Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Cold Case: Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey

DanaK

By DanaK
in Netflix

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

SnarkAttack

SnarkAttack

Some thoughts:

I don't believe the killer went through papers in John's office and saw the amount of his bonus, that's dumb.  And someone who worked for/with him wouldn't know the amount either, except for who approved it/HR.

If the original intent was kidnapping, why would you write the ransom note while there, wouldn't you write it ahead of time to save time?  If it wasn't the original intent, then why write it if you are going to kill her/sexually assault her in the house?  Even if the parents did it, it still doesn't make sense since the child was murdered.  The note is so odd.  

They talked about the marks on her hands maybe being from her trying to grab the garrote from her neck, but her hands were tied, so that doesn't make sense.  I doubt her hands were tied after it was around her neck.

To think that her 9 year old brother would slam her on the head with an object because of a piece of pineapple, and then move her to the basement and tie her hands and make/put the garrote around her neck is ridiculous.

I was shocked how old John looked, but he's 80.  Time flies.

It makes sense that someone who knew of her from the pageants did it.

They checked the neighbors, right?   

I can't believe that networks like CBS would run a program implicating Burke and not expect to be sued and lose.

I didn't know about Beth dying.  So much tragedy.

 

 

  • Like 1
lemoncake

lemoncake

I know that most people think the murderer was one of the Ramsey's and the others covered it up. But I have never been able to wrap my head around the garrot and the sexual abuse with the paintbrush. I could almost see if Burke did it and Patsy and John wanted to cover it up so they faked the note. But really, they would sexually abuse their child and make a garrot and pull it so hard as to cause that level of damage? No way. I think it was an intruder and they found her, were worried they would be blamed and made the note. 

And that detective Steve was a total jerk. Wow. 

And after all these years why would John still be looking for the killer if her knew it was a cover-up? Why not walk away and never speak about it.

  • Like 4
Soapy Goddess

Soapy Goddess

18 hours ago, SnarkAttack said:

why would you write the ransom note while there, wouldn't you write it ahead of time to save time? 

Exactly. And a 2-page note at that!  

Someone in that house (John, Patsy, or her brother), killed JB. Whether it was accidental or not, it simply does not make sense that anyone other than one of them did it.

 

TattleTeeny

TattleTeeny

(edited)

Seems like for every individual thing that points toward the family, there is something else that does the opposite. I have changed my mind about this case 100 times since the late '90s. But that's the thing – my opinion doesn't matter; I am just an observer, and some of my early opinions were shaped by a compromised, subpar police investigation and questionable (to put it kindly) behavior on the part of the officers involved. Whether the family is responsible or not, they couldn't and wouldn't have a fair trial anyway. Ironically, the police forcing a certain narrative, whether it later ends up being correct or not, is a large part of why someone has, up to now, gotten away with this.

Edited by TattleTeeny
  • Like 4
SeanBug

SeanBug

(edited)

If you think the police weren't trying to push a narrative to close this quickly, listen to the Serial podcast about Adnan Syed. Or watch Making a Murderer. It happens all the time. The Innocence Project has made it clear how many people go to prison based on lies perpetrated by the police. 

Or read the book about the Golden State killer, written by Michelle McNamara, "I'll Be Gone in The Dark".  He waited in houses, raped women and eventually started murdering people.  

People will case out a home to get a feel for it, and wait inside. It happens quite a bit and it happened in Boulder just a few months after JonBenet's murder. But this time the girl was not murdered, just assaulted. 

It would be easy to get into the home thru that window, walk around and determine the lay out. Then come back later. Or do it while the Ramseys were out that evening.  They could have seen that check or paperwork while looking for something to write the note with.  Who knows what goes thru the mind of a sick individual like this? 

JonBenet's pediatrician said he never saw signs of abuse.  And as far as JonBenet performing in pageants, what about all the little girls who act at that age?  They are taught how to perform. Look at Kiernan Shipka in Mad Men. She was 6 years old during the first season. She was able to portray Sally Draper. Dakota Fanning. Kids in commercials. Some children are natural performers. Of course those costumes are a little over the top. That's pageant 101. It can seem weird to those of us who don't participate in it.  But if the audience is just parents and family, and it's a bunch of little girls having fun. When I was 6 years old I took tap dancing classes and performed in recitals. 

Bottom line is police fucked up, decided the Ramseys did it without any evidence, as well as hiding DNA evidence that would have cleared them.  And we think the media is bad now. FFS Geraldo Rivera held a mock trial on that shit show of his. I would have sued him to kingdom come. What a sleazeball. 

As far as John cooperating with the film makers, he stated he offered to help, but hasn't watched the series, as it's too painful.  I felt awful for them. His older daughter is killed in a car accident,  Patsy has ovarian cancer, and then this murder. 

Anyone who has been thru this much trauma and just wants to live would cherish their children, not murder them. 

Edited by SeanBug
  • Like 4
ShowsILoveToHate

ShowsILoveToHate

(edited)

The reason that John Ramsey is being public again is because he wants the Boulder Police dept to either release the DNA evidence or else use the DNA themselves, in order to have a reverse family tree done on it, just like genealogists have done with so many cold cases in the last few years. A LOT of old men murderers are now being caught and held accountable for what they did 20, 30, 40, 50+ years ago.  There is absolutely no legitimate reason the police department to not do this. 

Edited by ShowsILoveToHate
  • Like 6
iarwain

iarwain

Some random thoughts:  If an intruder did it, and got into the house while the Ramsays were away, maybe he wrote the ransom note while waiting for them to return home.  

A lot of the behavior by the family seems odd, but wouldn't you expect that from people who put their daughter into child beauty pageants?  An intruder may have become interested in her because of those pageants.

I can't really blame the family for not cooperating, when it seemed clear from the start the police were going to try to go after them as suspects.  I don't blame them for "lawyering up".

TattleTeeny

TattleTeeny

20 hours ago, ShowsILoveToHate said:

The reason that John Ramsey is being public again is because he wants the Boulder Police dept to either release the DNA evidence or else use the DNA themselves, in order to have a reverse family tree done on it, just like genealogists have done with so many cold cases in the last few years. A LOT of old men murderers are now being caught and held accountable for what they did 20, 30, 40, 50+ years ago.  There is absolutely no legitimate reason the police department to not do this. 

Especially with newer DNA-extracting technologies like M-Vac, which people have been pushing for the DNA in the West Memphis 3 case.

The idea of an intruder lying in wait and writing the note has been debated for years. The Boulder police pretty much immediately blew off that possibility as ridiculous, as did many people. I may have. But now I don’t know what seems so farfetched about it. It’s weird, but there are also countless cases of people literally living in people’s homes undetected for stretches of time, making the idea of hiding out for an hour and writing a letter not so crazy.

  • Like 1
iarwain

iarwain

14 hours ago, TattleTeeny said:

The idea of an intruder lying in wait and writing the note has been debated for years. The Boulder police pretty much immediately blew off that possibility as ridiculous, as did many people. I may have. But now I don’t know what seems so farfetched about it. 

I don't pretend to know what actually happened, but no matter what the real answer is to this case, it's a bizarre situation.

  • Like 1
merylinkid

merylinkid

On 12/14/2024 at 6:09 PM, TattleTeeny said:

The Boulder police pretty much immediately blew off that possibility as ridiculous,

Reason right there to believe it.

The cops will never use that DNA.   Because then it will blow up their narrative.   Sticking to their version of events is more important than catching the guy.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...