First, the reader should know that JonBenet was a descendant of John C. Bennett. She was also a distant cousin of mine on her mother's side.

I am absolutely appalled at the CBS series of the murder of JonBenet. The errors are stark. The killer was not a member of the family but a person who, in part, chose her because of her lineage so dramatically presented by her name.

The phoney analysis of the ransom note as possibly being written by a young person is hogwash. The writing presents in the first portion of the note (being the larger part) the age of killer from the waviness of the writing (which disappears largely in the latter portion). This demonstrates that the two parts were written separately. The person was of a certain age who had in prior crimes demonstrated the change from nervously (as per the first portion) to confidence and calm later. The killer was of the same age as John Ramsey within a year but by noting other factors including the size of some letters, most notably the small "o" eliminates the Ramsays. It is certain that the first portion was written in anticipation and the last part after the murder was completed.

While trying to demonstrate that a blow with the flashlight could have been done by a child of similar age of JonBenet's brother, it eliminates the fact noted by Lou Smit of the use of a stun gun or taser while she was alive. That finding is important as no such instrument was present in the Ramsay home and explains how the killer was able to get her downstairs without waking anyone else. The note contains reference to certain movies as noted and as one can see from the killers other crimes including oral directions in prior extortions.

One of the many interesting facts which demonstrate more about the killer was the scream heard by the next door neighbors. JonBenet could not have given such a carefully directed scream. But the killer was quite capable of imitating voices including that of a child of her age as he did in other murders. The killer furthermore imitated one of his other child murders with the placement of the arms of the victim - stretched out in back of her head - contrary to all known cases where a loved one or family member killed the victim. This was in replication of another murder by the killer where the arms were similarly placed, where the victim was taken from her basement room and her nightgown carefully placed next to the body - as was a nightgown not worn by JonBenet that night. The CBS people missed the garrote on her neck which equally doomed the child as well as the actions against her sexually

Other clues carefully placed by the killer included not only the flashlight (per a murder in Ohio he did not commit) and spider web per the Ilinois murder, and the golf club with the blond hair under the fir tree as a clue to a murder in New England.

Of course, only by access to all the police had would one know the above. CBS just wasted a bundle. The police did not realize the reason for the baseball bat.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 07:51PM by rhgc.

I didn't watch it all, but from what I had heard and read, it seemed they were just trying to re-victimize the father and brother.

That ransom note was about as believable as the Book of Abraham. Come on...

It was written by a serial killer who used similar language in his oral extortions and who carefully set out clues relating each killing to prior and FUTURE murder as was the baseball bat.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 08:21PM by rhgc.

How did the serial killer know the precise amount of JonBenet's father's bonus? Why the reference to foreign gentlemen? Why the phrase "southern good sense," which I have never heard any Yankee say?

How did the killer get into the house, isolate the child, tase the child, torture, molest and murder the child, and go upstairs to leave a note written on family stationary without anyone hearing anything?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 08:56PM by donbagley.

In an earlier crime the killer used the same references though oral instead of in writing. As for the amount of the bonus it was duck soup. You see the killer just had to walk into the home on a previous day (or even that evening) and see the records of the Ramsays which indicated the bonus! I figure that the time to find JonBenet's room and the other bedrooms would have been less than five minutes tops. The note was written on a pad used by Patsy. It was probably taken earlier at a time when the killer was able to rifle through recent papers in the home office. He also noticed the final letter of the ransom note from a certificate on the wall there. Make it look as if it were someone who was familiar with the Ramsays. BTW, I know where the killer stayed while in Colorado that time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 08:59PM by rhgc.

The family was gone for hours that evening. The killer probably came in when they left and had hours to look at the layout and write the note, not to mention snoop through financial records. It was a very large place and he could have easily hidden in an extra bedroom or in the basement and waited until everyone was asleep.
Although the police say he was cleared I always though the Santa fellow was a good suspect. Jon Benet said she was going to get a surprise from Santa AFTER Christmas and would have gone willingly as she knew him. His own daughter had been kidnapped and his wife had written a play about a child murdered in her own basement. He was cleared but the coincidences are strange. There were other suspects too.
The children slept on the second floor, the parents on the third. The basement was three stories down from the parent's, the child was likely tasered and unconscious and John had taken a sleeping pill. It would be unlikely there was anything to hear.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 09:19PM by bona dea.

But only one man had gone to Boulder to commit the murder and missed a court appearance because of it and had imitated the voice of a child, brought the tape with him from where he was living in the east, and connected the murder with others which he had committed. Bona dea, you know much about the case.

So the ransom note is definitely fake, right? You're saying it was written by a killer who didn't belong in the house. Why write the note at all? Seems to me it was written to cover a disappearance. There was no disappearance, so something went wrong, didn't it?

The murder was the object, not an accident at all. The note was actually the work of a genius.

Not necessarily.The murderer was likely a pedophile who intended to kidnap the child. She was accidentally killed andntherenwas no point in taking the body with him.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 09:31PM by bona dea.

True, but the killer also killed adults. His first victim was a girl almost the same age as JonBenet. As a pedophile he also killed boys.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 09:30PM by rhgc.

Depends on who the killer was. That hasn't been determined although there are suspects. Who do you think did it?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 09:40PM by bona dea.

I know who it and am writing the book.

aha! so you are writing "the book!" That explains a lot.

According to Det.Smit, he intended to take the girl, but accidentally killed her. He had left a suitcase by the window and the theory is that he had intended to put her inside alive, but it was too big to get through the window.Besides, she was dead so there was no point.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 09:41PM by bona dea.

The suitcase was a clue to the murder in Illinois. The clue in that murder is found in reading a book by Sir Walter Scott. BTW, the killer knew that John was NOT from the south.

I read several online stories about the case, and I don't see enough evidence to prove an intruder. Thomas is my patron saint, and I'm from Missouri.

Read the books.DNA was found inside Jon Benet's underpants and on the outside of her leggings . It was from an unknown male. Anyway, why would parents come up with such a crazy plot including strangling their already dying child and writing a stupid ransom note if she had been accidentally killed over bedwetting which is the original theory.If she had a severe head injury,say she had fallen in the bathroom and hit her head on the tub or put the body at the foot of the stairs and say she slipped. That would be a lot more believable.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 09:48PM by bona dea.

The police kept the lid on the DNA report for months. There was semen on her pj's, on her underwear and under he nails. All three samples were the same and cleared the Ramsey family. But that wasn't in the narrative that the Police wanted to go with.

True, but it was contact DNA rather than semen.The police decided the day of the murder that the family did it and weren't going to let evidence get it the way of their foregone conclusion. They botched it from the get go.

You are correct. It was touch DNA.

I agree. I have read practically everything on the case and the family has been cleared. End of story. I watched the first part and didn't bother with the second due the bias. The Investigative Discovery series was much better as was Dr Phil.

This is what I learned from watching the various interviews from the experts.The autopsy confirmed: no sexual assault. None.
The scratches on her neck show she was conscious when she was garrotted. Those knots are not common. Used in the Navy, I read.
Head injury came after the strangulation.
Unknown DNA on waist of leggings and panties. Never found.

My opinion: no way the 9 yr old brother could have done anything to hurt her or write a ransom note that was not a ransom. They, (CBS) program) are being sued by him because of trying to say he did it. Ludicrous claim.
It would have to be an adult male that tased, garrotted, hit her head very hard and strangled her and wrote the three page note, and would have to know the layout of the house and where everyone slept as it was a very unusual floor plan.

Problematic: not finding her when the police canvased the house -- did not go into the room where she was. Also, father took off the garrott and "cleaned her up" and placed her near the Xmas tree rather than not touching anything and calling the police.
Also read that the mother had not been to bed or changed her clothes from Xmas Eve.(Was that validated?)
Police made a lot of mistakes.

My view: it will never be solved.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/21/2016 09:48PM by SusieQ#1.

Head injury came first and she was not raped but there were signs that she may have been molested. They were not sure.

bona dea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Head injury came first and she was not raped but
> there were signs that she may have been molested.
> They were not sure.


The last people who reviewed the photos and autopsy, in one of the programs I saw last week said she had to be conscious to have made the scratch marks with her fingers around the rope that was garrotted which means the head injury came after. That's what I found interesting when listening to their reports. I always thought it was the other way around before I heard that.

The "sexual contact" was merely the use of the paint brush handle and was, of course, symbolic rather than actual sexual contact although one should note that under the law it is the same. The killer from his very first to his last murder got his sexual kicks out of killing rather than from sexual activity or touching.

She probably was partially conscious but the majority opinion was that the head injury came first.

bona dea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> She probably was partially conscious but the
> majority opinion was that the head injury came
> first.


Apparently there are dynamic differences of opinions on how it all happened and in what order. I heard one (or two-I forget) that reviewed everything who were adamant that the head injury came second.

This is from Mark Beckner, retired Boulder Police Chief who led the investigation initially following the murder, he states the head injury indeed occurred before the stangulation did. It was the strangulation that killed her, although the head wound was enough to have caused death by itself, she would've suffered longer from that. He also states the crime scene was staged to make it appear like a kidnapping/assault gone bad. He suggests he knows who done it, without coming right out and calling a spade a spade, other than saying "let the facts speak for themselves."

"We know from the evidence she was hit in the head very hard with an unknown object, possibly a flashlight or similar type item. The blow knocked her into deep unconsciousness, which could have led someone to believe she was dead. The strangulation came 45 minutes to two hours after the head strike, based on the swelling on the brain. While the head wound would have eventually killed her, the strangulation actually did kill her. The rest of the scene we believe was staged, including the vaginal trauma, to make it look like a kidnapping/assault gone bad. I have avoided saying who I believe is responsible and let the facts speak for themselves. There are several viable theories."

http://extras.denverpost.com/jonbenetAMA.html

That may be but is not what I read.

bona dea Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> That may be but is not what I read.


I saw the men interviewed in the program the other day. They made a medical claim because of the scratches on her neck which was photographed and part of the interview. I think one was a coroner. They were apparently asked to review the autopsy report and photos. Some they showed on TV.

I am not saying I am right but that isn't what I read. I am not a coroner, but the book I read made a good case. I am not knowledgeable enough about anatomy or forensics to make a judgment, but she could have scratched him at an earlier time.

I think she was unconscious at the time of the head injury.

Sort of off topic, but I watched the Jonbenet Ramsey special on tv, and one of the experts said a few times something to the effect of "let the evidence lead you to the truth." Of course, I thought of Mormonism! Overwhelming evidence that it is a fraud.

The network show did raise some good points. One was that the ransom note was ridiculously long. As one investigator pointed out, the statements and demands could have been boiled down to four sentences. It doesn't fit in with other known ransom notes including the Lindbergh kidnapping, which were far shorter. When timed by several investigators, it took more than 22 minutes to hand-write. What home invader would want to take that kind of time? And why not have the note available beforehand?

I agree with Don that the phrase, "southern good sense" is odd. I can't make up my mind if it is an appeal to a fellow southerner or is meant to be condescending. During my time living in Boulder, I don't recall meeting anyone from the deep south. Boulder tended to get transplants from the I-95 corridor from Washington, D.C. to Boston, Chicago, California, and a few from Texas who come for the skiing. I think most southerners would have a hard time adjusting to all the snow.

The handwriting on the note was also odd. The slant went all over the place. Highly unusual. Perhaps disguised.

The 911 operators assessment was interesting. She noted how Patsy went from a hysterical mess on the call to a calm, "We've called the police, what now?" after she thought the call was disconnected. The 911 operator wasn't buying it. It was too quick of a switch. She stated that this was the first time that anyone had ever asked for her opinion about the call.

I'm not saying that the facts as presented by the show conclusively lead in one direction or another. But they did lend to the narrative.

IMO, the father was intelligent enough to know not to touch or move his daughter's body. Yet he did, anyway.

As a former Boulder resident, the size of the Ramsay house boggles my mind. Not the norm for Boulder at all. Also, did anyone else note the messiness and disorganization of a lot of the house? The family could afford a maid, right? And very different from Patsy's fanatical devotion to meticulous landscaping (per their gardener.)



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2016 06:28AM by summer.

The fact that the note took 21+ minutes just to copy confirms that this was an inside job. Who kills a child and then sits down and writes a novel of a ransom note? And the ransom note was all over the place, hinting that it really wasn't about a ransom, but instead about misleading detectives.

And I think it's plausible that Burke killed his sister accidentally. The year before he hit her in the head with a golf club in a fit of anger.

WRONG! The killer had hours and hours to compose the note. Not only was it carefully planned as the killer had entered the home earlier and taken the pad but also had plenty of time AFTER he killed her to write the final paragraph. BTW, the only interesting fact was the Patsy had been upset that OJ got off. Ironically, OJ also is innocent in fact.

Now I know you're drinkin' the Kool-Aid. Even OJ's lawyers like the judge knows he did it. They were his paid hacks to get him off the hook. Plus, he lost the civil trial. He was able to fool a jury of his peers in the criminal one, but not the civil one.

And now he rots in jail for lesser crimes. Serves the bastard right.

OJ is innocent? You just lost any credibility with anything you write, or will write.

In the immediate aftermath and investigations following the homicide, the initial reports indicated the mother's handwriting was responsible for the handwritten note, not a stranger.

As for sexual assault, so there wasn't the night of the homicide, but there had been reports and physicians reports that the child had been sexualized prior to that night. Most likely by her father, or her mother. The homicide was purported to be an act to silence JonBenet because of the trauma already done to her leading up to that night.

I wonder why all the sensationalism now following her death when no one has ever been arrested. The husband and wife took their dirty little secrets with them to their graves (ie, the wife did, and the husband will.) I'm sure they know more than they ever fessed up to.

It is a tragedy that JonBenet suffered a cruel death no child should ever go through.

The parents may have got off in a court of law, because not enough evidence was found to bring charges. They were slick Willies, those two. No one forced entry into the home that night. What parent would turn a deaf ear to their 6-year old daughter murdered under their noses on Christmas Day, and then claim not to know where she was in their own home for hours and hours until investigators happened upon the crime scene? Nah, that's the line I don't buy either. They were culpable as sin IMO.

JonBenet's mother died from guilt and shame, and remorse for what she did, and taking her secret guilt to the grave with her. It ate her up alive.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2016 08:27AM by Amyjo.

They know more than they let on. No parent obstructs justice of a murdered child. Period.

The alleged killer was so confused and so clumsy. He didn't know if he wanted to rape or kill the child. He didn't know if he wanted to extort the parents. (He also never gave parents a way to pay the ransom, so clearly the ransom note was a charade.) The killer was a foreign faction with no stated agenda. He gave no reason for targeting the Ramseys. And the killer was so comfortable killing the child, he took 21 + minutes just to write the ransom note.

Sorry. That's bull. This is an inside job.

And to think Patsy was pissed that OJ "got off."



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2016 08:53AM by newcomer.

Read my prior posts. The killer was not clumsy. He could not rape in the usual sense because he only reach ejaculation upon murder. The killer used the "foreign faction" excuse in other crimes as well as "two" cohorts watching. The note was NOT written in 21 minutes because it was not copied but carefully composed and the killer had hours in which to do it. What took the most time was careful placement of items such as the flashlight, the baseball bat, and the golf club.

DNA.cleared.the.family. That is the bottomline

Amyjo, JonBenet was NOT a molested child. The suggestion of people who knew little if anything about her was on the basis of bedwetting and the doctor was aware of it and made absolutely clear that it was not caused by molestation. Note again that the note was written by someone other than the Ramsays. I am expert on handwriting and have used my knowledge in a number of cases. I have a number of exemplars of the actual killer.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2016 09:00AM by rhgc.

Other doctors besides the Ramseys confirmed the child had been molested before the murder. Only the Ramsey's doctor denied those allegations (paid hack.)

Also, the Boulder Chief of Police had this to say about the handwritten note found at the murder scene, on a recent blog that disputes your position.

"From /u/Mo7ia7ty:
Was the handwritten note tested for DNA/fingerprints? And do the police think the murderer sat in the house and wrote a long winded note on the Ramseys note pad before attempting to kidnap her. obviously didnt do it after if it was a criminal as they would have just got out. Also how might the "kidnapper" have known how much john ramseys bonus was. thanks.
permalink
[–]MarkBeckner[S] 61 points 3 days ago

Yes, of course it was. The only fingerprint on the note was one belonging to the document examiner at the Colorado Bureau of Investigation (CBI). On the notepad from which the note came from, the only fingerprints on the pad belonged to the CBI agent, the sergeant with the police department who took the pad into custody, and Patsy Ramsey. No, we do not believe a someone wrote the note prior to attempting to kidnap JonBenet. Neither the PD or the FBI believe this was ever a kidnapping. It was a murder that someone tried to stage as a kidnapping."

He also states further down his blog, this at the crime scene,

"Was any fingerprints found on the door leading into the room containing the body including the families?
Three palm prints were found, two belonging to Patsy Ramsey and one belonging to John Andrew Ramsey."

http://extras.denverpost.com/jonbenetAMA.html

He has his opinion as to who did it, but cannot make it public because it hasn't gone to trial without enough evidence - so he presents the facts as he found them, and nothing more.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2016 09:45AM by Amyjo.

Amyjo, I thought that the handwriting looked like Patsy's as well. Patsy also has a mixed slant from what I saw briefly on the show. I've taught handwriting for years and a mixed slant is very unusual. Most people slant to the right. Some write up and down. A very few slant to the left. But a mixed slant? You almost never see that. Even kids don't do that as a rule.

And if you thought your daughter was kidnapped, wouldn't the first thing you would do would be to conduct a thorough search of the house? Heck, I do that much when I'm trying to ascertain the location of my cat.

I almost did a research paper on this in a forensics science class back in graduate school. The topic became too depressing for me, so I had to change to something else.

But heck yeah, it was Patsy's handwriting. She just tried to pretend it was someone else's.

It was definitely a staged murder, and an inside job.

We may never know why, or what the real motive/s were. It doesn't really matter at the end of the day. They will answer to God if there is one, as Patsy already has.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2016 11:25AM by Amyjo.

But then what about the DNA?

How did she plant the DNA under her daughter's nails?

And what about unknown male DNA in two.separate articles of clothes. One was on the inside of her panties. Gee. Ya think maybe the owner of the DNA might have done it?

handwriting experts at first said there were similarities and she could not be eliminated. That is not the same as saying she wrote it and other experts disagreed with the first about the similarities.

this will sound totally out there at first to a bunch of you but anyone up to date on the 'jimmy saville' case and 'operation yewtree' in the UK will know what relevance this has.

Recently, the daily mail released some pictures that michael jackson had in his possession at neverland - some people have suggested that he was not just a paedo but he and his ranch were used to 'condition', ie groom, and abuse children.

There is a picture of 'miss colorado' as part of the collection at his link - SPOILER ALERT - CENSORED X-RATED PICS - DO NOT CLICK IF EASILY OFFENDED

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3655438/Why-did-13-years-proof-Jacko-s-depravity-revealed-Mail-knows-pictures-police-raid-Neverland-home-disturbing-just-released-shatter-protestations-innocence.html

As you can see, on the wall are pictures of johnbenet's face. The girl - miss colorado in the picture - has her panties round her ankles, she looks really, really sad and she is holding above her head the leg of the tights that are tied in a noose around her neck.

No mention of the picture was made in the daily mail article, only that it was part of a book. The picture of jonbenet on the wall seemed indicative, to me at least, of a connection between she, the photographer, wacko jacko and the european leg of this operation. In belgium it has been pegged around a guy called marc dutreaux who allegedly stole kids to order to make snuff movies. He has been to jail for murder, a very short sentence - police were extremely 'incompetent' during searches of his property: he had 2 girls in a cage in a secret room that they did not find. Bureaucracy was incompetent during the bringing of the case which some investigators claim implicated government and establishment figures (just like here in UK)

Maybe I am making connections where there are none but there is a world-wide 'ring' - religious or otherwise - and they, the big boys, all know of each other.

Beauty pageants are not common in europe but they would be a paedo's paradise - organise the biggest and best and treat the parents and kiddies wonderfully to groom them and get the prettiest for the snuff movies.

JonBenet had eaten pineapple. It was the last thing she ate according to the autopsy.
There was pineapple in a bowl on the counter.
It had Patsy & Burke's finger prints on the bowl not JonBenet's.

So she wasn't in bed asleep before the murder?

I think she was accidentally killed by her brother and the parents covered it up. He hit her with the flashlight or bat or whatever.....

The train track poking was very interesting....Not a taser gun maybe.

It's been 20 years.......

Tutu/exmo-K

It wasn't the head injury that resulted in death to JonBenet. It was strangulation that followed, most likely by her parents.

Their palm prints were the only ones found on the door leading to the room where her body was found when the police recovered her body.

Not their son's. If indeed he had hit her accidentally or otherwise in the head with an instrument, any right thinking parent isn't going to "cover it up" by murdering their daughter. They would take her to the ER on Christmas Day and call it an accident or a sibling fight, or whatever. But not aid and abet in murder. Unless they were all complicit, which they may have been, which only makes it all the more sinister.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/22/2016 09:41AM by Amyjo.

One thing's for sure. The Boulder police were either in on it or idiots.

a phrase both in the ransom note and in the family Christmas letter - or so it was told to me by a friend in law enforcement.

That's interesting about JonBenet being descended from John C. Bennett of Mormon fame.

I found a family tree of JonBenet where a line went back to Massachusetts and showed her descent from John Alden and Priscilla Mullins, two of the Pilgrims on the Mayflower.

I'll try to find the link.

The link for the genealogy showing the John Alden/Priscilla Mullins ancestral connection. The family tree appears to trace mostly JonBenet's mother's side of the family.

http://www.wargs.com/other/ramsey.html

The father's genealogy is traced only a few generations and it showed a few generations of the Bennett line, but not far enough to get to John C. Bennett. The Bennett line went back to Michigan and then stopped in the mid-1800s.