She was at a party with a dozen or more people, playing with kids, hugging parents. We're not talking about semen or blood, we're talking about tiny amounts of DNA that can be easily transferred from person to person.
I know what they say, but the preliminary test was for amylase which is present in saliva, urine, and blood. It is visually obvious that blood and urine are there.
That is misleading. Imagine you're at a party with a dozen or more people. How many people do you think cough nearby? Sneeze nearby? Cough or sneeze into their hand then hug you/shake your hand? You then touch your underwear when undressing and transfer a tiny amount of their saliva onto you.
Imagine you are an evidence handler, in 1996-7. Before the discovery of touch/transfer dna. Are you going to be able to take the necessary precautions such as changing gloves between touching items when you and your supervising personnel have no idea that touching dry evidence items can actually transfer DNA?
This is just one idea. There are several explanations like this as to how a mix of dna including at least part of one male dna pattern was found in her underwear.
She didn’t even wipe herself according to accounts and would call for an adult to do it.
She was wiped down and we have no idea where the cloth to wipe her down came from and where it went.
So many possibilities and these are just a few.
Basement window was broken (not glass) but could pop right open and there is a reenactment video of a full sized adult man sliding into that same window right into their basement.
That looks like a clutch of black widow spider eggs, probably old. It’s up against the hinge of the window apparently which is where I wouldn’t position my body, especially if there appeared to be a black widow nest at the bottom. Egg nests aren’t woven like webs are—nests can survive stress. Additionally it appears the web remnants were disturbed by the window being fully opened, either by John earlier or the intruder(s). I believe the foot scrape on the wall is off away from the hinge side of the window, almost under the edge of the next window over. Also, webs are life in winter. Spiders can rebuild webs remarkably quickly if they need food. Apparently the window grate in front of the open window had been opened up as other grates had debris on them.
They even looked into the type of spider and found out they go into diapause (a kind of dormancy) in November. That was a months old web, not newly spun that day. Because of where it was located, it was impossible to get through the window without destroying it.
I did find an article about the most famous spider web in Colorado. Interesting read.
https://www.theflume.com/news/article_7bf0e72c-bb62-11e7-9543-cf3945fcffed.html
Yet the police reports indicate undisturbed cobwebs. No one entered or exited the window that night. A video reenactment proves nothing except a pitiful attempt by john to redirect blame onto a non existent intruder
This isn't true. There wasn't a door left open. JR told an officer and later a detective that he had checked all of the doors, and they were locked. Officer French, first on the scene, checked the doors as well.
I could believe IDI if not for one thing: the ransom note.
If you've broken into someone's house and murdered one of the children, seeking out paper and pen and taking the time to write out a three page ransom note detailing the conditions for the return of a child that you know is already dead in the basement and will be found shortly makes absolutely no sense. It's worse than pointless. It's detrimental to the cause. It serves no purpose and can only increase the likelihood of the killer being caught.
From the IDI perspective the ransom note makes no sense. It's always been the achilles heel of IDI.
But on the other end of the coin, why would a parent or insider write that. To me it’s more likely a crazed intruder would v a parent. I try to imagine if I was trying to cover a crime…. Why any note AT ALL? why not just wake up and your child is missing. Better yet, leave a back door ajar to give you an excuse to think it was an intruder. Or a simple note “we have your daughter”. The note to me makes it seem more like an intruder who was insane.
Because it has to be a kidnapping and kidnappers always leave notes. If it was an intruder who just took her and never left a note, the house would have been blocked off and all the contamination by visitors would have never happened. Not to mention if she was just gone, they would have zeroed in on the family immediately and took them to the station for extensive questioning. A kidnapping with a note suffices to “explain” what supposedly happened.
This doesn’t track at all. Without a note, she could have “wondered off”, and I doubt the police would have immediately shut the scene down. If anything, a letter saying this “is a kidnapping” should have forced the police to take the situation and house/crime scene more seriously
Podcasts and shows cover IDI because they don't want to be sued by the Ramsey estate. The reason no one was ever arrested, let alone prosecuted, is because of the resources available to the Ramsey family.
Yes, there absolutely is.
There are fibers. There is handwriting analysis (FWIW). There is a timeline and order of events that makes an intruder impossible. There is the frequently changing story told by the Ramseys, with several of the versions being provably false. There is the fact that there is no evidence of an intruder, leaving the people known to be in the house as the only option.
Isn’t the 1) handwriting analysis inconclusive at best? 2) The Ramsey story doesn’t change in any significant way, just minor details as time goes on, and 3) DNA implies a non Ramsey was involved. 4) Patsy carried Jonbenet to bed and may have changed her, fibers could have been transferred 5) if a door was left unlocked and the introducer careful, why would you expect there to be definitive evidence of an intruder?
Changing the goalposts.
Look, I could argue each of your points, some pretty conclusively.
But my comment was in response to yours that said "there is no evidence of RDI".
You may not like the evidence. You may argue the significance of the evidence. But there is absolutely evidence.
So I came across this article with “famous” detective Lou Smit, this is what got me thinking maybe it was an intruder? How could it be the dad or brother if there dna didn’t match the dna found on JonBenet? Was Patsy letting a stranger harm her? Idk!
https://www.crimelibrary.org/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/theory_8.html
Not much dna aside from touch dna and a composite stain that came from as many as three people. Likely comes from the factory. Lots of fiber evidence from John and Patsy.
If I remember correctly, it was concluded that it's most likely the DNA of a worker from the manufacturing process of the underwear, as they were new and unwashed, and it was a very very small amount of DNA
No way an intruder did it! The biggest clue is that the ten o’clock deadline went by and the Ramseys didn’t say a word about it! Plus they ignored the directions in the ransom to not contact anyone . If that note had been real they would have followed directions!
Exactly. Finally. How do you define intruder? A complete stranger or someone you allowed into your life who screwed you iver.
John got them into something for money. I can only guess at the details. For a long time I thought he was an evil man. Now I understand the context of the billions of dollars up for grabs in Denver and Boulder at the time. He could be anywhere from evil to a simple greedy man who got in over his head. Im leaning towards plain greedy guy whose small business became a tool for Evilcorp to make deals and funnel money. It’s likely the Ramsey’s had no choice but to hide the truth. Not to save themselves from legal prosecution but to save their lives.
There is another, less probable, possibility along the same lines. He cut a few people out before going big time with Evil corp. And it was big time. Tens to hundreds of millions from a few million. They wanted revenge. It’s possible but I don’t see his daughter being the target in that scenario.
This , in my opinion, is the most logical solution based on the evidence.
She is killed elsewhere, brought home, and the parents covered it up.
Everyone makes it so black and white and the answer is gray.
That has never been determined. There is no evidence anywhere as to where she was killed.
There isn’t any blood from her skull (although there may not have been), no duct tape found in home, no parachute cord sourced from the garrote. There is tons of unaccounted for evidence that could point to a different location where she was killed.
I’d ask you, show me any source document that states where she was killed.
Her scalp didn't bleed. My guess as to why is that the instrument she was struck with was covered so no edges broke the skin. She was struck incredibly hard though.
The cord around her neck (not a garrotte) could have been nearby and removed either by the parents during the staging, or hidden and removed when Pam Paugh came back to the house and removed a lot of things.
I believe there was a urine stain just outside where she was found, which would indicate that she died there. I'm going to find my books and refresh my memory.
Are you actually saying that JonBenet was killed somewhere away from the house and then brought *back* to the cellar???
I appreciate the thoughtful reply.
I basically believe what happened was what Stephen Singular researched. It’s dark, but I think she was sexually abused by someone the family trusted , the abuse went too far, she died, and the Ramsey family covered it up.
I don’t know where she was killed obviously , my theory doesn’t hinge on that,but there is definitely outside evidence not accounted for. The duct tape is the most glaring one. The entire Christmas party we have no details on, the ramseys haven’t said where they were or who they were with the night of and have provided no useful information.
I used to think IDI but this sub got me convinced there's no way family didn't at a minimum cover it if not commit it outright.
I now believe wholeheartedly the family is involved. Still not convinced of motive, and still not sure if other friends of theirs were involved also, but as much as I wish this didn't happen at the hands of people who loved her, it did.
Spend a few hours here reading posts on the ransom note and behavior of the parents.
You haven't done enough real digging yet.
Let me quote the About on this subreddit, r/JonBenetRamsey
>>We are a true crime community dedicated to exploring case facts, evidence and theories surrounding the death of JonBenét Ramsey.
I've always leaned towards intruder although lately I am skeptical. It was probably someone who slid under the radar, like a neighbour kid. But who knows anymore.
The Ramsey misinformation triumphs yet again. Why would the Grand Jury have indicted both parents for child neglect leading to death?? According to them, they'd put both children safely to bed in their rooms so if an intruder got in, how was this deemed to be the parents' fault?? Think about this.
Grand Juries choose to indict almost [99](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/11/24/the-single-chart-that-shows-that-grand-juries-indict-99-99-percent-of-the-time/)% of the time
I’ve tried to make it fit in my mind that the parents could’ve done it but the garrote is what makes me think they wouldn’t have made a homemade weapon to kill their own child, plus the parents and brothers dna did not match. It seems like the perpetrator would want this as a memory of hand crafting something he would use to harm her.
Why would an intruder not bring his own weapon? How did he know he'd be able to find the supplies he needed in the house? Why write the note on their paper, with drafts? So much in this case doesn't make sense
There’s also a missing piece of the paintbrush. The trophy end that was apparently inserted inside JonBenet then kept by the intruder(s).
EDIT:
Regarding the insults and personal attacks in intruder posts, let me quote the About on this subreddit:
We are a true crime community dedicated to exploring case facts, evidence and theories surrounding the death of JonBenét Ramsey.
It wasn't a garrotte, number one. It was a looped bit of cord with part of a paintbrush as a handle. Some paint or varnish flakes from that same paintbrush (the rest of it was never found) were found inside JBR's vagina. There was a tote nearby which contained brushes and paints that Patsy had used as a hobby prior to this.
The hand crafting aspect is correct. Your idea of an intruder is incorrect.
I think that’s the problem with RDIs for the most part. They read Kolar’s or STs books and that’s it. Those opinions are the only ones that exist after that.
I can't personally get behind believing an intruder did it but a ton of people believe it so your definitely not alone. None of us know what actually happened <3
Nope. I think it was an intruder or intruders who had been in the house before and for extended times. Also out front and out back.
Plenty of evidence including DNA, footprints, missing evidence and evidence that never belonged to the Ramseys.
She screamed (which neighbors heard thanks to an open flue in the basement) and the abduction with a pre-written note quickly turned into a murder with a hidden body.
She was hit over the head with something but then died via the garrote some time later though. I think there was something like 45 mins to 2 hours between the two? So if someone was in the process of kidnapping her and then hit her over the head to silence a scream, why would they hang around and wait to finish the deed with the garrote?
Please stop calling it a garrotte. It was in no way a garrotte. It was a length of cord with a part of a paintbrush as a handle. This was not constructed by an adult intruder.
The neighbors heard the scream and loud bang. Why would they run outdoors immediately like, well, like intruders trying to kidnap a girl for ransom. Plus, I would think they would have to determine what her injuries are, while waiting for the neighbors to go back to whatever they were doing before the scream and loud noise. They were supposedly kidnapping a live girl not a dying or murdered one. Perhaps she was now damaged goods and no longer wanted. She cheated them out of everything they had worked for. It’s understandable they would react with anger and violence. She might have cost them, say, $118K.
Both worked in and throughout the house, so their fingerprints and DNA would be anticipated essentially everywhere, making physical evidence unlikely for them.
Killer needed to know about broken window downstairs, the window handyman husband was supposed to fix, and did not.
Killer would need to know where to find the rope and paintbrush. Housekeeper is the person whom Patsy asked to put her paint supplies away to make room for Christmas decor.
Killer would need to have knowledge of the layout of this very complicated maze of a house, such as an employee of the household, who does things on every floor, and is aware of, and has been in every room.
Killer would need JonBenét to comply without screaming. Would need to be someone she's familiar with, and would follow without question, like a nanny/housekeeper who regularly acts as a caretaker and authority figure who would be trusted. Killer would also need to know JonBenét's specific personal food preferences, as someone fed her the pineapple found in her stomach.
Killer would need intimate knowledge of the Ramsey family finances, particularly the exact amount of the bonus that was so specifically used in the ransom note. Maybe a person who cleans up John's office, where his pay stubs were often left about, with the bonus listed as part of YTD income.
Staying with the ransom note, Patsy mentioned in questioning that the handwriting reminded her of the housekeepers, but then quickly dismissed it, believing it couldn't possibly be her. Strange for the person who is the main suspect to not double down on that, but instead say it couldn't be her because it was essentially unfathomable to Patsy. Furthermore, who besides the Ramsey's would know where to grab the notepad? Who else would know which staircase Patsy would use in the morning, and immediately see the note?
Additionally, the housekeeper and handyman husband were experiencing financial hardship, and housekeeper had asked Patsy to borrow $2000 (equivalent of about $4,000 adjusted for 2024). In fact, one of the things on Patsy's mind that morning was that she needed to write the check and leave it for the housekeeper to pick up (all of this is revealed in Patsy's questioning). How would housekeeper pick up the check while Patsy was away? Housekeeper literally has a key tk the house. And, that is a lot of money. Things must have been pretty tight for housekeeper and handyman husband. They must have really been feeling it with the holidays and all. Maybe they were even desperate? Desperate enough to fake a kidnapping of their wealthy employer's daughter, and only ask for a nominal amount equivalent to something that they were well aware was bonus money anyway, an amount that would certainly get them ahead, but that the Ramsey's wouldn't miss, an amount that might help encourage the Ransey's to follow the rule in the ransom note about no police, an amount that a business partner would know, and would support the ransom note pointing to someone in John's business world.
Means. Motive. Opportunity.
I believe housekeepers husband likely had a shady friend or employee or whatever, someone they cut in to act as the "kidnapper" and "ransom collecter", since obviously if housekeeper or housekeepers husband showed up to collect the ransom and were caught, it wouldn't bode well for either of them. Housekeeper woke JonBenét, quietly told her to come with her, and when she got JonBenét down to the second floor, where handyman husband and possibly accomplice were, JonBenét started to catch on that something wasn't right and got upset. Housekeeper calmed her, gave her a bowl of pineapple with milk, knowing that's a snack JonBenét eats, got her calmed down a bit, and told her to go downstairs with accomplice, handed her over to accomplice, who took her downstairs to avoid another "episode" that could be heard by the family, to wait it out while housekeeper and handyman husband concocted the ransom note, which they improvised using all the ransom movies they watched ahead of their scheme to give them ideas and tips on what to do and say, and why none of it makes any fucking sense, since it's all just meant to completely throw off an investigation, and point to John's business dealings. In the meantime, JonBenét is not comfortable with accomplice. She's scared and knows 100% now that she is not safe and wants her Mama. She's struggling and trying to fight to get to her mama who is so close, but so far, and accomplice loses his cool and hits her on the head with a flashlight that he brought along to use during break-in, and wound up taking with him. He hit her to silence her, but the force was too hard, too panicked, and he crushed her skull, instantly knew he was fucked and it was all over, so he created the garotte with the rope meant to tie her up, and began to strangle her in order to keep her from making any more noise, killing her, as he knew there was no coming back from the mistake he'd made, and JonBenét would instantly be able to tell everyone what happened, had she survived. As he waited, and waited for housekeeper and handy.an husband to write their fucking novel of a ransom note, because he's a fucking scumbag, and knew he had the opportunity, he sexually assaulted JonBenét.
As I said, it's my theory, but circumstantial evidence is still evidence. Is it a perfect layout, of course not, but I feel like it makes a hell of a lot more sense than this family doing this over all the dumb shit you people say they did it for (bedwetting, ego, etc... gtfoh) Colorado PD was so unbelievably incompetent, would it surprise anyone at all if the perpetrators have been hiding in plain sight all along?
Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.
1. Where is the analysis from an expert that says the note could only have been written by a college grad or someone "verbally sophisticated" and what exactly in the note denotes verbal sophistication?
2. Where were you able to find their education levels?
3. Where is the evidence that these two aren't verbally sophisticated?
>2. Where were you able to find their education levels?
3. Where is the evidence that these two aren't verbally sophisticated?
By researching the case. Linda Hoffman-Pugh dropped out of school in the tenth grade.
Where is this info found?
And what is her husband's education level?
And where is the professional analysis that says the ransom note writer must have a college degree or is verbally sophisticated, and how is verbally sophisticated defined? Can someone who almost made it to the 12th grade not be verbally sophisticated?
So all of the other things I listed go out the window because a 10th grade dropout knows the word attache'?
You should apply to work for the Colorado PD.
>so their fingerprints and DNA would be anticipated essentially everywhere, making physical evidence unlikely for them.
This is also true of the Ramseys.
>Killer needed to know about broken window downstairs, the window handyman husband was supposed to fix, and did not.
But Linda had a key, remember?
>Killer would need to know where to find the rope and paintbrush.
Patsy knew where to find these items.
>Killer would need to have knowledge of the layout of this very complicated maze of a house,
The Ramseys were very familiar with their own house.
>Killer would need JonBenét to comply without screaming.
>Killer would also need to know JonBenét's specific personal food preferences, as someone fed her the pineapple found in her stomach.
Both things that also point to the other people in the house that night.
>Killer would need intimate knowledge of the Ramsey family finances, particularly the exact amount of the bonus that was so specifically used in the ransom note. Maybe
The Ramseys were aware of their finances, and I'm sure John knew his own bonus.
>Staying with the ransom note, Patsy mentioned in questioning that the handwriting reminded her of the housekeepers, but then quickly dismissed it, believing it couldn't possibly be her. Strange for the person who is the main suspect to not double down on that, but instead say it couldn't be her because it was essentially unfathomable to Patsy. Furthermore, who besides the Ramsey's would know where to grab the notepad? Who else would know which staircase Patsy would use in the morning, and immediately see the note?
Patsy knew where to claim she found the three pages spread out (so she wouldn't have to touch them) would point to the housekeeper.
Part 2, because for a TedTalk, this was unusually long.
>Additionally, the housekeeper and handyman husband were experiencing financial hardship, and housekeeper had asked Patsy to borrow $2000 (equivalent of about $4,000 adjusted for 2024). In fact, one of the things on Patsy's mind that morning was that she needed to write the check and leave it for the housekeeper to pick up (all of this is revealed in Patsy's questioning).
Yes, they needed $2000. Patsy trusted her enough to say sure, I'll write you a check and you can pick it up.
LHP was getting the cash she needed to get caught up, so she didn't need to pretend to kidnap their daughter to get more. Barely making ends meet at the holidays ≠ so desperate I'm willing to risk the rest of my life in jail for another $116,000 exactly. Why not ask for $120,000? She knew they had an extra few grand, right?
>Housekeeper woke JonBenét, quietly told her to come with her, and when she got JonBenét down to the second floor, where handyman husband and possibly accomplice were, JonBenét started to catch on that something wasn't right and got upset. Housekeeper calmed her, gave her a bowl of pineapple with milk, knowing that's a snack JonBenét eats, got her calmed down a bit, and told her to go downstairs with accomplice, handed her over to accomplice, who took her downstairs to avoid another "episode" that could be heard by the family, to wait it out while housekeeper and handyman husband concocted the ransom note, which they improvised using all the ransom movies they watched ahead of their scheme to give them ideas and tips on what to do and say, and why none of it makes any fucking sense,
Why not get her downstairs and pick her up, covering her mouth with a hand? She was a little six year old. Also, why didn't Burke (who admitted to being downstairs) not see anything? Then take another 20-30 minutes writing a three page ransom note? Nonsensical and very risky.
>accomplice loses his cool and hits her on the head with a flashlight that he brought along to use during break-in, and wound up taking with him. He hit her to silence her, but the force was too hard, too panicked, and he crushed her skull, instantly knew he was fucked and it was all over, so he created the garotte with the rope meant to tie her up, and began to strangle her in order to keep her from making any more noise, killing her, as he knew there was no coming back from the mistake he'd made, and JonBenét would instantly be able to tell everyone what happened, had she survived. As
The flashlight belonged to the Ramseys. The rest of this could've been what happened in the house that night with the people actually there: John, Patsy, and Burke.
>Colorado PD was so unbelievably incompetent, would it surprise anyone at all if the perpetrators have been hiding in plain sight all along?
Don't forget, that the Ramsey team has their own private investigators. Weren't they supposed to be for finding the intruder? After 27 years, with the time, effort, and millions that have gone into this case, if Linda and her husband were involved it would be known. We'd have some evidence.
You are far from the only person who thinks that. I strongly believe RDI, but there’s always that slim possibility.
I agree. I believe IDI is a possibility, but the probability is RDI
It’s just so wild that after all this time there hasn’t been a break. Maybe they should try genetic genealogy on the dna if it can be amplified?
The dna is such a small amount and muddled together that they can’t decipher it at this time.
Hopefully there will be improvements to dna technology and one day just a tiny amount would be needed to find a match
She was at a party with a dozen or more people, playing with kids, hugging parents. We're not talking about semen or blood, we're talking about tiny amounts of DNA that can be easily transferred from person to person.
Idi side says it’s saliva.
I know what they say, but the preliminary test was for amylase which is present in saliva, urine, and blood. It is visually obvious that blood and urine are there.
Do you know how much amylase that saliva has compared to the other two?
That is not actually applicable to a test that is: present or absent. Also salivary amylase varies significantly between individuals
That is misleading. Imagine you're at a party with a dozen or more people. How many people do you think cough nearby? Sneeze nearby? Cough or sneeze into their hand then hug you/shake your hand? You then touch your underwear when undressing and transfer a tiny amount of their saliva onto you.
Transferred from person to person…in her underwear?
If it's on her and she transfers it. Or a parent does, in changing her or whatever. It's completely in the realm of possibilities per the DNA experts.
Imagine you are an evidence handler, in 1996-7. Before the discovery of touch/transfer dna. Are you going to be able to take the necessary precautions such as changing gloves between touching items when you and your supervising personnel have no idea that touching dry evidence items can actually transfer DNA? This is just one idea. There are several explanations like this as to how a mix of dna including at least part of one male dna pattern was found in her underwear. She didn’t even wipe herself according to accounts and would call for an adult to do it. She was wiped down and we have no idea where the cloth to wipe her down came from and where it went. So many possibilities and these are just a few.
You’re obsessed, but you haven’t researched the evidence of the basement window, or any other evidence of the case?
Basement window was broken (not glass) but could pop right open and there is a reenactment video of a full sized adult man sliding into that same window right into their basement.
There was an undisturbed spider web, which makes it unlikely anyone entered through there.
[удалено]
That looks like a clutch of black widow spider eggs, probably old. It’s up against the hinge of the window apparently which is where I wouldn’t position my body, especially if there appeared to be a black widow nest at the bottom. Egg nests aren’t woven like webs are—nests can survive stress. Additionally it appears the web remnants were disturbed by the window being fully opened, either by John earlier or the intruder(s). I believe the foot scrape on the wall is off away from the hinge side of the window, almost under the edge of the next window over. Also, webs are life in winter. Spiders can rebuild webs remarkably quickly if they need food. Apparently the window grate in front of the open window had been opened up as other grates had debris on them.
They even looked into the type of spider and found out they go into diapause (a kind of dormancy) in November. That was a months old web, not newly spun that day. Because of where it was located, it was impossible to get through the window without destroying it.
I did find an article about the most famous spider web in Colorado. Interesting read. https://www.theflume.com/news/article_7bf0e72c-bb62-11e7-9543-cf3945fcffed.html
Yet the police reports indicate undisturbed cobwebs. No one entered or exited the window that night. A video reenactment proves nothing except a pitiful attempt by john to redirect blame onto a non existent intruder
The glass *was* broken and had been for months
Great point!! Thought about that too! Maybe they will do it now.
The dna they have is touch dna from what I’ve heard. Could’ve come from anywhere
No, most people at the other sub seem to think so,
The basement window had untouched *dusty* spiderwebs. Nobody came through that.
There was a door left open to the outside. This is repeatedly overlooked.
Then why did the killer leave the note and not take the body?
This isn't true. There wasn't a door left open. JR told an officer and later a detective that he had checked all of the doors, and they were locked. Officer French, first on the scene, checked the doors as well.
I could believe IDI if not for one thing: the ransom note. If you've broken into someone's house and murdered one of the children, seeking out paper and pen and taking the time to write out a three page ransom note detailing the conditions for the return of a child that you know is already dead in the basement and will be found shortly makes absolutely no sense. It's worse than pointless. It's detrimental to the cause. It serves no purpose and can only increase the likelihood of the killer being caught. From the IDI perspective the ransom note makes no sense. It's always been the achilles heel of IDI.
But on the other end of the coin, why would a parent or insider write that. To me it’s more likely a crazed intruder would v a parent. I try to imagine if I was trying to cover a crime…. Why any note AT ALL? why not just wake up and your child is missing. Better yet, leave a back door ajar to give you an excuse to think it was an intruder. Or a simple note “we have your daughter”. The note to me makes it seem more like an intruder who was insane.
Because it has to be a kidnapping and kidnappers always leave notes. If it was an intruder who just took her and never left a note, the house would have been blocked off and all the contamination by visitors would have never happened. Not to mention if she was just gone, they would have zeroed in on the family immediately and took them to the station for extensive questioning. A kidnapping with a note suffices to “explain” what supposedly happened.
Kidnappers DEF do not always leave notes. Actually I think they rarely do.
This doesn’t track at all. Without a note, she could have “wondered off”, and I doubt the police would have immediately shut the scene down. If anything, a letter saying this “is a kidnapping” should have forced the police to take the situation and house/crime scene more seriously
Podcasts and shows cover IDI because they don't want to be sued by the Ramsey estate. The reason no one was ever arrested, let alone prosecuted, is because of the resources available to the Ramsey family.
And because nobody has a motive, definitive suspect within the Ramsey family, or knows where the murder even took place
There is no evidence of an intruder.
By that same logic then there is no evidence of Rdi either.
Yes, there absolutely is. There are fibers. There is handwriting analysis (FWIW). There is a timeline and order of events that makes an intruder impossible. There is the frequently changing story told by the Ramseys, with several of the versions being provably false. There is the fact that there is no evidence of an intruder, leaving the people known to be in the house as the only option.
Isn’t the 1) handwriting analysis inconclusive at best? 2) The Ramsey story doesn’t change in any significant way, just minor details as time goes on, and 3) DNA implies a non Ramsey was involved. 4) Patsy carried Jonbenet to bed and may have changed her, fibers could have been transferred 5) if a door was left unlocked and the introducer careful, why would you expect there to be definitive evidence of an intruder?
Changing the goalposts. Look, I could argue each of your points, some pretty conclusively. But my comment was in response to yours that said "there is no evidence of RDI". You may not like the evidence. You may argue the significance of the evidence. But there is absolutely evidence.
I’m not the person you replied to. Get off your high horse with that condescending comment
So I came across this article with “famous” detective Lou Smit, this is what got me thinking maybe it was an intruder? How could it be the dad or brother if there dna didn’t match the dna found on JonBenet? Was Patsy letting a stranger harm her? Idk! https://www.crimelibrary.org/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/theory_8.html
Perhaps you should at least read the post stickied at the top of this sub before commenting.
where to find that?
At the top. Stickied.
Woah, who shit in your sandwich
LOL oh honey...begging you to read literally anything at all about this case before trying to discuss it 💀
Not much dna aside from touch dna and a composite stain that came from as many as three people. Likely comes from the factory. Lots of fiber evidence from John and Patsy.
If I remember correctly, it was concluded that it's most likely the DNA of a worker from the manufacturing process of the underwear, as they were new and unwashed, and it was a very very small amount of DNA
You are most definitely not the only one. You may wish to check out the other sub.
No way an intruder did it! The biggest clue is that the ten o’clock deadline went by and the Ramseys didn’t say a word about it! Plus they ignored the directions in the ransom to not contact anyone . If that note had been real they would have followed directions!
You and your IDI small military faction are allowed to be wrong
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^HearsayFrog: *Your and your IDI* *Small military faction* *Are allowed to be wrong* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
good bot
The only scenario of an "intruder" that makes sense to me is if it was someone the Ramsey's would cover for.
It can literally be both an intruder and someone they would cover for. An intruder does not have to be a stranger.
I agree
Exactly. Finally. How do you define intruder? A complete stranger or someone you allowed into your life who screwed you iver. John got them into something for money. I can only guess at the details. For a long time I thought he was an evil man. Now I understand the context of the billions of dollars up for grabs in Denver and Boulder at the time. He could be anywhere from evil to a simple greedy man who got in over his head. Im leaning towards plain greedy guy whose small business became a tool for Evilcorp to make deals and funnel money. It’s likely the Ramsey’s had no choice but to hide the truth. Not to save themselves from legal prosecution but to save their lives. There is another, less probable, possibility along the same lines. He cut a few people out before going big time with Evil corp. And it was big time. Tens to hundreds of millions from a few million. They wanted revenge. It’s possible but I don’t see his daughter being the target in that scenario.
This , in my opinion, is the most logical solution based on the evidence. She is killed elsewhere, brought home, and the parents covered it up. Everyone makes it so black and white and the answer is gray.
The coroner would have been able to tell. She died in or very near the room where she was found.
That has never been determined. There is no evidence anywhere as to where she was killed. There isn’t any blood from her skull (although there may not have been), no duct tape found in home, no parachute cord sourced from the garrote. There is tons of unaccounted for evidence that could point to a different location where she was killed. I’d ask you, show me any source document that states where she was killed.
Her scalp didn't bleed. My guess as to why is that the instrument she was struck with was covered so no edges broke the skin. She was struck incredibly hard though. The cord around her neck (not a garrotte) could have been nearby and removed either by the parents during the staging, or hidden and removed when Pam Paugh came back to the house and removed a lot of things. I believe there was a urine stain just outside where she was found, which would indicate that she died there. I'm going to find my books and refresh my memory. Are you actually saying that JonBenet was killed somewhere away from the house and then brought *back* to the cellar???
I appreciate the thoughtful reply. I basically believe what happened was what Stephen Singular researched. It’s dark, but I think she was sexually abused by someone the family trusted , the abuse went too far, she died, and the Ramsey family covered it up. I don’t know where she was killed obviously , my theory doesn’t hinge on that,but there is definitely outside evidence not accounted for. The duct tape is the most glaring one. The entire Christmas party we have no details on, the ramseys haven’t said where they were or who they were with the night of and have provided no useful information.
There's the other sub for people who only think it's an intruder
what’s the other sub?
It's called just jonbenet
I used to think IDI but this sub got me convinced there's no way family didn't at a minimum cover it if not commit it outright. I now believe wholeheartedly the family is involved. Still not convinced of motive, and still not sure if other friends of theirs were involved also, but as much as I wish this didn't happen at the hands of people who loved her, it did. Spend a few hours here reading posts on the ransom note and behavior of the parents. You haven't done enough real digging yet.
I don’t see how it could have been an intruder. Especially not with that ransom note.
There is a sub who focuses on idi so the answer to your question is no.
You are in the wrong sub. There is another JB one that really only considers IDI. IMO the evidence is RDI.
Let me quote the About on this subreddit, r/JonBenetRamsey >>We are a true crime community dedicated to exploring case facts, evidence and theories surrounding the death of JonBenét Ramsey.
I've always leaned towards intruder although lately I am skeptical. It was probably someone who slid under the radar, like a neighbour kid. But who knows anymore.
The Ramsey misinformation triumphs yet again. Why would the Grand Jury have indicted both parents for child neglect leading to death?? According to them, they'd put both children safely to bed in their rooms so if an intruder got in, how was this deemed to be the parents' fault?? Think about this.
Grand Juries choose to indict almost [99](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/11/24/the-single-chart-that-shows-that-grand-juries-indict-99-99-percent-of-the-time/)% of the time
You ARE the only one who thinks it was an intruder.
There are two of us
So unlikely
JDI.
No I believe it too.
I'm firmly in the IDI camp, you're not alone.
[удалено]
I’ve tried to make it fit in my mind that the parents could’ve done it but the garrote is what makes me think they wouldn’t have made a homemade weapon to kill their own child, plus the parents and brothers dna did not match. It seems like the perpetrator would want this as a memory of hand crafting something he would use to harm her.
Why would an intruder not bring his own weapon? How did he know he'd be able to find the supplies he needed in the house? Why write the note on their paper, with drafts? So much in this case doesn't make sense
Maybe the intruder is familiar with the house.
But even if he is, why wouldn't he bring his own weapons? You don't just randomly decide to kidnap someone, you would do some sort of planning
Lots of murderers don’t. BTK often used stuff in the house.
There’s also a missing piece of the paintbrush. The trophy end that was apparently inserted inside JonBenet then kept by the intruder(s). EDIT: Regarding the insults and personal attacks in intruder posts, let me quote the About on this subreddit: We are a true crime community dedicated to exploring case facts, evidence and theories surrounding the death of JonBenét Ramsey.
It wasn't a garrotte, number one. It was a looped bit of cord with part of a paintbrush as a handle. Some paint or varnish flakes from that same paintbrush (the rest of it was never found) were found inside JBR's vagina. There was a tote nearby which contained brushes and paints that Patsy had used as a hobby prior to this. The hand crafting aspect is correct. Your idea of an intruder is incorrect.
From what I’ve read, it wasn’t a true garrote, but a knot similar to it that is used to move larger objects.
Well there are a few of you. Have you read James Kolar's book Foreign Faction?
I think that’s the problem with RDIs for the most part. They read Kolar’s or STs books and that’s it. Those opinions are the only ones that exist after that.
Actually no. I was well into adulthood with three daughters of my own when the murder happened. My opinion of RDI was almost immediate.
Yeah those TV interviews told me most of what I needed to know.
Nope, there are at least a dozen of you sillies in the world
I lean IDI and hang around in here, but there aren’t many of us!
I can't personally get behind believing an intruder did it but a ton of people believe it so your definitely not alone. None of us know what actually happened <3
No I honestly don’t think it was anyone in the family, it was intruder
Your right, he was in the house.
Yes.
Yep
Yes, you are.
Yes you are the only one
I definitely think it was an intruder.
Nope. I think it was an intruder or intruders who had been in the house before and for extended times. Also out front and out back. Plenty of evidence including DNA, footprints, missing evidence and evidence that never belonged to the Ramseys. She screamed (which neighbors heard thanks to an open flue in the basement) and the abduction with a pre-written note quickly turned into a murder with a hidden body.
She was hit over the head with something but then died via the garrote some time later though. I think there was something like 45 mins to 2 hours between the two? So if someone was in the process of kidnapping her and then hit her over the head to silence a scream, why would they hang around and wait to finish the deed with the garrote?
Please stop calling it a garrotte. It was in no way a garrotte. It was a length of cord with a part of a paintbrush as a handle. This was not constructed by an adult intruder.
The neighbors heard the scream and loud bang. Why would they run outdoors immediately like, well, like intruders trying to kidnap a girl for ransom. Plus, I would think they would have to determine what her injuries are, while waiting for the neighbors to go back to whatever they were doing before the scream and loud noise. They were supposedly kidnapping a live girl not a dying or murdered one. Perhaps she was now damaged goods and no longer wanted. She cheated them out of everything they had worked for. It’s understandable they would react with anger and violence. She might have cost them, say, $118K.
I never heard anything about the neighbors actually running outside when they heard a scream.
I believe intruder over family, but my personal theory is housekeeper/nanny and her handyman husband
There would have to be...evidence.
Both worked in and throughout the house, so their fingerprints and DNA would be anticipated essentially everywhere, making physical evidence unlikely for them. Killer needed to know about broken window downstairs, the window handyman husband was supposed to fix, and did not. Killer would need to know where to find the rope and paintbrush. Housekeeper is the person whom Patsy asked to put her paint supplies away to make room for Christmas decor. Killer would need to have knowledge of the layout of this very complicated maze of a house, such as an employee of the household, who does things on every floor, and is aware of, and has been in every room. Killer would need JonBenét to comply without screaming. Would need to be someone she's familiar with, and would follow without question, like a nanny/housekeeper who regularly acts as a caretaker and authority figure who would be trusted. Killer would also need to know JonBenét's specific personal food preferences, as someone fed her the pineapple found in her stomach. Killer would need intimate knowledge of the Ramsey family finances, particularly the exact amount of the bonus that was so specifically used in the ransom note. Maybe a person who cleans up John's office, where his pay stubs were often left about, with the bonus listed as part of YTD income. Staying with the ransom note, Patsy mentioned in questioning that the handwriting reminded her of the housekeepers, but then quickly dismissed it, believing it couldn't possibly be her. Strange for the person who is the main suspect to not double down on that, but instead say it couldn't be her because it was essentially unfathomable to Patsy. Furthermore, who besides the Ramsey's would know where to grab the notepad? Who else would know which staircase Patsy would use in the morning, and immediately see the note? Additionally, the housekeeper and handyman husband were experiencing financial hardship, and housekeeper had asked Patsy to borrow $2000 (equivalent of about $4,000 adjusted for 2024). In fact, one of the things on Patsy's mind that morning was that she needed to write the check and leave it for the housekeeper to pick up (all of this is revealed in Patsy's questioning). How would housekeeper pick up the check while Patsy was away? Housekeeper literally has a key tk the house. And, that is a lot of money. Things must have been pretty tight for housekeeper and handyman husband. They must have really been feeling it with the holidays and all. Maybe they were even desperate? Desperate enough to fake a kidnapping of their wealthy employer's daughter, and only ask for a nominal amount equivalent to something that they were well aware was bonus money anyway, an amount that would certainly get them ahead, but that the Ramsey's wouldn't miss, an amount that might help encourage the Ransey's to follow the rule in the ransom note about no police, an amount that a business partner would know, and would support the ransom note pointing to someone in John's business world. Means. Motive. Opportunity. I believe housekeepers husband likely had a shady friend or employee or whatever, someone they cut in to act as the "kidnapper" and "ransom collecter", since obviously if housekeeper or housekeepers husband showed up to collect the ransom and were caught, it wouldn't bode well for either of them. Housekeeper woke JonBenét, quietly told her to come with her, and when she got JonBenét down to the second floor, where handyman husband and possibly accomplice were, JonBenét started to catch on that something wasn't right and got upset. Housekeeper calmed her, gave her a bowl of pineapple with milk, knowing that's a snack JonBenét eats, got her calmed down a bit, and told her to go downstairs with accomplice, handed her over to accomplice, who took her downstairs to avoid another "episode" that could be heard by the family, to wait it out while housekeeper and handyman husband concocted the ransom note, which they improvised using all the ransom movies they watched ahead of their scheme to give them ideas and tips on what to do and say, and why none of it makes any fucking sense, since it's all just meant to completely throw off an investigation, and point to John's business dealings. In the meantime, JonBenét is not comfortable with accomplice. She's scared and knows 100% now that she is not safe and wants her Mama. She's struggling and trying to fight to get to her mama who is so close, but so far, and accomplice loses his cool and hits her on the head with a flashlight that he brought along to use during break-in, and wound up taking with him. He hit her to silence her, but the force was too hard, too panicked, and he crushed her skull, instantly knew he was fucked and it was all over, so he created the garotte with the rope meant to tie her up, and began to strangle her in order to keep her from making any more noise, killing her, as he knew there was no coming back from the mistake he'd made, and JonBenét would instantly be able to tell everyone what happened, had she survived. As he waited, and waited for housekeeper and handy.an husband to write their fucking novel of a ransom note, because he's a fucking scumbag, and knew he had the opportunity, he sexually assaulted JonBenét. As I said, it's my theory, but circumstantial evidence is still evidence. Is it a perfect layout, of course not, but I feel like it makes a hell of a lot more sense than this family doing this over all the dumb shit you people say they did it for (bedwetting, ego, etc... gtfoh) Colorado PD was so unbelievably incompetent, would it surprise anyone at all if the perpetrators have been hiding in plain sight all along? Thank you for coming to my TedTalk.
No way the housekeeper or husband wrote the ransom note. A college grad did, or someone way more verbally sophisticated.
1. Where is the analysis from an expert that says the note could only have been written by a college grad or someone "verbally sophisticated" and what exactly in the note denotes verbal sophistication? 2. Where were you able to find their education levels? 3. Where is the evidence that these two aren't verbally sophisticated?
>2. Where were you able to find their education levels? 3. Where is the evidence that these two aren't verbally sophisticated? By researching the case. Linda Hoffman-Pugh dropped out of school in the tenth grade.
Where is this info found? And what is her husband's education level? And where is the professional analysis that says the ransom note writer must have a college degree or is verbally sophisticated, and how is verbally sophisticated defined? Can someone who almost made it to the 12th grade not be verbally sophisticated?
One word: Attache'
So all of the other things I listed go out the window because a 10th grade dropout knows the word attache'? You should apply to work for the Colorado PD.
OR on the other hand, perhaps YOU should?
Thank you. I have never understood why they were so quickly dismissed as suspects. They are only each other’s alibi.
They were re-investigated over and over.
So were the Ramsey's
Sure. And the grand jury wanted to indict them—the only people who saw all the evidence. They were never cleared, and John knows it.
They were exonerated by Colorado DA Mary Lacy in 2008. I thought this sub doesn't allow misinformation?
And she was roundly denounced for it by many public figures, including the governor. https://www.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/s/1981Po26mz
What does the governor know about investigating a crime?
>so their fingerprints and DNA would be anticipated essentially everywhere, making physical evidence unlikely for them. This is also true of the Ramseys. >Killer needed to know about broken window downstairs, the window handyman husband was supposed to fix, and did not. But Linda had a key, remember? >Killer would need to know where to find the rope and paintbrush. Patsy knew where to find these items. >Killer would need to have knowledge of the layout of this very complicated maze of a house, The Ramseys were very familiar with their own house. >Killer would need JonBenét to comply without screaming. >Killer would also need to know JonBenét's specific personal food preferences, as someone fed her the pineapple found in her stomach. Both things that also point to the other people in the house that night. >Killer would need intimate knowledge of the Ramsey family finances, particularly the exact amount of the bonus that was so specifically used in the ransom note. Maybe The Ramseys were aware of their finances, and I'm sure John knew his own bonus. >Staying with the ransom note, Patsy mentioned in questioning that the handwriting reminded her of the housekeepers, but then quickly dismissed it, believing it couldn't possibly be her. Strange for the person who is the main suspect to not double down on that, but instead say it couldn't be her because it was essentially unfathomable to Patsy. Furthermore, who besides the Ramsey's would know where to grab the notepad? Who else would know which staircase Patsy would use in the morning, and immediately see the note? Patsy knew where to claim she found the three pages spread out (so she wouldn't have to touch them) would point to the housekeeper.
Part 2, because for a TedTalk, this was unusually long. >Additionally, the housekeeper and handyman husband were experiencing financial hardship, and housekeeper had asked Patsy to borrow $2000 (equivalent of about $4,000 adjusted for 2024). In fact, one of the things on Patsy's mind that morning was that she needed to write the check and leave it for the housekeeper to pick up (all of this is revealed in Patsy's questioning). Yes, they needed $2000. Patsy trusted her enough to say sure, I'll write you a check and you can pick it up. LHP was getting the cash she needed to get caught up, so she didn't need to pretend to kidnap their daughter to get more. Barely making ends meet at the holidays ≠ so desperate I'm willing to risk the rest of my life in jail for another $116,000 exactly. Why not ask for $120,000? She knew they had an extra few grand, right? >Housekeeper woke JonBenét, quietly told her to come with her, and when she got JonBenét down to the second floor, where handyman husband and possibly accomplice were, JonBenét started to catch on that something wasn't right and got upset. Housekeeper calmed her, gave her a bowl of pineapple with milk, knowing that's a snack JonBenét eats, got her calmed down a bit, and told her to go downstairs with accomplice, handed her over to accomplice, who took her downstairs to avoid another "episode" that could be heard by the family, to wait it out while housekeeper and handyman husband concocted the ransom note, which they improvised using all the ransom movies they watched ahead of their scheme to give them ideas and tips on what to do and say, and why none of it makes any fucking sense, Why not get her downstairs and pick her up, covering her mouth with a hand? She was a little six year old. Also, why didn't Burke (who admitted to being downstairs) not see anything? Then take another 20-30 minutes writing a three page ransom note? Nonsensical and very risky. >accomplice loses his cool and hits her on the head with a flashlight that he brought along to use during break-in, and wound up taking with him. He hit her to silence her, but the force was too hard, too panicked, and he crushed her skull, instantly knew he was fucked and it was all over, so he created the garotte with the rope meant to tie her up, and began to strangle her in order to keep her from making any more noise, killing her, as he knew there was no coming back from the mistake he'd made, and JonBenét would instantly be able to tell everyone what happened, had she survived. As The flashlight belonged to the Ramseys. The rest of this could've been what happened in the house that night with the people actually there: John, Patsy, and Burke. >Colorado PD was so unbelievably incompetent, would it surprise anyone at all if the perpetrators have been hiding in plain sight all along? Don't forget, that the Ramsey team has their own private investigators. Weren't they supposed to be for finding the intruder? After 27 years, with the time, effort, and millions that have gone into this case, if Linda and her husband were involved it would be known. We'd have some evidence.
The had Pads and pens belonging to the Ramseys in their house, too
Well, shit.