jameson's Webbsleuths Forum

Full Version: Start here
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4

Lou Smit said the note was written BEFORE the murder, that no one could have written it after, not even a vicious brutal person because they'd be on an adrenalin rush.He said a sadistic sociopath would have written it before in a calm and delibeerate manner.

One clue in the letter is that the killer said he'd call "tomorrow morning" - evidence it was written before midnight, not closer to the morning.

Lou was one who believed the note - whether the man intended to go for the money or not -- may well have been part of a planned kidnapping. He also says the reference to "two gentlemen" should not be easily dismissed and may be an indication that the killer was not acting alone.

(I personally think the note was written as a diversion for the killer as he waited int he house for the family to get home.)

Lou points to the language in the letter and asks people to imagine a parent writing those words after brutally murdering their own child.

On the familial references int he note, Lou admits the amount of the ransom COULD be related to the bonus John received, but cautioned it could have been unrelated and mean something entirely to the killer.

SBTC - not letters used for the Naval base where John had been, could have any meaning, we still don't know what it was. But Lou noted there was a protest demonstration around that time and one sign had those letters in a vertical line.
Third World

The movie references in the note (please do check other threads for more detail) - The Ramseys didn't have any of those movies in thir home and there was no record of them renting them either.

POLICE used hired "experts" like Vassar Professor Don Foster and Dale Yeager of Seraph to make their case against the parents as authors. One piece of 'telling evidence" they found was that if you go to a certain set of Psalms and looked at the first letters in each of four verses and reversed them, the letters would say SBTC. (Personally, I think students of the case need to read my Foster_page and then Dale Yeager's statements from his appearance on the radio to see for themselves how shameless those false witnesses were when working on this case.)
Handwriting was also part of this article but all that information is in the handwriting thread.

I will just note that I found it revealing and less than amusing that the police leaned on LINGUISTICS expert Don Foster for handwriting analysis. In my mind this case needs to be taught to all people who think the justice system, from cops to court, is honest. These hired guns who give biased expert opinions disregarding the TRUTH should be exposed and stopped from continuing. But I don't expect that will happen in my lifetime so I would just caution readers to check sources before blindly believing.

palm print

Lou points out that there is still an unidentified palm print on the door to the windowless room. The photograph of it was taken before 9 am - well before the body was found.

BORG says it was Melinda's - it was not and remains unsourced.
Butler door -

John Fernie found the door to the butler's pantry ajar and no one has admitted opening it. Lou felt it may have been a way in or out for the killer or an accomplice.
Baseball bats -

Two baseball bats were found on the property though John only remembers owning one and Burke at first said he had one, the one found in the back yard - - then faltered and said maybe the second one found (on the north side of the house) might also have been his. THAT one had a fiber on it that matched the basement carpet.

Who really owned that bat and how did it get to the north window ledge where the children did not play ball?
The wet bed -

A big part of the BORG problem is motive - - and most turn to a wet bed as the cause for the child's death.  But, as Lou points out, the bed was dry!

Lou points out the the unsourced rope left in JAR's room as something the killer may have carried in and left.

Also he notes the bed skirt is not even all around and may be evidence the killer hid under the bed at some point.

1. The very end of the paintbrush the killer used to make the garrote was never found. Was it taken as a trophy?

2 and 3. The cord and tape matched nothing in the house - and both were just parts of what the person would have bought - so where is the rest? Did the killer carrying in just that much? Does the rest still exist and could it be brought forward as evidence?

4. Missing notebook pages - Between the "practice note" and the actual ransom note, there were some pages that are simply gone. Were they torn out of the pad earlier or did the author dispose of them after the murder? If so, where could they be?

5. Evidence of interest in knots, ligatures. Lou feels the knot was something the killer practiced and people around him at that time may have seen this man playing with ropes, cords, knots.

6 The rarity of true staging. Lou Smit had been involved in HUNDREDS of homicides and could recall only TWO cases where there was staging - and that was minimal - - perhaps a gun was put in someone's hand.

OK - that's the story of Lou's Clues as reported by the Rocky Mountain News on May 5th, 2001.

I found it interesting to revisit the story and wish it was still available online.


(07-19-2017, 01:14 PM)jameson245 Wrote: [ -> ]SUSPICIOUS EVENTS

Lou listed three suspicious events or clues

1. a blue van was parked across the street from the Ramsey house on Christmas Eve and no one knows who that was or what they were doing there.  Was someone watching the family?

2. A Jaguar was seen near the Whites' house during their Christmas dinner party.

3. Megan Kostinak and her mother told police little JonBenet told them she was getting a "special visit from Santa" after Christmas.  

Could any of those things be important?  The BORG simply pointed out that Patsy didn't know anything about a secret visit from Santa.

The secret visit has always been a missing clue to me. If only we knew what it meant for sure.
I did not talk to anyone who believed Meghan and her mother lied about JonBenet's belief that Santa was coming for a special visit after Christmas. But was that really something JonBenet was told or was it a child's wish/dream. I just don't know.

I do think that is the big reason McReynolds was a suspect even the police found believable. He was one of few they really checked out in the first days.

Thing is, JonBenet had met McReynolds more than once and believed he was THE SANTA. I don't think another Santa could have promised her a visit and have her total faith in that. I personally think someone would have to pose as a messenger of Santa to get JonBenet to believe the story. I have, sadly, not found where that possibility was included in any questioning.
Pages: 1 2 3 4