Back to Ramsey Did It Theories

The JDI Theories

Virtually all JDI theories incorporate either prior sexual abuse or child pornography as being motivating factors for the killing. In some theories, the killing was accidental--an erotic asphyxiation game gone awry; Cyril Wecht is the most well-known proponent of this idea. In other theories the killing was deliberate, motivated by anger or fear that JBR would blow the whistle on what had been going on.

Incriminating Evidence Related to John Ramsey

• Why Do Fathers Kill Children? Here's a general summary of fathers who kill children and the reasons why.
• Fiber Evidence.

1. Dark fibers were reportedly found in JBR's underpants.
2. Internet poster koldkase summarizes conflicting claims about this evidence, which Ramsey lawyer Lin Wood has flatly denied.
3. While some argue that investigators deliberately falsely claimed to have found such fibers to see how John would react, the Colorado Rules of Professional Conduct state: Rule 4.1 Truthfulness in Statements to Others "In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly: a) make a false or misleading statement of fact or law to a third person; or(b) fail to disclose a material fact to a third person when disclosure is necessary to avoid assisting a criminal or fraudulent act by a client, unless disclosure is prohibited by Rule 1.6. COMMENT Misrepresentation A lawyer is required to be truthful when dealing with others on a client's behalf, but generally has no affirmative duty to inform an opposing party of relevant facts. A misrepresentation can occur if the lawyer incorporates or affirms a statement of another person that the lawyer knows is false. Misrepresentations can also occur by failure to act."

• John Found Body. Some find it suspicious that early in the morning, Fleet White had opened the door to the room that JBR eventually was found in, but could see nothing on the floor in the darkness (he did not switch on the light). John, however, instantly cried out upon opening the door even though he too hadn't yet switched on the light.
• Arndt's Intuition. Linda Arndt, the only BPD investigator on the scene when John Ramsey found JBR's body at 1:05 PM, had strong suspicions at that point that JR was the culprit. Her testimony makes clear that until he brought the body upstairs, she harbored no suspicions about John. But given the strange way in which he carried the body, Arndt concluded that he'd had an incestuous relationship with JBR and that he was responsible for her death. The Daily Camera news coverage of Linda Ardnt's appearances on Good Morning America are here.
• Why No Libel Suits Filed? There have been several books and tabloid accounts published that advance a JDI theory. Even though the Ramseys have been assiduous about filing libel suits to protect Burke's name, but Internet poster IvoryTower has observed that none of their suits has been directed against those who promote JDI theories.
• Dubious Lie Detector Test. Although JR passed a lie detector test, skeptics are dubious about this test.
• Handwriting Evidence. docG writes: There is some very real evidence pointing toward John as sole perpetrator of this horrendous crime, but this evidence is rarely considered due to widely circulated reports that he was eliminated as a possible writer of the note. Every other aspect of the case has been thoroughly examined and thoroughly questioned in the media and on the internet, but the decision to eliminate John has a very special status: it has always been accepted as gospel. We have only to visit the website of forensic document expert Fausto Brugnatelli to wonder at the strange decision to rule John out.
• docG believes that to understand why John must be regarded as the chief suspect in this case, it is necessary, first, to realize that there is no real intruder evidence and no reason for any intruder to have done all the things that were done on the night of the crime -- certainly no reason for an intruder to write an obviously phoney ransom note; secondly, there is no evidence connecting Patsy to the crime (see above). Burke could not have written the note, much less cracked open his sister's skull. Which leaves: John Ramsey. Evidence pointing to John includes:

1. The note itself, which was clearly part of a plan to stage a phoney kidnapping and dump the body while claiming to be delivering the ransom. If Patsy had not called 911 when she did, the plan could have succeeded. Patsy is the one who made that call, NOT John. Moreover, the note is directed at John and designates HIM to be the one to raise the ransom and deliver it to the kidnappers. If Patsy hadn't called 911, he could have used the note as an excuse to send her and Burke off to stay with friends while he took control of the situation, as demanded by "the kidnappers." Many people think John told Patsy to make that call, but this is contradicted by Patsy's own testimony in the first Tracey documentary, in which she says it was she who told John she was going to call the police. More about the note here.
2. Evidence Used in Crime Not Linked to John. The evidence that supposedly links Patsy with the crime is actually much more consistent with John as perp. Nothing from the house that was used in the crime is directly linked to John. Most is linked to Patsy. If Patsy were guilty, she'd have avoided using her own things. Same with John. Patsy's things were used. John's were not. This fact points to JOHN, not Patsy. (This does NOT mean, by the way, that John was trying to frame Patsy, there's no evidence of that. All it means is that there was a limited number of things available in the house, so if someone wanted to avoid using his own things, he'd go out of his way to use someone else's. Burke's knife was also used, so he didn't limit himself to Patsy, just took whatever was available that couldn't be directly linked to him.)
3. Fiber Evidence. Fibers matching John's shirt were found in JonBenet's crotch. This potentially highly incriminating evidence is cited in the transcripts of interviews the police conducted with both John and Patsy Ramsey in August, 2000. (See Section 0202, lines 10-24 of Patsy's interview and Section 0057, lines 21-25 and 0058, line 1 of John's interview.) While the presence of Patsy's fibers at the crime scene can be explained as innocent transference from mother to daughter prior to the crime, John's fibers are a different matter entirely, since it's difficult to explain how they could have gotten inside JonBenet's panties in some innocent manner.
4. In their highly publicized polygraph, Patsy was asked about the ransom note, but not John. This strongly suggests he must have failed that part of an earlier exam. The polygraphers were not independent, but hired by the Ramsey's lawyers. They would therefore be constrained by lawyer-client privilege from revealing such a result. Ultimately, we only have the Ramseys word for it that both of them passed all the polygraphs they were given.
5. Basement Window Staging. There is evidence of staging at the basement window. John went to the basement very early, supposedly to look for clues. When he found the window open, he closed it without telling anyone. Later he claimed he'd broken that window months earlier. But his story is totally unconvincing. He can't remember when this earlier incident happened, can't explain why he couldn't have gotten a key from a neighbor who had a copy, can't explain how he could have managed to place his hand and arm through a baseball sized hole in the glass to unlatch the window, and can't recall whether or not the window had been subsequently repaired. The housekeeper, Linda Hoffmann Pugh, is on record as stating she knew nothing about any broken window and has flatly contradicted Patsy's claim that both of them cleaned up the glass. All of the above is consistent with a plan gone wrong, an attempt to stage a kidnapping and dump the body before calling the police, a plan that was foiled when Patsy called them despite the warnings in the note. With his plan foiled, John might well have felt uneasy about the window, which he seems to have staged as an entry point for an intruder. Realizing the police, called in before he'd had a chance to complete his staging, might see through it and arrest him on the spot, John may well have decided to UNstage by closing the window, pocketing most of the glass, and claiming he'd broken it months earlier.

• docG's Theory. All of the above will naturally raise questions in the minds of those who have followed this case closely. Most if not all such questions are addressed by docG's theory.
• American Girl Doll Order? Internet poster Jahazafat claims that

1. When Ordered. Jahazafat claims "the duplicate or replacement doll order was processed into the Pleasant Company computer system on January 1st 1997 and shipped via UPS with a tracking number the following day. It would have been received in the mail the day prior, as the 1st was a mail holiday. First class mail generally runs 2-3 days. If received the 31st it was likely mailed the 28th or 29th."
2. Source of Fibers and Tape? Jahazafat is convinced one of these dolls may have been the source of a) dark blue fibers (from the doll's dress); b) tan fibers (from the doll's torso; c) duct tape used on JBR's mouth; d) synthetic hair/fiber; and c) other fibers found at the crime scene.
3. Motivation for Removing Dolls. In Jahazafat's view, this provided a motivation for Pam Paugh to remove "several American Girl dolls" when she retrieved funeral clothing for the Ramseys. According to Schiller: "The day before, one of Patsy Ramsey's sisters had gone into the house with police permission and taken out an oil painting, several American Girl dolls, a portfolio of JonBenet's pageant photographs, a pageant medal with a blue ribbon, graduation photos of the older children, and a Bible from John Ramsey's desk..."
4. Did Pam Paugh Assist in a Cover-up? According to Jahazafat, "Few people knew Pam Paugh removed anything when the duplicate doll was ordered. It was not general knowledge the Ramseys had composed a list for her of things they wanted removed from the house. Everything removed was packaged up and bagged, not visible for everyone to see. And every attempt was made to prevent anyone from knowing she was even at the house. To order the doll the person responsible had to have a catalog with the codes, prices, shipping costs, and the address were to send the order. They had to have it at their disposal almost the instant the dolls were removed. Did Pam Paugh remove a catalog with the dolls?"
5. Did DA Assist in a Cover-up? "Early on the tape doll connection pointed nowhere, just the dolls were likely present at the crime scene. It is the DA's failure to pursue this evidence that points to their own involvement in covering up the death of Jonbenet. They have never questioned Pam Paugh about removing items or attempted to investigate her actions at the crime scene."
6. Did John Ramsey Order a Replacement Doll? Jahazafat asserts: "John Ramsey claims he was out walking alone the afternoon of 12/28, a perfect alibi for ordering the duplicate doll."

Exculpatory Evidence Related to John Ramsey

• No Handwriting Match. JR's handwriting does not match.
• No DNA Match. JR's DNA does not match.
• Fiber Evidence. Lin Wood stated in November 2002: "That was invented. We know that there were black fibers found, they claim, but there were no black fibers found in the areas of Jon Benet's underwear, as claimed in that question. The Boulder Police Department did not even ask for the Ramseys to provide the department with the clothes they were wearing the night of Jon Benet's murder for over one year. They couldn't even remember what they had worn. They had to go back and look at photographs to try and reconstruct what they wore that night."
• Passed Lie Detector Test. JR passed a lie detector test; Ed Gelb's summary report to Lin Wood of tests conducted between May 6 and May 17, 2000 is here; a transcript of the press conference at which the lie detector test results were announced is here.
• No Pornography Found. Early reports that pornography was found in the house were false (Glick et al. 1998).
• John Found Body. Internet poster Braveheart has explained how the physiology of the eye would explain why Fleet White couldn't see the body even after driving over in the dark. In contrast, by the time John entered the room, there was more ambient daylight by which he could see the contrasting white blanket against the dark floor.