The Case of JonBenet Ramsey-CBS Sept. 18 # 2

[LisaB]

One sticking point for me is that the train tracks had three prongs, and for this to work it would mean the middle prong had snapped off. Kolar mentions this in his book, stating that someone else told him those snap off "all the time." Possible, but did they find tracks like that in the house? Did they even look? Could be something that is still part of the confidential case file, and it's not enough to dissuade me from believing the train tracks did indeed cause those marks. I'm open to other theories, but that is the best one so far, IMO.

Really? I see two prongs only.

 

[Frigga]

I actually doubted that NO kidnapper EVER has written the note at the scene, and googled it. I'll be darned! NEVER!
I agree that if the child is dead and removed, a note might be left to trick the family into paying the ransom, but that if the BODY is left, the note is unlikely to help you get the money, and very likely to include things that point the finger of suspicion in your direction. In watching the CBS special, I learned that the pad was taken from the desk, the pen from a kitchen drawer, and the two were returned to their respective places after the note was written. Who does this?

Agreed about the Whites.

100% agree about Burke's reaction to the pineapple. i think he was in such a hurry to leave the crime scene that he totally forgot he had left the bowl. He was hustled out so quickly in the morning that he did not think of it again until presented with the photo. I personally thought it looked like apples in milk, but if he lived in a home where pineapple in milk was a regular snack, he should have immediately been able to identify it. I think it is clear he CHOSE not to recognize it. He seemed SO uncomfortable trying to avoid it.

HIS fingerprints were on the damn bowl- as well as the glass with Tea. Only HIS were on the glass. If Patsy's were on the bowl because she unloaded the dishwasher (GMAB- Patsy didn't do a damn thing to clean up her own house EXCEPT change wet bed sheets because she HAD TO), then why weren't Patsy's on the glass as well?

She didn't wrap her own gifts either- FAO Shwartz did and whatever other store she bought gifts from.

Burkes prints and Patsy's prints on the bowl but not JonBenet's tells the story and their LIES about it confirm it to me. MOO

 

[LisaB]

singularity,
They are also available as free downloads from various upload sites just enter the title into your favorite search engine along with the keyword download.

Might take while to download, but its free ...

I can't find a legal download...

 

[RL2]

If JBR was deceased before the garotte they would of known because there wouldn't have been any sign of breathing in her. I don't know if i necessarily believe it was for staging purposes, because children are murdered by perpetrators anyway without that, so i think the garotte was totally unecessary. And i think whoever did that wanted to make sure JBR was in fact dead, and they could of done that without the garotte, they could of smothered her instead. I think the garotte was just a really additional evil thing to do to her. If JBR was already dead from a head injury there was absolutely no need for the garotte and it still would of looked like murder anyway. And if she wasn't already dead after the head injury then it was the garotte that killed her.

It never occurred to me until someone posted yesterday that the garrote could have been something completely different---used to secure a large box or Christmas tree branches----and, just was conveniently down there in the basement.

I would think a parent would strangle their own child with an item/object because they would not want to actually place their hands around the child's neck... it has always made sense to me that they would strangle her with the rope/garrote rather than their bare hands.

 

[RL2]

I can see PR as a verbal abuser, possibly physical abuse, but I do not see her as a sexual predator. I just don't see her getting a high from that, her highs came from attention and adoration.

Sexual abuse isn't always motivated by sexual gratification... Power, control, etc. are often the motivation

 

[Karinna]

It never occurred to me until someone posted yesterday that the garrote could have been something completely different---used to secure a large box or Christmas tree branches----and, just was conveniently down there in the basement.

I would think a parent would strangle their own child with an item/object because they would not want to actually place their hands around the child's neck... it has always made sense to me that they would strangle her with the rope/garrote rather than their bare hands.

Well i wasn't thinking of them doing it like that with bare hands but smothering with a blanket or something. If they could even come at violating a deceased or dying child with a garotte, that is even a lot worse because the perp. would of had to make that object first so involved that type of premeditation. I don't know how someone that loves their baby so much could even think like that. It's just brutal.

 

[LisaB]

If the pineapple was a big enough deal to cause BR to club his sister with a flashlight, what would have caused him to then walk away from the pineapple entirely? If I wanted something, and hit someone to get it, i would TAKE THE THING! In this case, I would EAT THE PINEAPPLE. The bowl looked pretty full. He did not go back, eat all he wanted, and then go to bed. The only thing I can think of as a kid that would deter me would be if something REALLY BAD happened that took my mind of the desired object. Like, I hit someone to take the thing, then they would not move. I might leave the thing behind because I wanted to distance myself from the scene, or because the "bad thing" overshadowed all thought of the item I had started the altercation over. I might even PURPOSELY leave the thing that caused the fight, as if to say it was not important to me... certainly not important enough to hurt someone over.

 

[BoldBear]

The photo of the soda cans in Burke's sink does have me wondering what parents regularly let their kid consume that much sugary, caffeinated soda...

I don't think it's odd that they allowed the kids to have a soda.

Christmas day and Burke had a new Nintendo in his bedroom. The neighbor kids came over. His bathroom was one of 5 full bathrooms in the house and there were 3 half baths. What part of having 2 soda cans in his sink is odd? I know the storyline and the idea that they were put there after hours, but they could have been in the sink from earlier that day.

 

[PositiveLight]

Not all deaf people are the same though. There's the militant big-D Deaf culture who sign and refuse to interact with the hearing world. There's the small- d deaf people who wear hearing aids and use total communication. There's also deaf people who have cochlear implants and they listen and speak and interact with the hearing world.

In the same vein not all people who act giddy and smile have Aspergers even though some are desperate to be a self appointed psychiatrist and slap a label on Burke. "Oh look he's an aspie!" "Oh look he's on the spectrum." "Oh look at that, he has high functioning autism!" He could very well have SBP or other behavior or attachment disorders. We just don't know. We weren't there to review his medical records ot listen to his grand jury testimony or the testimony from his doctors. All we know is that JB had prior sexual trauma, Burke had scatological behaviors, he hit JB with a golf club before, Dr. Bernhard was concerned, the grandparents were concerned enough to buy books, and so on. The grand jury evidently saw enough to hand out indictments to the parents for permitting JB to be placed in a situation which posed a threat to her life or health.

Not to mention that Dr. Phil specifically stated in his question and answer episode that BR did NOT have aspergers or any other issue. He said he was "nervous". In my opinion he was nervous that he was about to be asked questions that he was going to be put on the spot to answer. Questions he probably knew he would have to lie about. That people would see through his facade. My own opinion but Dr. Phil did say he didn't have any issues on the spectrum. He stated this because everyone was speculating that he did have spectrum issues. As much as I did not like how Dr. Phil came out and completely defended the Ramsey's, that little nugget of that episode spoke volumes to me. So, if we are to believe Dr. Phil, BR didn't have any diagnosed spectrum issues. So that in my opinion, points more towards deviant behavior. I feel that others did notice issues. One of the reasons I think that he may not have showed feces smearing outside of the home was that he mainly did it directly towards JBR. That was his target. The housekeeper stated she did catch them naked playing doctor and they told her to leave them alone. I believe the ones who Ramsey's kept close knew a lot of Burkes behaviors and they wanted the lid to be kept closed on that.
James Kolar was privy to all of the case documents and evidence. So I do trust that he saw things that we haven't. Such as the scatological evidence.
Laura Richards the lady in the CBS documentary that Brandon referred to is a behavioral analyst. She is trained to look at people's behavior and body positioning.
(I just put everything in one comment here before I forget what I wanted to respond to. Haha still ten pages behind on my phone at the moment so this all could have been already pointed out.)

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[carolinea]

A serving bowl? Looked like a cereal bowl (comparing to the size of the glass with the teabag) to me. The interviewer asked Burke "could it be cereal" which would be a silly question if it was a serving bowl! Who mixes up a serving bowl of cereal and milk for people to help themselves?

I agree--it looks like a regular bowl, not a serving bowl. Now, it might have had a serving spoon in it (the big spoon), but it the bowl didn't look huge.

There's a simple explanation for that anyway--it was right after Christmas and their housekeeper wasn't due back until the 27th. Whoever prepared the snack likely just grabbed whichever dishes and utensils were clean.

 

[carolinea]

Who on earth chokes a little girl with a freakin garotte FGS? I don't think i have ever heard of such an evil thing before when a child is murdered? I know some poor murder victims are strangled, but not garroted. She was just a tiny little girl. Why would someone even dream up such a thing? I think out of this whole case that stands out the most to me. It's just horrific really.

This, to me, is an indication that it was Burke. An adult would have been able to strangle her with their hands, very simply. An almost ten-year-old, however, might have needed the extra force. (And yes, it's horrific. Hopefully she was indeed unconscious from the blow to the head at that point and at least didn't have to suffer the fear and pain of it.)

 

[LisaB]

Oh boy, do I agree with you on that one! I've looked at that picture, even at different angles and I couldn't describe what it was, definitely can not see pineapple. If this is all that hangs on Burke being the guilty party, no wonder this won't get anywhere.

I'm in the Patsy/John did it camp and the other covered but even still, I'm open to other theories but Burke, no way! Nothing in that documentary convinced me he did anything out of the ordinary for a 9/10 yr old kid.

I was appalled by the producers of this documentary using a child to re-enact the bashing of a little girls head! They will stop at nothing for ratings, and they had the audacity to critique Burke demonstrating how he thought a murder might be committed, how will the child who acted it out demonstrate the same thing in the future?! Potential murderer? Ohh, please! :facepalm: JMO

Unless he frequently ate apples or pears in milk, he would have known what it was. And if he DID eat other fruit in milk, he'd have said "some kind of fruit".

 

[carolinea]

Unless he frequently ate apples or pears in milk, he would have known what it was. And if he DID eat other fruit in milk, he'd have said "some kind of fruit".

And the "oh" he uttered made it clear he knew exactly what it was.

 

[Tortoise]

Well i wasn't thinking of them doing it like that with bare hands but smothering with a blanket or something. If they could even come at violating a deceased or dying child with a garotte, that is even a lot worse because the perp. would of had to make that object first so involved that type of premeditation. I don't know how someone that loves their baby so much could even think like that. It's just brutal.

Why would they smother her if they thought she was already dead?

I don't see why, faced with a choice between strangling her as an act of brutality or strangling her to make others believe she was murdered by a non family member, you would think the former more likely - especially with a ransom note pointing to an intruder. Particularly since you think it is unbelievable.

 

[LisaB]

Doesn't everybody do that?

(with regard to my mentioning that the Ramsey's shoved things in the basement and forgot about them)

My comment was a reply to the poster who said the house looked messy in the crime scene video. It really was only the basement (and Burke's room - the soda cans in the bathroom sink, etc.) that were disheveled.

 

[PositiveLight]

But that doesn't make sense. BR murders JB, then PR wakes up and says "I better write a fake ransom note"?

Unless.....they were in it together and planned the whole thing! Perhaps they tried to frame JR too. That would explain how they manipulated Arndt to ask JR to search again.

(I'm going to reference several posts here because I don't want to flood the ongoing chat so bare with me)
I think BR did everything to JonBenet physically except wrapping her up in the blanket and possibly cleaning her up and moving her body from maybe the train room to the WC so that she's not only hidden but she's covered up and halfway presentable. Signs of remorse on PR part that she didn't protect JBR better. I do think she wrote the Ransom note. I think the reason she used the $118,000.00 was because she knew he had received that amount as a bonus so it would be easily acquired. IIRC Patsy wasn't privy to most of JR's financial information. Wasn't she only given money in a separate account to pay bills and use for extra spending such as groceries. But wasn't allowed access to JRs other accounts? Honestly I think this is why she was so lavish on parties and such and on JonBenet's pageantry because in those instances, JR probably gave her more money to spend so that the perfect family always looked perfect.
I feel PR wasn't let in on most of JRs business dealings. She was just a trophy wife. So that to me is the reason for the strange amount on the ransom note. That's the most recent amount she had heard JR mention. It was never about the money, it was about covering for BR. She just threw the amount out so in case they did have to get the money, it would be an easy sum to gather up.
I think PR wrote the note. I do however think that Burke was smart enough to write it. Remember the dictionary was flagged to the word incest? It could have easily been used to check spelling too.
The ransom note is the one thing that to me points directly to someone in the home committing the murder. MOO

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[LisaB]

I don't think it's odd that they allowed the kids to have a soda.

Christmas day and Burke had a new Nintendo in his bedroom. The neighbor kids came over. His bathroom was one of 5 full bathrooms in the house and there were 3 half baths. What part of having 2 soda cans in his sink is odd? I know the storyline and the idea that they were put there after hours, but they could have been in the sink from earlier that day.

They were in his bathroom sink. So unless he was spitting Crest all over them, they had both been left in there since the last time he brushed his teeth. My daughter always brushed at each meal, but even if he only brushed once a day, he had had 2 12 oz cans of soda on a day he spent most of visiting other people. If I give a child under 10 a soda, it is generally uncaffeinated, and only one a day max.

 

[PositiveLight]

He was likely still wearing those shoes as well!

I'd be interested to know if Burke was also wearing the same outfit that morning that he wore to the White's the night before. It would be easy to jump under the blankets fully clothed and cover up to your neck and pretend to be asleep. A cop walking in wouldn't think to check his clothing and just assume he had on PJs.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[Karinna]

Why would they smother her if they thought she was already dead?

I don't see why, faced with a choice between strangling her as an act of brutality or strangling her to make others believe she was murdered by a non family member, you would think the former more likely - especially with a ransom note pointing to an intruder. Particularly since you think it is unbelievable.

The smothering in case they weren't sure if she was dead perhaps? I think from what i have read JBR died from asphyxiation due to strangulation associated with the head injury. So the head injury came first then the strangulation which killed her.
And what i find unbelievable is how evil those people were, IMO.

 

[HarmonyE.]

They were in his bathroom sink. So unless he was spitting Crest all over them, they had both been left in there since the last time he brushed his teeth. My daughter always brushed at each meal, but even if he only brushed once a day, he had had 2 12 oz cans of soda on a day he spent most of visiting other people. If I give a child under 10 a soda, it is generally uncaffeinated, and only one a day max.

The Ramseys were total slobs when they weren't pretending to be perfect, high society folk. If Burke had friends in his bedroom on Christmas day and tossed them in there, I doubt anyone would notice or care enough to remove them. He may never have brushed his teeth that night. I probably wouldn't read anything into it.