Your worst nightmare -Murder of Cassie Jo Stoddart and Jonbenet Ramsey

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 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.

Murder of Cassie Jo Stoddart

Brian Lee Draper (born in 1990) and Torey Michael Adamcik (born June 14, 1990)[1] are former American high school students who are currently serving life sentences without the possibility for parole, for murdering their classmate Cassie Jo Stoddart on September 22, 2006.[2]

Draper and Adamcik have been featured on BBC Three's 'Teen Killers: Life without Parole', originally shown on April 21, 2014. They also appear in the 2013 documentary Lost for Life.[3][4][5] also featured on Investigation Discovery's "Your Worst Nightmare" premiered in October 2014.

Background

Brian Draper spent most of his childhood residing in the state of Utah. He and his family moved to Pocatello, Idaho where he met Idaho native Torey Adamcik through Pocatello High School.
The murder

Cassie Jo Stoddart (born on December 21, 1989 in Pocatello), attended Pocatello High School, along with Draper and Adamcik. On the night of September 22, 2006, Cassie was house sitting for her aunt and was visited by her boyfriend Matt Beckham. Later, Draper and Adamcik showed up. The four decided to watch a movie together, until Draper and Adamcik said they'd prefer to go to a movie at a local theater, leaving Cassie and Matt at the home. At one point when Cassie and Matt were alone, the electricity was suddenly lost. However, it was restored before Matt was picked up by his mother. Unbeknownst to Cassie or Matt, Draper and Adamcik had returned to the house before Matt's departure (roughly 10:30 p.m). Having never gone to the theater, the two were lying in wait and later confessed to purposely shutting the power off. It is portrayed in the television series "Your Worst Nightmare" (see above reference), that they cut the power again before proceeding. They then entered the house and stabbed Stoddart 29 times, 9 wounds were fatal.[6][7] It was revealed in the course of investigation that Draper and Adamcik recorded their plan to murder Stoddart on video tape while they were at school.[8]
Trial and sentencing

Draper and Adamcik were arrested on September 27, 2006 and charged with first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murder.[9] During the interrogations, both teens blamed each other. During interrogation, Draper claimed he was in the same room with Adamcik when Stoddart was killed but denied stabbing her. He later admitted stabbing her allegedly under commands from Adamcik. He also led the investigators to Black Rock Canyon where the teens disposed of the clothing, masks and knives they used for the murder.[10][11] It was revealed that Brian was impressed by Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold who committed the Columbine High School massacre, and it was later revealed that Adamcik was inspired by the series of horror films known as "Scream." Adamcik's trial started on May 31, 2007 and ended on June 8, 2007 with the guilty verdict. On April 17, 2007, Draper was also found guilty. On August 21, 2007, both were sentenced to life in prison without the possibility for parole for first degree murder and 30 years-to-life for conspiracy to commit murder.[8][9][12]

Both Adamcik and Draper are serving their time at Idaho State Correctional Institution. Their attorneys filed separate appeals at Supreme Court in September 2010 and April 2011.[12][13][14] The first appeal for Adamcik was denied in a 3/2 decision, as was Draper's appeal.[15] Torey Adamcik is currently filing for a motion of post-conviction relief was to be decided on 9/19/14 but has been postponed to October. An evidentiary hearing for Adamcik will take place in April.[4]

The Stoddart family also filed a lawsuit against the Idaho School District. They claim that the school was negligent and should have known Draper and Adamcik posed a threat to life. Both the civil court and the Supreme Court dismissed the case stating the action of the killers was not foreseeable.[16]