Darney Hoffman
JONBENET RAMSEY HOMICIDE ANALYSIS
From Letter to District Attorney Alex Hunter
May 24, 1997
1) Patsy’s possible participation in this crime is the single most significant
clue to this
murder.
2) Although research shows that fathers are more likely to kill members of
their families (over
80% of the time), Patsy Ramsey fits the profile of older women who kill
family members.
Remember: until forty years ago most intrafamilial homicides were caused
by women.
3) Older women are most likely to kill their younger daughters. Frequently,
it is the prospect
of divorce or impending single parenthood, coupled with suicidal
depression that often leads
these mother's to think and respond anomically (i.e., "amorally"), which
means they grow to
believe that killing their children will actually "benefit" them. (Remember
Patsy Ramsey's
Susan Smith-like remark during her first CNN interview on January 1,
1997 when she referred to
JonBenét as perhaps being "better off" not living old enough to become a
cancer victim, or to
experience the other heartaches of adulthood? This is classic "anomic"
thinking by a parent who
has just murdered their child).
4) The events in Patsy's life just prior to the day of the murder are highly
significant: i.e.,
an isolated and comparatively unhappy, depressed older woman, about to
turn forty; whose
sixteen year marriage to an older man was showing signs of stress;
whose body had begun to
betray her former good looks with a sex organ cancer; whose beautiful
and talented daughter
began serving as a bittersweet reminder of lost youth, and whose
unhappiness and disappointment
in her gilded cage existence a thousand miles from her family and
hometown of Atlanta, Georgia
are clear indicators that Patsy may have been harboring suicidally
depressed thoughts.
5) The need for Patsy to establish some kind of control in her life made her
relationship with
her daughter paramount. After all, Patsy had already lost control over
where she lived, her
body, her marriage to John, and the general direction of her life.
Controlling JonBenét was the
single most important "safety valve" in Patsy's life.
6) Patsy began losing control over JonBenét as her daughter reached six
years old. At that age,
children are no longer interested in satisfying their parents emotional
needs to the exclusion
of their own. This is the age when many children become openly resistant
to continuing with
their ballet, or ice skating, or piano lessons which have often been
"forced" on them by their
overly ambitious parents. It's an age when they just want to be "kids."
7) JonBenét displayed the usual degree of resistance, even
demonstrating it with bedwetting.
8) Patsy began sensing her daughter's increasing independence, but she
was too emotionally
vulnerable and needy to completely accept it.
9) JonBenét’s bedwetting just became another in a series of frustrations
and disappointments,
and, consequently, took on greater symbolic importance than it normally
would have were Patsy
not sensing that her own life was "cascading" out of control.
10) Losing control of her daughter might have presented an intolerable
threat to Patsy's
psychological survival and may have even contributed to suicidal thinking
on Patsy's part.
11) Suicidal thinking is the most common and prevalent emotional
component in female homicides
of family members, especially involving their younger children.
12) Although the precipitating event of the night of JonBenét’s murder
remains unclear, the
injury to JonBenét’s head is more constant with a parent who flew into a
sudden rage, than with
a parent involved in a pattern of sex abuse that resulted in an accidental
homicide.
13) Patsy Ramsey's psychological profile does more to explain why she
was more likely to go
into a sudden rage (probably at the loss of control over JonBenét) than
John Ramsey, who, by
all accounts, was an absentee parent with little or no psychological
investment in controlling
his daughter's behavior that we know about. John had had three children
by a prior marriage,
and so had "been there, done that" as a parent. Sociological studies of
affluent families show
the husbands as assuming the role of "sole" financial support, with
mothers assuming the more
traditional roles as the exclusive arbiters of the children's behavioral
development. While
their husbands measure their success and status among their peers with
wealth, these wives
measure their status and success by how well they raise and control their
children's behavior.
14) If Patsy Ramsey did, in fact, strike her daughter on the head with a
blunt object in a
blind rage, what would she have done next? Answer: What she had always
done in the past, which
was to go to John and have him "save" her.
15) "Saving" women like Patsy is what John Ramsey is all about. A man
who made a fortune by
creating a hands-on business, which he started on his kitchen table, and
which he also
"micro-managed," would be accustomed to playing Pygmalion to Patsy's
Eliza Doolittle. As a
former naval officer and airplane pilot, John Ramsey sees himself as calm
and experienced in
crisis management -- in fact, he prides himself in it.
16) One has only to remember how Richard Nixon engineered the
Watergate cover-up (a crime he
probably didn't initiate) to realize that certain personalities relish the
challenge of being
able to meet the demands of orchestrating a "cover-up" to "save" their
subordinates, who are
frequently people they feel morally superior to.
17) Since the single most important element in a parent/child homicide is
the issue of CONTROL;
and since the parent feels that they have lost control of their child, whether
real or
imagined, this would explain why the FBI claims that children between the
ages of 0-2 are most
often killed for uncontrolled crying and screaming ("shaken baby"
syndrome), and children
between the ages of 2-6 are killed for chronic bedwetting or lose of bowel
control.
18) Who in the Ramsey household had the greatest "control issues" in
their lives? John or
Patsy?
19) The idea that John Ramsey "accidentally" killed JonBenét by
strangling her in a strange
sex-game ritual, or killed her to keep from being "exposed" by her
threatening "to tell mommy",
is the least likely of all the scenarios involving a family member being
responsible for the
murder. As Star Trek's Mr. Spock was so fond of saying: "It's possible, but
not probable."
20) Studies show that incest victims are rarely physically hurt or killed by
the molesting
parent. Several of these studies show that parent pedophiles are
remarkably non-violent.
21) The most likely scenario, assuming the injury sequence is one in which
the head injury
occurred first and the strangulation resulting from the staging occurred
later, is one in which
Patsy Ramsey assaulted her daughter in a fit of rage involving a "control
issue" triggered by
JonBenét’s chronic bedwetting, which then resulted in Patsy running to
John and begging him to
"save" her. John then foolishly agreed to help his wife by "staging" a
horrific ritual
kidnap/killing, thinking his daughter already dead from the blow to her
head. Ironically,
John's application of the ligature to JonBenét’s neck actually became the
technical cause of
JonBenét’s death in the coroner's report -- a completely unforeseen and
unintended result --
thereby resulting in John's being "upgraded" from a mere accomplice
after-the-fact, to the
actual "murderer." When John learned what had occurred when the
coroner's report was released
several days later, he couldn't believe how far down into a hole he had
buried himself.
22) Any theory of this crime, which involves Pasty as the "event initiator", is
further borne
out by the fact that the Boulder police and FBI have completely failed to
drive a wedge between
the two parents -- a common occurrence in solving domestic homicides
(e.g., Joel Steinberg and
Hedda Nussbaum). Most police clearances of domestic homicides involve
a confession or
eyewitness testimony by the "innocent" spouse. Neither Patsy nor John
can give the other up --
even if one wanted to -- because they are now both equally culpable.
23) Psychologically, both Ramseys regard, and believe, the event to be
"accidental." They are
sincere in their expressions of love for their daughter and in their sorrow
for her death. Like
O.J. Simpson, the Ramseys don't believe "they" have killed anyone.
"They" are not capable of
murder. Some other "they", serving as their evil twins, or alter egos,
reflexively, and
defensively, created this accident and then covered it up, to prevent an
uncaring world from
condemning them. Why should a person's whole life be defined by a
momentary loss of control --
to be branded as a murderer for all time, despite the years of good
"works" and Christian
deeds? Why, indeed, the Ramseys ask. They undoubtedly feel that they
are suffering enough
already as the result of the enormous public scrutiny and loss of reputation
in the community.
They also miss their daughter terribly, suffering enormous guilt and loss,
the way most parents
do when their children die prematurely from disease or accidents. Parents
whose children die
from their negligent care of them frequently don't go to jail. Why should the
Ramseys?
So, in order to move this case to the next step, your office is probably
going to have to take
a page out of the prosecution's book in the Joel Steinberg/Hedda
Nussbaum case. You may
remember that the New York City police arrived in that case only to find a
comatose six-year
old girl dying on the living room floor of the apartment of a multi-millionaire
criminal
defense attorney and his common law wife. The DA had no forensic
evidence, only two adults,
each capable of committing the crime.
What to do? The DA Morgenthau arrested them both (sometimes "One
Degree of Separation" between
suspects in separate jail cells is more potent than a ton of DNA evidence).
As usually happens
in these cases, after her arrest, Hedda Nussbaum, with the help of her
attorney Barry Scheck,
gave Joel up, something she would never have done had she not been
arrested and charged with
murder. The DA gambled and won. It was worth it.
The only conceivable prosecution scenario that should break this case
open is a grand jury
indictment of the ransom note writer, who is then arrested and jailed on
first degree felony
murder charges, with no possibility of bail for first degree murder in
Colorado. Time to
reflect while in the confines of a jail cell should do the trick.
Well, that's it. If you would like to discuss this further, I'd be happy to do so.
Good luck,
you're really going to need it.
Very truly yours,
Darnay Hoffman