A best-fit analysis of the facts and circumstances related to the death of JonBenet Patricia Ramsey
Download 5.45 Mb.
|
| did you find”?, as if to say, the kidnapping was, just as we suspected, a ruse they played on their own son as well. And that BR was in fact asking if they had found JBR, the answer off-tape being “no”, and the response picked up on tape being, “what did you find”? The tape was not used for best-fit, but like so many other non-included, inexplicable things, suddenly it all makes perfect sense. Was BR also a mark in this con to ensure that he couldn’t mess up and spill the beans? We must admit that it explains a lot of odd behavior that JR and PR surely knew would appear incriminating; from the hokey ransom note to JR’s odd behavior that morning, to BR’s apparent cognizance of, or content with, facts not overtly revealed to him on the morning of 26 December. Indeed, given our profile of PR, was the ransom note and other items relating to kidnapping an arrogant taunt of PR’s to the police and everyone else? JR was told of the impending search warrant minutes before he “found” the body. Are we misunderstanding something about general aviation if we suppose that JR’s “readying” request would be straightforward or even unnecessary if the plane were already readied for a flight to Michigan, a trip of about the same distance? Was it really readied for Michigan at 6:45 a.m., 15 minutes before the “supposed” takeoff for a trip the Ramseys stated they intended to make that morning? Or was the “trip” to Michigan a ruse intended as some kind of exculpatory evidence that they would not have planned a murder that evening, acting doubly as an excuse to involve the pilot by having him ready the plane and himself for a flight that morning? Is this why attorneys were so quickly hired for JR’s relatives, some of whom came to Minneapolis to “meet” them? Was there something about the preparation of the remains in the basement that, if found by police, would show material relevance of an airplane – and to a King Air air container, thus overwhelmingly implicating a guilty party? We do know that the King Air air container is a remarkable geometric match to JBR’s remains in rigor mortis. Is that where she was originally placed? Did JR “tidy up” the scene and bring the body up himself to preclude police discovery upon warrant execution? That also seems to explain JR’s decision to bring the body to the police, rather than allowing the police to find it. JR almost certainly knew that such an act would appear incriminating, even in his possibly diminished state of mind. But were supra possibilities true, it would be necessary. Did he involve FW just barely enough to make FW wary of JR’s behavior and destroy a friendship with a very loyal old friend? Where in Georgia was JR planning to dispose of the remains? Though we don’t know the answers, we concur that there is sufficient inconsistency to suspect direct material relevance of an airplane in this case. And, since most of the errors occurred on PR’s end (we never really got to see how JR would have done) we have little evidence of the final transportation plan, only that there was something terribly incriminating about the original body storage location and that removal of the remains was most likely part of the original plan. Thus, the most likely incriminating feature would be something speaking to:
1.) the intent to transport (clearly incriminating if a ransom note was written and a dead body is set for travel) 2.) the kind or type of transport intended (also incriminating if this mode of transport can be traced to the Ramseys – which is why we honed in on an airplane) 
An example of a King Air air container pod (with side door open) which weighs approximately 100 pounds. Were JBR’s remains placed in this container in a basement closet? The death wrap and other subtle features were also rather incriminating, but moving the body alone wouldn’t solve them. We must also take into account that if these latter actions are impromptu, yet more mistakes are likely – such as placing the death wrap in the “wine cellar” to suggest that that is where the body was actually placed. That part worked incredibly well, despite the glaring elephant in the living room personified in a body wrap full of inculpatory, evidentiary items that couldn’t be disposed of without removal from the house. BPD is, 13 years later, still clueless on that one. Good idea, except it raises questions about why a kidnapper would use such a sentimental death wrap. And why would they leave sensitive objects clearly on an evidence list bundled up in the blanket? It basically advertises the intent to remove the remains. Again, it is in these errors where we see the most plentiful evidence. It’s the unplanned stuff that “doesn’t add up”, as they say. That’s right. JR and PR were quite clever and quick on their feet. I’m impressed. A final word regarding the alienated friend, FW, is in order. If we follow the best-fit it means that FW was made aware of something highly suspicious in the morning hours of 26 December, 1996. This would likely create great concern if it involved one’s best friend. By virtue of being a best friend, FW was likely to have given JR the benefit of the doubt, assisting him in whatever he was doing even if JR looked suspicious or even guilty of a serious crime; assuming all the while that JR would explain what really happened later (and not leave FW hanging by the neck in the tree of conspiracy to commit murder). Perhaps someone was framing JR and JR was trying to protect himself. Who knows until FW has a chance to talk to JR “in the open”? Only later when and if JR did not explain himself and that presumed conversation didn’t happen would FW become concerned. In his legendary altercations with the Ramseys shortly after the murder (police were even called to break them up) one of FW’s biggest complaints seemed to be that JR was not cooperating with Boulder Police. Indeed, FW seemed to support the BPD more than anyone – suggesting he wanted the truth to be found without him having to tell it himself. He would have obviously had to have implicit trust in JR prior to the murder, which is why he likely quietly assisted JR that horrible morning despite what he may have seen. It is not a logical leap then to realize the outcome of this. FW would suddenly realize a few key things: JR had a remarkable ability to appear to be trustworthy, reliable and not one likely to commit serious crimes. FW would then realize that a darker side of JR was hidden with incredible skill and ability. He had seen it with his own eyes. JR and PR had officially accused FW and his wife Priscilla White (PW) of being suspects early in this case. Given what FW has realized supra, FW most likely also realized that accusing the Ramseys of what he believed they were in fact guilty of would only backfire and draw suspicion to FW. FW was trapped. His hands were now dirty. He knew too much about the crime. His knowledge of the crime would almost certainly cause the police to zero their attention on him. He had too much access to the scene. He had been had, betrayed. He was likely very angry. FW’s daughter Daphne was JBR’s best friend. FW may have had concerns about his own daughter with respect to any abuse she may have experienced by the Ramseys. Upon investigating this with Daphne, FW may have discovered that Daphne had in fact been abused, possibly by BR. At this point FW is more than angry, but a father deliriously trying to achieve justice. FW would likely then be the one person in this entire affair that truly did not underestimate the Ramseys, particularly with regard to their Narcissism and lack of empathy. Like an intimate partner he had witnessed literally unbelievable human behavior up close, in private and with blatant certainty. FW would have known clearly where the Ramseys stood there. The famous story of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde likely took on an odd and surreal realism for FW. It wasn’t fiction. Almost all of FW’s purportedly “odd” behavior that followed the murder is readily and sensibly explicable given this scenario. One, he does not want the Ramseys to know what he knows or what he has said in depositions. Two, he does not want it leaked or known that he suspects the Ramseys because it would almost certainly backfire. As long as he does not act to inculpate them the Ramseys will likely not pursue him further; a détente exists that FW does not want to destabilize. We find it likely, in consequence of the best-fit herein derived, that FW was frantically and wildly trying to obtain justice for his daughter and to protect his family from people he knew to be extremely clever, dangerous and capable of anything. Fear for one’s daughter or one’s desire to obtain justice for her (not to mention JBR), is precisely the kind of thing that would make a father go bananas. That is what his behavior indicates. Ignoring subpoenas, virtually stalking the federal courts and making outrageous demands of them, and zealously doing everything he can to conceal from public view what he knows and what his motives and strategies are with regard to the Ramseys, all stems logically from this best-fit. A federal judge in Atlanta actually enjoined him to stop what the court seemed to characterize as “harassment” of the court. This is astonishing in what it says of FW’s aggressiveness in fighting the Ramseys. It was more than a restraining order but was a direct order from the judge regarding FW’s relations with the court. But we’d do the same if we were in his shoes. PW, FW’s wife, hinted that what we’ve deduced above is in fact exactly what happened. She seemed to try to tell PR that she and FW knew the gig and there was no point in hiding it from them. She seemed prepared to prove that to them by sharing what she knew. This is according to PR in a deposition she did, a quote of which is given below (like the consummate Narcissist PR was, she reacted incredulously and innocently): [Patsy Ramsey] I just sort of remember Priscilla 16 standing in my mother's living room, family 17 room, you know, just kind of like this and 18 saying, "well, I know what's going on" and she 19 said, "if you would give me a few minutes of 20 your time, I could let you in on some things." 21 And I turned to her and I said, 22 "Priscilla, how can you know so much?" And I 23 said, "I am the mother of this child. And I 24 know nothing." In other words, PR is saying, “our lie is a total lie and we’re not backing down”. PR was going to deny what happened, even to herself. “If you don’t side with us and lie for us, regardless of how wrong our actions are, you’re our enemy because we are the center of the universe”, is the likely thought process of a Narcissist in a situation like this. Of course, the delusional aspect of this is that had any of their friends seen what FW likely saw in the basement none of them would likely have defended them. All of their defenders were what Sadie Ann calls “marks”. So, what value can we place on this? While we can’t speak of the state of mind of PW we can note the obvious: she and her husband were best friends of the Ramseys and knew them probably better than anyone, saw more of the crime scene (in the basement) than anyone other than the Ramseys or police, and the words PW spoke likely indicate her theory of what it all meant. We can’t know her investigation skills, but we know she had to have been knowledgeable of key facts pertaining to questions of Ramsey involvement. Assuming strong credibility could be attributed to PW, and given the specific ordering of events required versus what FW and JR stated, this likely corroborates our best-fit quite strongly. The Best Fit Possible with Current Evidence We have received numerous emails from people stating that they don’t really understand what we’re saying. We, therefore, decided to add a more overt summary of the evidence in this article. We will begin the final statement of events by ignoring all evidence that was thrown out and listing all facts that stand prima facie consequent to the observations made in the text. Why each is prima facie requires referencing the text. We have included all such evidentiary facts, regardless of implication. Prima facie: JR was in the basement of the home at or before the 911 call and his statements to the contrary were willful. Prima facie: At the time the police first arrived the remains of JBR were not in the “wine cellar”. Prima facie: JR, with probable assistance from FW, moved the evidence bundle (which included the remains) from one location in the basement to the “wine cellar” sometime on the morning of 27 December, 1996 while police were present. Prima facie: By 3, JR acted to conceal the intent and manner of transport for removing the evidence inculpatory to the killer. Prima facie: The killer placed all inculpatory evidence not disposable using household means in one place, disposing of all other evidence, save any items inculpatory to Bill McReynolds (garotte, rope and garland), by probable way of the household sewer system. Prima facie: By 1 - 5 => the killer acted willfully to prepare the evidence inculpatory to himself or herself for later removal from the home. Prima facie: The killer intended that all evidence inculpatory to the killer was removed and all evidence inculpatory to Bill McReynolds remained. Prima facie: By items 1 – 7 => the killer was an occupant of the home and not an intruder. Prima facie: The killer/s was/were unable to remove the remains from the home as intended. Prima facie: Someone using PR’s camera photographed a scene involving the notepad used to write the ransom note, positioned with sufficient uniqueness that it proved foreknowledge of the photographer of the existence of a ransom note at least one day prior to the murder. Prima facie: By 10, this murder was premeditated. The date was chosen with deliberation to match the date of an important event in Bill McReynold’s life. Prima facie: The victim was served pineapple possibly combined with milk within 2 hours of being murdered. Both statements by PR and JR to the contrary that JBR was asleep were willful. Prima facie: The victim expired at approximately 12:00 a.m., midnight, the morning of 27 December, 1996. Prima facie: The victim expired due to asphyxiation by related craniocerebral trauma. Prima facie: The victim was seated and bound to a chair or similar object at the time of her murder. Prima facie: The victim was asphyxiated from behind by heaving on a garotte, but not using the garotte as such. Prima facie: The victim was further attacked with a blow from a long (about 28”) cylindrical, hard, smooth object on the top of the skull. Prima facie: The attack thence continued with more vigorous asphyxiation, heaving and dragging of the child and chair backward. Prima facie: The killer did not exceed 68” height in their bludgeon swing. Prima facie: The killer was right-handed. Prima facie: The killer exhibited a “dead lift” physical strength limitation consistent with being an adult female or minor. Prima facie: The killer suffered from one or more Axis II personality disorders with a total lack of empathy as its expositor. Prima facie: The victim was deceived into a vulnerable position by use of familiar objects, actions and circumstances. Prima facie: The victim was killed in the “vestibule” area of the “boiler room” in a melee that resulted in a final position just in front of the open “wine cellar” door. Prima facie: The victim presented pulmonary vascular failure and expired just outside the “wine cellar” at approximately midnight, 26 or 27 December, 2006. Prima facie: The victim was a six year old female who was murdered in her home. Prima facie: The victim suffered from chronic sexual abuse, or some set of actions however defined, resulting in epithelial erosion of the vaginal area. Prima facie: This murder was bollixed and the victim suffered for not less than 15 minutes. Prima facie: This was a murder of the 1st degree with malice and forethought under substantially aggravated circumstances. It was not an accident. Prima facie: JR is most likely responsible for aiding and abetting this murder with a high degree of involvement therein. Prima facie: By items 1-8, 10, 11, 19, 21, the universe of possible suspects reduces to PR; though a small window of possibility could remain for BR if we can deduce more regarding his relationship to a faux kidnapping. Prima facie: Considering the universe of possible suspects, whether in the home, a guest or an intruder, and by all facts supra, PR is the person most likely to have physically murdered this child. BR cannot be entirely excluded. Directory: 2012 2012 -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? 2012 -> Annual InStructional unit plan 2012 -> University of Hawai‘i Maui College dental assisting program review october 21, 2013 2012 -> Committee on the rights of the child the rights of all children in the context of international migration 2012 -> Background on the Haitian Earthquake 2012 -> The Collected Wisdom of Science Olympiad Coaches 2012 -> Federal Communications Commission fcc 12-81 Before the Federal Communications Commission 2012 -> Aa and na members Dying from Tobacco 2012 -> [Baby Crying] 01: 04 [Ching Download 5.45 Mb. Share with your friends:
|