JonBenet Ramsey

[crystaldawn]

I just heard that her mother Patsy has died of cancer.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...l=chi-news-hed

Its so sad that she went to her grave not knowing who killed her daughter. I never thought the parents were responsible. For those of you who don't know it UM actually did profile this case but unexplicably Lifetime never airs it. I think they should since its still unsolved.

[mystery_daisy]

That is very sad that Patsy Ramsey died.
I think this was an inside job. The facts of the case are just too bizarre for me to believe some stranger came in, tied up little Jon Benet, left a ransome note, and then killed her.
It took the parents 8 hours to find the dead girl in the home, once they knew she was missing! It doesn't add up for me. I think the fact that this was an affluent family had a lot to do with why no one has been punished for this crime. Again, it's sad to hear the news, though. It's always sad when someone dies, especially a child.

[Gangreen]

does anyone remember the special they did around 96-99?

[studster147]

i reckon the reason they havent repeated the episode (though ive never seen it) is that since it was made, evidence has come to light to suggest that someone outside the family (ie not the Ramseys) COULD have been responsible...at the time the segment was made, i suspect the prevailing view was that the Ramseys were the prime suspects, and that the segment is probably now considered "out of date" in light of subsequent developments....

i still have very great doubts as to whether the Ramseys were "innocent", though ive never believed it was murder, rather an accidental death that was subsequently covered up....

[wiseguy182]

I would have to lean more towards the Ramseys being innocent. While there are some actions of John and Patsy that seemed a bit suspect, I don't think they would have killed their daughter. There just doesn't appear to be a motive, and there's nothing in their background to suggest they were abusive or had mental disorders. I epsecially don't think they would have done it on Christmas, after having celebrated the holidays all day with her. (plus they had plans to do a bunch of traveling and getting together with more relatives in the weeks following Christmas) If one or both of them were guilty, I would speculate it was accidental as opposed to premeditated. There was the whole bedwetting theory about Patsy going berzerk after finding out JonBenet wet the bed, but that seems absurd. Why would Patsy get that fired up on a holiday? Plus, John had already lost a daughter and Patsy was recovering from Stage 4 terminal cancer (although it came back and claimed her life yesterday), which for me makes it all the more unlikely that they would have killed her. I'm kind of going by memory here as it's been awhile since I've followed the case, so things might be a tad fuzzy.

I read the book that John and Patsy put out right about the time it came out, which was 1999 If I'm not mistaken. There are a couple of actions of theirs that I don't quite get. Patsy makes mention of their son Burke somehow acquiring a knife and said that he could have gotten it from anywhere in the house. Well if I had a young son I would make sure any knives I had in the house were locked up or put out of his reach. Also, John speculated that he thought whoever did it got in the house through a window John himself had broken when he locked himself out of the house one day and forgot to have it replaced. If I lived in a city as big as Boulder, Colorado I would have made darn certain that window was replaced the same day. Still, all in all, I just don't think the Ramseys did it.

I don't recall seeing the actual UM segment, although I have seen plenty of coverage on it on television, possibly a Dateline or something of that nature.

[Kane]

Originally Posted by Gangreen

does anyone remember the special they did around 96-99?

Yes. UM aired it just a month after the murder.

[crystaldawn]

I agree with you wiseguy and think the parents weren't responsible. I don't buy that they accidentally killed her either. They were very doting parents and its ridiculous to think she would kill her because she wet the bed. CBS did a very interesting documentary on her case last year and said there was dna at the crime scene (in the basement) and it ruled out the parents. They were going to put it in a national database to see if they could get a match. I think it would have been easy for someone to carry a sleeping JonBenet to the basement which is where the assault took place. Within a 2 mile radius of the Ramsey's home there were 38 registered sex offenders at the time of the crime. Not to mention in the months preceeding the murder there were 100 burglaries in their neighborhood. I do think the perpetrator at least knew John Ramsey in some capacity (whether it be personally or had just heard of him) as the ranson note the amount requested was for an odd amount of $118,000 which was the amount of John Ramsey's Christmas bonus that year.

[UMLongtimefan]

Such a sad sad case, the Ramsey's were devestated emotionally,physically and financially by this case.

Obviously the intial surge of the media who were looking for anything OJ like to grasp onto at the time, tried to do everything to convince us that the Ramsey's were some how guilty in this crime, sorry tv people life is not a tv season and you can't wrap it all up by the end of the show.

The more recent reviews of this case, starting with the Court TV special where the DA/Special Detective that was brought in from another city was the first one to me that pointed out that the Ramseys probably are innoncent. The detective who wanted to find evidence of the Ramseys guilt went through the crime scene photos and showed examples where it looks like an intruder may have indeed been in house. He walked away from the case convinced that they were not guilty.

The CBS special went even further with possible perps, including a case where an older child was attacked in her own home with her mother sleeping near by in the Boulder area.

Also the fact that some unkown males dna was found on the body have convinced me that this was a horribly botched investigation and the chances that the Ramsey's are guilty are about as high as the probability that unicorns are real.

[studster147]

The notion that DNA evidence is foolproof is misguided...plenty of cases have shown it to be more than fallible....i dont think the Ramseys did themselves any favours by hiring themelves a lawyer before the crime had even been investigated...an odd thing to do when you are inncoent, presumably devastated at the shocking death of your daughter, and presumably hell bent on finding the killer....

the question remains why any kidknapper who planned to extract a ransom then killed the girl and dumped her body in the basement having planted the ramson note....and how all of that could have happened without the Ramseys having been alerted to it....

as for the 118,000 pound ransom demand....well, you could surmise that it was someone who knew what bonus he got (hardly likely though, if you assume a sex offender was involved, and if it was a sex crime, where does the ransom come in anyway) or you could surmise that Mr Ramsey ,who obviously knew what bonus he got, wanted people to think that..

all in all, i think the chances of family involvement are some way greater than the existence of unicorns...

[ddelta]

I have read two books on this case (both of them not taking either side) and have some really hard questions that need to be answered before I can clear the parents of any wrong doing. Right now i lean towards it being an accident (either they killed their daughter or someone they know did (i.e. Burke) and are covering up for them).

The reasons i think this is that:

1. The ramson note was (i think) three pages long and it has been determined it was written on a pad taken from inside the house. Who would commit a murder (or sit around waiting for them to come home) and write out a ransom note if they killed (or were going to kill) the young girl? That never added up for me.

2. The ramson note contained the amount of John Ramseys Christmas bonus. That would mean this could not be some random sexual offender. It was either someone who knew the family (or worked for them) or it was the Ramsey's themselves.

3. The house was searched once or twice before John made another look around and then happened upon her. Made me think that he might of been getting frustrated that no one was finding her adn went to get her himself.

4. The hiring of the lawyers always irked me. If it was my daughter and I had nothing to hide, there is no way i would hire a lawyer as soon as they did.

The whole investigation was botched for sure (who sends family members around to look for a body??) and i blame the Boulder Police Dept for being inexperienced. But i really, really think the Ramseys know more then they have ever let on.

[peachysquirt21]

Originally Posted by ddelta

I have read two books on this case (both of them not taking either side) and have some really hard questions that need to be answered before I can clear the parents of any wrong doing. Right now i lean towards it being an accident (either they killed their daughter or someone they know did (i.e. Burke) and are covering up for them).

The reasons i think this is that:

1. The ramson note was (i think) three pages long and it has been determined it was written on a pad taken from inside the house. Who would commit a murder (or sit around waiting for them to come home) and write out a ransom note if they killed (or were going to kill) the young girl? That never added up for me.

2. The ramson note contained the amount of John Ramseys Christmas bonus. That would mean this could not be some random sexual offender. It was either someone who knew the family (or worked for them) or it was the Ramsey's themselves.

3. The house was searched once or twice before John made another look around and then happened upon her. Made me think that he might of been getting frustrated that no one was finding her adn went to get her himself.

4. The hiring of the lawyers always irked me. If it was my daughter and I had nothing to hide, there is no way i would hire a lawyer as soon as they did.

The whole investigation was botched for sure (who sends family members around to look for a body??) and i blame the Boulder Police Dept for being inexperienced. But i really, really think the Ramseys know more then they have ever let on.

Your #2 has always been puzzling for me. I cannot see a total stranger committing this crime given the person who wrote the ramsom note knew this such detail.

[Mr. Fuji]

Originally Posted by ddelta

I have read two books on this case (both of them not taking either side) and have some really hard questions that need to be answered before I can clear the parents of any wrong doing. Right now i lean towards it being an accident (either they killed their daughter or someone they know did (i.e. Burke) and are covering up for them).

The reasons i think this is that:

1. The ramson note was (i think) three pages long and it has been determined it was written on a pad taken from inside the house. Who would commit a murder (or sit around waiting for them to come home) and write out a ransom note if they killed (or were going to kill) the young girl? That never added up for me.

2. The ramson note contained the amount of John Ramseys Christmas bonus. That would mean this could not be some random sexual offender. It was either someone who knew the family (or worked for them) or it was the Ramsey's themselves.

3. The house was searched once or twice before John made another look around and then happened upon her. Made me think that he might of been getting frustrated that no one was finding her adn went to get her himself.

4. The hiring of the lawyers always irked me. If it was my daughter and I had nothing to hide, there is no way i would hire a lawyer as soon as they did.

The whole investigation was botched for sure (who sends family members around to look for a body??) and i blame the Boulder Police Dept for being inexperienced. But i really, really think the Ramseys know more then they have ever let on.

I disagree with the above poster. How foolish would it be for John Ramsey to write a ransom note and put down the exact number of his Christmas bonus on it? (Side note, where the heck is this guy working? That's a pretty hefty Christmas bonus if you ask me.) That leads me to believe that it wasn't he who wrote it or he'd be more likely to write a generic number, like $100,000. But it had to be someone who knew him well.

Additionally, if any of my close family members were ever murdered, I wouldn't hesitate to hire a lawyer immediately. Hiring a lawyer doesn't necessarily mean you have something to hide. It could just mean that you want to make sure you don't somehow get convicted of a crime when you're innocent of any wrongdoing. With all of the people who go to prison for crimes they don't commit, I'd consider hiring a lawyer when the Ramseys did a very wise move.

[UMLongtimefan]

The notion that DNA evidence is foolproof is misguided...plenty of cases have shown it to be more than fallible....i dont think the Ramseys did themselves any favours by hiring themelves a lawyer before the crime had even been investigated...an odd thing to do when you are inncoent, presumably devastated at the shocking death of your daughter, and presumably hell bent on finding the killer....

Sure DNA can get screwed up, but the fact that it shows up on this girl after her death, is a fact that can't be ignored. After all if the DNA pointed at one of the Ramsey's they'd probably be in jail (it was under her fingernails and in her pants).

As for hiring a lawyer, its not like the Ramsey's hired the lawyers before they called 911. The Ramsey's were cooperative until it was evident they were the primary suspects. Anybody who becomes a suspect SHOULD hire a lawyer. Whether we yanks like to admit or not there are plenty of innoncent people in our gaols because they thought they could convince the police they were innocent.

the question remains why any kidknapper who planned to extract a ransom then killed the girl and dumped her body in the basement having planted the ramson note....and how all of that could have happened without the Ramseys having been alerted to it....

That's where the more recent shows on this case I think provid an interesting and to me a reasonable doubt theory of the Ramsay's guilt. They proposed that the killer ,who from the evidence of the body suggests that they were sexually motivated, may have killed Jon Bennet before kidnapping her (unable to control their urge?) Maybe the kidnapping wasn't the motivation at all, and the killer was fanatasizing about the crime when they wrote the note.

He's already thinking about killing her, maybe something went wrong when he tried to get her out of the house and he decided to kill her before he left?

As for the Ramsey's not being alerted to to the kidnapping/murder.. unfortunately there are MANY MANY cases where children are kidnapped/murdered while their parents and guardians sleep in the next room and they don't here a sound. Some very recent cases of this in Florida and Utah. Of this very thing happening (Jacquilin Dwalaby (sp) you um fans?).

It was also mentioned in the newer shows that Lou Smit (the experienced detective that the boulder police hired to look into the case) believed that Jon Bennet was shocked by a stun gun, something that may have incapcitated her, and yet one wouldn't think the parents would do something that awful as use a stun gun on her for wetting her bed.

All lot of people believe that the Ramsey's were guilty because they abused Jon Bennet, yet if that's true why hasn't the brother or any of John's other children ever come forward and confirmed that either Jon or Patsy had abused Jon Bennet in the past? Do you think he wasn't asked? (As for her brother's guilt, no one involved in this case has ever believed he was the party responsible for this brutal murder).

Any history of previous sexual abuse (by John or Patsy)was not there and Jon Bennet's pedetrician was prepared to testify to that effect.

as for the 118,000 pound ransom demand....well, you could surmise that it was someone who knew what bonus he got (hardly likely though, if you assume a sex offender was involved, and if it was a sex crime, where does the ransom come in anyway) or you could surmise that Mr Ramsey ,who obviously knew what bonus he got, wanted people to think that.

The 118,000 certainly indicates to me that it was somebody who knew John Ramsey, but can it be proved it was Patsy,John or Burke?

Ramsey was well known in Boulder and was even called "Billion Dollar" John. Could his bonus have leaked out into the community as Fuji says that's a pretty big amount?

Despite repeatedly giving samples of her handwriting Patsy Ramsay could not be either proven or ruled out? I'm not sure why I would so readily discount DNA under a childs fingernails and in her pants as evidence, but be so eager to convict someone based handwriting analysis.

The note as I said is a long one and quite rambiling too, hard to believe that if anyone were trying to cover up a crime they would write a note that long? But leave the body in the house to be discovered?

To me, I think the note was doodling and fantasizing by the killer, not the parents writing with their left hands. Fuji's point is well taken and if you don't think this is was a brutal killing with ulterior motive than all I can say is read the facts of the case.

[dbcoopercatcher]

Originally Posted by crystaldawn

I just heard that her mother Patsy has died of cancer.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...l=chi-news-hed

Its so sad that she went to her grave not knowing who killed her daughter. I never thought the parents were responsible. For those of you who don't know it UM actually did profile this case but unexplicably Lifetime never airs it. I think they should since its still unsolved.

We can't say for sure that Patsy went to her grave not knowing who killed her daughter. All we can say is that the case is unsolved. the lead detective, Steve Thomas, actually wrote a book in which he believed Patsy was responsible. Steve actually was sued because you can't accuse someone publicly unless they are found guilty in court. However, it is not a done deal that John and Patsy had nothing to do with JOn Benet's death. The case is unsolved. Anyone could be responsible.

A major reason. Why would a kidnapper leave behind a ransom note and the body. Ask anyone in law enforcement, it is usually one or the other. Plus, Patsy could not be excluded as the writer of that ransom letter. the ransom letter was actually written on the same tab of paper which was in the kitchen of the Ramsey house. could someone have set John Ramsey or Patsy up? Possible. But, nobody is excluded in this case.
db

[nohwheregirl]

I watched John Walsh (host of America's Most Wanted) on Larry King last night. He stated that he didn't think this case would ever be solved due to the botched investigation. Such a sad statement.