Knowing all you know today about this case who do you think really killed JonBenet?

Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Who do you believe killed JonBenet?

  • Patsy

    Votes: 168 25.0%
  • John

    Votes: 44 6.6%
  • Burke

    Votes: 107 15.9%
  • an unknown intruder

    Votes: 86 12.8%
  • BR (head bash), then JR

    Votes: 4 0.6%
  • BR (head bash); then JR & PR (strangled/coverup)

    Votes: 113 16.8%
  • Knowing all I know, still on the fence.

    Votes: 55 8.2%
  • John, with an 'inside' accomplice

    Votes: 11 1.6%
  • I think John and Patsy caught him and he made her cover up

    Votes: 17 2.5%
  • I still have no idea

    Votes: 57 8.5%
  • patsy and john helped cover it up

    Votes: 9 1.3%

  • Total voters
    671
Status
Not open for further replies.
madeleine, that's an excellent question. And it seems that reasoning made quite an impression on Burke.

I can only guess, but my vote would go to his grandma, Patsy's mom, as being the one to tell Burke these words of wisdom. I always figured kids his age had what I called "Mother Deafness." They would hear what mom said, but not heed it. But grandparents seem to have a way to make an impression on youngsters.

"Once you tell a secret, it's no longer a secret," sounds like an ideal code for any kid. To me it's like a get-out-of-jail-free card for children who like to grab on to a reason not to tell the truth when confronted by a parent when something wrong was done and the parent is trying to get to the bottom of it. "Who was in the cookie jar?" Can't be answered since the child has been taught secrets are to be kept. Right or wrong. To me this would be a lesson against being honest or having honor.

just my thoughts on the subject.

on the other hand this also sounds like a pedo's modus operandi.it's how they manipulate kids,our special secret.+the secret Santa Visit.....who knows what went on in that household...
 
At http://www.forstevethomas.com/, one sentence caught my eye. Thomas is commenting on the return of JonBenet's case to the BPD. Here's a direct quote from his March 2009 statement:

"Although no one is anticipating a prompt resolution to this long and much-detoured case, perhaps -- just perhaps -- might we see one of those moments “when a chance arrow of history scores a perfect bullseye on a deserving target”?"

Now, he isn't talking about Patsy. I doubt he is referring to Burke. That's an interesting turn of phrase.

 
This is an interesting read. Thomas Miller is a defense attorney in the Denver area, and I ran across this on his website. http://www.tommillerlaw.com/Chapter...ution-of-Justice-by-Thomas-C-Doc-Miller.shtml.

I like his writing style. He makes a lot of good points, and he sure spares the R's nothing in his assessment of the crime and investigation.

I was particularly intrigued by Dr. Andrew Hodges work with the ransom note. It's unfortunate that the BPD dismissed his findings, and refused to have him testify at the Grand Jury. Testimony like his might have made a difference.
 
This is an interesting read. Thomas Miller is a defense attorney in the Denver area, and I ran across this on his website. http://www.tommillerlaw.com/Chapter...ution-of-Justice-by-Thomas-C-Doc-Miller.shtml.

I like his writing style. He makes a lot of good points, and he sure spares the R's nothing in his assessment of the crime and investigation.

I was particularly intrigued by Dr. Andrew Hodges work with the ransom note. It's unfortunate that the BPD dismissed his findings, and refused to have him testify at the Grand Jury. Testimony like his might have made a difference.

No one will determine the guilt or innocence of the parents. Instead, an expensive and manufactured reasonable doubt will replace the American courtroom with a 24/7 inundation of a crackpot intruder theory, and an occasional crackpot who claims to be an intruder. By delaying a decision, Alex Hunter gave rumor and gossip time to soften public outrage into speculation. Shirking his office's decision to charge, he convened a grand jury. By then, the purchased evidence and testimony of the Ramseys' experts, and their gossip show interviews, had reduced common sense to irrelevancy. "Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" diminished to an impossible public relations standard. The "umbrella of suspicion" was cast by a rich woman's parasol.

Hunter tossed his obligation to a grand jury because he knew that the proceedings there would be agonizingly slow and, more important, conducted in secret. The rules of procedure for a Colorado grand jury would shift the responsibility to find probable cause to indict from Hunter to a dozen gagged citizens. In time, Boulder's next DA, Mary Keenan Lacy, would adopt the intruder theory and permit grand juror interviews. L. Lin Wood, Ramsey lawyer for their "Shut Up!" lawsuits, made it perfectly clear than any deviation from the intruder theory would make the proponent of common sense a defendant in a civil action. Without the DA's direction or approval, the public will never be allowed to know what the grand jury thought of the evidence.



:clap:
good article
 
At http://www.forstevethomas.com/, one sentence caught my eye. Thomas is commenting on the return of JonBenet's case to the BPD. Here's a direct quote from his March 2009 statement:

"Although no one is anticipating a prompt resolution to this long and much-detoured case, perhaps -- just perhaps -- might we see one of those moments “when a chance arrow of history scores a perfect bullseye on a deserving target”?"

Now, he isn't talking about Patsy. I doubt he is referring to Burke. That's an interesting turn of phrase.


If I were the BPD and IF I really wanted to try and solve this I would grill dr.Beuf.Dunno why I have a tiny obsession with this person....for starters,he knew the family pretty well,he did everything possible to keep JB's medical records away from police and the public,he was one of the people called over by the Ramseys that day .
I'd also test a sample of his DNA (he might be one of the people called over that night /maybe it was an accident and they DID call someone for help,but someone close?maybe they called someone over to help them calm down?(and I am thinking of Patsy now,JR is the cold blooded one),maybe this person even helped them in the cover-up?)

Yep,this guy would DEFINITELY be on my priority list!
 
At http://www.forstevethomas.com/, one sentence caught my eye. Thomas is commenting on the return of JonBenet's case to the BPD. Here's a direct quote from his March 2009 statement:

"Although no one is anticipating a prompt resolution to this long and much-detoured case, perhaps -- just perhaps -- might we see one of those moments “when a chance arrow of history scores a perfect bullseye on a deserving target”?"

Now, he isn't talking about Patsy. I doubt he is referring to Burke. That's an interesting turn of phrase.


Well,he definitely was and probably still is a convinced PDI,so MAYBE he's hoping they grill JR or BR into spilling the beans about her?
IF PDI I don't think that will ever happen,IMO if PDI and she acted alone any sane father would have spilled the beans after she died no matter what in order to lift the umbrella of suspicion off his SON.His future matters more than a dead wife,IMO.
But I don't think PDI or if PDI,she wasn't the only one involved.There's more to it.
 
The sourced evidence located in the crotch section of the size 12 underwear JonBenet had been dressed in - fibers from the black wool shirt John Ramsey had been wearing to the Whites' party - links John to the staging of the scene (and possibly to more than staging!):

I was surprised that in his book, Kolar doesn't especially mention these crucial shirt fibers, although he does point out (on p. 179/180) that the year 2000 Atlanta interviews had been arranged to explore whether the Ramseys had any explanation for some of the evidence that placed them under suspicion.
 
Well,he definitely was and probably still is a convinced PDI,so MAYBE he's hoping they grill JR or BR into spilling the beans about her?
IF PDI I don't think that will ever happen,IMO if PDI and she acted alone any sane father would have spilled the beans after she died no matter what in order to lift the umbrella of suspicion off his SON.His future matters more than a dead wife,IMO.
But I don't think PDI or if PDI,she wasn't the only one involved.There's more to it.

Red emphasis above: that's what makes me think Thomas was not referring to Patsy in the "arrow of history" statement, although the arrow could still land on a grave I suppose.
 
If I were the BPD and IF I really wanted to try and solve this I would grill dr.Beuf.Dunno why I have a tiny obsession with this person....for starters,he knew the family pretty well,he did everything possible to keep JB's medical records away from police and the public,he was one of the people called over by the Ramseys that day .
I'd also test a sample of his DNA (he might be one of the people called over that night /maybe it was an accident and they DID call someone for help,but someone close?maybe they called someone over to help them calm down?(and I am thinking of Patsy now,JR is the cold blooded one),maybe this person even helped them in the cover-up?)

Yep,this guy would DEFINITELY be on my priority list!

I'd like to see this guy on a witness stand, too. I don't recall reading that he was called before the Grand Jury. I'l love too see him perjure himself when asked about her many doctor visits for "vaginal irritation". Or to explain why he refused to allow her medical records to be seen by investigators. Or why HE was treating Patsy instead of her own doctor- keeping her sedated so he could tell police she wasn't fit to answer questions. I'd love to see him answer why he made the statement that he found no evidence that she was sexually abused and then made a CONFLICTING statement that he NEVER LOOKED (never did an internal pelvic exam or exam with a speculum).
Oh, yeah- I'd love to see this guy on the hot seat.
 
I'd like to see this guy on a witness stand, too. I don't recall reading that he was called before the Grand Jury. I'l love too see him perjure himself when asked about her many doctor visits for "vaginal irritation". Or to explain why he refused to allow her medical records to be seen by investigators. Or why HE was treating Patsy instead of her own doctor- keeping her sedated so he could tell police she wasn't fit to answer questions. I'd love to see him answer why he made the statement that he found no evidence that she was sexually abused and then made a CONFLICTING statement that he NEVER LOOKED (never did an internal pelvic exam or exam with a speculum).
Oh, yeah- I'd love to see this guy on the hot seat.

This is a man who very likely knew more than he was saying. IMO he was either turning a blind eye to what was going on in that household, or he was the most inept pediatrician in history.

You make a very good point. Why WAS he treating PR after the murder? She had her own doctors, why not call one of them? There had to be a reason why they called him specifically, and I doubt it had anything to do with Burke. AND you don't call in a pediatrician for a dead child.
 
No one will determine the guilt or innocence of the parents. Instead, an expensive and manufactured reasonable doubt will replace the American courtroom with a 24/7 inundation of a crackpot intruder theory, and an occasional crackpot who claims to be an intruder. By delaying a decision, Alex Hunter gave rumor and gossip time to soften public outrage into speculation. Shirking his office's decision to charge, he convened a grand jury. By then, the purchased evidence and testimony of the Ramseys' experts, and their gossip show interviews, had reduced common sense to irrelevancy. "Guilt beyond a reasonable doubt" diminished to an impossible public relations standard. The "umbrella of suspicion" was cast by a rich woman's parasol.

Hunter tossed his obligation to a grand jury because he knew that the proceedings there would be agonizingly slow and, more important, conducted in secret. The rules of procedure for a Colorado grand jury would shift the responsibility to find probable cause to indict from Hunter to a dozen gagged citizens. In time, Boulder's next DA, Mary Keenan Lacy, would adopt the intruder theory and permit grand juror interviews. L. Lin Wood, Ramsey lawyer for their "Shut Up!" lawsuits, made it perfectly clear than any deviation from the intruder theory would make the proponent of common sense a defendant in a civil action. Without the DA's direction or approval, the public will never be allowed to know what the grand jury thought of the evidence.



:clap:
good article

Glad you enjoyed the article. :)

Hunter throttled this investigation from the get go, so I completely agree with everything this attorney said. It's unfortunate that Lin Wood was unable to have the Grand Jury findings released. I would like to know if they found enough evidence to recommend an indictment, and if the DA chose not to act on their recommendation.
 
The sourced evidence located in the crotch section of the size 12 underwear JonBenet had been dressed in - fibers from the black wool shirt John Ramsey had been wearing to the Whites' party - links John to the staging of the scene (and possibly to more than staging!):

I was surprised that in his book, Kolar doesn't especially mention these crucial shirt fibers, although he does point out (on p. 179/180) that the year 2000 Atlanta interviews had been arranged to explore whether the Ramseys had any explanation for some of the evidence that placed them under suspicion.

Kolar took care to point out behaviors of JR's, maybe thinking that emphasis would cause us to take a closer look at JR, since the fiber evidence is fact that speaks clearly?

I took Cyril Wecht's book along on vacation recently, and am more convinced than ever before that this crime was a sexually motivated homicide, and that puts Patsy on the back-burner for me unless she was led to rage upon discovery of JB and her molester.

And this last week, some info in Steve Thomas' book jumped out at me. There was a Christmas card found on JR's desk made by JB that said, "The best Christmas gift I can give you is me." Eeeewwwwww! :what:
 
jonbenet made the same card for her mom... to read anything more into the card she gave her dad is just absurd imo

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon101300.htm

Good article. I liked the part about how the Ramseys were making a "rare appearance" in the media. Then, Patsy says concerning Gov. Owens statement that the Ramseys were under the "umbrella of suspicion" (their quotes):
[SIZE=-1]
"Why wasn't the media all over Gov. Owens?" asked Patsy Ramsey as she and her husband fielded questions from a group of journalism students at the Newseum in suburban Arlington, Va. "Even if we are guilty, he shouldn't be the Justice Department."
[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1] "The media should be saying 'Whoa' " to Owens, said Ramsey, making a timeout sign with her hands."[/SIZE]


[SIZE=-1][SIZE=-1]Even if they are guilty the governor isn't supposed to make a comment. :floorlaugh:[/SIZE]
[/SIZE]
 
jonbenet made the same card for her mom... to read anything more into the card she gave her dad is just absurd imo

http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon101300.htm

Thanks for posting this link. Glad to get more info. So, why did Steve Thomas make such a point of putting that reference in the book? It's so hard to pick through the printed info and compile all the comments from this book and that article and get a truly clear picture of all the available case information.

Guess that's why some of us are still coming to the forums to share info and opinions.
 
Not sure where to post this...sorry. Just watched the Larry King interview again...and I must say as much as I laugh at lizard guy she does it just as much!!! watch her she licks her lips sooooo much too. they act like they just want it to go away....i'm assuming that PR would make JR's life hell if he didn't make it 'go away'. for a big time exec he really comes across nervous and f*cked up too. that interview is really telling i think. what a pair of whack jobs regardless omg!!!
 
Kolar took care to point out behaviors of JR's, maybe thinking that emphasis would cause us to take a closer look at JR, since the fiber evidence is fact that speaks clearly?

I took Cyril Wecht's book along on vacation recently, and am more convinced than ever before that this crime was a sexually motivated homicide, and that puts Patsy on the back-burner for me unless she was led to rage upon discovery of JB and her molester.
There also exists fiber evidence which links Patsy to the (staging of) the crime scene in the basement:
Fibers from her jacket were found in the neck ligature, in the tray which contained the other part of the broken paintbrush, on the duct tape and on the blanket covering the dead body.
 
There also exists fiber evidence which links Patsy to the (staging of) the crime scene in the basement:
Fibers from her jacket were found in the neck ligature, in the tray which contained the other part of the broken paintbrush, on the duct tape and on the blanket covering the dead body.

Indeed there was, surprise surprise. I referenced that fact in a post in another thread, which is linked below. It arose out of the grand jury investigation I believe, if I am reading PR's 8/00 interview in Atlanta correctly.

For a brief (somewhat) synopsis of my feelings on the case, reference this post I just made (which probably belongs in here tbh): [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=8571059&postcount=847"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - James Kolar's New Book Will Blow the Lid off the JonBenet Ramsey Investigation[/ame]

It doesn't include all of the factors or supporting evidence that has lead me to arrive at this conclusion, that would take nearly 20 pages and many hours of researching and consolidating my thoughts, I would suppose. However, I am compiling a report on the forensic evidence in the JBR case for a course I'm currently taking, which is due December 17th and will be 8-10 pages complete with sources, references, etc (a real research paper - yippie!). If anyone's interested in reading that, let me know and I will post it when I am finished writing it (and if anyone has any pointers or things they think should be included, threads here about the forensics of the case, please, do tell). If anyone wants to comment on the post I made in the above link, please do. I'm all ears.
 
Thanks for posting this link. Glad to get more info. So, why did Steve Thomas make such a point of putting that reference in the book? It's so hard to pick through the printed info and compile all the comments from this book and that article and get a truly clear picture of all the available case information.

yw.

i've tried to google what ST says about the card in his book... but cannot find the quote. can you post what exactly he said? maybe then we can try to figure out an answer to your question...
 
Oh, and BDI is nonsese because in that scenario no one is going to jail, so there is no need for a coverup. BDIs love the theory because it seems to explain PR/JR pulling in team. But the 911 call with the body in the house makes no sense, so we know PR wasn't part of the team.
Have to disagree. Surely the parents would have been charged with something had it been proven that BDI - child endangerment or something to that effect.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
169
Guests online
236
Total visitors
405

Forum statistics

Threads
606,588
Messages
18,206,425
Members
233,898
Latest member
sleuthchic
Back
Top