In general, people who smoke for twenty years will have very damaged lungs. Their genes are not of interest to researchers. The genes of the individual who is the 'outlier' are of interest; the fellow who smokes two packs a day for twenty years but has great lungs. The odd value. The 'different drummer'. The offbeat. The exceptional.

So if we are to solve a crime that has perplexed us for so many years, should we adopt a stance that focuses on the outliers rather than the 'measures of central tendancy'?

The extreme, the unusual, the strange...NOT the routine.

Routine thoughts when a girl is taken from her bed and later found dead can be summed up in one word: pervert. And lets face it folks, we don't expect it to be some female pervert!

So, put aside any preconceived notions about parental guilt or sex crimes and lets start anew.

Focus on the 'unusual' about this crime. NOT the usual.

What are your thoughts as to:

what crime was committed?
Why was the crime committed?
Who did it?

The unusual suspects. Who are they?

I started this thread elsewhere but it simply degenerated into the usual Ramsey bashing and tabloid-rumor mongering.

I'd like the thread here to remain away from parental guilt theories and to focus on simply identifying the unusual elements and using those to go well beyond the usual 'box'.

My list:
Occupied home
Overly lengthy and needlessly elaborated note
"kidnapping-note" with an absolutely clear lack of any attempt or intention to obtain a ransom
Excessively brutal death
Excessively prolonged death
Excessive 'making sure' with that final skull splitting blow.
Unusual lack of forensic clues
On edit, I would add:
Unusual 'taunting' such as the needless and ineffective duct tape, solely to induce one final last-minute hope in a rescuer.

I see the brutal death, the taunting existence of the note and the superfluous duct tape as indicating a really intense and focused anger.

This was a premeditated killing of a six year old girl; it was not a sex crime; it was not some kidnapping that went horribly awry. This was a crime that taunted the parents with 'hope' of a telephone call and 'hope' that she was still alive or else there would be no need for that silly duct tape, but all such falsely-raised hopes would be dashed. And that was made absolutely certain by the depth to which the cord was imbedded and the awesome power of the unnecessary blow that was struck.

Well, the obvious question then would be:

Was this the first crime of such a nature that he committed and was it the last? Did this one murder satiate him? If not, where are the other crimes? Why no elaborate notes in other crimes?

Do you think the "Mr. Ramsey" of the note came from having read the name on the mailbox as he went in or from some prior knowledge of the family? If it was just a randomly selected target, then it is unlikely this one crime would have satiated him. It also seems that more sexual activity would have taken place, even if a ransom note was later left to 'cover up' the true nature of the crime.

The homicide part of the 'sexual homicide' seems very violent. The sexual part seems rather tame.
Is this common with sexual homicides?

I'm not sure what,"think outside the box" means but I think I probably already do.

>My list:
>Occupied home

Person was probably already there. Walked around the house, looked at things, got the idea over a period of time. Perhaps originally it had a different direction. Picture I saw of the garrott made it a long thing almost like a long choker-type of dog leash. Unless the picture was misleading. Still seems like too much cord in use there. Perhaps was intended originally for a bigger target. If Mr. Ramsey was the real target pehaps it was originally for him.

>Overly lengthy and
>needlessly elaborated note "kidnapping-note" with an
>absolutely clear lack of any attempt
>or intention to obtain a ransom

I thought way back when that the note was a delay device, written overly long and windy in order to delay whoever came down the stairs looking for their daughter.

Now, think of this. What if one of the parents had come down the other staircase, without knowing that JBR was missing??? Well, if someone didn't know she was missing, and didn't notice the note on the spiral staircase, then perhaps that would be allright. Since the spiral staircase was close to JBR's room, I beleive that the note was left THERE so IF a parent found her missing from her room, they'd most likly search that top floor and then go down the closest to JBR's room stairway, which was the spiral staircase, and of course that's where the note was found. BEcause of this I think it likely that the perp walked all over the house, with the pad and wrote his game plane out as he went along. When he got to the stairway he needed a GOOD way to slow everyone down AND know that they WERE at that point, so he thought about it for awhile and wrote that note.
If the note had had any meaning, it would've been left on the kitchen counter or someplace like that, or on JBR's bed. However, it was left IN the path between JBR's room and where the killer was headed. And it was left there to delay. And I really beleive that this perp pulled the movie lines out of his head since I've known more than one person who could do exactly that. Not only could they do that, but they could ALSO quote it, who said it and in what movie. Like that fictional Steel character on TV; but they really did do that. Must be a trend or something.
So it's my belieaf that the letter can tell us more about the perp than some might think, even if it IS made up of movie lines. If there was a true crime refrenceing 1:18 in the morning like I heard somethign about, then that is probably where that came from. I believe the perp NEEDED to write a LONG letter to have a good delay, and in the quest for making it longer, anything and everything was thrown in, so the 118 for the 118000 may have very well have come from there. Since it's a college town, I think quoting a movie line and it's source is 'done' and therfore not something to make one stand out.

In the case of the note, it's content I beleive shows us the perp - what he/she liked to watch, etc. It's length was the main point however as the content was untrue (not taken for ransom) and once we decide THAT, then we can see that IF one is focused on making a letter long, one may insert things they wouldn't normally have put in there. (I know, I know, I write things long too but I'm NOT trying). If I had to write a semilie of such a letter it'd NEVER take that long. How much explaniation does one have to go through in order to tell someone that you have their.....? Usually, (or the way I hear it anyway) it's "wait for our call for further instructions" and it goes from there. I am NOT a student of true crime so I don't really know but I don't think I've ever heard of an instance of where a ransome note spelled out most of the instructions. I think that's usually done by phone. But as I said before, I really don't know.

So think of the note as a delay-device. It keeps the parents stopped there and if the perp DIDN'T hear someone decending the spiral staircase, surly they'd hear SOME reaction out of the parent, right? And as I understand it now, there was a phone in the basement (saw a picture of that anyway) and if so the perhaps had someone called out, the perp would've seen the light go on on the phone and been able to get out of there in a hurry.

As it was, the perp was able to do whatever he did without anyone upstairs knowing it and therefore was able to get away without needing to have used the note for a delay.

So why not pick it up on the way out??? On the other hand, why bother with it at all??? It served it's purpose, the perp has no reason to think that anyone will ever know that he was ever there, and therefore he can get away allright. That point was brought up by ANOTHER poster; that it was almost as if he beleived that there would be no way to connect HIM to the crime.

I DO wonder about THAT. WHY does this person think they have such a good alibi or whatever, OR, was this person supposed to have been in ANOTHER town at that time, (as in visiting relatives in another town) and came back to do JUST that deed. All I can do is offer ideas. I have never been to Boulder and I know no one there so there is nothing I can do but to offer ideas and thoughts.

>Excessively brutal death
>Excessively prolonged death
>Excessive 'making sure' with that final
>skull splitting blow.

I would call all of this 'transferrence' in that the perp transferred his hate of one person, onto another. I think many people use transferrence. Used to be when I'd get angery, I'd get cleaning. Some of my best and fastest cleaning was done when I was angery at someone. However, others do other things, and some may transfer their anger at someone they believe they cannot face, onto somene connected with them who they beleive they CAN attack. That's what I see at this point anyway.

>Unusual lack of
>forensic clues

That COULD indicate someone who had been in the house before, enough that if they left trace, than it wouldn't be noticed. Then the hair that was found could've very well been (as someone here suggested) a hair from a restroom someplace. That sounds way gross but I suppose someone couldve done it to lead everyone astray, altho I would imagin a person on a mission would NOT think about hiding anythihg but would boldy go in, do the job and go back out like one in a trance. The one who craftly plans it, holds a deeper grudge becausse that grudge has to have been there LONG enough to think about the crime enough to plan it and do it, and STILL get away.

By all that I've heard about the BPD, I think perhaps had the FBI been called first, that the crime would've been solved by now.

>On edit, I would
>add: Unusual 'taunting' such as the
>needless and ineffective duct tape, solely
>to induce one final last-minute hope
>in a rescuer.

The duct tape mightve been to muffle any sounds that could've been made, yes, but what a monster this perp must actually be. I know, you say he was a person on a mission, but what a mission to be on. And I don't think this had anything to do with Lockheed. JMO.

1. The light at the side of the house that was on every single day was now out.

2. Odd lights coming from house (possibly closed shutters creating odd lights)-- never happened before.

3. Loud grating sound. Never heard before.

4. Scream. Never heard before.

First the 'delay' is minimal; a scream a call to 911, then finish reading the note. Some basement intruder would have but a few moments of imposed 'delay' from the note's length and all this would be in the unlikely event of some nocturnal parental wandering from third floor to first floor.

What crime was committed?

The crime of kidnapping,(moved from Point A to B) murder, rape, and attempted extortion.

Why was the crime committed?

I see several possible scenarios as to "Why"

1. If indeed it was a kidnapping gone bad, in spite of the "low" dollar amount (some ransom requests have been made for even less) then "MONEY" might have been a motive.

2. Revenge against one of the parents.

3. A sexual crime disguised as "kidnapping" to cover the true motive of a sexual sadist who in this case prefers young girls vs boys. (JonBenet vs Burke)

Who did it?

The "118,000" thousand dollar question Don!
But, I think it was someone who knew the family although not very well. I also think there is more than one perp involved.

The unusual suspects. Who are they?

I think some of the most "unusual" suspects that the police investigated are good ole Santa Claus & family..."Coincidence'R Us"

>The crime of kidnapping,(moved from Point A
>to B) murder, rape, and attempted extortion.
Could probably add burglary and littering as well as malicious destruction of that paintbrush, but the real question is why did he(?) kill? Because that was his goal? Because he wanted to eliminate the witness to the rape? Because killing her was best way to hurt the parents? Or simply the best way to entertain himself?
I really think we can eliminate the kidnapping/extortion and the rape as simply being 'artistic license' type stuff that he found necessary to fill out the script abit. They were not the goals or part of the main plot at all.

>as to "Why"
>If indeed it was a kidnapping gone bad,
Rare indeed to have such a low amount requested much less by someone capable of articulating such a ransom note.

>Revenge against one of the parents.
Yeah, I think so, even if was also a thrill for him and even if it was also a thrill sexually for him, the motive that overrides everything else was revenge.

>sexual crime disguised as kidnapping to cover the true motive of
>a sexual sadist who in this case prefers young girls vs boys.
Possible, though I think most of those types don't differentiate much between young boys and young girls. And why not take her and dump the body? Also if he really enjoys inflicting pain and hearing cries, then why not take her to some place where such things could be prolonged and repeated for even more enjoyment? Are sexual sadists too broke to have a place to take her or a car to take her in? Too unable to disguise the crime by some song and dance about ransom dropoffs?

>someone who knew the family although not very well
>I think some of the most "unusual"
>suspects that the police investigated are
>good ole Santa Claus & family..."Coincidence'RUs"
Unusual personality and interests and behavior, but certainly a 'usual suspect' in that he was one who promptly came to the minds of the parents, the police and the public. Nothing 'unusual' in that aspect.

An 'unusual suspect' would be the computer guru hired by the family accountant: he might know of the bonus amount. Or a disgruntled employee from years before who has nursed a grudge for fifteen years or something.

"Coincidentally" he also knew Santa from the university. Wasn't he a journalism major & student of Santa McReynolds?

DonB, you're much more the legal eagle than I, what charges do you think will be filed if an arrest in made in this case?

By todays standards "rape" is "sexual assault". Her hymen was broken. Whether a broken end of a paintbrush or other object was used, a defenseless six year old girl was removed from her room, bound, raped & murdered.

When Jesse McReynolds was arrested for robbery, he was also charged with kidnapping although the victim was left under the same "roof."

Also, about the ransom demand...I've read about ransom demands that were $50k or less. Although, I tend to agree the note may have been "artistic license" to some degree, there's also the possibility some stupid thug might think it possible to ask for $118k rather than alert the FBI for a million or more.

I think it's entirely possible there were mixed motives & more than one perp. Tell us more about "outliers"...and your theory.

So I really think it was someone who watched the family, who may have wanted to know them, somone who wasn't part of their circle but watched.

The viciousness, the attention to planning before the crime - - this person brought inthe stun gun, cord and tape. This person fantasized about this - - and I think someone had to know he was disturbed.

Several suspects have a history of violence and were taking medication for their problems (acting out when not taking their meds.) I think the killer is there.

Most such mental cases have problems with obsessions and impulse control, have difficulty with jobs, etc.

I see the note writer as educated and functioning in society and I see far too much preparation and attention to detail for this to be a mental case. However, I do realize that it is a possibility.

I'll play off what you've written.

If not a mental case, do you mean that someone decided to commit a crime, decided what it would be, planned it with forty leads pointing away from himself and THEN did the deed, all in a cold-hearted totally un-passionated way??? In other words, to prove that his plan was a good one, rather than someone out for revenge??? But wouldn't there have had to have been SOME kind of envy of the Ramsey's to look at them at all???

There was however no feeling of 'envy'. The intruder is fairly well off himself and is also a businessman, though by no means such a successful one.

Why JBR and not her brother? Maybe Burke's room was closer to the wide staircase which led to John and Patsy's room and so had more chance of being heard? Who knows?

No, it was his second killing, but so far its his last.

Not Burke because that would have allowed the parents the luxury of suicide and also because females are always of greater value(even though they would not think that in the Middle East).

I've referred to the sexual activity as 'minimal' and wonder if the 'covering up' that you mention would apply here or not. The sexual nature of the crime was not 'covered up' it was not performed, except for the barely necessary offense to the parent's sensibilities.

And if you wanted to cover up a sexual homicide, a ransom demand for five million dollars would distract someone from focusing on the true nature of the crime, but a ransom demand for 118,000 only raises suspicions.

On edit:
The thrust of my argument is that the degree to which something is covered up indicates more than just thoroughness, it can indicate intent.

I believe Daves's 'sexual homicide' theory is that the crime is solely a sexually motivated homicide and that everything else about the crime is simply some sort of cover-up to disguise the true nature of the crime and to particularly disguise the crime's true nature from the perpetrator himself who for certain reasons does not wish to acknowledge his motivation but wishes to pretend to himself that he had other, less dishonorable, motives.

But my thoughts are that a murder which was concocted to look like a kidnapping that unravelled with fatal consequences would have a "reasonable and customary" ransom demand. An illogical ransom demand or one that stands out in any way as being unusual or absurd defeats the entire purpose of the 'cover up' because it is immediately rejected.

And you said his second killing... so what do you mean by this? Was his first also a child?

Myself:
Yes, I thought you meant 'why not kill Burke also. Killing Burke as well would have afforded the Ramseys the luxury of suicide, I think Burke is alive today solely because the intruder felt that he should intentionally deprive the Ramseys of that option.

Now as to your actuall question which apparently was 'why not Burke instead of JonBenet' the answer is simple. Males are expendable. They always have been, they always will be. Daughters are an investment in the future. Sons are more akin to a lottery ticket: you have hopes, but you would not view it as an investment.

Why the actions by the BPD and the Attorney's Office?

There is so much that is strange about this case Don and I don't know what you mean about thinking outside the box. Maybe you mean the unusual suspect in that people say it is usu the parents (?). I think it is some bloke interested in FBI and combat actions than a parent... I think maybe there were two and I can think of all kinds of scenarios and you know who my main suspect is but he is no longer with us. I know what your theories are Don. Does that mean we are thinking outside the normal bell curve because we have these suspects? Our suspicion is perfectly normal for us.