Dirty Harry and the RDI "intruder would not leave body and ransom note" part 1

these comments are similar in intention

detective pinkie wrote:
Hold yourself to the same standards - explain why an intruder would leave a body and a note, simply and believably

tawny wrote:
the fail in logic is astounding.

This is an example of NO IDI explanation. Why would an intruder hide her body? Seriously, please answer that for me. Why would an intruder hide her body rather than take her with them and dump her, or leave her where she was? Did an intruder seriously believe she would NEVER EVER be found inside the house?

Serious question: Why would an intruder hide her body in a dark room in a basement?

If he wanted to ensure it was found, why hide it? If he had to bug out, not taking the kidnapped-turned-murdered with him, why did he leave the note?

Delay discovery to what end? If he were bugging out, why would he care when, where, and how she's found?

It makes zero logical sense.

ukguy wrote:
Mama2JML,
Why does an intruder need to bother with a RN at all, all that sitting around authoring a RN, increases the risk of being caught.

No JonBenet in the house tells its own story, when followed up with a ransom phone call, no RN is required.

There is no IDI explanation forthcoming as to why the said intruder did not remove JonBenet from the house, which is just as inconsistent as any staged kidnapping leaving JonBenet in the house!

Intruder plan of action: Enter Ramsey household remove JonBenet, dead or alive, relocate to the boot of awaiting car, then simply drive away. Next day phone ransom demands. Total time to execute less than fifteen minutes!

nimyat of reddit wrote:
There is absolutely 0 reason to start to write a draft ransom note and then write the real thing and make it that ridiculously long.

If it was a premeditated kidnapping, ('hid in the house' theory) why the fuck wouldn't you bring a ransome note with you and why the hell would you start to draft one and then write one on paper found in the house.

If it was a burglary turned kidnapping, why would you start to draft a ransom note, and then write the real thing 4 pages long? You would scribble something like "I've taken your daughter, dont contact police, deposit money at this location at this time if you want to see her again." A panicked burglar does not sit and start writing about his 'organisation'.

A lot of people get bogged down in the details of the case, because it is a fascinating one and it is very interesting, but the ransom note is the most ridiculous thing ever and was totally written by one of the family in my opinion. They also completely over thought it - mentioning the fathers business, his bonus, writing 4 pages worth etc.

There's no way the family wasn't involved. As for which one did it, that is what is hard to prove.

docg makes a similar claim

docg wrote:

Questions

An intruder intending to express his anger or disdain for the Ramseys would have had no reason to write a meaningless ransom note. A kidnapper would not have left both the note and the body. If the parents were involved in this together, as so many assume, such a note might serve to throw the police off the track, but only if the body were found, days later, in some remote area. Or never found. With the body hidden in the house, where it is sure to be discovered, the note only creates problems for the Ramseys, the only ones who could "logically" have written it. If they were not planning on getting the body out of the house before the police came, then why would they write an obviously phony note?

Also, why was the note hand printed? Why not print it via computer? Or paste words together from newspapers? If the parents, or anyone at all close to the family, wrote it, they would be risking exposure for sure.

Answers

No intruder would have had anything to gain by writing the ransom note. No intruder would have any reason to write it. A kidnapper would have taken the child (or her body) with him. If something had gone wrong with his plan, he would have had no reason to leave a possibly incriminating note. Someone intending to frame John or Patsy would not have written the note in his own hand, as that would be evidence of an intruder. The conclusion is simple: there was no kidnapper. There was no intruder. The note must have been written by someone on the inside -- and it does indeed read like a staged kidnapping attempt.

the fail in the above statements is astounding. perhaps this is  thrill kill, made to look like a kidnapping, b/c of a movie. not complicated. there is no requirement for a psychopath to act logically or reasonably. psychopaths have killed from reasons ranging from money to thrill seeking, envy, jealous, racism, homophobia, foreigners, rape, voices in the head, delusions, voices from God, terrorism, extortion, vampires, life insurance money, bets, dares, boredom etc.

there is no requirement for a killer to kill for a reason or motive that "makes sense". if a suicidal airplane pilot wants to crash his plane into mountain, there is no reason for it to make sense, only that he did so, not why he did so.

there are murders including Sandru Cantu where they identify the killer and ask why they killed. The killer's response "I don't know why"

To answer the above RDI objections, why leave body and ransom note? B/c he wanted to. or, he doesn't know why he did. or it just felt like something spur of the movement.


as a sensible answer the objections

A simple reason is that the goal was to kill Jonbenet as a thrill kill, as a fantasy formed from watching movies like Dirty Harry, made to look like a kidnapping.


the RN has a statement

"If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies"

Dirty Harry Scorpio

If you talk to anyone, I don't care if it's a Pekinese pissing against a lamppost, the girl dies

a pekinese is a breed of dog


talking to dogs violates a condition

other similarities

   Specified denomination of bills and type of container for delivery of the ransom
   The delivery of the ransom requires extreme physical exertion (Harry had an exhausting run at the kidnapper's direction). This could explain why the killer advised John to be rested
   The kidnapper employs counter-surveillance
   The girl was dead all the while Harry was running all over town

   Similar Phrases

   "Now listen to me carefully." (JBR's RN begins "Listen carefully")
   "Now listen. Listen very carefully."
   "If I even think you're being followed, the girl dies."
   "If you talk to ayone, I don't care if it's a Pekinese p i s s ing against a lamppost, the girl dies." (JBR's RN says "If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies")
   "... that's the end of the game. The girl dies." (the phrase "the girl dies" is used 3 times, just as in the JBR RN)
   "It sounds like you had a good rest. You'll need it."

this is Dirty Harry


this is Scorpio



this is one important action Scorpio did



Scorpio note says "I will set up a meeting
RN says " I will call you "

Scorpio note says "if i do not hear from you it will be my next pleasure to kill a catholic priest or nigger"
RN says "You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult."

also important was where this handwritten document was found.

if you actually watch the movie you would know that the above ransom note was found here



he left it at the murder scene where he kills




Scorpio left handwritten ransom demands for Dirty Harry and LE to find, read, and comment on. In that scene, detectives use a overhead projector to project Scorpio's handwritten ransom demand.

so to answer the first part of the objection, why would an intruder leave a ransom note and body?

b/c the intruder identifies and is a fan of Dirty Harry. Scorpio's actions in the movie Dirty Harry form part of his fantasy plan.

in the second part 2 I will explain in terms of Dirty Harry why he left the body in the house, instead of removing it.

RDI
"I do not believe it!"

That is why you failed.

Scorpio left handwritten messages at the crime scene of the murder for LE to read, so Jonbenet's killer did likewise.