John Bennett who killed. A film was made in the United States about the murder of six-year-old beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey. Documentary about the murder of a girl

The police arrived, and everyone - both law enforcement officers and family members - began to wait for the call. However, no one ever called. Then it was decided to inspect the house. When the girl's father, accompanied by his friend, went down to the basement, he saw his daughter's lifeless body wrapped in a blanket.

Two large hematomas were found on the girl’s head, and traces of blood were found on her underwear (as it later turned out, not hers). Her hands were tied above her head with a white cord. The baby was first hit on the head with a heavy object, or she could have hit a wall or door, and then she was strangled with a homemade garrote.

Investigation versions

Of course, the police acted incorrectly from the very beginning, which they later admitted: the house was not searched properly, and when the decision was made to inspect it, for some reason the father of the murdered baby, John, and a friend, and not the law enforcement officers, began to do this. As a result, some important evidence could have been lost, and the chances of solving the crime without delay were reduced to zero.

Two versions of what happened have been put forward:

an intruder entered the house (it was necessary to find out whether he knew the girl or turned out to be a stranger);
The baby's parents are involved in the murder.

Upon learning of the suspicions against them, a wealthy married couple immediately hired the best lawyers. On their advice, John and Patricia flatly refused to give written testimony, according to which the investigation hoped to obtain the opinion of specialist psychologists (there is a technique that allows you to quite accurately determine what is false and what is true in the written testimony of witnesses). The further actions of the girl’s mother and father were also suggestive: she refused to be questioned and stated that in informal conversations they had already given all the information to the investigators.

Why did the parents come under suspicion in the first place?

There are many strange things in this story, and most of them are related to the behavior of the parents. For example, they reported that they undressed their daughter before going to bed and let her hair down. But JonBenét was found in a festive dress, with her hair gathered in two tails - on the back of her head and on the top of her head, in which the leaves of the laurel wreath that the girl was wearing at the holiday were stuck. Does it mean they lied? No answer.

During the autopsy, undigested pieces of pineapple were found in the girl's stomach, meaning she had eaten about 4 hours before the murder. According to the parents, the last time the baby ate food at the celebration was around 20.00. Then where does pineapple come from in the stomach? No answer. By the way, the police found this fruit in the family refrigerator...

Some windows and doors in the house were not locked at night. Why didn't the parents lock the house? Perhaps they opened the locks after the tragedy happened in order to confuse the investigation? And shortly before the incident, Patricia and John distributed the keys to their home to many people - friends, relatives, servants - supposedly so that they would look after the house during the owners' future vacation. Also a somewhat alarming fact...

When Patricia wrote texts from dictation for a handwriting examination, she deliberately changed her handwriting. Why did she do this? No answer.

The investigation first checked the theory that the father was the killer. It was assumed that he accidentally, in a fit of anger (John was on antidepressants), hit the girl’s head on something, believed that she had died, and in fear staged her murder by a stranger. It was also assumed that he committed sexual acts against his daughter - this was also not confirmed.

The police have been repeatedly accused of being fixated on the guilt of the parents and not developing other versions. Even within the group of investigators there were disagreements: some developed a version of the family’s guilt, others insisted on the penetration of a stranger. The second claimed that the intruder entered the house through a basement window that had been broken long before. A smudged boot print was also found on the window. Its origin has not yet been established - none of the family members wore such boots.

Fake grave

A fake tombstone was ordered, completely replicating the real one, into which listening devices were installed. The grave was monitored. However, imagine the surprise of the police when the parents... didn’t even think about going to their daughter’s grave upon arrival in the city! They went shopping, furnished the house, took care of current affairs, and did not even plan a visit to the cemetery.

As a result, the idea failed: a boy, accidentally running past the grave, moved the false tombstone, which his mother immediately informed the cemetery administration about. The operation had to be curtailed amid a scandal.

Fake Criminal

For a long time, the case was opened and closed, and no clarity was added to it. Journalists created a huge hype around him: dozens of articles about the murder and new details of the investigation were published, although many of them were simply false. The public didn't know who to believe.

The girl’s parents appeared on TV shows, gave interviews, and even published a book called “The Death of Innocence,” in which they allegedly told everything they knew about their daughter’s murder, and also put forward their own versions of what happened. Steve Thomas, the investigator on the case, also published a book about it. But none of these publications brought the public one iota closer to solving the terrible crime - and could not do this.

Finally, in 2008, the unheard of happened: former teacher John Mark Carr... admitted to killing JonBenét! The man was living in Thailand at the time and was extradited to the United States to confirm or deny his guilt. Carr claimed that he was in love with the girl, had an affair with her, and later drugged her and, by an absurd accident, killed her. After checking his testimony, it turned out that the man was lying - the reasons for self-incrimination, by the way, were never established.

By the time Carr confessed, JonBenét's mother was no longer alive: she died of ovarian cancer at the age of 49.

Family excuse

In 2008, using DNA analysis, it was possible to establish that the blood found on JonBenet’s underwear did not belong to any of the girl’s relatives. The charges against the family were dropped, but there are still people who are convinced that the parents were involved in the murder of the baby. As it turned out, the blood belonged to an unknown man. A comparison of his DNA with the FBI's database of genetic material of criminals has not yet yielded results.

First interview with Burke, JonBenét Ramsey's brother

In September 2016, the world again remembered the high-profile murder: JonBenét's older brother, Burke, spoke about it for the first time. He gave an exclusive interview to the host of the popular show “Dr. Phil”, where in a frank conversation he spoke about his own guesses about the case.

“I always thought that it was a pedophile who noticed his sister at one of the competitions. I want to honor JonBenét's memory with this interview. I want her not to be forgotten,” he said.

For JonBenet’s parents (at least while the girl’s mother was alive), publicity did not interfere with their lives: they not only gave numerous interviews and wrote a book, but also sued several publications that published false information about the murder of their daughter. As a result, John and Patricia each sued (!) $4 million from two American magazines. Later, after his wife's death, John (who had remarried) published another book of memoirs called The Other Side of Suffering.

“Why didn’t we understand that a child participating in competitions is so vulnerable? Why did we hold parties in our house to which strangers were allowed? I will never forgive myself for this... - John writes in his work. -<...>I had to raise all my relatives and friends to their feet, attract all possible resources to find the killer. He was hiding in the dark. He is still hiding somewhere..."

We don't know whether JonBenét's killer will be found. Usually such stories have a rather trivial solution, which, we hope, law enforcement officers will still find. In the meantime, we invite you to participate in our survey. Do you think the girl’s brother is right and can beauty contests play a fatal role in a child’s life?

The essay presented below is subject to the Law of the Russian Federation of July 9, 1993 N 5351-I “On Copyright and Related Rights” (as amended on July 19, 1995, July 20, 2004). Removing the “copyright” signs posted on this page (or replacing them with others) when copying these materials and their subsequent reproduction on electronic networks is a gross violation of Article 9 (“Origin of copyright. Presumption of authorship.”) of the mentioned Law. The use of materials posted as content in the production of various types of printed materials (anthologies, almanacs, anthologies, etc.), without indicating the source of their origin (i.e. the site “Mysterious Crimes of the Past” (http://www.. 11 (“Copyright of compilers of collections and other composite works”) of the same Law of the Russian Federation “On Copyright and Related Rights”.
Section V ("Protection of Copyright and Related Rights") of the mentioned Law, as well as Part 4 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, provide the creators of the site "Mysterious Crimes of the Past" with ample opportunities to prosecute plagiarists in court and protect their property interests (receiving from defendants: a) compensation, b) compensation for moral damages and c) lost profits) for 70 years from the date of origin of our copyright (i.e. until at least 2069). © A.I. Rakitin, 2005 © "Mysterious crimes of the past", 2005

page 1

Every year in the United States of America, more than 2 thousand children die violently as a result of crime.

The death of the absolute majority of them, with all its untimely tragedy, passes by public attention, confirming the remarkable observation of Remarque, who said that “the death of a person is a tragedy, and the death of thousands is just statistics.” But from time to time, a case of the death of a child comes under the biased attention of the media, often without good reason, and then the indignant public, contrary to common sense, turns into the driving force of the legal process.
It so happened that a rather trivial murder of a child committed in the town of Boulder, Colorado, on Christmas night in 1996 attracted the attention of the population throughout the United States. Dozens and even hundreds of more terrible and mysterious crimes committed in the same year escaped the attention of the media, and the rather banal murder of 6-year-old JonBenét Ramsey literally split society into supporters and defenders of the official version of the crime.
Reflecting on this circumstance, one cannot help but come to a very sad conclusion regarding the nature of the American type of democracy: the population of this country has once again turned out to be a kind of hostage to unscrupulous media, which completely irresponsibly inflame and extinguish passions. We must agree with the sad conclusion of the mayor of Boulder, who declared at a press conference in December 1997: "American society has received a malignant tumor in the form of our information system."
On the evening of December 25, 1996, 6-year-old JonBenét Ramsey spent the evening at a children's Christmas party held at the home of family friends a few blocks from her own home. On this day, she was inundated with gifts: her parents gave the girl a two-wheeled bicycle, Santa Claus at the ball - a large teddy bear in red Santa Claus clothes, as well as a gold bracelet engraved "JonBenet 12/25/96".

rice. 1 and 2: Born on August 6, 1990, JonBenet Ramsey was a funny and cute child at six and a half years old. In the left photo she is shown wearing a prom queen ribbon on her shoulder; on the right - next to his older brother Bark.

The children's ball ended at 21.30. The girl was so tired from eating and dancing that she fell asleep right in the back seat of the car in which her father took her home. At approximately 9:50 p.m., the girl's father, John Ramsey, drove into the garage of his own house at 755 15th Street and carried the sleeping JonBenet in his arms to her bedroom on the second floor.
According to the official version of events, it is believed that at 22.00 the girl was lying in bed in her bedroom and sleeping. After this time, no one saw her alive again.
The next morning, John Ramsay's wife, JonBenét's mother Patricia, woke up first. She got up around 5.00 and spent some time getting herself in order. The need for such an early awakening was explained by the fact that on the morning of December 26, the Ramsey family planned to go by car to Lake Michigan, on the picturesque shore of which there was another house that belonged to them. It was there that the Ramsays planned to celebrate the New Year.
At approximately 5:15 a.m., Patricia Ramsey left the third-floor bedroom where the couple had spent the night and began walking down the spiral staircase. She walked past the door to her daughter's bedroom without looking there, and headed towards the kitchen, which was located on the first floor. On one of the last steps of the stairs, Patricia saw a piece of paper covered in unfamiliar handwriting. Taking it in her hands, she realized that there were actually three sheets; the message written on them was a ransom demand for JonBenet Ramsey, who was kidnapped that night.

rice. 3, 4 and 5: JonBenét's kidnapper left a three-page message on the stairs demanding $118,000 for the girl's return. The letter was discovered at approximately 5:15-5:20 on December 26, 1996 by Patricia Ramsey.

Patricia rushed upstairs to her husband. John read the note carefully. It followed that the unknown kidnapper took JonBenét with him and demanded that a ransom of $118 thousand be prepared for delivery, placed in a brown paper shopping bag, such as those given out in department stores, and wait for a phone call between 08.00-10.00 hours. The criminal specifically warned that parents should not notify anyone about their daughter’s abduction. Otherwise, he promised there was a "99% chance" that they would never see JonBenét alive again.
What did the father of the kidnapped girl do?
Before answering this question, you should think about something else: what would the average father of a kidnapped child do in his place? The question can be formulated differently: what should be the impulsive reaction of a man in this situation who considers himself a protector of his family and a guard of his own home?
The thought that at the very time when you were sleeping (and therefore defenseless) someone entered the house and walked somewhere next to you is terrible in itself. But even more terrifying is the thought that there was a potential killer in the house, acting with malicious intent. How did he gain access to the closed premises? Broke a door or window? Or did you open them with your key? Obviously, until this is clarified, the threat of re-infiltration remains. In addition, there is a threat that the criminal has not yet left the house. Let us remember that at the moment when John Ramsey read the kidnapper’s letter it was not yet half past six in the morning.
The following sequence of actions for a man in such a situation seems natural: armed with any available weapon, quickly inspect the house in order to detect the place of entry of the intruder. In addition, during such an inspection one should pay attention to those places that could serve as a refuge for the criminal if he did not manage to leave the house. If a place of entry is discovered (say, a broken window in a room on the first floor), this room should be blocked (for example, blocking the doorway with furniture). The Ramseys' house was quite large (15 rooms), but still such an inspection would not require much time. Such an algorithm of actions would be typical for men who are strong and active, self-confident, and proactive. These people would be angry if they learned about the kidnapping of a child.
Of course, not all men are strong and active. A significant number of them would experience brutal fear. For this category of men, a different course of action would be more preferable: fearing to inspect the house alone and not wanting to risk their health and the health of their loved ones, they would simply take the family out of the house. Fortunately, the Ramseys did not live on a wild forest farm, but in the most prestigious area of a quiet and wealthy provincial town.
What did John and Patricia Ramsay do?
They called 911 (the call was received by the dispatcher at 5:25) and reported their daughter’s abduction. After that, they began calling friends and telling them about what happened. From the very beginning, the parents of the abducted girl agreed to violate the demands of the kidnapper (or kidnappers). Within one hour of the discovery of the ransom letter, Priscilla and Fleet White, Barbara and John Fernier, as well as the pastor of the Episcopal Church, whose parishioners were members of the victim family, came to the Ramseys. Three foreign cars were parked in front of house No. 755, and this does not count the police patrol car that appeared at 5.32 (that is, 7 minutes after John Ramsey’s call to the 911 dispatcher). Moreover, people continued to arrive: by 8.00 police officers Linda Arendt, Michael Everett, Rick French, Tom Trujillo, and Larry Mason arrived in their cars. After this time, other police cars (such as Fred Patterson's) came and went openly. Of course, such activity could not go unnoticed by the kidnappers if they established surveillance of the victim’s house (and child kidnappers very often try to control the subsequent behavior of the parents; to do this, they make a hidden connection to telephone lines, establish external surveillance of the house, track the movements of relatives and friends of the abducted child).
Need I say that between 08:00 and 10:00 the criminals never called the Ramseys?
The actions of the Boulder police deserve special praise in this situation. The patrolmen who showed up at 5.32 did not bother to inspect the building, they did not even walk around the house! The police were satisfied with the assurance of the abducted girl's parents that all the windows and doors of the building were closed; The patrolmen calmly sat down in the chairs of the living room on the first floor and conscientiously waited for a replacement in an hour and a half! This is how they protected the scene and witnesses...
By 8 o'clock in the morning the Ramseys' house was like a beehive. In addition to the victims themselves (John and Patricia Ramsey, as well as their 11-year-old son Bark), their friends gathered in front of the phone: the Whites, Fernier, a priest and five police officers. The parents of the kidnapped girl were terribly worried and “could only scream,” as Fleet White later recalled. Negotiations with criminals are one of the most important elements of the operation to free kidnapped people; they require not only confidentiality, but also serious preliminary preparation. In this case there was neither the first nor the second. In this situation, the presence of a hysterical girl’s mother in the room where negotiations were supposed to be held seems completely unacceptable. It is unclear why the police doctor did not inject her with a strong sedative and put the woman to sleep.
Another thing is unclear. Why didn’t any of the police officers present come up with a completely obvious idea: isn’t the kidnapping of a child masking another crime, say, a house robbery or the murder of an allegedly “kidnapped” girl? None of the police officers inquired about the safety of the house owners’ money, valuables and antiques. It didn’t occur to any of them to try to find the abductor’s trail inside and outside the house, to go to the abducted girl’s bedroom, etc.
The first hours passed since the abduction, which could provide the most valuable information about the crime that took place last night, and the detectives sat in the living room with a thoughtful look, staring at the silent telephone. We must pay tribute to the patience of the Boulder police - they sat in front of the phone not even until 10 a.m., but until 1 p.m.! They, apparently, could not believe that the criminal would not call at all and therefore spent an extra three hours waiting in vain.
At 10.30 Linda Arendt, who led the police group, decided to inspect the bedroom of the kidnapped girl. Fred Patterson walked with her to inspect the room. This examination did not reveal anything unusual.
After that, for almost two more hours, the police group sat aimlessly in the living room in front of the silent telephone.
And only at 13.00 Linda Arendt finally decided to ask John Ramsay if he had examined the house? Having received a negative answer, she invited him to do it. It looked something like this: “well, come in and see if everything is in order...” None of the policemen went to inspect the house with John Ramsay! This seems simply unheard of!
John Ramsey, accompanied by his friends Fleet White and John Fernier (not police!), went down to the basement and, entering the first door, discovered the body of his own daughter lying on the floor. The girl was dead, the body was in a state of rigor mortis and was already beginning to emit a specific smell of decomposition. Ramsey rushed to his daughter, picked her up and carried her into the first floor living room.
That. it became clear that the abduction of a child had turned into a completely different, more serious crime - murder.
As recorded in the official police report, JonBenét Ramsey's body was laid out on a table in the first floor living room at 1:05 p.m. and left undisturbed until the medical examiner arrived. Well, admirable foresight... Only it should have been shown by the Boulder police officers seven hours earlier, as soon as they arrived on the scene. Observing how rigor mortis develops would allow us to determine the time of death with high accuracy.
The first examination of the body of the deceased girl was carried out in the Ramseys' house between 20.20-20.30 on December 26, 1996. During this examination, the following was stated: the body of JonBenet Ramsey was wrapped in a white blanket, the deceased was dressed in a white dress with a silver star embroidered on the chest, under dress - white tights and panties. The deceased's hair was gathered into two ponytails - on the crown and back of the head - and secured with elastic bands. On the right side of the head, an extensive hematoma was visible under the hair; another hematoma (smaller in size) was located below the right ear to the back of the head. The deceased's clothing had no defects; several small (up to 1.2 cm) brown spots were found on her panties. Traces of urine were found in the crotch and legs. During the examination, the body was in a state of complete rigor mortis, with its hands behind its head. A white cord 53 cm long, tied in a double knot, was found on the wrist of the left hand, and a compression mark was found on the wrist of the right hand. The deceased's neck was wrapped in a tight double loop of white cord, identical to the one found on her wrist, one end of which was tied to a wooden stick. External signs - emptying the bladder, pinpoint hemorrhages on the inner surface of the eyelids - were consistent with the assumption of death as a result of strangulation.
In the future, the results of a complete forensic medical examination of the body of the deceased girl will be carefully analyzed by us, but for now we should focus on something else. By the evening of December 26, the police had already begun a systematic inspection of the Ramseys’ house, and even its preliminary results provided rich food for thought.
First of all, it turned out that the large three-story, 15-room house was by no means properly closed: two first-floor windows, one of the three entrance doors, and a basement window were found open! It turned out that the ransom amount of $118 thousand was indicated in the letter of the kidnapper (or kidnappers) not by chance: shortly before the events described, John Ramsey received an annual bonus in the amount of exactly $118 thousand. He did not deposit this money in the bank, but kept it in the house. Given the widespread use of cashless payments in the United States, this seemed very strange. In addition, a large number of valuable things were stored in the house, and in the garage there were two cars of the owners of the house (one of them, a Jaguar 4, was purchased a year ago).
A palm print was found on the door of one of the rooms in the basement, which did not belong to any member of the Ramsey family. A smeared boot print was found on the glass of an open first floor window. In addition, a vague shoe print was also found on the wall of the house; its location seemed to indicate an attempt by a person to climb into the first floor window.

rice. 6 and 7: Open window in the basement of the Ramsey house; a smeared boot print on the glass of a first floor window.

Already on December 26, 1996, the American public learned about the tragic events in the Ramsey house. In addition to local journalists, a film crew from the Denver-7 television channel happened to be at the scene of the incident, and on the same day they aired the first report from the scene. It should be emphasized that until March 1997, journalists knew nothing about the open windows and doors in the Ramseys' house; the police hid this information from them and for this they were subsequently much criticized. However, reproaches against law enforcement agencies can hardly be considered appropriate: this information should be considered extremely important and its disclosure, obviously, could significantly interfere with the investigation.
John, Patricia and Bark Ramsey were taken away by police in an unknown direction and until 14.00 on December 27, 1996, no one knew where they were. Subsequently, journalists learned that the family was under police protection until December 29; Law enforcement officials feared possible attempts on the lives of family members.
The autopsy report, signed on December 27, 1996, by Coroner John E. Meyer, provided very valuable information about the circumstances of the death of John Bennett Ramsey. This document is now available to Internet users, so anyone can familiarize themselves with its verbatim content, but we will focus on those of its fundamental conclusions that are important for understanding the circumstances of the death of JonBenét Ramsey.
An autopsy revealed the following injuries on the body of the deceased girl:
1) Injuries consistent with suffocation from compression of the throat: abrasions on the neck, pinpoint hemorrhages on the inside of the eyelids;
2) Linear fragmentation of the right side of the skull. The total length of the crack in the bone is 21.6 cm, the skull fracture itself measures 4.5 cm by 1.2 cm. This bone break corresponds to a hemorrhage on the surface of the right cerebral hemisphere measuring 18 cm by 10 cm. An autopsy of the skull showed that that as a result of this injury, 7-8 cubic meters leaked from the damaged vessels. see blood. This injury alone, without strangulation, would have resulted in the death of the 6-year-old girl;
3) Small contusions in the temporal lobes;
4) Abrasions of unknown origin on the right cheek, near the right ear;
5) Scuff marks and a purple bruise measuring 1.9 cm on the right shoulder;
6) Abrasions on the left buttock and two dry scratches on the left leg approximately 10 cm above the heel. These injuries were most likely unrelated to the girl's death and appeared several days before JonBenét Ramsey's death;
7) On the labia majora there is a small amount of dried blood. At the entrance to the vagina and on the walls of the vagina there is a small amount of semi-liquid blood. There is hyperemia (redness) inside the vaginal opening. A violet-red friction area measuring 1 cm is expressed on the right side of the vaginal canal, a second similar (1 cm by 1 cm) friction area is in the area of the hymenal opening. On the right labia majora there is a “very weakly expressed” area of epithelial erosion measuring 2.5 cm by 1 cm. These damages indicated some manipulation of the girl’s genitals, carried out shortly before her death. However, the forensic physician did not identify any “remote or recent anal or other perineal trauma.” This conclusion meant that the deceased had not been subjected to systematic anal or vaginal rape;
8) Traces of compression of the right wrist.
An examination of the internal organs did not reveal any developmental pathologies, chronic or hereditary diseases.
Toxicological testing found no traces of sleeping pills, narcotics or medications. This meant that at the time of death JonBenét was conscious and not intoxicated by alcohol, drugs, etc.
The deceased's pupils were equally dilated. This led to the conclusion that the blow to the head, which caused extensive hemorrhage, was inflicted in the last moments of her life.
To strangle the child, the criminal used a homemade “garotte” (a type of noose that does not require a loop with one or two handles). A varnished stick with traces of breakage on both ends was used as a handle; the stick had the words "Korea" carved into it.

rice. 8 and 9: On the left is a photograph of the homemade garotte that was used to strangle JonBenét Ramsey. On the right is a photograph of a cord taken from the left wrist of the deceased girl. A knot with two loops, left unraveled by the forensic experts, is clearly visible. With this cord, the criminal first tied JonBenét's hands (this left a compression mark on her right wrist), but then (apparently after the murder) freed her right hand.

Undigested pieces of pineapple were found in the stomach of the deceased girl. This meant JonBenét ate pineapple less than four hours before her death.
The deceased was wearing jewelry: a gold ring on the middle finger of her right hand, a gold chain around her neck and a bracelet with the engraving “JonBenet 12/25/96” on her right wrist.
On the blanket in which JonBenét's corpse was wrapped, pubic hair was found (the hair belonging to one or another part of the hairline of the human body is determined with absolute reliability due to its varying thickness. The thickest hair corresponds to a man's beard and mustache). In addition, a study of the substance found under the girl’s fingernails suggested that it contained genetic material suitable for identifying its owner. In other words, the girl could have scratched herself before her death, resulting in particles of the killer’s skin getting under her nails.
Since the pathologist was unable to observe the process of development of rigor mortis in a corpse, he described the process of relieving rigor. This is a very important observation, since the degree of rigor of the corpse can be used to judge the time of death with high reliability. Loss of muscle mobility is associated with biochemical processes in tissues and develops in a certain order. After some time, rigor mortis disappears, and this process occurs in the reverse order to the way in which rigor mortis developed. The degree of rigor is described by coefficients from “0” to “3” and the speed with which the direct or reverse processes develop allows us to determine the moment of death with an accuracy of up to an hour. In addition, the time of death is determined by measuring rectal body temperature. In JonBenet's case, both methods were used. Based on their results, the expert determined the time of death of the girl as an interval from 00.00 hours to 06.00 hours on December 26, 1996, and indicated that he considered a “shift to the beginning of the specified interval” (i.e., to midnight) to be more accurate.
What can be gleaned from the above facts?
The first significant point is that the girl was found dressed. Moreover, she had two “tails” on her head, secured with blue elastic bands. John and Patricia Ramsay claimed that they put their daughter to bed with her hair down. And in fact, any woman will say that sleeping with a “tail” is very uncomfortable. So who made the “tails” on JonBenét’s head and when? Who and when fully dressed the girl? And most importantly, why? The answer to these questions is actually not as obvious as it seems. Kidnapper didn't need to waste precious time dressing the girl. And even more so, he didn’t need to collect her hair on her head. However, we will have a separate conversation later about the actions of the kidnapper (kidnapper).
The second significant point is that the deceased was found wrapped in a blanket. Why was she wrapped in a blanket? And why was the blanket from the bedroom moved to the basement? After all, the girl was dressed! Criminal psychology has long described the “effect of repentance” of a criminal, one of the manifestations of which is the desire of the killer to cover the body or face of the person who died at his hands. Such behavior of the criminal usually manifests itself if he knew the deceased well and spent some time next to his body after committing the murder.
The third significant point is the presence of undigested pineapples in JonBenet's stomach. According to the testimony of the girl's mother and father, at 22.00 on January 25, 1996, she was already fast asleep. And of course, I didn’t eat anything. At the Christmas ball, the children spent the last hours dancing and actively having fun; They got up from the table at about 20.00. Based on this, we can conclude that JonBenet’s death occurred no later than 12:00 pm on January 25th. This is consistent with the forensic scientist's belief that JonBenét died around midnight. However, the pineapples were found by police in the refrigerator in the kitchen of the Ramseys' house. This meant that the girl could eat pineapples in her own home, waking up after her parents put her to bed at 10 p.m.
Of course, very important for understanding what happened was the fact that the criminal committed some kind of sexual manipulation with his victim (Moreover, one must clearly understand the difference between the terms “sexual manipulation” and “rape”. The criminal did not perform sexual intercourse with the deceased, did not rape her. According According to the police medic, he inserted an object, possibly a finger, into her vagina. Sexual assault has a completely different purpose than extorting money and proceeds in a completely different way. Either the criminal was planning from the very beginning to rape the girl (and in this case he had no need to imitate kidnapping, since sexual manipulations would still be discovered when examining the corpse), or he still wanted to make money from the kidnapping and then the manifestation of his sexual fantasies in such a responsible and dangerous moment for him.

In 1996, a murder occurred in the United States that shocked the entire country: 6-year-old JonBenét Ramsey was found dead in the basement of her parents' house. The tragedy occurred on Christmas night and left a huge number of questions that the investigation still cannot answer. One of the key roles in the whole story is played by the baby's parents - John and Patricia Ramsey, who during this time managed to be the main suspects in the crime and profit well from the death of their daughter. Some time ago, the results of a DNA test were made public, justifying them, but the case has not yet been concluded...

Christmas evening on December 25, 1996 will long remain in the memory of residents of the town of Boulder, in the US state of Colorado. Little JonBenet Ramsey, the daughter of a wealthy computer company owner, John Ramsey, and his wife Patricia, went to celebrate Christmas with friends in the company of her parents. The celebration was fun: Santa Claus entertained the children all evening.

The contented little girl fell asleep in the car on the way home, and dad, having reached the house, took her to the nursery and put her to bed. The last time the girl was seen alive was at 10 p.m., when her parents left her in their room for the night. What happened next is more reminiscent of the plot of a detective novel with thriller elements. The best minds of the American police worked on the investigation of the case, genetic experts, psychologists, criminologists were involved - what’s more, a special fake tombstone was even ordered for the girl’s grave, where listening devices were built in to collect additional information. However, this did not shed any light on the baby’s murder. Who took the life of the little beauty queen? The investigation has two versions: the first is that an intruder-killer entered the house, the second is that members of the Ramsey family are involved in the crime, including her mother, father and older brother, who was 9 years old at that time. The second version was the main one for many years, but not so long ago, thanks to the latest DNA tests, suspicions against the family were officially lifted. While the investigation is looking for new leads, let’s remember everything that is known about this case.

On Dec. 26, JonBenét's mother woke up at 5 a.m. to get ready for a family trip to Lake Michigan. Going down the stairs, the woman saw a letter on the last step. The message said that her daughter JonBenet (who, as we remember, was supposed to be sleeping peacefully in her bed from 10 pm) had been kidnapped and that $118,000 must be paid for her return. Patricia immediately woke up her husband, and they decided to call the police, although the letter stated that this should not be done under any circumstances. The criminals also wrote in the message that they would call between 8.00 and 10.00 to tell them how to transfer the money. The police arrived, and everyone - both law enforcement officers and family members - began to wait for the call. However, no one ever called. Then it was decided to inspect the house. When the girl's father, accompanied by his friend, went down to the basement, he saw his daughter's lifeless body wrapped in a blanket.

Two versions of what happened have been put forward:

an intruder entered the house (it was necessary to find out whether he knew the girl or turned out to be a stranger);
The baby's parents are involved in the murder.

As for the “kidnappers” note, they found out that it was prepared in advance using a typewriter. They searched for the device wherever they could - in John Ramsey’s house, office, and garages, but were not found. The police have been repeatedly accused of being fixated on the guilt of the parents and not developing other versions. Even within the group of investigators there were disagreements: some developed a version of the family’s guilt, others insisted on the penetration of a stranger. The second claimed that the intruder entered the house through a basement window that had been broken long before. A smudged boot print was also found on the window. Its origin has not yet been established - none of the family members wore such boots.

JonBenét Ramsey was buried not in Boulder, but in Atlanta, Georgia, where her family formerly lived. Some time after the murder, the Ramsey couple decided to move back to Atlanta - the girl’s mother complained that she “missed her baby.” In this regard, investigators decided to conduct an operation to collect additional information. It was expected that the parents would go to their daughter's grave within a few days of arriving in Atlanta and perhaps talk among themselves about the murder. Their conversation could reveal new details of the case. A fake tombstone was ordered, completely replicating the real one, into which listening devices were installed. The grave was monitored. However, imagine the surprise of the police when the parents... didn’t even think about going to their daughter’s grave upon arrival in the city! They went shopping, furnished the house, took care of current affairs, and did not even plan a visit to the cemetery. As a result, the idea failed: a boy, accidentally running past the grave, moved the false tombstone, which his mother immediately informed the cemetery administration about. The operation had to be curtailed amid a scandal.

Burke, 29, admitted that as a child he had a hard time dealing with the publicity surrounding the case. Reporters were constantly on duty near their house, the public discussed the affairs of his family for several years, and as a result, the guy, in his own words, developed a persistent aversion to publicity, he closed himself off and began to lead a solitary life. For JonBenet’s parents (at least while the girl’s mother was alive), publicity did not interfere with their lives: they not only gave numerous interviews and wrote a book, but also sued several publications that published false information about the murder of their daughter. As a result, John and Patricia each sued (!) $4 million from two American magazines. Later, after his wife's death, John (who had remarried) published another book of memoirs called The Other Side of Suffering.

We don't know whether JonBenét's killer will be found. Usually such stories have a rather trivial solution, which, we hope, law enforcement officers will still find.

On Christmas night 1996, a participant in children's beauty pageants was killed in her own home. This case is considered one of the most notorious crimes that occurred in the United States in the nineties, but it has not yet been solved. However, last year information appeared that the killer of a six-year-old girl had been hiding from justice all this time in the most unexpected place - in prison.

Biography of a young beauty queen

The girl was born on August 6, 1990 in Atlanta, Georgia. Her parents are computer magnate John Bennett Ramsey and his wife Patricia Ann Poe. These are quite influential people who were suspected of kidnapping and murdering their own daughter (after a DNA test, all doubts of law enforcement agencies disappeared). The girl also had an older brother, Burke. At the time of the birth of the girl in the family, the first-born was three years old.

When the baby was only nine months old, her family moved to Boulder. Quite strange (even to American ears) the girl’s name came from the merger of her father’s first and second names, and the second came from her mother’s name. JonBenet Patricia Ramsey regularly entered among the participants in beauty pageants and children's competitions. The girl managed to visit several neighboring states.

JonBenet Ramsey's mother (photo of the girl above) independently organized several competitions. She was the winner of the Miss Virginia title and a participant in the Miss America pageant, so this area was close to the woman. By the age of six, JonBenet Ramsey had won the titles “Tiny Beauty of the Nation,” “Little Miss Colorado,” and “Colorado Cover Girl.” The girl also played the violin and was actively involved in rock climbing.

Kidnapping and murder of JonBenet Ramsey

On Christmas night 1996, JonBenet Ramsey and her parents went to visit family friends. After a short party they returned home. Patricia put the girl to bed and went about her business. This was the last time JonBenet was seen alive. The next morning the girl did not wake up.

According to Patricia Ramsey’s own statements, which were recorded by the police who arrived at the crime scene, in the morning she found a ransom note on the stairs. After that, she immediately checked - the girl was not in her bed. The note said that JonBenet had been kidnapped. The criminal demanded a ransom of 118 thousand dollars.

It is worth mentioning that this is exactly the amount the girl’s father recently received as a bonus. The note also contained standard demands not to contact the police. But JonBenet Ramsey's mother immediately contacted law enforcement. When police arrived at the scene, they found no signs of forced entry.

The ransom letter was unexpectedly verbose. The police did not yet suspect that the girl's body was in the house. John Ramsey quickly prepared the amount necessary for the ransom, but no one has yet called him about transferring the money. The next morning, his friend John Ferney withdrew $118,000 from the bank.

Discovery of a girl's body in the basement

Detective Linda Arndt suggested that the parents take another look at the house. John Ramsey, along with family friend Fleet White, discovered his daughter's body in the basement during a search. JonBenet was covered with a white blanket and had a nylon cord wrapped around her neck. The girl was tied up and her mouth was taped shut.

Later, an examination showed that the little beauty was strangled and her skull was fractured. There were no signs of rape, but police believed that six-year-old JonBenet had been sexually assaulted. Two hematomas were found on the head. The girl's underwear was stained with blood.

The first suspects were the parents of JonBenet Ramsey. The parents refused to give written testimony, but later underwent a handwriting examination. It turned out that none of them was the author of the note that was found on the morning of December twenty-sixth.

John and Patricia refused formal questioning. They hired highly qualified lawyers to defend their interests. A lot of criticism fell on the police. Law enforcement officers were accused of inattentive search, improper performance of official duties, and concealment of facts.

Later it was discovered that a window was open in the basement. In addition, there is reason to believe that the doors to the house were left unlocked. So who killed JonBenet Ramsey? The police concluded that the murder was committed by an unknown intruder who entered the house through a window in the basement.

Possible killer of "Little Miss Colorado"

In August 2006, a certain John Mark Carr confessed to the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. This is a former school teacher. At this time, Carr was a defendant in a child pornography case. The 41-year-old teacher told police he was with JonBenet at the time of her death. However, Carr called it an accident.

The DNA found on the girl's body did not match the biological materials of the criminal. John Carr said he gave the girl drugs and had sex with her. But the police found no traces of drugs in the blood or traces of semen. In addition, the teacher lived in Alabama at the time, and the crime occurred in Colorado.

All evidence confirming John Carr's guilt was purely circumstantial. During a graphological examination, it was found that the handwriting of the accused is very similar to the handwriting of the real criminal. It was noted that Carr wrote the letters “E”, “T”, “M” in a very unusual way, but in the same way as the killer unknown to the police.

According to data released by law enforcement agencies in 2006, the investigation continued many years after the crime was committed. It was obvious that the police were not at all satisfied with the frank confession of the girl’s school teacher, John Carr. In February 2009, the prosecutor's office resumed the investigation into the murder of a little beauty queen from the United States.

Buried next to JonBenet Ramsey in Marietta is her mother, who died of cancer in 2006, as well as her half-sister Elizabeth Pash Ramsey, who died in a car accident.

Was the killer hiding in prison?

The real criminals have not yet been found. But in the early 2000s, information appeared in the press that the girl’s killer had been hiding from investigation in an American prison all this time. The killer was thinking about how to protect himself, so he simply went to jail.

One of the detectives, even during the active investigation, wanted to include him in the list of suspects, but his superiors forbade it. According to the journalist who revealed this version, the alleged kidnapper JonBenet Ramsey is currently about 50-60 years old and has been convicted of rape.

New details of the shocking case

In 2010, the case was reopened. The latest DNA research methods have made it possible to prove that the parents are innocent. Their genetic material was not found on the girl's body. However, the samples taken from the body could not be found in any database.

In 2013, documents were released to the public that showed that in 1999, a jury that determines whether someone should be formally charged found there was sufficient evidence to indict the parents. But the district attorney refused to sign the charges. He said the evidence was insufficient.

Documentary about the murder of a girl

Twenty years after the tragedy, the documentary film “Who Killed JonBenet” and its sequel about the girl’s mother, “JonBenet’s Mother: Killer or Victim?” appeared. The role of the detective also starred Michael Gill and Julia Campbell, who played the parents of the little beauty. In the tape, Python Lapinski spoke in Jenbenet's voice:

I was Little Miss Colorado. This Christmas I would have been 26 years old - but to everyone I will forever only be six.

The brother of JonBenet Ramsey, the beauty queen who died in childhood, recently gave an exclusive interview. He said that the killer was most likely a pedophile who spotted his sister at one of the many beauty pageants, and then broke a window in the basement, kidnapped and killed the girl. The victim's 29-year-old brother said he did the interview so little JonBenet would not be forgotten.

From the age of three, Burke had a hard time. The police were constantly on duty at their house, and the parents were suspected of murdering their sister. Therefore, the boy hated publicity at a young age, and when he grew up, he began to lead a closed life.

Memoirs of parents and author's books

The parents of the little beauty queen, many years after the tragedy, published a book dedicated to their deceased daughter. They expressed their versions of the monstrous crime that shocked all of America. Father JonBenet wrote a book called The Other Side of Suffering.

He lamented and asked questions. Why didn’t parents realize in time that a child who is so popular is very vulnerable? Why did they throw big parties where many strangers were invited? Perhaps excessive caution would have avoided the tragedy. However, the biography of JonBenet Ramsey (photos of the girl are presented in the article) shocked the Americans.

So how did the girl's story end?

There are a lot of guesses and rumors in the biography of JonBenet Ramsey. Many believe that the girl was killed by her mother or brother (possibly through negligence), and her father helped hide the evidence and the body. How consistent is this version? Law enforcement agencies could not prove the guilt of the parents in the murder of the girl, so these are only guesses and versions.

Taylor Sarah
@thesarahdtaylor

In 1996, the murder of 6-year-old JonBenét Ramsey became one of the most discussed unsolved mysteries of the decade. Ramsey was found dead in her home in Boulder, Colorado. on the morning of December. 26th. Recently, the family was informed that they saw JonBenét alive on Christmas night. According to the Denver Post, parents Patsy and John Ramsey called police after finding a two-page ransom note asking for $118,000 in exchange for the return of their daughter. Later that day, Jon found JonBenét's body in the family basement. She was reportedly strangled and bound with duct tape.

As the investigation continued, John, Patsy, and even JonBenét's 9-year-old brother, Burke Ramsey, were identified as suspects. In 1999, a jury trial was moved to indict John and Patsy on charges of child abuse resulting in death, but those charges fell through. In 2008, in light of new DNA information, a judge ordered all members of the Ramsey family to have all charges dropped.

Although approximately 1,500 pieces of evidence have been recovered, the JonBenét case has gone cold, but now, at 29, Burke has broken his years of silence through a series of interviews with talk show Dr. Phil McGraw. As the 20th anniversary of his sister's death approaches, the world is wondering who Burke has become and why he suddenly decided to speak out.

Why is he speaking

Two decades after his sister's death, and 10 years after mom Patsy died of ovarian cancer, Burke told Dr. Phil he's talking because "I want to honor not...I don't want to forget anyone."

“For a long time, media has made our lives a mental thing,” Dr. Phil said (via the New York Daily News). “It's hard to miss cameras and vans in your yard. We would go to the supermarket, sometimes and there would be a newspaper with my photo or a picture of JonBenét plastered on the front.” Burke said, "seeing as how a small child is just some kind of chaotic nightmare, so I was very skeptical of any media, as a very private person had just done to me."

McGraw said Burke knew the media attention would intensify as the 20th anniversary of his sister's death approached: “his thought was, 'If this happens, I want to control the narrative.'"

“I think what I wanted to do was remember her and not just be another news story,” Burke said.

Burke remembers the day his sister disappeared

Getty Images

Dr. Phil Burke said he received little reaction when he initially said his sister was missing. “I think I would like it to avoid conflict,” he said (via RIA Novosti): “I think part of me doesn’t want to know what’s going on.”

As chaos erupted around him, Burke said he remained in bed. “The first thing I remember is my mom bursting into my room, really saying, ‘Oh my God, oh my God,’ running around my room,” he said (at one time). “I remember how she said, ‘Where is my child? Where’s my baby?’ I just laid there and didn’t know what to do.”

In the end, John broke the terrible news to his son. Burke remembered that moment too. “My dad told me JonBenét is in heaven now, and he started crying, then he started crying.”

Burke knew he was a suspect

Getty Images

Patsy and John lamented the absurdity of blaming, or even presenting for questioning, their son for the murder of his sister. In a 2016 A&E documentary called The JonBenét Murder: The Undisguised Truth, John said (via People), “the accusation that Burke once had this violent 9-year-old, 60-pound child and he bashed JonBenét's head and that Patsy and I set it all up to protect him makes me laugh.”

"I know people think if I did it, my parents did it," Burke told Dr. Phil (via E! News). I know we were suspects.”

Viewers may find his behavior disturbing

Viewers watching McGraw's interview and juxtaposing the footage may be put off by Burke's behavior. “There will be dark content, and he is smiling, and people will watch throughout the interview, very unusually affected, either smiling or laughing. He's a very socially awkward young man,” McGraw told the “Today” show. “But understand, from the time this happened, his parents, depending on your interpretation, either protected him or hid him, based on how you want to interpret it. He had no social contacts, most children grow up.” He spent two decades behind bars.

Body language expert January Hargrave said Burke's behavior could show a warning sign. “He thinks that if I make this nice they will be like me,” she said (via Button 2 Houston), “but I think it's really a façade for the anxiety that he feels deep inside.” Hargrave wouldn't do one way or another if she thought that Burke was lying about his memory of the tragedy.

According to McGraw's interview today, Burke now works remotely as a software engineer and has no face-to-face interaction with other people.

Burke reminds me of watching my sister

Getty Images

Burke admitted that he can still see in his head that his sister's body was looked upon as being at her service. “I remember watching,” he said. “The Small Casket [and] her eyes were closed. I think one of her eyes was a little like a droopy,” Dr. Phil said (via Side). “It was strange. It was painful to watch, a little.”

“I remember my parents were very upset,” he said. “I remember my father leaned over to kiss her.”

Did Burke pay for this interview?

According to ABC News, Burke paid for the interview with Dr. Phil, although no further details were given. Recent news suggests expenses incurred by guests are also paid for the program, with tabloids claiming some high-profile guests are being compensated tens of thousands of dollars for their appearances.

What's Burke up to now?

Over the past two decades, Burke has staked out a very private but seemingly fulfilling life. He supposedly graduated from Purdue University in 2010 and works in the high-tech industry.

In 2012, John told People magazine that his son went to therapy and went on to lead a fairly quiet life with his girlfriend and a good job. “He's certainly matured,” John said. “He has a 401(k) IRA and, and he did it his way.”