MovieChat Forums > The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey (2016) Discussion > Why write the note?

Why write the note?

posted 7 years ago by strangebedfellows
11 replies | jump to latest

The whole case is completely bizarre.
I think the father was an arrogant man who thought he was clever and was anything but. He knew the child was dead in the house so why on earth would he either instruct or collude with his wife to write a ridiculous ransom note.
If he was trying to protect someone known to them then why not dispose of the body and simply report her missing and not offer any explanations or theories at all. The police would have treated the case as a missing persons and it would have eventually become cold as so many do.
I think both parents had a longing for fame and notoriety and wanted media attention to focus on them - that's why they invited friends to the house knowing the child was dead in the same building - why they gave interviews to CNN before they spoke to the police etc.
Even if the killer is revealed - no prosecution could take place given age and circumstance - justice cannot be done.

[–] slidell333 7 years ago

Take away the ransom note and what do u really have? A home with the owner's dead daughter in it that was murdered....they thought they were being slick with that note but anyone can see right through it. Too long....says they'll kill their daughter if they go to the cops but what do they do? Immediately they call police because they know it's BS.

So somebody had the time to sit down and right a four page note?? Yeah...ok..

Sadly, no prosecution will ever take place now.

[–] strangebedfellows 7 years ago

I have just watched the conclusion of this and I thought it was well researched and reasoned - I think there is only one conclusion to be reached.
The note (or should I say novella!!) was the most bizarre aspect of the case - you have to wonder at the intellect that composed it - all those movie references?
As you say - no prosecution will take place now - and wouldn't have been at the time.
The worst aspect of this case for me was the Grand Jury being ignored on the decision of one man - how is that possible? Money talks - money walks - it's always the same.

[–] slidell333 7 years ago

And to think upon hearing the OJ Verdict a year prior, she was "outraged" and said "you can get away with MURDER in this country if you have money!"

Yes, to me the Grand Jury being ignored by the DA is pretty bad. And the next DA exonorating them based on that BS "Touch DNA" is just as bad....so people repeated what she said and still believe they're innocent and some pervert broke in, kidnapped her, killed her, sat there and wrote a novella IN their home... I just had one respond to another post on another board basically proclaiming their innocence.

I'm sorry but if someone thinks the parents had NOTHING to do with this whole affair IMHO they're incredibly naive....

[–] strangebedfellows 7 years ago

It is my feeling that they had nothing to do with the actual killing but everything to do with the cover up. The Grand Jury indicted them both on allowing a child to be placed in danger - negligent homicide - I think. I can't remember the exact wording so please forgive me if I am inaccurate.
They should have known that you cannot spoil a child for four/five years and then transfer your complete focus and attention to a new sibling - any parent of multiple children knows that. The signs were all there - hitting Jon Benet in the face (tellingly) with a golf club - spreading faeces on her presents and a great ball of it in her bed. The parents must have known the extent of the anger in that child but did not get him counselling or any form of psychiatric help. They knew his outbursts were physical and violent but did nothing to protect Jon Benet. I think to that extent they were guilty.

[–] slidell333 7 years ago

Agree 100%. I've never thought they were molesting her or abusing her in any form but I've always believed they did the cover-up. In the almost 100 year history of the FBI there has never been a kidnapping case where the victim was killed inside the victim's own residence. Never.

20 years ago as a teenager I thought the boy was responsible and Definately do today. Just makes sense. I think in a fit of rage he hit her with the flashlight (devoid of any fingerprints I believe) and perhaps didn't say anything....just went too his room and by the time they found her she was gone. And having already lost a child they were horrified that in one night they went from 2 kids to zero, as Burke would be taken away (when in all likelihood he was too young) and they would be held responsible and the public perception of them as "perfect family" would have went to crap. People like them care about appearance.

Calling the police and telling them what happened, well just made them look bad. Irresponsible parents that obviously had a troubled kid and did nothing about it. One of my friends told me the other day her firstborn daughter used to punch her younger son after when he was young and say "why did you have to have him." She wanted to be an only child. It's not uncommon.

And by his behavior then, and now, he's obviously very troubled. He can't even work at a regular workplace and works from home.

The Grand Jury heard it all, from her slip-up of "we didn't mean for this to happen" to much more. And to hear the DA didn't indict is ridiculous. And I'm not 100% sure, either, but they basically indicted them for child neglect that lead to a minor's death...they failed to act in any way that could have saved her (although I'm pretty sure she was dead by the time they found out).

[–] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] slidell333 7 years ago

No I stated a fact. So stating a fact listed by the FBI makes no sense? I was merely presenting what an FBI agent said and confirmed...that the Ramsey's story is so bogus it's almost funny...if a little girl didn't die.

I don't even call this case a kidnapping because it's not. The Ramseys have said for 20 years this was a kidnapping.

What I'm basically saying your blasting me for pointing out the absurdity of the action of them. I know what a kidnapping is.

[–] pedroburbankado 7 years ago

I disagree with your theory that they found her later, Patsy fixed the pineapple for the boy, the bowl wasn't finished ... the Parents had all night to hatch their plan! ... and as bad as it was, it worked!

[–] slidell333 7 years ago

It worked......with a LOT of help from the D.A! If we only heard everything the grand jury did. I can't think of a case when the DA did not have go through when the Grand Jury votes to indict. Man, the Ramsey's team of lawyers and PR people must've scared him pretty good. Maybe he was afraid of a Not Guilty verdict and his own career?? I dunno...odd.

Well, I might have said something about them finding her later but I was thinking more on the lines of an hour after she was hit with the object, and thus looked dead. Someone else posted this site below has some interesting stuff in it...although I'm not sure about their angle and basically labor John as the perpetrator and it might've been a sexually motivated crime or cover-up of abuse...but it def. lays out an all-night cover-up scenario and some interesting theories. I didn't know a neighbor saw strange lights in the kitchen (like a flashlight I thought) around midnight.

http://shadowgov.com/Ramsey/ramsey.html

[–] detataandrea 7 years ago

You are a good writer and I agree with everything you said... :)

[–] detataandrea 7 years ago

The note was just part of an elaborate coverup to protect Burke...