Ivy said:
DocW, whether Burke wrote the note is neither here nor there in determining whether he killed JonBenet.
Tell that to BC: he thinks that if it can be proved that Burke wrote the note, the case is solved.
Ivy said:
That aside, please back up your claim that there is overwhelming evidence that Burke didn't kill JonBenet, by telling us specifically what that evidence is.
Perhaps I should have been more clear. There is overwhelming evidence of an intruder, which BC himself concedes. The problem comes in "marrying" this intruder evidence with any credible theory that BDI and that parents covered this up. Again, even BC concedes that it is implausible to believe that Burke and friend(s) did this entirely on their own (i.e., including RN, alleged "staging" etc.). I cite BC only because he is the most vocal and insistent of the BDI theorists posting here. If you have an alternative BDI theory NOT involving parents or intruder (i.e., the "5th person" whom Burke allegedly let into the house), then please spell it out in detail and I would be happy to share Sherlock's views on its plausibility.
Either the intruder was malevolent, i.e., came to Ramseys with intent of killing JBR, i.e., part of a small foreign faction (e.g., APAC) trying to send a message, in which case parental complicity in a cover-up is completely implausible, OR
the intruder had no intent to kill JBR but nevertheless very much wanted to molest her!--either by proxy, i.e., encouraging Burke and same-aged friend to engage in AEA activities with her, resulting in an accidental death, or by himself with Burke watching or assisting. Again, the idea that the parents would be aware of either of these possibilities and conclude that the best strategy was to cover everthing up, making themselves VILIFIED in the press for years in the process just doesn't compute. MAYBE if the older teen/young adult perp were their own child, they possibly would have a motive to cover up out of embarrassment, but in this instance we're asked to believe that the Ramseys would feel it worth the tsunami of aggravation that has ensued in order to protect the Stines' babysitter!!!!
Thus, the overwhelming evidence is a combination of the substantial evidence of an intruder coupled with just smidgeon of common sense. If you can offer just ONE case study of parents who behaved in the fashion Ramseys are alleged to have behaved, then I would be happy to adjust my assessment of the plausibility of this theory. In contrast, a theory in which a pedophile such as Gary Oliva enters an unlocked house (thereby explaining the intruder evidence), molests and strangles a little girl on whom he admits he was obsessed (which is far more consistent than an AEA-game-gone-awry in explaining the physical evidence surrounding JBR's death) is a far simpler and more plausible explanation. The principle of Occam's Razor suggests we accept it until/unless a more plausible theory supported by the evidence is offered, which no BDI theorist has done to date.
Ivy said:
By the way, did you ever receive a reply from Keenan confirming that Burke was cleared?
No, if I do, I will post it. I feel certain that had I queried her on whether BC had been cleared, the non-response would have been the same. In short, one should not leap from her non-response to the illogical conclusion that BDI.
imo
