Frank's thoughts in 2000
Doing some studying and cross referencing and came across some old printouts I had saved.  This one is interesting.

The subject was Michael Helgoth - and by then Frank was pretty much convinced it was the family and tried to clear anyone else mentioned.

I don't care about that but this bit did bother me as I read it today.

"The Ramseys weren't well-known in Boulder before the murder of their daughter.  (As a Boulder resident I never heard of them.)  JonBenet wasn't famous.  JonBenet's name and photograph never appeared in the local newspaper while she was alive."

Well, I am not a resident of Boulder but I know the story of her father's business reaching a billion dollars in sales was in the paper, Patsy had been the focus of a magazine article (Colorado Woman??)  and JonBenet had been in the parade sitting in a convertible.  Famous?  No, I would agree she was not famous.  But the family was not totally unknown, either.
Although Frank was undoubtedly trying to suggest that it's unlikely that anyone else other than the family was involved in the homicide, what it actually does is agree with the FBI homicide database: Most six-year-olds are murdered by someone that is close to them --- not necessarily the family --- precisely because almost nobody knows they exist compared to older kids.  Given her age, it is very likely that her family knew the killer.  This is why I asked, on the thread about the killer, who did JonBenet know that had the "credentials," so to speak, to kiil her?

Knew the family + qualifications = good suspect.

For example:
Knew the family + cop = good suspect.

Knew the family + "cop buff" (for example, listens to police scanners or cop wannabe) = good suspect.

Knew the family + private investigator = fair suspect.

Knew the family + forensic knowledge = good suspect.

Knew the family + forensic knowledge + cop wannabe = excellent suspect.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)