BURKE did it, and WHY the Ramseys covered up -an Opinion

[shoe_horn]

Isn't is odd that Burke's middle name is "Hamilton"...also the name of John Mark Karr's hometown in Alabama?

well maybe it's not that weird afterall.

 

[i_dont_chat]

You said:
"As for BlueCrab, he has posted other outlandish theories here too. One of them for example was that JB was 'hog-tied' by her wrists and ankles to be 'shockingly displayed'. I forgot to ask him if he thought Burke had done his too."


I agree with BlueCrab in that the way JonBenet's body was positioned when she was found in the middle of the next day -- was probably far different than how they found the body sometime in the middle of the night. In my theory, the parents found the body the first time, when no one was in the house. Then, later in the day when people were milling around, John "found" the body the second time. Most likely the first time the body was found -- it was a more gruesome sight.

The parents probably did what they could to remove any obvious sexual appearance. Wipe her off, change her panties, cover her -- to give her as much dignity that they could.

But they knew they could NOT do anything about the cause of death. Goes without saying they didn't know at that time exactly what killed her. They couldn't do anything about the bash on the head and they didn't want to remove the cord around her neck or the authorities would have known that someone had "altered" the murder scene.

 

[i_dont_chat]

But the head bash does not not fit into this scenario at all if you imply that JB died from erotic asphyxiation done by Burke.

The head bash does fit into this scenario when you consider that JonBenet was being choked to death and was fighting for her life, and it frightened Burke to the point that he just wanted to shut her up and he grabbed something substantial and hit her on the head as hard as he could. He was probably very much afraid of being caught by their parents while doing anything harmful to JonBenet.

In my opinion, it was a typical childish reaction to strike out to silence her.

 

[julianne]

The head bash does fit into this scenario when you consider that JonBenet was being choked to death and was fighting for her life, and it frightened Burke to the point that he just wanted to shut her up and he grabbed something substantial and hit her on the head as hard as he could. He was probably very much afraid of being caught by their parents while doing anything harmful to JonBenet.

In my opinion, it was a typical childish reaction to strike out to silence her.

I don't know what type of kids you know, but it certainly is not a "typical childish reaction" to break your sisters skull in two pieces.

 

[i_dont_chat]

You are right about that. What happened that night was not typical.

I am saying that it is possible that Burke hit his sister over the head and cracked her skull. Hitting her was not an accident -- but killing her was an accident. It is not a stretch, in my opinion.

 

[questionable]

I don't think the Ramseys performed strange sex acts either. I do agree however that the boy did mimick what he saw somewhere? I found out from this thread that he owned a Nintendo. Now, my guess is that he either stole a sex tape from his parents and or relatives and mimicked the actions on his sister or there is a Nintendo game out there somewhere that he mimicked. It may have been a war torture game of some kind and he may have added the sexual part on his own but that's not likely because he was after all just nine years old? Maybe he had gotten new games for Christmas? Anyone know of any popular Nintendo games around 1996 with this type of scenario?

 

[close_enough]

here's part of an interview with Patsy answering questions about Burke....

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6076

 

[close_enough]

Details about Burke's 1/8/97 interview....good read, imo...

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14914

 

[i_dont_chat]

Thank you, Close Enough, for posting the information on Patsy Ramsey's and Burke's Ramsey's interviews. And, again, thank you, Blue Crab for your contribution towards getting to the truth.



I had not read these accounts before, and I believe they give more support to my theory.



One of the reasons, I think -- and this is just my opinion -- people have a problem accepting that Burke "accidentally" killed his sister is because if that were the case, WHY didn't the parents, even in their grief, simply call the police? Burke was a child, and would not have been held responsible.



But I think it is obvious to most people that the Ramsey's, instead, went into a drastic cover-up mode. Why would the parents go to such means (ransom note, altering the scene, lying) to protect Burke when Burke didn't need protecting? A reasonable person understands that children can and accidentally do things which cause harm. It was an accident and accidents do happen.



The behavior of the parents became suspect from the beginning. Add to that -- the actions of their friends and neighbors, some say because they wanted so much to protect Patsy and John. But I say there was something more personal about how a few of the neighbors and friends came to the rescue. Not so much to protect Patsy and John, but something to do with protecting themselves. That's why LE was thrown off -- The parents brought suspicion onto themselves. Their closest friends jealously protected the Ramseys. In a suble way, everybody appeared to be guilty, or hiding something. Why?



I relate it to the elephant in the living room. Everybody knows it's there, but no one wants to talk about it.



The elephant in the living room is this: The way JonBenet died -- that darn cord around her neck. I am theorizing that Burke had seen this very exact thing being done -- and not in a video -- but in real life. And some of the Ramsey's close friends, and most certainly Patsy and John, KNEW exactly why Burke did what he did. They knew where he had seen it done before. And it involved them in a dramatic way. They felt threatened that IF the public/LE found out WHAT Burke was trying to do, and HOW he knew about erotic asphyxiation (EA) otherwise known as the "choking game", then they would have some responsibility.



It is apparent to me that Burke had, at some time, witnessed adult sexual partners engaging in Erotic asphyxiation (EA).



Patsy and John Ramsey and some of their close friends and neighbors (my theory) knew this. I propose that they knew or guessed HOW Burke had been exposed to this sexual activity. They are not stupid. My theory is they realized, perhaps silently, individually, without having to discuss the matter, that their lives would be greatly affected if the truth came out that Burke did it. Because it would follow -- the public/LE would want to know WHERE Burke learned of such things.



Child Protective Services would get involved and children could be removed from homes when the parents don't protect their children from being exposed or affected by such sexual behavior. The ramficiations were huge: child neglect charges, children placed in foster homes, divorce, public humilitation and shame.



All of this is mute at this point, because most likely, the statute of limitations has passed to charge the Ramseys with giving false statement, destruction of evidence.



This murder case has tugged at our collective consciousness because the TRUTH has not be revealed.



My theory suggests why the truth was hidden. Burke did it -- he was doing to his sister what he had seen saw adults doing. These adults (who had unintentionally set the wheels in motion for this terrible and senseless accident) were successful in confusing the investigation by shielding Burke and more importantly by shielding WHY Burke did what he did.

 

[close_enough]

hi Chat!....yeah, there's so much info/interviews/news articles etc, packed in this forum....

i'll be honest...i can't 'grasp' the whole EA thing, as far as the R's & their friends go, BUT i do think it's possible that BR somehow got wind of this EA stuff...i understand how folks are 'taken back' with BR being a suspect, & i was the same way for a long time....no way, he had anything to do w/this, BUT over time, & knowing that there's a lot of children 'out there' that do these horrible things to other children, i think it IS conceivable....i'm also starting to lean toward another person being there w/BR...

i know that Steve Thomas doesn't believe BR had anything to do with JBR's death...he thinks Patsy did it, which i also did, for a long time...it's just been over the last two years or so, that i started thinking more about BR....

OK, if PR flew into a rage with JBR, & threw her up against something in the bathroom, to crack her skull, then all this elaborate 'cover up' just seems too much, imo.....i think that it's possible that the garrotte might have already been down in the basement..who knows?? someone might have been using it on themselves in the past????.....do we KNOW that the garrotte was made that night?...could BR have been 'turned on' to AEA by a friend?..maybe the garrotte had it's secret place down in the basement.....

but then i go back & think that maybe JBR was being molested, prior to all of this...eww, it's just so sickening to think about, but interesting at the same....

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Chat, you've presented the most plausible BDI theory I've heard yet.

One problem I've always had with BDI is that I can find no evidence of Burke ever acting jealous or resentful enough of his sister to really hurt her like that. There's the golf club incident, but the accounts I've heard of that sound like it was nothing more than an accident and not something he planned. And in my mind, if Burke could do something like that to his own sister, and get away with it, then he would exhibited some of the same behavior at some point afterwards.

But if he was copying something that he had seen adults doing, and it wasn't something meant to be violent, that would explain some of it...but why would JonBenet comply with a cord around her neck?

Why is there no sign of a struggle with the cord around her neck, such as the lack of internal damage - including her tongue being unblemished? Choking victims usually bite the insides of their cheeks and their tongue while struggling to breathe.

If she was struck on the head trying to fight off Burke, why are there no defensive wounds?

And how was Burke able to keep it together and not reveal anything when he was interviewed by the police?

 

[close_enough]

Chat, you've presented the most plausible BDI theory I've heard yet.

One problem I've always had with BDI is that I can find no evidence of Burke ever acting jealous or resentful enough of his sister to really hurt her like that. There's the golf club incident, but the accounts I've heard of that sound like it was nothing more than an accident and not something he planned. And in my mind, if Burke could do something like that to his own sister, and get away with it, then he would exhibited some of the same behavior at some point afterwards.
But if he was copying something that he had seen adults doing, and it wasn't something meant to be violent, that would explain some of it...but why would JonBenet comply with a cord around her neck?
Why is there no sign of a struggle with the cord around her neck, such as the lack of internal damage - including her tongue being unblemished? Choking victims usually bite the insides of their cheeks and their tongue while struggling to breathe.

If she was struck on the head trying to fight off Burke, why are there no defensive wounds?

And how was Burke able to keep it together and not reveal anything when he was interviewed by the police?

maybe because it was a "game" that BR talked JBR into playing???

i can see how this wouldn't be behavior that he would have exhibited later...it was a game that 'went wrong'...his sister was accidently killed playing this game....

as far as defensive wounds, scratching would be the only one i can think of, & from what i understand, the samples under JBR's nails is useless .... i guess with everything that went on w/this case, i imagine we'll never know if BR had any scratches on his body that morning, before he was whisked off ....

 

[gaia]

"And how was Burke able to keep it together and not reveal anything when he was interviewed by the police?"__________________

This has been one of the hard things to explain away when it comes to taking the BDI theory seriously. I'll tell you, though, I think if Burke was told (in a certain way!) by his parents (especially his DAD!), this kid would do whatever they wanted. I believe this family operated that way about a lot of things. I don't think they were in a child *advertiser censored* sex club or any of that malarky, but I do think they were a family riddled with problems and secrets (like many families) and knew how to keep one another from exposing these things to the outside public. Burke was young, but not THAT young and he's certainly no dummy. After the first moments of the day, I think his parents gave him a BIG TALK and he was INSTRUCTED what to talk about and what to avoid - at all costs. This could even help to explain why Burke acted kinda WEIRD that day when he was going being ferried away from his house. Does anyone remember that? The description was on the order of - he seemed to be kinda spaced-out and just really involved with his toy. Didn't talk much and asked no questions about what was going on with JonBenet and his family. Seems pretty strange to me.

 

[close_enough]

"And how was Burke able to keep it together and not reveal anything when he was interviewed by the police?"__________________

This has been one of the hard things to explain away when it comes to taking the BDI theory seriously. I'll tell you, though, I think if Burke was told (in a certain way!) by his parents (especially his DAD!), this kid would do whatever they wanted. I believe this family operated that way about a lot of things. I don't think they were in a child *advertiser censored* sex club or any of that malarky, but I do think they were a family riddled with problems and secrets (like many families) and knew how to keep one another from exposing these things to the outside public. Burke was young, but not THAT young and he's certainly no dummy. After the first moments of the day, I think his parents gave him a BIG TALK and he was INSTRUCTED what to talk about and what to avoid - at all costs. This could even help to explain why Burke acted kinda WEIRD that day when he was going being ferried away from his house. Does anyone remember that? The description was on the order of - he seemed to be kinda spaced-out and just really involved with his toy. Didn't talk much and asked no questions about what was going on with JonBenet and his family. Seems pretty strange to me.

i agree....it certainly seems strange that BR didn't 'crack' while being interviewed, but it's definately not impossible, if he had been "INSTRUCTED"...

i remember what you're talking about...i read someone that was interviewed in one of my books... :banghead: can't remember which one now...they said BR acted odd.....certainly out of character for a child to have all this commotion & conversations going on about his little sister...

 

[i_dont_chat]

maybe because it was a "game" that BR talked JBR into playing???

i can see how this wouldn't be behavior that he would have exhibited later...it was a game that 'went wrong'...his sister was accidently killed playing this game....

as far as defensive wounds, scratching would be the only one i can think of, & from what i understand, the samples under JBR's nails is useless .... i guess with everything that went on w/this case, i imagine we'll never know if BR had any scratches on his body that morning, before he was whisked off ....

Am I correct that it was John Ramsey’s intention to fly his family out of town that morning? But the police nipped that in the bud? That flight would have gotten Burke away from having to answer probing questions, including being checked for scratches, etc.



Am I correct that it was FW who took Burke to his house? Burke was taken straight away from his bed, to the neighbor’s?



Am I correct that it was FW who was with John when they discovered JonBenet's body? (In my theory, John and Patsy had already discovered her body at some point during the night, and this mid-day finding was the second time John Ramsey saw her.)



All of this is of course conjecture. It seems to me that FW might have made a snap judgment, when he saw her body, that it was Burke's doing and thus FW instantly went into the mode of cooperating with the Ramseys in getting Burke away from the police. It is possible there was never a conversation regarding what to do. I'm saying it was obvious what to do -- get Burke outta there -- to people who had some prior knowledge of the children's awareness of deviate sexual play.



I am suggesting that at least these two families knew the connection between what Burke had done and some previous encounter with erotic asphyxiation. EA is defined as obtaining pleasure from the feeling of being suffocated, and the use of it within the context of sex play.



In the practice of EA, the person who benefits is the person whose breathing is controlled. Apparently, after being deprived of oxygen to the brain, intense sexual pleasure is felt at the moment of organism. I'm fairly sure of one thing, it was not JonBenet's intention to be a willing participant in the choking game. It was not a sexual act. I’m saying that what happened was an accident when 2 children try to "act out" what they've seen. That's what makes me think there were adults involved somehow -- to give Burke the idea that he needed his sister to "play with." My theory, Burke was duplicating what he had seen. Two people doing this choking thing. From his child-like perspective, the adults seemed to like it. Nobody was hurt or angry. What Burke didn't comprehend was -- when and why to "release" the ligature. He simply choked JonBenet her to death. Whether the head bash came before, during, or after is not material.



Some have suggested that Burke could have learned about solo (AEA) masturbation -- at school or even from the Internet. If that were the case, he could have experimented on choking himself while masturbating. But how would he have gotten the idea on his own to apply a cord around another person's throat, unless he had seen it done?



That's why I think Burke was "acting out" what he had seen. He could have easily coaxed JonBenet into "playing" and to allow him to put the cord around her neck. If she and Burke had in the past experimented with masturbation, then this session could have started like others. There was a mark, the cause of which isn't known, on her neck which could indicate force, if not just holding her down forcefully. I can imagine that when JonBenet started having trouble breathing, she fought for her life.

 

[luvbeaches]

I don't believe Burke did it even if he was able for the following reasons:

1. His parents sent him to school the following January. If they thought there was any chance of him spilling the beans, they wouldn't have let him out of their sight.

2. They allowed Burke to testify before the Grand Jury. Burke was just a little kid. As we've seen from other cases involving children, they are very easy for the police to "lead" into coherced statements. J&P would never have allowed this with Burke if there was any chance he would tell.

3. All of the early law suits were charged by the Ramsey's on Burke's behalf. They always filed in his name for defamation of character. They NEVER filed in their own name even though they were being skewered in the media (much worse than Burke ever was). This is because they could prove Burke didn't do it. They didn't charge on their own behalf because they would have to prove they didn't do it and they weren't even going to try!

I don't think Burke did it...and those are all good reasons. Even though I know the 911 background sounds have never really been verified, I wouldn't be a bit surprised if Burke's voice was really on the tape asking, "What did you find?" Or whatever the wording was.

But I do believe that Burke heard something that night...and most likely knows what happened. Poor kid.

 

[i_dont_chat]

"And how was Burke able to keep it together and not reveal anything when he was interviewed by the police?"__________________

This has been one of the hard things to explain away when it comes to taking the BDI theory seriously. I'll tell you, though, I think if Burke was told (in a certain way!) by his parents (especially his DAD!), this kid would do whatever they wanted. I believe this family operated that way about a lot of things. I don't think they were in a child *advertiser censored* sex club or any of that malarky, but I do think they were a family riddled with problems and secrets (like many families) and knew how to keep one another from exposing these things to the outside public. Burke was young, but not THAT young and he's certainly no dummy. After the first moments of the day, I think his parents gave him a BIG TALK and he was INSTRUCTED what to talk about and what to avoid - at all costs. This could even help to explain why Burke acted kinda WEIRD that day when he was going being ferried away from his house. Does anyone remember that? The description was on the order of - he seemed to be kinda spaced-out and just really involved with his toy. Didn't talk much and asked no questions about what was going on with JonBenet and his family. Seems pretty strange to me.

Consider this possibility -- when John and Patsy discovered what had happened, and they realized they had lost their daughter, they had the SERIOUS talk with Burke that he should NEVER tell what happened -- no matter what. Because if he did, it could mean that he would be taken away from his mom and dad. And that his mom and dad could go to jail. The parents could have promised him that they would NEVER tell anyone what he did, that they knew it was an accident, and that they all three had to stick together. Also, they probably told him that they were going to say that a stranger came into the house that night and hurt JonBenet.

AND if the Ramseys had any knowledge of EA and how Burke may have learned about it -- separation and jail was a distinct possibility for the parents. The Ramsey's could have been charged with neglect or abuse, to allow their son/children to be exposed to this sexual practice.

I also think that after the SERIOUS talk, the parents probably gave Burke a sleeping medication -- to knock him out. It could have been Benadryl. They needed him out of the way - so they could do the cover-up, moving suspicion away from Burke, even if it meant drawing suspicion on themselves. They knew no evidence could prove THEY did it -- because they didn't. It was Burke whom they were protecting -- and at the same time protecting themselves.

 

[MysteryAddict]

The evidence doesn't suggest Burke did it!

How would he have obtained fibers from the sweater his
Mother was wearing that night to entwine in the garotte?

How did he place a fiber from his Father's shirt in his
sister's underpants?

Poor kid, his sicko parents killed his sister and they would
rather he remain under suspicion than confess.

 

[i_dont_chat]

The evidence doesn't suggest Burke did it!

How would he have obtained fibers from the sweater his
Mother was wearing that night to entwine in the garotte?

How did he place a fiber from his Father's shirt in his
sister's underpants?

Poor kid, his sicko parents killed his sister and they would
rather he remain under suspicion than confess.

We don't know either of these two facts are true. We know that at one time, authorities CLAIMED these fibers existed. To my knowledge, there is no evidence that fibers from Patsy sweater was in the knotted cord on the broken paint brush handle.

As far as fibers of John's shirt in JonBenet's underwear, I think definitely that was a fabrication, an attempt to get John to confess, and John called their bluff.

Like others, I think much of this supposed evidence was leaked to pressure a confession out of the parents.

My theory is that the parents had all night to get rid of anything that pointed to Burke and to the children's attempt to mimic EA. That included wiping down JonBenet's body, changing her panties, whatever it took to give their daughter's body some dignity in death. A lot of fiber exchange could have taken place during this "staging" period.

Someone -- most likely John -- found that unopened package (size 10/12) of girls' underwear in a drawer in JonBenet's room. He hurriedly grapped "Wednesday's" pair, and took them down stairs to be put on JonBenet. That accounts for why the size was not JonBenet's size. It makes sense to me that John would decide on a new pair of panties, just out of the package -- rather than take a chance on selecting a pair which wasn't pristine clean. JonBenet was a bedwetter and did wet her pants. It wasn't Patsy who grabbed the Size 10/12. Patsy knew that JonBenet's washed and cleaned underwear was kept in the bathroom; Patsy would have picked the correct size.

With all due respect, if there is evidence which states that fibers from Patsy red sweater was in the knot on the cord around JonBenet's neck, or that fibers from John's shirt was found in her underwear, please show me the links.

 

[Love_Mama]

I don't know how one could prove this.

A 9-year old boy, I think, has the strength to bash in the skull of a 6-year. With a weapon, or course. A flashlight or a bat or something substantial.

This is my humble opinion.

Michele............just 3 days ago, here in San Diego CA.......a 11 yr. old girl beat her 5 yr. old sister to death!


xxxxxxxxxxoooo
mama