- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: WTF happened to JonBenet?
Posted on 9/17/16 at 2:23 pm to RobbBobb
Posted on 9/17/16 at 2:23 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
Again, NO ONE takes the time to write a ransom note on the scene. You bring it before hand so that you can make a quick exit, if required
That's just your preconceived notion. The perp was in the house with the intention to take the child and torture/murder her. BTK style. And while he was waiting, and walking around the home, inspiration hits and he decided to muddy the waters and torture the family a bit psychologically with a letter. There was never any intention for ransom. That's just a way to inflict psychological pain on the family/point law enforcement in another direction.
quote:
uh, the suitcase was placed there as a step up. Because no one small enough to squeeze through that window was going to be able to get himself and a kid up that wall without a step. And John, the engineer would know that
I agree that the suitcase was used to make window exit easier. But there has also been speculation that the suitcase served a dual purpose. Large enough to stuff a child's body in as well. Taking a body for later "use"
(don't want to say the obvious) is commonplace in cases of torture murder. At some point though, he ritualistically murdered her and made his escape without her. And somebody asked about Burke's involvement. That's just laughable in a 1000 different ways. He was nine and by all accounts the sweetest and most psychologically stable boy. He did not have anything to do with it,and there has never been anything legitimate to suggest he was. It was nothing more than people attempting to make the facts of the case fit some kind of understandable narrative that would allow people to accept a murder involving the family. I've seen this evolve over two decades and it's just lazy sophistry. It's the cruelest part of the whole case, imho, making him a lifelong victim of people's nonsensical pet theories.
4
Posted on 9/17/16 at 2:27 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
People that might have access to the 118k figure: An Access Graphics employee. A payroll company employee. A bank employee. Somebody with access to John's work computer/email. A random hacker. Somebody that went through the trash. Somebody that saw a check stub. A careless comment.
All entirely possible. But keep in mind this was 20 years ago when electronic technology wasn't near what we have now.
I still believe the family was involved.
Posted on 9/17/16 at 3:32 pm to Lsupimp
You do know the no 'sexual molestation'.
No one came it to molest the girl. Like you said, they were there for a long time, and did nothing to her. So, If they came in to kidnap, they would have had a pre written note
Notice how in 20 years, no hand writing or DNA has matched up? Everything was staged
quote:
There was no evidence of rape or sexual abuse, however, there were abrasions around her vaginal area
No one came it to molest the girl. Like you said, they were there for a long time, and did nothing to her. So, If they came in to kidnap, they would have had a pre written note
Notice how in 20 years, no hand writing or DNA has matched up? Everything was staged
Posted on 9/17/16 at 3:55 pm to retreaux
DNA wouldnt show who killed her, just show who was around her at some point.
This post was edited on 9/17/16 at 4:44 pm
Posted on 9/17/16 at 4:05 pm to fatboydave
The mom was mad bc the dad was more intrested in the daughter than her, another crazy women. So she killed her own daughter.
Posted on 9/17/16 at 4:56 pm to fatboydave
$$$$$$$ Brother did it
Posted on 9/17/16 at 5:04 pm to moffettduck
quote:
$$$$$$$ Brother did it
How did he get money from it?
Posted on 9/17/16 at 5:14 pm to Pectus
Pretty sure the police shot her.
The video, when recovered, will prove it.
The video, when recovered, will prove it.
Posted on 9/17/16 at 5:16 pm to fatboydave
Her parents obviously didn't love her to give her a name like that.
Posted on 9/17/16 at 5:17 pm to Rockbrc
Elizabeth smart case made. Me think this could be a random outsider.
Posted on 9/17/16 at 11:33 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
eople that might have access to the 118k figure:
An Access Graphics employee.
A payroll company employee.
A bank employee.
Somebody with access to John's work computer/email.
A random hacker.
Somebody that went through the trash.
Somebody that saw a check stub.
A careless comment
And the author of the ransom note: Patsy Ramsay
There just simply is NO way to explain away the ransom note. Since you refuse to believe the family can be involved, please explain how an outsider would write this type note? A foreign faction? completely laughable
Do you imply that someone wanted to frame the Ramsays?
Then why not make the crime somehow look more like the Ramsays would have done it, like by NOT leaving a ransom note.
And you insist the perpetrator hid in the house for an extended amount of time. What did he do, go looking for paper and pen to write the ransom note? How idiotic. And in Patsy's handwriting.
What about the pineapple? Did he get Jonbenet out of bed, take her downstairs to share some pineapple with her, then do the things you say?
What about Patsy Ramsay wearing the same clothes as the night before? I guess you can write this off, but it all fits as part of the crime scene, to be honest.
I guess all rich, white folks just should start killing folks, for it is people like you who will refuse to believe their capability of such a crime, since they don't "look the part".
I'm not the one coming up with silly conspiracy theories or stretching a few of the minor points of the crime.
What I point to are the biggest parts of the crime.
Oh and one more thing: the autopsy showed that she was first hit with an object to the head, then was then strangled with the garotte. Why, if you had time to prewrite the ransom note, with a plan to take her away from the premises, not still carry her out even after you hit her? Why would you go to the trouble to hide her in a remote area of the basement? And how did you escape without leaving any trace?
Posted on 9/18/16 at 3:17 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
Lsupimp
By your logic then some psycho murderer did this to this little girl and never had another sexual/murder/torture fantasy again in his life? Highly unlikely. DNA would have been matched to this person by now. Also highly unlikely the random psycho happens to know the exact amount of money John got as a bonus. It was also stated that the DA I think she was at the time very good friends with the Ramsey's. She had some responsibility for this whole cover up. I think the DNA results were tampered with to exonerate her friends. There is zero way anyone goes to commit a heinous crime with no murder weapon, writes a long note in the house, takes the child downstairs to eat pineapple, and then kills her without anyone in the house hearing any of this. It was stated that she likely knew the killer because she would never sit at the kitchen table and eat with a stranger. It's absolutely ridicoulous to think an outsider broke in and waited for them to come home and then wait for everyone in the house to go to sleep before making his move. He would obviously have to be a very unorganized criminal and then somehow become very organized while committing this crime. They also interviewed a Ramsey family friend that stated Burke had struck Jon Benet previously in the head.
Absolutely a cover up not only by the Ramsey but by the DA
This post was edited on 9/18/16 at 3:18 pm
Posted on 9/18/16 at 3:28 pm to Howyouluhdat
You can't rationalize with him. He knew someone who knew them, therefore they must be innocent. They were white and rich, again must be innocent.
I'm with you. There just simply is zero way the Ramsays weren't involved.
I honestly think this bogus mystery DNA that showed up 10 years later was to let the BPD off the hook. Patsy had already died, therefore the real murderer here and passed, thus making it any arrest a moot point.
Further, if the DA really believed this mystery DNA, they would and should be actively pursuing this case. But much like OJ and Nicole simpson and Ron Goldman, there simply is no reason to look for the "murderer".
I'm with you. There just simply is zero way the Ramsays weren't involved.
I honestly think this bogus mystery DNA that showed up 10 years later was to let the BPD off the hook. Patsy had already died, therefore the real murderer here and passed, thus making it any arrest a moot point.
Further, if the DA really believed this mystery DNA, they would and should be actively pursuing this case. But much like OJ and Nicole simpson and Ron Goldman, there simply is no reason to look for the "murderer".
Posted on 9/18/16 at 4:02 pm to LSU alum wannabe
quote:
Are you talking about his current behavior in the interview? That's one fricked up guy, but how could you not be. Sister murdered, mother dies of cancer, and you are publicly convicted of the crime. Hidden from the world like a serial killers kids.
I should have been more clear, I was talking about his behavior when being interviewed after JonBenet was killed (when he was still a child).
The interview you are referring to must be the one I saw recently. I didn't see the whole thing, but he had this weird smile on his face. It seems like it was a nervous type of smile, but I am sure he has some issues.
Posted on 9/18/16 at 8:33 pm to OweO
Anybody watching this Jon Benet thing? There's no doubt that family had everything to do with her murder. Ridiculous.
Posted on 9/18/16 at 8:48 pm to JuiceTerry
quote:
Anybody watching this Jon Benet thing?
what is on? 60 minutes?
somebody close enough to the family to know what Mr. Ramsey's Christmas bonus was definitely involved. $118,000.00 is not a number you randomly make up.
i don't believe it was the son. i think he's just creepy. the parents had to have an idea of who did it.
Posted on 9/18/16 at 8:51 pm to Lsupimp
quote:
That's just your preconceived notion. The perp was in the house with the intention to take the child and torture/murder her. BTK style. And while he was waiting, and walking around the home, inspiration hits and he decided to muddy the waters and torture the family a bit psychologically with a letter. There was never any intention for ransom. That's just a way to inflict psychological pain on the family/point law enforcement in another direction.
There was never any intention for ransom but they knew the $118k figure?
lol.
Posted on 9/18/16 at 8:51 pm to Rebel
Good episode so far
Posted on 9/18/16 at 9:09 pm to Make It Rayne
Very interesting so far.
Posted on 9/18/16 at 9:12 pm to Rebel
Yeah, CBS. I mean the first thing they covered is the 911 call, and the voices at the end of the call when they thought they had hung up. Of course they did it.
Page 6 of 35
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News