>I prefer a paradigm that tries to explain the known ‘facts’
>as part of an intentional and, on the surface, at the moment
>of action, fully realized plan. There were no mistakes,
>errors of judgment or last minute alterations. The fact that
>the killer has been able to escape discovery and suspicion
>(as far as we can tell) for so long supports this paradigm.
>Not only has he escaped discovery and suspicion for an
>extended period of time many could not even be convinced of
>his existence. There was no intruder.

Are you saying without an intruder, mistakes, errors of judgment or last minute alterations that JonBenet's mother, father, or brother without motive, thought up all this puzzling evidence and did this elaborate murder? In the next line you say the killer has been able to escape suspicion? Wouldn't that nuke this paradigm since they have all been under major suspicion for years?