A best-fit analysis of the facts and circumstances related to the death of JonBenet Patricia Ramsey

Another detail worth examining, especially in the context of the IDI theory, is what was the significance of the suitcase found under the window in the storage room of the basement? JR stated that he recognized the suitcase but that it was out of place; that is, it was not where it was normally stored. The suitcase contained two blankets and a Dr. Seuss book; as if to say that some kind of unfinished packing was occurring. Since we’ve reached this point in our best-fit it might be more expedient to cut right to the punch and ask if this was authentic or some kind of staging; a ploy to deflect from the truth. We suspect that that is more likely true than not. If we can dispense with an IDI theme at this point, then it necessarily follows that if the suitcase is “out of place” as JR stated, and if it is placed under this supposed egress window, it is likely an intentional placement. But why do this? Most likely, the deceiver was theatrical in personality and was attempting to create the impression that a kidnapper had initiated steps to remove the child but was interrupted for some reason and abandoned the effort. At least to some degree, it has worked inasmuch as that is exactly what many investigators concluded.

That weird suitcase beneath the window

Reconciling this with what we’ve found already, we note that we’ve found it likely that this was a premeditated murder. If premeditated, the perpetrator must include in their plan a means of bodily disposal. If a contrived kidnapping were planned, as it were, then the perpetrator likely had only one solution in play: the perpetrator likely intended to report the kidnapping assuming that an intensive search of the premises would not occur within the first few hours of reporting the crime. Once reported and within some period of hours afterward, the perpetrator/s could remove the remains with suspicion and the death of the victim explicable to authorities by a supposed kidnapping betrayal. The obvious follow up question is, “do we have any information to tell us where the remains were to be taken?” The surprising answer is, “yes”. We know this because this plan as executed in part by JR involved a phone call (where he left a message) made shortly after reporting the crime to JR’s private pilot to ready the plane to fly to Georgia. Since the request was to initiate preparations for a flight to Georgia, JR left no time after the supposed kidnapper phone call window ended at 10 a.m. to take the remains anywhere else. Hence, the remains were likely to be taken to Atlanta, GA where they would be likely disposed. The call from his pilot was answered by PR and was in response to JR’s message he left when he called earlier. The return call came in at 6:45 a.m. This is our first indication that JR also acted in premeditation to aid and abet the murder of his own daughter.

The “alley” behind the Ramsey home. The back yard and garage area of the home were accessible via this route

But there is more. A plan of this nature would require a safe, secure place for storing the remains during the initial period of police scrutiny in the home. If not the “wine cellar” where? An examination of the residence reveals a couple of viable options. But first we note that the remains were possibly placed under a locking mechanism requiring key operation for both opening and closing/locking. We shall see why shortly. A place satisfying the conditions supra identifies one of two closets in the basement. One is the closet in the storage room located at the end of the basement main hallway (passing the train room and following the hallway to its opposite end). And about halfway between those points is a closet on the right. These two closets should be examined for the presence of a locking mechanism as described. One or both of them will have it. Both are of the proper dimensions for the bodily position revealed at full rigor mortis. Of course, this part of the plan could backfire if a search warrant were obtained for the home as it would incontrovertibly implicate the Ramseys if found because only the Ramseys had physical access to the remains, hence the qualification that the lock must be of a certain type. Should circumstances change, the body must be removed from this location at once and an alternative location indicated as the location at which the remains were found.

We are now ready to consider one of the most curious, and confusing, aspects to this case. We noted previously that indications of premeditation were not only strong but arguably shown beyond all reasonable doubt. So, what about the ransom note? Could two have been written? Why? How? The answer begins, we suspect, with a “yes”. Recall that PR was acting “off-plan” as soon as the bat went flying through the air. This means that any ransom note written previously that showed any indication of facts that were now obviously inconsistent could cause even greater problems. Since this was unplanned and PR was in a panic state in the middle of the night, she opted for the next best thing. It is more likely than not that an original, better planned note was used as a guide to write a “new” note which corrected portions of the original to make the facts fit. We suspect the second note was merely a modified version of the original and that the paper impressions and supposed practice notes are related to the “new” note. Given what we’ve noted about the likely pathologies involved, it does not surprise us that PR may have over-planned the events and left little flexibility in her options. This could have forced her to rewrite the note because she offered too much information in the original (and the “new” as well, for that matter). This and the DNA evidence conclusion (next section) are the only likely conclusions we’ve reached based on a preponderance of other evidence; that is, the events as most likely constructed require that at least two notes were written. Some corroboration is then found directly, as we’ve discussed.

So, what exactly changed from “old” to “new”? This is best answered by asking what a bat has to do with the “new” ransom note, as that was the beginning of the “off-plan” activities. The answer presents itself at once. The problem was one of communication. The original plan almost certainly involved a plan for both JR and PR to stay away from each other and not talk. This is for two reasons. They want it to appear that they couldn’t have conspired because of their lack of communication on the morning of the 26^th, which police would witness. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, they wisely realized that the way they behave with each other might subconsciously reveal that they were hiding something significant. They didn’t want any slipups. It was “radio silence” from the time they went to bed until they landed in Georgia. But this meant that PR had to communicate to JR early in the morning that something had gone wrong and the urgency to remove the body was now very high. This is because PR invariably left more evidence behind when the bat started swinging than she originally anticipated. So, the note was rewritten to act as a communication tool to JR as well as a kidnapping letter. We suspect the original note was much shorter and written over a period of several days by both JR and PR. Why couldn’t they just talk after JR woke up? Because BR could also be awake. They chose the “radio silence” approach and followed it strictly. BR did in fact hear voices and JR and PR did seemingly search the house frantically for JBR. But in this case it was BR who became the mark. In other words, this was a stage performance for BR because JR and PR likely knew of BR’s tendency to listen in on what goes on in the house while pretending to be asleep or otherwise unaware of events around him. Rather than trying the rather uncertain tactic of coaching BR into a plethora of lies, it was far easier to just present a different reality to him altogether. He would testify to that which they wanted him to testify.

We are beginning to come full circle in the sense that many of the strange behaviors of the Ramseys are beginning to make perfect sense, even though we never relied on state of mind to resolve these questions. Let us explain. There is the apparent change in mood of JR after his “disappearance”, his seemingly obvious self-incrimination by bringing the remains upstairs rather than calling others to the remains, his seemingly obvious self-incrimination by making a call to “ready” the plane for departure to Georgia and his disappearance act itself. We conclude that these behaviors are not due to stress or anxiety but are a necessity enforced by the causal constraints supra and infra.

The basement laundry room – note the drop-down door style on the dryer, conspicuously displaying bed sheets if lying there.

As for the sexual aspect, what about the DNA indicating an attack by a Caucasian male not known to be in the home? What about the evidence of chronic sexual abuse? Now the story takes an even wilder turn.