Poll: was Patsy involved?

[BBB167893]

There's no evidence to support PR committing the head bash, but you support this hypothesis, yes?

There's way more holes in a PDI theory than in a BDI one (who molested JBR, why no divorce, why no history of abuse, why no coherent explanation for BR's nonchalant attitude, etc.), but we'll agree to disagree.

ETA: We don't know what kind of shirt BR was wearing, so to say his fibers were not found is erroneous.

Sorry, OliviaG1996, but I can't go along with you. From where I'm sitting, PDI is the only one that ties up the majority of facts.

 

[Pinkland]

There's no evidence to support PR committing the head bash, but you support this hypothesis, yes?

There's way more holes in a PDI theory than in a BDI one (who molested JBR, why no divorce, why no history of abuse, why no coherent explanation for BR's nonchalant attitude, etc.), but we'll agree to disagree.

ETA: We don't know what kind of shirt BR was wearing, so to say his fibers were not found is erroneous.

Yes. The lighting was an issue in JBR'S room. A flashlight is a logical solution to the problem and we all know Patsy was in the room that night.

The molestation is an issue in the BDI theory as well...but we do know from the housekeeper that she heard JBR scream from behind bathroom doors with Patsy present. Something very wrong was going on. Also one can make a case that Bleaching a little girls hair is abuse.

As for no divorce there are so many reasons. Social stigma, money, lifestyle, reputation, criminal charges, fear, embarrassment, and religious reasons.

These are all logical explanations. All of these are very plausible as there is supporting evidence of these behaviors. Oh and emotional and mental health.

Then we also have physical evidence as well.

Just wanted to add:

Patsy was very religious. In the Christian religion the spouse is supposed to be the main priority...yes even above the children in the relationship. (After God and Christ of course.) It's not far fetched to believe that John shared the same principles. They did attend the same church.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[OliviaG1996]

Yes. The lighting was an issue in JBR'S room. A flashlight is a logical solution to the problem and we all know Patsy was in the room that night.

I don't think it's been confirmed by anyone other than PR herself that she was in JBR's room that night. And lighting wasn't an issue in that room, one of the lamps on the nightstand is on in many of the crime scene photos. If the flashlight was put into anyone's hands last night, it was put in JR's with BR not far behind per Dr. Phil (to which BR did not deny).

The molestation is an issue in the BDI theory as well...but we do know from the housekeeper that she heard JBR scream from behind bathroom doors with Patsy present. Something very wrong was going on. Also one can make a case that Bleaching a little girls hair is abuse.

I had a friend in elementary school who would scream at the top of her lungs whenever her mom brushed her hair. While bleaching a six-year-old's hair is inappropriate, I wouldn't put it on the same level as physical abuse leading to death.

As for no divorce there are so many reasons. Social stigma, money, lifestyle, reputation, criminal charges, fear, embarrassment, and religious reasons.

These are all logical explanations. All of these are very plausible as there is supporting evidence of these behaviors. Oh and emotional and mental health.

From what I've seen from both R parents, religion was just a show they put up for people they wanted to impress. I doubt they lived out the Christian faith the way most of us Christians try to.

Then we also have physical evidence as well.

All of the physical evidence we have from PR points to her undoubtedly being part of the staging part of the crime. The actual murder, though, I have yet to see.

Just wanted to add:

Patsy was very religious. In the Christian religion the spouse is supposed to be the main priority...yes even above the children in the relationship. (After God and Christ of course.) It's not far fetched to believe that John shared the same principles. They did attend the same church.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

I mentioned what I thought of the R's actions regarding Christianity above. It was just a label to them, unfortunately.

 

[Pinkland]

I don't think it's been confirmed by anyone other than PR herself that she was in JBR's room that night. And lighting wasn't an issue in that room, one of the lamps on the nightstand is on in many of the crime scene photos. If the flashlight was put into anyone's hands last night, it was put in JR's with BR not far behind per Dr. Phil (to which BR did not deny).



I had a friend in elementary school who would scream at the top of her lungs whenever her mom brushed her hair. While bleaching a six-year-old's hair is inappropriate, I wouldn't put it on the same level as physical abuse leading to death.



From what I've seen from both R parents, religion was just a show they put up for people they wanted to impress. I doubt they lived out the Christian faith the way most of us Christians try to.



All of the physical evidence we have from PR points to her undoubtedly being part of the staging part of the crime. The actual murder, though, I have yet to see.



I mentioned what I thought of the R's actions regarding Christianity above. It was just a label to them, unfortunately.

The murder was the ligature strangulation. We have evidence of Patsy being involved with the ligature.

The bash and molestation (if it wasn't staged) did not kill JBR.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[EtherealMoonRose]

The murder was the ligature strangulation. We have evidence of Patsy being involved with the ligature.

The bash and molestation (if it wasn't staged) did not kill JBR.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

The bash would have eventually killed her.

IMO Patsy discovered an already strangled JB and she staged the 'garrotte' to make it look like an intruder.

Just my opinion.

 

[OliviaG1996]

The murder was the ligature strangulation. We have evidence of Patsy being involved with the ligature.

The bash and molestation (if it wasn't staged) did not kill JBR.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

In order to tie the paintbrush to the cord, PR would have needed to touch it, of course. Besides, marks on JBR's lower neck suggest she was strangled there also. Perhaps she was strangled with something before the ligature was placed around the neck, furrowing as post-mortem swelling took place.

The bash would've eventually killed JBR.

 

[Pinkland]

In order to tie the paintbrush to the cord, PR would have needed to touch it, of course. Besides, marks on JBR's lower neck suggest she was strangled there also. Perhaps she was strangled with something before the ligature was placed around the neck, furrowing as post-mortem swelling took place.

The bash would've eventually killed JBR.

The bash didn't technically kill her
(Yes it likely would have, if left untreated. Life support if treated) However, that is a moot point because the ligature technically killed her.

You basically have Patsy's fingerprints all over the murder weapon.... (figurative) and your prime suspect is a 9 year old; whom has nothing forensically tying him to the scene?

That makes no logical sense.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[EtherealMoonRose]

The bash didn't technically kill her
(Yes it likely would have, if left untreated. Life support if treated) However, that is a moot point because the ligature technically killed her.

You basically have Patsy's fingerprints all over the murder weapon.... (figurative) and your prime suspect is a 9 year old; whom has nothing forensically tying him to the scene?

That makes no logical sense.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

The Ramseys did a good job of getting rid of potential evidence linking Burke to the crime. Ie: the wipe down of her groin area, wiping the flashlight of all prints ect. Plus we don't know if LE found any evidence linking Burke. We will never know everything about this case. Ever thought why that is?

JB would have been brain dead. Have you looked at the autopsy report/seen photos of the crack of her skull? She (most likely) never would have recovered from that.

 

[OliviaG1996]

The bash didn't technically kill her
(Yes it likely would have, if left untreated. Life support if treated) However, that is a moot point because the ligature technically killed her.

You basically have Patsy's fingerprints all over the murder weapon.... (figurative) and your prime suspect is a 9 year old; whom has nothing forensically tying him to the scene?

That makes no logical sense.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

A mother staging a sexual assault by jabbing her daugher's genital area with a painbrush and then cleaning up remaining blood doesn't make logical sense either, but that's part of your theory.

Crimes are solved with way more than just physical evidence.

 

[Pinkland]

A mother staging a sexual assault by jabbing her daugher's genital area with a painbrush and then cleaning up remaining blood doesn't make logical sense either, but that's part of your theory.

Crimes are solved with way more than just physical evidence.

And yet it is a stronger argument because her fibers are on the brush.

There is also the ransom note, and testimony linking Patsy to odd behavior. Not to mention the drinking and prescription drugs...

Which all equals more than just physical evidence linking Patsy to the crime.

The BDI theory has nothing solid. It is nothing but speculation because there is nothing tying him physically to the scene or weapons.

PDI is the overall stronger case.


Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[kanzz]

Yes. The lighting was an issue in JBR'S room. A flashlight is a logical solution to the problem and we all know Patsy was in the room that night.

The molestation is an issue in the BDI theory as well...but we do know from the housekeeper that she heard JBR scream from behind bathroom doors with Patsy present. Something very wrong was going on. Also one can make a case that Bleaching a little girls hair is abuse.

As for no divorce there are so many reasons. Social stigma, money, lifestyle, reputation, criminal charges, fear, embarrassment, and religious reasons.

These are all logical explanations. All of these are very plausible as there is supporting evidence of these behaviors. Oh and emotional and mental health.

Then we also have physical evidence as well.

Just wanted to add:

Patsy was very religious. In the Christian religion the spouse is supposed to be the main priority...yes even above the children in the relationship. (After God and Christ of course.) It's not far fetched to believe that John shared the same principles. They did attend the same church.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

BBM
What we also know from the housekeeper is that BR was being sexually inappropriate with JBR. That was witnessed visually. Valid point.
Those screams you mention were only heard from behind a bathroom door. Could have been for any reason. Moot point.

Religion? The only time the R's attended an Episcopal Church was when they lived in Boulder. They were denomination hoppers. That tells me something. Most couples/families who attend do go to the same church. Many attend for social/business reasons. Episcopalians are not evangelical. They're not encouraged to talk about it the way the R's did. "By their fruit you will recognize them."

 

[kanzz]

The bash would have eventually killed her.

IMO Patsy discovered an already strangled JB and she staged the 'garrotte' to make it look like an intruder.

Just my opinion.

* Agree *

 

[singularity]

Sorry, OliviaG1996, but I can't go along with you. From where I'm sitting, PDI is the only one that ties up the majority of facts.

Absolutely.

And if PDI "has way more holes than BDI" like she says, Patsy wouldn't have been suspect number one for two decades and when this latest theory loses its steam, she'll be suspect number one again and we all know why.....because the arrows point towards her.

Out of PDI, BDI, JDI, and a combination of them, the one that requires the least amount of speculation and has the biggest amount of actual evidence in its favor is PDI.

Some BDI will claim PDI is "dead in the water" yet in their next breath say if not BDI, it has to be PDI.

In other words, even they know its not dead in the water. BDI is just the hot topic now and once its goose is cooked, they can go back to talking about their original theory.....PDI.

 

[UKGuy]

Absolutely.

And if PDI "has way more holes than BDI" like she says, Patsy wouldn't have been suspect number one for two decades and when this latest theory loses its steam, she'll be suspect number one again and we all know why.....because the arrows point towards her.

Out of PDI, BDI, JDI, and a combination of them, the one that requires the least amount of speculation and has the biggest amount of actual evidence in its favor is PDI.

Some BDI will claim PDI is "dead in the water" yet in their next breath say if not BDI, it has to be PDI.

In other words, even they know its not dead in the water. BDI is just the hot topic now and once its goose is cooked, they can go back to talking about their original theory.....PDI.

singularity,
You wish in hope. Just like ST gave PDI impetus so did Kolar to BDI.

BDI has one more factor that PDI completely lacks. i.e. Grand Jury True Bills, and no mention of Murder 1 for PR, yet the person missing in action is accused, no less, of both sexual assault and murder 1.


Its a no brainer and it would take PR to deliberately stage BR into JonBenet's death, via BR's long johns and all the other related items, e.g. size-12's, etc, to swing the momentum back to PDI !

.

 

[Pinkland]

singularity,
You wish in hope. Just like ST gave PDI impetus so did Kolar to BDI.

BDI has one more factor that PDI completely lacks. i.e. Grand Jury True Bills, and no mention of Murder 1 for PR, yet the person missing in action is accused, no less, of both sexual assault and murder 1.


Its a no brainer and it would take PR to deliberately stage BR into JonBenet's death, via BR's long johns and all the other related items, e.g. size-12's, etc, to swing the momentum back to PDI !

.

Except all the grand jury's findings were not released.

BDI requires so many assumptions it is ridiculous. We have to assume motive. We have to assume physical evidence hasn't been released or found. We have to assume why no 911 call was placed. We have to assume why a parent would cover for the murder. We have to assume why a murderer would not be sent away for help. We even have to a assume why the murder would take place in the basement.

There are to many assumptions and not enough physical proof tying Burke to the murder.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[OliviaG1996]

Absolutely.

And if PDI "has way more holes than BDI" like she says, Patsy wouldn't have been suspect number one for two decades and when this latest theory loses its steam, she'll be suspect number one again and we all know why.....because the arrows point towards her.

Out of PDI, BDI, JDI, and a combination of them, the one that requires the least amount of speculation and has the biggest amount of actual evidence in its favor is PDI.

Some BDI will claim PDI is "dead in the water" yet in their next breath say if not BDI, it has to be PDI.

In other words, even they know its not dead in the water. BDI is just the hot topic now and once its goose is cooked, they can go back to talking about their original theory.....PDI.

Why do you think the GJ voted to indict PR with the charge of accessory to murder?

By the way, BDI has been the "hot topic" for years now. It won't be shoved under the rug for a long while.

 

[Pinkland]

Why do you think the GJ voted to indict PR with the charge of accessory to murder?

By the way, BDI has been the "hot topic" for years now. It won't be shoved under the rug for a long while.

Because without a doubt it's proveable. 1ST degree murder is pretty much unprovable due to reasonable doubt.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[OliviaG1996]

Because without a doubt it's proveable. 1ST degree murder is pretty much unprovable due to reasonable doubt.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

The GJ did not need to prove First Degree Murder, or anything else for that matter.

The wording of the indictments points to an unknown third person.

 

[UKGuy]

Except all the grand jury's findings were not released.

BDI requires so many assumptions it is ridiculous. We have to assume motive. We have to assume physical evidence hasn't been released or found. We have to assume why no 911 call was placed. We have to assume why a parent would cover for the murder. We have to assume why a murderer would not be sent away for help. We even have to a assume why the murder would take place in the basement.

There are to many assumptions and not enough physical proof tying Burke to the murder.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

Pinkland,
You completely fail to substantiate your case.

We have to assume motive.

Sexual assault with maladaptive behavior.

We have to assume physical evidence hasn't been released or found.

This is the case. Not just for BR, but for JR and PR, e.g. no mention of touch dna, or fibers on JonBenet, other than JR's shirt.

if the case is BDI, then Colorado statutes kick in.

We have to assume why no 911 call was placed.

Redundant assumption, i.e. it's the same in all RDI theories.

We have to assume why a parent would cover for the murder.

The same reason people in other homicide cases cover crimes up.

We have to assume why a murderer would not be sent away for help.

No you do not. Help can come to the murderer. We are discussing a millionaire family.

We even have to a assume why the murder would take place in the basement.

This is the preferred location for the staging, it likely began elsewhere in the house.

BR's touch dna on the barbie nightgown, his penknife, his footprint, his long johns, his fingerprints on the pineapple bowl and tea glass in the breakfast bar all link him to JonBenet's death.


This excludes the possibility BR's touch dna is on the ligature, or on JonBenet's body or the size-12's.

BPD have done the analysis but they have never made the results public except for the mythical Intruder's dna.

.

 

[Pinkland]

Pinkland,
You completely fail to substantiate your case.


Sexual assault with maladaptive behavior.


This is the case. Not just for BR, but for JR and PR, e.g. no mention of touch dna, or fibers on JonBenet, other than JR's shirt.

if the case is BDI, then Colorado statutes kick in.


Redundant assumption, i.e. it's the same in all RDI theories.


The same reason people in other homicide cases cover crimes up.


No you do not. Help can come to the murderer. We are discussing a millionaire family.


This is the preferred location for the staging, it likely began elsewhere in the house.

BR's touch dna on the barbie nightgown, his penknife, his footprint, his long johns, his fingerprints on the pineapple bowl and tea glass in the breakfast bar all link him to JonBenet's death.


This excludes the possibility BR's touch dna is on the ligature, or on JonBenet's body or the size-12's.

BPD have done the analysis but they have never made the results public except for the mythical Intruder's dna.

.

Again...your making flat assumptions on what the Ramsey family would do.

You have no evidence of Burke sexually assaulting anyone. It could have easily been John or Patsy.

Most of the evidence you bring up has Patsy directly tied to them as well. Pineapple bowl, barbie outfit, underwear that was bought and wrapped by Patsy, a knife that only Patsy knew the location of.

What you fail to have is anything physically tying Burke to the body of JBR. No fibers on the garrote, tape, or ligature; and yet Patsy is tied to the body.

Where I come from, you go on what evidence you have. If it is not provided or released; you cannot make assumptions that any such evidence exists. Just like in court, if such evidence isn't presented it is not considered.

All that grand jury finding reveals is that they did not find proof of an intruder.

Furthermore, it would be extremely hard for a 9 year old to physically move an unconscious body to redress it; let alone redressing it without leaving physical evidence behind. That is a hard task to accomplish even for an adult. Yet, I have yet to hear this brought up at all.

When I look at what we do know, PDI is the only scenario that easily checks off evidence that we have access to without having to go on basically pure speculation for 90% of the theory IMO.



Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk