JonBenet – 15 years later

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Madeleine, who is the guy in your pictures at the bottom of your post?
 
Burke at this point wouldn't add anything over what he said during his interviews right after the murder. He doesn't know what happened.

They know who did the murder---they have the DNA---they just haven't matched it. That's the only way this case will be solved, unless there is a confession and then a subsequent matching of the DNA.
 
Burke at this point wouldn't add anything over what he said during his interviews right after the murder. He doesn't know what happened.

They know who did the murder---they have the DNA---they just haven't matched it. That's the only way this case will be solved, unless there is a confession and then a subsequent matching of the DNA.

They do NOT know who did the murder. KNOWING means you have a NAME. Unmatched DNA does not solve a crime.
 
Burke at this point wouldn't add anything over what he said during his interviews right after the murder. He doesn't know what happened.

They know who did the murder---they have the DNA---they just haven't matched it. That's the only way this case will be solved, unless there is a confession and then a subsequent matching of the DNA.

Maikai,
How do you know what Burke knows? He must know something otherwise LEA would not want to interview him again.

Do you know if Burke was sipping tea as JonBenet snacked pineapple shortly before her death?

Maybe Burke does!



.
 
Wow has it really been fifteen years? It doesn't seem like it. I remember I had my tv on while I slept and my son, who had turned four only a few months prior had crawled into my bed that night to sleep. I woke up and was looking at my perfect little angel sleeping so soundly beside me when I heard a blurb about it on TV. I'm thinking this may have been the day after Christmas because I don't think the story would have broke on national news early Christmas morning, but I could be wrong. We had gotten our first computer that year as our family gift. That was the start for me. I spent a lot of time reading and participating in the forums that sprung up. I posted mainly on the Yahoo forum for many years. I also was involved with WS way back then but mostly as a reader/lurker. 15 years. JB would be a grown young woman now. It still frustrates me that her case is not solved, legally that is.
 
I think of JonBenet every Christmas. She was such a bright little light that was snuffed out so violently. Bless her heart, I'm sure she was frightened. I know she is flying with the angels. Many years ago I hung an angel on her tree. The time will come when we will know and until then, God Bless the Ramsey family.
 
I can't believe it's been 15 years. Fifteen years and someone got away with something so heinous.

Honestly I can't see how this case can ever be "solved" legally. I understand that the police just let the parents and all the guests tromp around all over the house, and Mr. Ramsey brought the body up from the basement. Any DNA recovered would be possibly contaminated, wouldn't it? Anyone who was implicated by the DNA evidence could just say well, that evidence doesn't mean anything because it's been compromised.
 
On an important anniversary such as this, not a word on John Ramsey’s website:
http://www.fairjusticefoundation.org/index.html

We are expected to believe that his mission in life is the following:
May 1, 1997
REPORTER: What do you want to say to the killer of your daughter?
JOHN RAMSEY: We'll find you. We will find you. I have that as a sole mission for the rest of my life.
REPORTER: Mrs. Ramsey?
PATSY RAMSEY: Likewise.
http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/05011997ramseymediainterview.htm

The reality has always been this:
Q. Then what was, basically, your association with the private investigation of the potential suspects in the murder of JonBenet Ramsey?
A. The investigators were retained by our attorneys, and they stated to me that the principal purpose of those investigators was to prepare a defense in the case that the police might bring a charge against me. I hoped that they would also follow up on leads that came to us, but I was frequently reminded by our attorneys that their principal role was to prepare a defense should that be necessary.
Deposition of John Ramsey, December 12, 2001

Yes, John Ramsey is clearly obsessed with finding the “killer,” as obsessed as OJ.
 
what has JR done in 15 yrs looking for JB killer?
 
This was the first case I followed online...I can't believe it's been 15 years. This case and the development of websites centered around true crime have had a huge impact on how my life has evolved.

I hope you are resting in peace, JonBenet...Merry Christmas. :prayer:
 
I'm a new poster but I have followed this case intensely. When this happened, my daughter was the same age and looked similar to Jonbenet. It has haunted me since day one. My daughter is now a wonderful young woman. I think about how Jonbenet would be her age now except she was robbed of her life. I also grew up in Patsy's hometown. I have been reading here a long time and I want you to know I think you are all great. Insightful and respectful. That is why I decided to quit lurking around and start posting.


:welcome4:
 
I thought I would start a thread for people's comments as another anniversary approaches.

15 years later and still no justice for JonBenet.
Misinformation still abounds as Aphrodite Jones aptly demonstrated with her abysmal, error-filled “documentary” earlier this year.
John Ramsey is still self-absorbed and has affirmed this by writing yet another self-serving book.
While Mary Lacy’s reign of incompetence has ended and the current DA has un-cleared the Ramseys, it seems that little has changed.
BR has chosen to continue the family legacy of evading police and hiding behind lawyers.
The silver lining continues to be the small community of people here and elsewhere that have preserved the truth of the case and continue to keep it alive.
After taking a break from thinking about the JonBenet case (I became briefly obsessed with it earlier this year), I am more convinced than ever of the RDI theory, after initially coming to this forum as an IDIer. The idea of someone breaking in the house, walking around as if they were in no hurry, writing a long rambling ransom note, nabbing JonBenet, possibly abusing her, then killing her with a garrote and some other object and then leaving her body behind to be found before ransom could be paid defies all logic.

On the other hand, no one seems clear on the motive. I think most believe it was an accidental death, but was it out of rage (PDI) or sexual abuse (JDI)? If sexual abuse, how come no other Ramsey kids have come forward to claim sexual abuse?

So I still have some doubt. But I think the preponderance of evidence points towards JDI, with Patsy as part of the coverup.

Unfortunately, I think we are unlikely to get any definitive answers, unless the perp slips up again or someone close to the family steps forward with previously withheld info.
 
After taking a break from thinking about the JonBenet case (I became briefly obsessed with it earlier this year), I am more convinced than ever of the RDI theory, after initially coming to this forum as an IDIer. The idea of someone breaking in the house, walking around as if they were in no hurry, writing a long rambling ransom note, nabbing JonBenet, possibly abusing her, then killing her with a garrote and some other object and then leaving her body behind to be found before ransom could be paid defies all logic.

On the other hand, no one seems clear on the motive. I think most believe it was an accidental death, but was it out of rage (PDI) or sexual abuse (JDI)? If sexual abuse, how come no other Ramsey kids have come forward to claim sexual abuse?

So I still have some doubt. But I think the preponderance of evidence points towards JDI, with Patsy as part of the coverup.

Unfortunately, I think we are unlikely to get any definitive answers, unless the perp slips up again or someone close to the family steps forward with previously withheld info.

mtwentz,
Nice to hear you went from IDI to RDI. If you check out my posts I am on record, more or less, from day one, proposing that because JonBenet's homicide has been staged that this will inluence peoples perception as to what happened. This was deliberate so should be factored into your theory of who did it?


My own opinion is that that JonBenet was a sexual abuse victim, this was likely something that started when JonBenet was younger than six years old.

The autopsy report outlines a sexual assault prior to JonBenet's death, Coroner Meyer's verbatim account relates sexual contact, so patently JonBenet had been sexually assaulted prior to death.

For me this is what makes JonBenet's death a sexually motivated homicide, e.g. she was killed because sex was involved, not specifically because an accident happened.

This is why there is staging, so to inluence people to think IDI, PDI whatever.

Conisder the Ramsey plans e.g. to fly ASAP by plane after dropping Burke Ramsey off with Fleet White, what does that suggest : a desire to stay resident in Boulder and assist LEA, or a desire to flee justice and make sure Burke Ramsey avoids arrest?


On the other hand, no one seems clear on the motive. I think most believe it was an accidental death, but was it out of rage (PDI) or sexual abuse (JDI)? If sexual abuse, how come no other Ramsey kids have come forward to claim sexual abuse?
You do not need to refer to other children, the Coroner cites sexual contact in his vebatim report. Whether the death was accidental or deliberate, its genesis lies within sexual abuse.



.
 
Jeff Shapiro looks back...
[snip]
For several years, I secretly hoped I could prove the Ramseys were innocent. Not only did I feel compassion for them in the wake of relentless media attacks, my interaction with them forced me to recognize them as real people instead of mere names in newspaper print.
In 2006 however, after Patsy Ramsey died of ovarian cancer, I came to terms with the fact that the most compelling evidence suggested that she was somehow involved in the death of her daughter – even if it was just an accident covered up to look like an intentional killing.

[snip]
It is my firm belief that JonBenet’s killer was a deeply religious person who was calling out to God for help in a hysterical panic after the little girl died, someone who was trying to convince themselves that Satan was responsible for their actions.
Who would believe such a delusion?

[snip]
But as former LAPD Detective Mark Fuhrman once told me: not everything in a murder case is going to add up. You have to look at the totality of the evidence.
As much as I’d love to believe that DNA was not an unrelated, accidental transfer and that Patsy was completely innocent, I cannot. In addition, I do not believe that any other member of the Ramsey family was involved in JonBenet’s death or the cover up of her murder, because neither proposition is what the totality of the evidence suggests.
Finally, there were personal observations I made that led me to think Patsy could have been involved.
One summer day in 1997 I sat beside the Ramseys in church only a few months after JonBenet’s passing. At one point, the reverend, Rol Hoverstock put his hand on John’s shoulder and compassionately whispered to him, “You’re a good man, John. I know you didn’t do this.”
Minutes later, when he walked by Patsy sitting alone in an empty pew, the two made eye contact, but instead of greeting her as he did John, he angrily looked away and drifted right past her.
That stunned me.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2011...eys-killer-15-year-anniversary-retrospective/
 
I can't believe it's been 15 years. Fifteen years and someone got away with something so heinous.

Honestly I can't see how this case can ever be "solved" legally. I understand that the police just let the parents and all the guests tromp around all over the house, and Mr. Ramsey brought the body up from the basement. Any DNA recovered would be possibly contaminated, wouldn't it? Anyone who was implicated by the DNA evidence could just say well, that evidence doesn't mean anything because it's been compromised.

That's the point I've been trying to make these last few years, BuzzieCat. The DA's office really shot themselves in the foot by giving the DNA the leading role instead of trying to build a totality of evidence. The scenario you outline is certainly valid, but it works the other way too: if a suspect is brought in who has no alibi and matches up to all the other evidence (as much as anyone CAN "match"), if the DNA comes back negative, game over! They HAVE to let him go! They can't suddenly turn around and say that the DNA is just an artifact, because they've bet the farm on it! No soap, as they say.
 
If sexual abuse, how come no other Ramsey kids have come forward to claim sexual abuse?

mtwentz, I'd be happy to address that for you, but I think I already did. There was a poster not too long ago, "melissamom," I believe, who I had that discussion with. I'll see if I can find it for you.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
78
Guests online
1,962
Total visitors
2,040

Forum statistics

Threads
600,910
Messages
18,115,494
Members
230,991
Latest member
DeeKay
Back
Top