Was BR involved? #2

[Jolamom]

I'm sorry, but did you just imply that Steve Thomas included this in his book because he thought Burke did it? Isn't this just an example of being through and looking at all possibilities? Or are you concluding that Steve thought BR did it when his theory was that it was an outburst from Patsy.

I also think you're smart enough to reach your own conclusions as to why this was mentioned. I'm just pointing out that it was mentioned as an accident. If you want to turn BR into something more than a child who was dealing with his father's absence and his mother's stage 4 cancer, then just say it. If you think he's a sociopath, then please provide examples like killing animals and striking out at his friends and family without remorse.

I'm fine if that's your opinion, but as you so well pointed out, this was mentioned--it was mentioned as an accident. We were left with no other examples other than Burke being withdrawn and that's not a crime.

Oh and I do see both sides. JB was known to walk though Burk's Lego projects, but I'm not going to make your arguments for you.

.

I did say what I think, but I did that on the thread where it asks us to posts our theories. The title of this thread is "was BR involved" and I was pointing why I thought the golf incident could be significant even though it was listed as an accident. I do not feel BR is sociopath, but I do feel he might have had some emotional issues. His behavior after JB death were pointed out by a psychologist/psychiatrist to be unusual and his bathroom issues are another area of concern. Possibly he had anger control issues, not unusual in young children.

<modsnip>
By the way, do you think anyone, Steve Thomas included, would intentionally violate the Colorado Children's Code, especially with an incident that he could never prove happened?

 

[Fides]

I think Thomas took Patsy's word for this simply because Patsy was his target, not Burke.

I've heard various accounts of when this happened, the last one putting Burke at 3 or 4, so I had dropped this theory, but if he was 8...?

I'd always felt it was odd that JB was actually hit twice in that incident, on the leg as well as in the face. That to me doesn't fit the pattern of an accidental strike.

But I really would like a definite answer as to how old Burke was when this happened?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

From Steve Thomas: BR golf club swing -> JBR injury was summer 1994, so BR was age 7.5
Internet timeline no source: PR takes JBR for plastic surgeon consult in October 1994

 

[BoldBear]

You make it sound like the state couldn't have done anything at all if they knew Burke committed the murder. There are other options when dealing with children that don't involve prosecution of a crime. Their hands weren't completely tied. They just couldn't prosecute and treat him as a criminal.

You also seem to be promoting a wall of silence from the investigators. You've studied this case. If LE had concrete evidence that BR committed the murder, wouldn't it have been leaked? This boat was by no means water tight. It seems to me that the only people who didn't leak information were the GJ.

Kolar was also a little late to the game. Even if he found concrete evidence implicating Burke, the cake had already been baked. If he knew that Burke did it, then the case wouldn't have haunted him. He wouldn't have written his book. At the end of his book, he said that BDI needed further investigation. He also talked about wanting to find the source of the DNA. That doesn't sound like someone who's convinced.

I also understand that this is the BDI thread. Language has nuance. What was being stated here was getting away from the source. It was promoting a psychopathy I can't see given the few details we know about Burke.

 

[Jolamom]

You make it sound like the state couldn't have done anything at all if they knew Burke committed the murder. There are other options when dealing with children that don't involve prosecution of a crime. Their hands weren't completely tied. They just couldn't prosecute and treat him as a criminal.

You also seem to be promoting a wall of silence from the investigators. You've studied this case. If LE had concrete evidence that BR committed the murder, wouldn't it have been leaked? This boat was by no means water tight. It seems to me that the only people who didn't leak information were the GJ.

Kolar was also a little late to the game. Even if he found concrete evidence implicating Burke, the cake had already been baked. If he knew that Burke did it, then the case wouldn't have haunted him. He wouldn't have written his book. At the end of his book, he said that BDI needed further investigation. He also talked about wanting to find the source of the DNA. That doesn't sound like someone who's convinced.

I also understand that this is the BDI thread. Language has nuance. What was being stated here was getting away from the source. It was promoting a psychopathy I can't see given the few details we know about Burke.

To tell you the truth, I am not sure I understand exactly what they do with children under 10. The law says "No child under ten years of age shall be found guilty of any offense." It also says "Although a child under the age of 10 cannot be charged with an offense, it does not necessarily follow that the child cannot violate the law. In enacting the statute, the general assembly determined those persons who could be held responsible for their criminal acts, not that such persons could not commit the acts." I am assuming based on other things I have read, this allows someone else involved, who is of age to be charged, can be still charged.
But going back to what you said, what other options would be available? If they are not charging a minor with an offense, can they force anything else (treatment, rehab programs, therapy...) on him?
I am not promoting a wall of silence, I really am not sure I understand.

 

[ozazure]

Why are people so resistant to the idea that children his age do offend, violently and sexually? The evidence is in, they do. This includes sadistic sexual acts. Why also are people resistant to the idea that people frequently hide family abuse, whether it is being perpetrated by their partner, parent or child? They do it for complex psychological reasons, including deep seated emotional and social needs, and for pragmatic reasons also, finances, living conditions, dependence - either absolute based on age and circumstance or perceived dependence. The to and fro about what would have legally happened to Burke comes nowhere close to other factors that would have been at play. No theory can be discounted because of a distaste for these possibilities, that are proven to be possible by a myriad of other examples.

Have you ever experienced the company of someone who fundamentally lies to themselves? All their actions pivot off an untrue contention because facing the real contention is life shattering. Maintaining their commitment to this lie preserves their equilibrium. It is a lot easier to do when the evidence is somewhat up for debate and you can rightly be angry at anyone claiming you are lying. In fact this is a psychologically comfortable place to be, as you can immerse yourself in the lie in your defence - rather than having the truth sneak up on you during quiet times (and why you might write books and go on talk show circuits when you could sit home and quietly get away with murder). The only thing worse than JonBenet being killed, is her being killed AND them having to face the reality of the situation. This goes for any RDI theory.

 

[otg]

I think Thomas took Patsy's word for this simply because Patsy was his target, not Burke.

I've heard various accounts of when this happened, the last one putting Burke at 3 or 4, so I had dropped this theory, but if he was 8...?

I'd always felt it was odd that JB was actually hit twice in that incident, on the leg as well as in the face. That to me doesn't fit the pattern of an accidental strike.

But I really would like a definite answer as to how old Burke was when this happened?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let&#8217;s put this confusion (and sometimes misconception) to rest once and for all. The only thing relating to this incident that is in public domain is the interviews with Patsy Ramsey. The police know more, but all we know about it is what they asked her and what answers she gave. So let&#8217;s look at what was said.

Patsy Ramsey BPD Interview - April 30, 1997:

TT: Okay. What about any injuries, any major injuries, any major injuries to JonBenet?
PR: She, Burke hit her in the face with a gulf (sic) club one time, and the leg&#8230;
TT: Ay (sic) stitches or anything like that?
PR: No, it was just kind of a skin abrasion, she had a little scar, a little teensy little scar there, but it just kind of squashed the skin up and something to stitch it. She had a black eye, and&#8230;
TT: The 25th, during the day of the 25th, do you recall seeing any injuries on JonBenet? Any scratches, abrasions, cuts, bruises, or anything like that?
PR: I don&#8217;t remember, but she was always getting bruised, you know. Kids just, I don&#8217;t remember anything.
TT: Nothing major&#8230;
PR: Nothing&#8230;
TT: Nothing that you would have to use aspirin or ice, or anything like that?
PR: No.
​

Notice what Tom Trujillo (TT) is doing here. He asks a question and doesn&#8217;t let her finish what she&#8217;s saying before he fires another question. This is an interrogation technique. The purpose is to get the interviewee in the frame of mind to answer questions without thinking about the answer before giving it. They begin answering quickly without thinking it out and not concentrating on what they give as an answer as much because they are anticipating and concentrating on listening for the next question.

Notice also the mistakes in transcription. Sometimes what is actually said is not written correctly. The stenographer is simply entering phonetic sounds and the transcriber might not catch what is intended to be said (e.g., &#8220;gulf club&#8221; instead of &#8220;golf club&#8221 -- and might even leave out a letter here or there (e.g., &#8220;Ay&#8221; should be &#8220;Any&#8221.

So using this interrogation technique, Trujillo asks Patsy about any injuries or illnesses. Patsy starts listing them, but before she can finish he asks another question. The facial injury and the leg injury are not related and did not occur at the same time. What Trujillo is really trying to do is set Patsy up so he can get her to answer about any injuries she might have already had prior to her being killed. IOW, they were trying to find out which of the injuries found during the autopsy might have already been there and not related to her death.


Patsy Ramsey BDA interview - June 23, 1998:

24 THOMAS HANEY: Okay. There was
25 mention while we are talking about that, there
0294
1 was mention of a situation where he apparently
2 hit JonBenet with a golf club up at Charlevoix?
3 PATSY RAMSEY: Yes.
4 THOMAS HANEY: Could you tell us
5 about that?
6 PATSY RAMSEY: He was taking a
7 practice swing, he was just a little guy, he (sic) was
8 two or three, or two and a half, and he was --
9 it was our first summer there, how young they
10 were there.
11 THOMAS HANEY: About what year
12 would that have been?
13 PATSY RAMSEY: That was '93, I
14 believe. And he, you know, he was out there
15 with his little Whiffle ball, golf balls, and
16 she walked up behind and he kind of clipped her
17 right on the cheek. And she screamed bloody
18 murder.
19 And I jumped down off the porch and
20 grabbed her and, you know, slammed ice on it. I
21 thought he got her in the eye, and went down
22 there to the emergency room and, you know, the
23 doctor looked and it was just, you know, that
24 socket around your eye, protects your eye there,
25 so she had a good old black eye for a while.
0295
1 She had a little, I don't remember which eye it
2 was, little abrasion. I took her to a plastic
3 surgeon just to see if there was anything to do
4 to help there. He said it will go away. You
5 know.
6 THOMAS HANEY: So that was just an
7 accidental --
8 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. You know, he
9 wasn't used to looking around and she walked
10 right up behind him, so --
11 THOMAS HANEY: Okay.
12 TRIP DeMUTH: And who was the
13 doctor?
14 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, somebody there
15 at the emergency room in Charlevoix.
​

The incident in Charlevoix happened the first summer they spent there after they bought the property. That was in 1993*. Burke was born January 27, 1987. In the summer of 1993, Burke was 6-1/2 years old. JonBenet was born August 6, 1990. Summer of 1993, JonBenet was either 2 or 3 years old (depending on the month). The transcriber left off the &#8220;s&#8221; in the word &#8220;she&#8221;. Big mistake because it changes what Patsy actually said and it created this confusion which keeps on coming up time after time on the forums. This is what that passage should read:

6 PATSY RAMSEY: He was taking a
7 practice swing, he was just a little guy, she was
8 two or three, or two and a half, and he was --
9 it was our first summer there, how young they
10 were there.
11 THOMAS HANEY: About what year
12 would that have been?
13 PATSY RAMSEY: That was '93.
​

No one will ever know the exact circumstances about how this happened; but I really don&#8217;t think so much attention should be given it. Kids have accidents. It doesn&#8217;t mean Burke deliberately hit his sister, and I don&#8217;t really think he did -- at least, not in 1993.


*As Fides noted above, Steve Thomas wrote in IRMI that this incident happened in 1994. I think this was his mistake because he says nothing more about it than that. Patsy has references in her mind to when it happened (first summer after buying it, and the ages of the kids). In DOI, they said they bought the property in 1992, so their first summer spent there was in 1993. That is when I think this incident actually happened.

 

[Jolamom]

Let&#8217;s put this confusion (and sometimes misconception) to rest once and for all. The only thing relating to this incident that is in public domain is the interviews with Patsy Ramsey. The police know more, but all we know about it is what they asked her and what answers she gave. So let&#8217;s look at what was said.

Patsy Ramsey BPD Interview - April 30, 1997:

TT: Okay. What about any injuries, any major injuries, any major injuries to JonBenet?
PR: She, Burke hit her in the face with a gulf (sic) club one time, and the leg&#8230;
TT: Ay (sic) stitches or anything like that?
PR: No, it was just kind of a skin abrasion, she had a little scar, a little teensy little scar there, but it just kind of squashed the skin up and something to stitch it. She had a black eye, and&#8230;
TT: The 25th, during the day of the 25th, do you recall seeing any injuries on JonBenet? Any scratches, abrasions, cuts, bruises, or anything like that?
PR: I don&#8217;t remember, but she was always getting bruised, you know. Kids just, I don&#8217;t remember anything.
TT: Nothing major&#8230;
PR: Nothing&#8230;
TT: Nothing that you would have to use aspirin or ice, or anything like that?
PR: No.
​

Notice what Tom Trujillo (TT) is doing here. He asks a question and doesn&#8217;t let her finish what she&#8217;s saying before he fires another question. This is an interrogation technique. The purpose is to get the interviewee in the frame of mind to answer questions without thinking about the answer before giving it. They begin answering quickly without thinking it out and not concentrating on what they give as an answer as much because they are anticipating and concentrating on listening for the next question.

Notice also the mistakes in transcription. Sometimes what is actually said is not written correctly. The stenographer is simply entering phonetic sounds and the transcriber might not catch what is intended to be said (e.g., &#8220;gulf club&#8221; instead of &#8220;golf club&#8221 -- and might even leave out a letter here or there (e.g., &#8220;Ay&#8221; should be &#8220;Any&#8221.

So using this interrogation technique, Trujillo asks Patsy about any injuries or illnesses. Patsy starts listing them, but before she can finish he asks another question. The facial injury and the leg injury are not related and did not occur at the same time. What Trujillo is really trying to do is set Patsy up so he can get her to answer about any injuries she might have already had prior to her being killed. IOW, they were trying to find out which of the injuries found during the autopsy might have already been there and not related to her death.


Patsy Ramsey BDA interview - June 23, 1998:

24 THOMAS HANEY: Okay. There was
25 mention while we are talking about that, there
0294
1 was mention of a situation where he apparently
2 hit JonBenet with a golf club up at Charlevoix?
3 PATSY RAMSEY: Yes.
4 THOMAS HANEY: Could you tell us
5 about that?
6 PATSY RAMSEY: He was taking a
7 practice swing, he was just a little guy, he (sic) was
8 two or three, or two and a half, and he was --
9 it was our first summer there, how young they
10 were there.
11 THOMAS HANEY: About what year
12 would that have been?
13 PATSY RAMSEY: That was '93, I
14 believe. And he, you know, he was out there
15 with his little Whiffle ball, golf balls, and
16 she walked up behind and he kind of clipped her
17 right on the cheek. And she screamed bloody
18 murder.
19 And I jumped down off the porch and
20 grabbed her and, you know, slammed ice on it. I
21 thought he got her in the eye, and went down
22 there to the emergency room and, you know, the
23 doctor looked and it was just, you know, that
24 socket around your eye, protects your eye there,
25 so she had a good old black eye for a while.
0295
1 She had a little, I don't remember which eye it
2 was, little abrasion. I took her to a plastic
3 surgeon just to see if there was anything to do
4 to help there. He said it will go away. You
5 know.
6 THOMAS HANEY: So that was just an
7 accidental --
8 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. You know, he
9 wasn't used to looking around and she walked
10 right up behind him, so --
11 THOMAS HANEY: Okay.
12 TRIP DeMUTH: And who was the
13 doctor?
14 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, somebody there
15 at the emergency room in Charlevoix.
​

The incident in Charlevoix happened the first summer they spent there after they bought the property. That was in 1993*. Burke was born January 27, 1987. In the summer of 1993, Burke was 6-1/2 years old. JonBenet was born August 6, 1990. Summer of 1993, JonBenet was either 2 or 3 years old (depending on the month). The transcriber left off the &#8220;s&#8221; in the word &#8220;she&#8221;. Big mistake because it changes what Patsy actually said and it created this confusion which keeps on coming up time after time on the forums. This is what that passage should read:

6 PATSY RAMSEY: He was taking a
7 practice swing, he was just a little guy, she was
8 two or three, or two and a half, and he was --
9 it was our first summer there, how young they
10 were there.
11 THOMAS HANEY: About what year
12 would that have been?
13 PATSY RAMSEY: That was '93.
​

No one will ever know the exact circumstances about how this happened; but I really don&#8217;t think so much attention should be given it. Kids have accidents. It doesn&#8217;t mean Burke deliberately hit his sister, and I don&#8217;t really think he did -- at least, not in 1993.


*As Fides noted above, Steve Thomas wrote in IRMI that this incident happened in 1994. I think this was his mistake because he says nothing more about it than that. Patsy has references in her mind to when it happened (first summer after buying it, and the ages of the kids). In DOI, they said they bought the property in 1992, so their first summer spent there was in 1993. That is when I think this incident actually happened.

Thank you, your explaination makes sense. It seems like it might be more innocent then I first thought.

 

[dogperson]

Young children commit heinous crimes all the time. An 11-year-old boy in my own state of TN was convicted for murder last Friday for shooting and killing an 8-year-old girl because she would not let him see her puppies.

If we google such crimes in children we find quite a long list of such cases. I don't find it at all difficult to believe a child Burke's age could commit murder.

 

[icedtea4me]

It wouldn't surprise me if some BDIs equated Burke hitting JonBenet in the face while swinging a golf club with Jeff MacDonald slamming a 2 x 4 on his wife's head.

 

[elannia]

Young children commit heinous crimes all the time. An 11-year-old boy in my own state of TN was convicted for murder last Friday for shooting and killing an 8-year-old girl because she would not let him see her puppies.

If we google such crimes in children we find quite a long list of such cases. I don't find it at all difficult to believe a child Burke's age could commit murder.

I am 30 minutes away from the town where the boy shot the girl. So sad... I have a 4 year old daughter and a 2 year old son and the way they fight sometimes scares me, they like to throw things too during an argument and have hurt each other by doing so. But they always make up and apologize to each other. So yes accidents happen and the golf club incident could have been an accident, and kids will have temper fits but in JB's case it went to far (the bashing on the head to shut her up

 

[ozazure]

It wouldn't surprise me if some BDIs equated Burke hitting JonBenet in the face while swinging a golf club with Jeff MacDonald slamming a 2 x 4 on his wife's head.

Well for what it is worth, I think the golf club story has little to nothing to do with what happened to JonBenet. If Burke did it and there were notable precursor behaviours that were recorded that'll be in the medical files stored on the "island of privacy".

 

[andreww]

Thank you, your explaination makes sense. It seems like it might be more innocent then I first thought.

Sure, it could have been accidental. We have very little info of the incident, all of it coming from someone who has been shown to be a liar on many occasions.

The reason this incident even comes up is because IDIs would say things like "there is no history of violence between them" whilst dismissing BDI notions. If Burke had purposely caused JBs injury, do you honestly expect that Patsy would have said as much?

Like the boy that cried wolf, Patsy's word means nothing anymore. Was the golf club incident an accident? How would we know? Patsy's a liar, JBs dead, and Burke will only say "talk to my lawyer".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dogperson]

The golf club incident could well have been an accident. But the thing that interests me even more is how desperately Patsy tries to downplay JBRs injury. She is very careful to stress how teeny tiny and little it was. If that's the case, why was a plastic surgeon consulted? Surface abrasions wouldn't normally require the opinion of a plastic surgeon. It's possible Patsy overreacted to a facial injury on her young pageant queen but she really seems to want to prevent any connection being made between that golf club incident and the blow to JBRs head on the night of her death.

BR may have intended to hit JBR with the golf club but that also doesn't mean he wanted to kill her with the golf club. He could have just been upset with her or jealous of her. You don't even have to be a troubled child to be unthinkingly cruel or aggressive. When I was a little girl I remember purposefully hitting other children quite hard at times during the type of petty disputes children occasionally have. Sometimes I left some ugly marks on other kids after our fights got physical. And if I had that kind of temper as a scrawny little girl from a stable home where there were never any major family issues, imagine what aggression might come out in a troubled child like BR. I remember other kids, especially the boys, giving each other black eyes and things like that. Kids fight and kids get angry with each other and kids get jealous of each other. Maybe Burke was tired of his mom paying so much attention to JBRs pretty face and he decided to take a swing at it. When we are that young it's sometimes hard to imagine the consequences of our aggression. We don't intend or expect to inflict a serious injury on another child during our temper tantrum.

However, I think whether or not he intended to hit her with the golf club, this doesn't remove suspicion from him for whatever happened the night his sister died. The two events may not be connected but clearing him of bad intentions for the golf club injury doesn't necessarily clear him of what happened Christmas night.

 

[andreww]

The golf club incident could well have been an accident. But the thing that interests me even more is how desperately Patsy tries to downplay JBRs injury. She is very careful to stress how teeny tiny and little it was. If that's the case, why was a plastic surgeon consulted? Surface abrasions wouldn't normally require the opinion of a plastic surgeon. It's possible Patsy overreacted to a facial injury on her young pageant queen but she really seems to want to prevent any connection being made between that golf club incident and the blow to JBRs head on the night of her death.

BR may have intended to hit JBR with the golf club but that also doesn't mean he wanted to kill her with the golf club. He could have just been upset with her or jealous of her. You don't even have to be a troubled child to be unthinkingly cruel or aggressive. When I was a little girl I remember purposefully hitting other children quite hard at times during the type of petty disputes children occasionally have. Sometimes I left some ugly marks on other kids after our fights got physical. And if I had that kind of temper as a scrawny little girl from a stable home where there were never any major family issues, imagine what aggression might come out in a troubled child like BR. I remember other kids, especially the boys, giving each other black eyes and things like that. Kids fight and kids get angry with each other and kids get jealous of each other. Maybe Burke was tired of his mom paying so much attention to JBRs pretty face and he decided to take a swing at it. When we are that young it's sometimes hard to imagine the consequences of our aggression. We don't intend or expect to inflict a serious injury on another child during our temper tantrum.

However, I think whether or not he intended to hit her with the golf club, this doesn't remove suspicion from him for whatever happened the night his sister died. The two events may not be connected but clearing him of bad intentions for the golf club injury doesn't necessarily clear him of what happened Christmas night.

Problem is that if you feel Patsy lies, when do you believe her? For instance, we debate the intent of this incident, we debate the severity of the injury, but never once do we question whether or not it was a golf club. Its classic illusionist stuff. Keep people staring at your right hand while the left is fooling them.

 

[dogperson]

Problem is that if you feel Patsy lies, when do you believe her? For instance, we debate the intent of this incident, we debate the severity of the injury, but never once do we question whether or not it was a golf club. Its classic illusionist stuff. Keep people staring at your right hand while the left is fooling them.

I can't recall, were there witnesses to the golf club incident? I think after the murder of JBR Patsy downplayed the injury from the golf club. At the time it happened, there may not have been any reason to lie about what JBR was struck with or who struck her. It could really have been an accident or Patsy believed it to be an accident. If anyone witnessed it, it would be hard to lie about it, but right now I don't remember if anyone saw it happen.

I rarely believe anything Patsy said, unfortunately. At the time JBR was hurt by the golf club, she may have been entirely truthful about it, but when questioned later by LE it seemed prudent to her to make the injury seem insignificant. Notice how many times she uses words like "tiny", "little", calling it a "surface abrasion". We don't take children with surface abrasions to plastic surgeons for consultation, normally, so I have discounted all her references to it being as minor as she later claimed it to be.

 

[Tricia]

Hi Everyone,

I removed 11 posts. Please, do not post personal information unless you can connect it to the case.

The Ashley Madison information was obtained illegally and has no place on Websleuths.

Personal contact you may have had with anyone who is involved in any case on Websleuths is not permitted unless you get permission first.

Before you post anything of a personal nature connected to a case ask yourself if the information helps when discussing the facts of the case. If not then do not post the information.

 

[Foreign Faction]

Not only do I believe BR was involved, I feel that he was the main catalyst for this whole damn mess! I have little doubt he was the one who struck JBR on the head, and thus putting this whole damnable disaster in motion.

 

[questfortrue]

It was asked on another thread what facts exist to support BDI. This is just a summary of evidence, both forensic and behavioral, primarily considered by Kolar about BR&#8217;s involvement. It of course doesn&#8217;t prove anything. Moreover, I can personally see a domestic event occurring for which we&#8217;ve no details. (IMO there&#8217;s too much crazy at the dysfunction plantation otherwise known as the &#8216;hell-hole&#8217; to omit any of them from involvement in JB&#8217;s death.)

IIRC, Kolar&#8217;s circumstantial evidence is BR&#8217;s tDNA on her nightgown (the nightgown did not come from the laundry), fingerprints on a bowl of pineapple demonstrating a nexus of contact between BR and JB who consumed a morsel or two of pineapple, a pleading young voice heard at the conclusion of the 911 call (&#8220;What do I do?&#8221; &#8220;What did you find?&#8221; ) and BR&#8217;s pajamas with fecal material and a fecal smeared box of chocolates in JB&#8217;s bedroom.

Additionally, there was confirmation by the housekeeper and a household guest once of having caught BR in inappropriate activity with JB. From what I&#8217;ve read innocent &#8216;playing doctor&#8217; activities cease after the age of six. If it continues, it&#8217;s out of the norm. There were books which were given to Patsy by her parents addressing children&#8217;s behavioral issues, including premature sexual activity.

Also, remember &#8216;DNA-X&#8217; spoken of in the depo of Chief Beckner, found at the crime scene but not on JB&#8217;s body or clothing. Why would Beckner take the 5th rather than reveal anything further about this &#8216;DNA-X?&#8217; I only see two answers: 1) It belonged to one of the adult Rs and he can&#8217;t reveal tightly-held criminal evidence to LW who was representing the Rs and their book publisher&#8217;s insurance company in the civil case with CW or 2) It belonged to an underage male.

One other thought I&#8217;ve had centers around discussions of BR&#8217;s behavior from our sister forum FFJ. This is not published in any of the detective books, AFAIK, and is unknown to the public for the most part. It involves excerpted commentary regarding BR&#8217;s temper. It was known by some acquainted with the family in Georgia that PR and JR had BR in a program to address anger/tantrum issues. Further, there was information from an unnamed authority in Atlanta that the reason for the move to Charlevoix concerned something which happened with BR. I&#8217;d been curious why they moved before the end of BR&#8217;s junior year. It would make sense something precipitated the sudden move.

JMHO, the behavioral incidences are important to know, for no other reason than the majority of children with SBP do not fatally harm a sibling. (Though who knows if the Diane Hallis story could be true - PR struck JB accidentally, and it was JR/BR she was aiming to strike?) As to Kolar&#8217;s thoughts on this, I recall it&#8217;s one of the reasons Kolar really wished to see another GJ impaneled, to subpoena BR&#8217;s medical records and to ask BR additional questions. Kolar says in his book, if it could be proven, not just theorized, that BR was solely responsible the case could be brought to conclusion. The records might reveal a deeply disturbed child who&#8217;d likely gone off the rails that night.

 

[singularity]

Not only do I believe BR was involved, I feel that he was the main catalyst for this whole damn mess! I have little doubt he was the one who struck JBR on the head, and thus putting this whole damnable disaster in motion.

I'm in the group that believe no matter what happened and who did it, the catalyst for her murder is whatever really happened at the Dec. 23rd party.

I don't chalk that 911 call up as a coincidence. Never been a big fan of coincidences in general.

Do you believe Burke did something to her on the 23rd or do you minimize the potential importance of the incident?

IMO if considering one of Jonbenet's siblings had involvement, I'd lean more towards it being JAR related than BDI and yeah I know he has an alibi.

I think I'll read this whole thread tonight. I am not BDI and while Kolar didn't even come close to making it pass my smell test, I like to stay open minded on the issue. I am definitely no longer straddling the IDI side of the fence so everyone in that family is suspect.

Moreover, I can personally see a domestic event occurring for which we’ve no details.

Me too. I'd love to know the conversation John and Patsy were having in that final car ride home.

I've wondered about the layers of this family's dysfunction. I've also wondered if John and/or Patsy had a drinking problem and if this led to the typical domestic disputes that occur in such families. This comment from John is what got me to wondering about this aspect of the family....

LOU SMIT: So it was on a paint can?

JOHN RAMSEY: It was, yeah.

LOU SMIT: If you want to look at these, just the photographs on this side.

MIKE KANE: How often did you smoke a cigar?

JOHN RAMSEY: I couldn't smoke in the house. And Jonbenet would actually get after me if I smoked or drank a beer. So the only time I would smoke a cigar is if I drove to the airport or something like that. So, once or twice a week,maybe.

The only reason a child(especially one that is only six) would be mad at one of their parents drinking a beer is if they know the connection between the drinking and its potentially negative consequences(arguing, fighting, abuse, etc.).

a pleading young voice heard at the conclusion of the 911 call (“What do I do?” “What did you find?” )

If Burke killed her, why is he asking rhetorical questions to his parents at 6 am?

 

[OliviaG1996]

I'm in the group that believe no matter what happened and who did it, the catalyst for her murder is whatever really happened at the Dec. 23rd party.

I don't chalk that 911 call up as a coincidence. Never been a big fan of coincidences in general.

Do you believe Burke did something to her on the 23rd or do you minimize the potential importance of the incident?

IMO if considering one of Jonbenet's siblings had involvement, I'd lean more towards it being JAR related than BDI and yeah I know he has an alibi.

I think I'll read this whole thread tonight. I am not BDI and while Kolar didn't even come close to making it pass my smell test, I like to stay open minded on the issue. I am definitely no longer straddling the IDI side of the fence so everyone in that family is suspect.


Me too. I'd love to know the conversation John and Patsy were having in that final car ride home.

I've wondered about the layers of this family's dysfunction. I've also wondered if John and/or Patsy had a drinking problem and if this led to the typical domestic disputes that occur in such families. This comment from John is what got me to wondering about this aspect of the family....

The only reason a child(especially one that is only six) would be mad at one of their parents drinking a beer is if they know the connection between the drinking and its potentially negative consequences(arguing, fighting, abuse, etc.).


If Burke killed her, why is he asking rhetorical questions to his parents at 6 am?

BBM: IMO, it's likely BR wasn't involved in the staging. He could've been asking his parents about anything pertaining to that. (For example, the ransom note.) Also, it was well known to friends of the Ramseys that BR was an early riser, which would explain why he would be awake during the 9-1-1 call.