# What happened to JonBenet Ramsey? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 11, 2010, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577 "2010-01-11T23:41:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 14
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/261 "2010-01-14T18:10:25Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > The note can be written by somebody else; it doesn’t exclude the possibility of the parents knowing the author. And neither does your famously accurate DNA. It doesn’t exclude the possibility that Carrot Top knew the killer either. We have a presumption of innocence in this country. By the standards being expressed in this thread, it would be impossible for anyone to ever be acquitted of anything. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/262 "2010-01-14T18:12:56Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > Because rich people never want to make more money, eh? :rolleyes: > > And who says they were pimping her for money? It just seems absurd. We’re supposed to believe not one but both of her parents were so twisted that they were okay with pimping her out to adult men? That they’d risk exposure for this? And just how much money would they be making from this–I doubt they’d consider a few hundred or even a few thousand worth it. That would be nothing to them–for them a bonus alone is in the six figures. And how many pedophiles are really ready and able to pay thousands of dollars, anyway? ETA: If not for money, then what else? ---
**Author:** ![Pray\_for\_peace](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/5f9b8f/32.png) [@Pray\_for\_peace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pray_for_peace)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/263 "2010-01-14T18:17:53Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > What about the handprint? > > [http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious\_murders/famous/ramsey/theory\_8b.html](http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/theory_8b.html) > > It seems like there had to have been a third party. They could have hired some guy to kill their daughter I guess. Or pimped her out. Though I’m wondering why they’d pimp her out since they were already so incredibly rich. I do think there was a third party there, because of the DNA evidence, but I’m not sure what to think of the handprint. Why would there be only one handprint? Did the person wear gloves and then take them off just before touching that one place? What about handprints or fingerprints on the note or near where the note was written? Maybe there’s additional information about other handprints or fingerprints that hasn’t been released to the public, though. I read that trutv summary and IIRC there was only one unexplained bootprint near the body, too. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/264 "2010-01-14T18:18:05Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It is your inference which is wrong. The inference that the note had any more probability of being written by the Ramseys than an intruder is a baseless one, hence, it’s not evidence against them. The inferrence is distinct from the circumstantial evidence. The circumstantial evidence allows the inference (and in this case it does, just not to the exclusion of everything else). The (i)facts are (ii)circumstantial evidence of the (iii)inference. You’re statement that, “The inference that the note had any more probability of being written by the Ramseys than an intruder is a baseless one, hence, [the inference] is not evidence against them.” demonstrates perfectly the point of your misunderstanding.\* The inferrence is not the evidence. \*and provides yet another example of your trademark hyperbole. It is not a baseless inferrence. I have given a basis for the inference. You might find it a weak basis. That does not mean it does not exist. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/265 "2010-01-14T18:18:18Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > It doesn’t exclude the possibility that Carrot Top knew the killer either. If the best you can do is keep making ridiculous comparisons or offering silly alternatives, perhaps you should be rethinking your position? > [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > We have a presumption of innocence in this country. By the standards being expressed in this thread, it would be impossible for anyone to ever be acquitted of anything. A presumption of innocence is fine, but if the family were never investigated for pedophile connections, they weren’t investigated thoroughly enough. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/266 "2010-01-14T18:20:13Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > ETA: If not for money, then what else? Political and/or business favours. Swapsy’s with other children. Nothing would surprise me. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/267 "2010-01-14T18:21:09Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > Ransom note from the mysterious drifter knew a bunch of details about John–like that he was Southern…how’d he know that? Just guessing? Noboy is saying it had to be a “mysterious drifter.” It could well have been someone who knew the Ramseys. > [@](#): > > Ransom note writer managed to find the secret hidden room to stuff Jonbenet’s body in. This is a commonly made, and utterly fatuous argument. There’s no reason a person can’t find a remote part of a house if they’re looking for a remote part of the house. It is fallacious to say that no one could go searching around for a nice secluded spot and find one unless they knew where it was beforehand. it’s also entirely possible that the chikd herself could have shown the killer where the room was. This is a huge swing and whiff right here. > [@](#): > > The room the police missed the first time through. And left the body rather than taking it out with him, despite wanting a ransom because…um…if the parents found the body, they’d be more likely to pay? It’s more likely that the killer originally intended a kidmnapping and wrote the note, then got carried away and accidentally killed the kid, panicked and fled, leaving the note. It would actually make no logical sense at all for the Ramseys to write a fake ransom note, knowing th body was in the house and would be found. > [@](#): > > The Mysterious Drifter then wrote a 2 page rambling ransom note. Two pages. With a dead body on his hands. Rather than “We have your kid. Give us $118,000 or we’ll kill her. Don’t contact the cops: we’re watching you. We’ll give instructions later.” Again, it doesn’t have to be a stranger, and someone with a personal grudge would not be at all unlikely to write a ranting, self-indulgent note. > [@](#): > > Mysterious drifter was able to kill the kid without waking anyone in the house. What’s implausble about that? Especially when it’s a big house. It has already been poinbted out that Elizabeth Smart was taken out her house without waking anyone, and we know for an absolute fact that a person who was not the Ramseys left DNA under the kids fingernails, in her panties and in the waisband of her panties, and also left a sack hair on the blanket used to cover her body. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/268 "2010-01-14T18:21:30Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > Ransom note from the mysterious drifter knew a bunch of details about John–like that he was Southern…how’d he know that? Just guessing? > > Ransom note writer managed to find the secret hidden room to stuff Jonbenet’s body in. The room the police missed the first time through. And left the body rather than taking it out with him, despite wanting a ransom because…um…if the parents found the body, they’d be more likely to pay? > > The Mysterious Drifter then wrote a 2 page rambling ransom note. Two pages. With a dead body on his hands. Rather than “We have your kid. Give us $118,000 or we’ll kill her. Don’t contact the cops: we’re watching you. We’ll give instructions later.” > > Mysterious drifter was able to kill the kid without waking anyone in the house. So what? I am not arguing that the Ramseys did it. I am arguing that the ransom note is circumstanital evidence that implicates the Ramseys. This is a disupte born out of Diogenes ignorance of a term of art. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/269 "2010-01-14T18:23:48Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > So what? I am not arguing that the Ramseys did it. I am arguing that the ransom note is circumstanital evidence that implicates the Ramseys. This is a disupte born out of Diogenes ignorance of a term of art. No–I was agreeing with you. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/270 "2010-01-14T18:25:06Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > If the best you can do is keep making ridiculous comparisons, perhaps you should be rethinking your position? > A presumption of innocence is fine, but if the family were never investigated for pedophile connections, they weren’t investigated thoroughly enough. What “pedophile connections” are you awre that the ramseys had that were not investigated? if you think their backgrounds weren’t thoroughly investigated for of child molestation or personal associations with known sex offenders, you are mistaken. ---
**Author:** ![Freudian\_Slit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/5daacb/32.png) [@Freudian\_Slit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Freudian_Slit)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/271 "2010-01-14T18:25:32Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What’s implausble about that? Especially when it’s a big house. It has already been poinbted out that Elizabeth Smart was taken out her house without waking anyone, and we know for an absolute fact that a person who was not the Ramseys left DNA under the kids fingernails, in her panties and in the waisband of her panties, and also left a sack hair on the blanket used to cover her body. Also a big house that people had been in before. [http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious\_murders/famous/ramsey/book\_9.html](http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/book_9.html) > [@](#): > > They believe that the killer entered their home while they were at a Christmas evening dinner at the home of Fleet and Priscilla White. **They further believe the intruder may have known the layout of the home after touring it during an Historic Boulder Homes Tour in Christmas 1994** , and could have become aware of John’s business successes through local newspaper stories. They were apparently a fairly prominent Boulder family. There is a way someone could have known the layout without necessarily knowing them. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/272 "2010-01-14T18:26:08Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > So what? I am not arguing that the Ramseys did it. I am arguing that the ransom note is circumstanital evidence that implicates the Ramseys. This is a disupte born out of Diogenes ignorance of a term of art. Except it doesn’t implicate the Ramseys in any way. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/273 "2010-01-14T18:30:40Z")
> [@Freudian\_Slit](#): > > Are a lot of bonuses $118,000? I mean, maybe it’s a more common number than we think. Drop the zeroes, add one, reverse it… _…you got 9/11, man!!!_ ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/274 "2010-01-14T18:30:50Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Except it doesn’t implicate the Ramseys in any way. **If** the Ramsey’s did know the author, how would you expect this fact to present itself, if they and the author weren’t saying? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/275 "2010-01-14T18:33:48Z")
That’s for you to prove, if you want to assert that the Ramseys knew the author. ---
**Author:** ![whole\_bean](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/96bed5/32.png) [@whole\_bean](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/whole_bean)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/276 "2010-01-14T18:36:20Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > Except it doesn’t implicate the Ramseys in any way. Sure it does. I have stated it numerous times. Could we resolve this if we got a legal expert you trust to confirm that the following facts are circumstantial evidence\* of the Ramsey’s invovlement in the crime? 1. the ransom note was written on the Ramsey’s stationary 2. the ransom note included infromation known to the Ramseys and few others was \*Not dispositive. Not necessarily even weighty. What about this: > [@](#): > > The evidence, though circumstantial, crucified the Ramseys in the eyes of the public: The ransom note was written on paper belonging to the Ramseys; fiber found on the duct tape used to bind the child was consistent with that found on Patsy’s clothing. from [here](http://www.biography.com/articles/JonBenet-Ramsey-12986606) Please read before you respond: The point of this post is not to agrue the Ramsey’s guilt or innocence. It is to argue the definition of circumstantial evidence. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/277 "2010-01-14T18:40:58Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > What “pedophile connections” are you awre that the ramseys had that were not investigated? > > if you think their backgrounds weren’t thoroughly investigated for of child molestation or personal associations with known sex offenders, you are mistaken. So, because a prominent local family didn’t hang around with **known** sex-offenders, that is a reason to drop that line of enquiry?? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/278 "2010-01-14T18:41:21Z")
> [@whole\_bean](#): > > Sure it does. I have stated it numerous times. Could we resolve this if we got a legal expert you trust to confirm that the following facts are circumstantial evidence\* of the Ramsey’s invovlement in the crime? > > 1. the ransom note was written on the Ramsey’s stationary Irrelevant. Does not implicate the Ramseys, since any intruder could obviosuly find the note pad. Everything in the house belonged to Ramseys. Saying something in their home is “circumstancial evidence against them” because it’s in their house is specious byond words. > [@](#): > > 1. the ransom note included infromation known to the Ramseys and few others No it didn’t. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/279 "2010-01-14T18:42:23Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > So, because a prominent local family didn’t hang around with **known** sex-offenders, that is a reason to drop that line of enquiry?? How does one go about looking for _un_known sex offenders? ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [January 14, 2010, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577/280 "2010-01-14T18:42:42Z")
> [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](#): > > That’s for you to prove, if you want to assert that the Ramseys knew the author. Are you acknowledging though that it could never be known if they were never to confess? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577.md?page=13) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-happened-to-jonbenet-ramsey/524577.md?page=15)