Katarina's Redemption

Here are some posts i made on Reddit:

X

X

x

Thank god for the Redditor "The Cabal". And btw, the NETWORKS at some point *did* greenlight Redarina. Remember, Jon had said that he wasn't sure if the Networks would allow him to do what he planned. Regardless, the show proceeded with Redarina. The hints throughout only work with Red being the Mom. Not a third man. (We don't entertain the Lizzington theory in this house). The networks allowed them to reveal Redarina; therefore, the idea that the Networks did not allow a reveal like this Redditor is saying is FALSE. The networks may not have wanted a direct reveal (based on what the insider said because of potential blowback... I mean, the world is a crazy place with crazy people who can get violent... people opposed can raise hell if they oppose the story. Without saying who would oppose, but it has to do with po-li-tics. NBC/Sony and whoever else could be put in a huge negative spotlight, and would be all over the media if certain factions had their way. So yeah, it was probably better they didn't say it out loud. But make no mistake, a reveal WAS MADE. The Networks were aware. According to an insider who works on the show (I have the screenshot somewhere) said something along the lines of: That Nachalo and Konets were too revealing, so they needed to scale back because if they had shown what they had planned, the Networks were afraid of the backlash. Note that Redarina was revealed anyway so the network indeed knew and green-lit Redarina. Just not out loud. The insider also said, IIRC, that Jon said it was the plan all along. Can't remember if the insider was in his presence when Jon was on set... But I think they were IIRc.

This world is something else. I just want to scream at this bullshit. Thank god for Dan Abrams.

From John Ramsey's April, 1997 police interview: "Tom Truillo:  OK. You run down stairs and about where was Patsy at when she was running up the stairs? John Ramsey:  Well, I don’t remember exactly, but I think she was kind of either coming up the spiral staircase or was up fully. I just kind of remember, kind of meeting her. TT:  Actually why don’t I just talk to you and I’ll go back and try to get some of the things we missed. Kind of talk to you just like you did on the 25th. You guys meet on the landing, what happened after that? JR:  Well I’m, it’s a lot of screaming going on around that, but we saw the note and read the first part. Ah, I think I might have run upstairs to look in JonBenet’s room. At one point I laid it on the floor and spread it out so I could read it real fast without having to sit and read it. At some point we checked Burke, I think I checked Burke. Patsy asked what should we do, and I said call the police, and she called 911. TT:  Patsy called 911 (inaudible). JR:  Yeah. It was, I remember she was on the phone, I was, I think that was when I was looking at the note again, which was on the floor and I was in the back hallway."

" it’s a lot of screaming going on around that, but we saw the note and read the first part."

John and Patsy's accounts of what happened that morning are completely believable and plausible. Not sure why people keep inventing stuff that isn't there in an attempt to poke holes in John and Patsy's recollection of that morning. What they did immediately upon finding the ransom note is what most parents would do. (The screaming, Patsy screaming John's name, the way John described her scream, flying into JonBenet's room... then checking on Burke (John), not fully grasping the ransom note... because it isn't every day someone enters a home and kidnaps a child, leaving a ransom note. I could envision Patsy's confusion. (The intruder knew she came down those stairs)

Upon finding out your child is not in their room, one is not gonna go back to the note to calmly read it... at that point, all one could concentrate on is that someone took your child. So Patsy saying "what should we do?!!!" rings absolutely true.

Patsy's 911 call gives me chills. There is terror in her voice. And RDI folks have managed to dissect the whole thing, inventing things that are NOT THERE.

audio from Paula Woodwards site.

https://www.paulawoodward.net/911-call

what people invent:

The threats are on the 2nd page of the Ransom Note for a reason.

Why would someone be so verbose in a Ransom Note... Well, maybe it is to put the kidnapping info on the 1st page, and all of the threats on the 2nd page to give them plausible deniability so they could call the police that morning, because they can say they didn't read past the first page of the note (which is basically what they Patsy said). No parent would call the police after reading the second page with all of the direct threats and being watched and what would happen if they were even "caught speaking to a stray dog". The first page however, gives them all they need to know with what happened and the ransom amount. It does say if you want your daughter to see 1997, but it is nothing compared to the threats on the 2nd page. Any real intruder/kidnapper would just do one page and lead the note with not contacting authorities. Patsy said she just glanced at the top page, but then Patsy also said "Victory! SBTC" on her 911 call so police knew she saw more than the front page. The Ransom Note seems purposefully written in a way that allowed the Ramseys to call police. The note still seems like the key to their involvement.

Listen to Michael Vail. I think Gary Oliva is a strong possibility as the murderer. Michael Vail (MikeYouLikeAtNight) on Reddit. Oliva lived a few houses down the back alley. JonBenet would ride her bike up and down this alley.

"Look Google—I'm Michael Vail. I have inside information from the killer Gary Oliva as I was a high school classmate of his. Gary Oliva told me he killed JonBenét many times. He was drinking vodka. He wore gloves and Hi-Tech boots he got from the police station's winter giveaway for homeless people. He crept into the house with a brown bag with supplies, including a brush from the mural he was painting at the church Food bank/green cottage (on the same alley as the Ramsey House), for which he had stolen a key so he could sleep in there. He wrote the ransom note as a ruse to get time to escape. As he waited for the Ramseys to return, he continued to gulp from a bottle of vodka he had brought. He planned to carry her out in the suitcase, take her to the cottage and rape and eat her. but she was too big to fit inside the suitcase. And the suitcase was too big to fit out the basement window. He took a paintbrush he had brought from painting a mural at the cottage and broke it and used it to assault her sexually and attempted to lift her up and out of the window, but she started choking as the cord was wrapped around her neck. He pulled her up four times. She slipped and fell, cracking her skull. He took her to the basement wine cellar and cried over her body and told me he was worried his DNA was on her. Then he ran away, leaving her body and the ransom note and the other end of the paintbrush in Patsy's art box—not to frame her but because he had to get rid of it and thought it would simply blend in. He had no idea how famous this case would become. Now he makes alters and shrines to her to "keep her spirit alive" to ease his remorse and guilt. He lives in fear that DNA will finally catch up to him. Three Boulder cold case detectives recently told me my evidence (including wearing a wire for them) is a solid 10 out of ten. They are concerned about getting 12 jurors to agree and are waiting as DNA technology evolves rapidly. Meanwhile, Yvonne "Missy" Woods just pled guilty to tampering with DNA at the same time as the JonBenet case and is facing many years in jail. Thank you for letting me tell you the facts of this case."

Sigh. My response for the millionth time. RDI (Ramseys Did It). I do NOT subscribe to that theory.

These parents are not the killers. And bless Patsy; may she RIP. She died while being accused of murdering her beloved Jonbenet by the entire world.

Reply #1 In reference to the very line of your comment. Because the intruder theory actually makes more sense. RDI would like to make people believe that the intruder theory is the most ridiculous thing ever. But if one takes the time to dissect this, it is far more plausible that an intruder invaded that home, killed JonBenet, and got away with murder. RDI would have people believe that their theories make far more sense. But they really don't. Not by a long shot. These parents have no history of anything even remotely linked to violence, tempers, or sexual deviancy. And then out of all the days in the entire world, THIS NIGHT... Xmas night 1996 is when a so-called accident just happened to occur. On THIS NIGHT, someone decided to lose their temper. Really take a look at the events the Ramseys reported and tell me which part of their story does not seem plausible. Assume that their account of the story from the moment they leave for the party to the moment the officers arrived at their door on the 26th is the truth. It makes so much sense what they said; it's unreal. Anyway, to answer your question, "That same objection applies to an intruder. You claim 'something made him not do it",  see my next comment.

Reply #2 Yes, you are right. Why would an intruder write a ransom kidnapping letter if there was no kidnapping involved? More on that below.

"It makes no sense whatsoever to leave a ransom note that could potentially identify you if you can't take the body."

And why would the Ramseys do the same thing? Take a stab at answering that for me.

I have posted my theory a zillion times. I believe the killer did not plan or foresee that his plan of invading this house, snatching the little girl, and running out of the house with her into a waiting car wasn't going to be as easy as he thought. For one, I don't think he had a car, and I think he lived up the street within walking distance. Alternatively, the idea that he could just run up those spiral stairs, take her from her bed (I don't believe in the stun gun theory)... running down those spiral stairs and down to the butler kitchen... and out the door... into the night walking side by side with Jonbenet is the most ridiculous thing ever. Not to mention, taking a chance that neighbors could see him either going in or out or being caught red-handed by the family is a bold move.

Nevertheless, and despite all of that, what I think is that the person was mentally ill, a psycho who's watched one too many ransom kidnapping movies, as evidenced by the bizarre, fantastical ransom note. He's also a pedophile who intended to sexually assault her as part of his plan. He's been in that house many times before, in my theory, whenever the Ramseys left the house. He could actually see them leave the house, and he would go inside. I do not believe the crime was sexually motivated, nor do I believe he used the paintbrush (it was digital penetration) because if it was sexually motivated, there wouldn't be a kidnapping. Graphic warning: And maybe she would be found unclothed, with her pants around her ankles, with far more damage or bleeding (poor JonBenet, I'm so sorry this is so graphic).

So because he's crazy and unhinged, he thought he could pull this off. And pull it off with an aura of arrogance. He was calling the shots and addressing John in the letter with disrespect.

In my theory, he puts the note on the spiral staircase with the intent to take her. I am uncertain if he truly wanted the money and if that was his MO. I don't think so. Once he takes her out of the room, instead of running out the door with her, there was literally a door at the bottom of the spiral staircase and an exterior door at the bottom of the front stairs...(or the butler kitchen)... He runs to the basement with her. The SUITCASE is how he probably planned to take her out. I do not subscribe to any of this tiny basement window basement.

What went wrong? Maybe JonBenet was fighting back, screaming, making noise; he couldn't fit her in the suitcase. She's making noise, and he could get caught at any moment. He decides to kill her right then because she could identify him. He grabbed the paintbrush, broke it to make the garrotte (and quickly). To make sure she was dead (she was pretty much already dead) he delivers the final blow to the head. Then he runs out, leaving the note behind.

Why would Patsy sit there and write a 2 1/2 page note knowing that her true handwriting might reveal itself the longer the note? Answer me that. See, the thing is, the Boulder Police Department gave them nothing to be confident about. The Ramseys are expecting Law Enforcement to find the killer of their daughter. And law enforcement believed THEY were the killers. I don't blame them one bit.

my reply:

The contradiction:

The Ramseys, according to RDI folks, write the note to make it look like a kidnapping. They want law enforcement to believe a foreign faction took their daughter. "We have your daughter," they wrote, according to RDI.

Then they call the cops knowing full well the body will be found. Essentially, this ruins their plan in saying a kidnapper took her. Their plan fails immediately. In fact, they didn't need a ransom note at all. All they had to do was call 911 (after disposing of the body) to say someone went into their home and kidnapped their child. When LE arrives, the body is not there. No ridiculous ransom note required.

This is why Patsy writing the note is absurd. The ransom did not help them at all. Because law enforcement would just say, "You want us to believe a kidnapper took her when the murdered body is right here? Law Enforcement rejected the ransom note immediately.

Either it's a kidnapping, and they take the body, or it's a murder. It can't be both.

It can, however, be a planned kidnapping turned murder by an intruder. See my comment and the theory I wrote to SeaBiscuit elsewhere in this thread.

Their kid was kidnapped wouldn't a more appropriate phrase be "Why can't I find my baby"

I think this is more of a slip in her sanity as the morning progressed emotional and exhausted she might have been reliving an earlier moment of that night/morning.

The OP is thinking of:

"Later Patsy asked Arndt why the author of the note had not asked for a larger sum of money, or at least a round sum of money. She also couldn’t understand why the author of the note thought her husband was a Southerner. Then she started to again cry. “Why didn’t I hear my baby? From Lawrence Schillers, Perfect Murder, Perfect Town"

"I think this is more of a slip in her sanity as the morning progressed" Sigh.

They are contorting themselves into pretzels. They have arrived at the conclusion Patsy killed her daughter all night and her comment is evidence of that.

I don’t get it. I really don’t. I’m not BDI, I’m a convinced PDIA. Is it possible that they DID feed her pineapple, lied about it, and washed her bowl?

I have coined it #forgetaboutthepineapple

The pineapple has nothing to do with the crime. On that morning of the 26th there was a house full of people. The Boulder Police Department called upon "The Victims Advocates" to comfort the parents. They brought Bagels and fruit. Possibly coffee as well.

The reason why I believe Patsy wrote the ransom note is the similarity in the 911 call. In the ransom note the first two line are “ We are a foreign faction” and “We respect your business but not the country it serves”. Now when Patsy calls 911 how does she start the call when the operator answered? “We have a kidnapping hurry please”. After that the operator says “explain to me what is going on?” Patsy again say “We have a..Then she stops like she realized how she was sounding and the continued with “There is a note left and our daughter is gone.” I think she called 911 after she wrote the note because it appears she is still in the mind frame of writing that note.

This is exactly what I'm talking about. They are inventing shit that isn't even there.