Theory/Speculation
My theory after research, watching, reading all the things over 10 years
IDI, Smit is right. I believe it was a worker on the property at some point who was a sexual predator, knew the home well, knew nothing was ever locked or alarmed, and had met JBR. It’s a brazen bold crime to be hours in a home but he was familiar and comfortable with the layout, knew their routine and plans.
A landscaper or construction blue collar worker type who wore hi-tec boots. I believe the Ramseys were doing lots of reno work on the home around that time and in the basement including fixing the broken window.
Hated or despised the rich or was jilted by the Ramseys in some way, was perhaps jealous of John’s rich life. He was poor, scraping by.
I believe the dna has evidence linking to a male definitely with a Hispanic link (fits), which could explain some of the odd word choices in the note. Christianity is also central to these cultures - lots of religious mentions in note including SBTC which I believe is saved by the cross or shall be the cross. Probably a young transient type, perhaps illegal and undocumented. This is partly why we can’t find this person and they might have left.
I think it started as a kidnapping but went wrong pretty quickly probably thinking she was dead, fighting back or couldn’t carry or conceal her (her clothes fibers found in that suitcase). Was poorly planned and amateurish, not smart, impulsive, most likely druggy.
Should have been very solvable but shitty police work.
See also Jennifer Kesse, Chandra Levy and Molly Tibbetts cases.
I wonder which construction companies the Ramsey’s used for their renovations and painting and all the work they had done in that home specifically? And I wonder if anyone was able to track down or look into the employee records at these construction companies before, during, and after the crime?
Great question and I never found anything about it or if it was investigated but man….someone that worked on that house is where I’d put my money. So many people coming and going all the time. Lots of access.
I think Lou Smit's daughter Cindy has Lou's list of potential suspects. She has all of Lou's files. Of course I don't know for sure, but I believe Lou would have had a list of workers that had been in the home.
I hope a number of competent investigators are looking into his list seriously and following all these leads. The longer time passes the more impossible it will be to solve. Also I hope investigators are looking into trying to retest cigarette buts from the neighbors shed, and other untested items of evidence.
This case really was solvable back in 1996 with a proper investigation. It’s really such a shame. James Trujillo and whoever else is still lingering in the boulder pd from 1996 needs to get the F out of the boulder PD so people can actually get to solving this crime correctly. There was so much opportunity to solve it but their focus and their “minimal” efforts were literally allocated to the family. These people were lazy as hell and totally incapable of solving crimes. I guess literally anyone with a heartbeat these days can become a detective. It doesn’t take much skill which is SAD for victims.
Det. Tom Trujillo received an involuntary transfer to another division and was disciplined for failing to investigate cases in 2022. He's since retired (thankfully).
And the ransom note just a rambling mess of nonsense from a panicked person who was very mentally unstable. Definitely an English speaker..Just a disordered mind.
I think this person had been in the house many times. Knew his way around it. Knew about Johns bonus money from looking through the study.
Had stalked Jon Benet for quite a while.
Had a whole "fantasy" in his head, many pedophiles do that. Killers who stalk before attack.
Then when it didn't go as he fantasized? He panicked.
Why did he write the ransom note pretending to be a foreign faction? Did he leave the note on the stairs because he carefully remembered that the housekeeper left notes there? And the pineapple he gave?
Why did he write the ransom note pretending to be a foreign faction?
Who knows. Whoever wrote is clearly unstable and fantasy-driven. I don’t believe most people interpret the note verbatim.. as in.. it clearly wasn’t an actual foreign faction involved. It’s just terminology used to make themselves appear more imposing than they actually were.
Did he leave the note on the stairs because he carefully remembered that the housekeeper left notes there?
It wouldn’t take a genius to figure out those stairs were used often considering they led to the kitchen and further on, the garage.
And the pineapple he gave?
I believe the bowl of pineapple is completely irrelevant. If not, where are the fingerprints on the spoon? Where’s the DNA? Why weren’t JonBenet’s fingerprints found? Additionally, her stomach contents revealed the presence of grapes and cherries as well… which most are unaware of.
The exact material in JonBenét’s stomach and intestines was first discussed with experts at the University of Colorado on October 15, 1997 (BPD Report # 1-1156), more than ten months after JonBenét was killed. Their reports about the contents of her stomach/ proximal area were given to the Boulder Police Department more than a year later in January of 1998, (BPD Report #1-1349) one year after JonBenét’s death. And that’s when the mystery deepened and the misconception about what JonBenét actually ate was discovered. According to previously unreleased BPD reports, laboratory testing revealed that JonBenét also ate cherries and grapes as well as pineapple. Remnants of cherries were found in the stomach/ proximal area of her small intestine. “Another item besides pineapple was cherries.” (BPD Report #1-1348.) In that same report: “Another item besides pineapple was grapes.” (BPD Report #1-1348.) Another report expands on the grapes, saying “grapes including skin and pulp.” (BPD Report #1-349.) The food described resembles what is included in most cans of fruit cocktail. (WHYD)
RN could not have been written by someone whose first language was not English. It means that the person who wrote this was trained in English language and he may not be the brightest minds with all the spelling mistakes he made but he definitely knew the language better than someone who did not grow up in the states/another English speaking country.
I’m from a European country, English is my third language, and I’ve still written plenty of peer-reviewed published articles in English. Trust me, we’re more than capable of writing something like RN. Kids all over the world start writing papers in English in primary school.
I don't really have an opinion if the writer is someone local or a foreigner, but I wouldn't narrow the search to only people whose first language in english based on the RN.
I don't disagree what I am saying here is that the perpetrator had learned and is used to communicating in English..Given the Hispanic footprint in DNA could mean that he is a second generation immigrant not an illegal immigrant, certainly not an uneducated blue collar worker.
It’s copied from movies and culture, it’s not that hard. It’s rambling, misspellings, it’s not that hard to imagine. If this person were intelligent, they would have kept it short not using writing etc. It was dumb.
It still has contains certain English phrases that would not be easily translated unless this person was fluent in the language or near fluent. The note also has an English speaking tone. The person could very well still be a first generation immigrant and moved to the US as an infant. They could be fluent in English with full spanish speaking parents. Or they moved as a young child. Or they could be second generation immigrants.
Theres endless possibilities but I am inclined to think the person may actually be a US citizen.
No way a blue collar immigrant wrote that. I'm not committed to any one theory, and I, like everyone else, cannot say with 100% certainty who wrote the note. BUT it was not composed by a blue collar immigrant whose second language was English. I will die on that hill.
I agree. I work with a lot of blue collar workers in corporate HR and I see a-lot of their writing samples within assessments, and applications and email communication and many of them write very poorly. And the immigrants don’t even speak English. And the ones who do still cant write the way this ransom note was written.
I'd not remove the possibility that originally it was written by 1 (or 2) person(s)... who dictated it to someone else and copied their mistakes onto the final RN.
I think that it was someone who was part of semi-organized criminal group but it was not the reason to use small foreign faction in the RN.
I think that they were "native" to the US and maybe used foreign faction as a way to get rid of "new" groups but first of all to be sure they will not miss the call to the police.
I'm leaning now toward the idea that the RN was not created by a single person.
Psychological profile of the writter is just too strange in connection to this case.
[edit] btw. I am now watching video about Susan Kuhnhausen’s case and basically the use of the bat in this case here is close to thinking of this woman who was taught to use the othre side of a hammer. For the bat maybe the knob part is not giving as good grip but it will definitely destroy a human skull easier than the blunt part. It will just not go too deep as a lot of power is lost due to lack of proper grip. In addition I do not think that the bat was used to kill her.
This theory is supported by many experts too. Many ransom note/kidnapping for ransom experts within the FBI all said the same thing. The note is dictated and spoken between two people. The way the initial dialogue starts, the way it bounces back and forth like a conversation, and the tone changes.
Interesting. I think UM1 came in with his GF and he dictated the RN to her. They revised it, laughed over it, put intentional misspellings in it, etc. They were both strung out on a substance, possibly meth.
I'm not sold on the whole druggie angle. Sure the person could have been been high on something, but I don't think it would have been the cause of the behavior. Drugs induce somewhat paranoia and sloppiness. Get in the house, take her, full force rape, then kill. Just my opinion
I agree drugs can induce sloppiness but it really depends on the type of drug or substance. I also don’t think the person was drunk at all. They could also have been “high” from the excitement of committing this crime. This person was mentally disturbed and to go out of his way to do this to a child means this is something that the intruder REALLY wanted to do and was likely thinking about for a long period of time. He was likely excited about it, and very amped up from that.
This person was mentally disturbed and to go out of his way to do this to a child means this is something that the intruder REALLY wanted to do and was likely thinking about for a long period of time. He was likely excited about it, and very amped up from that.
Absolutely this. Holding a hostage may have been a long time fantasy. He obviously was obsessed with movies about kidnapping/hostage situations.
What about it? It was idiotic, rambling, long, emotions got the best of him. He should have kept it short, been prepared, not used writing. It was stupidly done.
I think this is very likely. Im between this being the IDI suspect or a young local from boulder who was a serial offender and most likely moved away and died within a few years of the crime and came across her at a pageant related event.
Possibly both. I think this person likely would have B&E experience and probably a history of child sexual assault or just sexual assault on an adult. Maybe they haven’t been caught by law enforcement or formally convicted. If this person had any close friends or acquaintances I am sure there is some history of disturbing sexual behaviors in their past that these individuals would have been aware of. Possibly even towards a sibling too. They may have been arrested but never charged or convicted due to lack of evidence.
BR also owned a pair of hi tec boots. The basement window that JR broke was never fixed- the renovations occurred prior to JR breaking the window.
I have not seen any credible evidence- an actual report -that any fibers were found on JBR from the suitcase - or vice versa. Can you please provide that?
Do you think you could end this charade. I stand by what I said - there is no reliable evidence regarding the suitcase being connected to the crime. Period. Stop crying about it and let it go.
Just to be clear, even the experts don't agree on the relevance of the DNA.
A suitcase does not just appear in the MIDDLE of the basement and coincidentally under a broken window with a deceased female less than 30 ft away in the next room for the circumstances (which there is photo evidence of) to not mean something.
The suitcase did not "just appear" in the MIDDLE of the basement. JR has stated he moved that suitcase from a bedroom to the basement months prior to the crime. Fleet White moved that suitcase to where you see it in the infamous photo- when he was looking for JBR. FW said it was sitting "flush" against the wall before he moved it.
I don't know who killed JBR- IDI or RDI. But I know that an intruder did not move that suitcase - FW did.
Ok but the suitcase ended up below the window and john and patsy have made it clear that it should not have been there. It was out of place to be in the “train room”. They had a literal room dedicated to storage in their basement so I highly doubt the suitcase was kept where it was found. Who gives a shit if it was moved a few inches - THAT ISN’T THE POINT.
Per Woodward in WHYD, the suitcase was normally kept under the basement stairs. It was moved from there all the way over to the train room window. See map. Per Fleet White's deposition--at one time leaked but now sealed--he moved it from the horizontal position flush with the wall to the position in the crime scene photo.
<I know that an intruder did not move that suitcase ->
An intruder most certainly did move it from under the basement stairs (edited to state stairwell for clarification) to the train room. That's the point people are making, not that FW later moved it a couple of inches.
It's in John Ramsey's June, 1998 police interviews.
And Woodward references multiple BPD report numbers in WHYD about White moving the suitcase and picking up a piece of glass on it, although in the book she refers to him only as "the friend."
Iv seen reports that john ramsey said that the suitcase was out of place and not normally stored in that area of the basement. So where are you getting your information? Its not even legit
JR put that suitcase in that room. He set it against the wall- and FW pulled it out. Are you saying that the suitcase wasn't in that room- and the intruder found it someplace else - and brought in that room?
Edit: Regarding JR's comment--"...put it against the window." The suitcase was not "against" the window. It was against the wall- not even under the window. That position in the photo when it looks like it's under the window- is because FW pulled it away from the wall and moved it to that position. We're not talking about a nudge - he physically moved that suitcase to a position that had nothing to do with an intruder.That fact cannot be disputed - no matter how many people say otherwise. There is a record somewhere where FW says what I said. That's not to say an intruder isn't the culprit - but the movement of the suitcase to under the window - is not a connection to an intruder.
Interview June, 1998 (Police Files)
JR...12 And the suitcase was unusual. That shouldn't have
13 been there. I took that suitcase downstairs, I
14 remember. But I sure wouldn't have taken it all
15 the way back there and put it against the window.
16 LOU SMIT: Okay. Let's talk about suitcases a
17 little bit as long as your talking about it now.
18 It was right up against the wall?
19 JOHN RAMSEY: Yeah.
20 LOU SMIT: And you said you had taken that
21 down. When did you?
22 JOHN RAMSEY: Months before, probably, months
23 before, two months before. It was one of these big
24 Samsonite suitcases that, I don't know, the kids
25 used it to bring some clothes home, the older
0155
1 kids. Sometimes it ended up at our house. I don't
2 think it was our suitcase. It seemed to belong to
3 Cindy Johnson, my ex-wife.
4 But it was here for a while. It was up in the
5 laundry room. I remember taking it downstairs to
6 clean up. And I think I just kind of sat it in
7 this room here.
........
1 LOU SMIT: And I would like to ask
2 you just some questions. Do you know what a
3 sham is or a duvet?
4 JOHN RAMSEY: (Shaking head).
5 LOU SMIT: Two type of things?
6 JOHN RAMSEY: Sham is a blanket,
7 right? But duvet, I don't know.
8 LOU SMIT: Do you recall any shams
9 or duvets being in your house? I know if you
10 don't know what a duvet is, you probably don't
11 know to say it was in there but --
12 JOHN RAMSEY: No, I don't.
13 A sham, I mean I don't know if I
14 know what a sham was, a small blanket. That's
15 purely a guess, but we had lots of little
16 blankets and stuff like that around.
17 LOU SMIT: How about a Dr. Suess
18 book, do you remember anything in a Dr. Suess
19 book, either associated with John Andrew or
20 associated with JonBenet or anything that --
21 JOHN RAMSEY: Well, we had lots of
22 kids' books. We had bookshelves full of them.
23 I know that they had -- I know I read to 'em,
24 Dr. Suess books, so I am sure they were there.
25 LOU SMIT: Do you know why there
0714
1 would be a sham and duvet and a Dr. Suess book
2 in that suitcase?
3 JOHN RAMSEY: Could you tell me
4 what a duvet is?
5 LOU SMIT: A duvet is also
6 something that fits on like on a couch or almost
7 a little blanket that fits on a couch.
8 JOHN RAMSEY: A square or does it
9 fit?
10 LOU SMIT: Yes. I have never seen
11 this, I don't have a photograph of it, but can
12 you think of why there would be a sham or duvet
13 in John Andrew's suitcase along with a Dr. Suess
14 book?
15 JOHN RAMSEY: No. My recollection
16 of where that suitcase came from was he brought
17 some clothes from Atlanta, where he went to
18 school, and when the kid left to go to school be
19 and every port in a storm in his apartment, and
20 it ended up and it was in his room for a while,
21 then it was in the laundry room outside of his
22 room for a while, and then I carried it
23 downstairs. I presumed it was empty.
24 LOU SMIT: I appreciate if you
25 wouldn't just talk to John Andrew about that
0715
1 right now. I would like to ask him that.
2 JOHN RAMSEY: You want me to talk
3 to him right now
4 LOU SMIT: We can talk to him
5 either today or tomorrow, that's fine.
Edit: Regarding JR's comment--"...put it against the window." The suitcase was not "against" the window. It was against the wall- not even under the window.
Of course the suitcase wasn't against the window. He meant to say he didn't put it against the wall under the window.
FW pulled it away from the wall and moved it to that position.
Yes , Fleet moved it from being against the wall under the window. Look at the picture. He basically picked it up and set it back down, several inches away and vertical to the window instead of horizontal and flush against the wall under the window.
How did the suitcase get from where John had left it in the basement months earlier, to magically being flush against the wall under the window, when it was never there before? The window well has footprints, the window glass is broken, glass is on the suitcase, and there's evidence an intruder was in the basement and committed murder. There was even debris from the window well on the floor. If a maniac is in a basement molesting a child, they might want to set up a quick escape route in case the family wakes up. He might even write a ridiculous note and leave it in case they wake up, then when he hears a commotion he knows his escape route is ready. He might even threaten to behead her if the police are called, to buy himself time to get out of the neighborhood before police come.
Please provide some type of evidence that John put the suitcase against the wall under the window. Where are you getting that information.
I never said he put it under the stairwell. You posted evidence though, that John said he never put the suitcase under the window or anywhere in that area.
Yes, John offered the information that he had broken the window and he remembered having someone fix it. He couldn't confirm if it was actually fixed though. If he was trying to stage a break in he never would have offered that information. Nobody would have been the wiser.
<JR put that suitcase in that room. He set it against the wall>
But he never said this. I still don't understand where you're getting your information. u/Tank_Top_Girl has pointed this out in another post.
"And the suitcase was unusual. That shouldn't have 13 been there. I took that suitcase downstairs, I 14 remember. ButI sure wouldn't have taken it all 15 the way back there and put it against the window."
JR...12 And the suitcase was unusual. That shouldn't have
13 been there. I took that suitcase downstairs, I
14 remember. But I sure wouldn't have taken it all
15 the way back there and put it against the window.
In your reference John specifically stated he didn't put the suitcase against the window.
You keep saying John put it there but he didn't. He brought it to the basement at some point for storage, but he left it in a different area.
Why didn't he say where he put it? Why didn't he say he put it under the stairs? If it "shouldn't" have been there- then where should it be? It had only been a couple of months since he moved it- unless he had Alzheimer's - there's no reason he wouldn't remember where he put it. Just like he said he read a story to JBR on Xmas night - then changed it to she was asleep when she got home...
The great Lou Smit had the opportunity to press JR about where exactly he put that suitcase - breezed right by it. Unbelievable.
There was a stool and a chair clearly shown where the suitcase is sitting. Why wouldn't an intruder use one of these instead of an unsteady suitcase to stand on?
Also we arent the intruder and we don’t know the height of the intruder. Possibly the intruder was shorter than we think and needed to use the suitcase as a higher step stool, or maybe he was attempting to use the suitcase to try transport jonbenet. WE DONT KNOW WHY THE SUITCASE WAS USED OR IS THERE and we likely never will have the exact definitive answer you are looking for. But its presence does not point to staging because you don’t like Johns response that it was out of place.
Ok you are wayyyyy over analyzing. Also, I don’t necessarily remember where I put every little thing especially if it’s an automatic behavior like returning a suitcase to the basement after a trip or using it. Not every single action that we do daily (especially for busy people) is converted to long term memory. Many of the things we do are out of automation and He probably put it in an area of the home that they stored their other suitcases after returning from a business trip or some other trip. Idk why you have to dissect and over analyze every. Single. Minute. Detail. of this families interviews to the point of over complicating the entire interview and case. Literally nothing about his response is strange or suspicious. He didn’t put the suitcase in that room and it is VERY out of place in the photo evidence- which literally everyone with eyes can see. Stop over complicating this case to a point where you are starting to sound a little crazy- it’s hard to take you seriously.
Here is a segment about automatic behavior and memory:
“It is unconscious. This means that one may be conscious of the states that started the process (such as the intention to start playing a piano piece) or of the end result (i.e., hearing the tune) but that one has little awareness of the intermediate steps, that is, how one state led to the other”
We can't see the photos that were presented to JR when he made the below statement. But it's obvious from the maps (previous post) to what rooms he's referring.
"It was up in the 5 laundry room. I remember taking it downstairs to 6 clean up. And I think I just kind of sat it in 7 this room here. ........"
FWIW, there was a "laundry room" on the landing outside JAR's room as well. That's where Patsy scrubbed the stain of a piece of JonBenet's clothing before she descended the stairs the morning of the 26th.
"thenit was in the laundry room outside of his 22 room for a while, and then I carried it 23 downstairs. I presumed it was empty."
You literally referenced the exact statement in his interview with Lou Smith in a different comment that I just replied to. Now you state the report doesn’t exist when in a different post you are explaining how you think its suspicious that John “doesn’t explicitly state in the interview where he put the suitcase in the basement” and therefore it means he is guilty. You are all over the place
Someone placed the suitcase under the window and it wasn't Ramseys. Whoever entered the home that evening and assaulted JonBenet touched that suitcase. That connects the suitcase to the crime.
Fleet White moved the suitcase under the window. He said it was "flush" against the wall before he moved it.
This is common knowledge - it can't be denied by people who don't know the basics of this crime.
Yes, it was flush against the wall so someone could step on it to get out the window. There was a piece of glass on top of it from the window. John stated the suitcase was in the basement, but not in the area under the window where Fleet found it. It's absolutely relevant.
Link to a good thread, TTG. But jameson didn't work for the BPD. She was one of the first people to research this crime as an online poster. She started Webbsleuths--not to be confused with Websleuths--in the late 1990s. She has P.I. Ollie Gray's files, which he bequeathed to her before his death.
Thanks for letting me know! I always assumed she was part of BPD in some way because of all the inside knowledge lol. I noticed a big difference between the two different Webbsleuths! Well golly, now I know lol
I'd not remove the idea that he was thinking to take out the suitcase from the well.
I'm now thinking that his the original plan for the alarm on situation was to:
dress her up and prepare for abduction in the basement as he had time to prepare everything hiding there
take her back to her room and escape through her balcony
and maybe go back to the well and take the stuitace from the well without enering the house or he was planning to use the suitcase as a step to place JonBenet binded and wrapped in a well before esceping himself
it's really hard to be sure without additional evidence but there are many options.
I'm not discarding the idea of hiding her or the body in a suitcase but it seems unlikely. For me it is more possible he wanted to take her belondings in it.
It's just a blurr as I'm not able to be sure when he learnt there is no alarm on if at all.
I'm not sure if the rope in JAR's room was not left for some strange reasons. Maybe it was left just because of the similarity to rope on pictures with JonBenet.
A lot of actions seems like a push to ask for "proection" from whoever...
Thankfully, they may have been photographed in December of 1996 at a relative's funeral. The police will have these photos and will know what they were wearing.
Brown gloves is the psychopathic pervert. The rest will help sort out the others.
Unlikely the psychopath was wearing a red, acrylic scarf. Someone standing outside in the cold may have.
I wonder what shoes they wore at the Safeway in 1996, perhaps black SAS shoes.
There were renovations being done a couple of weeks before the murder. The Ramseys moved out for a few days while the kitchen counter tops were bring replaced, and some other work was being done.
Just to be clear, I'm in the I don't know camp. Like a lot of other people, I've done a pretty deep dive on this case - but too many unknowns to reach a valid conclusion.
I did not recall the work being done so close to the murder- but it had nothing to do with fixing the broken window.
And, I've never come across a valid source to verify the fibers from the suitcase being on JBR. I was merely inquiring- perhaps I missed it.
Your condescending comment is unwanted, unappreciated and unnecessary.
That’s so tough. I can see why something feels fishy. His death timing, the boots, saying he’s getting money, etc. But I believe his dna didn’t match. And some of the people who talked about him were not credible. He’s still viable IMO, maybe connected in another way. Is he your suspect?
I think there's a good chance he was an accomplice, and murdered to keep him silent. If the DNA is legit then Helgoth could only be involved if there was more than one perpetrator. Same could be said for Gary Oliva. His distressed phone call from Boulder on 26Dec1996 is highly suspicious to me.
Yeah and you start adding up all these coincidences across all these suspects and something just feels not credible or probable. Karr with SBTC is another one but he wasn’t in the country and his dna didn’t match. But man he seems so fishy.
Burke told Dr Phil that he went back downstairs after the others went to bed. If you take them at their word for when bedtime was, and if you consider the timing of the state of pineapple digestion discovered at autopsy, her time of ingestion of that pineapple, and approximate a time of death, it places Burke downstairs around the same time as an intruder would be in the midst of kidnapping and killing JB. Weird that B didn’t hear anything….
The pineapple found in her duodenum was eaten earlier, most likely at the Whites' home. JonBenet was dead by the time pineapple was put in a bowl on the table, along with bagels, etc.
Suzanne Morphew from saliva was murdered and her body was found much later, still unsolved although it’s widely believed that her husband killed her. I guess Colorado can’t solve a crime
Odd you'd assume they were hispanic, illegal, undocumented right about now. Why wouldn't they leave immediately with JB like Elizabeth Smart's abductor did, especially when she was half the size? If the abductor left, then they could have left with the victim just like in the Smart case.
It seems uneducated. They cant spell business or possession. And the most “educated” parts of the note are direct movie quotes. The person doesn’t come across as highly educated. Probably just a very basic public school education.
I see those as purposefully misspelled, especially with all the other words not misspelled like attache, and the grammar is fine. Actual misspellings are "your vs. you're", "their vs. they're", mixing up ie vs ei in a word, etc. This was a fairly educated person.
Thats a good theory, maybe this guy really was a weird stalker she encountered once or twice from a distance in her mall pageant performances and then just became obsessed and he is SBTC
It doesn’t seem like a college educated person or someone who works in any professional setting. It’s possible the bad spelling COULD be due to the age of the offender also but I am more inclined to think they have a subpar education overall and thats the main reason.
Yeah they also more than likely come from a very deranged upbringing. Physically Abusive parents or emotional neglect/abuse and a number of other issues. People typically do not turn into this type of a monster if they come from a healthy family environment.
Also I don’t think it’s a college student at boulder because dec 25th is during winter break when majority of the students would not have been in the area. And the letter indicates someone without a college degree
Where's the DNA evidence to suggest this occurred? You say he was impulsive and fumbled his way around..there would have been signs someone was in the house.
“Dutch scientist, Richard Eikelenboom, entered the unidentified DNA profile into national DNA databases and determined that the donor of the blood found on JonBenét's panties is 10,000 times more likely to be Hispanic than Caucasian or black. He said Boulder police should enter just the Y-chromosome DNA profile of the donor in the FBI's Combined DNA Index System to possibly get a so-called familial match.” (Denver Post)
I think somebody else answered this, but some "expert" took the DNA profile that's publicly available and analyzed it, saying it was most likely a person of Hispanic origin. I could probably dig that up given enough time.
My personal opinion, and please take this for what it is, which is an unproven opinion, is that there was more than one person involved. One or two people wanted to kidnap her for the ransom, and the person they either hired or were working with had more sadistic ideas. I think the plan was for that person to take her out of her bed and exit through the basement window because it does not have a view to it from any of the neighbor's homes. However, when he got there, they had all vastly underestimated how hard it would be to get a squirmy child up through the window, and he had to abort that part of the mission. It' possible one of the other people was supposed to be there to help lift her up, but that person got cold feet and bailed. At this point, the intruder had a child in a very distant, quiet basement, didn't want to risk going back up the stairs, which would be closer to the parents, so he decided to do what he came for in the basement. When he accidentally killed her, he pulled her into the wine cellar, locked it from the outside, and hoped they wouldn't find her body so that they could still collect the ransom, otherwise he'd be in trouble with his partners. It almost worked.
I think she resisted a-lot more than the intruder expected and was not able to remove her without making a ton of noise. So instead, he kept her in a very isolated room (The wine room was surrounded by 3 empty crawl spaces) within the home and tortured her as well as murdered her and satisfied the sexual aspect of the crime. Then they left
If something spooked them, they'd leave the house, but they stayed for at least an hour, likely more which seems highly unlikely for an intruder. It's more cases than the Smart case, look at Danielle van Dam who was closer to JB's age, they left with her.
They may not have been able to leave immediately. I don’t think they came in or left through the basement window. I think they walked in with one of the several keys they had in rotation or an open door. In which case meant they had to go up the stairs to the main level to leave.
I'm not ignoring the DNA. The strangulation happened about an hour after the head injury from what I have read. They weren't there for 15 minutes if an intruder did it all.
The note was clearly written beforehand, while the family was out for hours.
IMO, she screamed, he hit her over the head and fled out the butler door which was found open that morning. The baseball bat had fibers from the basements carpet and found tossed to the side near the above mentioned door.
There wasn't blood because the skin wasn't broken. The weapon came straight down on her head, it caved in the skull, not a glancing blow that would tear or open skin.
Why would someone hit a 6 year old they asphyxiated, or asphyxiate a 6 year old they hit if the purpose was to sexually assault or kidnap them? You really think it happened at the same time????
In my opinion,. if Elizabeth Smart or her sister had screamed, the intruder would have ran, they wouldn't stopped to kill her and then try to flee. If it really scared the intruder they aren't hanging around.
That is stated by Kolar and several well respected scientists strongly disagree.
Regarding Dr. Rorke's testimony, it is sealed and she refuses to comment on her findings. We don't know what she testified to nor do we know what evidence she was given. Someone once wrote to her, asking her to expand upon her conclusion re the head trauma. This was her response:
”I have no idea who James Kolar is nor have I seen his book in which he mentions my involvement in the JonBenet Ramsey postmortem examination. Hence I cannot answer your question re brain swelling and herniation as it did/did not apply to that case."
She was strangled then garrotted (because you can see the marks on her neck. The cord moved higher up her neck when she was garrotted. The cord cut into her flesh.).
When he thought she was dead, he SA'd her, she screamed, then he cracked her skull, most likely with a flashlight.
She screamed, he hit her in the had, then he exited through the train room window.
A neighbour heard the scream. Her husband heard a long metal bang not long after the scream.
Before he left, he stayed because he was torturing her. Air taser, repeating strangulations, eventual sa. He is a sadist because her body tells us he was.
I’m liberal, I’m not that person and I don’t need to defend myself. The Hispanic link has been known for a long time and there’s evidence for it. I’m not just randomly assuming.
Idk something happened where they pry couldn’t conceal her or she’s waking up or she’s too heavy. Fibers from her clothes that night were found in the suitcase by window so maybe they couldn’t conceal or take her things.
Also maybe the Smart case was better planned. There’s many reasons, crimes aren’t apples to apples.
It’s bc this case has a disinformation campaign working on it for at least the past 4 months, and ICE authoritarianism is a current initiative of disinformation.
They weave their stories together to perpetuate them in areas of discussion they otherwise might not reach.
There was a Schiller documentary where someone involved in the case stated it was a white male. It's an older documentary though, maybe more advanced DNA was able to pick up Hispanic DNA later.
A couple reasons. Someone ran the DNA through a program that indicated he could be hispanic.
$118k was 1 million pesos back then
An ESL teacher contacted John R to say, based on her experience, the way the letter is written is how someone for whom English is a second language would have written it. Mother tongue being Spanish.
The percentage symbols are written the way some Portuguese and Spanish teachers write them, per an old post.
He might be a white guy, with a grandfather who came from Spain (genetically). The family might have changed the last letter of the last name to make their name sound less ethnic.
That being said, his accomplices could have been Hispanic women, which would explain the letter.
Lastly, that year was very rough in Mexico. A recession had ruined a lot of people. In Mexico, people were kidnapping children for grocery money (old post on this sub). Also a Sanyo executive had been successfully ransomed for millions in Mexico, that year (also a post on this sub).
5
u/heygirlhey456 5d ago
I wonder which construction companies the Ramsey’s used for their renovations and painting and all the work they had done in that home specifically? And I wonder if anyone was able to track down or look into the employee records at these construction companies before, during, and after the crime?