The Ramsey's own words

The "Jack the Stripper" incident has always intrigued me - especially since jameson has claimed that there was a "witness" to the incident who confirmed everything.

Patsy was at the loch house with the kids and if you look at aerial photos of the house, that window is very well sheltered from neighbours' windows. So who witnessed John stripping to his scuddies and breaking into the house? Did he have a "friend" with him? If so, it might explain why he didn't just collect the spare key from a neighbour.

 

This episode has intrigued me also.

I'm sorry I don't how to show quotes from others but here goes: "PR: In Charlevoix and he told me to come back from out of town or whatever and he didn't have a key and the only way he could get in was to break the window."
First of all is she saying that because JR couldn't get in the house he called her from Boulder to Charlevoix to come home so he could get into the house? I mean how stupid is that!! Then PR says OR WHATEVER... And the person conducting this interview says after this exchange OK. That was a golden opportunity to have Patsy back up and tell exactly what she meant. This just frosts me that LE just let priceless moments like this go without a challenge of any sort. GRRRRRRR!


And to think that there were so many outstanding keys for that house anyway...esp the house keeper and neighbors.

 

I agree that there were umpteen questioning opportunities which weren't seized upon. I'm not particularly familiar with LE questioning tactics "for real" but have seen on police dramas where there has been a comms link between the detective questioning the suspect and another detective(s) who is watching and the onlooker will relay instructions through. I think that's quite a good idea because a detached onlooker will often notice an opportunity whereas the interrogating officer may be too busy thinking about the next question.

 

The "story" of John breaking in that basement window is a prime example of the Ramseys lying through their teeth to LE, IMO.

Here is what John said to Smit, in his '98 interview, about this little "episode":

[Continued in next post, because that's when the BS gets REALLY deep!]

 

Here's the story in full, and notice how John does THREE important things in telling this story: he talks in HYPOTHETICALS, distancing himself using the pronoun "you" and implying the subjunctive mood used for hypotheticals..."IF" this happened, then I "would" or "could" have, all because he KNOWS he's flying by the seat of his PANTS here [how's that for a pun?]; he tells a story that on its face isn't specific, committed, nor POSSIBLE; he skillfully leads the interviewers away from the window to discuss the celler room door.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/1998BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm

 

Now, check out the ACTUAL window, with Lou Smit inadvertantly putting THE LIE to everything John said.

[Photos from ACR's site: http://www.acandyrose.com/lousmit.htm ]

John's story is so pathetic: he says he got on his knees and BACKED through the window. That is not physically possible, as far as I can see, on several points:

!. The window well is not of sufficient WIDTH, from the window to the parallel brick wall at the back of the well for him to do that, unless he's three feet tall.

2. Try standing on the edge of your bed on your hands and knees and "dropping" to the floor. Then imagine doing it on a WINDOW SILL, with molding. Then imagine the cement well in which you are attempting to do this. It's not possible. You'd HAVE to either lay on your stomach or sit down and squeeze through at some point. You CANNOT crawl backward INTO SPACE. And there is NO ROOM for John to do this on his hands and knees or to lay on his stomach!

3. Now look at how far John would have to have "dropped" from his "hands and knees". Tell me how he could do that, WHY he would do that?

John was LYING. And Patsy was LYING to back him up, as well.

I spent years ON THE FENCE with John's involvement until I worked this out from his "break-in" story. I'm not sure why he and Patsy felt they had to tell this huge lie, but they certainly took Lou "swear to God you didn't do it" Smit and Interrupting Haney for a ride, didn't they?

 

Oh, and did ANYONE see John talking about THE PERSON ALLEGEDLY WITH HIM WHEN THAT HAPPENED? I may be just missing it or forgot it...too much I don't remember anymore; but seems like that might have been an important DETAIL. What if that "person" knew that window was broken, after all...and that's how that person/intruder GOT IN TO MURDER JONBENET? :winko: (Or is this just another example of the Ramseys deciding WHO IS and WHO ISN'T worthy of being a suspect, LE NOT ALLOWED?) I'm not up to reading the whole thing again. Anyone remember John telling Smit about that "friend", or LE in another interview?

 

Right on, Zoomama! These are the holes liars fall into when presenting their cockamamie stories, and it is of course the interviewer's job NOT to let them out of such a hole.

Why didn't they push on, for example by picking up on what she said:

"Patsy, so you were in Michigan and John called you from Colorado to come back because he had no key handy to get into the house - have I got that right?"

Then watch how she is trying to wriggle out, and keep pushing by asking further questions.

"Patsy, many people in Boulder had a key to the house. But John wanted you to come back from Michigan and open the door for him - have I got that right?

And so on ... and in case she is trying to perform a Scarlett O' Hara crocodile tear number (snaky Scarlett always 'cried' conveniently when it served her purpose) don't let her take a break, but instead ask her point-blank what exactly upset her so much ....

So instead of pushing her into a corner, they politely step aside and let her walk away. Just as they did on many other occasions.

These interviewers were every guilty suspect's dream. :banghead:

 

I believe they initially did break the window pane to stage a point of entry, but then realized they would have to lift the grate also to make it look convincing. They did not dare to do this for fear of being seen.
I believe it was then when they decided it was safer and more convincing to pin the crime on someone who had a key to the house - the housekeeper for example. ("inside job").
If they should be asked about the broken pane, they would offer a "John broke the window months ago" story.
Imo that is why John, in the morning of Dec 26th, did not tell the police about the broken window: the Ramseys didn't need the broken window anymore, it had become redundant.
But later of course, when John realized Smit was so delusional to actually believe an intruder 'intruded' through that window, he readily let Smit elaborate.

 

Rashomon,

Right you are. My dream would be to let LE once again question JR about all of his testimony And this time hold his feet to the proverbial fire. Don't just ask and then move on make him elaborate until the question is answered. Someone mentioned how questioning is done on TV or movie crime dramas. Well of course, there is written dialog and it usually very snappy and almost always makes sense and LE gets answers to questions that are asked.
And lies are exposed and the guilty confess. HA

When I read the dialogs of how all of Boulder's finest questioned JR or even Patsy there are questions that aren't answered or answers that don't go with the questions and yet they are left to stand. I get so frustrated with reading some of that gibberish. As I understand it the Cops who really do the interviewing of suspects are real experts at it. Have any of your ever seen the Head LE guy who did the interviewing of Gary whats his name who is the Green River Killer. He kept after him for hours and crept into his"space" by sliding his chair closer and closer so that Gary had to actually lean way out of the way to avoid touching noses. That was all very real and quite funny actually. But it goes to my point of an expert doing the interviewing. Those cops in Boulder did the best they could but they weren't good enough and I think JR and PR knew it.

 

If you look at those pictures of Smit crawling IN the window, you see him stepping ON to the suitcase, which is under the window. Isn't that amazing? The perp was able to place that suitcase right under the very window he decided to climb through without even being in the room. I guess he used telekenesis. And of course, NO one questions Smit on how the perp was able to have placed that suitcase in that exact spot FROM THE OUTSIDE.
I guess it was the same way they pulled the chair in front of a closed door WHILE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE CLOSED DOOR.

 

As far as JR calling PR to come home TO COLORADO FROM MICHIGAN to bring him a key, did no one think to ask him why he couldn't call any one of the MANY people the Rs claimed all had keys to the house? I bet it was because all those KEYS the Rs claimed were floating around out there were non-existent.

 

Didn't ST say that Fleet White moved that suitcase?

 

I recall something like that, but what I am wondering is why no one thought to ask Smit to explain how the intruder managed to put that suitcase under the window from outside the house. Of course, without the suitcase there, Smit could simply have dropped to the floor- the window wasn't that high. Also, why LE didn't pick up that ball when such a big deal was made out of the suitcase and where it was placed under the window. If FW admitted to putting it there, why didn't LE use that info to say that an intruder couldn't have used it to climb out the window because it wasn't there to begin with? Instead, that suitcase becomes one of the mainstays of the intruder theorists, providing the intruder with a way to escape. They tellingly ignore the contents of the suitcase- JAR's comforter with semen stains, a children's book and one of JBR's hairs.

What I'd much rather have seen Smit do was climb OUT that same window using the suitcase to push off on. We know what would have happened. He'd have never been able to do it. And I'd have loved to have seen him pull that chair back in front of the door through the closed door.

 

You caught that too eh?

 

I remember reading about this to, but don't recall where. I don't think John mentioned this in any police interview.
It looks like this came from Jameson, with her saying either someone was with John or claiming someone had witnessed him climbing through the window. (see post # 167 )
But compulsive liars like Jameson will tell anybody anything provided it serves the Ramseys' story.

Jmpo, if there had really been such a person with John who as an eyewitness could corroborate his story, no doubt John would have told this the investigators.

C'mon John, who will buy that nonsense? Either you broke the window or you didn't. People don't go around breaking windows often, especially adults.

"I was just going to tell FW my concocted story about having broken the window" comes probably far closer to the truth. Imo that's what his mind was busy with while was down there with Fleet.

Interview with L.Smit:

Again John pretends not to be completely sure whether he had broken that window before or not.

A good question to push John would have been:
"So you think you broke the window before but you are not completely sure whether you broke it at all? So you have some doubts as to whether you broke it?"

He tries to sell the story that if there had been a lot of glass lying around, then it must have come from the intruder.

His inconsistent babble indicates how nervous John is. For now he continues by telling Kane he definitely KNEW the window had NOT been fixed. So the intruder could of course have reached through the hole in the window without having to break the pane.

Even if one accepts John's story about having broken the window himself before, it does NOT explain why he didn't alert the police at once about the hole in the window because the intruder could of course have used it as a point of entry.

Suppose I have a burglary in my home and remember accidentally having left a basement window open which the burglar could have used to get in.
Instead of showing the police this window, I say nothing but tell myself instead
"Oh, I left that open. It wasn't the burglar who opened it. So this can be of no interest to the police."
But does that mean he couldn't have used it??

John not telling the police at once about the broken window is a HUGE red flag, no matter howis trying to explain it all away. His explaing is nothing more than dancing away from possible tough questions, but these questions never were asked.

John's broken basement window story has far more holes in it than the window itself.

 

Yes, on p. 20 hardb ed.

When FW went down to the basement alone, the broken window caught his eye. He found a piece of galss benath the window and placed it on the ledge. He dropped to his hands and knees, searching for oher pieces and moved the suticase in doing so.

Good photo demonstration KK in your # 166 post.
Indeed John (almost ten feet tall, weighing 195 pounds) could not have backed through the window because the well was too narrow.
This was also the reason why Smit couldn't back through the window ewither, but had to let himself in facing the room.

John theorizing to Lou Smit about possible ways of climbing through the basement window:

Without realizing it, John slips into hypothetical mode, telling Smit more or less that if he ever had to climb through such a window, that's probably "how he would have done it".

I would bet my bottom euro that Johnny has never climbed through any such window in his whole life.

 

Indeed Elle, a multimillionaire worrying about having a pair of pants cleaned just doesn't wash, pun intended.

Good catch Elle about the shoes which he would have had to put back on. Imo he also would have had to put them back on to break the window, for kicking it in with his shoes on would be a quick and safe method. He wouldn't have done that barefooted.
Just curious: has John ever told Smit & Co how exactly he broke the window?

"Jack the Stripper"! LOL - brilliant title!! :floor:

 

I just think it's all lies rashomon. A businessman comes home and finds he doesn't have a key. A spare key was supposedly given to a neighbour across the street. John doesn't bother to go there. Most people think of the easiest way to get into their own home when they are locked out. There had to be an easier way for John Ramsey to get into his own house than choose the most awkward cumbersome way he wants everyone to believe.

What was wrong with him breaking one pane of glass to reach the window lock in this window next to the door, sliding the window open and going in through here? It wouldn't have cost him too much to have one pane of glass replaced.
www.acandyrose.com/<WBR>crimescene-panic911.htm


John Ramsey is a liar.