The Cases That Haunt Us (45 page)

As I’ve stated on many occasions, murder is the single most disturbing and devastating experience that can happen to any of us; because murder, unlike death by disease or accident, is an intentional act, one that turns our world upside down and robs us of all of our basic orientations to the world except, if we are very fortunate, our faith. And this particular murder is among the most horrifying of all: both because of its beautiful, sixyear-old victim, and because of the horrendous evil it implies by raising the possibility that a father or a mother could be capable of killing his or her own child.

The case is also noteworthy—virtually unique—for other reasons as well. Many crimes are tried in the court of public opinion long before they reach a court of law—the Borden, Lindbergh, and Simpson- Goldman murders, to name just a few. But I know of no other case in which the majority of people have decided the solution based on statistics. I know of no other case in which the public substantially believes what has been reported in the tabloids. I know of no other case in which the mainline media have let the tabloids take the lead and then reported on their reporting. And I know of no other case in which largely respectable television programs have so tried to outdo each other in sensationalism. I would not be so exercised except this is so clearly and fundamentally the enemy of fairness and justice.

Am I saying I alone have the inside track on those two ideals? By no means. Nobody knows for certain what happened on the night of December 25, 1996, that caused the unnatural and violent death of JonBenet Patricia Ramsey, except for the person or persons who perpetrated it. All that any of the rest of us can do is to make our best judgment based on our common sense, analysis, and whatever expertise and experience we can bring to bear.

If I am vilified for coming out and stating what I believe to be true, so be it. It won’t be the first time and doubtless will not be the last. I had already experienced this reaction when I was called to Atlanta in 1980 during the horrifying string of child murders. I came away with the police pissed off at me for moving in on their territory and the public rejecting my suggestion that the killings of black children wasn’t an organized conspiracy of hate by the Ku Klux Klan, but the work of a lone and inadequate young black man. That’s the nature of the business.

But the important point I want to make here is that a criminal investigation is not a popularity contest. It is not, nor should it be, directed or determined by public opinion or media influence.

Some have called me a “hired gun” in this case, and it is true that I received a small fee early on, as I have in certain other cases in which I have consulted since leaving the Bureau. Some have called me a “publicity hound,” and it is true that I have never been shy around a camera, particularly in the days when I was trying to get the FBI’s profiling program off the ground and would seek publicity from just about anywhere, both to support the program and to elicit the public’s help on individual cases. But I have
never ever
offered an opinion that wasn’t deeply felt and fully supported by my own belief and the facts as I saw them.

A defense attorney has the responsibility of making a case for his client’s innocence, whether he believes in that innocence or not. A criminal investigator has only one responsibility, and it is an extremely solemn one. It has to do neither with whom he or she works for, nor who is signing the paycheck. It should have nothing to do with personal glory or career advancement. It has only to do with the silent pledge made by the investigator to the victim, who can no longer speak for herself, that he or she will do everything within his or her power to uncover the truth of what happened and bring the offender to the gates of earthly justice. There is not enough money or fame in the entire world to lure me away from the enormity and seriousness of that pledge.

And I am far from alone in this. I believe in the sincerity of that pledge no less vehemently with regard to former detective Steve Thomas, with whose interpretation I disagree radically, than with detective Lou Smit, with whom I am in much more basic agreement, to name but two participants in this case. I believe both men to be of solid integrity and to want nothing more or less than justice for JonBenet. I hope they regard me the same way.

With that off my chest, let’s look carefully at the Ramsey case and why it has haunted us so profoundly.

I don’t think we can deny that we became obsessed with this one because the victim was so young, blond, and beautiful, the parents rich and prominent and intelligent, the neighborhood fashionable and safe, the community secure and self-satisfied, and the timing—Christmas. All these elements suggest a crime like this should not have occurred. If ever there was a “man bites dog” case, this is it. Even her unique name—a combination of her father’s given names coupled with her mother’s first name—added to the mystique.

And let us be plain: the first time we saw those beauty-pageant images of the mini Las Vegas showgirl—the pint-size cowboy sweetheart and the patriotic, red-white-and-blue-bedecked, tap-dancing tot, eyes always full of fun and mischief and hand resting confidently on a cocked hip—they were instantly and indelibly etched on our collective memory. District Attorney Alex Hunter offered the opinion that it was this pageant film that separates this case from two thousand other child homicides. In a bizarre and perverse mockery of our cult of celebrity, in death JonBenet became America’s greatest cover girl.

DECEMBER
25–26, 1996

So how are we going to approach this case?

Regardless of who the killer is, we’ve got to deal with the facts as they were. We’ve got to be able to track a family from a morning of gifts and visiting and childish delight, through a happy and fun-filled Christmas dinner with good friends and the anticipation of an early-morning flight on their private plane to their vacation home, to the garroting, blunt force trauma, sexual assault, and fatal sustained aggression against a six-year-old last known to be asleep in her bed.

Those are the facts. Any participants and motives we attempt to plug into the scenario must work with those facts.

For law enforcement, the case began at 5:52 A.M. on December 26, 1996, when a Boulder, Colorado, police dispatcher took the following 911 emergency call from Patricia Ann Ramsey:

Ramsey: (inaudible) police.

Dispatcher: (inaudible)

Ramsey: Seven fifty-five Fifteenth Street.

Dispatcher: What’s going on there, ma’am?

Ramsey: We have a kidnapping. Hurry, please.

D: Explain to me what’s going on, okay?

R: There we have a … There’s a note left and our daughter’s gone.

D: A note was left and your daughter is gone?

R: Yes.

D: How old is your daughter?

R: She’s six years old… . She’s blond … six years old.

D: How long ago was this?

R: I don’t know. I just found the note and my daughter’s (inaudible).

R: What?

D: Does it say who took her?

R: No. I don’t know … it’s there … there’s a ransom note here.

D: It’s a ransom note?

R: It says “S.B.T.C. Victory.” Please …

D: Okay, what’s your name? Are you …

R: Patsy Ramsey. I’m the mother. Oh my God, please …

D: I’m … Okay, I’m sending an officer over, okay?

R: Please.

D: Do you know how long she’s been gone?

R: No, I don’t. Please, we just got up and she’s not here. Oh my God, please.

D: Okay.

R: Please send somebody.

D: I am, honey.

R: Please.

D: Take a deep breath (inaudible).

R: Hurry, hurry, hurry (inaudible).

D: Patsy? Patsy? Patsy? Patsy? Patsy?

Within a few minutes, Boulder PD officer Rick French arrived at 755 Fifteenth Street, a large, red-brick, Tudor-style house in the city’s University Hill neighborhood. The exterior of the house was elaborately decorated for Christmas. He was met at the front door by the missing child’s mother, Patricia Ramsey, three days short of her fortieth birthday, attired in a red sweater and black slacks. They were joined shortly by the father, John Bennett Ramsey, fifty-three years of age, dressed in a blue-andwhite-striped shirt and khaki slacks. Patsy was John’s second wife. His first marriage, to the former Lucinda Lou Pasch, had ended in divorce, and he and Patsy had been married for sixteen years. Officer French’s impression was that Patsy appeared agitated and distraught, while John appeared tense but calm and controlled. Their nearly ten-year-old son, Burke, had not yet been awakened.

They told French that Patsy had come down from her third-floor bedroom around 5:45 A.M. to awaken six-year-old JonBenet and to begin getting everything ready for their flight to Charlevoix, Michigan, where their vacation home was located. From there, they had planned to fly to Florida to take Burke and JonBenet on a cruise on Disney’s
Big Red Boat.

JonBenet’s bedroom was empty. Patsy then descended the back spiral staircase outside the child’s room on the second floor. On one of the lower steps she noted three sheets of lined, white legal paper laid side by side. They showed French the communication, now laid out on the wooden floor of the hallway outside the kitchen:

Mr. Ramsey,

Listen carefully! We are a

group of individuals that represent

a small foreign faction. We [cross-out]

respect your bussiness but not the

country that it serves. At this

time we have your daughter in our

posession. She is safe and un harmed

and if you want her to see 1997,

you must follow our instructions to

the letter.

You will withdraw $118,000.00

from your account. $100,000 will be

in $100 bills and the remaining

$18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure

that you bring an adequate size

attache to the bank. When you

get home you will put the money

in a brown paper bag. I will

call you between 8 and 10 am

tomorrow to instruct you on delivery.

The delivery will be exhausting so

I advise you to be rested. If

we monitor you getting the money

early, we might call you early to

arrange an earlier delivery of the

[Page 2]

money and hence a earlier

[cross-out] pick-up of your daug hter.

Any deviation of my instructions

will result in the immediate

execution of your daughter. You

will also be denied her remains

for proper burial. The two

gentlemen watching over your daughter

do not particularly like you so I

advise you not to provoke them.

Speaking to anyone about your

situation, such as Police, F.B.I.,etc.,

will result in your daughter being

beheaded. If we catch you talking

to a stray dog, she dies. If you

alert bank authorities, she dies.

If the money is in any way

marked or tampered with, she

dies. You will be scanned for

electronic devices and if any are

found, she dies. You can try to

deceive us but be warned that

we are familiar with Law enforcement

countermeasures and tactics. You

stand a 99% chance of killing

your daughter if you try to out

smart us. Follow our instructions

[Page 3]

and you stand a 100% chance

of getting her back. You and

your family are under constant

scrutiny as well as the authorities.

Don’t try to grow a brain

John. You are not the only

fat cat around so don’t think

that killing will be difficult.

Don’t underestimate us John.

Use that good southern common

sense of yours. It is up to

you now John!