The Case of JonBenet Ramsey-CBS Sept. 18

[expat79]

I can easily see it being wiped clean and then forgotten on a counter in a chaotic scene. I wouldn't even put it past the Ramsey's to have left it there on the counter in the hope that someone in the house that morning would have picked it up, depositing their prints on the damned thing. Not that I think they really did that, but I sure wouldn't put it past them.

Wow. Bingo!

 

[cricket49]

I don't know why some people feel that the parents would not cover up this crime to protect their son. I have friends of the same BB generation who go to great lengths to cover and protect their children over much smaller issues and problems. Children of this generation do not suffer consequences when they get into trouble because mommy and daddy make everything better. They are trying to create the image of being a perfect parent and perfect family.

I have mad respect for the mother who sees a video of their child committing a crime and turns them in to the police department. Tired of seeing mothers on tv saying "Not my child!!"

 

[Boodles]

The Maglite was kept in a drawer but it was suspiciously left out on the counter on that morning. Are there any other explanations for it being out?

If I had a murder weapon flashlight and I was staging a cover up before the police arrived, I would hide that flashlight! I wouldn't leave it on the kitchen counter wiped clean of fingerprints. And if I forgot, and realized at the last minute that it was sitting right out in the open, I'd exclaim (to the police), "we found this here and it's not ours, it might be a clue!"

That said, I'm curious if more will be revealed tonight regarding forensic evidence from the flashlight.

 

[Dogface]

Humour me if you will. Is it possible that JR was listening in on the call on another extension in the house with his hand over the mouthpiece, BR wants to know what's going on, and JR tells him 'we're not speaking to you', meaning we're speaking on the phone - ?

Actually I think that could totally be what happened. I think that's a great train of thought.

 

[Sphinx]

I guess that is why a longer series might be better because it would have time to build groundswell support, for word of mouth to spread like with Making a Murderer, more and more people watching on Netflix over time because it was available all the time and people were talking about it. This will be hopefully be available online (where I hope to watch it!) and will spread for sure; it is just a different mechanism and focused on a previously well-publicized case with so many misconceptions to begin with.

The show was extremely well done, with very intelligent people. Although the subject matter was unavoidably difficult, I appreciated seeing some really intelligent tv. For the last few years, I have been watching mainly PBS shows, because I could not stand the dumbed - down drivel on most of the mainstream media shows. I think these people will get a show of their own, and I hope they keep high standards, using only highly qualified participants, with backgrounds like real FBI and Scotland Yd. specialist detectives. Before this show, and after following the case for years, I could not come to a firm conclusion about who killed JBR, but now after only seeing the first show, I have little doubt they proved that it was BR. I think he tried to do damage control on Dr. Phil, but he is so psychopathic, that he actually just helped to prove their case. IMO

 

[chlban]

Well that says it all. The person that killed her Burke Ramsey and the people that individuals that helped him get away with it. Patsy and John

Do you honestly believe they are going to name Burke and/or Patsy and/or John?

I just find that really hard to believe. I agree after watching last night it looks like where they are headed, but I have this sinking feeling tonight will be all about proving everything they said last night wrong. I have no idea how they do that, but I just don't have a lot of faith in how this murder is now covered.

Not to mention the giant elephant in the room which is how they avoid litigation, which we all know John and his buddy Lin will file 10 seconds after the name any Ramsey as the killer.

I sincerely hope I am wrong. I don't believe there will be any justice in the courts. Patsy is dead, Burke was too young at the time of the crime to be charged and no public official is going to charge John with obstruction.

However, as we learned with OJ there can be different forms of justice. Even before his stupid robbery stunt his life was ruined. He was hated by everyone and it was virtually impossible to find anyone that did not believe, beyond all doubt that he murdered Ron and Nicole. I would settle for that in this case, since it's all we can get.

I bet John Ramsey is so livid today he can barely function. It's one thing on a cable show. This is a major national network, and they just went there.

 

[dogperson]

Now I understand why Kolar has always believed Burke did the garroting and that it was the prime motivation behind it all. If he did, the parents' actions are explained in this huge cover up. If all BR had done was hit her in the head, it could have been passed off as an accident. You cannot pass of a garrotte as an accident. Neither can you explain the paintbrush in the vagina or evidence of previous vaginal trauma. To save BR, the ransom note had to be written and the cover up begun. No, he wouldn't have gone to prison, but he would have borne the label of sexual deviant and murderer for the rest of his life. Plus there's the parental guilt for not seeing this coming and not stopping it. Feeling responsible for all this dysfunction, John and Patst took control of the situation in a way they thought would save Burke.

 

[Boodles]

Hi guys, new here but have been following this case for a while now.

I was wondering if anyone could clarify Dr Spitz's comment about her death when he said it was the head wound that killed her. He said "brain dead" and I think brain death meets the legal definition of death. But doesn't that contradict Dr Meyers finding of asphyxiation as her cause of death? And why didn't Dr Spitz mention the strangulation?

Also I've noticed the IDI's have been pretty vocal these past few weeks on social media but they're eerily quiet tonight

Yes, ditto. Spitz saying the head wound killed her contradicts the autopsy finding and opinions of other forensic pathologists from what I've read. Also, Henry Lee seems reticent when Spitz makes his bold assertions.

And Spitz is the one who contradicted Dr.G's opinion in the Caylee Anthony case. I thought he was full of crap when he testified back then. I'm not sure how much credence to give his opinions in this case.

 

[chlban]

Or PR because she's deceased.

Which is why I am afraid we are going to witness a total turn around tonight and end up with some ridiculous
Intruder being named.

 

[johnjay]

Now I understand why Kolar has always believed Burke did the garroting and that it was the prime motivation behind it all. If he did, the parents' actions are explained in this huge cover up. If all BR had done was hit her in the head, it could have been passed off as an accident. You cannot pass of a garrotte as an accident. Neither can you explain the paintbrush in the vagina or evidence of previous vaginal trauma. To save BR, the ransom note had to be written and the cover up begun. No, he wouldn't have gone to prison, but he would have borne the label of sexual deviant and murderer for the rest of his life. Plus there's the parental guilt for not seeing this coming and not stopping it. Feeling responsible for all this dysfunction, John and Patst took control of the situation in a way they thought would save Burke.

Everything comes into focus from that point of view.

 

[Boodles]

Watching this now. Just had to stop to say how shocked I am that Fleet White agreed to speak with these investigators. So far, this is the best piece I have ever seen on the case.

I am so disappointed that we didn't get to hear the White's observations and opinions!! I was confused, though. They agreed to speak to investigators off camera, but then changed their minds when they met?

 

[chlban]

The problem with BDI is that there is no reason for them to continue to cover for Burke. Certainly by the next day they've contacted their lawyers and have been informed the Burke is safe from prosecution. One does not continue to risk being charged with murder to avoid being charged with lesser crimes such as evidence tampering or obstruction of justice. If it were BDI then John and Patsy would simply have confessed to staging the scene to protect Burke. Again they aren't going to risk being charged with a murder they did not commit.

If you believe Burke did all of it, then coming forward means that you have raised one very sick kid. Not good for either of their images and image was everything to Patsy. I don't think John would have wanted it out there either.

If you believe that Burke hit her in the head but that one or both parents did the staging, including the strangulation, then one of them in a murderer, since that is what killed her.

Personally, if Burke was involved then I think he would have been the one delivering the head blow, then, IMO, Patsy took over the rest.

I still think Patsy did it. But I am open to Burke for head blow, Patsy for the rest.

 

[nona's mum]

Now I understand why Kolar has always believed Burke did the garroting and that it was the prime motivation behind it all. If he did, the parents' actions are explained in this huge cover up. If all BR had done was hit her in the head, it could have been passed off as an accident. You cannot pass of a garrotte as an accident. Neither can you explain the paintbrush in the vagina or evidence of previous vaginal trauma. To save BR, the ransom note had to be written and the cover up begun. No, he wouldn't have gone to prison, but he would have borne the label of sexual deviant and murderer for the rest of his life. Plus there's the parental guilt for not seeing this coming and not stopping it. Feeling responsible for all this dysfunction, John and Patst took control of the situation in a way they thought would save Burke.

This makes sense. I cannot fathom a parent strangling their child in such a way just to stage a kidnapping - I always wondered would it not have been "gentler" to smother her with a pillow or something?! I guess using a garrotte wouldn't require much strength so Burke could have easily done it. Especially if he was in a rage

 

[kimi_SFC]

New Docuseries to begin airing 9/18/16 on CBS

"Twenty years after her death—in which 140 suspects have been cleared of the crime, including her parents, John and Patsy—the high-profile puzzler remains unsolved. A “dream team” of investigators chronicled in the upcoming six-hour docuseries The Case Of: JonBenét Ramsey (premieres September 18, 8:30/7:30c, CBS) claims to have cracked the case."

Thought I'd provide a link to the Real Crime Profile podcast. Episode 36 is a discussion of the upcoming docuseries, and a bit about the team comprised to re-do the investigation. The team includes Jim Clemente, a retired FBI profiler, and Laura Richards, formerly of Scotland yard. To hear them speak about their investigation, theirs is the end all be all of all of these anniversary shows that are popping up.

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/real-crime-profile/id1081244497?mt=2

https://www.facebook.com/Real-Crime-Profile-1197397233613178/

Thank you for linking the podcast. I just listened to it twice!

At the close of the podcast, Mr. Clemente mentioned that there would be Q&A at the end of the broadcasts. I went to their Facebook page, and so far, I haven't seen anything posted yet. I'm unclear as to whether the Q&A occur after each episode, or upon completion of the entire docuseries.

Here is the link to the Real Crime Profile Facebook page post announcing the podcast:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1360617627291137&id=1197397233613178

Podcast link for non-iTunes users:
Episode 36: The JonBenét Ramsey Case: Jim and Laura re-investigate the homicide two decades later
https://art19.com/shows/real-crime-profile/episodes/17c132da-acb8-4ac7-967c-1eaf479d76a8

Lastly, this was linked on the Facebook thread. Has anyone else seen it?

Eery Burke Ramsey Interview! (January 1997)
https://youtu.be/o6iy6ZhMjTs

(My apologies if I'm posting this on the incorrect thread :blushing: )



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[minazoe]

The problem with BDI is that there is no reason for them to continue to cover for Burke. Certainly by the next day they've contacted their lawyers and have been informed the Burke is safe from prosecution. One does not continue to risk being charged with murder to avoid being charged with lesser crimes such as evidence tampering or obstruction of justice. If it were BDI then John and Patsy would simply have confessed to staging the scene to protect Burke. Again they aren't going to risk being charged with a murder they did not commit.

I believe Burke was too close to turning ten, and it would have been the judges prerogative, given special circumstances...the sexual aspect and strangling with a tool designed for killing.

Some children are tried as adults, even...I am sure Jr was advised of this...br being only several weeks from his tenth birthday. Imo

 

[Dogface]

Can someone tell me if Patsy made the call from a corded phone or a cordless?

 

[chlban]

Those of you who have continued to follow the case for 20 years (I gave up after two or three years) were probably familiar with the silence of the "circle of friends". That stood out for me in the program last night. Whose idea was it to make certain that the Ramsey's inner circle of associates did not submit to LE interviews or speak with media about the murder of JonBenet? My guess is that John and Patsy orchestrated this with the help of their closest friends who made the necessary contacts. :moo:

Which makes me question what kind of people they were friends with. I could get on board with not talking to the press, but if LE is investigating the death of a 6 year old child and one of my "friends" told me not to cooperate with them? Um, No.

 

[fullmoon]

I'm going to go out on a limb here, and say that Burke's appearance on the Dr. Phil program was planned by JR because it was leaked that Burke would be named as the suspect in the upcoming conclusion of "The Case of JonBenet-Ramsey." Who best to interview Burke other than Dr. Phil, a psychologist? JR wanted to display Burke on Dr. Phil to show how "normal" he is. I don't think Burke volunteered without JR's consent.

That said, I never thought Burke was involved. I always believed one of the parents was responsible.

 

[reintarnation]

Can someone tell me if Patsy made the call from a corded phone or a cordless?

According to Patsy's April 1997 interview, it was a phone with a cord.

TT: Okay. Where, where were you at when you called 911 cause I know there’s . .
PR: Kitchen.
TT: . . .quite a few phones in the house. (Inaudible) kitchen phone there?
PR: Um hum.
TT: Okay. Is that a cordless phone.
PR: No.
TT: Just a, it’s a regular wall phone right?
PR: Right.
TT: Okay.
PR: And it’s some kind of (inaudible).
TT: It, it’s not one of these, oh, what do you call them, you, you, little antenna. You can walk around the house?
PR: No, no.
TT: (Inaudible) This has a cord on it.
PR: To the wall, yeah.

 

[merribe]

\

Lastly, this was linked on the Facebook thread. Has anyone else seen it?

Eery Burke Ramsey Interview! (January 1997)
https://youtu.be/o6iy6ZhMjTs

(My apologies if I'm posting this on the incorrect thread :blushing: )

I just watched the video and it says there that he was secretly filmed while at a friends house and parents were at the police station. The date you noted was Jan. 1997. And I had heard before he was interviewed 13 days after the murder but was not clear on how that came about.

I am not sure at what point the Ramseys said they had never talked to Burke about it ... did he know anything at this point? And why would he say knife and hammer if he knew it was otherwise? Unless, that is just a kid thing...?

Thanks for all these links !