I was going to ask the same thing. I can be found that way at least 1/2 the time. I fall asleep in front of the TV a lot.
Well, according to the same cite, she claimed the reason she was like that was that she had gotten up and put on the same clothes as the day before. I guess the way she was dressed together with her explanation is pretty damning - that she’s lying.
Again, I’m wondering if that’s factual.
I going strictly from memory here, but I recall thinking, at the time, that the son was the most likely suspect and that the mother wrote the ransom note to try and divert attention away from him. I also seem to remember that he was eliminated, maybe because he wasn’t home that night? Wasn’t there also some casual worker involved, some guy who did some yard work for the Ramsey’s a few weeks, or months, before the murder? I also remember one of the investigators claiming that no one could have entered, through the broken basement window, because he found a spiderweb across the opening the next morning. I thought that conclusion was ridiculous when I first heard it.
Anyway this thing was speculated to death a decade ago, unless there’s a confession, or some new evidence, I doubt we’ll ever know.
You’re one of only 13 people I can recall who seem to think the case was *not * solved beyond a reasonable doubt.
I don’t remember hearing that the father was sneaky; I do, however, remember the police and public hounding to death an innocent odd-job man. (Innocent in its most precise use here, by the way. Despite his history, he was innocent of the crime for which he was suspected.)
Elizabeth Smart, by the way.
Isn’t that the family that everybody tut-tutted because the parents were swingers?
No, that was, umm, umm, tip of my tongue… I can’t remember. California, I think.
Van Damm?
Bingo.
Man, I’m just full of bad info today. I’ll stop now.
What I don’t understand, if everyone who has studied the case pretty much feels the mom did it, even though the evidence is only circumstantial, why not charge her with it and let a jury decide? Maybe she’ll crack if she testifies? It wouldn’t hurt, unless there is evidence that has not come out that may offer up more damning proof down the road. But if what is out is all there is, and no more info is forthcoming, they’ve spent all this money anyway, maybe they will luck out and get a jury who agrees? The “West Memphis 3” were found guilty on similar circumstantial evidence.
A friend of mine who is in law enforcement says that he is pretty sure that OJ did it.
I like Crime Library and use it all the time – but in the article they totally dismiss the Ramsey’s as suspects on the second page – and trully never consider them again. Now, while I can’t swear they DID it – I think anyone sane realizes they have to be considered and discussed reasonable suspects – even if you like other theories better. Crime Library totaly drops the ball on this issue.
A lot of cool “I personally talked to the DA” stuff in this thread. Here is Alex hunter THE DA talking about the case on the Record.
I am not sure what I think of this transcript:
He clearly favors Lou Smit who believes the Ramsey’s are innocent (tho He calls Smit unprofessional by name for talking to Newsweek) over the ‘two police buddies” who think the Ramsey’s did it
He lets it be known several times he and the police disagree
OTOH However, it is funny how he goes out of his way to hit Mr. Ramsey for saying the FBI was not involved (it was and Ramsey knew it because that was the GIANT backnforth in 1999 when the Ramseys insisted that any Polygraph be given under their own conditions with their own polygrapher while Boulder PD insisted that the FBI administer the Polygraph test) and for claiming that there was a special prosecutor (there wasn’t)
So ultimately I am not sure if he believes in Smit or not. Weird
[He dodges Greta van Sustren’s Question about whether the Grand Jury voted to indict and he, Smith, wouldn’t sign off and we know now that that same grand jury ended its work without returning indictments against the Ramseys – so he made himself sound shady.]
Look there isn’t conclusive evidence either way obviously. In court, given this, I would let the Ramseys walk if I were on the jury and this were all the evidence presented. Having done that and found reasonable doubt, these things would keep me up at night:
The Jacket thing is significant in that there were red fibers matching the Jacket Patsy Ramsey wore the night before (that she was still wearing the next morning) fibers that were found on the inside of the duct tape covering JBR’s mouth, and on Jon Benet’s body and in the paint tray where the paintbrush to make the garrote was found and on the blanket that was covering her body. patsy claims that when they brought her upstairs she “folded herself” over the dead body of JBR.
Some people think it shows a woman who never went to bed – YMMV
From Jump street the police were almost positive that Patsy immediately lied about giving JonBonet any pineapple (Patsys prints were on the freakin’ bowl) Probably because JBR was awake and it doesn’t fit with “the kids were asleep and immediately put in to bed” story they told the police.
So I ask myself which scenario, knowing what the numbers will logically say is more likely, is closer to the truth:
A.
Smit et al tell some version of this story: The ‘sexual predator’ breaks in, stun guns JBR, but also hits her hard enough to knock her out too, ties her up, garrotes her but, and this is very important because people don’t realize it, the ‘predator’ abuses her with the paintbrush – not with himself - and takes time to use the Ramseys stationary to leave a ransom note that really serves absolutely no purpose. (sometimes: he planned to ransom her - and he brought evrything but stationary because, presumably, he was going to write the long note on the spot - while escaping the house with a 6 year old child through a window a more than smallish man could not fit out of - but after all this he creates the garrot and abuses her on the way out and she dies and he runs away)
Or
B. One of the Trio hits hard enough to damage her, they panic, kill her and throw 10,000 red herrings around (badly).
(quote from the autopsy report)
DEATH D/T: 12/26/96 @ 1323
AUTOPSY D/T: 12/27/96 @ 0815
ID NO: 137712
COR/MEDREC#: 1714-96-A
FINAL DIAGNOSIS:
I. Ligature strangulation
A. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of neck
B. Abrasions and petechial hemorrhages, neck
C. Petechial hemorrhages, conjunctival surfaces of eyes and skin of face
II. Craniocerebral injuries
A. Scalp contusion
B. Linear, comminuted fracture of right side of skull
C. Linear pattern of contusions of right cerebral hemisphere
D. Subarachnoid and subdural hemorrhage
E. Small contusions, tips of temporal lobes
III. Abrasion of right cheek
IV. Abrasion/contusion, posterior right shoulder
V. Abrasions of left lower back and posterior left lower leg
VI. Abrasion and vascular congestion of vaginal mucosa
VII. Ligature of right wrist
No semen was found on JonBenet or her clothing. From an affadavit:
My mistake, it was blood, not semen, that they extracted the DNA evidence from. As I pointed out, I was going by memory alone.
Susan Smith did something awful but she didn’t actually have to watch her kids drown up close and personal.
Andrea Yates is insane.
Point taken it’s not 100% but it’s close. Read the autopsy report. JBR was strangled and skull cracked. This doesn’t fall into the ‘normal’ parent murdering a child scenario.
Wonder how many countries have ‘normal’ parent murder scenarios aside from the US.
I’d guess pretty much all of them.
Regards,
Shodan
How about Larry Slack, who beat his 12-yr-old daughter to death. Took him 2 hours. (link offered for cite, but not something you really want to read)
Personally, I always figured her 9-yr-old brother did it. Sibling rivalry’s a bitch.
The only insight I ever had into the case came while I was reading an article on it one night while watching the movie “Speed”. Several statements in the ransom note are word-for-word the same as dialogue from the movie.
To me, the best evidence that the killer was not a stranger was that the ransom note specified a ransom amount ($118,000) that was equal to a bonus that JonBenet’s father John had just received, information that only a very small number of people would have known.