By Accident Or On Purpose Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey?

[JustJo]

I kicked my brat monster little brother down a flight of stairs once. I was of, of course, 40 at the time. (Kidding, we were 9 and 15.) Little brothers exist to torture you until you lose your temper and go all psycho. I understand.

My brother has never actually mentioned said incident... He seems more bothered about the time I accidently pushed him into the pantry!

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

 

[BBB167893]

Would you spend half of your life explaining to the mob who did it not knowing how?

You the mob did nothing on your side. Why do you think one or two family members will do better?

I think they know (at least John) who did it, this person is dead.

Prove me wrong or stop talking nonsesnse.

You are greedy. wants to force someone not to grab the information who...

You want him to solve the case which was too complicated for some reasons for thousands of people.

ok. John goes to interview and he says "I know who did it. He is dead."

or

"I know who did it, I can point you this person and believe me as much as you believe me I am not a murderer."

Do you understand? You want someone to do an impossible. Is this too complicated reasoning for someone here?

It's complicated for me, because I don't know what you're saying. What's this "mob?" You think the Mafia did this?

And it's one thing to tell the investigators who did it. I don't know if that's what anyone wants John to do. It would be enough for me if he at least ACTED like he cared about finding out who did it! He had a LOT more resources at his disposal than most of the parents who go through this. He could have done things they couldn't. For several years, he claimed that's what he WAS doing. That turned out to be a lie.

 

[archieil]

It's complicated for me, because I don't know what you're saying. What's this "mob?" You think the Mafia did this?

And it's one thing to tell the investigators who did it. I don't know if that's what anyone wants John to do. It would be enough for me if he at least ACTED like he cared about finding out who did it! He had a LOT more resources at his disposal than most of the parents who go through this. He could have done things they couldn't. For several years, he claimed that's what he WAS doing. That turned out to be a lie.

mob = people in some way concerned with a case. they can just trample someone when trying to do sth. sociology.

A mob is acting like a big herd in many situations.

I think unorganized mob can act in a semi organized way without pushing any idea of mafia alike organizations on the top.

Do you know modern Augmented reality games?

I think idea lying behind them is much older than a wheel. It was a backbone of most primitive religions back in the days.

This is only a hypothesis as I have not enough results of tests but it seems semi organized middle size and large groups are using not only some type of meme ideas on the top.

I know there are some proofs, tests for primitive telepathy alike communications between living entities. Docu series I have seen was talking about "pineal gland" or some other part of the brain which can "intercept" some type of signals (Morse code alike) from another brain.

I think any type of organized mafia was thoroughly checked in the past 21 years if you are asking for things regarding this case.

 

[BBB167893]

mob = people in some way concerned with a case. they can just trample someone when trying to do sth. sociology.

A mob is acting like a big herd in many situations.

I had a feeling you meant that. Heard enough.

 

[archieil]

I had a feeling you meant that. Heard enough.

You are welcome.

I could lie but ...

I would still be thinking what the world be like without lying at all.

I can always assume you people wanted to do it all... there is no god, isn't it?

 

[TiffanyL_AS]

It is extremely rare for children under 10 to commit murder, especially without a gun being involved or the victim being an infant or toddler. Such cases are so unusual as to barely exist. Meanwhile murders of children by parents are common.

If Burke was the only possible suspect, I would simply accept that something extremely unusual happened. But he was in the house with at least two vastly more likely suspects, i.e. Patsy and John. The possibility that it was an adult is far more likely than a 9 year old killing a 6 year old.

With enough research, someone can find maybe two or three cases similar to the BDI theory in the last few decades. Meanwhile, mothers killing their children take place on a weekly, even daily basis.

What about the fact that he'd struck JBR before in the head with a golf club?

I think that is NOT normal sibling rivalry and shows his level of aggression towards his sister. That really needs to be considered as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[archieil]

What about the fact that he'd struck JBR before in the head with a golf club?

I think that is NOT normal sibling rivalry and shows his level of aggression towards his sister. That really needs to be considered as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...m-and-the-doctor-quot&p=12164385#post12164385

It was a scratch which more or less proves it was not intentional.

I am not sure why one source speaks 1 year and the other 2 years.

Was it a summer 1 year earlier?

 

[Userid]

What about the fact that he'd struck JBR before in the head with a golf club?

I think that is NOT normal sibling rivalry and shows his level of aggression towards his sister. That really needs to be considered as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, that is quite normal. That occurs among young siblings all the time.

 

[Swirlz]

Yes, 9-year-olds CAN kill but them doing so is extremely uncommon. It is even more rare when the victim is older than 3, and when there isn't a firearm involved. So yes it does happen, but really, really infrequently.

There is no compelling evidence that shows Burke did it: eyewitness testimony, video, DNA, confession, etc. Without something strong to back it up, the BDI theory puts the blame on the least likely person.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, 9-year-olds CAN kill but them doing so is extremely uncommon. It is even more rare when the victim is older than 3, and when there isn't a firearm involved. So yes it does happen, but really, really infrequently.

There is no compelling evidence that shows Burke did it: eyewitness testimony, video, DNA, confession, etc. Without something strong to back it up, the BDI theory puts the blame on the least likely person.

Peppermintswirlz,
Maybe thats your problem, you rely too much on the probabilites. e.g. 2008 Financial Crash arrived because too many people relied on incorrect probabilities suplied by Gaussian Statistics AKA the Bell Curve.

The FBI profilers in CSI said the JonBenet case was an outlier, never seen a case like it before, nothing in the records, i.e. no stats, so no probabilities.

BDI theory puts the blame on the least likely person.

Thats what your stats say, but what if the case is BDI and its a Black Swan?

.

 

[archieil]

Peppermintswirlz,
Thats what your stats say, but what if the case is BDI and its a Black Swan?
.

Stats says:
12:1 in-the-house family murder.

psychology says:
it is very unlikely Burke would be able to pass all interviews with only some annotations about him regarding minor things.

many factors against the family:

I can even imagine police were checking the killer but have not decided to grab his DNA, check his writing.

The same thing with last problems regarding people watched by agents and doing nasty things when they were put off the list.

 

[BBB167893]

You are welcome.

Thank you.

I would still be thinking what the world be like without lying at all.

Ugly, to be brief.

I can always assume you people wanted to do it all... there is no god, isn't it?

WHAT??!

 

[neesaki]

Peppermintswirlz,
Maybe thats your problem, you rely too much on the probabilites. e.g. 2008 Financial Crash arrived because too many people relied on incorrect probabilities suplied by Gaussian Statistics AKA the Bell Curve.

The FBI profilers in CSI said the JonBenet case was an outlier, never seen a case like it before, nothing in the records, i.e. no stats, so no probabilities.


Thats what your stats say, but what if the case is BDI and its a Black Swan?

.

Stats says:
12:1 in-the-house family murder.

psychology says:
it is very unlikely Burke would be able to pass all interviews with only some annotations about him regarding minor things.

many factors against the family:

I can even imagine police were checking the killer but have not decided to grab his DNA, check his writing.

The same thing with last problems regarding people watched by agents and doing nasty things when they were put off the list.

Thank you.



Ugly, to be brief.



WHAT??!

I realize I'm way behind, meaning I lost track for a while.... But, all I can say is, I think Burke did it. IMO, there's no other logical explanation. I haven't seen proof otherwise. It's the only thing that makes sense to me.

As I said, I probably have missed some stuff here, so if any thing is out there that says otherwise, I'm all ears. TIA

 

[UKGuy]

I realize I'm way behind, meaning I lost track for a while.... But, all I can say is, I think Burke did it. IMO, there's no other logical explanation. I haven't seen proof otherwise. It's the only thing that makes sense to me.

As I said, I probably have missed some stuff here, so if any thing is out there that says otherwise, I'm all ears. TIA

neesaki,
Nothing earth shattering. Its still an open case, it could be any of PDI, JDI, BDI? A neat rule of thunb for me is that Burke should not really factor into any RDI, other than as a resident. Yet we can construct a reasonable BDI that out performs JDI. So looks like PDI is simply a mistaken component of BDI, with Patsy staging for Burke?

.

 

[Swirlz]

Peppermintswirlz,
Maybe thats your problem, you rely too much on the probabilites. e.g. 2008 Financial Crash arrived because too many people relied on incorrect probabilities suplied by Gaussian Statistics AKA the Bell Curve.

The FBI profilers in CSI said the JonBenet case was an outlier, never seen a case like it before, nothing in the records, i.e. no stats, so no probabilities.


Thats what your stats say, but what if the case is BDI and its a Black Swan?

All I was really trying to do here was point out, with supporting stats, that children below the age of 10 committing murder, especially without a gun being involved or the victim being an infant are extremely rare. In all the JBR coverage I have seen, I don't recall that fact ever being mentioned.

If, somehow, Burke was the only possible suspect, we would have to simply accept that something very, very rare happened. But he isn't the only suspect. Others include both parents (acting alone or together). Of these possibilities, a 9 year old killer is statistically the least likely - not impossible, just by far least likely.

 

[UKGuy]

All I was really trying to do here was point out, with supporting stats, that children below the age of 10 committing murder, especially without a gun being involved or the victim being an infant are extremely rare. In all the JBR coverage I have seen, I don't recall that fact ever being mentioned.

If, somehow, Burke was the only possible suspect, we would have to simply accept that something very, very rare happened. But he isn't the only suspect. Others include both parents (acting alone or together). Of these possibilities, a 9 year old killer is statistically the least likely - not impossible, just by far least likely.

Peppermintswirlz.
Years ago, like just after the case broke I thought exactly just what you say. It could not be BDI, as it does not fit the stats profile, anyway how would a 9-year old know to do all that staging?

Now I favor BDI over PDI as I see the parents staging BR out of the case. JonBenet was not moved because she was kidnapped, she was moved to relocate the primary crime-scene. In any PDI Patsy could stage JonBenet in her bedroom, since leaving forensic traces there is less relevant than those left in the wine-cellar.

.

 

[k-mac]

All I was really trying to do here was point out, with supporting stats, that children below the age of 10 committing murder, especially without a gun being involved or the victim being an infant are extremely rare. In all the JBR coverage I have seen, I don't recall that fact ever being mentioned.

If, somehow, Burke was the only possible suspect, we would have to simply accept that something very, very rare happened. But he isn't the only suspect. Others include both parents (acting alone or together). Of these possibilities, a 9 year old killer is statistically the least likely - not impossible, just by far least likely.

doesn't matter what evidence or facts you bring to the table uk will shut you down with a no just because he says so.
its getting really old and I don't think moderators even care anymore.
the fact the forum has become a ghost train doesn't seem to bother anyone sadly.

 

[Jolamom]

All I was really trying to do here was point out, with supporting stats, that children below the age of 10 committing murder, especially without a gun being involved or the victim being an infant are extremely rare. In all the JBR coverage I have seen, I don't recall that fact ever being mentioned.

If, somehow, Burke was the only possible suspect, we would have to simply accept that something very, very rare happened. But he isn't the only suspect. Others include both parents (acting alone or together). Of these possibilities, a 9 year old killer is statistically the least likely - not impossible, just by far least likely.

I think the odds are exactly as you say. I just wish there was more supporting evidence that would actually lead to someone. It seems like every actual piece of evidence could be used in almost any theory if you wanted it to be. Unless there is some more actual evidence uncovered or someone decides to talk, I think we are not ever going to know for sure what occurred.

 

[Userid]

All I was really trying to do here was point out, with supporting stats, that children below the age of 10 committing murder, especially without a gun being involved or the victim being an infant are extremely rare. In all the JBR coverage I have seen, I don't recall that fact ever being mentioned.

If, somehow, Burke was the only possible suspect, we would have to simply accept that something very, very rare happened. But he isn't the only suspect. Others include both parents (acting alone or together). Of these possibilities, a 9 year old killer is statistically the least likely - not impossible, just by far least likely.

How dare you......using facts and stats to support your hypothesis instead of pure conjecture. Who do you think you are?!

 

[s(he) be(lie)ve(d)]

If one is looking at this as a child murdering another child then stats are all fine and well but only if murder was the intent. These stats mean nothing if this was an accident caused by a child with some behavioral problems or emotional problems, or maybe just POed and lashing out.

There are so many ways to look at this case but only one of them is right and we will probably never know which one it is. I can remember when BDI was so taboo you couldn't even whisper about it and it seems that that's the way people like it. Theres only one theory ever allowed here and that's PDI. BDI the new IDI.

or at least that's how this forum reads now.