jbrunsolved - Tumblr blog

jbrunsolved · 1 day ago

Text

In February of 2000, Judith Phillips gave an interview to Mary Suma, a poster on the internet who used the hat "mame".

In that interview, Judith said that when she first heard of the murder, she was "not surprised". Judith felt that the Ramseys had been given their hard times as a "lesson". They were living evil lives, not doing as they should have been, so they lost Beth, Patsy got cancer, and then JonBenét died. Judith felt they should have been donating more time and money to the poor, not spending it on homes, decorating, traveling... certainly not PAGEANTS!

But Judith said that she did NOT believe that the parents were involved in the murder at all. She said the thought was "inconceivable". THAT was what she felt right after the murder.

She went on to say that she later became convinced that Patsy wrote the ransom note. She said this happened because she "was privy to a lot of information." In truth, this all happened at the same time her marriage was failing and her new friends were the tabloid people. They were calling her up to 30 times a day, talking to her, befriending her.

She said she knew the Ramseys had asked their friends and relatives not to speak to the press, but, she said, "I guess I'm the kind of person that, someone says, 'Don't do something.', I go ahead and do it anyway."

Before long, Judith found herself not only cut off from the Ramseys but befriended by the tabloid reporters and FURIOUS at Patsy!

Judith said that she became infuriated at Patsy's statement said at the end of the CNN interview - Patsy said "There's a killer out there, hold your babies close." Judith said that terrified her, was a terrible thing for Patsy to do - scare people like that. Mame, the leading interviewer, commented that that was a "...very selfish thing to do." Judith agreed. "...she would want us to share in her terror."

Judith went on to say that she revieved a letter from the Ramsey lawyers advising her not to make the photographs public. She said that "...made me mad....extremely angry." and "...that's when I started thinking, "What's going on here?"

Judith was marketing herself as a friend of the Ramseys, but she clearly never had been. The interview gave clear evidence of that. They spent very little time together, had little in common. . In 1997, it was "inconceivable" that John or Patsy had harmed their child. Then Judith started spending time with tabloid reporters. It was no secret that she was having an affair with one of them.

In 1998, Judith believed Patsy wrote the ransom note. . In February 2000, Judith was stating that she believed Patsy killed her daughter. Her theory was that Patsy had caught John molesting his daughter and that resulted in the murder of JonBenét. . In February, 2000, Judith was engaged to Tom Miller and close friends with Craig Lewis. . Hmmmmm.

0 notes

jbrunsolved · 1 day ago

Text

Q. Was there any test done on the duct tape that would establish the imprint of JonBenet's lip prints on that tape? A. Was there any test that would establish that? Q. Did you all to your knowledge, did the Boulder Police Department conduct any test that would establish that the duct tape that was pulled off of her mouth by John Ramsey that was then picked up by Fleet White was found somehow to contain a perfect set of JonBenet's lip prints, was any test performed that made that finding? A. There was an examination apparently done at some point which was reported back to a detective briefing at which I was present and I believe that was Wickman or Trujillo that shared that information. Q. Who conducted that examination? A. I don't know. Q. Was it an expert of some type? A. I don't know that there is such a thing as an expert examination and there is no testing that I'm aware of. I think that's more common sense observation.

....

Q. (BY MR. WOOD) After your book came out, sir, were you aware that Mr. Ubowski publicly denied the accuracy of the statement that he concluded Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note? A. No. You're telling me this for the first time. Q. Are you familiar that Mr. Ubowski stated that he had never reached the conclusion that 24 of her letters out of the 26 letters of the alphabet were matched with the ransom note? A. No, I have not heard that. Q. And you stated to the contrary in your book, didn't you? A. Yeah, I stated what I was told by my detective sergeant. Q. And you weren't even, I guess, aware that Mr. Ubowski and the CBI said they don't even make that kind of analysis with respect to the 24 out of the 26 letters of the alphabet, you don't know anything about that -- A. No. Q. -- in terms of the public statement by the CBI after your book was published? A. The CBI made a public statement? Q. Yes, sir.

....

Q. Jeff Shapiro was your confidential informant, right? A. Yes. Q. So you had during your investigation of JonBenet Ramsey's murder a confidential informant who was a tabloid, supermarket tabloid, reporter for Globe, right? A. Yes.

....

Q. Take a look, if you would, at page 45 of your book. Second -- actually, first full paragraph. "An acquaintance said that JonBenet was rebelling against appearing in the child beauty contests. She was being pushed into the pageants by her mother and grandmother, said the witness." Who is that individual? A. I believe that was Judith Phillips. Q. Did you find Judith Phillips to be credible? A. At times.

0 notes

jbrunsolved · 1 day ago

Text

John's letter to DA Alex Hunter

A letter from John Ramsey to District Attorney Alex Hunter April 15, 1998

Dear Mr. Hunter,

I'm writing this letter because it seems difficult at times to communicate through attorneys who are focused on protecting my rights as a citizen. I want to be very clear on our family's position. We have no trust or confidence in the Boulder police. They have tried, from moment they walked into our home on December 26th, 1996, to convince others that Patsy or I or Burke killed JonBenet. I will hold them accountable forever for one thing: not accepting help from people who offered it in the beginning and could have brought a wealth of experience to bear on the crime.

We, myself and Patsy and Burke, John Andrew and Melinda will meet anytime, anywhere, for as long as you want with investigators from your office. If the purpose of a grand jury is to be able to talk to us, that is not necessary. We want to find the killer of our daughter and sister and work with you 24 hours a day to find it.

I can't refer to this thing as a person frankly.

If we are subpoenaed by a grand jury, we will testify regardless of any previous meeting with your investigators. I'm living my life for two purposes now: to find the killer of JonBenet and bring it to the maximum justice our society can impose. While there is a rage within me that says, give me a few minutes alone with this creature and there won't be a need for a trial, I would then have succumbed to the behavior which the killer did.

Secondly, my living children must not have to live under the legacy that our entertainment industry has given them based on false information and a frenzy created on our family's misery to achieve substantial profit.

It's time to rise above all this pettiness and politics and get down to the most difficult mission: finding JonBenet's killer. That's all we care about. The police cannot do it. I hope it is not too late to investigate this crime properly at last.

Finally, I am willing and able to put up a substantial reward, one million dollars, through the help of friends if this will help derive information. I know this would be used against us by the media dimwits. But I don't care. Please, let's all do what is right to get this worst of all killer in our midst.

Sincerely, John Ramsey

0 notes

jbrunsolved · 1 day ago

Text

The ransom note and movie connection

In my opinion, whomever wrote the ransom note had to be an avid movie watcher. According to the BPD. The Ramsey’s had none of the films that were referenced in the RN nor could the BPD find any evidence that they had rented any of these films from the 2 local video stores. The film Ransom was still in theaters when JonBenet was brutally murdered and has an eerily similar plot. The BPD attempted to find evidence that they had been to the movies recently yet found nothing. The Ramsey’s admitted to watching the film Speed on an flight once. This seems to discount my theory to some but that’s only one film out of several that were clearly used as ‘inspiration’ to the killer.

The ransom note text:

Mr. Ramsey:

Listen Carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We respect your business, but not the country it serves. At this time, we have your daughter in our possession. She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.

You will withdraw $118,000 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank.

When you get home, you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 a.m. tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence and earlier pickup of your daughter.

Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for a proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.

Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as police or F.B.I. will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in way marked or tampered with, she dies. You can try to deceive us, but be warned we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics.

You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to outsmart us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% of getting her back. You and your family are under constant scrutiny, as well as the authorities.

Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't underestimate us, John. Use that good, Southern common sense of yours. It's up to you now John! Victory! S.B.T.C."

Dirty Harry

“Now listen to me carefully. Listen very carefully.” (The killer says this while beating Callahan.)

“If you talk to anyone, I don’t care if it’s a Pekingese pissing against a lamppost, the girl dies.” (The killer says this to Callahan in a call related to the ransom drop.)

“It sounds like you had a good rest. You’ll need it.” (The killer says this to Callahan.)

Speed

“Do not attempt to grow a brain.” (The killer says this to Traven.)

Ransom

(1996- still in theaters at the time of JonBenet’s death) Specified denomination of bills and type of container for delivery of the ransom The child is bound with his hands placed above his head Duct tape is used on the child The child's parent is a wealthy businessman who can fly his own plane The kidnapper employs counter-surveillance.

Nick of Time > On the night Jonbenet was murdered, the movie 'Nick of Time' aired at 7:30 P.M. on a Boulder cable channel. ...Bill Cox, who was staying with Fleet and Priscilla White, told the police he remembered watching the movie that night." (Schiller 1999:225)

The story centers on an unarmed political faction that kidnaps a six-year-old girl." (Schiller 1999:225)

Nick of Time quotes:

“You talk to a cop; you even look at a cop too long and your daughter’s dead … I’ll kill her myself. Cut the head off right in front of you.” (The killer says this to Watson.)

“you need you to listen to me carefully. Three lives depend on it … Very carefully.” (Watson says this to the governor of California.)

Ruthless People:

“Listen very carefully!” (The kidnapper says this to Stone.)

“You are to obtain a new, black, American Tourister briefcase. Model number eight-one-o-four. Do you understand?"

“In it you will place five hundred thousand dollars in unmarked, non- sequentially numbered one-hundred dollars bills. Do you understand?"

“Monday morning, at eleven A.M., you will proceed, with case in hand, to Hope Street Plaza and wait for a phone to ring. You will receive further instructions then. Do you understand?"

“If you notify the police, your wife will be killed. If you notify the media, she will be killed. If you deviate from our instructions in any way whatsoever, she will be killed. Do you understand?"

The similarities of the above movie quotes (and plots) to the ransom note are obvious in my opinion.. and, I believe it’s a significant clue as to who this person might be and what their thought process was at the time. Any other insight or ideas are appreciated!

0 notes

jbrunsolved · 1 day ago

Text

Thomas's theory

‘I believe she committed the murder' I told Smit and proceeded to lay out what I thought had happened ...

An approaching fortieth birthday, the busy holiday season, an exhausting Christmas Day, and an argument with JonBenet had left Patsy frazzled. Her beautiful daughter, whom she frequently dressed almost as a twin, had rebelled against wearing the same outfit as her mother.

When they came home, John Ramsey helped Burke put together a Christmas toy. JonBenet, who had not eaten much at the Whites' party, was hungry. Her mother let her have some pineapple, and then the kids were put to bed. John Ramsey read to his little girl. Then he went to bed. Patsy stayed up to prepare for the trip to Michigan the next morning, a trip she admittedly did not particularly want to make.

Later JonBenet awakened after wetting her bed, as indicated by the plastic sheets, the urine stains, the pull-up diaper package hanging halfway out of a cabinet, and the balled-up turtleneck found in the bathroom. I concluded that the little girl had worn the red turtleneck to bed, as her mother originally said, and that it was stripped off when it got wet.

As I told Smith, I never believed the child was sexually abused for the gratification of the offender but that the vaginal trauma was some sort of corporal punishment. The dark fibers found in her pubic region could have come from the violent wiping of a wet child. Patsy probably yanked out the diaper package in cleaning up JonBenet. Patsy would not be the first mother to lose control in such a situation. One of the doctors we consulted cited toileting issues as a textbook example of causing a parental rage.

So, in my hypothesis, there was some sort of explosive encounter in the child's bathroom sometime prior to one o'clock in the morning, the time suggested by the digestion rate of the pineapple found in the child's stomach. I believed JonBenet was slammed against a hard surface, such as the edge of a tub, inflicting a mortal head wound. She was unconscious, but her heart was still beating. Patsy would not have known that JonBenet was still alive, because the child already appeared to be dead. The massive head trauma would have eventually killed her. It was the critical moment in which she either had to call for help or find an alternative explanation for her daughter's death. It was accidental in the sense that the situation had developed without motive or premeditation. She could have called for help but chose not to. An emergency room doctor probably would have questioned the 'accident' and called the police. Still, little would have happened to Patsy in Boulder. But I believe panic overtook her.

John and Burke continued to sleep while Patsy moved the body of JonBenet down to the basement and hid her in the little room. As I pictured the scene, her dilemma was that the police would assume the obvious if a six- year old child was found dead in a private home without any satisfactory explanation. Patsy needed a diversion and planned the way she thought a kidnapping should look.

She returned upstairs to the kitchen and grabbed her tablet and a felt-tipped pen, and flipping to the middle of the tablet, and started a ransom note, drafting one that ended on page 25. For some reason she discarded that one and ripped pages 17-25 from the tablet. Police never found those pages.

On page 26, she began the 'Mr. and Mrs. I,' then also abandoned that false start. At some point she drafted the long ransom note. By doing so, she created the government's best piece of evidence. She then faced the major problem of what to do with the body. Leaving the house carried the risk of John or Burke awakening at the sounds and possibly being seen by a passerby or a neighbor. Leaving the body in the distant, almost inaccessible, basement room was the best option.

As I envisioned it, Patsy returned to the basement, a woman caught up in panic, where she could have seen--perhaps by detecting a faint heartbeat or a sound or a slight movement--that although completely unconscious, JonBenet was not dead. Others might argue that Patsy did not know the child was still alive. In my hypothesis, she took the next step, looking for the closest available items in ... desperation. Only feet away was her paint tote. She grabbed a paint brush and broke it to fashion the garrote with some cord. She then -- then she looped the cord around the girl's neck.

In my scenario, she choked JonBenet from behind, with a grip on her broken paintbrush handle, pulling the ligature. JonBenet, still unconscious, would never have felt it. There are only four ways to die: suicide, natural, accidental, or homicide. This accident, in my opinion, had just become a murder.

Then the staging continued to make it look like a kidnapping. Patsy tied the girl's wrists in front, not in the back, for otherwise the arms would not have been in the overhead position. But with a fifteen-inch length of cord between the wrists and the knot tied loosely over the clothing, there was no way such a binding would have restrained a live child. It was a symbolic act to make it appear the child had been bound. Patsy took considerable time with her daughter, wrapping her carefully in the blanket and leaving her with a favorite pink nightgown. As the FBI had told us ... a stranger would not have taken such care.

As I told Lou, I thought that throughout the coming hours, Patsy worked on her staging, such as placing the ransom note where she would be sure to 'find' it the next morning. She placed the tablet on the countertop right beside the stairs and put the pen in the cup.

While going through the drawers under the countertop where the tablet had been, she found rolls of tape. She placed a strip from a roll of duct tape across JonBenet's mouth. There was bloody mucous under the tape, and a perfect set of the child's lip prints, which did not indicate a tongue impression or resistance.

I theorized that Patsy, trying to cover her tracks, took the remaining cord, tape, and the first ransom note out of the house that night, perhaps dropping them into a nearby storm sewer or among the Christmas debris in wrappings in a neighbor's trash can.

She was running out of time. The household was scheduled to wake up early to fly to Michigan, and in her haste, Patsy Ramsey did not change clothes, a vital mistake. With the clock ticking, and hearing her husband moving around upstairs, she stepped over the edge.

The way I envisioned it, Patsy screamed, and John Ramsey, coming out of the shower, responded, totally unaware of what had occurred. Burke, awakened by the noise shortly before six o'clock in the morning, came down to find out what had happened and was sent back to bed as his mother talked to the 911 emergency dispatcher.

John Ramsey, in my hypothetical scenario, probably first grew suspicious while reading the ransom note that morning, which was why he was unusually quiet. He must have seen his wife's writing mannerisms all over it, everything but her signature. But where was his daughter? "He said in his police interview that he went down to the basement when Detective Arndt noticed him missing. I suggested that Ramsey found JonBenet at that time and was faced with the dilemma of his life. During the next few hours, his behavior changed markedly as he desperately considered his few options--submit to the authorities or try to control the situation. He had already lost one child, Beth, and now JonBenet was gone too. Now Patsy was possibly in jeopardy.

The stress increased steadily during the morning, for Patsy, in my theory, knew that no kidnapper was going to call by ten o'clock, and after John found the body, he knew that too. So when Detective Linda Arndt told him to search the house, he used the opportunity and made a beeline for the basement. Then tormented as he might be, he chose to protect his wife.

That's the way I see it, I said to Lou Smit. That's how evidence -- That's how the evidence fits to me. She made mistakes, and that's how we solve crimes, right?

I reminded him of his own favorite saying: 'Murders are usually what they seem.'.

Lou Smit totally disagreed with my version of the events that night, insisting that the Ramseys were innocent.

”I say, in law enforcement circles, this is under this hypothesis that I purport that this was not an intentional killing, that this was accidental initially, which by definition lacks motive. But then what happened, I think, a panicked mother, instead of taking that next step, went left, and covered this thing up. I don't think that -- this isn't rocket science." (Steve Thomas)

0 notes

jbrunsolved · 1 day ago

Text

proof of an intruder thanks to jason king from fb for the link.

This article will explore evidence that supports the theory that an intruder came into the Ramsey home that night and killed JonBenét as part of a foiled kidnap for ransom plot. Here are the arguments:

[*] The “Mindhunter” himself John Douglas consulted with the Ramsey family and has written that he fully believes the family is innocent. There aren’t a lot of people in the true crime world that carry so much weight with just their opinion, but John Douglas is definitely one of them. Here he is explaining the lack of motive for the Ramseys to be involved here on a news report about John Mark Karr, who falsely confessed to the crime:

[*] John and Patsy Ramsey were interviewed by the police for over two hours. Burke Ramsey was also interviewed within a few weeks of JonBenét’s death.

[*] The existence of evidence that JonBenét had been sexually assaulted is one of the strongest indicators that this was an intruder crime, as it is much more rare for a husband and wife to work together to cover up abuse only one of them committed. This evidence is inconclusive and it’s not clear whether she was ever sexually abused or not. No semen was found and the official findings is just that sexual assault can not be ruled out.

[*] If someone was forced to kill their daughter to cover up their son’s attack, I don’t think strangulation with a garrote would be what they would come up with. It’s too personal and barbaric.

[*] A blood stain on JonBenét’s underwear was found to have DNA from two people who are not the Ramseys.

[*] Burke has never been a suspect in this crime. He was interviewed by police and by a child psychologist, none of whom walked away believing Burke had anything to do with JonBenét’s murder. Since 9-year-olds aren’t skilled liars or criminal masterminds, I believe the experts involved in investigating this case would have a good handle on whether Burke seemed suspicious.

[*] An unidentified boot print was found in the room where JonBenét’s body was discovered.

[*] Police discovered one door to the Ramsey home was unlocked. There were also two basement windows that were left ajar to allow cords for Christmas lights to be plugged in from the outside. An additional basement window was broken prior to the events of JonBenét’s murder and would have allowed entry into the Ramsey home. (Detractors note that cobwebs, foliage, and debris in the vicinity of the basement window appeared to be undisturbed.)

[*] Marks on JonBenét’s may indicate a stun gun was used on her:

youtube

[*] There were over 100 burglaries in the Ramsey’s neighborhood in the months leading up to the murder, there were also dozens of registered sex offenders in the area. Due to JonBenét’s higher profile as a child beauty pageant participant, some believe she was more at risk from stranger abduction by a pedophile.

[*] There was no evidence of blood spatter found in the Ramsey home. This means that JonBenét was likely dead or almost dead when the wound to the head was administered. This contradicts the idea that strangulation was used as part of the coverup after Burke lashed out and fatally struck his sister in the head. Strangulation came first.

John Douglas is a retired FBI agent known for helping pioneer behavior profiling, and was hired by the family to give his professional opinion. Despite reports to the contrary, he never gave a psychological profile of the killer, because he did not have access to all the necessary information. Apparently the Boulder PD was combative with John and reluctant to give him access to all the information collected. After months of investigating, and long after he began to refuse payments from the family, he came to the conclusion that an intruder was the culprit and the motive was a personal vendetta against John Ramsey.

Rather than just plagiarize what is written in the book, I'll just highlight some key points and make quotes when they're necessary.

1. Which injury came first? [the head trauma or the garrote strangulation]

John Douglas asserts that with blunt force trauma to the cranium, 99% of the time there is blood spatter, however fine a mist. Investigators never found any in the house, on the walls or a weapon or anywhere. I suppose it's possible investigators might have missed it, but apparently they went through that house with a fine toothed comb and never found so much as a speck. To this day, no one is sure which room she was killed in. So how is it that she had this massive skull fracture that never sprayed any blood? Easily, if her heart had already stopped beating. Based on this, and the peticial hemorrhaging, he concludes that the strangulation via garrote occurred first. This goes against the theory that a family member hit her, accidentally or on purpose, and then staged the scene with the garrote.

2. the Vaginal Trauma

Even though he didn't provide any specific reasons that lead him to this conclusion, he asserts that the vaginal trauma happened very close to or during her murder. I'm thinking a skilled coroner could probably tell that the wounds showed no signs of healing, but apparently there has been some assertation that the wounds could have come from childhood masturbation or riding her bike. Regardless, John seems to see this not so much an act of sexual gratification, but a power play for control or punishment.

3. the Ransom Note

Regardless of who committed the crime, John Douglas seems positive that the note was written before the murder. He can see a scenerio where the intruder broke in while the Ramseys were out, walked around the house for a bit, and wrote the note at his leisure. It may sound absurd, but this exact thing is not without precedent. He could not see a scenario where a, by all accounts, loving parent accidentally killed their child and then had the wherewithal to write a 3 page note peppered with movie quotes. Douglas also noticed that nowhere in the note is JonBenet mentioned by name. He surmised that this could be because the intruder didn't really know her, or probably even how to spell her name.

4. Scenarios he found Preposterous

In fact, that whole Ramseys Did It scenario seemed pretty much ludicrous to him.

Quote from the book:

"Honey, I accidentally killed JonBenet in a fit of anger. I don't know what came over me. What should we do?"

John pulls himself together enough to ask what happened. Patsy describes how JonBenet was sent flying across the room and struck her head on the edge of her dresser. "Okay," John says, "We'd better take her to the emergency room and say it was an accident." "No," Patsy disagrees, "What if they see my handprint across her face [or shoulder, back, bottom, wherever] and realize what really happened?"

"Okay, you're right. We'd better make it look like a botched kidnapping."

"How do we do that?"

"We'll need a ransom note, and we'll need to make it look like the kidnapper killed her. Let's tie her hands together and fashion a garrote tightly around her neck to strangle her."

"Just in case the kidnapping isn't believable enough, I guess we better make it look like she was sexually molested."

Additionally, Douglas sees it as extremely unlikely that John Ramsey was a pedophile who had been abusing his daughter. He saw zero evidence that would even hint at this. "People don't behave in vacuums", he said. That is to say, with those types of individuals there is usually some kind of hint or evidence as to who they really are. Not only was his entire family and ex wife thoroughly questioned by investigators but also heavily scrutinized by the media, and no one was able to find any sort of evidence that he abused JonBenet, his other children, or any other children for that matter. Douglas further asserts that these people never just wake up one day and decide to molest a child. There is always a build up to it.

5. a Scenario that Seems Plausible

Based on evidence he had seen and read, John Douglas thinks that JonBenet Ramsey's killer was a white male, relatively young, who had a personal grudge against John Ramsey and intended to carry it out by defiling and robbing him of the most valuable thing in the world to him. He entered the house while the family was out, either through the basement or with one of the many unaccounted for keys to the Ramsey home, carrying with him a stun gun, a roll of duct tape and a spool of chord. His intention was to incapacitate her, abduct her, and molest her. The ransom demand was an after thought, and could explain why it was written on materials found in the home. He had no intention on collecting such a low sum, he was just trying to make a point, and possibly cast suspicion on the Ramseys. It's also possible he had already written a shorter and more succinct ransom note, but that given the amount of time he had to himself, wrote a longer one. He went up to JonBenet's room, incapacitated her with an Air Taser stun gun, which would not have made much noise, taped her mouth shut and then took her downstairs. He began strangling her either during or right after the molestation, and whether he meant to or not, caused her death. When he realized what he had done, he finished the job with a quick blow to the head, and instead of taking her, he fled the house in a panic.

So in my personal conclusion, I guess I'm still on the fence about this case, I'm starting to lean towards the Intruder Theory, and this book and it's specific chapter have particularly convinced me. However, that's not to say John Douglas is immune to being wrong occassionally. In his first book Mindhunter, which I've also read recently (Side note: I cannot recommend this book enough. If you haven't read it yet, buy it now. I mean it, right NOW. It's so good), the Green River Killer had not yet been caught. And based on some slight differences in MO and due to the sheer number of victims, Douglas was convinced that it was actually at least three different killers who all targeted prostitutes. We now know that Gary Ridgeway was indeed responsible for all the murders. The fact that he managed a stupid high victim count is probably a testament to how little society seems to care about the safety of sex workers.

John Douglas also makes the comparison of this crime to the disappearance of Annie Hearin. In that case, 73 year old Annie disappeared from her affluent Jackson, Mississippi home in the afternoon. A ransom note was left near the door demanding that her husband Robert pay "damages" to 12 individuals. The individuals were all former franchise owners of a company Robert took over, and had been harmed financially. As predicted by investigators, one of the 12 people named in the note was likely the kidnapper, a man named Newton Alfred Winn, who was near bankrupt after a failed lawsuit against Robert. The motive likely wasn't about the money at all, but out of sheer anger and a need for revenge. Winn was convicted of conspiracy, extortion and perjury, but Annie has never been found and to this day no one has been charged with her murder. Could this be similar to what happened in JonBenet's case? The fact that she was killed before the ransom could be carried out might indicate that money was never the true motive. But as John Douglas has surmised, we are likely dealing with an unsophisticated, disorganized and probably young killer. So ascertaining a motive will be difficult because such an individual isn't operating very logically to begin with.

“JonBenet Ramsey’s killer was a white male, relatively young, who had a personal grudge against John Ramsey and intended to carry it out by defiling and robbing him of the most valuable thing in the world to him. He entered the house while the family was out, either through the basement or with one of the many unaccounted for keys to the Ramsey home, carrying with him a stun gun, a roll of duct tape and a spool of chord. His intention was to incapacitate her, abduct her, and molest her. The ransom demand was an after thought, and could explain why it was written on materials found in the home. He had no intention on collecting such a low sum, he was just trying to make a point, and possibly cast suspicion on the Ramseys. It’s also possible he had already written a shorter and more succinct ransom note, but that given the amount of time he had to himself, wrote a longer one. He went up to JonBenet’s room, incapacitated her with an Air Taser stun gun, which would not have made much noise, taped her mouth shut and then took her downstairs. He began strangling her either during or right after the molestation, and whether he meant to or not, caused her death. When he realized what he had done, he finished the job with a quick blow to the head, and instead of taking her, he fled the house in a panic.” [*] The Boulder police never felt they had a strong enough case to officially charge the Ramseys with any crime.

#Youtube

0 notes

jbrunsolved · 1 day ago

Text

fleet white

From this Westword article: https://www.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/q2sjhi/all_the_lives_impacted/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf

“When the police sat down with Krebs and Hill a few days later, they soon discovered several huge problems with her story. She was the subject of a missing-person report from California. She claimed to be a witness in at least two other homicide investigations. She claimed that she'd been sexually assaulted at different times in her youth by Fleet White Jr., Fleet White Sr. and "Uncle" John Ramsey, and that her mother and niece were present at the Whites' 1996 Christmas dinner, hours before JonBenét was killed.

But the detectives found no evidence that Krebs had ever met Fleet Junior or Ramsey. Her mother and niece weren't at the Whites for Christmas dinner. Almost nothing about her account of that evening fit the circumstances of the JonBenét homicide. Hartman, who interviewed Krebs extensively himself before running his front-page exclusive, didn't respond to a request for comment. But it's doubtful he would have published such a tale if Hunter hadn't remarked how "believable" the witness was.

Hunter had sat in on the first round of police interviews. Hartman would later tell investigators that Hunter had been opposed to going public with the story. So what prompted him to endorse the mystery woman in print? Hunter didn't respond to a request for an interview for this article, but he backpedaled on his comments almost as soon as they were published. "Opinions about believability are premature before...a full investigation is complete," he acknowledged in a hastily issued press release.

A secretary's notes of phone messages coming into Hunter's office after the article appeared indicate that his enthusiasm for pursuing the Krebs allegations took some of his colleagues by surprise. A message from prosecutor Michael Kane: "Kane thought you had come to the conclusion that this woman is a goof ball, so Kane is curious how this hit the paper the way it did."

Message from Boulder police chief Mark Beckner: "Mark thought you and he had come to an agreement on Sunday that, yes, while there were some credibility issues, Mark agreed that they needed to follow it up.... Obviously you believe she is more believable than they do at this point."

Other media outlets quickly picked up the story. The local CBS affiliate, News 4, even used its report on the mystery woman to tease the upcoming Schiller miniseries. Fleet and Priscilla suspected that more than coincidence was involved in the trashing of their reputation, just as the miniseries was hitting the airwaves (based on a book the Whites had denounced as riddled with inaccuracies) and the Ramseys were preparing to launch their own book. "The 'umbrella of suspicion' needs to reach beyond the heads of John and Patsy Ramsey," huffed an editorial in the Camera -- and that wider net had ensnared and befouled the entire White family.

"We really don't know where Nancy Krebs came from," Fleet says now. "I can't prove this, but I believe that one reason people came after us is to demonstrate to the world that there were other suspicious people out there. We were already in the crosshairs. We were the flavor of the month."

After eleven weeks and extensive interviews with members of her family, the Boulder police concluded the Krebs investigation, having found no credible evidence linking anything the woman said to JonBenét's murder. (Krebs, who has said she never wanted her story published but has also never recanted, could not be reached for comment.) The Whites embarked on a long, frustrating campaign to seek criminal libel charges against the Camera and those individuals responsible for disseminating the woman's allegations. In 2003 a special prosecutor declined to pursue the matter, noting the shaky legal standing of the state's seldom-used criminal libel statute and other considerations. The newspaper emerged unscathed from the legal machinations surrounding the Ramsey case. Not so the Whites. In 2001, Fleet White was summoned by the defense to testify in the trial of attorney Tom Miller, who'd been charged with commercial bribery after his client, a tabloid editor, allegedly attempted to buy a copy of the ransom note. White defied the subpoenas, concerned that his testimony might compromise the murder investigation.

Miller was acquitted. White was found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to thirty days in the Jefferson County Jail.”

0 notes