JonBenet Ramsey ////// The Autopsy

39 comments

  • Amy
    Amy KCMO
    that was a really hard one to listen to. but you guys did a great job keeping the respect for the victim. it seems like the Captain is really against it being the Ramseys and more like an intruder but i still dont buy it. i also dont think the ransom letter was written before she died... definitely a cover up. you all went into the bed wetting thing alot and that is a very telling sign of abuse. you said there wasnt any reports of abuse but that means nothing. doctors could have missed it especially if she was a bedwetter and they could have wrote any irritation off as because of that. or Patsy could be a very good manipulator (like DeeDee Blanchard) and made the dr not suspect that. the thing that makes me the most MAD in this case is everyone was touching everything and the police really dropped the ball. THE FINGERNAIL CLIPPERS are you freaking serious?? that is a good source of DNA and now you cant get a clear match because they were used on other people? UGHHHH so frustrating

    that was a really hard one to listen to. but you guys did a great job keeping the respect for the victim. it seems like the Captain is really against it being the Ramseys and more like an intruder but i still dont buy it. i also dont think the ransom letter was written before she died... definitely a cover up. you all went into the bed wetting thing alot and that is a very telling sign of abuse. you said there wasnt any reports of abuse but that means nothing. doctors could have missed it especially if she was a bedwetter and they could have wrote any irritation off as because of that. or Patsy could be a very good manipulator (like DeeDee Blanchard) and made the dr not suspect that.

    the thing that makes me the most MAD in this case is everyone was touching everything and the police really dropped the ball. THE FINGERNAIL CLIPPERS are you freaking serious?? that is a good source of DNA and now you cant get a clear match because they were used on other people? UGHHHH so frustrating

  • Binx
    Binx Hillsboro
    I am listening to episode 283. The Captain mentioned that the Ramsey's allowed Burke to be interviewed by the police; which was technically correct, however that first interview did not take place until approximately 10 days after the murder. The Ramsey's negotiated the more though interview, I think with the FBI, until months after Jonbenet's death. One of you mentioned that John Ramsey's attorney (the corporate attorney) advised him that the BPD was trying to pin it on them (not an exact quote). In the murder of a child the police typically will look to member of the family. The Ramsey's fought the police all the way (I do not know what I would do in their position). Perhaps if they had been more forthcoming they (especially Burke) would not still be living under a storm cloud of suspicion.

    I am listening to episode 283. The Captain mentioned that the Ramsey's allowed Burke to be interviewed by the police; which was technically correct, however that first interview did not take place until approximately 10 days after the murder. The Ramsey's negotiated the more though interview, I think with the FBI, until months after Jonbenet's death. One of you mentioned that John Ramsey's attorney (the corporate attorney) advised him that the BPD was trying to pin it on them (not an exact quote). In the murder of a child the police typically will look to member of the family. The Ramsey's fought the police all the way (I do not know what I would do in their position). Perhaps if they had been more forthcoming they (especially Burke) would not still be living under a storm cloud of suspicion.

  • Sharon Cameron
    Sharon Cameron Herman
    Sorry Captain, I need to keep my Pod Cast hosts straight🤦🏻‍♀️. I don’t think that was a good bet

    Sorry Captain, I need to keep my Pod Cast hosts straight🤦🏻‍♀️. I don’t think that was a good bet

  • AlixS
    AlixS Cinci
    Thoughts while listening to these past episodes: I’m thinking that the person who did it has to be person who is educated and interested in culture- I.e. knowing a lot of movies/pop culture references, historical references to torture, use of specific upper class vocabulary. It has to be someone who is either surrounding themselves with people in wealthy circles or someone who belongs to wealthy circles- then on their own time looking into things that would make them feel a part of the wealthy group if the group ever decided this person was worthy of being in the group. JonBenét was a personification of acceptance in the group but innocent enough to be accessible to the perp without judgement or ridicule that an adult would give.

    Thoughts while listening to these past episodes:
    I’m thinking that the person who did it has to be person who is educated and interested in culture- I.e. knowing a lot of movies/pop culture references, historical references to torture, use of specific upper class vocabulary. It has to be someone who is either surrounding themselves with people in wealthy circles or someone who belongs to wealthy circles- then on their own time looking into things that would make them feel a part of the wealthy group if the group ever decided this person was worthy of being in the group. JonBenét was a personification of acceptance in the group but innocent enough to be accessible to the perp without judgement or ridicule that an adult would give.

  • Elizabeth Bramlett
    Elizabeth Bramlett HUNTINGTON BEACH CA
    Hello to both y’all! I realize this is extremely unoriginal -But for whatever reason I’m compelled to say-that this is my first time to comment on a podcast...well really to comment on anything besides FB. Anyway!! the reaction to this case has always seemed odd to me....I realize that many people feel very strongly that the Ramseys are guilty-I personally never saw them as anything other then absolutely devastated- and completely destroyed over losing their child - and one thing that has always puzzled me is people obsessing over the Ransom Letter being this unequivocal- smoking gun-piece of evidence that absolutely proved they were involved - why would anyone write a Ransom Letter - that clearly links them to the crime? Supposedly John’s bonus was the amount stated as the ransom amount .....I mean I think most have to agree that both John and Pasty are at the least slightly intelligent ...how is writing a ransom letter that has information only you or those close to you should know, smart? Isn’t it more likely that would be done by someone else to implicate the Ramseys - if Patsy was writing a ransom letter wouldnt she be smart enough to not put clues in it that lead directly back to her??? Where is the logic in that? and using the ‘ on attaché’ Case-or any of the other things that seem to have convinced so many that Patsy HAD to have written it - doesn’t anyone see how absolutely ridiculous that is ?? I mean- think of other criminals :ie Susan Smith - she said 2 men car jacked her and took her babies while she ran after them ....or Diane Downs who said a ‘bushy haired stranger’ flagged her down and shot her 3 children -but the best Patsy Ramsey could come up with is writing a ransom letter using an exact amount of money that her husband received only days before and used a notepad from her own kitchen counter and language that clearly make her a likely candidate ???? again, isn’t it at least plausible that someone else just might do all those things to implicate her?

    Hello to both y’all! I realize this is extremely unoriginal -But for whatever reason I’m compelled to say-that this is my first time to comment on a podcast...well really to comment on anything besides FB. Anyway!! the reaction to this case has always seemed odd to me....I realize that many people feel very strongly that the Ramseys are guilty-I personally never saw them as anything other then absolutely devastated- and completely destroyed over losing their child - and one thing that has always puzzled me is people obsessing over the Ransom Letter being this unequivocal- smoking gun-piece of evidence that absolutely proved they were involved - why would anyone write a Ransom Letter - that clearly links them to the crime? Supposedly John’s bonus was the amount stated as the ransom amount .....I mean I think most have to agree that both John and Pasty are at the least slightly intelligent ...how is writing a ransom letter that has information only you or those close to you should know, smart? Isn’t it more likely that would be done by someone else to implicate the Ramseys - if Patsy was writing a ransom letter wouldnt she be smart enough to not put clues in it that lead directly back to her??? Where is the logic in that? and using the ‘ on attaché’ Case-or any of the other things that seem to have convinced so many that Patsy HAD to have written it - doesn’t anyone see how absolutely ridiculous that is ?? I mean- think of other criminals :ie Susan Smith - she said 2 men car jacked her and took her babies while she ran after them ....or Diane Downs who said a ‘bushy haired stranger’ flagged her down and shot her 3 children -but the best Patsy Ramsey could come up with is writing a ransom letter using an exact amount of money that her husband received only days before and used a notepad from her own kitchen counter and language that clearly make her a likely candidate ???? again, isn’t it at least plausible that someone else just might do all those things to implicate her?

  • Steff
    Steff Parts Unknown (PU)
    Seems like you two had given your very best for this JonBenet series. I'm so proud of you guys, have some rest and keep doing what you're doing, Captain and Nic :)) Cheers and love from the Parts Unknown

    Seems like you two had given your very best for this JonBenet series.
    I'm so proud of you guys, have some rest and keep doing what you're doing, Captain and Nic smile)

    Cheers and love from the Parts Unknown

  • DM
    DM UK
    Hmmmm. Enjoying the podcast immensely but I’m a bit confused. My understanding is that JonBenet received the head injury at least an hour before she died. The dead don’t bleed but her brain was found to have a subdural hemorrhage & they could tell by the amount of blood how long she was alive for following that injury and that it would have rendered her immediately unconscious. Her actual cause of death was strangulation via the ligature. I think that in the course of being sexually abused she fought back which caused the injuries to her back. She may have been noisy, screaming and calling for her mother, which prompted her attacker to subdue her by striking her head. I think he knew she was still alive so quickly took her to the basement to hide her in case Patsy came looking - and also duct taped her mouth and tied her hands so that while he was figuring out what to do she wouldn’t come to and start screaming again. I think the elaborate garrotte & abuse with the paint brush was anger - “Look what you made me do”. Obviously these are just my own thoughts & I’m really looking forward to hearing which way you lean, Nic. It’s incredibly rare for me not to agree with your analysis on something but maybe that’ll be the case this time?!

    Hmmmm. Enjoying the podcast immensely but I’m a bit confused.

    My understanding is that JonBenet received the head injury at least an hour before she died. The dead don’t bleed but her brain was found to have a subdural hemorrhage & they could tell by the amount of blood how long she was alive for following that injury and that it would have rendered her immediately unconscious.

    Her actual cause of death was strangulation via the ligature.

    I think that in the course of being sexually abused she fought back which caused the injuries to her back. She may have been noisy, screaming and calling for her mother, which prompted her attacker to subdue her by striking her head. I think he knew she was still alive so quickly took her to the basement to hide her in case Patsy came looking - and also duct taped her mouth and tied her hands so that while he was figuring out what to do she wouldn’t come to and start screaming again.

    I think the elaborate garrotte & abuse with the paint brush was anger - “Look what you made me do”.

    Obviously these are just my own thoughts & I’m really looking forward to hearing which way you lean, Nic. It’s incredibly rare for me not to agree with your analysis on something but maybe that’ll be the case this time?!

  • Jackie
    Jackie KCMO
    So we've got Ransom that's about an airline owner, Die Hard that's about a Christmas party, and Dirty Harry where they find the girl already dead. Interesting. Also, while I was listening to you guys talk about the garrote, all I could think was "what if she was supposed to be pretending to be a reindeer??" She seemed to be all excited about the Santa visit. What if she mentioned her special visit to the wrong person at the Christmas party and they showed up instead?? Maybe the only person the guy really knew at the party was John - until he met JonBenet - and then he put together his plan and decided exactly what he was going to do?? Your coverage of this case has me thinking about it all in a completely different way. Thank you for that!

    So we've got Ransom that's about an airline owner, Die Hard that's about a Christmas party, and Dirty Harry where they find the girl already dead. Interesting.

    Also, while I was listening to you guys talk about the garrote, all I could think was "what if she was supposed to be pretending to be a reindeer??" She seemed to be all excited about the Santa visit. What if she mentioned her special visit to the wrong person at the Christmas party and they showed up instead?? Maybe the only person the guy really knew at the party was John - until he met JonBenet - and then he put together his plan and decided exactly what he was going to do??

    Your coverage of this case has me thinking about it all in a completely different way. Thank you for that!

  • Michelle
    Michelle Belton, MO.
    I listen to a LOT of podcasts and I have to say, that this one has one of the absolute best sound quality of them all. The opening montage is always great too! When I saw that you were covering this case I almost deleted the episodes, just because I have heard soooo much about this. But I'm glad I listened. I think you guys did a great job with this and covered things more in depth and from a different perspective than I have heard before.

    I listen to a LOT of podcasts and I have to say, that this one has one of the absolute best sound quality of them all. The opening montage is always great too!
    When I saw that you were covering this case I almost deleted the episodes, just because I have heard soooo much about this. But I'm glad I listened. I think you guys did a great job with this and covered things more in depth and from a different perspective than I have heard before.

  • Pierre Delecto
    Pierre Delecto Ohio
    ‪I’ve always thought it was the brother, then covered up by the mother, but now I have no idea what to think. None of it makes sense. Here’s what I have a problem with... Everything about the scene after the crime feels like a cover up by the parents. Though everything about the act of the murder, gaining entry to the home, remaining undetected seems like a sadistic, experienced killer. (or someone who already lives there) If your plan was to break in, assault and murder a child, why spend time writing the note? People are home. Wouldn’t you get in, get out ASAP. Pen, pad found at the scene. ‬Why leave it? Why would it be in a different area than the note, the body? That’s not throwing people off. That’s asking to get caught. (Unless you’re the parents hastily covering up a crime) Handwriting matched Patty... investigators also thought it was a woman’s handwriting? Up close and personal murder isn’t usually a female crime. Two people broke into the house? Even less likely. Anyway — Why leave the actual ransom note in a place you could be caught while leaving it? Again, it’s an unnecessary risk. Why leave the body? That’s the KEY piece of evidence. Why commit the crime inside the home, while everyone is home and could interrupt at anytime? Assuming you could get the child alone is a big leap. An attempted break in gone wrong to child murder is also a huge leap. Always assumed the garrote was an attempt to cover up the blow to the head. Which came first? Wouldn’t the blow have killed her? I think I just talked myself back into a cover up by the parents. It’s hard to rationalize an irrational act, but the burglar/killer theory just doesn’t make any sense. It feels like 3 separate crimes, from sophisticated and experienced to bumbling and bizarre.

    ‪I’ve always thought it was the brother, then covered up by the mother, but now I have no idea what to think. None of it makes sense.

    Here’s what I have a problem with...

    Everything about the scene after the crime feels like a cover up by the parents. Though everything about the act of the murder, gaining entry to the home, remaining undetected seems like a sadistic, experienced killer. (or someone who already lives there)

    If your plan was to break in, assault and murder a child, why spend time writing the note? People are home. Wouldn’t you get in, get out ASAP.

    Pen, pad found at the scene. ‬Why leave it? Why would it be in a different area than the note, the body? That’s not throwing people off. That’s asking to get caught. (Unless you’re the parents hastily covering up a crime)

    Handwriting matched Patty... investigators also thought it was a woman’s handwriting? Up close and personal murder isn’t usually a female crime.

    Two people broke into the house? Even less likely.

    Anyway — Why leave the actual ransom note in a place you could be caught while leaving it? Again, it’s an unnecessary risk.

    Why leave the body? That’s the KEY piece of evidence.

    Why commit the crime inside the home, while everyone is home and could interrupt at anytime?

    Assuming you could get the child alone is a big leap.

    An attempted break in gone wrong to child murder is also a huge leap.

    Always assumed the garrote was an attempt to cover up the blow to the head. Which came first? Wouldn’t the blow have killed her?

    I think I just talked myself back into a cover up by the parents. It’s hard to rationalize an irrational act, but the burglar/killer theory just doesn’t make any sense. It feels like 3 separate crimes, from sophisticated and experienced to bumbling and bizarre.

  • jameson
    jameson North Carolina
    I am a part of the Ramsey saga and have paid attention to almost everything that has happened in this case. I want to thank you for your podcasts - - I can see a few MINOR errors but overall this is GREAT. 5 stars from me.

    I am a part of the Ramsey saga and have paid attention to almost everything that has happened in this case. I want to thank you for your podcasts - - I can see a few MINOR errors but overall this is GREAT. 5 stars from me.

  • Mariana
    Mariana Montreal, Canada
    Great episode, and great series overall. I'm really looking forward to next week's episode. Also, I have to give the Captain special props for the music and the mixing for this series. Truly spectacular.

    Great episode, and great series overall. I'm really looking forward to next week's episode. Also, I have to give the Captain special props for the music and the mixing for this series. Truly spectacular.

  • RACHEL
    RACHEL O-H-I-O
    The analysis of the note on the Jim Clemente's special said 76% of the note is superfluous. The linguist said the note is not about delivering information, it's about selling a story. Who would want to sell a story of how a little girl died if they already successfully came in the house, got her out of bed and downstairs and assaulted her without anyone knowing? Why not just leave quietly the same quiet way you came in, undetected? In fact, wouldn't it be in an intruder's best interest for the whole world to assume that it was an inside job which pretty much every person alive would think given the absence of forced entry and the fact that it was a child and most child murders committed in the home are by someone in the family? An intruder would want the world to think it was the family, not an intruder, so why add an element that points to an intruder if you just got away with the crime? Why write a ransom without the intention to collect the money because you know the child is dead? That will only make the police look for an outside perp instead of stopping at the conclusion that the family did it, and you therefore just increased your chances of getting caught. The notepad was inside the house. The brush handle used to strangle her was inside the house. The duct tape was from inside the house. The child died inside the house. Why are we trying so hard to make an intruder fit? Because of the note. That's it. That stupid, gosh darn, problematic note. Nothing else suggests outsider. Even the underwear DNA could have been transferred. Or come from the factory or store.

    The analysis of the note on the Jim Clemente's special said 76% of the note is superfluous. The linguist said the note is not about delivering information, it's about selling a story. Who would want to sell a story of how a little girl died if they already successfully came in the house, got her out of bed and downstairs and assaulted her without anyone knowing? Why not just leave quietly the same quiet way you came in, undetected? In fact, wouldn't it be in an intruder's best interest for the whole world to assume that it was an inside job which pretty much every person alive would think given the absence of forced entry and the fact that it was a child and most child murders committed in the home are by someone in the family? An intruder would want the world to think it was the family, not an intruder, so why add an element that points to an intruder if you just got away with the crime? Why write a ransom without the intention to collect the money because you know the child is dead? That will only make the police look for an outside perp instead of stopping at the conclusion that the family did it, and you therefore just increased your chances of getting caught. The notepad was inside the house. The brush handle used to strangle her was inside the house. The duct tape was from inside the house. The child died inside the house. Why are we trying so hard to make an intruder fit? Because of the note. That's it. That stupid, gosh darn, problematic note. Nothing else suggests outsider. Even the underwear DNA could have been transferred. Or come from the factory or store.

  • Karri
    Karri Washington
    You have a few things that aren't correct. First, the DNA from Jonbenet fingernails was her DNA and her killer. Second, No fecal matter was found in Jonbenet bed or on anything in her room this was a rumor by the house keeper and not true. Third, Jonbenet bed was not wet crime scene photos show her bed the morning of the murder. Fourth, The blood DNA from Jonbenet panties Was Jonbenet DNA and a unknown male none of the DNA matches the Ramseys. Fifth, No Prior sexual abuse ever happened this was said by many doctors and Jonbenet doctors experts have said the sexual assault came at the time of her murder not anytime before. Sixth, expects have said Patsy did not write the RN from a score of 5 Patsy scored 4.9 meaning not likely. Seven, Jonbenet tried to save her life she fought her killer, the moon Mark's under her neck proves this. Eight, All the Ramseys have been excluded by DNA! The DNA is solid and is used to this day to clear suspects and is in the codis database. Nine, The lack of blood around the brain tells you Jonbenet was already dead by strangulation, Jonbenet was alive while being strangled. The hit on the head was after she was dead.

    You have a few things that aren't correct.
    First, the DNA from Jonbenet fingernails was her DNA and her killer.
    Second, No fecal matter was found in Jonbenet bed or on anything in her room this was a rumor by the house keeper and not true.
    Third, Jonbenet bed was not wet crime scene photos show her bed the morning of the murder.
    Fourth, The blood DNA from Jonbenet panties
    Was Jonbenet DNA and a unknown male none of the DNA matches the Ramseys.
    Fifth, No Prior sexual abuse ever happened this was said by many doctors and Jonbenet doctors experts have said the sexual assault came at the time of her murder not anytime before.
    Sixth, expects have said Patsy did not write the RN from a score of 5 Patsy scored 4.9 meaning not likely.
    Seven, Jonbenet tried to save her life she fought her killer, the moon Mark's under her neck proves this.
    Eight, All the Ramseys have been excluded by DNA! The DNA is solid and is used to this day to clear suspects and is in the codis database.
    Nine, The lack of blood around the brain tells you Jonbenet was already dead by strangulation, Jonbenet was alive while being strangled. The hit on the head was after she was dead.

  • Nicholas
    Nicholas Parts Unknown
    I appreciate the thorough presentation by Nic and the Captain. I can hear the Captain beginning to edge toward an intruder theory, which I believe is terribly unlikely. The main issue here in the ransom note. If one examines the language usage and compares the handwriting in the note to samples and other handwriting specimens from Patsy Ramsey easily found on the internet, there seems little doubt that 1) the note is, as you called it, a "farce" in reference to being an actual ransom request by a "foreign faction", and 2) the note appears quite clearly (at least to me) to be written by Mrs. Ramsey. The use of the word "hence" would be terribly coincidental if written by an anonymous intruder. It's also too coincidental that the unlikely amount picked matches the funds available to the family as a result of John's bonus. Patsy would be the most likely individual to decide on this odd and low amount, because it would not require the family to have to make extraordinary efforts to raise a larger, more likely ransom demand in the event they actually had to raise the funds prior to the body being discovered. This is a concern that really only the Ramsey's would have, certainly indicating both an inside knowledge of finances and a concern for the difficulty of fundraising that would not be shared by any intruder. If it is the case that Patsy Ramsey wrote the note, then there is no outside intruder. Obviously Mrs. Ramsey isn't going to concoct a ransom note to cover for someone outside of the family. The writing of the note by an outside intruder just doesn't make sense. Why would someone outside the family take the time to compose a note while skulking about in someone else's home after committing murder, greatly increasing their risk of detection by taking the time to not only write the note but also go back upstairs after the crime to neatly lay it out on the stairs? To what end? To gain a few minutes once the note is discovered? If one assumes a competent and thorough search of the house, this plan could have been expected to yield very little in regard to time gained while risking a great deal. This is extremely unlikely. This leads me to my theory of these events. This is obviously conjecture, but this is the tale that I think best fits the facts as we known them: 1. JonBenet is getting abundant attention from her mother given her pageant participation. According to the transcript of Mrs. Ramsey's police interview in March, 1997, they had just began this participation early in 1996, and had done perhaps 10 events, averaging nearly one a month. She had had special portfolios of professional photographs taken, trips to make-up artists, and a great deal of success. The brother, on the other hand, is being displaced by the adoration of his sister, and may be generally unattended to by Patsy. This results in a destructive combination of resentment toward his sister as well as unusual interest in the odd sexualized nature of the outfits and activities surrounding these pageants. A suburbanized version of Ed Kemper. 2. The brother engages in some form of sexual play or abuse with the victim days before her death, accounting for the evidence of possible sexual interaction several days before the crime. Neither victim or perpertrator reveal what happened. 3. In the early AM of December 26, JonBenet awakens and goes downstairs to eat some pineapple. She encounters the brother who talks her into going to the basement area in which he is known to play, according to Patsy's interview with police. This accounts for the victim making it to the basement without any struggle, noise, or screaming. The ensuing sexual abuse does not involve ejaculation because it's being perpetrated by a prepubescent boy, accounting for a lack of semen at the crime scene or on the victim. The abuse goes wrong, with JonBenet yelling, objecting, or threatening to tell. She is overpowered, tied up, and asphixiated. To make sure she is dead, she is shaken (accounting for the signs of shaking in the brain) and struck violently on the head with a fire place poker (which accounts for the lack of bleeding from the head trauma, given that it occurs after cardiac arrest.) 4. Patsy discovers the crime in the middle of the night. Her husband is soundly asleep after taking a sleeping medication. She has plenty of time to develop and carry out a plan. She decides to fabricate a ransom note, with the intention of covering up the true perpetrator of the crime by making this seem like a kidnapping, perhaps a kidnapping gone wrong. One child is dead - why ruin the life of the remaining child if she can manage to avoid this? She has time to draft the note once and rewrite it, even bothering to correct errors. She makes certain that she is the one who finds the note, not leaving it's discovery to chance. She very quickly arranges for the brother to be out of the house and away from the police. The family friends are certainly not going to ask him about these events; they are trying to distract the boy. He had likely also been heavily coached after the crime is discovered to keep silent. 5. What follows has been a cover-up involvng non-cooperation, police mismanagement, and some very sympathetic folks in Boulder attempting to exonerate the family, in one case refusing to go forward with the grand jury findings, and ultimately using very scant touch DNA evidence to try to argue for the unlikely outside intruder/perpetrator.

    I appreciate the thorough presentation by Nic and the Captain. I can hear the Captain beginning to edge toward an intruder theory, which I believe is terribly unlikely. The main issue here in the ransom note. If one examines the language usage and compares the handwriting in the note to samples and other handwriting specimens from Patsy Ramsey easily found on the internet, there seems little doubt that 1) the note is, as you called it, a "farce" in reference to being an actual ransom request by a "foreign faction", and 2) the note appears quite clearly (at least to me) to be written by Mrs. Ramsey. The use of the word "hence" would be terribly coincidental if written by an anonymous intruder. It's also too coincidental that the unlikely amount picked matches the funds available to the family as a result of John's bonus. Patsy would be the most likely individual to decide on this odd and low amount, because it would not require the family to have to make extraordinary efforts to raise a larger, more likely ransom demand in the event they actually had to raise the funds prior to the body being discovered. This is a concern that really only the Ramsey's would have, certainly indicating both an inside knowledge of finances and a concern for the difficulty of fundraising that would not be shared by any intruder.

    If it is the case that Patsy Ramsey wrote the note, then there is no outside intruder. Obviously Mrs. Ramsey isn't going to concoct a ransom note to cover for someone outside of the family. The writing of the note by an outside intruder just doesn't make sense. Why would someone outside the family take the time to compose a note while skulking about in someone else's home after committing murder, greatly increasing their risk of detection by taking the time to not only write the note but also go back upstairs after the crime to neatly lay it out on the stairs? To what end? To gain a few minutes once the note is discovered? If one assumes a competent and thorough search of the house, this plan could have been expected to yield very little in regard to time gained while risking a great deal. This is extremely unlikely.

    This leads me to my theory of these events. This is obviously conjecture, but this is the tale that I think best fits the facts as we known them:

    1. JonBenet is getting abundant attention from her mother given her pageant participation. According to the transcript of Mrs. Ramsey's police interview in March, 1997, they had just began this participation early in 1996, and had done perhaps 10 events, averaging nearly one a month. She had had special portfolios of professional photographs taken, trips to make-up artists, and a great deal of success. The brother, on the other hand, is being displaced by the adoration of his sister, and may be generally unattended to by Patsy. This results in a destructive combination of resentment toward his sister as well as unusual interest in the odd sexualized nature of the outfits and activities surrounding these pageants. A suburbanized version of Ed Kemper.

    2. The brother engages in some form of sexual play or abuse with the victim days before her death, accounting for the evidence of possible sexual interaction several days before the crime. Neither victim or perpertrator reveal what happened.

    3. In the early AM of December 26, JonBenet awakens and goes downstairs to eat some pineapple. She encounters the brother who talks her into going to the basement area in which he is known to play, according to Patsy's interview with police. This accounts for the victim making it to the basement without any struggle, noise, or screaming. The ensuing sexual abuse does not involve ejaculation because it's being perpetrated by a prepubescent boy, accounting for a lack of semen at the crime scene or on the victim. The abuse goes wrong, with JonBenet yelling, objecting, or threatening to tell. She is overpowered, tied up, and asphixiated. To make sure she is dead, she is shaken (accounting for the signs of shaking in the brain) and struck violently on the head with a fire place poker (which accounts for the lack of bleeding from the head trauma, given that it occurs after cardiac arrest.)

    4. Patsy discovers the crime in the middle of the night. Her husband is soundly asleep after taking a sleeping medication. She has plenty of time to develop and carry out a plan. She decides to fabricate a ransom note, with the intention of covering up the true perpetrator of the crime by making this seem like a kidnapping, perhaps a kidnapping gone wrong. One child is dead - why ruin the life of the remaining child if she can manage to avoid this? She has time to draft the note once and rewrite it, even bothering to correct errors. She makes certain that she is the one who finds the note, not leaving it's discovery to chance. She very quickly arranges for the brother to be out of the house and away from the police. The family friends are certainly not going to ask him about these events; they are trying to distract the boy. He had likely also been heavily coached after the crime is discovered to keep silent.

    5. What follows has been a cover-up involvng non-cooperation, police mismanagement, and some very sympathetic folks in Boulder attempting to exonerate the family, in one case refusing to go forward with the grand jury findings, and ultimately using very scant touch DNA evidence to try to argue for the unlikely outside intruder/perpetrator.

  • Uncle D.
    Uncle D. BFE
    Ofcourse everyone knows about this case. But I never knew how she died until today. Thanks guys. The more I listen to this series, the more I think the parents and brother had absolutely nothing to do with this. Sounds lile a botched kidnapping to me. The perv accidentally killed her after leaving the note but before he could get her out of the house. In my opinion.

    Ofcourse everyone knows about this case. But I never knew how she died until today. Thanks guys. The more I listen to this series, the more I think the parents and brother had absolutely nothing to do with this. Sounds lile a botched kidnapping to me. The perv accidentally killed her after leaving the note but before he could get her out of the house. In my opinion.

  • Paul
    Paul USA
    Where did you guys get that it is a fact that the blow to the head came after the strangulation? I researched and this is an open discussion by many professionals in the field. I was dead set that Burke did it but this made me doubt it. You said it was a fact, but I can't find it anywhere... This is a huge part of the case that change it one way or the other, so I don't think it is right for you guys to say it is a fact when not even the people who worked on the case can actually decide.

    Where did you guys get that it is a fact that the blow to the head came after the strangulation? I researched and this is an open discussion by many professionals in the field. I was dead set that Burke did it but this made me doubt it. You said it was a fact, but I can't find it anywhere... This is a huge part of the case that change it one way or the other, so I don't think it is right for you guys to say it is a fact when not even the people who worked on the case can actually decide.

  • Christina
    Christina Duluth, MN
    The Ramseys had a LOT of money... A LOT. If Burke killed his sister, the Ramseys had the money to protect him without the need of an elaborate and brutal cover up.

    The Ramseys had a LOT of money... A LOT. If Burke killed his sister, the Ramseys had the money to protect him without the need of an elaborate and brutal cover up.

  • Laura
    Laura MI
    As I am reminded of things by listening, there have always been two things that bothered me. One, is the ransom letter. There was never a reason for it. She wasn't kidnapped. There was never going to be a ransom call because she was dead downstairs. In my opinion, it doesn't belong. Doesn't make sense that it was even written. By the way, I'm not a kidnapping expert but who assaults the victim first and then kidnaps them. Isn't it usually the other way around? Two, is when John and his friend went searching for JBR. He goes directly downstairs; finds her almost immediately. That bothers me the most.

    As I am reminded of things by listening, there have always been two things that bothered me. One, is the ransom letter. There was never a reason for it. She wasn't kidnapped. There was never going to be a ransom call because she was dead downstairs. In my opinion, it doesn't belong. Doesn't make sense that it was even written. By the way, I'm not a kidnapping expert but who assaults the victim first and then kidnaps them. Isn't it usually the other way around? Two, is when John and his friend went searching for JBR. He goes directly downstairs; finds her almost immediately. That bothers me the most.

  • True Crime Garage
    True Crime Garage
    Karri - I appreciate you posting here but would beg that you listen more carefully. As 6 of 9 of the things you state that we got incorrect were covered and we were stating the same as you did in your post. I don’t have the time to go through them point by point. Thanks Nic

    Karri - I appreciate you posting here but would beg that you listen more carefully. As 6 of 9 of the things you state that we got incorrect were covered and we were stating the same as you did in your post.
    I don’t have the time to go through them point by point.
    Thanks Nic

  • True Crime Garage
    True Crime Garage
    @ Paul - ouch, I hope I didn’t say that was “fact.” If I did I apologize - that was not my intention but there was a lot of talking and back and forth. What my intention for the autopsy show was to point out that the way the autopsy reads (to me) sounds like Dr. Meyer believed the hit to the head was first followed by strangulation or could not determine the order but both took place,could even be at the same time. He was the only one to actually examine the body. Several very reputable experts after reviewed his documents and photos and stated it’s of their opinion she was strangled then hit on the head. I lean that way as well but it’s not a fact. Thank you for pointing that out. Nic

    @ Paul - ouch, I hope I didn’t say that was “fact.” If I did I apologize - that was not my intention but there was a lot of talking and back and forth. What my intention for the autopsy show was to point out that the way the autopsy reads (to me) sounds like Dr. Meyer believed the hit to the head was first followed by strangulation or could not determine the order but both took place,could even be at the same time. He was the only one to actually examine the body. Several very reputable experts after reviewed his documents and photos and stated it’s of their opinion she was strangled then hit on the head. I lean that way as well but it’s not a fact.
    Thank you for pointing that out.
    Nic

  • X
    X Nowhere
    Fraternity member of Chi Psi, 2 blocks away, knew the family through John's CU Boulder student son. No one else.

    Fraternity member of Chi Psi, 2 blocks away, knew the family through John's CU Boulder student son. No one else.

  • RACHEL
    RACHEL O-H-I-O
    Darn you guys for doing this case. I cant stay away! This and Jack the Ripper and Amy Mihaljevic. Anyways, I have been posting frequently in the Facebook discussion group about it too. There are a few thoughts I just had as I was sitting here attempting to work at my real job-which at this point could actually be considered more like moonlighting to my job of solving crimes :)--The autopsy does not state definitely which wound came first. So let's suppose that the Ramsey's did cover up a fit of rage by staging a murder. To me, a garotte is just as theatrical as the ransom note. A mind that could write that note with all of it's movie quotes, and quasi mobster language (fat cat? really?) would also conjure up images of a film noir-esque intruder in a trench coat and fedora, black leather gloves, slipping a garotte over the neck of the victim. It's so completely outlandish. And as far as the knots, I think it was Michael Kane that said no expert had actually ever examined the knots, and the statement that they were too complicated (for someone with Naval training and/or accomplished sailors) was in no way substantiated. There are many people out there that claim they are actually quite simple knots and anyone could do them. As for DNA evidence, the DNA actually shows 6 different perpetrators which we know is completely implausible. So its most likely relic DNA. Finally, one thing that gets overlooked is when Patsy randomly describes her daughter as a blonde on the 911 call. She cant say her name but she is focused on a detail that revolves around her appearance. Even if she thought she was kidnapped that detail would be irrelevant as its not like they need a description to look for a lost or wandering child. According to the note, Jonbenet was in the kidnappers "posession." So what good a description does is beyond me. However, if she was only making that call to establish a narrative that a molester had broken in and assaulted her daughter, then at that point, to her at least, a description of her blonde daughter would make sense--her daughter was a pedophiles dream was what I think she was trying to establish. Once you realize that the only thing pointing to an intruder is the note, you can conclude its an inside job. Then it's basically just a Monty Hall probability scenario. You assume it's Patsy since she most likely wrote the note and made the call. Then you can use the audio at the end of the 911 call as Monty opening a zonks door. When you do that, you are left with Burke being your perp with 2/3 probability.

    Darn you guys for doing this case. I cant stay away! This and Jack the Ripper and Amy Mihaljevic. Anyways, I have been posting frequently in the Facebook discussion group about it too. There are a few thoughts I just had as I was sitting here attempting to work at my real job-which at this point could actually be considered more like moonlighting to my job of solving crimes smile--The autopsy does not state definitely which wound came first. So let's suppose that the Ramsey's did cover up a fit of rage by staging a murder. To me, a garotte is just as theatrical as the ransom note. A mind that could write that note with all of it's movie quotes, and quasi mobster language (fat cat? really?) would also conjure up images of a film noir-esque intruder in a trench coat and fedora, black leather gloves, slipping a garotte over the neck of the victim. It's so completely outlandish. And as far as the knots, I think it was Michael Kane that said no expert had actually ever examined the knots, and the statement that they were too complicated (for someone with Naval training and/or accomplished sailors) was in no way substantiated. There are many people out there that claim they are actually quite simple knots and anyone could do them. As for DNA evidence, the DNA actually shows 6 different perpetrators which we know is completely implausible. So its most likely relic DNA. Finally, one thing that gets overlooked is when Patsy randomly describes her daughter as a blonde on the 911 call. She cant say her name but she is focused on a detail that revolves around her appearance. Even if she thought she was kidnapped that detail would be irrelevant as its not like they need a description to look for a lost or wandering child. According to the note, Jonbenet was in the kidnappers "posession." So what good a description does is beyond me. However, if she was only making that call to establish a narrative that a molester had broken in and assaulted her daughter, then at that point, to her at least, a description of her blonde daughter would make sense--her daughter was a pedophiles dream was what I think she was trying to establish. Once you realize that the only thing pointing to an intruder is the note, you can conclude its an inside job. Then it's basically just a Monty Hall probability scenario. You assume it's Patsy since she most likely wrote the note and made the call. Then you can use the audio at the end of the 911 call as Monty opening a zonks door. When you do that, you are left with Burke being your perp with 2/3 probability.

  • Leigh
    Leigh Alabama
    I am so impressed with how you guys are presenting this from a different perspective than so many others. After years of back and forth I am definitely leaning toward Intruder. I believe they broke in while the family was out and in the deranged, stalker minds enjoyed lurking and waiting. During that time they likely found things that made their way into the letter (like the bonus amount). It would not be unusual for a check stub of deposit receipt to be in the home from the bonus. This would also explain the letter’s length— they had plenty of time to waste while the family settled in and they waited for them to all fall asleep. The long rambling nature is very much in line with how mentally unstable people communicate and confabulate. I believe the intent was to take her, but the perp couldn’t wait to get their hands on her and then things went awry. As for all the strange behavior ... people are strange! I often think about my daily idiosyncrasies and how someone investigating my sudden disappearance might view them in retrospect. What a tale they could invent! Thanks for the hard work guys!

    I am so impressed with how you guys are presenting this from a different perspective than so many others. After years of back and forth I am definitely leaning toward Intruder.

    I believe they broke in while the family was out and in the deranged, stalker minds enjoyed lurking and waiting. During that time they likely found things that made their way into the letter (like the bonus amount). It would not be unusual for a check stub of deposit receipt to be in the home from the bonus. This would also explain the letter’s length— they had plenty of time to waste while the family settled in and they waited for them to all fall asleep. The long rambling nature is very much in line with how mentally unstable people communicate and confabulate.

    I believe the intent was to take her, but the perp couldn’t wait to get their hands on her and then things went awry.

    As for all the strange behavior ... people are strange! I often think about my daily idiosyncrasies and how someone investigating my sudden disappearance might view them in retrospect. What a tale they could invent!

    Thanks for the hard work guys!

  • amy
    amy New York
    Regarding the "ransom letter", I don't think any kidnapper in his or her right mind, would take the time to write a two page letter while standing or sitting in the home of their intended victim. The more time they spent in the Ramsey home, the higher the probability that they would be found out by someone in the house.Knowing that, the fact that this letter was even taken seriously is mind boggling. Clearly, it was not written by a "kidnapper".

    Regarding the "ransom letter", I don't think any kidnapper in his or her right mind, would take the time to write a two page letter while standing or sitting in the home of their intended victim. The more time they spent in the Ramsey home, the higher the probability that they would be found out by someone in the house.Knowing that, the fact that this letter was even taken seriously is mind boggling. Clearly, it was not written by a "kidnapper".

  • Johnson
    Johnson Australia
    I looked up the autopsy/neck photos you talked about and they are pretty sick. I had seen them before maybe ten years ago but they didn't stick in my mind like they do now. Having kids now (and not back then) probably changes my perspective but my god they are hard to look at without real emotion, the way the rope embeds deep inside the neck's skin. The notion that the parents knew how to do this (theoretically) let alone then went and did this to their own daughter: tie the rope that deep (twice), set up an elaborate garrotte system as a torture/rape device, all to cover up an accidental death (which would have been ruled a sad accident anyway), in the middle of the night while presumably freaking out at their daughter's real-life Death, is really just incomprehensible. As for any suggestion that Patsy saying "she's blonde" on the 911 call after being asked how old she was somehow demonstrates her own guilt - talk about mental gymnastics. Patsy saying "she's blonde" after being asked how old she was (obviously triggering the "description?" answer) actually shows her being natural, off-guard, trying to help while answering questions that aren't literally being asked. I'm sorry but to think Patsy's over-help (if it even is) on the 911 call somehow shows "the parents did it", is the very definition of "Tunnel Vision" especially when there is not one scrap of evidence at all to say the parents had anything to do with it. Handwriting doesn't match, 911 call is as expected, garrotte/rope system is so sick only a freakin' sicko could do it - Occam's Razor people. A sicko pedophile did it. Did she die accidentally? did he ever intend to take her away alive? who knows. It doesn't have to matter. Boring, non-conspiracy perhaps, but likely true.

    I looked up the autopsy/neck photos you talked about and they are pretty sick. I had seen them before maybe ten years ago but they didn't stick in my mind like they do now. Having kids now (and not back then) probably changes my perspective but my god they are hard to look at without real emotion, the way the rope embeds deep inside the neck's skin. The notion that the parents knew how to do this (theoretically) let alone then went and did this to their own daughter: tie the rope that deep (twice), set up an elaborate garrotte system as a torture/rape device, all to cover up an accidental death (which would have been ruled a sad accident anyway), in the middle of the night while presumably freaking out at their daughter's real-life Death, is really just incomprehensible.

    As for any suggestion that Patsy saying "she's blonde" on the 911 call after being asked how old she was somehow demonstrates her own guilt - talk about mental gymnastics. Patsy saying "she's blonde" after being asked how old she was (obviously triggering the "description?" answer) actually shows her being natural, off-guard, trying to help while answering questions that aren't literally being asked. I'm sorry but to think Patsy's over-help (if it even is) on the 911 call somehow shows "the parents did it", is the very definition of "Tunnel Vision" especially when there is not one scrap of evidence at all to say the parents had anything to do with it.

    Handwriting doesn't match, 911 call is as expected, garrotte/rope system is so sick only a freakin' sicko could do it - Occam's Razor people. A sicko pedophile did it. Did she die accidentally? did he ever intend to take her away alive? who knows. It doesn't have to matter. Boring, non-conspiracy perhaps, but likely true.

  • Rachael
    Rachael Missouri
    I didn't buy the new "evidence" regarding Burke, but I've always thought the parents were involved in some way, either directly or by knowing who did it. The Captain is kind of changing my thoughts on that 😱. I'm Burke's age and have been obsessed with this case since it happened, always thinking it was the parents. This series has me rethinking my presuppositions! Thank you, looking forward to next week's episodes! I hope this case has a resolution someday, in my lifetime.

    I didn't buy the new "evidence" regarding Burke, but I've always thought the parents were involved in some way, either directly or by knowing who did it. The Captain is kind of changing my thoughts on that 😱. I'm Burke's age and have been obsessed with this case since it happened, always thinking it was the parents. This series has me rethinking my presuppositions! Thank you, looking forward to next week's episodes! I hope this case has a resolution someday, in my lifetime.

  • Willow
    Willow FL
    The podcast is so full of misinformation. You guys are basically falling for the carefully crafted PR campaign efforts of the prime suspects in this homicide investigation and their attorneys. Sad! JonBenet deserves better.

    The podcast is so full of misinformation. You guys are basically falling for the carefully crafted PR campaign efforts of the prime suspects in this homicide investigation and their attorneys. Sad! JonBenet deserves better.

  • True Crime Garage
    True Crime Garage
    Willow You obviously need to do some research. None of the information we have shared is from the PR campaign. Autopsy results are straight from the medical examiner that did them. Nor have we have our thoughts on what happened so you have no clue what we think. We have no agenda other than to report the actual facts. Just because you don’t believe actual facts doesn’t mean they aren’t real.

    Willow

    You obviously need to do some research. None of the information we have shared is from the PR campaign. Autopsy results are straight from the medical examiner that did them. Nor have we have our thoughts on what happened so you have no clue what we think. We have no agenda other than to report the actual facts. Just because you don’t believe actual facts doesn’t mean they aren’t real.

  • Veronica
    Veronica CA
    Handwriting analysts don't use a 5 point scale. That was invented by Ramsey lawyers and added to a peculiarly long order for summary judgment, which was signed by default by a judge who didn't read it. All 6 graphologists are on record as saying that Patsy was the only person they could not exclude (none using a ridiculous 5 point scale). Guys, you misinterpreted or didn't read the autopsy results. JBR led *inside her brain.* Quite a bit. Before she died. You also didn't read the further pathology reports based on various tissues sent off to other pathologists. Rachel, your post is great. Expert forensic analysis of brain tissue preserved after the first autopsy also shows that the time she lived was 45 minutes to 120 minutes.

    Handwriting analysts don't use a 5 point scale. That was invented by Ramsey lawyers and added to a peculiarly long order for summary judgment, which was signed by default by a judge who didn't read it. All 6 graphologists are on record as saying that Patsy was the only person they could not exclude (none using a ridiculous 5 point scale).

    Guys, you misinterpreted or didn't read the autopsy results. JBR led *inside her brain.* Quite a bit. Before she died. You also didn't read the further pathology reports based on various tissues sent off to other pathologists.

    Rachel, your post is great.

    Expert forensic analysis of brain tissue preserved after the first autopsy also shows that the time she lived was 45 minutes to 120 minutes.

  • Natalie
    Natalie Oregon
    I’m really enjoying the Garage take on this case. I’ve followed it since day one and I never thought it was the parents— I don’t think a couple would do that to their child to cover up an accident, and they’d be able to keep that secret that long. I do feel that someone close to them had been abusing her for a while and might have done it. They recently arrested a photographer, who took her pictures, on child porn charges: https://komonews.com/news/local/jonbent-ramsey-photographer-jailed-on-child-porn-charges-in-oregon She came into contact with dozens of people she was taught to trust. It’s a shame things weren’t handled better in the beginning. A few extra steps in those first few minutes could have saved us years of debate.

    I’m really enjoying the Garage take on this case. I’ve followed it since day one and I never thought it was the parents— I don’t think a couple would do that to their child to cover up an accident, and they’d be able to keep that secret that long. I do feel that someone close to them had been abusing her for a while and might have done it.
    They recently arrested a photographer, who took her pictures, on child porn charges: https://komonews.com/news/local/jonbent-ramsey-photographer-jailed-on-child-porn-charges-in-oregon
    She came into contact with dozens of people she was taught to trust.
    It’s a shame things weren’t handled better in the beginning. A few extra steps in those first few minutes could have saved us years of debate.

  • SJ
    SJ OTHER parts unknown
    Thank you Nic n Captain. Bravo...👍 At the beginning of the episode...I was sure the Ramseys were guilty as sin....but by the end of the show, I m sitting with Nic "on the fence"... Thank you again for a great podcast.

    Thank you Nic n Captain. Bravo...👍
    At the beginning of the episode...I was sure the Ramseys were guilty as sin....but by the end of the show, I m sitting with Nic "on the fence"...
    Thank you again for a great podcast.

  • Dr Macabre
    Dr Macabre Texas
    Are you guys going to have one more episode on this to give your thoughts/opinions? Felt like the fourth episode ended too soon, too abruptly. I always look forward to your episodes, not only because of the fantastic research you guys pour into the episodes, but also because I like hearing your opinions. I don't felt like your opinions or theories were voiced as much during this four-parter. Not sure if maybe that was intentional? Would love just one more episode, or even an Off The Record companion episode, to hear you guys give theories. Much love. _doc

    Are you guys going to have one more episode on this to give your thoughts/opinions? Felt like the fourth episode ended too soon, too abruptly. I always look forward to your episodes, not only because of the fantastic research you guys pour into the episodes, but also because I like hearing your opinions. I don't felt like your opinions or theories were voiced as much during this four-parter. Not sure if maybe that was intentional? Would love just one more episode, or even an Off The Record companion episode, to hear you guys give theories. Much love. _doc

  • Uncle D.
    Uncle D. BFE
    @ Willow. To this point in the series, I have seen them do nothing other than lay out facts based on various reports. I'm not sure what your beef is.

    @ Willow.

    To this point in the series, I have seen them do nothing other than lay out facts based on various reports. I'm not sure what your beef is.

  • Fenway22
    Fenway22 Boston
    Wow Captain, you have some seriously bad takes on this case. You both are really slandering this Santa Bill person. Not sure if you believe what you're saying or just playing Devil's Advocate? The notion that John and/or Patsy had no involvement in their daughter's death is silly.

    Wow Captain, you have some seriously bad takes on this case. You both are really slandering this Santa Bill person. Not sure if you believe what you're saying or just playing Devil's Advocate? The notion that John and/or Patsy had no involvement in their daughter's death is silly.

  • Joy
    Joy New York
    I’m a little behind here but I initially wanted to comment on the blow to the head. I think the lack of blood was simply because it didn’t break the skin. I was once in a really bad car accident and they thought I had brain bleeding/swelling or had cracked my skull (turned out to be just a very bad concussion luckily) and I wasn’t visibly bleeding at all. I’m no medical doctor but I don’t think that part is uncommon with some head injuries? Then I started reading some of the comments. I’m kind of surprised how strongly people seem to feel about this case. I totally get that a little gurl was brutally killed but to get so offended that the hosts are either being biased for against suspects...the truth is nobody knows what happened that night and the hosts are entitled to their opinions like everyone else is. No need to get so upset people!! I personally think there’s so much that could go either way it’s impossible to tell exactly what happened. Is this an incredibly odd case of our an intruder, well yeah, but odd things happen. If one of the parents killed their child, let’s assume by accident, why would they then brutally choke her and molest her? People are saying the bed wetting is a sign of sexual abuse that’s been going on. Well I’m my practice I specialize in clients who have trauma and yeah, it can be a sign, but it proves nothing and I do not see enough evidence to point to the child having been sexually abused on that alone. Beauty pageants? I personally find them tacky, but in the south they are quite popular (I discussed this part with a friend of mine from Tennessee) and patsy was the classic southern belle type so I don’t think there’s some perverse reason she was in the pageants. If we look at children who are sexually abused from a behavioral point of view I’ve seen nothing to indicate JonBenet exhibited troubling behaviors. Everyone who knew her said she was a very happy, well adjusted, active child including the family doctor who said the vaginal issues could have been easily explained by bladder infections JonBenet would often get (which I suppose makes sense if she had toileting issues). This was disputed by other doctors but so it seems is everything in this case. If patsy got angry and hit her child hard enough to kill her I just can’t imagine she would then wrap a rope around her neck and cause that kind of damage and then sexually assault her own daughter to make it look like a murder? This to me would take a certain kind of personality-someone with a personality profile more like that of Casey Anthony (who likely suffers from several serious personality disorders). While patsy seemed to be the affluent pageant queen type I see nothing resembling any severe personality disorder in her behavior before or after this event took place. The same holds true for the father. That being said where I get stuck is that letter- the wording ‘attache’ and such just does not sound like some street thug predator. It sounds like something a debutante like patsy would say. Plus the amount of money seems like inside information. If it wasn’t the family members I think it was certainly someone who ran in the same social circles and not a street wise criminal-quoting the movies?? That’s not something real street criminals do. This feels personal to Jon to me, in my gut somehow. I think people formed opinions about this case one way or the other based on information that’s become attached to the case from the beginning whether it’s accurate or just talking heads opinions stated as fact on tv, it’s become part of the case. I hope one day we know who really did this but I think the jury is still out. And I personally feel like even if you think it points to the parents it’s pretty cruel to crucify two people for sexually assaulting and murdering their five year old without some pretty significant proof to back you up.

    I’m a little behind here but I initially wanted to comment on the blow to the head. I think the lack of blood was simply because it didn’t break the skin. I was once in a really bad car accident and they thought I had brain bleeding/swelling or had cracked my skull (turned out to be just a very bad concussion luckily) and I wasn’t visibly bleeding at all. I’m no medical doctor but I don’t think that part is uncommon with some head injuries?

    Then I started reading some of the comments. I’m kind of surprised how strongly people seem to feel about this case. I totally get that a little gurl was brutally killed but to get so offended that the hosts are either being biased for against suspects...the truth is nobody knows what happened that night and the hosts are entitled to their opinions like everyone else is. No need to get so upset people!!

    I personally think there’s so much that could go either way it’s impossible to tell exactly what happened. Is this an incredibly odd case of our an intruder, well yeah, but odd things happen. If one of the parents killed their child, let’s assume by accident, why would they then brutally choke her and molest her? People are saying the bed wetting is a sign of sexual abuse that’s been going on. Well I’m my practice I specialize in clients who have trauma and yeah, it can be a sign, but it proves nothing and I do not see enough evidence to point to the child having been sexually abused on that alone. Beauty pageants? I personally find them tacky, but in the south they are quite popular (I discussed this part with a friend of mine from Tennessee) and patsy was the classic southern belle type so I don’t think there’s some perverse reason she was in the pageants. If we look at children who are sexually abused from a behavioral point of view I’ve seen nothing to indicate JonBenet exhibited troubling behaviors. Everyone who knew her said she was a very happy, well adjusted, active child including the family doctor who said the vaginal issues could have been easily explained by bladder infections JonBenet would often get (which I suppose makes sense if she had toileting issues). This was disputed by other doctors but so it seems is everything in this case.

    If patsy got angry and hit her child hard enough to kill her I just can’t imagine she would then wrap a rope around her neck and cause that kind of damage and then sexually assault her own daughter to make it look like a murder? This to me would take a certain kind of personality-someone with a personality profile more like that of Casey Anthony (who likely suffers from several serious personality disorders). While patsy seemed to be the affluent pageant queen type I see nothing resembling any severe personality disorder in her behavior before or after this event took place. The same holds true for the father.

    That being said where I get stuck is that letter- the wording ‘attache’ and such just does not sound like some street thug predator. It sounds like something a debutante like patsy would say. Plus the amount of money seems like inside information. If it wasn’t the family members I think it was certainly someone who ran in the same social circles and not a street wise criminal-quoting the movies?? That’s not something real street criminals do. This feels personal to Jon to me, in my gut somehow.

    I think people formed opinions about this case one way or the other based on information that’s become attached to the case from the beginning whether it’s accurate or just talking heads opinions stated as fact on tv, it’s become part of the case.

    I hope one day we know who really did this but I think the jury is still out. And I personally feel like even if you think it points to the parents it’s pretty cruel to crucify two people for sexually assaulting and murdering their five year old without some pretty significant proof to back you up.

  • Bev
    Bev Kentucky
    I believe that you ALMOST got it right Captain. I believe that her mother (maybe father) was selling her in a sex ring (history of bed wetting, sexual abuse, pageant circuit pedophiles, Santa is paying a special visit, etc) and she was awaken to eat pinnacle by her mother to get her up and in the hands of “Santa”. And the sexual assault took place in the basement as you stated. But when it went too far and she died, her mom knew and to cover it up the ransom note was written by Patsy. Perhaps the plan was to take her out the window in the suitcase to explain the kidnapping and get rid of the body and Patsy wasnt aware she didn't make it out. The perp freaked and left. Therefore, we have the pineapple bowl w moms fingerprints, pineapple in her stomach, a secret visit from Santa, history of sexual abuse and bed wetting, pageant circuit used to exploit her, ransom note to cover it up, suitcase under the window, no one awaiting the kidnapper call, burke was STILL asleep (gotta figure it out and keep it quiet from him), disobeys the ransom note instructions, wouldnt cooperate w police, wouldnt take a lie detector test, AND the grand jury originally agreed to indite on child abuse causing her death. The family DIDNT do it, but I think they (at least the parents) know who did.

    I believe that you ALMOST got it right Captain. I believe that her mother (maybe father) was selling her in a sex ring (history of bed wetting, sexual abuse, pageant circuit pedophiles, Santa is paying a special visit, etc) and she was awaken to eat pinnacle by her mother to get her up and in the hands of “Santa”. And the sexual assault took place in the basement as you stated. But when it went too far and she died, her mom knew and to cover it up the ransom note was written by Patsy. Perhaps the plan was to take her out the window in the suitcase to explain the kidnapping and get rid of the body and Patsy wasnt aware she didn't make it out. The perp freaked and left. Therefore, we have the pineapple bowl w moms fingerprints, pineapple in her stomach, a secret visit from Santa, history of sexual abuse and bed wetting, pageant circuit used to exploit her, ransom note to cover it up, suitcase under the window, no one awaiting the kidnapper call, burke was STILL asleep (gotta figure it out and keep it quiet from him), disobeys the ransom note instructions, wouldnt cooperate w police, wouldnt take a lie detector test, AND the grand jury originally agreed to indite on child abuse causing her death.

    The family DIDNT do it, but I think they (at least the parents) know who did.

  • Mal
    Mal Newcastle, Australia
    Captain, you seem to be losing your objectivity and accepting or dismissing evidence to suit your idea of events. I think you are taking Lou Schmidt as the final word here and projecting a sexual aspect onto the strangulation itself, which is quite frankly verging on obsessive. This is an excellent series otherwise.

    Captain, you seem to be losing your objectivity and accepting or dismissing evidence to suit your idea of events. I think you are taking Lou Schmidt as the final word here and projecting a sexual aspect onto the strangulation itself, which is quite frankly verging on obsessive.
    This is an excellent series otherwise.

  • Alex
    Alex BC
    Nic, Cap, It has been confirmed the cause of death was a blow to the head-not asphyxiation as you mentioned . She was brain dead when the slipknot was applied, alive, but brain dead: cause of death was injury by blunt object. This is critical to understand what happened. Also, the key thing here is the ransom letter. Think about this: you are a kidnapper, you go thru the whole ordeal of planning a crime, you are in a half state of panic, you need to do your deed and get the hell out of the house, as soon as possible right? and then you go: "Oh, I didn't bring my ransom letter with me, (though I know the girl is dead) I guess I'll find myself something to write one here in the kitchen while everyone is asleep!" And then you write the "War & Peace" of ransom letters? Asking for mere change as ransom when the dad is worth millions? Who is this murderer? Willy Coyote? A Grand Jury did vote for an indictment of the parents but D.A. Alex Hunter let the parents go. I understand there are parents that would do anything to protect their families- but- the Ramsey dragged many families and people thru the mud to save face. Destroyed lives, friendships and professional careers and that is bothersome. Remember that at one point they pointed the finger at the Whites - their best friends.

    Nic, Cap,
    It has been confirmed the cause of death was a blow to the head-not asphyxiation as you mentioned . She was brain dead when the slipknot was applied, alive, but brain dead: cause of death was injury by blunt object. This is critical to understand what happened.
    Also, the key thing here is the ransom letter. Think about this: you are a kidnapper, you go thru the whole ordeal of planning a crime, you are in a half state of panic, you need to do your deed and get the hell out of the house, as soon as possible right? and then you go: "Oh, I didn't bring my ransom letter with me, (though I know the girl is dead) I guess I'll find myself something to write one here in the kitchen while everyone is asleep!" And then you write the "War & Peace" of ransom letters? Asking for mere change as ransom when the dad is worth millions? Who is this murderer? Willy Coyote?
    A Grand Jury did vote for an indictment of the parents but D.A. Alex Hunter let the parents go.
    I understand there are parents that would do anything to protect their families- but- the Ramsey dragged many families and people thru the mud to save face. Destroyed lives, friendships and professional careers and that is bothersome. Remember that at one point they pointed the finger at the Whites - their best friends.

Add comment