Was BR involved? #2

[icedtea4me]

Nice to see you icedtea4me. The toy was shown as partially unwrapped in the wc. Kolar shows a photo of it in his book, and I posted a photo of it on this thread http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?129344-The-Wine-Cellar&p=11207557#post11207557 I believe its description is a garage with moving parts (robotic), and it can be seen on one of the historical lego websites. I thought it may have been meant for BR's birthday later in January.

Thank you for the pic. So, this is definitely the parking garage John mentions in DoI and more specifically as a robotic Lego toy in TOSoS? I mean, it isn't possible that it isn't some other Lego toy, is it? I'm just having a hard time determining by the pic.

 

[questfortrue]

Thank you for the pic. So, this is definitely the parking garage John mentions in DoI and more specifically as a robotic Lego toy in TOSoS? I mean, it isn't possible that it isn't some other Lego toy, is it? I'm just having a hard time determining by the pic.

True, he could have received another Lego toy for Christmas. When I researched this using the description by JR as some kind of garage with moving parts or a robot(ic) Lego set, it was the only one I found which seemed to be likely. This was set 6991 released in 1994. There was another set called the City Garage, but it was released in 2009.

Could be I missed some Lego toy in my research. IIRC KoldKase examined the photo in Kolar’s book, too, and also thought it was a probable candidate for the Lego toy JR references. But no one could prove it. Just a “best-fit conjecture.”

 

[andreww]

Nice to see you icedtea4me. The toy was shown as partially unwrapped in the wc. Kolar shows a photo of it in his book, and I posted a photo of it on this thread http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?129344-The-Wine-Cellar&p=11207557#post11207557 I believe its description is a garage with moving parts (robotic), and it can be seen on one of the historical lego websites. I thought it may have been meant for BR's birthday later in January.

If John helped Burke assemble the toy, why would it be partially wrapped in the WC?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elannia]

About the toy, PR stated that the Lego toy in the wc was for BR birthday in January... as andreww pointed out, how did they assemble that toy if it is shown in the crime scene photos? I think the toy they put together was one he had opened up on Christmas morning. And also didnt PR claim she was the one who tore the paper off the presents in the wc, but Kolar states that it was actually BR. Why would she have lied about that? I believe (like DeeDee) that the size 12 panties were in one of those packages,

 

[icedtea4me]

If John helped Burke assemble the toy, why would it be partially wrapped in the WC?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The toy Burke was said to have received at Christmas was a robotic Lego parking garage. The toy in the wine cellar is a robotic Lego space station.

 

[andreww]

So back to the original question, was the Lego parking garage found assembled anywhere in the house? That doesn't seem like the type of toy that you would assemble at 10:00 and then put back in the box? Also, I find it a little odd that when questioned about it John just stated that it was some kind of parking garage, not even mentioning that it was a Lego set. The Rs seemed to have told so many lies it just makes you wonder if this was another of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[andreww]

About the toy, PR stated that the Lego toy in the wc was for BR birthday in January... as andreww pointed out, how did they assemble that toy if it is shown in the crime scene photos? I think the toy they put together was one he had opened up on Christmas morning. And also didnt PR claim she was the one who tore the paper off the presents in the wc, but Kolar states that it was actually BR. Why would she have lied about that? I believe (like DeeDee) that the size 12 panties were in one of those packages,

Those size 12s seem like such a big clue don't they? I mean besides Patsy, who else would have known they were there? Then again, you would think that she would know exactly what package they were in, so why open all of them?

And why the need to change the panties anyway? The only logical conclusion is that a sexual assault took place and an attempt was made to cover up forensic evidence? I wonder if the paintbrush was used in conjunction with a cloth or something to swab her vagina to eliminate further evidence?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[elannia]

Those size 12s seem like such a big clue don't they? I mean besides Patsy, who else would have known they were there? Then again, you would think that she would know exactly what package they were in, so why open all of them?

And why the need to change the panties anyway? The only logical conclusion is that a sexual assault took place and an attempt was made to cover up forensic evidence? I wonder if the paintbrush was used in conjunction with a cloth or something to swab her vagina to eliminate further evidence?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I find it very interesting to go back through PR interviews and see how many different things she tells... examples, they left lights on, no they were off she claims, I cant remember... she was asked abouf JB bedwetting(starting and stopping) and writing it on the questionnaire form at the dr office, but nope she didnt remember doing that either, didnt know if she washed her hands, when she bathed last, she said in one interview she woke up between 5:30 and 6:00 on the 25th and it took her about 20 to 30 minutes to get dressed and it took her about 5 to 10 minutes at the laundry room. I mean the 911 call was made at 5:52 am, if she did all that the approximate time would have been about 6:20 or so...

 

[andreww]

I find it very interesting to go back through PR interviews and see how many different things she tells... examples, they left lights on, no they were off she claims, I cant remember... she was asked abouf JB bedwetting(starting and stopping) and writing it on the questionnaire form at the dr office, but nope she didnt remember doing that either, didnt know if she washed her hands, when she bathed last, she said in one interview she woke up between 5:30 and 6:00 on the 25th and it took her about 20 to 30 minutes to get dressed and it took her about 5 to 10 minutes at the laundry room. I mean the 911 call was made at 5:52 am, if she did all that the approximate time would have been about 6:20 or so...

I know right? I just don't know how the detectives could have let that slide without further questioning? The first time I read that interview all I could think was that her timeline made absolutely no sense! I watch The First 48 quite a bit and see a lot of police interviews and if a suspect were to give that kind of flimsy account, the response would certainly be "we know you are lying, this doesn't make any sense". Why on earth did they let that slide???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DeeDee249]

I know right? I just don't know how the detectives could have let that slide without further questioning? The first time I read that interview all I could think was that her timeline made absolutely no sense! I watch The First 48 quite a bit and see a lot of police interviews and if a suspect were to give that kind of flimsy account, the response would certainly be "we know you are lying, this doesn't make any sense". Why on earth did they let that slide???


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This isn't the only thing LE let slide during the parents' interviews. It is so aggravating to read them that I want to rip them right off the page. The interruptions and misdirecting by the Rs lawyers- the "breaks" and then when they resume they NEVER go back to the topic they were discussing. This case didn't have a prayer.

 

[andreww]

This isn't the only thing LE let slide during the parents' interviews. It is so aggravating to read them that I want to rip them right off the page. The interruptions and misdirecting by the Rs lawyers- the "breaks" and then when they resume they NEVER go back to the topic they were discussing. This case didn't have a prayer.

Having read all the interviews several times, I never really considered them to be interrogations. I read somewhere that ST said he really didn't want to confront the Ramsey's with inconsistencies, possibly because he figured they would just end the interview and leave. Instead his game plan was to let them spew their lies so as to have them on record. At one point Thomas felt he had Patsy close to breaking but someone called for a break in the proceedings and Patsy regained herself.

I guess it's easy to say now that the interviews were soft, but it's also pretty obvious that the Ramsey's attorneys would never have let them sit around for a real interrogation.

IMO the mistake was made on the 26th when the Rs were moved out of the residence. They certainly should have been transported to HQ for questioning right then and there. If they had been separated and interviewed on that day I don't believe they would ever have left the station and would probably still be behind bars today. Instead they were given four months to prepare themselves and acquire the confidence of being backed by one of the most powerful legal firms in the country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[questfortrue]

I find it very interesting to go back through PR interviews and see how many different things she tells... examples, they left lights on, no they were off she claims, I cant remember... she was asked abouf JB bedwetting(starting and stopping) and writing it on the questionnaire form at the dr office, but nope she didnt remember doing that either, didnt know if she washed her hands, when she bathed last, she said in one interview she woke up between 5:30 and 6:00 on the 25th and it took her about 20 to 30 minutes to get dressed and it took her about 5 to 10 minutes at the laundry room. I mean the 911 call was made at 5:52 am, if she did all that the approximate time would have been about 6:20 or so...

Agree, elannia. Like you, the primary reason I’ve re-read interviews of all of the parents is to discern discrepancies between them and to consider where their inconsistencies exist. As their explanations evolve it’s maddening to determine which account is true. The description of the toys BR received for Christmas is but one example. But there are other more important ones. I consider JR’s comment about finding JB to be interesting, revealing to his son-in-law that he found JB at 11:00 am. Both Kolar and ST note that discrepancy in light of the fact that he brought JB up from the wc at 1:05 pm. Kolar even has it documented that JR said he was down in the basement in the early morning between 7:00 am and 8:00 am. (We know he wasn’t doing laundry.)

Another evolving explanation was in regards to whether BR was asleep or awake. None of them, neither BR nor JR/PR own up to the fact that he was awake in the vicinity of the phone when the 911 call was placed by PR. BR, likely in trying to assist his parents’ initial declaration that he was asleep, says later that he was only “pretending to be asleep.” (So pretend sleep-walking and speaking to his mom at the phone? Maybe not exactly the whole truth. moo)

From an interview with Kolar, and it was only a brief comment, Kolar alludes to the fact that detectives interviewed past family friends regarding some issues of BR. IDK when those interviews took place, and I don’t know what was in those detective reports Kolar read. But I do suspect it contributed to his evaluation of BR and the SBP syndrome. It’s therefore also interesting that AH provides an R attorney a document eliminating BR’s involvement with a carefully worded statement saying that no evidence had been developed to name BR as a suspect. (If one really wants to scrutinize puzzling behavior, imagine that AH knew the contents of those detective reports, and that he knew JB was shown to have signs of chronic molestation, and yet he still produced that letter for the R attorney.) Now consider and compare how AH worded the statement to the public and press that the GJ had finished their work and no charges would be filed.

It was all so well-orchestrated for deniability - from the changing or vague R statements, to the cleverly-worded DA pronouncements. MHO

 

[UKGuy]

Those size 12s seem like such a big clue don't they? I mean besides Patsy, who else would have known they were there? Then again, you would think that she would know exactly what package they were in, so why open all of them?

And why the need to change the panties anyway? The only logical conclusion is that a sexual assault took place and an attempt was made to cover up forensic evidence? I wonder if the paintbrush was used in conjunction with a cloth or something to swab her vagina to eliminate further evidence?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

andreww,
In his book, James Kolar cites Burke as being responsible for opening the partially opened gifts, something he did during the day.

The size-12's are not simply a clue they link the R's directly to JonBenet's death, since Patsy stated they were purchased by her and not brought into the house by the intruder.

IMO JonBenet's underwear was changed to match the R's new version of events, i.e. a kidnapping, this means either parent may have substituted a wednesday pair for another wednesday pair, only the BPD know the facts here.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Agree, elannia. Like you, the primary reason I’ve re-read interviews of all of the parents is to discern discrepancies between them and to consider where their inconsistencies exist. As their explanations evolve it’s maddening to determine which account is true. The description of the toys BR received for Christmas is but one example. But there are other more important ones. I consider JR’s comment about finding JB to be interesting, revealing to his son-in-law that he found JB at 11:00 am. Both Kolar and ST note that discrepancy in light of the fact that he brought JB up from the wc at 1:05 pm. Kolar even has it documented that JR said he was down in the basement in the early morning between 7:00 am and 8:00 am. (We know he wasn’t doing laundry.)

Another evolving explanation was in regards to whether BR was asleep or awake. None of them, neither BR nor JR/PR own up to the fact that he was awake in the vicinity of the phone when the 911 call was placed by PR. BR, likely in trying to assist his parents’ initial declaration that he was asleep, says later that he was only “pretending to be asleep.” (So pretend sleep-walking and speaking to his mom at the phone? Maybe not exactly the whole truth. moo)

From an interview with Kolar, and it was only a brief comment, Kolar alludes to the fact that detectives interviewed past family friends regarding some issues of BR. IDK when those interviews took place, and I don’t know what was in those detective reports Kolar read. But I do suspect it contributed to his evaluation of BR and the SBP syndrome. It’s therefore also interesting that AH provides an R attorney a document eliminating BR’s involvement with a carefully worded statement saying that no evidence had been developed to name BR as a suspect. (If one really wants to scrutinize puzzling behavior, imagine that AH knew the contents of those detective reports, and that he knew JB was shown to have signs of chronic molestation, and yet he still produced that letter for the R attorney.) Now consider and compare how AH worded the statement to the public and press that the GJ had finished their work and no charges would be filed.

It was all so well-orchestrated for deniability - from the changing or vague R statements, to the cleverly-worded DA pronouncements. MHO

questfortrue,
As with most conspiracies the claims of no evidence or absence of evidence simply reflects a desire to avoid any focus on BR.

These are tell tale markers of bogus rhetoric similar to politicians pointing to more milionares must mean less poverty or poor.

That no evidence was developed to consider BR as a suspect does not mean that no evidence existed which may have been developed. Developed is another legal term which only comes into play when there is a court case, otherwise its alike a theory with no evidence to support it.

BR colluded with his parents in the homicide of JonBenet, he faked being asleep, he went along with leaving the house, i.e. being separated from his parents after his sister was murdered, and corroborating his parents version of events.

BR is linked to the wine-cellar crime-scene via his touch-dna being found on JonBenet's pink barbie nightgown, also his fingerprints are to be found on the pineapple bowl and a glass containing a tea-bag. Anyone who understands probabilities knows that the likelihood of two events occuring simultaneously is pretty low.

So in summary AH's statements regarding BR are self serving anf have no foundation in evidence.

.

 

[elannia]

Also, in one of PR interviews she says "I hear my scream, then I hear John's scream when he came up from the basement... now this may have no significance, but why in the heck didnt TH say something when she said that? Did JR scream when he brought her up later that day, (cant remember)Or was it that morning before the 911 call was made that they found her? Like I said she may have just gotten mixed up during the interview, but she should have been questioned about it. Is it possible that it was PR and BR or just one?.. lets think about this..., it was either P or B, JR had no idea what had happened, he woke to get ready for the trip(maybe earlier than 5:30) PR had it all planned out already, she screamed for JR, he came running she showed him the note, he runs around looking for her and finds her, PR calls 911, etc. Maybe JR had no idea what happened to her until the 11:00 am comment, maybe he knew the whole time. The only thing that connects him with the crime scene evidence are the fibers from his shirt, whereas P and BR have DNA and FP on pieces of the crime scene. If JR figured it out who was actually responsible he covers for him, her. Honestly though I couldnt imagine him sleeping while all of that was going on. just a theory here

 

[DeeDee249]

Patsy's comment about hearing "JR scream as he came up from the basement" is just one of the many things police let go by when they heard them. Later interviews saw a much better "prepared" Patsy and JR. The lawyers stalled so long that "I don't remember" was the reply to most questions. One of the Rs "demands" for allowing police to interview them were copies of questions in advance and to not be asked anything they had previously been asked. This would NEVER have been allowed for anyone without the Rs political connections. The R wanted to be able to review the answers they had previously given to they could be sure to make the same claims. One of the best ways to "catch" a suspect is to confront the courtroom with the inconsistencies of the suspects statement. But I forgot....the Rs weren't allowed to be "suspects", according to the DA, were they?

 

[traacker13]

It makes perfect sense to me now that BR was involved because after all of these years one would think that something would eventually come out to someone somewhere by BR about his parents involvement. But if your parents helped YOU cover it up... then you likely wouldn't be putting anything out there to discredit anything they had said on their "theories of intruders". JMO

 

[eileenhawkeye]

It makes perfect sense to me now that BR was involved because after all of these years one would think that something would eventually come out to someone somewhere by BR about his parents involvement. But if your parents helped YOU cover it up... then you likely wouldn't be putting anything out there to discredit anything they had said on their "theories of intruders". JMO

9-year-olds can definitely keep secrets. How many kids who are molested do not say a word until they are an adult? Or what about a kid who still wets the bed...I bet they wouldn't tell anyone. I can't see any reason why he would tell someone his parents killed his sister, especially if he was certain they would go to jail, etc.

 

[andreww]

9-year-olds can definitely keep secrets. How many kids who are molested do not say a word until they are an adult? Or what about a kid who still wets the bed...I bet they wouldn't tell anyone. I can't see any reason why he would tell someone his parents killed his sister, especially if he was certain they would go to jail, etc.

Burke was 9 at the time and if he wasn't involved, his memory of that time is probably pretty sketchy. It is natural for a child that age to believe everything his parents tell them, so it is very conceivable that he still believes in their innocence. However, he might now have doubts, but not wanting to jeopardize a healthy inheritance, he may have chosen to live with those doubts. One has to wonder if Burke has or will ever want to investigate the facts of this case for himself? I'm sure if he were to read his parents interviews he would find at least several instances that he would know for a fact are lies. But it was a traumatic event and it wouldn't surprise me in the least if he simply didn't want to open up that can of worms.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[alfiebaby]

Ok go easy, 1st time poster here. A sexual assault never physically consummated, ongoing possible digital molestation? Cannot see a sexual predator with such restraint, no such restraint was used in JBs death.