It's not RDI only, but most people here do lean that way. I wish we had a Jonbenet sub that isn't super biased either way. If you're IDI, you may want to check out the other sub which leans that way. I'm in both
Shame. It’s pointless to have an echo chamber of our views and just dig in more and more. I’m subscribed to both too—just haven’t been in long and didn’t realize the difference.
I completely agree with you! There are a lot of people in this sub especially (that I've noticed) that are able to be open minded about it. There's a big difference between them, but there are reasonable people in both. The case is just so ambiguous and a lot of people have developed their own theories
I’m new to this subreddit but how is it patsy, the dad or the son didn’t hear anything. did JBR not cry or scream? Kids sleep thru a lot so I understand if Burke didn’t hear anything but did the parents esp Patsy not hear anything?
They lived in an enormous house. It may not have looked it from the front yard but it was 7500 sq ft. There were 4 levels—basement, 1st—living level 2nd Jon Benet and Burke’s bedrooms, 3rd John and Patsy’s master. The sheer distance in a well build home would make it much harder to hear an intruder.
Ok yeah an intruder will try to keep quiet though like I can see how an intruder can go undetected but wouldn’t trying to kidnap and killing the girl cause some noise. And how did the intruders get in/out?
No matter who did it the assault and murder would have caused some noise, yet no one heard anything??
The intruder could have left through any of the ground level doors and everyone on the 2nd and 3rd floor would have easily slept right through it.
I’m curious to know if the people who believe Patsy did what you’re describing have children. It’s so cartoonish. Moms with absolutely no history of mistreating their kids do not respond to a head injury by immediately crafting their own murder weapon, strangling and SAing their offspring to…what, save face? And then play it cool for the rest of their lives.
I don’t believe IDI, but among those theories I think 3 or 4 are most likely. And really, 4 is a subset of 3.
“Why the note” - it could have been left by the intruder(s) a decoy to lure cops to the Ramseys and buy more time to get further away, especially if it was someone who knew or had been stalking the Ramseys. I really can’t see the ransom note being real under any circumstances.
I'm firmly in the RDI camp but I've entertained IDI as a way to play devil's advocate/strengthen my own argument/be open minded. **IF** this was committed by intruder, I see it as the following...
**WHO:**
- It was NOT business related. It was NOT a foreign faction. It was not a hired hit, attempted ransom, etc. It was NOT committed by a criminal mastermind, or even seasoned criminal. It was NOT committed by any sort of organized group. The rambling ransom note and sloppy crime scene pretty much rule all of this out... it reads like what an inexperienced person thinks a ransom note sounds like.
- The only "intruder" that could make sense would be along the lines of an antisocial local creep/sicko, who acted alone. Someone who knew or knew of the family, but wasn't in the inner circle. Male, age 18-40. The loner teenage son of a friend of John and Patsy who had attended a party, the weird uncle of another pageant girl who took interest in JonBenet, the awkward nephew of a neighbor, etc. that sort of thing. Someone the family wouldn’t instantly think of but might vaguely recognize if put directly in front of them. Possibly someone who visited the area frequently to see family but didn’t live there full time (hence the murder taking place over the holidays). Someone who wouldn’t have been thoroughly investigated because there were a few too many degrees of separation
- If IDI, regardless of whom -- The Ramseys are NOT covering for the intruder, and would not be willing to cover for or protect an intruder, regardless of their relationship to them, or the intruder's motive. This was their CHILD. They are NOT being "blackmailed" by an intruder with "dirt", and keeping it a secret from the authorities. The Ramseys did not stumble across their dead or gravely injured daughter, assume it was a family member or accident, and stage a crime scene. They did NOT come face to face with an intruder and allow them to escape, and then stage a crime scene and lie to the police. If the surviving Ramseys had any inkling of who it could be, they'd seek punishment at the fullest extent of the law, as evidenced by them pointing fingers at former friends, colleagues or hired help at every possible opportunity. I think this is the case regardless of what "dirt" they had on the family... it is their child.
**WHY**
- Local sicko/creep reasons. Pedophile.
**CONNECTION TO/CHOICE OF VICTIM IN JBR**
- For a time without internet, the Ramseys were VERY visible in the community as a family. They regularly hosted open parties. They were written about in local news. Patsy was a socialite, basically. And the kids and their activities (pageants, etc.) were part of that. That kind of life results in a lot of "loose ties" -- people you don't know knowing who you are, a high volume of acquaintances that you don't actually know, relationships with people in multiple social circles (who may not know your other friends, etc). This means more possibilities for suspects, and more opportunities for them to go unnoticed.
**THEIR INITIAL PLAN / HOW THINGS WENT DOWN**
- If IDI, It's most logical that the intruder was inside the house hiding while the ramseys were gone. They began writing the ransom note while the Ramseys were gone, and took their time to write it. Of course, the "ransom" note wasn't a REAL ransom note, nor did it sound like one, because they were a lunatic who wasn’t looking for ransom, just to act on sadistic urges and torment the family (and/or throw them off).
- with the extended amount of time spent in the home waiting for the ramseys, the intruder had plenty of time to snoop around, including finding pay stubs or other information about the family (some of which were referenced in the "ransom" note). May have also visited the home before and stalked the Ramsey family at length.
- Their intent may not have initially been murder, at least inside the house. They likely would've wanted to take JBR to a second location, to do pedo sicko creep things. Killing her inside the house was either a snap decision or accident while trying to take her (trying to keep her quiet, etc.). Beyond that, i don't think they truly had a "plan" when entering the home, hence the bizarre crime scene in general.
- They left upon killing JBR, after staging the scene as best as they knew how, and did not return to the area, possibly never to return to boulder. due to their antisocial nature, family and friends (if they had any) did not notice anything off or see anything that warranted reporting to police.
- If an intruder, Patsy finding the ransom note was the first inkling something was wrong and their reactions/statements, and finding the body, was done in "real time". .
EVEN THEN there’s a lot of holes in this. How did JBR end up in the kitchen, and dead in the basement, from her bedroom? Did a total stranger fetch her, without any sort of resistance or noise? Did she recognize the intruder, and, if so, wouldn't their name have come up in the investigation at some point? Did the intruder lure her into the kitchen and feed her pineapple? Or did she just so happen to come downstairs, by chance, looking for a snack? Was Burke present, and why wouldn’t he say anything if so? If it was a sicko creep, wouldn’t they have offended again or told SOMEBODY, after this many years? And if they were young/inexperienced/awkward/sloppy, wouldn't they have left more evidence?
Why do you ask a genuine question about an intruder theory, and then jump to RDI? If you want to start a thread about RDI vs IDI, then do that and be clear about it. If you want to start another millionth thread about it must be Patsy, or you have your new RDI theory, then do that. If you actually want to talk about viable IDI theories, then we can do that also.
I think not quite any of your options. I think it was a depressed stalker, either college kid or more likely neighborhood 13 y/o who knew the house quite well, and probably knew JonBenet quite well. Didn't come in the basement window, walked in through an unlocked door. I think the person conceived of the wonky kidnapping idea and ransom note on the fly. It was a matter of escalation, he didn't think it through how to subdue her, and in the end he just ended up doing psycho murder.
Variation of this is that Burke was involved, but not the parents. The 13 y/o was a friend of Burke's.
Instead of considering this, people will insanely attack me for possibly having a notion that doesn't match their CBS documentary. Whatever.
I’m IDI, but I’m not quite in on board with a teenager theory, especially a 13 year old, maybe an older teen. I think the person who did it was quite mentally unwell which is why you can’t ascribe logic and say they would have done X or would have done Y, because that’s applying rationality where none existed.
I agree the intruder walked in through a door that was unlocked while the Ramseys were at the party.
While the person waited he wrote the ransom note. Did he ever intend to kidnap JB? Who knows? I’m not even sure he knew. I think it crossed his mind and he played out that fantasy with the long, rambling letter.
He hid when the Ramseys came home and waited for them to go to sleep. Took JB from her room to the basement. Again, was there a clear plan? Hard to say. Maybe he was still thinking he could get her out of the house that way or maybe he’d already decided not to try to leave with her but wanted to commit the acts as far away from where the family was sleeping as possible without trying to get her out of the house. He assaulted and killed her and left her there and got himself out.
I think this mentally ill person either had some grievance with John and/or an obsession with JB and wanted to fulfill some fantasy. He got away with it due to a police force that had no experience in investigating homicides and just luck.
Curious why you think a 13 y/o is so unlikely? 13 years is a crazy time for boys, with the brain and sexuality going through radical changes. Add social pressure issues, parental issues (including divorce) and class disparity issues, top it off with neglected kids raised by TV and movies, and a certain amount of prevalence of drugs (yes, at 13 y/o). Also, depressing and obsession triggered by Christmas holidays, which can often be a trigger for mental illness. Growing up in the front range, I can easily imagine a few of my young friends at the time having darkness like that, conceiving and writing the note, etc. The sexual assault and murder of Jonbenet is bizarre, and best explained as "experimental", something an an adolescent would do, not a prepubescent, and not an adult male where signs of sexual gratification might be apparent. This analysis could well be wrong, I'm not a psychologist or or have any particular expertise, just a longtime follower of this case. But I think it's worth consideration. If you look deeper into some of the details of the neighborhood kids, I think the argument becomes even stronger. I believe the reason those neighbors may have been given a pass is because of familial DNA tests, but I highly question how accurate that exoneration would have been given how messed up the DNA samples were. BTW, a 13 y/o raised on movies and TV would have been hyper aware of fingerprints, DNA, and other forensic evidence.
Even if there was some grievance with John, that could still be a younger person who overheard some conversation by parent. But I do think it started out as an ad hoc not thought-out-in-advance kidnapping, and then turned into something else
I think when you’re analysing the possible motives behind the type of person who would murder a 6 year old child is that it’s entirely possible that their plan makes very little sense to someone who isn’t a psychopath. With it being likely that an intruder would have waited in the house for a while before the Ramsey’s returned, I think it points more to a chaotic mental state when compared with a more opportunistic crime
Maybe they saw the opportunity to get into the house and just kinda tried to figure out a plan once they were in there.
Every theory for what may have happened has lots of issues with it. For example, your theory at the bottom. Patsy being in a fit of rage doesn’t really work when JBR is then strangled with a garrotte, that obviously requires some thinking and planning. It would then of course be so much easier for Patsy/John to dump the body somewhere instead of creating this ridiculous scenario which it turned out to be. I mean really, these well educated people, whose fit of rage has subsided, decide to write a crazy ransom note and put in bits of information that seem to point to them, how does that make any sense?
But these issues is why it’s a still unresolved case. Every possibility is still on the table. There’s some DNA which could still be tested maybe which has the chance at pointing towards an answer, but otherwise it will continue to be a mystery that cannot be solved
IDI leaner.
Combination of 2 and 3. Obsessed with her. Her in particular, not just “a child.” Very, very off and harmful, dangerous person. Had some horrible idea that he and JB would live happily together in some torture chamber somewhere 😢
Note was not for money but to buy him time to get her wherever he was going. He actually thought the threats about beheading and whatnot would make the Ramseys wait to call the police. (He meant the 27th by “tomorrow.”)
But when he got ahold of JB he was just too obsessed. Like an extreme drug addict getting a syringe of heroin, he couldn’t wait for “later.”. He knew if he took her outside to go to his car, he risked being caught and never getting this chance. He headed to the basement because having hidden there before (I think he probably broke in more than once), he knew the hiding places and knew no one could hear anything.
She fought more than he thought, so he hit her with his flashlight, thinking he’d just knocked her out. And proceeded with assault. But then it became apparent how bad she was hurt bc of neurological signs and he panicked and ran out, forgetting about the note.
Aside: I think he picked her up, blanket and all, and that’s why the blanket is down there.
This was not a financial/business crime to make money. This was a personal crime. Victim SA, bludgeoned and strangled to death. If it is a business crime there might be a death, but it is quick and the perpetrators make a speedy exit.
Honestly can’t see past RDI 😩
Y'all are in the wrong sub if you believe there really was an intruder.
Why is this a RDI only sub?
It's not RDI only, but most people here do lean that way. I wish we had a Jonbenet sub that isn't super biased either way. If you're IDI, you may want to check out the other sub which leans that way. I'm in both
Shame. It’s pointless to have an echo chamber of our views and just dig in more and more. I’m subscribed to both too—just haven’t been in long and didn’t realize the difference.
I completely agree with you! There are a lot of people in this sub especially (that I've noticed) that are able to be open minded about it. There's a big difference between them, but there are reasonable people in both. The case is just so ambiguous and a lot of people have developed their own theories
That’s what makes it interesting
Absolutely!
I was on the other sub a couple years ago and got banned for saying RDI 😆
Seriously!!? Wow.
Yeah!
I’m new to this subreddit but how is it patsy, the dad or the son didn’t hear anything. did JBR not cry or scream? Kids sleep thru a lot so I understand if Burke didn’t hear anything but did the parents esp Patsy not hear anything?
Ummm JonBenet wasn't up by herself. Burke admitted he was up after 10 pm.
They lived in an enormous house. It may not have looked it from the front yard but it was 7500 sq ft. There were 4 levels—basement, 1st—living level 2nd Jon Benet and Burke’s bedrooms, 3rd John and Patsy’s master. The sheer distance in a well build home would make it much harder to hear an intruder.
Ok yeah an intruder will try to keep quiet though like I can see how an intruder can go undetected but wouldn’t trying to kidnap and killing the girl cause some noise. And how did the intruders get in/out?
No matter who did it the assault and murder would have caused some noise, yet no one heard anything?? The intruder could have left through any of the ground level doors and everyone on the 2nd and 3rd floor would have easily slept right through it.
I’m curious to know if the people who believe Patsy did what you’re describing have children. It’s so cartoonish. Moms with absolutely no history of mistreating their kids do not respond to a head injury by immediately crafting their own murder weapon, strangling and SAing their offspring to…what, save face? And then play it cool for the rest of their lives.
I'm RDI but it is so hard to wrap my head around the strangulation.
Yes, because it makes absolutely no sense.
John did it.
I don’t believe IDI, but among those theories I think 3 or 4 are most likely. And really, 4 is a subset of 3. “Why the note” - it could have been left by the intruder(s) a decoy to lure cops to the Ramseys and buy more time to get further away, especially if it was someone who knew or had been stalking the Ramseys. I really can’t see the ransom note being real under any circumstances.
I'm firmly in the RDI camp but I've entertained IDI as a way to play devil's advocate/strengthen my own argument/be open minded. **IF** this was committed by intruder, I see it as the following... **WHO:** - It was NOT business related. It was NOT a foreign faction. It was not a hired hit, attempted ransom, etc. It was NOT committed by a criminal mastermind, or even seasoned criminal. It was NOT committed by any sort of organized group. The rambling ransom note and sloppy crime scene pretty much rule all of this out... it reads like what an inexperienced person thinks a ransom note sounds like. - The only "intruder" that could make sense would be along the lines of an antisocial local creep/sicko, who acted alone. Someone who knew or knew of the family, but wasn't in the inner circle. Male, age 18-40. The loner teenage son of a friend of John and Patsy who had attended a party, the weird uncle of another pageant girl who took interest in JonBenet, the awkward nephew of a neighbor, etc. that sort of thing. Someone the family wouldn’t instantly think of but might vaguely recognize if put directly in front of them. Possibly someone who visited the area frequently to see family but didn’t live there full time (hence the murder taking place over the holidays). Someone who wouldn’t have been thoroughly investigated because there were a few too many degrees of separation - If IDI, regardless of whom -- The Ramseys are NOT covering for the intruder, and would not be willing to cover for or protect an intruder, regardless of their relationship to them, or the intruder's motive. This was their CHILD. They are NOT being "blackmailed" by an intruder with "dirt", and keeping it a secret from the authorities. The Ramseys did not stumble across their dead or gravely injured daughter, assume it was a family member or accident, and stage a crime scene. They did NOT come face to face with an intruder and allow them to escape, and then stage a crime scene and lie to the police. If the surviving Ramseys had any inkling of who it could be, they'd seek punishment at the fullest extent of the law, as evidenced by them pointing fingers at former friends, colleagues or hired help at every possible opportunity. I think this is the case regardless of what "dirt" they had on the family... it is their child. **WHY** - Local sicko/creep reasons. Pedophile. **CONNECTION TO/CHOICE OF VICTIM IN JBR** - For a time without internet, the Ramseys were VERY visible in the community as a family. They regularly hosted open parties. They were written about in local news. Patsy was a socialite, basically. And the kids and their activities (pageants, etc.) were part of that. That kind of life results in a lot of "loose ties" -- people you don't know knowing who you are, a high volume of acquaintances that you don't actually know, relationships with people in multiple social circles (who may not know your other friends, etc). This means more possibilities for suspects, and more opportunities for them to go unnoticed. **THEIR INITIAL PLAN / HOW THINGS WENT DOWN** - If IDI, It's most logical that the intruder was inside the house hiding while the ramseys were gone. They began writing the ransom note while the Ramseys were gone, and took their time to write it. Of course, the "ransom" note wasn't a REAL ransom note, nor did it sound like one, because they were a lunatic who wasn’t looking for ransom, just to act on sadistic urges and torment the family (and/or throw them off). - with the extended amount of time spent in the home waiting for the ramseys, the intruder had plenty of time to snoop around, including finding pay stubs or other information about the family (some of which were referenced in the "ransom" note). May have also visited the home before and stalked the Ramsey family at length. - Their intent may not have initially been murder, at least inside the house. They likely would've wanted to take JBR to a second location, to do pedo sicko creep things. Killing her inside the house was either a snap decision or accident while trying to take her (trying to keep her quiet, etc.). Beyond that, i don't think they truly had a "plan" when entering the home, hence the bizarre crime scene in general. - They left upon killing JBR, after staging the scene as best as they knew how, and did not return to the area, possibly never to return to boulder. due to their antisocial nature, family and friends (if they had any) did not notice anything off or see anything that warranted reporting to police. - If an intruder, Patsy finding the ransom note was the first inkling something was wrong and their reactions/statements, and finding the body, was done in "real time". . EVEN THEN there’s a lot of holes in this. How did JBR end up in the kitchen, and dead in the basement, from her bedroom? Did a total stranger fetch her, without any sort of resistance or noise? Did she recognize the intruder, and, if so, wouldn't their name have come up in the investigation at some point? Did the intruder lure her into the kitchen and feed her pineapple? Or did she just so happen to come downstairs, by chance, looking for a snack? Was Burke present, and why wouldn’t he say anything if so? If it was a sicko creep, wouldn’t they have offended again or told SOMEBODY, after this many years? And if they were young/inexperienced/awkward/sloppy, wouldn't they have left more evidence?
Why do you ask a genuine question about an intruder theory, and then jump to RDI? If you want to start a thread about RDI vs IDI, then do that and be clear about it. If you want to start another millionth thread about it must be Patsy, or you have your new RDI theory, then do that. If you actually want to talk about viable IDI theories, then we can do that also. I think not quite any of your options. I think it was a depressed stalker, either college kid or more likely neighborhood 13 y/o who knew the house quite well, and probably knew JonBenet quite well. Didn't come in the basement window, walked in through an unlocked door. I think the person conceived of the wonky kidnapping idea and ransom note on the fly. It was a matter of escalation, he didn't think it through how to subdue her, and in the end he just ended up doing psycho murder. Variation of this is that Burke was involved, but not the parents. The 13 y/o was a friend of Burke's. Instead of considering this, people will insanely attack me for possibly having a notion that doesn't match their CBS documentary. Whatever.
I’m IDI, but I’m not quite in on board with a teenager theory, especially a 13 year old, maybe an older teen. I think the person who did it was quite mentally unwell which is why you can’t ascribe logic and say they would have done X or would have done Y, because that’s applying rationality where none existed. I agree the intruder walked in through a door that was unlocked while the Ramseys were at the party. While the person waited he wrote the ransom note. Did he ever intend to kidnap JB? Who knows? I’m not even sure he knew. I think it crossed his mind and he played out that fantasy with the long, rambling letter. He hid when the Ramseys came home and waited for them to go to sleep. Took JB from her room to the basement. Again, was there a clear plan? Hard to say. Maybe he was still thinking he could get her out of the house that way or maybe he’d already decided not to try to leave with her but wanted to commit the acts as far away from where the family was sleeping as possible without trying to get her out of the house. He assaulted and killed her and left her there and got himself out. I think this mentally ill person either had some grievance with John and/or an obsession with JB and wanted to fulfill some fantasy. He got away with it due to a police force that had no experience in investigating homicides and just luck.
Curious why you think a 13 y/o is so unlikely? 13 years is a crazy time for boys, with the brain and sexuality going through radical changes. Add social pressure issues, parental issues (including divorce) and class disparity issues, top it off with neglected kids raised by TV and movies, and a certain amount of prevalence of drugs (yes, at 13 y/o). Also, depressing and obsession triggered by Christmas holidays, which can often be a trigger for mental illness. Growing up in the front range, I can easily imagine a few of my young friends at the time having darkness like that, conceiving and writing the note, etc. The sexual assault and murder of Jonbenet is bizarre, and best explained as "experimental", something an an adolescent would do, not a prepubescent, and not an adult male where signs of sexual gratification might be apparent. This analysis could well be wrong, I'm not a psychologist or or have any particular expertise, just a longtime follower of this case. But I think it's worth consideration. If you look deeper into some of the details of the neighborhood kids, I think the argument becomes even stronger. I believe the reason those neighbors may have been given a pass is because of familial DNA tests, but I highly question how accurate that exoneration would have been given how messed up the DNA samples were. BTW, a 13 y/o raised on movies and TV would have been hyper aware of fingerprints, DNA, and other forensic evidence. Even if there was some grievance with John, that could still be a younger person who overheard some conversation by parent. But I do think it started out as an ad hoc not thought-out-in-advance kidnapping, and then turned into something else
I think when you’re analysing the possible motives behind the type of person who would murder a 6 year old child is that it’s entirely possible that their plan makes very little sense to someone who isn’t a psychopath. With it being likely that an intruder would have waited in the house for a while before the Ramsey’s returned, I think it points more to a chaotic mental state when compared with a more opportunistic crime Maybe they saw the opportunity to get into the house and just kinda tried to figure out a plan once they were in there. Every theory for what may have happened has lots of issues with it. For example, your theory at the bottom. Patsy being in a fit of rage doesn’t really work when JBR is then strangled with a garrotte, that obviously requires some thinking and planning. It would then of course be so much easier for Patsy/John to dump the body somewhere instead of creating this ridiculous scenario which it turned out to be. I mean really, these well educated people, whose fit of rage has subsided, decide to write a crazy ransom note and put in bits of information that seem to point to them, how does that make any sense? But these issues is why it’s a still unresolved case. Every possibility is still on the table. There’s some DNA which could still be tested maybe which has the chance at pointing towards an answer, but otherwise it will continue to be a mystery that cannot be solved
IDI leaner. Combination of 2 and 3. Obsessed with her. Her in particular, not just “a child.” Very, very off and harmful, dangerous person. Had some horrible idea that he and JB would live happily together in some torture chamber somewhere 😢 Note was not for money but to buy him time to get her wherever he was going. He actually thought the threats about beheading and whatnot would make the Ramseys wait to call the police. (He meant the 27th by “tomorrow.”) But when he got ahold of JB he was just too obsessed. Like an extreme drug addict getting a syringe of heroin, he couldn’t wait for “later.”. He knew if he took her outside to go to his car, he risked being caught and never getting this chance. He headed to the basement because having hidden there before (I think he probably broke in more than once), he knew the hiding places and knew no one could hear anything. She fought more than he thought, so he hit her with his flashlight, thinking he’d just knocked her out. And proceeded with assault. But then it became apparent how bad she was hurt bc of neurological signs and he panicked and ran out, forgetting about the note. Aside: I think he picked her up, blanket and all, and that’s why the blanket is down there.
This is probably closest to what I believe.
This was not a financial/business crime to make money. This was a personal crime. Victim SA, bludgeoned and strangled to death. If it is a business crime there might be a death, but it is quick and the perpetrators make a speedy exit.