JonBenet Ramsey Case

#177
#177
"Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. the smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contain epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen."

In Cyril Wecht's book he stated that this part of the ME's report was indicative of someone who was subject to chronic sexual abuse. The birefringent material was believed to have come from the paint brush handle used for the garrote. The other part of the report where it talks about vaginal bruising was supposedly indicative of acute vaginal trauma. (Something that had occurred within 24 hours of death.)
 
#178
#178
"Easy explanation for not dumping the body is that they had the stomach to cover for Burke but they couldn't stomach tossing their own child's body out like it was garbage. "Proper burial" and all that."

Let me see if I understand. Burke bashed Jon Benet's skull in and then taped her mouth and sexually assaulted and strangled her. He had also been sexually assaulting her for a while based on the ME's report. He then tied her body up and changed her clothing. Then he went and told his parents what he had done and instead of calling the ambulance right away they spent quite a bit of time concocting a ransom note but then left her body in the house because they couldn't bring themselves to get rid of her. Then Patsy called the police and mentioned the ransom note. This all happened around 6:30am. Then they waited till 1:00pm to "discover" the body when John Ramsey searched the house and brought it up to the living room. Is that your Burke did it theory?
 
#179
#179
"And your theory that JR did it has far too many variables and a conspiracy theory involving many people who could just turn a blind eye. It's unrealistic."

It does seem like they were conspiring to turn a blind eye to John. However, Linda Arndt the on-scene detective surely didn't. I believe the DA and police were intimidated by John's status in the community. That year he had received Boulder's Business Man of the Year Award. Also, it is hard to fathom how a father could do that to his daughter. Imagine the scenario that transpired in his mind at least to lead him to commit such a despicable act. DocG believes that he believed that she was getting ready to expose him-that she was asking him to stop and he wouldn't so she threatened exposure. However, many daughters are molested by their father for years and never tell anyone and are never exposed until the father dies. Then the daughter typically has enough courage to talk about it. It is a very strange case on every level.
 
#180
#180
"It's an interesting and plausible theory that John Ramsey did it. To be honest the whole case is bizarre and I don't think we'll ever find out what really went down that night or who all in that house was involved."

You have to throw out all the stuff that is least plausible and fantastic and focus on the most plausible-i.e. what fits best. Getting back to the note. What would be your theory for why the note was addressed to John and why it was left at the bottom of the stairs? It fits my John did it theory but let me please read your theory.
 
#181
#181
Another thing you have to know about the case is in later interviews the lead on-scene detective Linda Arndt got no sense at all that Patsy had anything to do with her daughter's death. She said that Patsy was truly distraught and mortified at the discovery of her daughter's body and that she had to be sedated. John on the other hand was cool as a cucumber the whole time and insisted on doing all the talking after the body was discovered and she said she felt she was looking into the eyes of a killer. She said during the morning he would disappear for long periods of time and no one knew where he had gone. And, for a period he was also casually reading the mail like nothing had happened. Patsy on the other hand was frantic the whole time.
 
Last edited:
#182
#182
"Why can you not imagine someone faking a 911 call?"
I guess what you mean by that is to throw off the police? Yes I can imagine it. I can imagine a lot of things. But, like I said in an earlier post you have to go with what is the most plausible inference from the facts? Your theories are all possible but are they really the most plausible? If you look at all the scenarios and all are surely possible, PDI, BDI, JPDI, JDI, but the "most" plausible scenario and the one that best "fits" all the facts of the case is the one I propose-JDI-John did it. Yes, Burke could have done it and then the parents covered for him and didn't call an ambulance and concocted the ransom note and then called the police anyway while leaving the body in the house. Or yes Patsy could have done it and smashed her skull and didn't call an ambulance and been the one who had been sexually assaulting her and finally shoved the paint brush handle into her vagina and strangled her and then wrote the ransom note and called the police anyway. But, you have to admit those are some pretty fantastic theories.
 
Last edited:
#183
#183
coug said:
77789-kramer-mind-blown-gif-vynA.gif
Click to expand...

Thanks for putting it together. At least you've given it some thought. My head hurt for a very long time until it all finally made sense. Everything fits.
 
#184
#184
Let me try to make this a little easier to decipher. I've obviously spent a lot more time thinking about this than you have. Isn't it more plausible that whoever wrote the ransom note did not want the police called?
 
#194
#194
The girl had her skull cracked in half without being struck by a blunt object (pic is gruesome). That required a good bit of rage. The person most likely to have been that enraged to do that probably was the person with the closet relationship to her. Which person in the family fit that description best? Who would have known the approximate amount of John's bonus, and been dumb enough to use it as the ransom amount in the "ransom note"? It appears to be a fairly open and shut case.


The brother who was supposed to be asleep (according to the parents) turning up on the 911 call proves a parental cover up. Then you are left to figure out who did what. Good luck with that. Plenty of devil in those details.

An intruder is unlikely. He would have to had intruded into the house and his entry point would be obvious (as his eventual exit point). He would need balls of steel to write and then re-write the "ransom note" while still at the crime scene yet be stupid enough to leave without the only thing which could compel the ransom (the body of course).

And how would a person that is even capable of bashing a babies head in know about John Ramsey, his bonus and the location + layout of his house? Hard to believe an outsider did that. Professional hits are not that sloppy. Random hits dont happen in 9 degree weather on Christmas night in the suburbs. It was most probably an accident that was caused by adult family member. Then a panicked, rushed but hair-brained cover up ensued.

That is my opinion of the facts as I understand them.
 
Last edited:
#195
#195
PimpVol said:
The girl had her skull cracked in half without being struck by a blunt object (pic is gruesome). That required a good bit of rage. The person most likely to have been that enraged to do that probably was the person with the closet relationship to her. Which person in the family fit that description best? Who would have known the approximate amount of John's bonus, and been dumb enough to use it as the ransom amount in the "ransom note"? It appears to be a fairly open and shut case.


The brother who was supposed to be asleep (according to the parents) turning up on the 911 call proves a parental cover up. Then you are left to figure out who did what. Good luck with that. Plenty of devil in those details.

An intruder is unlikely. He would have to had intruded into the house and his entry point would be obvious (as his eventual exit point). He would need balls of steel to write and then re-write the "ransom note" while still at the crime scene yet be stupid enough to leave without the only thing which could compel the ransom (the body of course).

And how would a person that is even capable of bashing a babies head in know about John Ramsey, his bonus and the location + layout of his house? Hard to believe an outsider did that. Professional hits are not that sloppy. Random hits dont happen in 9 degree weather on Christmas night in the suburbs. It was most probably an accident that was caused by adult family member. Then a panicked, rushed but hair-brained cover up ensued.

That is my opinion of the facts as I understand them.
Click to expand...

In James Kolar's book "Foreign Faction" he does a good job of ruling out an intruder. However, you only state one fact above and the rest is pure speculation. It is easy to determine who the perpetrator is by sticking to the facts and only the facts and developing the most probable inferences from them. Maybe you can answer the question I posed above without injecting all the speculation and Kabuki Theater.
 
#197
#197
Sandvol said:
"Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. the smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contain epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen."

In Cyril Wecht's book he stated that this part of the ME's report was indicative of someone who was subject to chronic sexual abuse. The birefringent material was believed to have come from the paint brush handle used for the garrote. The other part of the report where it talks about vaginal bruising was supposedly indicative of acute vaginal trauma. (Something that had occurred within 24 hours of death.)
Click to expand...

Cyril Wecht didn't see the body so all he's going off is the original ME's report. Perhaps if he'd been the one that did the autopsy I'd allow his opinion to hold more weight. There was a forum I stumbled on where others were analyzing the ME's report which had some interesting ideas, sadly I can't find the link to show you.

Sandvol said:
"Easy explanation for not dumping the body is that they had the stomach to cover for Burke but they couldn't stomach tossing their own child's body out like it was garbage. "Proper burial" and all that."

Let me see if I understand. Burke bashed Jon Benet's skull in and then taped her mouth and sexually assaulted and strangled her. He had also been sexually assaulting her for a while based on the ME's report. He then tied her body up and changed her clothing. Then he went and told his parents what he had done and instead of calling the ambulance right away they spent quite a bit of time concocting a ransom note but then left her body in the house because they couldn't bring themselves to get rid of her. Then Patsy called the police and mentioned the ransom note. This all happened around 6:30am. Then they waited till 1:00pm to "discover" the body when John Ramsey searched the house and brought it up to the living room. Is that your Burke did it theory?
Click to expand...

No, all of what you just wrote is pure speculation. Guessing the exact details of what transpired is just bad form.

Sandvol said:
"And your theory that JR did it has far too many variables and a conspiracy theory involving many people who could just turn a blind eye. It's unrealistic."

It does seem like they were conspiring to turn a blind eye to John. However, Linda Arndt the on-scene detective surely didn't. I believe the DA and police were intimidated by John's status in the community. That year he had received Boulder's Business Man of the Year Award. Also, it is hard to fathom how a father could do that to his daughter. Imagine the scenario that transpired in his mind at least to lead him to commit such a despicable act. DocG believes that he believed that she was getting ready to expose him-that she was asking him to stop and he wouldn't so she threatened exposure. However, many daughters are molested by their father for years and never tell anyone and are never exposed until the father dies. Then the daughter typically has enough courage to talk about it. It is a very strange case on every level.
Click to expand...

So suddenly on Christmas night John Ramsey becomes an enraged, child molesting, murderous, pedophile? Not only cracking her skull open but strangling her to death just after. Then he decides after killing her that he's just going to set her body aside to be dumped at a later date and just hope that either the wife doesn't call the police or that someone stumbles upon her body in the mean time? That's moronic at best.

PimpVol said:
The girl had her skull cracked in half without being struck by a blunt object (pic is gruesome). That required a good bit of rage. The person most likely to have been that enraged to do that probably was the person with the closet relationship to her. Which person in the family fit that description best? Who would have known the approximate amount of John's bonus, and been dumb enough to use it as the ransom amount in the "ransom note"? It appears to be a fairly open and shut case.


The brother who was supposed to be asleep (according to the parents) turning up on the 911 call proves a parental cover up. Then you are left to figure out who did what. Good luck with that. Plenty of devil in those details.

An intruder is unlikely. He would have to had intruded into the house and his entry point would be obvious (as his eventual exit point). He would need balls of steel to write and then re-write the "ransom note" while still at the crime scene yet be stupid enough to leave without the only thing which could compel the ransom (the body of course).

And how would a person that is even capable of bashing a babies head in know about John Ramsey, his bonus and the location + layout of his house? Hard to believe an outsider did that. Professional hits are not that sloppy. Random hits dont happen in 9 degree weather on Christmas night in the suburbs. It was most probably an accident that was caused by adult family member. Then a panicked, rushed but hair-brained cover up ensued.

That is my opinion of the facts as I understand them.
Click to expand...

An object was used to crack her skull and the debate was whether it was a golf club(which has my vote), or a 3 Cell Maglite.

Whoever killed the girl was at the very least angry, most likely enraged. They clearly wanted her dead.

I don't buy the "accident" turned cover-up story. At what point is a skull fracture AND subsequent strangulation an accident?
 
#198
#198
You can't prosecute the dead.

But you can accomplices.

This is one reason for the hatred of the tea party.
 
#199
#199
coug said:
Cyril Wecht didn't see the body so all he's going off is the original ME's report. Perhaps if he'd been the one that did the autopsy I'd allow his opinion to hold more weight. There was a forum I stumbled on where others were analyzing the ME's report which had some interesting ideas, sadly I can't find the link to show you.



No, all of what you just wrote is pure speculation. Guessing the exact details of what transpired is just bad form.



So suddenly on Christmas night John Ramsey becomes an enraged, child molesting, murderous, pedophile? Not only cracking her skull open but strangling her to death just after. Then he decides after killing her that he's just going to set her body aside to be dumped at a later date and just hope that either the wife doesn't call the police or that someone stumbles upon her body in the mean time? That's moronic at best.



An object was used to crack her skull and the debate was whether it was a golf club(which has my vote), or a 3 Cell Maglite.

Whoever killed the girl was at the very least angry, most likely enraged. They clearly wanted her dead.

I don't buy the "accident" turned cover-up story. At what point is a skull fracture AND subsequent strangulation an accident?
Click to expand...

Coug,
Can you just stop with the insults and answer my question above and I'll try to help you logically infer your way through this? (Speculation has no bounds, but inference does.) Also, you have to just look at the probabilities, someone in her family molested her, and someone in her family cracked her skull open. Why not the most probable of the three?
 
Last edited:
#200
#200
Again, I'll re-state the question:

Isn't it more plausible that whoever wrote the ransom note did not want the police called?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top