BDI,premeditated or not?

[txsvicki]

I think the head blow must have been premeditated because there was no bruises from a struggle, no injuries from the impact or falling, and the object was held just right to depress the skull and leave a shape. JonBenet wasn't running or in much motion when hit. It all happened soon after arriving home, so having a flashlight in hand for sneaking around in the dark shouldn't have been going on.

 

[borndem]

He was almost 10. Just weeks away.

Remember that 8 year old in AZ that murdered his father and the roommate? He even lured the roommate. That boy was bone chillingly cool as a cucumber while he was spinning his tale too.

I believe a 8-9-10 year old can intend to kill and can intend to rape. It's happened!

Burke strikes me as a child with pretty severe attachment issues. He seemed indifferent, cold and very detached from his sister. Like he never missed her, not even for even a second.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bbm

That's what my thoughts have been for quite a while, Linda7NJ. Some type of attachment disorder... Just detached and cold. If BR had been molesting her, she could have threatened to tell on him, as was said earlier, and he either panicked or he just found a weapon and cold-bloodedly killed her. Wham. No more problems. And maybe he decided to hide her or they were already down in the basement.

I'm still not sure who asphyxiated her. Could've been BR, but could've been JR or PR thinking that she was in great pain and/or badly brain-damaged, and they wanted to stop the suffering. JMHO

 

[txsvicki]

If JonBenet had some pain reaction when poked with the train track that might have been reason to strangle her. Not that she had no response and wouldn't wake up, but that she wasn't dead yet.

 

[otg]

It seems a lot of posters are still having a problem trying to resolve the two injuries that were the COD with one another. If one came first as unintentional, then it follows that the second must be intentional. Right?

Wrong. I don’t understand why it is so hard to grasp the idea that they could both be part of the result from what was done initially without thought of how dangerous the circumstances were. I don’t believe the person who struck the head blow intended her to die. He didn’t think it out and make a calculated decision about the best way to stop her from screaming (and yes, I think she screamed). He didn’t think about the result and formulate just how much force to use before swinging the weapon -- he just swung with thoughtless abandon to stop the scream before it was heard. If (as I believe) she was being restrained with the cord around her neck, when her body went limp from the head blow, the cord would tighten causing the strangulation -- an unintended result of what had been carelessly done prior to her falling into unconsciousness. There was no murderous intent. It doesn’t have to be contemplated or reasoned out as to why someone (or who) would deliberately strangle her to “finish her off”, “stop her suffering”, or “put her out of her misery” like an animal, as I have so often read. It didn’t happen like that (IMO). There is nothing in the known evidence that doesn’t fit with the set of circumstances I suggest happened.

 

[borndem]

It seems a lot of posters are still having a problem trying to resolve the two injuries that were the COD with one another. If one came first as unintentional, then it follows that the second must be intentional. Right?

Wrong. I don’t understand why it is so hard to grasp the idea that they could both be part of the result from what was done initially without thought of how dangerous the circumstances were. I don’t believe the person who struck the head blow intended her to die. He didn’t think it out and make a calculated decision about the best way to stop her from screaming (and yes, I think she screamed). He didn’t think about the result and formulate just how much force to use before swinging the weapon -- he just swung with thoughtless abandon to stop the scream before it was heard. If (as I believe) she was being restrained with the cord around her neck, when her body went limp from the head blow, the cord would tighten causing the strangulation -- an unintended result of what had been carelessly done prior to her falling into unconsciousness. There was no murderous intent. It doesn’t have to be contemplated or reasoned out as to why someone (or who) would deliberately strangle her to “finish her off”, “stop her suffering”, or “put her out of her misery” like an animal, as I have so often read. It didn’t happen like that (IMO). There is nothing in the known evidence that doesn’t fit with the set of circumstances I suggest happened.

I have no trouble at all, otg, with that scenario. I have thought, and posted previously on one of these threads, that BR and JB could have been playing walk the dog or lasso the pony, etc., and the lasso-like cord could have been used around JB's neck. The altered paint brush handle made the game even more real since it may have simulated a leash. (This could have been a game they had played before.) BR was holding the "leash" when she screamed and he hit her in panic, and her falling would have closed the noose tightly around her neck.

Yep, it fits easily a method of unintended death.

If so, the ransom note writer(s) covered for the remaining child and for the sake of appearances, IMO.

 

[Wildflower73]

otg:
My theory is much the same as you own: I see no murderous intent.

I have considered so many times how the R's may have wished they had called 911 and allowed the case to be investigated without all the staging and complications. I think all involved would have been better served, especially, BR.

It's such a heartbreaking case.

 

[txsvicki]

Patsy would have died in prison had they allowed investigation, imo. I just can't get past Patsy doing it all, and believe she may have been capable of making John believe that B may have done it.

 

[Venom]

I can see them playing a game like borndem suggests. I don't think her death was planned. But how do you fit in the sexual abuse? There was sexual abuse that night and at an earlier time. Was the abuse that night just done to help with the R's pushing an intruder? What about the abuse that points to earlier sexual molestation?

 

[borndem]

Patsy would have died in prison had they allowed investigation, imo. I just can't get past Patsy doing it all, and believe she may have been capable of making John believe that B may have done it.

Ouch, txsvicki! But it's totally believable and not a stretch at all, IMO. If everything was gonna be hush-hush anyway, BR would have never known that his mama sold him down the river, as they say. Yeah, it works...

PR is the ONLY one of the 3 R's who could have done it all -- certainly due to the RN. And the molestation (all of it) could have also been attributed to B per PR to JR's ears, no matter which of them did it. And we will never know who actually did that part... or, heck, any of it!!

 

[borndem]

:Welcome1:

:drumroll:Wild :spring: flower !!!:drumroll:


Glad you're with us on
:websleuther:Websleuths:websleuther:

:thewave:


:rollercoaster:​

 

[illumin8ted]

I have no trouble at all, otg, with that scenario. I have thought, and posted previously on one of these threads, that BR and JB could have been playing walk the dog or lasso the pony, etc., and the lasso-like cord could have been used around JB's neck. The altered paint brush handle made the game even more real since it may have simulated a leash. (This could have been a game they had played before.) BR was holding the "leash" when she screamed and he hit her in panic, and her falling would have closed the noose tightly around her neck.

Yep, it fits easily a method of unintended death.

If so, the ransom note writer(s) covered for the remaining child and for the sake of appearances, IMO.

Patsy said that Jonbenet liked to play kitty a lot...

TT: Yeah, entry form or something that kind of tell people about, who JonBenet, what her likes are?
PR: Yeah. You write down that, like what’s their hobbies.
TT: Right. And on of those had something about a kitty game, that was her favorite game. You remember what that’s about?
PR: Kitty?
TT: Yeah.
PR: To play kitty. Yeah, she likes to play kitty (inaudible).
TT: Uh.
PR: You don’t like kitty huh. She and Daphne like to, they love kittens. And we had some kittens up at the lake (inaudible). And she and Daphne like to pretend they were kittens. She’s just, they would walk around and they would say, oh there’s a kitty, (inaudible). Let’s go into the pet shop, I think I’ll buy this one.
TT: And that’s the game JonBenet really like or something?
PR: She and Daphne played kitty. They’d walk around on all fours, you know.

Source:
BOULDER POLICE INTERVIEW
Interviewer: Boulder Police
Interviewee: Patsy Ramsey
Date of Interview: April 30, 1997
Interviewed At: Boulder District Attorney’s Office
Case: Hasson Ramsey

 

[borndem]

Welcome to

:websleuther:
Websleuths

:cheers:
:drumroll:illumin8ted !!:drumroll:

Glad to have you aboard!
​