide everything.

So it's entirely possible Patsy committed the crime with John participating in a cover up to try and keep his own crimes secret.

Possibilities are infinite, so anyone convinced they "know" what happenned is a fool. Unless you were there and committed the crime, arguing that "this" is what happenned makes you look moronic.
Click to expand...

If they were both conspiring together then there would be no reason to write the ransom note and not get rid of the body before calling the police.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#267
#267
I think you guys are applying way to much rationalization to this. When something like this occurs logical thinking go straight out the window as the realization and consequently panic sets in. The note, window, garrote, and the other "staged" items seem to me to be the work of an irrational, panic striken, perpetrator(s). I think applying reasoning and logic to this case as it pertains to their actions is useless. JMHO....
 
#268
#268
InVOLuntary said:
I think you guys are applying way to much rationalization to this. When something like this occurs logical thinking go straight out the window as the realization and consequently panic sets in. The note, window, garrote, and the other "staged" items seem to me to be the work of an irrational, panic striken, perpetrator(s). I think applying reasoning and logic to this case as it pertains to their actions is useless. JMHO....
Click to expand...

Whoever was rational enough to write out a very well- crafted note whose directions were very clear.
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top