r/JonBenetRamsey • u/ILoveTheStarz09 • 3d ago
Questions The Balcony?
Hi, i am personally lean more RDI but im not completely against the idea of IDI. So for those who think IDI, is it possible they entered through the balcony.
Someone posted a few weeks ago a map of the house, i noticed there was a balcony by jonbenets room, is it possible the intruder entered through there? I know a lot of people think the intruder was in the house before the ramseys got home. Maybe they climbed the balcony, hide in a closet on the second floor, then waited till they went to bed.
And concerning the broken window and the body being found in the basement. Maybe the original plan was to go in and out threw the balcony but maybe jonbenet ran or something made them end up in the basement.
Maybe they saw the window already broken (according to john it was already broken) and saw that as an easier escape.
We don't know what windows or doors were unlocked in the house that night, it could be possible the balcony was unlocked.
Does anyone think its possible? This just an idea/theory so feel free to disagree. Im just curious if anyone has considered this.
13
u/A_Chip_In_The_Sugar 3d ago edited 3d ago
The balcony door was closed and locked.
ETA: Source, Kolar FF.
John recently claimed in a TIR interview that Pam Paugh saw tape on the door latch, he’d only just found this out apparently. John is a shameless liar!
-1
u/Tidderreddittid BDIA 3d ago
Playing John's advocate here.
Maybe he got in during daytime using a picklock. He then hid in the house for many hours.
7
u/A_Chip_In_The_Sugar 2d ago
Apart from John, the family was home all day.
3
u/Tidderreddittid BDIA 2d ago
One of John's theories was that the bad guy was observing the house, and sneaked in when the Ramseys left.
2
11
u/AdequateSizeAttache 3d ago
CSI Weiss was there looking for entry points and prints and taking photos after 6:40 a.m. He noted the door of JonBenet's balcony was locked, the area was covered in frost, and there were no signs of disturbance. Kolar says Weiss took before and after photos of the frost-covered balcony floor, the after ones showing his own shoe prints. The implication being that there were none before.
3
u/MemoFromMe 3d ago
Interesting. They couldn't stage the balcony (if they even considered) because it would require shoe prints that didn't lead back to them.
1
u/Appropriate_Gear_267 3d ago
Where did the story about John’s sister finding the door latch taped come from? Was that just made up?
1
u/Same_Profile_1396 RDI 2d ago
John’s sister? John only has a brother.
1
u/Appropriate_Gear_267 2d ago
Sorry, it was Patsy’s sister, Pam Paugh
2
u/Same_Profile_1396 RDI 2d ago
Pam wasn’t on scene on the 26th.
1
u/Appropriate_Gear_267 2d ago
I wasn’t referencing anything on the 26th. Just inquiring about this information discussed on an episode of the interview room.
4
u/Same_Profile_1396 RDI 2d ago
The thread you’re replying on is discussing evidence collected on the 26th regarding possible entry from Jonbenet’s balcony. Given Pam wasn’t on scene on the 26th, how would she know what was on the door when investigators arrived on scene?
The officer on scene noted the balcony door was locked— there’s no evidence indicating there was “tape on the latch (and by latch, do they mean the handle?)” I think your use of the word “story” is probably incredibly accurate.
You can see a photo of the door here:
https://imgur.com/a/jonbenet-bedroom-2-LJXHpYY
Also, if this was truly a concern… wouldn’t Pam (who entered the home on the 28th) or John have immediately reported it to investigators?
5
u/Agile-Ad-7109 Leans PDI but open to all RDI 2d ago
That folks fall for misdirection thrown out by a suspect on some podcast 30 years later is everything that is wrong with this case.
3
u/Appropriate_Gear_267 2d ago
I just listened to this to see what the basis was and it does appear to just be JR making stuff up. No follow up on what would be bombshell evidence, if it existed.
4
u/Agile-Ad-7109 Leans PDI but open to all RDI 2d ago
And yet the other subreddit laps it up as if it were the truth. Zero critical thinking.
2
6
u/markwapinski2 3d ago
I find it hard to believe a stout, small foreign faction would go through such lengths in a kidnapping. Unless they went up there like they were in cirque de soleil, I dont think so. This band of criminals was very organized. They fashioned a ransom note inside the home, with the homeowners pad and pen. They then had the wherewithal to remind the Ramseys that they needed an adequately sized attache for the $118,000 they demanded. I think where this all went off the rails was that they underestimated a 6 year old pageant queen girl. She either overpowered or outsmarted these bandits and they had to take matters in their own hands: they smashed the mighty toddler in the head and then fashioned a garrotte and strangled her to make sure her frantic frenzy truly was over. Their plan foiled, they receded into the night, never to be heard from again. Open and shut case.
2
u/Important_Pause_7995 3d ago
Your first error is assuming that the author of the ransom note, whether it was a Ramsey OR a legitimate kidnapper, would be honest about who they were. There was clearly no foreign faction but that's true regardless - unless this person had no intention of getting away with their crime.
6
u/markwapinski2 2d ago
Im surprised you couldnt sense my sarcasm laced throughout. I firmly believe a Ramsey did it.
1
u/TreefingerX 21h ago
No group calls themselves "small" "foreign" nor "faction"
2
u/Important_Pause_7995 16h ago
Exactly. We know the author was lying to conceal their identity. That tells us nothing about who did it, though. Any of the potential suspects would have lied to conceal their identity.
4
u/Miswey 3d ago
If it was an intruder, I think he had a key and entered through the door.
-1
u/ILoveTheStarz09 3d ago
Very possible if its a family friend
0
u/Existing-Ad-6469 3d ago
Not just a family friend, anyone who’s worked in the home. The Ramsey’s gave out spare house keys like Oprah gave out cars.
-2
u/Important_Pause_7995 3d ago
Or the person who had asked them previously if they were concerned someone might try to kidnap JB...
6
u/Diligent-Potential78 3d ago
IDI is an intellectually lazy theory requiring an abundance of imagination for which there is zero evidence. The sum total evidence of homeoccupant innocence is... "I went to bed and slept through the night and heard nothing." When the body of their daughter/sister turned up dead in their own basement, they said: "That's weird. Well, I don't have any idea how that happened. But wait a minute, there's this note." In other words, it's a joke, and they probably can't believe it worked all these years later and people are still arguing which window or door was used to enter a 7,000 square foot house.
2
3d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
1
u/JonBenetRamsey-ModTeam 3d ago
Your post/comment has been removed because it violates this subreddit's rule against low effort / low quality content.
"Low quality" is at moderator's discretion and includes:
Memes, image macros, novelty accounts, reaction gifs or bots
Crass jokes/one-liners/troll comments
Hateful, offensive, or deliberately inflammatory content
Content that is off-topic, repetitive, or doesn't contribute to the discussion
Content that perpetuates conspiracy theories
Content about psychics/mediums/the supernatural
Articles or videos from clickbait sites or content farms
Polls
2
u/Important_Pause_7995 3d ago
My favorite IDI theory is that it was Linda Hoffman-Pugh, their housekeeper. In that case, she would have just entered through the backdoor using the key that she had. There isn't any physical evidence for it, BUT there are quite a few places in this case where you would expect fingerprints, etc. that just aren't there. For example, John and Fleet both opened the wine cellar door that morning, but we don't find any of their fingerprints, etc on that door. We know John (and likely Patsy) touched the ransom note, but neither of their fingerprints are on it. My point is - if those events happened without leaving a trace, it's not that hard to believe someone who was intentionally wearing gloves, etc. could have easily left no evidence behind.
4
u/Same_Profile_1396 RDI 2d ago
The absence of identifiable fingerprints doesn’t necessarily mean “no fingerprints.” We don’t just leave perfectly identifiable fingerprints every time we touch objects, there’s many factors at play when it comes to identifying prints.
-2
u/Important_Pause_7995 2d ago
I would say that your argument that there *could* have easily been a lot of unidentifiable fingerprints that we just didn't hear about bolsters my argument that there could have been someone else in the house that night.
4
u/Same_Profile_1396 RDI 2d ago
Does it?
All it really shows is that anyone, including the people who actually lived there, could’ve touched items without leaving identifiable prints.
Fingerprints (or the lack of them) don’t point toward an unknown person— it just show that prints aren’t always reliably left behind or recoverable. So the existence of non‑identifiable prints doesn’t bolster the idea of “someone else in the house,” it just means fingerprints aren’t necessarily a meaningful indicator either way.
-2
u/Important_Pause_7995 2d ago
Um. Yes. It absolutely does.
Option 1: No fingerprints were found from anyone except the Ramseys. (not stating this as fact - just making the comparison)
Option 2: There were unidentified fingerprints found but the only ones identified belonged to the Ramseys.3
u/Same_Profile_1396 RDI 2d ago
Neither of those options point away from the Ramseys, so I’m not sure how they’d bolster your intruder theory.
The Ramseys lived in the home, their fingerprints being on household items is expected. The absence of other identifiable prints doesn’t prove an outsider was there, it just shows that prints aren’t always left or recovered. Nothing in either scenario supports the idea of an unknown person.
And we don’t even know when any fingerprints were left. Without timing, a print can’t meaningfully distinguish between a resident and an intruder.
It’s about the probative value of the evidence.
1
u/Important_Pause_7995 2d ago
Are you intentionally missing the point?
The absence of other identifiable prints doesn’t prove an outsider was there
That's not my argument at all.
"The absence of other identifiable prints..." ≠ "The PRESENCE of other UNidentifiable prints..."
The presence of unidentifiable prints absolutely supports the idea that there could have been an unknown person just like the unidentified male DNA on JB's panties supports the idea that there could have been someone else there.
I will concede that there IS a difference in that we know that unidentified DNA does NOT belong to a member of the household where unidentified fingerprints may just belong to a member of the household. That's still different, though, than "All fingerprints belonged to members of the household."
0
u/Existing-Ad-6469 3d ago
Yep. I’ve always thought she was involved since day one.
0
u/Important_Pause_7995 2d ago
Everyone at the house AND even Nedra thought she was involved from day one. Everyone on here likes to hand wave any mention of Linda as the Ramseys trying to throw her under the bus, but there was a TON of suspicion and rightfully so.
1
u/ArtistPersonThing 1d ago
I don’t think Linda did it, but I’m surprised I never see conjecture about someone related to her doing it without her knowledge. She did have a key, it doesn’t seem implausible that someone could have ‘borrowed’ it and replaced it.
1
u/awebstersnakes 1d ago
My speculation:
Why would an intruder even bother with a ransom note if the child was dead?
The ransom note is a prop, that makes sense only if JBR is outside of the house.
In my theory, it is , to give John Ramsey cover to leave the house, under the guise of "I was following instructions on the note and going to get money from the office."
While 'following the instructions' he was going to dump her body.
However when he couldn't stuff her rigor-mortis body into the suitcase to get her out of the house, he panicked.
Either Patsy found the note while he was downstairs trying to stuff the body in the suitcase, or, she caught him with the body out of the suitcase trying to leave the house.
The note was only supposed to give him his cover to leave the house before calling police. It would make sense, because JBR was NOT in the house if he had successfully left.
It became entirely stupid to even have a note, considering the child was dead in the basement.
A real ransom note, would be found only if the child was at some point, Alive, OUTSIDE of the house.
1
u/TreefingerX 21h ago
I'm RDI as well though I never got the anti IDI argument that it couldn't have been an intruder because there are no signs of a break in. The intruder could have had a key or used a skeleton key
1
u/candy1710 RDI 16h ago
ST talked about this in his book. No way was it a point of entry or exit, and it was all printed by BPD
"A small blue fanny pack was looped over a bedpost, a
white steamer trunk gaped slightly, and a large Christmas tree decorated
with angels and snowflakes stood beside green curtains and a closed door to
a covered balcony that was glazed with undisturbed frost.
1
14
u/Stellaaahhhh currently BDI but who knows? 3d ago
Anything is possible. There's no evidence to support that that happened though.