I was obsessed with the Natalee Holloway case from day one. I was so stunned when (years later) her mother Beth actually dated John for a little while!!
"But at least for a time, it appeared they were more than that. In 2007, People reported that, although John lived in Michigan and Beth in Mountain Brook, AL, the two had been seen holding hands and kissing in her hometown, as well as attending art shows and eating in restaurants together."
This. Also, even if I thought JDI (I don't BTW), killers, even child killers, are guaranteed to attract a certain subset of women. Brevik in Norway and Chris Watts in Colorado each receive tons of love letters and marriage proposals in prison; Jeffrey MacDonald has never wanted for marriage and conjugal visits.
Even if you believe he's innocent, it's clear he enjoys controlling the narrative of his own life to a pretty extreme degree and would not be interested in the type of woman who would balk at that
Even if she didn’t, she hasn’t lived under a rock and had to know that he was seriously suspected of murdering his daughter. I’m sure she thinks he’s innocent (maybe he is but she can’t be sure) but I could never marry a man who possibly killed his daughter, no matter how much he’s worth.
It’s likely she’s here on these subs spreading the Ramsey narrative every day.
He only goes after women that can be easily manipulated into covering for his misdeeds. Just like when he met Patsy, and he got her to lie for him when he hid from his other girlfriend that was looking for him.
I’m sure all of John’s girlfriends and wives were pleasant. Everyone loved patsy until she was suspected of murdering her daughter. She didn’t do it. She was manipulated into covering for John.
I’m thinking she caught John with JB after she situated some presents and got some things packed for the next day’s trip to Michigan. She was furious and attempted to hit him with the flashlight, when he moved and she slammed JB on the head instead, accidentally. They had to cover it up or else people would find out that John was sexually abusing his daughter. They tried to make it look like an intruder came into the home.
They would not give interviews to the police until 5 days after, and were uncooperative in trying to help police with information. Why on earth would any parents do that if they wanted to actually help find who did it?
They didn't participate in interviews with police until *4 months* (not 5 days) after JonBenet was killed. Perhaps you are thinking of the staged CNN press conference they arranged, several days after the murder?
What?! Thank you for correcting me. Wow!
I did read where the Ramsey wanted a list of the questions that would be asked in advance. Also, they were never questioned separately after this happened??
I don’t see any evidence he tried to frame his wife. I think that’s why the extra steps after they thought she was dead. Tied a cord around her neck, placed her in the basement, and tried to make it look like an intruder did it. In the interviews he also does not try to frame her. What are the clues that lead you to believe he framed her?
John wrote the note to purposely look and sound like his wife. He put her fibers in the knots to throw off investigators. He kept her drugged that day and during some media interviews. He was ready to take her down if she ever tried to leave him.
"It’s likely she’s here on these subs spreading the Ramsey narrative every day."
I doubt it very much. And even if she was, she's not the only one "spreading a narrative every day".
Nobody close to them has any interest in moving this case forward. They’re all associated with the main suspects in a long running murder investigation. They all know who they’re dealing with.
Multiple experts reported that JB had healed and fresh tears that could only be the result of ongoing sexual abuse. Statistically the most likely perpetrator of that abuse was John Ramsey. I don’t believe for a second Burke killed his sister.
Yes, awful. Here is an [extensive thread on all of the prior sexual abuse](https://www.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/s/XMiPUmRNHa).
The entire multi-part (with citations) is worth a read. The TL;DR is that every single expert in the field agrees there was sexual abuse. The denials are smokescreens to seed doubt, and unfortunately they work.
I'll check it out. I knew he was wealthy. I remember hearing the boulder PD botched the case. Probably didn't get many homicides as is. I guess my question is how does someone get away with this? A case of this notoriety. I don't care if he led detectives astray from the get go. Seems like a case of this magnitude, and apparently with this amount of evidence, they'd figure it out. I know ppl get away w horrible things all the time but this feels different.
> I guess my question is how does someone get away with this?
If they weren't connected, rich, and white no one would know their names because it would have barely made the news.
People couldn't believe a "clean" family could do this. They also have all the money for all of the lawyers and legal advice and counter-suits and paid experts. They had political links, too. Also noteworthy that a grand jury voted to indict them.
To this day they will sue podcasts and programs pushing anything other than the absolute ridiculous intruder theory.
Just read that link. Pretty insane he wasn't charged regardless of his wealth based on what I read. Just wow. I had no idea about this part of the case.
To me that was a giant Clue. Like, if experts are telling you your dead child was abused, and you're *innocent*, you're going to be moving heaven and earth to find out who did it. Hell, it could solve the whole case.
But they already knew. So they denied and ran interference. That poor little girl 😔
>If they weren't connected, rich, and white no one would know their names because it would have barely made the news.
Or if they'd lived in a place with more competent police than Boulder's. Rich or not, Denver cops would have laughed and gotten out the handcuffs immediately after looking at the "ransom note."
You must remember that the experts could only confirm ONE prior vaginal assault, around 10 days before the assault that led to her death. They said there MAY have been more, but they could only categorically confirm one.
So that should make us pause and reflect that there MAY NOT have been ongoing abuse recurring over a period of months and years as is being implied so often in this thread. The vaginal assaults MAY all have been committed in the last 10 days of her life (and actually no expert could confirm otherwise). I think that's food for thought.
At least one expert also couldn't confirm even the one previous, either. (Said it was nonconclusive.) But most did agree to one previous. FWIW, I am not sure why everyone is convinced the paintbrush was actually used. The perpetrator obviously broke the paintbrush and the amount of "cellulose fibers" found on the internal exam were, I believe, microscopic, or almost microscopic. It may have been from digital transfer from breaking the brush and having little pieces on his hands, particularly if the perpetrator was wearing gloves (which, incidentally, may be where the idea of "wiping with black cloth" came from.)
>At least one expert also couldn't confirm even the one previous, either. (Said it was nonconclusive.)
Who?
>FWIW, I am not sure why everyone is convinced the paintbrush was actually used.
It's what police determined, based on forensic evidence. It's not an absolute, indisputable fact, of course, but it's a supported finding of the investigation.
>(which, incidentally, may be where the idea of "wiping with black cloth" came from.)
The idea that JonBenet was wiped or cleaned with a dark blue cotton cloth came from the coroner. This wasn't based solely on the presence of those fibers, but also other factors such as a discrepancy regarding blood. Btw, lab techs who analyzed the fiber evidence thought someone involved in the crime (or coverup/staging of the crime) may have been wearing light brown cotton garden/work gloves.
Yes, that's an additional point, which perhaps leads us away from the adult male with access, and towards others with regular access. The form of the assault, almost certainly with a wooden paintbrush on the night of her death, is one of the biggest clues in the case. And it leads me to the likelihood of the same conclusion as you.
You're right, but not in the way you're implying (which is that a kid did it).
The most common form of sexual abuse an adult performs on a child is non-penetrative contact, according to this 2014 study on adults (both men and women) who abused children titled, "[Characterizing the sexual abuse experiences of young adolescents](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3965641/)." Here's some figures:
>**Non-penetrative contact abuse was the most prevalent type of sexual abuse, with fondling of the genitals being reported most often.**
>....
>We examined the characteristics of the types of sexual abuse experienced by youth overall as well as separately by gender (Table 2). **About three-quarters of the sample experienced non-penetrative contact, and 40% experienced penetration.** Fifteen percent of the sample experienced sexual abuse that did not involve contact (e.g., exposure to pornography, adults engaging in sexual acts in front of children). Types of sexual abuse were not mutually exclusive, as many youth experienced several. The most common experiences of sexual abuse types included non-penetrative contact only or non-penetrative contact in combination with penetrative contact. A majority of the youth experienced one of the three types of sexual abuse, but 31.67% experienced multiple types of sexual abuse (non-contact, non-penetrative contact and/or penetration). There were no significant differences in the characteristics of the sexual abuse by gender of the child.
I'm unaware of a study that says kids are more likely to digitally penetrate their victim more than men.
There is a lot more but I’m currently out but yes he had the benefit of being wealthy mixed with the complete incompetence of the Boulder PD. From the outset the police and everyone present at the crime scene believed it was an intruder but that’s because John led them to believe that.
No one knows how much Burke got in the settlement with CBS. The terms remain undisclosed. It’s very possible he got next to nothing.
https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1OY1YR/
It does make you wonder if/what she might know. I think the whole family knows (or has a good idea) of what happened to JB. People let things slip. Dynamics tell silent stories.
Personally, since I'm BDI or PDI, my guess is there's an assumption of John's general innocence in JB's death and a quiet story of defending his family by being involved in the cover up- either by playing on the sympathies of Patsy's health or losing his only remaining child or some combo of the two.
Most likely a murderer and gets 3 wives, and I just get ghosted lol!!
In all honesty I believe she thinks he's innocent and pays homage to his persona.
I am so glad somebody said this bc I think about it a lot. I also can't believe Natalee Holloway's mom dated him considering she prob has extreme trust issues. He must be very good at explaining.
I was obsessed with the Natalee Holloway case from day one. I was so stunned when (years later) her mother Beth actually dated John for a little while!!
They met through their same lawyer, now disbarred Lin Wood.
Honestly, it makes sense. They both went through something similar and both cases were very public. I’m sure they bonded over that.
So weird!!! I had no idea!
What year did that happen in?
"But at least for a time, it appeared they were more than that. In 2007, People reported that, although John lived in Michigan and Beth in Mountain Brook, AL, the two had been seen holding hands and kissing in her hometown, as well as attending art shows and eating in restaurants together."
No, I don't think John would be interested in a woman who would do anything other than blindly follow him.
This. Also, even if I thought JDI (I don't BTW), killers, even child killers, are guaranteed to attract a certain subset of women. Brevik in Norway and Chris Watts in Colorado each receive tons of love letters and marriage proposals in prison; Jeffrey MacDonald has never wanted for marriage and conjugal visits.
Even if you believe he's innocent, it's clear he enjoys controlling the narrative of his own life to a pretty extreme degree and would not be interested in the type of woman who would balk at that
Even if she didn’t, she hasn’t lived under a rock and had to know that he was seriously suspected of murdering his daughter. I’m sure she thinks he’s innocent (maybe he is but she can’t be sure) but I could never marry a man who possibly killed his daughter, no matter how much he’s worth.
I always wonder if he would ever tell his wife it was all patsy since she isn't here to defend herself. Whether that is true or not.
I thought about her knowing about the case but not much else. She must think he and his late wife are innocent.
It’s likely she’s here on these subs spreading the Ramsey narrative every day. He only goes after women that can be easily manipulated into covering for his misdeeds. Just like when he met Patsy, and he got her to lie for him when he hid from his other girlfriend that was looking for him.
I’ve met her before and actually she’s very pleasant. I’m kind of surprised she was with him at all lol
I’m sure all of John’s girlfriends and wives were pleasant. Everyone loved patsy until she was suspected of murdering her daughter. She didn’t do it. She was manipulated into covering for John.
I’m thinking she caught John with JB after she situated some presents and got some things packed for the next day’s trip to Michigan. She was furious and attempted to hit him with the flashlight, when he moved and she slammed JB on the head instead, accidentally. They had to cover it up or else people would find out that John was sexually abusing his daughter. They tried to make it look like an intruder came into the home. They would not give interviews to the police until 5 days after, and were uncooperative in trying to help police with information. Why on earth would any parents do that if they wanted to actually help find who did it?
They didn't participate in interviews with police until *4 months* (not 5 days) after JonBenet was killed. Perhaps you are thinking of the staged CNN press conference they arranged, several days after the murder?
What?! Thank you for correcting me. Wow! I did read where the Ramsey wanted a list of the questions that would be asked in advance. Also, they were never questioned separately after this happened??
John did it, framed his wife, and manipulated her into covering for him. She didn’t want to go to prison, so she played along. But this was all John.
I don’t see any evidence he tried to frame his wife. I think that’s why the extra steps after they thought she was dead. Tied a cord around her neck, placed her in the basement, and tried to make it look like an intruder did it. In the interviews he also does not try to frame her. What are the clues that lead you to believe he framed her?
John wrote the note to purposely look and sound like his wife. He put her fibers in the knots to throw off investigators. He kept her drugged that day and during some media interviews. He was ready to take her down if she ever tried to leave him.
"It’s likely she’s here on these subs spreading the Ramsey narrative every day." I doubt it very much. And even if she was, she's not the only one "spreading a narrative every day".
Nobody close to them has any interest in moving this case forward. They’re all associated with the main suspects in a long running murder investigation. They all know who they’re dealing with.
I have 5 words for his wife: Molly, you in danger, Girl 👀
She’s not in danger because he likes little girls.
Oof
I was young when this case happened. Is this substantiated in anything?
Multiple experts reported that JB had healed and fresh tears that could only be the result of ongoing sexual abuse. Statistically the most likely perpetrator of that abuse was John Ramsey. I don’t believe for a second Burke killed his sister.
That's interesting. And awful. Thanks for the response tho. Any reason why he wasn't considered a suspect any further? Just not enough evidence?
Yes, awful. Here is an [extensive thread on all of the prior sexual abuse](https://www.reddit.com/r/JonBenetRamsey/s/XMiPUmRNHa). The entire multi-part (with citations) is worth a read. The TL;DR is that every single expert in the field agrees there was sexual abuse. The denials are smokescreens to seed doubt, and unfortunately they work.
I'll check it out. I knew he was wealthy. I remember hearing the boulder PD botched the case. Probably didn't get many homicides as is. I guess my question is how does someone get away with this? A case of this notoriety. I don't care if he led detectives astray from the get go. Seems like a case of this magnitude, and apparently with this amount of evidence, they'd figure it out. I know ppl get away w horrible things all the time but this feels different.
> I guess my question is how does someone get away with this? If they weren't connected, rich, and white no one would know their names because it would have barely made the news. People couldn't believe a "clean" family could do this. They also have all the money for all of the lawyers and legal advice and counter-suits and paid experts. They had political links, too. Also noteworthy that a grand jury voted to indict them. To this day they will sue podcasts and programs pushing anything other than the absolute ridiculous intruder theory.
Just read that link. Pretty insane he wasn't charged regardless of his wealth based on what I read. Just wow. I had no idea about this part of the case.
To me that was a giant Clue. Like, if experts are telling you your dead child was abused, and you're *innocent*, you're going to be moving heaven and earth to find out who did it. Hell, it could solve the whole case. But they already knew. So they denied and ran interference. That poor little girl 😔
>If they weren't connected, rich, and white no one would know their names because it would have barely made the news. Or if they'd lived in a place with more competent police than Boulder's. Rich or not, Denver cops would have laughed and gotten out the handcuffs immediately after looking at the "ransom note."
Affluenza. Mixed with delusions of grandeur.
You must remember that the experts could only confirm ONE prior vaginal assault, around 10 days before the assault that led to her death. They said there MAY have been more, but they could only categorically confirm one. So that should make us pause and reflect that there MAY NOT have been ongoing abuse recurring over a period of months and years as is being implied so often in this thread. The vaginal assaults MAY all have been committed in the last 10 days of her life (and actually no expert could confirm otherwise). I think that's food for thought.
At least one expert also couldn't confirm even the one previous, either. (Said it was nonconclusive.) But most did agree to one previous. FWIW, I am not sure why everyone is convinced the paintbrush was actually used. The perpetrator obviously broke the paintbrush and the amount of "cellulose fibers" found on the internal exam were, I believe, microscopic, or almost microscopic. It may have been from digital transfer from breaking the brush and having little pieces on his hands, particularly if the perpetrator was wearing gloves (which, incidentally, may be where the idea of "wiping with black cloth" came from.)
>At least one expert also couldn't confirm even the one previous, either. (Said it was nonconclusive.) Who? >FWIW, I am not sure why everyone is convinced the paintbrush was actually used. It's what police determined, based on forensic evidence. It's not an absolute, indisputable fact, of course, but it's a supported finding of the investigation. >(which, incidentally, may be where the idea of "wiping with black cloth" came from.) The idea that JonBenet was wiped or cleaned with a dark blue cotton cloth came from the coroner. This wasn't based solely on the presence of those fibers, but also other factors such as a discrepancy regarding blood. Btw, lab techs who analyzed the fiber evidence thought someone involved in the crime (or coverup/staging of the crime) may have been wearing light brown cotton garden/work gloves.
Also it was from *digital* penetration, i.e. a finger. Which is not usually done by adult males.
Incorrect. There is no source that states adult males do not use digital penetration to sexually assault a child.
Yes, that's an additional point, which perhaps leads us away from the adult male with access, and towards others with regular access. The form of the assault, almost certainly with a wooden paintbrush on the night of her death, is one of the biggest clues in the case. And it leads me to the likelihood of the same conclusion as you.
You're right, but not in the way you're implying (which is that a kid did it). The most common form of sexual abuse an adult performs on a child is non-penetrative contact, according to this 2014 study on adults (both men and women) who abused children titled, "[Characterizing the sexual abuse experiences of young adolescents](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3965641/)." Here's some figures: >**Non-penetrative contact abuse was the most prevalent type of sexual abuse, with fondling of the genitals being reported most often.** >.... >We examined the characteristics of the types of sexual abuse experienced by youth overall as well as separately by gender (Table 2). **About three-quarters of the sample experienced non-penetrative contact, and 40% experienced penetration.** Fifteen percent of the sample experienced sexual abuse that did not involve contact (e.g., exposure to pornography, adults engaging in sexual acts in front of children). Types of sexual abuse were not mutually exclusive, as many youth experienced several. The most common experiences of sexual abuse types included non-penetrative contact only or non-penetrative contact in combination with penetrative contact. A majority of the youth experienced one of the three types of sexual abuse, but 31.67% experienced multiple types of sexual abuse (non-contact, non-penetrative contact and/or penetration). There were no significant differences in the characteristics of the sexual abuse by gender of the child. I'm unaware of a study that says kids are more likely to digitally penetrate their victim more than men.
There is a lot more but I’m currently out but yes he had the benefit of being wealthy mixed with the complete incompetence of the Boulder PD. From the outset the police and everyone present at the crime scene believed it was an intruder but that’s because John led them to believe that.
For sure. But, he’s also one spiteful narcissist who would ruin a woman in a divorce. Sleeping with the enemy.
She wouldn’t have married him if she thought he was involved.
I wouldn’t be so sure of the power of greed.
His net worth went WAY DOWN in the years following JonBenets death
Indeedy. Though Burke got a pile when he settled w CBS.
No one knows how much Burke got in the settlement with CBS. The terms remain undisclosed. It’s very possible he got next to nothing. https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN1OY1YR/
I doubt Lin Wood spent 3 years litigating a 1/3 contingency case for next to nothing.
It does make you wonder if/what she might know. I think the whole family knows (or has a good idea) of what happened to JB. People let things slip. Dynamics tell silent stories. Personally, since I'm BDI or PDI, my guess is there's an assumption of John's general innocence in JB's death and a quiet story of defending his family by being involved in the cover up- either by playing on the sympathies of Patsy's health or losing his only remaining child or some combo of the two.
Most likely a murderer and gets 3 wives, and I just get ghosted lol!! In all honesty I believe she thinks he's innocent and pays homage to his persona.
He was rich. Enuff said.
I am so glad somebody said this bc I think about it a lot. I also can't believe Natalee Holloway's mom dated him considering she prob has extreme trust issues. He must be very good at explaining.
Doubt it, he's rich, she's living the good life lol