Criminology - JonBenét Ramsey Part 2

Episode Date: March 31, 2024

The Ramsey family, 53-year-old John, 39-year-old Patricia, 9-year-old Burke, and 6-year-old JonBenét, lived what appeared to be an idyllic life in Boulder, Colorado. That happy family life was shattered on December 26th, 1996, after JonBenét was found dead in the home. Join Mike and Morf for this second episode covering the murder of JonBenét Ramsey. The investigation continued, and the DA took the case before a grand jury. The results were perplexing and seemingly did little to propel the case forward. You can help support the show at pareon.com/criminology An Emash Digital production Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Hey there, it's Wayfair here, where delivery and setup are as easy as a few taps on your phone. You're relaxing in an old hammock, scrolling Wayfair's app, when you spot it, a brand new patio set. Next thing you know, Wayfair delivers it right to your patio and sets it up. Oh, you need a new grill, too? All right, Wayfair's got you covered. With Wayfair's room of choice delivery and fast experts set up on qualifying orders, life gets a little easier. Visit Wayfair.com or the Wayfair app. Wayfair, every style, every home. Welcome to another round of Boardroom or Miroboard.

Today we talk retrospectives with Agile Coach Maria. Let's go. First question. You've spent two hours in a team retro, but the only input you've heard is Dave's. Boardroom or Meroboard? Boardroom. In Mero, Dave can't hog the space

because everyone can add thoughts anonymously, online at the same time. Correct. Next. You need the team to act on feedback fast, so you turn all those retro notes into Jira tasks instantly. Mero all the way. And I can assign those tasks to teammates.

You're nailing this. Now, you see hundreds of sticky notes from the retro. A real mess. But you organize them into five themes in just seconds. Mero, I basically get back an entire hour when I use its AI tools for clustering. And she's done it. Join over 60 million people running actually enjoyable

and actionable retros in Miro. Get your first three boards free at Miro.com. That's M-I-R-O-com. Criminology is a true crime podcast that may contain discussion about violent or disturbing topics. Listener discretion is advised. So, everyone, and welcome to episode 301 of the Criminology Podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson. And this is Mike Morford.

Morph, how you doing, man? Doing good. Just keeping busy with sports, fishing, a little bit of relaxing when I can, but excited to get into this episode. Yeah, yeah, me too. So let's not waste any time. Let's go ahead and give our Patreon shout-outs. we had Barb Siketti and Sarah Pugh. So some great new support.

We really appreciate it. Yeah. Thank you so much to everyone that takes the time to support the show. It helps us out a lot. And if you're interested in supporting the show, you can go to patreon.com slash criminology. So in the last episode in part one of our John Bonnet Ramsey coverage, we left off talking about how the Ramsies had essentially left Colorado for Georgia to mourn the death. of John Bonnet and many people that knew the Ramsey's felt that they may never return to their Boulder Colorado home. At the time, police were working hard to solve the case. On April 4th,

1997, John Ramsey returned to work on site at the Access Graphics Office on Pearl Street. By then, the cost of the investigation had topped $110,000. Near the end of the month, John and Patsy sat down for separate interviews with the Boulder Police Department. By May 1997, Patsy Ramsey had provided five different handwriting samples to authorities for comparison to the ransom note. By July, the Ramsey family was living in Atlanta full-time. On November 17, 1997, John Ramsey stepped down as CEO of Access Graphics and took on a consultancy role with Lockheed Martin. In June 1998, 11-year-old Burke Ramsey, Ramsey was interviewed by Broomfield police detective, Dan Schuller, for about six hours

over three days. It seems that police were looking closest to John Bonnet's family. And while many people, even to this day, suspect the Ramsey's, many other people feel that the Boulder police locked in on them early and didn't consider other possible suspects. So I had a couple of thoughts here, Morph. You know, one is that, yeah, obviously the police are going to look at the family because of how everything is thought to have transpired. John Bonae is found in the basement.

No doubt they're going to want to talk to the people in the home. And then I had this other thought of people speculating that the Ramsies probably wouldn't return to their Boulder home. I think it would be very tough to go back and live in that house. I mean, how could you not walk and around every corner just be. reminded of what it happened. Yeah, and I think that would be so difficult to remember, you know, especially for John finding his daughter in that condition, he'll probably never get that out of his mind. And, you know, that would just be a constant reminder every day. So I,

I can understand that. But I think some people that suspect them, they look at the move as an escape almost to get away to distance themselves from it. So I think people have thought that in, you know, the people that believe they had some involvement. But I just want to go back to one thing you touched on. It's a known fact that in murders, the overwhelming majority of the time, the victim is killed by someone they know, not a stranger. It's usually somebody close to them. So that's why police investigations start with those closest to the victims and then fan out

from there as they're able to rule them out and move on to other people. so you would think that the police did the right thing by looking at the Ramses, but a lot of people think they just focused solely on them and never fanned out anyone beyond them. In August 1998, District Attorney Alex Hunter announced that he would present the case to a grand jury, knowing that he and his wife, Priscilla, would likely be subpoenaed to testify, which meant a complete gag order on him regarding the case, Fleet White Jr., decided to publish a letter to the public. According to the Daily Camera, the letter read, in anticipation of receiving a subpoena to appear before the grand jury, we wish at this time to address matters concerning the investigation, which we feel are of great importance to the people of Colorado and the Boulder community.

They found it important to mention that the attorneys the Ramsey's hired had connections to prosecutors, the Denver and Boulder legal and judicial. communities, state legislators, and high-ranking members of Colorado government. While the community may have felt relieved about the news or progress in the case, finally a grand jury would hear all of the evidence and maybe someone would finally be held accountable. But Fleet and Priscilla White were not convinced that justice was the goal of these proceedings. Referencing the White's letter once again that they had published, they wrote, there's compelling evidence that their motivation for presenting the case to a grand jury has little or nothing to do with obtaining new evidence, drilling reluctant witnesses, or returning an indictment, and everything to do with sealing away facts, circumstances, and evidence gathered in the investigation in a grand jury transcript. It seems clear that the whites found it interesting, and many others do too, that the grand jury set to hear the Ramsey case was the first grand jury scheduled.

After a new statute concerning grand jury reporting procedures would take effect. The letter ends on a very strong point. We must be mindful, however, of the first cause of the investigation's failure. The refusal of John and Patsy Ramsey Ramsey to cooperate fully and genuinely with those officially charged with the responsibility of investigating the death of their daughter, John Bennett. On October 13th, 1999, District Attorney Hunter, announced that the grand jury had finished, but that there had not been enough evidence to charge anyone.

They had given it their best shot and come up short. So the investigation, you know, transpired over a couple of years. They finally made it to this point where they were going to present the case to a grand jury. This letter by the whites to me is very interesting. it seems morph to me that they're kind of taken some shots at the Ramsey's basically saying, you know, they didn't cooperate fully. What's your take on it?

Yeah, I took it the same way, but I also felt they were critical to of the grand jury gathering to begin with that maybe the DA was lacking in some regard. And the whites felt that once again, Gagra was in place. They wouldn't be able to talk about this later, so they preempted it with this letter. But it does seem like it's critical of everyone involved. Well, even to the point that they talk about the attorneys that the Ramsey's hired, having connections with, you know, prosecutors, legislators, all these different people in government.

There's a little bit of a conspiracy theory tone to it. But really, not much of anything comes out of the grand jury, right? No one is charged. And really after that, the investigation stalled. A cloud of suspicion hung over the Ramsey family for years following John Bonney's murder. On June 24, 2006, Patsy Ramsey passed away, about three years after a recurrence of ovarian cancer. She was just 49 years old. John was by her side at her parents' house until the very end. Patsy was laid to rest right next to John Bonae. In December, just months after Patsy's death, the investigation into John Bonae's death, which had been dormant, was renewed. A sample of blood taken from her underwear was sent to the FBI for DNA testing and analysis.

In 2008, after years of suspicion hanging over the Ramsey's head and police doing nothing to ease that suspicion, Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacey, formerly clear. the entire Ramsey family of involvement in John Bonnet's murder and issued a public apology. The statement read in part, to the extent that we may have contributed in any way to the public perception that you might have been involved in this crime. I am deeply sorry. There are many people who discount this exoneration in public apology. Stan Garnett, the Boulder District Attorney, after Mary Lacey said that Lacey's exoneration was just that.

Lacey's and Lacey's alone. According to ABC News, Garnett said, this letter is not legally binding. It's a good faith opinion and has no legal importance, but the opinion of the person who had the job before I did,

whom I respect. In short, Garnett was saying that the Ramses were not cleared. Years later in 2015, former Boulder County Police Chief Mark Beckner participated in an AMA. Ask me anything.

on the subreddit unresolved mysteries. He wrote that he did not discount the importance of the DNA evidence, but felt that there was other evidence that should be given equal weight. He also wrote that D.A. Lacey had, quote, made up her mind years before, that a mother could not do that to a child. Thus, the family was innocent. Essentially, the exoneration was based on emotion, not the facts of the case. It was clear that a fact that,

officially the Ramses were still under the microscope. And more if you said it, there's, there's really no way around it in this case. There are many people who to this day feel that the Ramsey's or someone in the family was involved in John Bonaise's death. We talk a lot about people who for many, many years walk around with, you know, this cloud of suspicion hanging over their head. that's exactly what happened here.

And then you have a new DA who comes out and says, not only are we exonerating the Ramses, we're also apologizing for anything that we did to make the public think that you might have been involved. Yeah. And then right after that, the new DA comes out and backtracks on what that former DA says and says, oh, no, that's just her opinion.

There's nothing legally clearing them. So to me, that back and forth from the DA's office, that inconsistency, that unsureness, it doesn't inspire a lot of confidence in me. Well, and it's another thing that we'll be talking about as we, you know, continue throughout this case. Yes, a lot of people suspect that maybe the Ramsies were involved. But then you have a lot of people who look at kind of the whole bolder system. them back then and think that they possibly bungled this whole case. I mean, there's no getting

away from that either. In 2013, it was revealed that the 1999 grand jury had returned an indictment. They had actually charged both John and Patsy Ramsey, with two counts each of child abuse resulting in death. The charges weren't accusing them of directly murder in John Bonnet. However, the grand jury did believe that the Ramseys had placed their daughter in a dangerous situation, and that they had aided her killer. This indictment seems to line up with what authorities have believed in hint at all these years, according to former Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner in a deposition transcript. No note has ever been written at the scene and then left at the scene with the dead victim at the scene other than this case. We specifically looked into this and had

the FBI check the records for any similar case, and ours was, and to my knowledge still is the only case in history where a body was found in the same house as a ransom note demanding money. And I get what Mark Beckner is saying. And it's tough to discount, but there is always a first time for everything. I mean, there's that saying for a reason. It's because it's true, but it's still very odd. I mean, I think we touched on it in episode one. Yeah, and I think we also have to remember that no two murders are identical in every aspect or the killers aren't identical. There's going to be some kind of deviation.

So just because they haven't seen this or it's not common doesn't mean it couldn't have happened in this one instance. Yeah, I get that, but does it make sense? And that's the filter through which I kind of look at everything. You know, as we go through these cases, does it make sense? And I think a lot of other people have asked that question, you know, in regards to this case. Why the need for the ransom note? if John Bonnet was murdered.

Did they write it before and then something happened? Then why leave it? I mean, there's just, there's a lot of questions surrounding it. So the indictment points to the Ramsey's involvement. But it doesn't seem to name either of the Ramsey's as the actual individual who killed John Bonnet. Is there a third person? The grand jury had in mind. Why were no charges brought against the Ramsey's?

if there had been an indictment. So, you know, you go down this road and it's like, okay, what are we missing here about what the grand jury knew? How is the case still unsolved? How do we figure out what the grand jury believed happened? These questions hung over the case for years and really they still do to this day. But to figure out what happened, maybe we need to go back to the beginning. Yeah, there's definitely some things that.

happened in the days leading up to John Bonnet's murder that we need to discuss. The Ramses were looking forward to a quiet Christmas day in 1996, before traveling to see their family in another state. They had just participated in Boulder's annual holiday home tour in which their decorated home was open to the public, and reportedly, well over 1,000 people were able to walk through the Ramsey home and taking its beautifully decorated scenery. Some sources say that that number of strangers allowed to walk through the home was as high as 2,000 people. A friend and neighbor of the Ramses, Bill McReynolds, had dressed up as Santa Claus to entertain neighborhood children in the Ramsey home. He called John Bonnet his special friend

and promised the six-year-old a secret visit on Christmas Day. So John Bonnet was excited for Christmas to arrive. And following a busy week, it would be a quiet, relaxing one for the four Ramses, John, Patsy, Burke, and John Bonnet. As far as we know, John Bonnet had a normal Christmas on December 25th, 1996. Everyone woke up around six because as many parents know, that's about as long as the kids can wait to open up their presents. So it's usually a day when kids don't have much trouble at all, getting out of bed. After all, the presents were opened, Patsy made pancakes for breakfast. Burke was already glued to his Nintendo 64. John Bonae loved her jewelry making kit. One discrepancy is that John and Patsy claim that only John Bonnet got a new bike for Christmas, but years later,

as an adult, Burke would claim they both got bikes as presents. Patsy's big present to John Bonae was a My Twin doll, which was based off of photos of her and was supposed to look just like her. Usually the Ramses would record their Christmas celebration, but there's no video from that morning the last Christmas together because John forgot to get batteries for the video camera. There were batteries, however, in the film camera, so a few photos were taken. And my kids are grown. They're off to college. I mean, Christmas is different now.

But when I think back to when they were young, you know, this is what we experienced as well. I mean, they woke up before I ever wanted to get out of bed. but there was no, you know, holding them off. They were so excited, you know, jumping on the bed. Get up, mom, get up dad. And then I was always in charge of the video camera. And it was just always amazing to see how excited they got over certain presents.

And I always just thought it was a magical day. Yeah. And this Christmas for the Rams, he seemed like a pretty normal one, one that a lot of us probably have just laying around, open presents, not in a hurry to do much. Everybody's sort of doing their own thing, playing with their presence that they got. So nothing unusual up to this point of that day. Later that day, some of the neighborhood children came over to play at the Ramsey's house. That night, the Ramses went to the home of their good friends, Priscilla and Fleet White Jr.,

who lived about a mile away. The whites had a daughter that was John Bonnet's age and a son, Burke's age. Priscilla made sure to save a plate of cracked crab for John Bonnet because she loved it so much. The last photo of John Bonnet, looking up into the camera, was taken here during this gathering. On their way home from the White's party, the Ramsey stopped by the homes of some friends to drop off presents. First the walkers, then the Steins. According to Patsy, John Bonnet had fallen asleep and it was late, so they decided not to drop off their final gift for the Fernies. That would have to wait.

Now we said this seemed like a normal Christmas that maybe a lot of us have experienced. I will say this. I think the Ramsies had a lot more money than most of us do. I don't remember ever, you know, breaking out the cracked crab for Christmas. Yeah, I think for a lot of us, it's cold cuts and lunch meat and stuff like that. At around 10 p.m. on Christmas night, the Ramsey's returned home. The versions vary here. Patsy and John have generally claimed that John Bonaugh fell asleep in the car on the way home from the White's house and that John carried her upstairs to bed.

Burke Ramsey later as an adult recalled her walking up the stairs that night. In his memory, she did fall asleep in the car but woke up to help deliver presents to the Steins and walked inside the house with everyone else when they got home. once in her bedroom, however they got there. John said he took her shoes off, but left her in what she was wearing, figuring Patsy would change her into a nightgown or pajamas. Patsy originally said she didn't change John Bonae out of the white long-sleeved top and black velvet pants she was wearing at the party. Both John and Patsy apparently told officers John Bonae had last been wearing a red long-sleeved turtleneck when she went to bed. this inconsistency in what she was last seen wearing and whether or not she was even awake it's part of what makes people wonder whether or not John Bonnet ever made it to bed that night. One of the first reports was that John Ramsey read to John Bonnet after he put her in bed.

This like many things would change. It's unknown exactly when John Bonnet was attacked. There is basically a gap from 10 p.m. when the Ramsey's claimed to have placed her in bed until 5.50. 2 a.m. the next morning. In the morning, Patsy appeared to be wearing a full face of makeup and had on the same clothes she was wearing to the White's Christmas party the night before. This is something by all accounts Patsy never did. She was not one to rewear an outfit. So it only stood out as suspicious and out of character. Whatever you make of Patsy wearing the same clothes and makeup

from the night before when she woke up and headed down the spiral staircase. That's when she claim she found the ransom note on the bottom step. And to me more, if there's a lot of things here that people make something out of, it could be something, it could be nothing. Would it be strange to find the ransom note, call the police, and then go in and put on makeup? Most people don't realize how much of their personal information is being bought and sold every day. Data brokers are making millions pulling details about you from public records and the internet, then packaging and selling it, usually without your consent. That's how your information lands in the hands of scammers, spammers, even stalkers.

It's why you get endless robocalls and why ads seem to follow you everywhere. That's where ORA comes in. ORA actively removes your data from broker sites and keeps it off. They also instantly alert you if your information shows up in a breach or on the the dark web. But ORA goes beyond data protection. With one app, you get a VPN, antivirus, password manager, spam call protection, dark web monitoring, and even up to $5 million in identity theft insurance, all backed by 24-7 U.S.-based fraud support. Other companies might just sell credit monitoring or just a VPN. ORA gives you all of it, together, at the same price

competitors charge for just one service. Start your free trial today at ORA.com. slash hidden. Protect yourself now at a ura.com slash hidden. In the suburbs of D.C., a woman fails to show up for work and is found brutally murdered. I wonder what's emergency. We just walked in the door and there's blood in the foyer. For the next two decades, the case remained unsolved until new technology allowed investigators to do what had once been impossible. A new series from ABC Audio in 2020. Blood and water.

Listen now, wherever you get your podcasts. I think it would be, but the makeup combined with wearing the same outfit, it leads many to think that she either went to bed that way, woke up that way, or didn't sleep much. And the one thing I don't know is whether she was drinking, going to these different homes, maybe they were having drinks, and maybe by the time she got home, she was tired, maybe a little drunk.

And I've been there where I've had a few drinks and just crashed late at night and with whatever I was wearing and woke up in the morning and took a shower and got changed. Maybe that was her plan. I don't know. And you decided not to take your makeup off? Well, now, the makeup part I didn't have to worry about. But the clothes part, I can understand.

Yeah, I just think it's one of those things that, and there are a lot of, of this type of stuff, right? In this case, does it mean something or does it mean nothing at all? If you love chilling mysteries, unsolved cases, and a touch of mom-style humor, Moms and Mysteries is the podcast you've been searching for. Hey guys, I'm Mandy. And I'm Melissa. Join us every Tuesday for Moms and Mysteries, your gateway to gripping, well-researched true crime stories. Each week, we deep dive into a variety of mind-boggling cases as we shed light on everything from heist to who-done-it. where you're a go-to podcast for Mysteries with a Motherly Touch. Subscribe now to Moms and Mysteries wherever you get your podcast.

We did discuss a lot of the ransom note in part one of our John Bonnet coverage, but one thing we didn't touch on is the cinematic theme of some of the statements in that note. It almost reads like someone is copying ransom calls from movies. They're meant to sound tough and intimidating in regards to the theatrical hints in the ransom note. Former Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacey told ABC News, The Boulder Police should have checked all the video stores to see who was running those movies, and they never did. It is true, some of the lines from the Ransom Note are very similar to lines from movies.

The 1994 movie Speed, starring Keanu Reeves, includes the line, Do Not Attempt to Grow a Brain, which is included almost verbatim in the ransom note. The 1971 movie Dirty Harry includes the line, If You Talk to Anyone, I Don't Care if it's a Pekingese pissing against a lamp post. the girl dies, which is very similar to the stray dog reference in the Ramsey Ransom Note. The 1986 movie Ruthless People includes the lines, if you notify the police, your wife will be killed.

If you notify the media, she will be killed. If you deviate from our instructions in any way whatsoever, she will be killed. Do you understand? These are very similar to the ransom note, too. The 1995 movie, Nick of Time, includes the threat. you talk to a cop, you even look at a cop too long in your daughter's dead. I'll kill her myself. Cut the head off right in front of you, which is similar to the ransom note. And in fact, this very movie actually aired on cable in Boulder at 7.30 p.m. on Christmas.

We're left to wonder whether the author of the notes saw these movies or if they were just trying so hard to sound like a kidnapper that they ended up rewriting things from movie scripts. and if these quotes were deliberate, was the author just a fan of these kinds of movies? Did they need a script? Or was the use of some of these quotes just some kind of message? It's debated how many times the author would have needed to see these movies to remember the line so closely. In 1996, before the internet was widely available, there was no way to Google ransom notes from movies. In 1996, the author of the note either really liked kidnapping movies and was perhaps inspired by them,

sought out kidnapping movies to help them in their plan, had recently seen the movies and the lines popped into their head, or they were trying very hard to sound, intimidating, and it ended up sounding very Hollywood. Like Mary Lacey said, knowing who had been running those movies may have been helpful. As far as we know, none of the movies we mentioned were found in the Ramsey's personal video collection.

So some of these lines from the Ransom Note, you know, they're very interesting. I wanted to talk about in episode one, but we decided we'd wait and talk about it in the second one. I remember, you know, the line from speed really jumped out of me where Dennis Hopper says, don't try to grow a brain. It's such a strange saying. I don't know how many people would use that in their everyday vocabulary. So for it to wind up in this letter.

along with other quotes that seem to come from movies. It does make you think that the letter was written by someone pretending to be a criminal, not a hardened criminal, but pretending to be one based off of what they had seen in movies. And then I think the other thing is that the internet was, you know, out there, obviously, in 1996. the Ramsey's had money. What we don't know is, you know, did they have the internet?

Did the police check their computers? I mean, that would be so automatic today for the police to kind of seize the computers, check the search history. I don't think it was that common back then. Yeah, and it's interesting to think about the internet growth. Because I think by that year there was something like 16 million. in people worldwide that had the internet. So not just anybody would be able to jump online and search up movie references.

So how they were able to know all those movie references, use them where they got that material from is a very interesting thing to think about. While the language in the ransom note is clearly interesting, it's the ransom amount in the note that has never really made sense to anyone. and it really kind of stands out. One unnamed source mentioned by the Boulder Daily Camera stated, it's just a weird amount that may have been the salary of a disgruntled employee. Pat Corton, the Ramsey's media consultant, confirmed for the Daily Camera,

that the amount roughly matched John Ramsey's urine bonus for 1995, which he would have received around February of 1996, almost a year before John Bonnet was killed. It may have been printed on paystubs and could have been seen by someone rifling through papers in the Ramsey home. An unnamed source quoted by the Boulder Daily Camera said that this amount was pretty significant because it shows that the person who did this obviously knew the family in its financial situation very well.

And I do think that that amount has always intrigued people because of the fact that it closely matched John's bonus, it does kind of lend to the theory that either someone put it in there because they knew the Ramsey so well, they were familiar with what his bonus was, or it wasn't someone that knew the Ramsey's well, but found some type of paperwork inside the house that maybe showed what his bonus was. Yeah, I think at the end of the day, it's a, it's a big clue because it clearly seems to be connected to that bonus, but it also doesn't lead anywhere. It's okay, they either knew them and knew about this bonus amount or they didn't know them and just happened to find it. So it doesn't really help us clear things up, unfortunately. Yeah, because what does it mean? Other than it may or may not be linked to this bonus, my thought is if you're getting

that much from a bonus, because that has a boatload of money, especially in 1996, obviously your salary is really high. You have a lot of money. You could ask for more than that bonus amount. It just seems specifically odd, that exact number. So one interesting thing would be, you know, for a second, let's assume that some outsider didn't just find his pay stub and use that amount on that letter. Then the question becomes how many people knew about that specific amount? Did they tell anybody about it, friends or anybody in particular?

Or would it point to somebody that may be at the company that has access to it? So if you take out the outsider for a moment, a stranger just coming upon that, maybe that does shrink the pool down of who they should be looking at. Then again, as some people suspect, if this was written by the Ramses, then they too would know that amount.

And in that scenario, maybe it just came to their mind because it was a, you know, a sizable amount that they had gotten during the past year. I think that's what maybe a lot of people speculate. or something along those lines. The ransom note was written on a notepad that belonged to the Ramsey's, specifically Patsy.

The pen was also still in the house, right where it belonged. When asked for a handwriting sample, it's been reported that John Ramsey grabbed Patsy's notepad, then added his own sample on a page. He handed the evidence right over to police. What has been called a practice note was found in the notepad. It just read, Mr. and Mrs. with a downstroke, like someone was going to write an R for Ramsey. It's as if the author changed their mind and decided to address the note to only John. There were pages missing in between the practice page and the pages used for the ransom note

that have not been found. According to the Denver Post, handwriting experts at the Colorado Bureau of Investigation ruled out John Ramsey as the ransom note, but they couldn't do the same for Patsy. After comparing one Patsy handwriting sample to the ransom note, Chet Ubalski, of CBI concluded, this handwriting showed indications that that the same thing. The answererner, the writer was Patsy Ramsey. I think we need to point out that handwriting examination is not exact science or physical science, like fingerprints or DNA. It's based on someone's opinion. And I really do think that the ransom note is such a big thing in this case for them to rule out John, but not be able to rule out Patsy. I think has led to the speculation on the part of many that,

you know, she was somehow involved, just the fact that they couldn't rule out that she had written the ransom note. Yeah, I think this was just one of the things that was a checkmark for her looking guilty to some people, the fact she couldn't be ruled out, but had she been cleared the way John was, maybe it would have been a checkmark in the other column. While many people think some big clues can be found in the ransom note, other people believe that there is more to the very end of the 911 call. Apparently, after Patsy thought she hung up,

the phone remained awkwardly in the cradle, not yet ending the call. According to Vanity Fair, it's believed by some that Burke Ramsey can be heard in the background, asking, what did you find? A terse John Ramsey replies, we're not talking to you, while Patsy panics repeating,

oh my Jesus, or help me, Jesus. This language, people think they can hear at the end of the call is commonly used as proof that the Ramses lied about the entire morning. Not only was Burke not asleep in his bed, like John and Patsy told police, he was up and speaking to his parents, clearly aware something was wrong, but very calm. And more if we are talking a lot about what some people believe. And I think that's a very important point to make. You have to talk about those things when you talk about this case.

Doesn't mean they're true. Doesn't mean they're not true. And when you listen to that end of that 911 call, it's really garbled and you could ask 50 people and get 50 different opinions on what they hear. So again, not science, but we're solid evidence, but again, just something that makes the Ramses look guilty to some. And I also think it's very natural for people to hear something that backs up what they already

believe, right? If you're in the camp of people who believe that the Ramsey's were trying to cover something up or something along those lines, well, then you want to hear it a certain way, possibly. I think that happens. Burke has admitted to being awake that morning. He remembers Patsy rushing into his room in a panic, turning on his late and crying out about her baby. He also remembers John turning off his late,

an officer French arriving and doing a cursory search of the room. It seems as if Burke was just pretending to be asleep. He has never mentioned speaking to his parents that morning before police arrived. So one thing that, you know, I do want to talk about is Burke. Obviously, he's grown up. And he has said things over the years. He's admitted to certain things that probably weren't known about during the, you know, the first parts of the investigation.

Now, I don't know what they mean, you know, admitting to being awake when it was thought that he was asleep. If he had said that, yes, I spoke to my person. parents that morning before police arrived, that would be, you know, I think something to, to look into. And I'd be remiss if I didn't say here that there are many people who believe it's possible that Burke had something to do with John Bonnet's death. And so I think that's why, you know, the, the end of this 911 call, uh, Burke's statements sometimes get picked apart. And I think it's pretty clear even if he was awake, but he never got out of bed that morning.

You know, I don't think that really proves anything. You know, it would certainly, if he never got out of bed, it wouldn't be him on the 911 call. But if it was, you know, would that change your thoughts on certain things or people's thoughts? And I would say, yeah, maybe so. Yeah, because that would mean that the Ramsies, Patsy and John were lying early on. and as an adult, Burke admitted to being awake but never getting out of bed, that would mean he was lying too. But there's no proof that he ever got out of bed that morning.

So let's talk about some actual tangible physical evidence. The broken basement window that Fleet White discovered in the basement definitely stands out. First, it's odd that despite being broken months earlier, it hadn't been fixed. I think we talked about that a little bit. in episode one, the Ramsey's had money. It wasn't a question of not having the money to get that fix. Maybe it was just about time. Maybe it was, you know,

forgiveness. You know, they could afford the extra heating, cooling costs. But there's also, you know, bugs, small animals that could get inside.

Or children playing near a broken glass. So that question comes up. Why not fix the window? On the other hand, if the Ramses were somehow involved, as some believe, why would John immediately confess that he had broken the window and that it had never been fixed? If he was guilty, that broken window would only help him look more innocent. So it wouldn't make sense to say that he was the one who broke it just to paint a better picture of that window leading into the basement. is situated very low on the home, and to access it,

you need to lift metal grates and climb down to the window in order to get through it. The great area and window itself was not very large, so not every person would be able to get in and out through it, although we know from John Ramsey

that he was able to do it. Lou Smith, a former Colorado detective, came out of retirement. to assist the Boulder DA in building a case against the Ramses. Two years into his investigation, he resigned completely convinced of the Ramsey's innocence. And he felt the Boulder authorities had blinders on, focused solely on the Ramsey's and nobody else. He demonstrated for a 2020 camera crew in an episode about the case just how easily he could make his way in and out of the basement. and he felt that John Bonnet's killer could have done the very same thing.

The Ramses actually insisted that all the doors and windows were locked when they went to bed, and they were still locked in the morning when they were searching for John Bonnet. According to them, there was no clear point of entry or exit, no forced entry that they could see. Again, if you're the Ramsey's and you're trying to cover up what you did and point to an outsider, why go out of your way to say that you can find no evidence of an outsider getting into your house? why would they point away from the possibility that an intruder was able to get inside the home? For those that believe in the Ramsey's innocence, this seems to strengthen the case for them. As far as who the Ramsey suspected of killing John Bonae, John seemed to look toward disgruntled access graphics employees,

who would not have had keys and would have needed to break in, possibly through the window, while Patsy looked to the housekeeper who had a key to the home. It's not clear how much Boulder police looked into ex-employees or into the housekeeper. In one of these scenarios, John Bonaise killer wouldn't have had access to get into the home. And in the other scenario, they potentially had a key. We touched on the broken window leading into the basement. Now let's talk about the suitcase found in the basement near that window. Coming in from that window could have been pretty simple.

Someone could have dropped down to the floor. But getting back out through the window, Fresh air, longer days, a chance to reset. This season, let therapy be part of your spring cleaning. Clearing mental clutter, shaking off stuckness, and building something better. Grow therapy helps you get there. Whether it's your first time in therapy or your 15th, grow makes it easier to find a therapist who fits you, not the other way around.

They connect you with thousands of independent licensed therapists across the U.S., offering both virtual and in-person sessions, nights and weekends. You can search by what matters, like insurance, specialty, identity, or availability, and get started in as little as two days. And if something comes up, you can cancel up to 24 hours in advance at no cost. There are no subscriptions, no long-term commitments. You just pay per session. Grow helps you find therapy on your time.

Whatever challenges you're facing, Grow Therapy is here to help. Grow accepts over 100 insurance plans, including Medicaid in some states. Sessions average about $21 with insurance, and some pay as little as $0.0 depending on their plan. Visit growtherapy.com slash book now to get started. That's growth therapy.com slash book now. Growtherapy.com slash book now. Availability and coverage vary by state and insurance plan. It would be a bit harder and would require them to climb up to it in order to get out.

The suitcase was positioned almost like someone was planning to use or had used it as a step to climb up and into the window well. A single piece of glass was on top of the suitcase. Fleet White had put it there after picking it up from the floor. On the wall above the suitcase, there was clearly a visible scuff mark. One theory is that someone planned to take John Bonnet out of the hall. in the suitcase. Sometimes in this theory it's an intruder hoping to use the suitcase to transport her out of the house before things went wrong and the kidnapping turned into a murder. Some people who believe the Ramses were involved believe they had planned to take John Bonaise's body out of the

house through the window in the suitcase to dispose of it. But if that's the case, why try to climb through the window with it instead of just bringing it up through the home and out the front door. Not only that, but if that's your plan to get rid of her body, why call 911 before you've taken her body away to dispose of? And I think these are big questions. Again, going back to the idea of what makes sense or the question, does this make sense? There's some questions here that are hard to answer. If you're in the camp who believes the Ramses were involved. While the window and suitcase may be important clues in this case, perhaps the one that might yield the best evidence or lead to a break in the case is the evidence found on John Bonnet's

body, most significantly the ligature, often referred to as a garot. The rope around John Mene's neck didn't seem to actually function as one. It did have the makeshift paintbrush handle, but it wouldn't actually tighten as you twisted it. This device, whatever you want to call it, was obviously constructed in the basement. Not only was John Bonaise's hair tangled into the knot tied around the stick, one broken section of the saint paintbrush was found in Patsy's paint tray on the floor of the basement. The other end has never been found. Scientific analysis of this ligature and collection of evidence from it may provide DNA, fibers, or hairs that might one day solve this case.

But again, Morph, if one or both of the Ramses, especially Patsy's, especially Patsy, is guilty of trying to cover up what happens to John Bonnet. It seems as though they used items that could be directly linked right to them. It's very counterintuitive to a coverup. What kind of coverup trying to point away from yourself exclusively uses items that can be traced to you? There's Patsy's notepad, Patsy's paintbrushes. And I think, you know, this is one of the main arguments for the intruder theory. And it, perhaps an intruder who knew and hated the Ramses and maybe even wanted to frame them. Patsy's paint tray was found just outside the wine cellar door on top of a urine stain.

This area appeared to be where John Bonae had been lying on her stomach when her bladder released after the assault and after being redressed. How she got to that area and whether or not she had already been hit on the head at that time is still unknown. Some people see this literature as a toggle rope used for dragging rather than a garot used for controlling. This theory is usually linked to Burke and him possibly being involved in his sister's death. The theory being that if he accidentally killed her, he may not have been strong enough to lift her 45-pound body up and carry her away and would have needed to drag her. And if she had been dragged by the neck, there would likely have been more evidence of that,

and her arms were above her head, indicating that if she was dragged at all, it would have been by the legs. The most common theory where Burke is involved in his sister's death is that he got angry and hit her over the head, causing the skull fracture and her immediate loss of consciousness, and that he either strangled her to death after the blow to her head or that he alerted his parents. And to cover up what he did, they strangled her to death

and then put into emotion, an elaborate hoax about an intruder being responsible. And obviously we're talking about a whole boatload of theories here. because essentially that's what you have in this case. A lot of different theories about who could be responsible for John Bonnet's death. I specifically, you know, really want to talk about this theory that it was Burke and then John and Patsy were involved in the cover up. Is it possible that at nine years old,

Burke could have, you know, gotten angry with his sister, hit her on the head, hurt her badly. And I would say yes. That is possible. Is it as possible that at nine years old, he would have known how to make a grot out of a paintbrush handle? And I would say, maybe a little less plausible there. And then you have to talk about a mother and father making the decision that in order to save their son, they're either going to kill their daughter or cover up the fact that their son killed their daughter.

Now, that first one to me is a very tough sell. Yeah, I agree. It's inconceivable to me that anyone could ever, when their child is her near death, that they could ever finish the job, so to speak, and strangle them the death just to help cover up with the other child. There's no scenario possible where if my son and daughter did something to the other one that I would ever do something like that. And I think most parents would agree there's just no scenario where they can ever do that. And even if you were going to try to help one child out, doesn't it seem more likely that you would make up some type of scenario where there was an accident and frame it that way? I don't know. Some of that stuff is just a tough sell for me.

Doesn't mean it couldn't have happened. It's just harder for me to wrap my head around. Yeah. And those that think Burke could have done it. Again, we mentioned how bad that skull fracture was in our first part. You know, he basically her skull was cracked in half. So if Burke did that to her with whatever kind of weapon it was that wasn't determined, would he have been strong enough to inflict an injury like that?

That's another thing that I think sort of goes against him being involved. One interesting clue we're talking about has to do with pineapple. At autopsy, fresh pineapple was found in John Bonae's small intestine. This indicated that it had been eaten about one hour before her death, long enough to make it past her stomach, but not long enough to be completely digested. The pineapple appeared to be consistent, down to the rind, with a bowl of fresh pineapple on the table. In the breakfast room of the Ramsey's house, this bowl had a large spoon in it. Next to the bowl was a glass with a tea bag in it.

It's unclear if the glass was used to discard a tea bag or if someone tried to make tea in a glass with cold or lukewarm water instead of a mug. Burke's fingerprint was on the glass. and both his and Patsy's were on the bowl. All of the Ramsey's denied knowledge of the pineapple. Or that John Bonnet got up to eat a snack. And remember, according to the Ramses, on Christmas night, they had brought John Bonnet to her bed after she had fallen asleep in the car and tucked her in. But at some point after this, John Bonnet ingested pineapple.

Some people argue that the pineapple is likely from fruit cocktail and that cherries and grape skins were also found in John Bonae's small intestine. The explanation here is that she ate fruit cocktail at the whites. However, the most popular theory that has Burke responsible for John Bonae's death is a fight over the pineapple left out on the table. Perhaps John Bonae grabbed some of Burke's late-night snack and it upset him, causing him to react and he hit her head with a flashlight or a baseball bat. Or maybe they were enjoying the snack together when she threatened a towel about something

or just annoyed him like little sisters sometimes do, resulting in John and Patsy covering up what happened. But we also need to talk more about the genital injuries. Found on John Bonnet at autopsy, doctors seemed to disagree about the nature of the injuries. However, not all of the people giving opinions about the cause had access to the same materials to review. As we mentioned in part one,

Dr. Kirshner only had the autopsy report, he told the daily camera without seeing the autopsy photographs, it's hard to say whether it could be an inaccurate measurement, prior injury, or normal anatomic variation. John Bonaise pediatrician, Dr. Francesco Buf, denied any evidence of prior sexual abuse. While John Bonae had been examined by the doctor multiple times, not long before she died, it's not likely the examiner. it's not likely the exams were as thorough as her autopsy was in her genital region if that area was examined at all by the doctor. Some of John Bonnet's visits were for injuries or allergies, so there would really be no reason for the doctor to check for sexual abuse during those exams. The last time that area is even mentioned in her medical records that we have access to is in 1995. when she had chicken pox, which had spread to her genital region.

Some people think that John Meney may have been sexually assaulted or abused on an ongoing basis before she was killed. While most people don't dispute the fact that John Bonae was sexually assaulted at or near the time of her death, there's disagreement whether it was a one-time thing done by her killer, or if she had been the victim of ongoing sex abuse for some time. What we do see argued is that the chronic inflammation found at all top, was not a sign of chronic sexual abuse. Dr. Jones Sluke, pediatrician with the Ballard College of Medicine in Houston,

as reported in a summary report by Detective Linda Arndt, stated that poor hygiene can sometimes cause chronic inflammation. While John Bonae was potty trained, she was still having accidents overnight sometimes. She had regressed since 1993, when Patsy's cancer symptoms were severe and the household was in upheaval. In April 1994,

John Bonae was diagnosed with vaginitis and a bladder infection. She was given antibiotics, and Patsy was told not to use bubble bath, as it can irritate the area. In September 1993, the area along with her buttocks was chafed from diarrhea. We've not seen the materials we would need to review to be able to even make a guess

as to the cause of the chronic inflammation, and we certainly don't have the education needed to give that kind of opinion. According to Dr. Cyril Wecht and Detective Arndt's report, with epithelial erosion, that would suggest something that is older, some type of instrumentality that was rubbed against the vaginal wall and caused it to erode. And according to Dr. Kirshner, her hyminal opening was about twice the diameter it should be. It's hard to ignore those two opinions because they indicate. something greater than irritation from bubble bats or bad hygiene.

Unfortunately, the identity of the person who may have been abusing John Bonnet, if there was one, was not obvious from the injuries, which could have been caused by an object or a finger. This would become another thing for people to argue about in this case. But if it was proven that John Bonnet was the victim of ongoing sex abuse and then was murdered, that abuse and who is responsible may become that much more important. Let's talk about some more evidence, that being the underwear, John Bonnet was found wearing. They were part of a set that each had a day of the week printed on them.

She was in the Wednesday pair, but they were too large for her. This ended up being a pair that was part of a set. Patsy and John Bonnet had picked out at Bloomingdale to send an older family member. They were a size 12, much larger than the size 6, John Bonnet normally. wore. Interestingly, Christmas was on a Wednesday that year, giving a clue about when John Bonnet was redressed. In 2000, Patsy claimed she had put the underwear in John Bonnet's underwear drawer, but many people still think they may have been wrapped in the basement with other presents waiting to go to family and friends. If this were true, then someone needed to redress John Bonnet without going back

upstairs. And I think there are a number of questions, you know, regarding the underwear. Patsy claimed that she had put them in John Bonaise's underwear drawer, but you would think that she would realize these are way too big. These can't be John Bonaise. And then I think there's an overarching question, which is, why would the killer need to redress John Bonae at all? Yeah, I think to some people, maybe that points to that the killer is somebody that cared for John Bonnet, and we hear about murder victims who are covered by their killer out of respect or that it shows a level of care or love. So some people might point to her being addressed as a sign that someone who did this to her cared about her and didn't want her to be found completely nude. But all these things that we're talking about, right? I think they just, you know, lead to the fascination in this case.

There's so many questions that so far have not been able to be conclusively answered. And I think in this case, there's no bit of evidence that can be more important or consequential than DNA evidence. And there are unknown DNA profiles in this case. DNA was collected from under John Bonnet's fingernails, but some, however, argue that this could be contamination. from the fingernail clippers at the morgue. There was also a DNA profile pulled from the blood in John Bonnet's underwear. This is generally thought to be saliva, though it can be argued that the presence of urine caused it to appear to be saliva,

rather than other types of DNA. But the discussion of this DNA and science behind it really gets involved, and it's hard to understand for many casual observers. These DNA profiles have been referenced in the media since at least January 1999. The problem is no one knows how the DNA got where it was found. So the importance is disputed. Many believe it's a mixture of multiple different innocent touch DNA profiles, which is why the single profile doesn't match anyone,

including anyone in the Ramsey family. In 2016, there were reports that the DNA on John Bonnet's long jogs was from at least two different people. Some people think that the DNA is from a factory worker who folded the underwear that John Bonae was redressed in. After all, it seemed like it had been pulled straight from the package as part of the staging. One controversial, but possibly very important clue in John Bene's case, was whether or not a stun gun may have been used on her. There are marks on her face and back that some people think are stun gun marks. others think that the ends of Burke's electric train track match much more closely.

If it was the train track, it doesn't automatically implicate Burke since the train set was in the basement near where John Bonnet was likely attacked and killed. John Bonnet's parents and family and even good family friends would have no reason to need to threaten or incapacitate her with a stun gun. She would have likely willingly followed them into the basement, or out of the home quietly. Only an intruder, a sadistic one at that, would need to use a stun gun. on a six-year-old girl in order to get her to comply. To this day, there's quite a debate amongst the experts

as to whether or not a stun gun was used. Another potential major clue was a boot print found at the scene. There was a high-tech boot logo in the muck on the wine cellar floor. It was unclear who had left it, but it was possibly from the killer. Many hope this could identify the killer, or at least who placed her body there, Though the brand of boot could be identified, the logo didn't give any information about the size of the shoe or the wearer. Eventually, articles began to confirm that this boot print belonged to Burke.

It's not exactly a smoking gun because Burke had a whole room he liked to play in down in the basement in what he called his train room, which had an electric train set. He was down in the basement a lot. The Ramses also kept their wrapped presents down in the basement. And it's possible Burke snooped in the wine cell before Christmas. His birthday was coming up too. So they would have had presents hidden after Christmas. And it would be pretty obvious that they were for him. Maybe he snooped when they got home from the whites.

Of course, if the boot print was Burke's and he didn't have anything to do with his sister's death, then it seems like a pretty worthless clue. So let's consider a couple theories. We've already talked a bit about them, but there are two main often competing theories in this case, and one of them has to be correct. Many people suspect that John Bonae was killed by someone who belonged in that home, and that at least one of the Ramses was directly responsible for John Beney's murder.

Well, many others believe that she was killed by someone outside of the family, usually called the intruder theory. Some theories blur the lines and combine elements of both, but there are truly two main camps in this case. especially in online discussions. So let's look at the theory that has one of the Ramses killing John Bonae in many cases where a child is murdered in their own home. One or both parents is responsible.

So it's natural to look toward the people who lived in the home when we look for a suspect in this case. After all, the ransom note had been written on a pad of paper that belonged to the Ramsies and it had even been written with their Sharpie. Both items were still in the home, neatly where they belonged, when investigators arrived on the morning of December 26, 1996. In January 1997, friends of the Ramsey family were reporting that investigators were looking for signs of past abuse. Shirley Brady, who had been the family's nanny from 1986 to 1989 in Atlanta, told the Daily Camera. They asked me if the first divorce ended.

because of child abuse, or if I had heard anything about child abuse ever mentioned. She also noted that investigators specifically asked her how the children acted when they were around their daddy. The investigation had expanded to include Elizabeth Ramsey too, though she hadn't been murdered. She had died in a car crash. A family friend speaking to the daily camera said, The police have asked me about child abuse and how Beth acted around her dad and how John Bonnet acted around her dad. I told them that children love their father. He's a very kind person. By May 1st, 1997, John Ramsey was well aware that many people suspected him. According to the Daily

Camera, he said, speaking directly to the media, to those of you who may want to ask, let me address it very directly. I did not kill my daughter, John Manet. He denied what he called innuendos about sexual abuse. He said, John Bonay and I had a very close relationship, and he added that, I will miss her dearly for the rest of my life. So I just want to say this more. If you are a father and your daughter is murder, first of all, you have to deal with that, which is unthinkable. And then if you had nothing to do with it whatsoever, to have people suspect you of

murdering your daughter, sexually abusing your daughter, that is very tough stuff to deal with. Yeah, I think an allegation like that would just be so hurtful on top of the fact that you've already lost your daughter, brutally murdered, and then have people think that you had something to do with it and that you may have been sexually abusing it. It would be horrible to be in his shoes. And as we've said, you know, there are people who suspect the Ramses, but there are also many people who feel very sorry for them. And what happened to them as a result of their daughter's death. you have to say that as well. In the summer of 1997, Detective Arndt went on an extended break

using her medical leave as the Denver Post described it to deal with the physical exhaustion and strength. The investigation caused her. In March 1999, she resigned from the Boulder Police Department. Later that year, Artst spoke to Good Morning America.

On the show, she said, there's no doubt in my mind, who killed John Bonae. But we were left to one. who she suspected because she wouldn't identify the individual or individuals by name. She went on to say, while this investigation is still ongoing, I don't think it's appropriate that I say that name out loud. It seems that Arndt didn't feel like anything would change, the eventual outcome of the investigation, as she said very confidently. The person who killed

John Bonnet will not see justice as we would like to see. But she didn't explain. She didn't explain why she thought this. So there were questions. Was the suspect dead? Was this a very powerful person? Was there not enough evidence that the person could be charged? What was keeping justice so far from reach, even with the identity of her killer? The only real hint we had about aren't suspicion is that she recalled being terrified when she saw John Ramsey holding John Benet's lifeless body. They locked eyes in what the daily camera described as a nonverbal exchange, and it caused her, as the Denver Post described, to consciously count out the 18 bullets in her gun. She did this, she explained, because she didn't know if they'd all be alive when people showed up. Arndt was much more clear

during a later deposition saying it was clear that John had killed John Meney. At the time of the deposition, she also believed that Patsy was involved in presenting the murder as something other than a murder. So first off, that's a pretty strong statement to make during a deposition. It was clear that John had killed John Bonnet. Now, the second part of that statement, I really didn't understand where she said that she believed that Patsy was involved in presenting the murder as something other than a murder. What does that mean? Yeah, I think from all the evidence, this was clearly no one here, the Ramses or anyone else,

is saying this is some kind of accident that happened, that she accidentally was found in the basement with a, with bindings on and strangled. That ransom note, that wasn't an accident. I think everyone agrees all the way around that this is no accident. So how Detective Arndt was saying that Patsy was involved in something that presented the case as something other than a murder is kind of, kind of strange.

Unless she was directly referring to. to maybe writing the ransom note to throw the police off? I don't know. And maybe that harkens back to, you know, if she was one of the believers that Patsy's handwriting matched that letter, then maybe that sold her on the fact Patsy was involved. John wasn't the only Ramsey under suspicion. They all were.

Although in March 1997, John Andrew and Melinda were officially clear to suspects due to their verified alibi. Patsy told the Daily Camera, I'm appalled that anyone would think that John or I would be involved in such a hideous, heinous crime, adding, but let me assure you that I did not kill John Bonnet and did not have anything to do with this. According to author Lawrence Schiller, in a Daily Camera article, all the detectives agree that one major mistake had been made in the first week, which was that Patsy Ramsey had not been arrested. Whether or not she was the killer, authorities believe she was definitely the weak link. Schiller explained that the detectives were sure that if only D.A. Hunter had agreed to jail Patsy, even for a short time, she would have caved. The handwriting is a point of contention for many who follow the case.

It's commonly stated that experts concluded that Patsy's handwriting matched, the handwriting of the ransom note. According to Mark Beckner in a deposition, handwriting experts noted some similarities, but not enough to say she wrote the note. And as we mentioned before, unlike DNA or fingerprints, a handwriting match is not exact signs or physical proof. It's a matter of someone's opinion. So let's say for a moment that John Meney Ramsey was killed by an immediate family member.

What are the possible motives and why covered up? next week in part three of our John Bonnet Ramsey coverage. We'll talk about all of that, as well as looking at the possibility that an outsider is responsible for John Bonnet's death. And we'll also touch on some of the potential suspects in strange or odd nuggets of information in this case as we wrap up John Bonnet's coverage. So that's it for episode two of the John Bonnet Ramsey case. But there's a lot to come. In the last installment, part three, we've talked about. you know, a lot of evidence.

We've talked about a lot of theories, but we're really going to get into, you know, potential suspects. And I think when you start to look at the outsider theory, there's some really interesting people, theories, ideas, again, I think all of it is what makes this case so fascinating

and has captured the attention of people for so many years. And there's definitely a lot of potential suspects and persons of interest that we're going to talk about and some circumstances that make them look good on paper, but we're also going to talk about things that might rule them out. So it's going to be interesting conversation as we wrap up to John Bonnet Ramsey case. If you love the show, but haven't done so yet, take a minute, go out, give us a five-star rating. You can leave a review as well.

But keep telling your friends. Word of mouth about the podcast really helps us out. If you want to find us on social media, you can find us on Acts with the handle at Criminology Pod. We're also on Facebook. Just go to facebook.com slash criminology podcast. And you can join our Facebook discussion group, criminology podcast discussion and fans.

So that's it for another episode of Criminology. But Morph and I will be back with all of you next Saturday night with the final installment, part three on John Bonay Ramsey. So until then for Mike and Morph. We'll talk to you next week. Take care, everyone.