3 Conflicting Motives

I think now would be a great time to go over an extremely important aspect of this murder case--one which really hasn't been talked about much since the first six months of the case: conflicting motives reflected in the staging of this crime scene.

A little girl was murdered in her own home on Christmas. This leaves two questions:

1. Who killed her?

2. Why did this person kill her?

We will leave question one unanswered--we'll call this person "X." Let's move on to the question of why?

The fact of the matter is that the "reason" JBR was killed is spelled out in the ransom note. In addition to what the ransom note says explicitly, you also have the motive for the murder reflected in other things at the crime scene--namely the garrote and the injuries to her vaginal area.

The problem is, these motives are completely different, and they shouldn't be.

The ransom note is quite clear that this kidnapping was done to extort money out of the Ramseys to help fund a terrorist organization. It says so right there in the note and the note is the killer's calling card. Everyone has forgotten this key bit of information--no one ever talks about this anymore. Why does Lou Smit never address this?

Because it's embarrassing. It gets in the way of talking about sexual predators.

So Motive One is kidnapping for money for a terrorist organization that hates the US.

Unfortunately for Motive One, we have a body which reflects sexual assault. We have trauma both inside and outside the vagina, and these types of injuries do not reflect a kidnapping for money. Then we have the garrote--an instrument designed for sexual torture. This instrument should not exist in a kidnapping for money.

So Motive Number Two is sexual assault/torture.


Unfortunately for Motives One and Two, JBR's body had the aspects of a rage killing as well. JBR was struck on the head with enough force to kill a 300lb football player, according to investigators. She also had signs of being manually strangled. On top of that, she was clearly struck in her vaginal area many times. All of these things add up to what the FBI considers "Overkill"--they reflect a killer who is so angry, so out of control, that they do not stop the attack even after the victim is clearly dead or close to it.

So Motive Three is rage killing.

These three motives are all present at the crime scene, and they cannot be ignored and you cannot pretend one exists, but the others do not. You cannot explore a pedophile theory, while ignoring the kidnapping for money angle, but Lou Smit has always done exactly that.

Kidnappers want money. Pedophiles want sex. Terrorists want exposure (terrorism is theater, don't forget).

So who is the killer of Jonbenet Ramsey?

As people drift off to sea with their bizzare conspiracy theories of sex rings and jealous friends and other such nonsense, it is important to keep things simple.

What is a rational, sane explanation for Three Motives at One Murder?

 

There is only one explanation that is sane enough for my poor little mind to consider

One of the Ramseys killed JBR. I think it was an accident. In no way do I feel it was premeditated

I think the other two covered it up and the staging began. I believe they provided so much overkill, that they convoluted themselves right under that umbrella and rightfully so.

The note was phony and overkill

The garrotte was staged and once again, overkill

The sexual assault, although minimal (please, I don't mean to make light of it), was where they got their "pedophile" theory from. This is a sensitive area as I personally don't feel that John was molesting her, but possibly Burke was "experimenting" (not so uncommon between siblings) and they needed to show that the "murderer" was a pedophile to lead away from either of the two Ramsey males living in that house

As far as Lou Smit, he finally backed down from the stun gun theory, despite never seeing it mentioned elsewhere, but Lou Smit is not going to discuss areas he has no explanation for because he has no explanation...

Kidnappers don't leave dead bodies IN THE HOUSE

Terrorists don't identify themselves as such; and if they did they certainly wouldn't call themselves a SMALL foreign faction, making themselves less powerful

Murderers don't leave ransom notes

AND....when ransom notes are REAL, you follow the instructions (with the exception of asking the authorities for help), but you DONT call all your friends
and others over to the house to watch you pretend there is a kidnapping.

The only motive as far as I am concerned is cover up.

 

Barbara

Ditto, I don't think it was premeditated.

BobC, there is only one answer.

I think the note writer/Patsy got a little carried away when writing it...the foreign faction....bwahhhhhhhhhhhhh had to get a little more drama in like decapitating her.....

 

I agree completely. I did this thread in response to the "Let's exxonerate Patsy" thread. In order to exxonerate her or John, you have to think an intruder did the crime. And to believe that, it follows that you have to come up with a theory of an intruder who has three different motives to do what he did that night.

So far, nobody has explained this.

It really annoys me that people constantly talk about pedophiles when the note clearly says it wasn't about sex.

 

Here's a portion of an interview with Robert Ressler (ex Quantico) about the murder. It's a great reminder of the basics:

D. Pugh: Mm-Hmm, and that's kind of our lead in question into our Ramsey related questions. Uh--Mr. Ressler, Internet and public opinion divides the Rams case into two different theories on what happened on December 26th in the death of JonBenet Ramsey. First, the scenario that the death was accidental and one or both the parents were involved in the murder and cover-up. And the second, the scenario when an intruder entered the Rams home, murdered JonBenet, and staged the crime scene. Please comment on both scenarios.

Ressler: Yeah, I've been to Boulder on two occasions. I've talked to a number of people in the law enforcement field, the medical field, the prosecutor, one of the prosecutors out there, even some of the domestic help of uh, the Ramseys and uh, some media people as well. I do not-- uh, I've been to the location of the house, I've been around the house, I've looked at the neighborhood and I do not ascribe at all to the concept that a stranger broke into the house and, uh, in an attempt to kidnap or abduct JonBenet, killed her and wrote the note, and then left. I believe it was some sort of an internal--- uh-- situation that occurred that-- uh--I believe the Ramseys-- Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey, possibly their son-- uh-- Burke, have more information available that they could provide police than they've held back-- uh-- in their non-cooperation they've put themselves in a position of being major suspects. It's very likely they're going to be indited in the Grand Jury here in April-- uh-- and whether or not there's enough to prosecute-- uh-- them to the point of conviction remains to be seen. But I think-- uh-- I've always believed that JonBenet was killed as a result of an accident that was being covered up-- I'm not saying whether or not Ramsey's parents or the brother were involved in the actual killing, but I think--as I say--I think that the entire-- uh-- elaborate staging was done to conceal the true facts of what really happened to that child.

D. Pugh: Okay, thank you. Uh, this next question is from KathyK. In the Ramsey crime scene, there is an unexplained shoe print next to the body, unmatched pubic hair on her blanket, unidentified DNA mixed with her blood stain in her panties, fibers on the genital area, and a palm on the door to the room she was found. Is this evidence proof positive that an intruder was involved?

Ressler: No, I don't think it is, because-- uh-- again, forensic evidence is--is only-- can only be as important as the investigators can link it to a-- a theory that would lead to a suspect. A palm print on the door, a shoe print down in the family room, things of this nature-- uh-- one has to consider the very basic fact that the police--one thing--that is --the policemen criticize for severely in this case--is they did not control the crime scene. Uh, they did not-- uh-- protect the crime scene, that being the entire house--uh--uh-- for many, many hours people were running around that house, neighbors, friends, relatives, a minister-- uh-- attorneys, God knows who else-- a number of police officers, and the palm print and the shoe print could have very well been left by one of these people who contaminated the crime scene. Uh, when we get down to DNA evidence, when we get down to --uh-- pubic hair, stains, things of that nature-- none of this has been collaborated to the extent that its been actually--uh--uh-- y'know, verified, in a-- in a court situation. So, until that information is given to the Grand Jury-- uh-- we really don't know what all that means at this stage.

 

I always liked Ressler

Smart man

 

Terrorist, Smerrorist

Regarding the Foreign Faction......Steve Thomas flat out told us on page 205:

"Since John Ramsey had no faith in the Boulder Police, I thought perhaps he had sought help from the security experts of Access Graphics' parent company. "I've never spoken to him," Bernie Lamoreaux, the director of security for Lockheed Martin, told me. "I'm not aware of any threats by foreign terrorists of any kind."

:bee:
RR

 

Here's another of Ressler's interviews on the subject, along with Greg McCrary's two cents:

``The note was totally ridiculous from the standpoint of having any credibility as a kidnap note,'' former FBI profiler Robert Ressler told The Associated Press. Police ``wasted effectively eight hours of crucial time in buying this kidnap note.''

But, said Ressler, ``get the person that wrote that note and that person may not have killed JonBenet, but they certainly know what happened.''

For that reason, he said, ``It's probably the best piece of evidence they have.''

Police Cmdr. Mark Beckner, who took over the investigation in October, called the note important but would not say what conclusions authorities have drawn from it.

``Listen Carefully!'' the note begins. ``We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We respect your business but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our possession.''

Ressler has assisted with hundreds of investigations, including those of multiple murderers Charles Manson, Ted Bundy, Jeffrey Dahmer and John Wayne Gacy. Now a private consultant in forensic behavioral science and based in Virginia, Ressler said the evidence, including the autopsy, suggests JonBenet was killed accidentally and ``an elaborate cover-up was done to divert police away from the crime.''

He believes, for instance, that the child was garroted to divert police from what he believes is the true cause of her death: a blow to the head. The writing of the note, he said, was part of the overall effort to send police astray.

If police had not fallen for the ploy, he said bluntly, the case would now be solved. ``They should have immediately started the investigation at another level,'' he said.

Patsy Ramsey said she found the note at 5:30 a.m. Dec. 26, 1996, as she walked down the backstairs toward the kitchen to make coffee.

Gregg McCrary, another former FBI profiler now doing private criminal consulting in Virginia, said placement of the note - on the backstairs of the sprawling $1.5 million home - is significant.

``That's not a prominent place to leave a note - unless you know that they come downstairs in the morning to make coffee,'' McCrary said. ``That shows me a knowledge of the house and of the activities of the people in the house.''

``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 FBI will result in your daughter being beheaded. ... Use that good, southern common sense of yours.''

Ressler said this passage and others that provide information about the kidnappers show the writer has no criminal experience.

``Kidnap notes do not give information,'' Ressler said. ``They don't tell you how many people are in the organization, they don't tell you they are going to behead your daughter and they don't tell you the kind of container to use to get the money.''

In addition, he said, the note ``reflects a person whose knowledge of kidnapping comes from movies and books.'' One line, in particular - ``Don't try to grow a brain, John'' - echoes a line spoken by actor Dennis Hopper in the movie ``Speed.''

The ransom note was written with a black felt-tip pen on lined paper reportedly from a tablet in the home. Containing directives and contingencies, it is overall a sophisticated letter written by an educated person, said Bethany Dumas, a University of Tennessee English linguistics professor who has testified several times as an expert witness.

``You can try to deceive us, but be warned we are familiar with law enforcement counter-measures and tactics.''

That passage, Dumas said, is ``very formal, very educated.''

The $118,000 demand is interesting to McCrary, who notes most ransom demands are for ``a huge fat sum.'' When Exxon executive Sidney J. Reso was abducted in 1992, the ransom demanded was $18.5 million.

Also, McCrary said, the Ramsey note is unnecessarily wordy.

``Like the comment, `We respect your business.' It's not important to get the job done, but somebody felt it was important to say,'' McCrary said. ``Usually, it's `We've got your daughter and if you want to see her alive pay us.'''

``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.''

``This business of getting a good night's rest because the next days are going to be trying, all these things are just above and beyond a kidnapper,'' Ressler said.

The language has a caretaker quality and sounds like it comes from a ``college-educated mature female. But I'm not saying that it is Mrs. Ramsey,'' he said.

Ressler said the writing points to a woman because ``men aren't that caring. They really don't care.''

 

But I'm willing to

Is it any wonder you fell in love with Patsy :winko: :toast:

 

Could you imagine me sitting down for cocktails with Miss Patsy? On my deathbed, this will be my only regret--that I never got to have a conversation with her. I know it would be hilarious. Remember when I hatched the scheme that I'd dress up as a tub of Kentucky Fried Chicken and ring the doorbell at their Atlanta home? Hoping that would gain me access to Patsy?

 

BobC, my hat's off to you, pal. No one has ever explained that mess.

 

Thanks Punisher. I am a little surprised that the whole terrorist angle never gets a mention anymore, particularly since 911. I guess, if I were a cop interviewing JR, I would have asked him questions like why would terrorists who respect you pick your daughter to kill? Why would terrorists sexually torture your daughter? Or maybe what precautions have you taken to protect yourself from these terrorists? Or maybe why did you send Burke away with a lone, unarmed woman that morning, when terrorists had you in their sights?

I think questions like this would have made both of them very nervous.

 

No kidding. A girl child wouldn't mean anything to Arab fanatics. And even before 9/11 most people knew about beheadings in that part of the world.

 

As far as terrorists go, they really sucked. Basically, they took JB out of her bed, "messed" with her a little, wrote a book and left...
No self-respecting terrorist would ever do any of that crap.

 

Hi vic. One of the initial things that the FBI took note of (pun intended) is the fact that these "terrorists" said they were small in number. Uh uh. Terrorist groups, whether big or small, want to appear large and threatening.

 

"We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction." I'm sorry, but I see "We are a group of individuals that represent a sma4 foreign factim." Look at the "ll"s in the word small. They were written specifically in the word small to form an open-top numeral 4. Now, how do the number 4, small, foreign and faction tie into Patsy?

"faction" = "factim" The "on" in "faction" are written in such a way to form the letter "m". The word "factim" looks like a combination of the words "fact" and "victim" or, in other words, JonBenet. This group of individuals (John and Patsy) represents, or speaks for, JonBenet, who was small, had a foreign name, and it's a fact that she was a victim.


-Tea

 

Great posts, Bob. Well done!

 

Thanks elle

 

Hi, Vic. Who's the little lovely in your signature photo?

These "terrorists" would have named themselves. Whether they were Arab fanatics like Islamic Jihad or Hizbollah, or home-grown nuts like ELF, they want you to know.

 

Hi Punisher! It's my granddaughter, isn't she a doll?

The Ramsey terrorists have to be the most inept, non-threatening, non-scary terrorists in the history of the world! What is the point if you dissapear forever, never to collect a dime from anyone anywhere?

Maybe because there was no such thing? Or was it Patsy "Usama" Ramsey?