Surely the brother wasn’t responsible for those contraptions….you think her parents did that to make it look more sinister?
Well, my opinion had been formed mostly due to that TV documentary on the case. Since then I’ve been reading more about it and am no longer at all sure what I think. As usual you make a good point. I can see a child acting spontaneously out of anger, hitting someone, but not the planning that would have been involved with the ropes, bindings, and so on. So I’ll go back to neutral on this one.
It’d be interesting how much JBR’s life insurance had been.
QT
*ZODIACHRONOLOGY*
Surely the brother wasn’t responsible for those contraptions….you think her parents did that to make it look more sinister?
Well, my opinion had been formed mostly due to that TV documentary on the case. Since then I’ve been reading more about it and am no longer at all sure what I think. As usual you make a good point. I can see a child acting spontaneously out of anger, hitting someone, but not the planning that would have been involved with the ropes, bindings, and so on. So I’ll go back to neutral on this one.
hi Marshall
I could see burke using the paint brush to sexually assault her and possibly wacking her on the head, or stabbing her with the train track. but the garrot? no.
this is how I see the possible scenarios ranked:
1. Patsy sexually abused and murdered her, writing the ransome note as cover up. John may have been totally clueless, or helped after the fact.
2. outside intruder-most likely the dude who killed himself.
3. the maid with others she planned a kidnapping that went horribly wrong.
…a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma
My girlfriend has the best theory on this case… what if…
A friend of Burke’s or slightly older boy in the area heard Burke brag, "my dad got a $118,000 bonus!"
That boy then (with or without Burke’s help) plans to get a ransom by kidnapping Jonbenet.
If B is involved, then it explains a coverup. (For example, he lets an older boy inside, or takes Jonbenet downstairs at the designated time)
To my mind this explains the unbelievably OBVIOUS teenage boy character of the note…
(Jim Clemente’s and others’ idea that the not IN ANY WAY has a female voice is totally absurd)
And it explains the fact that the perspn would think $118,000 is a lot of money and is easily available to JohnBR
In NO WAY could I ever believe that a ransom note in that tone could be written by a parent.
It also seems obvious to me that it was written before she was "kidnapped"…
Just place a teenage boy in that crime scene and let it play out… I think it fits.
Personally I believe my GF’s theory and a simple intruder theory work best… for example Helgoth was a good suspect in my eyes who would also think 118,000 was a huge sum.
There was a video that came out recently showing the interior of the house like a day later? In it, there is a cabinet in the hallway showing checks sitting in plain view, actually standing up. Could someone have simply walked in and seen his paycheck, making a mental note?
My girlfriend has the best theory on this case… what if…
A friend of Burke’s or slightly older boy in the area heard Burke brag, "my dad got a $118,000 bonus!"
That boy then (with or without Burke’s help) plans to get a ransom by kidnapping Jonbenet.If B is involved, then it explains a coverup. (For example, he lets an older boy inside, or takes Jonbenet downstairs at the designated time)
To my mind this explains the unbelievably OBVIOUS teenage boy character of the note…
(Jim Clemente’s and others’ idea that the not IN ANY WAY has a female voice is totally absurd)And it explains the fact that the perspn would think $118,000 is a lot of money and is easily available to JohnBR
In NO WAY could I ever believe that a ransom note in that tone could be written by a parent.
It also seems obvious to me that it was written before she was "kidnapped"…
Just place a teenage boy in that crime scene and let it play out… I think it fits.
Personally I believe my GF’s theory and a simple intruder theory work best… for example Helgoth was a good suspect in my eyes who would also think 118,000 was a huge sum.
There was a video that came out recently showing the interior of the house like a day later? In it, there is a cabinet in the hallway showing checks sitting in plain view, actually standing up. Could someone have simply walked in and seen his paycheck, making a mental note?
That is not a completely implausible theory. I’ve come to believe that the killer was someone who knew the Ramseys and had been in the house before.
"If, after I depart this vale, you ever remember me and have thought to please my ghost, forgive some sinner and wink your eye at some homely girl."
This is one of those cases that got so screwed up at the start that I doubt we’ll ever know for certain who did it short of a detailed confession from the killer or a big scientific advance related to the evidence.
– – – – – – – – – – – – –
Formerly Clovis.
This is one of those cases that got so screwed up at the start that I doubt we’ll ever know for certain who did it short of a detailed confession from the killer or a big scientific advance related to the evidence.
Makes me wonder if anything could come about with the current DNA familial genealogy testing.
“…they may be dealing with one or more ersatz Zodiacs–other psychotics eager to get into the act, or perhaps even other murderers eager to lay their crimes at the real Zodiac’s doorstep.“ L.A. Times, 1969
Keep watching the Dr Oz crime shows on Tuesdays and Thursdays, he will be talking to John Ramsey soon. I believe that there is enough DNA they could enter into GED Match.
That case bothers me so much and would like to see it solved.
The telephone call to police indicated the Ramsey’s were not telling the whole truth. I don’t believe it’s murder, just a petulant child lashing out and a cover up. As for the DNA in the panties claim – that discovery is effectively worthless, as the documentary proved. Touch DNA can be found in freshly bought undergarments from the shop and handled during manufacture, and easily transferable other than by sexual means. The answers lie in the pineapple dish and a kid pretending he doesn’t know what pineapple is when shown a photograph. https://youtu.be/kBUQO2u-eD4?t=613
The only reason to lie to police when dealing with the death of your child, is if you have something to hide.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/
“I simply cannot accept that there are, on every story, two equal and logical sides to an argument.” Edward R. Murrow.
The telephone call to police indicated the Ramsey’s were not telling the whole truth. I don’t believe it’s murder, just a petulant child lashing out and a cover up. As for the DNA in the panties claim – that discovery is effectively worthless, as the documentary proved. Touch DNA can be found in freshly bought undergarments from the shop and handled during manufacture, and easily transferable other than by sexual means. The answers lie in the pineapple dish and a kid pretending he doesn’t know what pineapple is when shown a photograph. https://youtu.be/kBUQO2u-eD4?t=613
The only reason to lie to police when dealing with the death of your child, is if you have something to hide.
DITTO!
It makes sense about the panties having DNA from the factory where they were made. The DNA that I would like to see tested and put into GED Match , is the semen that was found on her body. She was not raped she was molested , which indicates to me it was a older man.
I do not believe that anyone in her family had anything at all to do with with this horrific crime.
There was a test call made to 911 from someone at the party, I think that person was the killer. He wanted to know just how long it would take the police to get there, so he would know how much time he would have to get away. While he was in the room making the call , that person took the paper to write the ransom note, is what I think.
Reminds me of the Stine shooting, there were other robbery type crimes in that area just prior to Oct 11th. I feel could have been Zodiac checking how much time he would have to get away.
No Semen on Body, Panties or Clothing. Vaginal, oral and anal swabs were obtained from JBR’s body, but "according to examinations conducted by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, no semen was located on the body, panties, or clothing of JonBenet Ramsey http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/pag … 20Evidence
If the person who killed JonBenet Ramsey was somebody from outside the family, then he entered the house and spent 22 minutes writing a three page ransom note on the notepad within the Ramsey home, using their pen – and then decided to kill her instead. Burke was clearly heard in the background of that telephone call, despite the Ramsey’s claiming he was in bed the entire time. Deception is usually done for a reason. Wanting to sue a documentary for 750 million dollars, when this documentary has every right under the freedom of speech laws to give their opinion on whom they believed ended JonBenet Ramsey’s life, tells you everything you need to know.
https://www.zodiacciphers.com/
“I simply cannot accept that there are, on every story, two equal and logical sides to an argument.” Edward R. Murrow.
I Copied and pasted this : Jonbenet Ramsey murdered in Boulder Christmas 1996: Unsolved?
c1n.tv/boulderchannel1/jonbenet-ramsey-murdered-in…
There was also some level of semen found in Jonbenets body and police have not revealed whether they think it is Burkes. At one point Burke Ramsey was himself a suspect and police theorized that he might have killed his sister out of Jealousy. The question is will the DA move this case forward this Christmas.
This case has information / misinformation all over the place. One comment was that Katy Perry is JonBenet ,that she was not killed.
I can’t seem to find what the explanation was for the phone call where it was thought Burkes voice is heard in the back ground.
We will have to agree to disagree about anyone in that family having anything to do with her murder. DNA they do have and the palm print was not a match to any family member.
DNA is the only way we will find out who killed her. There was enough DNA under her finger nails to be tested again with the newer technology.
There is no proof that the killer wrote that note while he was in the house. He could have taken the paper and pen with him from the party and brought it back with him when he went back to do what he did. Probably knowing that would put suspicion on the father? When he wrote the note he intended to kidnap her, something caused him to change his mind. I don’t think he wrote it and then a few minutes later decided to kill her.
In a daytime exclusive, JonBenét’s father, John Ramsey, speaks out about what really happened the fateful night his daughter was murdered. Dr. Oz invites experts on the case to reveal new DNA evidence that could bring them closer to finding the killer.
Watch today’s Dr Oz show for more information about the murder of JonBenet. I watched the sneak preview of today’s show ,looking forward to hearing about the new DNA evidence!
I am hoping to see the clip of her at one of the shows she was in, where I can see a man on the right side of the screen who was doing some construction work near some stairs. It didn’t show his face only his body, you can see he stops and turns to watch her. Call it a gut feeling, but I often wonder if he could be the killer?
The idea that the parents wrote the ransom note has never seemed legitimate to me.
If it was a cover up, maybe they would write a note, but one this long, this vicious, and also this preposterous?
It is so clearly in the voice of a younger male who watched too many action movies.
