Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's my understanding that the later testing of the DNA in her underwear led to the production of 10 markers (there were originally only 9), which made it available for inclusion in the FBI's CODIS database.
No, they can't prosecute on this, but they can eliminate.
Also, John Mark Karr was released as a suspect on this same DNA evidence.
Again, I'm consistently surprised that anyone buys the intruder "theory" in this case.
As someone who is concerned about & pays attention to news about home invasions, robberies, etc. it's extremely obvious that there are only really three reasons why someone would want to break into a house:
1) Robbery/theft - typically done while no one is home, but has been also done when people are home - and, in some cases, even when the homeowners are asleep!
2) Kidnapping someone with the intent of requesting a ransom at a later date - when this is done, the victim is always taken away from the house - see the aforementioned Lindbergh baby case, etc.
3) Abducting someone without the intention of ransom - IIRC, this is what happened in the tragic Elizabeth Smart case - thankfully, she eventually was found alive - but not after having been victimized by her scumbag attacker(s).
None of the above occurred in this JBR case, i.e.:
1) JBR was not kidnapped & taken out of the house.
2) IIRC, nothing was stolen from the house - despite the fact that, if you buy into this intruder "theory", the alleged kidnappers were there before the family got home - and would have had plenty of time to go through their belongings and at least steal something - after all, the Ramsey's were quite wealthy. After all, if they wanted ransom $ - then it stands to reason that they would also have stolen something as well.
For someone to break into a house, leave a ransom note, then kill (either accidentally or on purpose) the "intended" ransom victim, and leave the victim in the house is so ludicrous as to be absurd. And, to top it off, not steal anything?! It does not add up whatsoever.
Plus - and has also been mentioned - this crime occurred on the evening of Christmas Day. The Ramsey's had plans to leave the very next day. So, why would a potential kidnapper strike at this time?! They wouldn't have even known that the Ramsey's were home. Also, even people like this have families (for the most part) that they would spend the holidays with - so, I don't see why they would pick Christmas as the day to commit a crime like this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoCUBS1
The note warns they are being watched and they:
- immediately call the police
- immediately call a big group of friends
- do not continually check on/guard their son
- do not frantically search their entire house with a weapon
- ask policeman to remove his weapon
Does not add up.
Exactly! I myself have had my house burglarized (I wasn't home at the time, Thankfully). I got an alarm system afterwards, and for months after this happened I would always check the house after I got home to make sure no one had broken in again.
In this case, if the Ramsey's had actually believed someone broke into their house & kidnapped JBR, the last thing they would have done would be to invite friends over - since the "alleged" intruder may still be in the house! The reason they felt comfortable having a group of people over was because they knew there was no danger to begin with.
Last edited by The Big Lebowski Dude; 09-26-2016 at 09:12 PM..
I've seen video of the house at nite on an episode with Lou Smit and 2 mediums.
JonBenet111 thread, first post.
Thank you, I'll check it out. It may tell me what I want to know.
I still prefer to see some photos if they exist, though, as they are generally higher resolution &more detailed. So if anyone else knows of photos of the house at night, please point me in the right direction.
EDIT: I've watched it now. I will resist the urge to demand that 39 minutes of my life back, because 1) you answered a request with something that met my imprecise conditions, and 2) although TruTV did their best to fill up those 39 minutes entirely with hogwash and hokum, it actually was enlightening in a few ways, such as to see some footage that appears to have been shot inside the actual house. But not much. So I thank you for the reply.
But as far as what I'm looking for, it didn't help. I should have specified that I'm looking for photos relatively contemporaneous to the murder, while the house was occupied or perhaps staged soon after by police or whoever to appear generally as it would have that night. Boarded up 10-20 years later doesn't help.
The other bright side is that it also helped confirm my opinion that Smit is an egotistical blowhard who is way too married to his own theories and unwilling to consider better explanations, although I do think he is correct on a few things, the main one being that there is very good reason to believe the Ramseys didn't do it. I won't get into that now. I'd like to make sure my research will lead where I expect and I haven't missed something important before I present any arguments or theories.[CENTER]SaveSave[/CENTER]
Last edited by meibomius; 09-26-2016 at 09:11 PM..
Reason: P.P.S. to P.S. to original message
By the time of his arrest the autopsy was on line, as was probably every detail of the crime scene that he got right.
No, he got three details (her wearing a bracelet, Wednesday panties, and nose mucus on the tape) that were unreleased at the time. However, much of his story was made up.
Karr was released because there was no evidence against him. He would have been released even if his DNA had matched that found at the scene.
First time poster in this thread & ANY of the JonBenet threads, ever.
Please forgive if I don't have the same grasp on the investigation as the rest of you do. Honestly; I feel like the multiple conflicting details of the family are very distracting & lead ... nowhere.
"It takes one to know one."
I think thats why anything Karr said ended up being spot on. He was of the same mind of the killer.
He should have been wined & dined by the FBI for the sake of the profile insight.
I think there was a sexual motive for this. The garrot (I think) was used for erotic asphyxiation.
I don't think the train tracks would have provided any advantage to killing/sexual abuse at all.
I think she was stunned into quiet submission, sexualized & then killed with a blow to the head.
I think they wasted valuable time waiting for a "ransom call". The ransom note worked as intended; as a time buyer.
Why would you want to buy time? To get the heck out of Boulder...I wonder if anyone ever scanned through passenger lists of flights that left the state of Colorado prior to 10 am?
I think there was a sexual motive for this. The garrot (I think) was used for erotic asphyxiation.
You're absolutely right. The garrote makes no sense as a staging tool.
Quote:
I think she was stunned into quiet submission, sexualized & then killed with a blow to the head.
Agreed.
Quote:
I think they wasted valuable time waiting for a "ransom call". The ransom note worked as intended; as a time buyer. Why would you want to buy time? To get the heck out of Boulder...I wonder if anyone ever scanned through passenger lists of flights that left the state of Colorado prior to 10 am?
Location: Finally the house is done and we are in Port St. Lucie!
3,487 posts, read 3,340,243 times
Reputation: 9913
Quote:
Originally Posted by coschristi
First time poster in this thread & ANY of the JonBenet threads, ever.
Please forgive if I don't have the same grasp on the investigation as the rest of you do. Honestly; I feel like the multiple conflicting details of the family are very distracting & lead ... nowhere.
"It takes one to know one."
I think thats why anything Karr said ended up being spot on. He was of the same mind of the killer.
He should have been wined & dined by the FBI for the sake of the profile insight.
I think there was a sexual motive for this. The garrot (I think) was used for erotic asphyxiation.
I don't think the train tracks would have provided any advantage to killing/sexual abuse at all.
I think she was stunned into quiet submission, sexualized & then killed with a blow to the head.
I think they wasted valuable time waiting for a "ransom call". The ransom note worked as intended; as a time buyer.
Why would you want to buy time? To get the heck out of Boulder...I wonder if anyone ever scanned through passenger lists of flights that left the state of Colorado prior to 10 am?
Interesting theory. One I hadn't considered before.
No, he got three details (her wearing a bracelet, Wednesday panties, and nose mucus on the tape) that were unreleased at the time. However, much of his story was made up.
The bracelet and Wednesday panties are noted on the autopsy. The tape was not on the body at the time of the autopsy but it was well known that it had been there when found, and the autopsy notes mucous at the nose and on a sleeve.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
