Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet?

by A. James Kolar

  “The Boulder Police would like us to go away. They would like to just close the books on it, pretend that none of it ever happened. But we are not going away. We are going to be their worst nightmare. Patsy and John Ramsey are hanging in there, until the day we die we’ll be looking for the person who murdered our daughter.”

  —Patsy Ramsey, quoted during an interview with Barbara Walters aired on ABC News March 17, 2000.

  Chapter Thirty-Four

  The Intruder Left Behind

  In the late fall of 2008, Boulder County District Attorney- elect Stan Garnett announced that he intended to take another look at the infamous JonBenét Ramsey homicide and return primary investigative responsibility back to the Boulder Police Department. Upon receipt of that news, one of the first steps taken by Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner was to invite a wide-ranging group of experienced local, state, and federal law enforcement investigators, forensic laboratory technicians, and prosecutors to participate in a briefing and brain-storming session that was intended to help point the 12-year-old homicide investigation in the right direction.

  I had been invited to attend, not only as an advisory member of the Cold Case Task Force, but as a presenter. I had been asked to participate because during my role as a chief investigator in the JonBenét Ramsey case for the Boulder County District Attorney’s Office, I had discovered credible information that discounted the single intruder theory that had been espoused in the early months of the investigation. It was my responsibility to spell out the details of that theory to the team of experts who had assembled for a briefing on the case.

  Over the course of two days, on February 26th and 27th, 2009, approximately 30 law enforcement professionals assembled to receive a briefing on the status of the investigation. It had been nearly seven years since the Boulder Police Department had relinquished their case to the D.A.’s office, and I was anxious to see where events would take the inquiry.

  I had been waiting for this opportunity for nearly three years and was hopeful that the district attorney’s office was willing to take a look at the case with a new set of experienced prosecutorial eyes.

  Prior to the gathering, Beckner had forwarded to me a portion of the materials that I had prepared for Lacy’s office in 2006. I proceeded to condense what originally was roughly an 8-hour Power-Point presentation to 2-hours. I was the last investigator to present on the first day of case review, and provided a condensed version of my theory to the group of experts who had been convened to review the matter.

  Day two was comprised of a round-table discussion of the previous day’s work, and it ended on a positive note. There was a renewed energy to clean up some old details and pursue new additional courses of inquiry.

  I was exhausted from a week of anxious, irregular sleep patterns, and the two days spent reviewing the details of the investigation had been mentally and physically draining. Boulder was more than four hours behind me as I headed home to the mountains of southwestern Colorado.

  The Escalante Canyon was coming up on the approach to Delta and the decision was made to pull off the highway to do some meditative wandering. The Escalante was a frequent stopping point for me on my return trips from the front-range, and meandering over the open rugged plain offered a brief respite of quiet and solitude. Moreover, it offered the opportunity to explore something that had been tugging at the edge of my consciousness for some period of time.

  Something said during our review of the investigation had set my subconscious into overdrive. It had been there, hiding beneath the surface, since the early days of my involvement in the investigation, and I felt that a meditative hike through the backcountry might help flush out the intangible that had been lingering in the background for several years.

  I contemplated the comment that had stirred my memories: a Colorado Bureau of Investigation lab supervisor had talked about looking at the chronological sequence of events. I knew there was a challenge in that because from the early outset of their response to the 911 call reporting the kidnapping of JonBenét, Boulder Police had decided to maintain radio silence so as not to alert the perpetrators to their activities. Constructing an accurate time clock from the dispatch radio logs for a number of the investigative steps that were taken on December 26th, 1996, could be challenging.

  Nevertheless, the comment about establishing a time line for the sequence of events struck a chord with me. After having poured over hundreds of pages of police reports, interviews, and lab findings during my time as lead investigator on the case, I recognized that it was the nature of the sequence of events that had been hovering in the shadows of my subconscious for the previous 3 1/2 years. The missing piece gradually began to take form as I trekked in a westerly direction toward the canyon walls enveloping the Gunnison River.

  It occurred to me that the answer had been voiced during my presentation regarding the analysis of John Ramsey‘s statements. I had held up two photographs for the group to see: one of John Mark Karr and the other a psychic rendition of what the perpetrator was supposed to look like. (Eerily similar to Karr I must note.)77

  Holding the photos up for all to see, I had posed a rhetorical question to the group: “Where were they hiding?”

  Photo 31 - Photograph of John Mark Karr at the time of his arrest by the Boulder District Attorney’s Office in 2006. Source: Boulder County Sheriff’s Department

  Photo 32 - Dorothy Allison’s psychic rendition of the “intruder” thought responsible for the kidnap and murder of JonBenét Ramsey. Source: Internet

  There had been an inordinately long pause of silence after I asked the question, and some forgotten insight had momentarily surfaced, but was gone before I could fully take hold of it. The synapses had failed to fire, and it wasn’t until I was hiking in the solitude of the rugged plain that the full image finally came to mind.

  As the sun breaks the horizon during its rise, so did the thought slowly emerge that shed clarity on the shadow that had been plaguing me.

  The realization slowly dawned that, according to John Ramsey’s account, at least one of the intruders must have remained hiding in his home well after the time that police arrived on the scene to investigate the kidnapping of his daughter.

  That realization abruptly halted my westerly progress, and I paused to gather my thoughts. I struggled to remember the details of the chronology of the visits to the basement that had taken place before the discovery of JonBenét’s body. I knew that four people had been through various parts of the basement that morning, either looking for JonBenét or for a viable point of entry and exit from the home. The sequence of those events was significant, and I recognized that confirmation of this watershed moment was to be found in the various statements provided by those who had been in the house that morning.

  From the outset of my involvement in this murder investigation, I found it interesting that John Ramsey had never mentioned his concerns about the placement of the Samsonite suitcase below the Train Room window, or his suspicions about the condition of that basement room to investigators during their initial inquiry on the morning of December 26, 1996. It seemed unusual because, after all, police officers and investigators were aggressively attempting to determine how the perpetrator(s) had gained entry to the residence to accomplish the task of kidnapping JonBenét, and it was on the minds of everyone at the home that morning.

  Determining a point of entry or exit might have yielded physical evidence that could help identify the assailant(s). Yet knowing this, John not once mentioned his concerns about the placement of the suitcase, the condition of the basement, nor the suspicious vehicles he reportedly observed driving in the area and parked in the alley across the street that morning. None of this information came to light until months later when the family finally consented to their first full-length police interview and even then, John continued to withhold information that may have been helpful to the investigation.

  It was the memory of these facts that provoked the realization that if John R
amsey’s account was to be believed, at least one of the perpetrators had remained in the home on the morning of December 26, 1996.

  For the sake of objective clarity, the reader may wish to review the chronological history of John Ramey’s statement in chapter Twenty-Five so that you may better understand the following analysis.

  The Chronology of Visits to the Basement Train Room

  Patsy Ramsey placed a 911 call to the Boulder Regional Communications Center at 0552 hours on the morning of December 26, 1996, and Officer Rick French was the first police officer to arrive on the scene at 0555 hours. Patsy greeted him at the front door and John Ramsey was observed standing to the rear of the residence near the kitchen. Officer French was advised that the Ramsey’s 6-year-old daughter was missing and shown a ransom note. He immediately took steps to sequester the parents to the first floor Solarium located in the S. E. corner of the residence.

  Sergeant Paul Reichenbach is reported to be the second police officer to arrive on the scene, and after receiving a quick briefing from Officer French, he conducted an exterior / interior sweep of the residence that included the basement. He is believed to have been the first police officer to visit the basement.

  Officer French remained with Patsy and John as Sgt. Reichenbach called in additional resources to assist in the investigation.

  CSI Karl Veitch arrived on scene at 0610 hours.

  CSI Barry Weiss arrived on scene at 0640 hours.

  CSI Sue Barklow arrived on scene at 0700 hours.

  At some juncture, French conducted a cursory inspection of the rear ground floor doors and garage and ultimately checked the basement. Looking for a forced entry to the residence, he did not open the Wine Cellar door due to the fact that it was secured from the outside by a rotating block of wood. If someone had forced entry through that door from the outside of the residence, behind which lay the body of JonBenét, the wood block would have been damaged.

  French apparently did not think the Train Room window a likely point of entry and left the basement as he had found it. He did not report placing a chair in the doorway to block the Train Room. The timing of French’s visit to the basement was believed to be sometime after CSIs had arrived on the scene to begin their processing on the first floor level of the house and before the White and Fernie families arrived on scene.78

  It was close to 6:30 a.m. when John and Barbara Fernie arrived and, from outside the rear kitchen / patio door, John was able to observe the ransom note still spread out on the floor of the hallway next to the kitchen.

  Not long thereafter, Fleet and Priscilla White were the next family friends to arrive at the Ramsey home. Fleet reported that within approximately 15 minutes of his arrival he made a quick inspection of the basement of the home. He was purportedly the third person to visit the basement at that point of the morning, and I believe his observations are a key component to unraveling this mystery.

  White observed a Samsonite suitcase beneath the broken Train Room window. Its side was flush to the wall, and he moved it as he closely inspected the area for new broken glass. White reported finding one small kernel on the floor that he placed on the interior window ledge. He observed the window to be closed but unlatched and left it in that condition.

  Continuing his exploration of the basement, White unlatched a door and briefly looked in the darkened room identified as the Wine Cellar. Unable to find a light switch and not seeing anything in the dark, he closed the door and returned upstairs. He subsequently removed Burke Ramsey from the residence, and this was accomplished prior to the arrival of Detective Arndt at 0810 hours.

  Interviewed by police on three separate occasions about his inspection of the basement, White never mentioned having to move a chair to enter the Train Room. He made it clear that he spent some amount of time inspecting the window and aside from placing a kernel of glass on the sill, he left the window in its original closed and unlatched position. He never reported placing a chair to block the Train Room doorway upon his departure from the basement.

  Critical Analysis of John Ramsey’s Statements

  At no point does John Ramsey ever state that he visited the basement prior to the arrival of Officer French. As outlined herein, over the course of numerous interviews and public statements, he vaguely indicates that the time frames were within one to three hours after French’s arrival and likely after the 10:00 a.m. ransom call had failed to materialize.

  Though it was noted that Ramsey had to run to the den to answer the phone on one or more occasions, it didn’t seem reasonable to believe that he would have ventured as far as the basement, or the second floor, while awaiting a call from the people who had kidnapped his daughter. I would suggest that it is more likely that he made trips to Burke’s room and to the basement when Detective Arndt reported losing track of his whereabouts from approximately 10:40 to 12:00 hours.

  Also to be considered were the time frames involved in his first being alerted to JonBenét’s disappearance by Patsy. According to family statements, John responded downstairs in his underwear and was reading the ransom note in the back hallway as Patsy was on the 911 call. At some juncture, he had to check on Burke, search JonBenét’s room, and then rush upstairs to fully dress and be back downstairs in the kitchen to be present when Officer French arrived at the scene. All of this activity would purportedly have had to have occurred within minutes of Patsy’s finding the note and the three minutes it took French to arrive after receiving notice of the 911 call.

  Based upon the historical record of his statements and the timing of events described above, it is therefore presumed that John’s first visit to the basement did not occur before Officer French arrived on scene. One has to surmise that John Ramsey did not report his trip to the basement or his suspicions about the suitcase to Officer French, for otherwise the first CSI on scene would have been diligently processing the area when Fleet White arrived that morning.

  If these are accurate statements, then it must be concluded that an “intruder” had to have moved the chair into a position to block the doorway after Fleet White had conducted his search of the basement. The time frame of White’s trip to the basement can be estimated to have occurred between 0730 - 0745 hours. Following this testimonial evidence, this places an intruder in the home well after a number of police officers and CSIs were on scene and processing the house.

  Photo 33 - The chair that John Ramsey purportedly moved to gain entry to the Train Room. Source: Boulder PD Crime Scene Video/Case File.

  There is another aspect of Fleet White and John Ramsey’s statements that need to be considered. During his first in-depth police interview conducted on April 30, 1997, John advises that he “closed and latched” the Train Room window during his first visit to the basement. Fleet White clearly states that he observed the window to be closed but “unlatched.”

  Giving consideration to the likely timing of John’s first visit to the basement (after 1000 hours), this means that Fleet visited the Train Room before John was there to close and latch the window. Under these conditions, based upon John’s statements, it must be presumed that the perpetrator was still concealed within the basement and didn’t block the Train Room doorway until after Fleet left the basement. This again places an intruder in the basement from approximately 0730 to 1040 hours.

  If, on the other hand, John was somehow mistaken about the time frames involved and visited the basement before Fleet, then the doorway blockage would have been cleared and the window latched. This could only have occurred after police had arrived.

  The intruder would have to have been responsible for unlatching the window and escaping after John’s visit to the basement, but before Fleet conducted his examination of the basement at 0730.

  Closing Observations

  The two key elements that should be considered in this analysis are to be found in the chronology of John Ramsey’s statements regarding the condition of the basement Train Room and window well. His observation of the blockage of the doorway t
o that room and his latching of the window, when viewed in terms of the timeline of events and witness statements, places an intruder in the home long after police arrive on the scene.

  Lou Smit questioned John in depth about the blockage of the Train Room door during the interviews conducted in June 1998, and it appeared to be a significant element that supported his intruder theory. But as noted above, the blockage of the doorway was never mentioned in John’s April 1997 interview and after its brief appearance in 1998, it was suddenly excised from any further discussion about his theory of the intruder’s actions in his home.

  The chair that played such a significant role in establishing the existence of an intruder is never again mentioned following Lou Smit’s 1998 exploration of matter.

  As a criminal investigator, I have to consider the question: Was this an oversight on John Ramsey’s part, or does the intentional absence of this key element reveal consciousness of guilt?

  It begs the broader question:

  Is it possible, or even plausible, that one or more intruders were able to remain concealed in the basement during four sweeps of that area?

  If so, why would they remain in the residence hours after JonBenét’s death, and how did they avoid the attention of police officers and family friends when they eventually did escape the residence that day?

  I found it noteworthy that John Ramsey never mentioned his immediate concerns and suspicions about the placement of the Samsonite suitcase to Boulder Police investigators on the morning of December 26, 1996. This information was only first declared on April 30, 1997, during his negotiated interview with police investigators.