Was Burke Involved ? # 3

[TUB23]

The absurd theory? These were medical experts who were looking at her body and determining the cause/time of her death. At first they thought she had died from strangulation but then as they went further into the autopsy, they found the head injury which had continued to cause her brain to bleed and swell *before* the cord around her neck finally ended her life. So it was the head blow first, and *then* the cord that strangled her. Just because you say something, that goes in direct contradiction to the evidence, does not make your account true and the FACTS false.

So you're implying an accidental hit to the head by Burke turns into cold blooded murder after.:facepalm:

 

[akh]

I can easily believe Burke intended to kill her. He seemed too happy she was gone in the videos.
Theory: He got up and fixed himself the pineapple and tea. Then he went and woke her up and invited her to the kitchen where he'd been eating pineapple and thinking about his plan. She grabs a bite of pineapple or maybe he offers it to her. He then asks her to the basement where he then hits her with the flashlight. Then makes a garrote to strangle her. Maybe she was moving after the flashlight strike so it was to make her stop. And it could've been another object but let's assume the flashlight is correct for the sake of argument.
Or maybe he'd already made the garrote as part of his plan. He starts to choke her with it and there's a short struggle, but he ends it quickly with a blow to the head with the flashlight. And then he goes back to the strangulation. Which might then account for the questions that arise about which came first and explain any signs of struggle.

Any signs of sexual abuse are explained by him being 'curious' (and creepy).

And the coverup is not the garrote or the sexual abuse. If anything, maybe PR was trying to coverup the sexual abuse (hadn't she been redressed?).

 

[johnjay]

I can easily believe Burke intended to kill her. He seemed too happy she was gone in the videos.
Theory: He got up and fixed himself the pineapple and tea. Then he went and woke her up and invited her to the kitchen where he'd been eating pineapple and thinking about his plan. She grabs a bite of pineapple or maybe he offers it to her. He then asks her to the basement where he then hits her with the flashlight. Then makes a garrote to strangle her. Maybe she was moving after the flashlight strike so it was to make her stop. And it could've been another object but let's assume the flashlight is correct for the sake of argument.
Or maybe he'd already made the garrote as part of his plan. He starts to choke her with it and there's a short struggle, but he ends it quickly with a blow to the head with the flashlight. And then he goes back to the strangulation. Which might then account for the questions that arise about which came first and explain any signs of struggle.

Any signs of sexual abuse are explained by him being 'curious' (and creepy).

And the coverup is not the garrote or the sexual abuse. If anything, maybe PR was trying to coverup the sexual abuse (hadn't she been redressed?).

Something like that, I'm not sure of the exact order, makes the most sense to me. I don't see the parents adding to the damage already done to her body. I think they cleaned her up the best they could.

 

[johnjay]

So you're implying an accidental hit to the head by Burke turns into cold blooded murder after.:facepalm:

There was nothing accidental about that blow to the head with the flashlight. Murder may not have been intended- but then again, it might have. Certainly the garrote wasn't an accident - no no. Those train track pokes don't look accidental either.

 

[mauidreemn]

Something like that, I'm not sure of the exact order, makes the most sense to me. I don't see the parents adding to the damage already done to her body. I think they cleaned her up the best they could.

This is insanity. No concrete evidence of any this scenario happening.

 

[mauidreemn]

Oh and BTW, to long-time members....

I'm barging onto these threads without so much as a how-de-do, which is rude. I've been on FFJ for so long that I just take for granted most of you are there also and already know me. I've been obsessed with this case since it happened and I saw JR and PR on TV and knew something was fishy with their story. My older son is 25 and so it was easy for me to imagine the horror of losing my child, but danged if I didn't know something was hinky with this case and then started reading...found forums...etc. etc. etc.

So thanks for putting up with my just barging in. I'm a rather blunt and forward person IRL and no different over the interwebs.

I'm really grateful for Chief Kolar's book which started a lot of what has finally happened in this case. RIP JonBenet.

And this makes me sad. Would you like to be convicted based on Kolar and Websleuths?

 

[mauidreemn]

Something like that, I'm not sure of the exact order, makes the most sense to me. I don't see the parents adding to the damage already done to her body. I think they cleaned her up the best they could.

There is absolutely NO evidence that Burke had anything to do with his sister's death. NONE.

 

[UKGuy]

Those are child fingernails on her neck (JB's).

TUB23,
Sure, BR's .

 

[mauidreemn]

TUB23,
Sure, BR's .

Did Jonbenet have Burkes dna under her fingernails?

 

[Vi0l3tt3]

I do not believe that Patsy would have killed JB because of bed wetting. That's insane. I believe that Patsy loved JB, but JB was also a project for her (the pageants and the dancing/singing lessons). A parent that has displayed zero physical abuse to their child prior has a very minuscule chance of going into a massive rage and bashing their child's head in. It just doesn't seem plausible. I also don't believe that John killed JB.

For the sake of debate, what if Burke had nothing to do with it? His behavior during and after the murder (up until present day) could be attributed to a form of autism, social anxiety disorder, the fact that his sister was murdered and he was already an odd child so it helped to decrease his mental and emotional stability...

 

[MissUnderstood]

So you're implying an accidental hit to the head by Burke turns into cold blooded murder after.:facepalm:

I think the accidental hit on the head is what caused the death, then panic mode hit!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[johnjay]

There is absolutely NO evidence that Burke had anything to do with his sister's death. NONE.

I suspect we disagree on what counts for "evidence". This was a crime, not a science experiment, all kinds of evidence are admissible in court and a jury weighs that evidence. Just like the grand jury decided to indict the parents weighed the evidence. They decided that the parents put JBR in a dangerous situation and helped cover up her murder - and they made that decision based on the evidence they were presented. And many of us here weigh the evidence in the same way - however, since this is an internet forum and not a court proceeding our standards of evidence can even be lower than the grand jury's standard- which balances out the fact that we didn't get all the evidence the GJ got.

Finally, if any of that seems unfair to you, then consider how many people the Ramseys pointed a finger at without any evidence of their guilt. We're just following their lead.

We don't need a video of Burke brutally murdering his sister to believe he did. The circumstantial evidence is sufficient for more that 80% of us.

 

[Vi0l3tt3]

I suspect we disagree on what counts for "evidence". This was a crime, not a science experiment, all kinds of evidence are admissible in court and a jury weighs that evidence. Just like the grand jury decided to indict the parents weighed the evidence. They decided that the parents put JBR in a dangerous situation and helped cover up her murder - and they made that decision based on the evidence they were presented. And many of us here weigh the evidence in the same way - however, since this is an internet forum and not a court proceeding our standards of evidence can even be lower than the grand jury's standard- which balances out the fact that we didn't get all the evidence the GJ got.

Finally, if any of that seems unfair to you, then consider how many people the Ramseys pointed a finger at without any evidence of their guilt. We're just following their lead.

We don't need a video of Burke brutally murdering his sister to believe he did. The circumstantial evidence is sufficient for more that 80% of us.

I agree, the circumstantial evidence against Burke is mind blowing. When he admitted to being downstairs that night during the time that JB would have been murdered he really did a number on himself. I believe he did it, although not intentionally.

 

[TUB23]

There was nothing accidental about that blow to the head with the flashlight. Murder may not have been intended- but then again, it might have. Certainly the garrote wasn't an accident - no no. Those train track pokes don't look accidental either.

Those weren't train track pokes. They were far too large, they were stun gun marks. How can you imply a family with no prior past of serious domestic/physical violence can suddenly turn into cold blooded killers choking out their 6 year old daughter even though she's already dead from the blow to the head? Logic has to be applied here and this ain't logical. Hmmm... wonder why the CBS doc refused to test the supposed train track poke on someone to see what it would look like, yeah they didn't want to embarrass themselves on national television would be my answer. Smart of them considering how absurd the train track hoax is.

 

[johnjay]

Those weren't train track pokes. They were far too large, they were stun gun marks. How can you imply a family with no prior past of serious domestic/physical violence can suddenly turn into cold blooded killers choking out their 6 year old daughter even though she's already dead from the blow to the head? Logic has to be applied here and this ain't logical. Hmmm... wonder why the CBS doc refused to test the supposed train track poke on someone to see what it would look like, yeah they didn't want to embarrass themselves on national television would be my answer. Smart of them considering how absurd the train track hoax is.

Too many experts have said they weren't stun gun marks to even go there. And they weren't even spaced correctly for the suspected stun gun! And it would be nutty to use a stun gun on a child when her parents were in the house.

On the other hand, the marks fit the train track rather nicely. Kolar tested the train tracks, you can see the pictures in his book. The train tracks are the obvious way the killer, and I'm thinking Burke, tested to see that the deed was done.

 

[Vi0l3tt3]

I read in a previous thread (I've been through pages of them so I'm not sure which it was) that stun guns typically leave burn marks but the coroner classified the marks on JB as abrasions.
Abrasions being: "In dermatology, an abrasion is a wound caused by superficial damage to the skin, no deeper than the epidermis. It is less severe than a laceration, and bleeding, if present, is minimal. Mild abrasions, also known as grazes or scrapes, do not scar or bleed, but deep abrasions may lead to the formation of scar tissue.

 

[Heymom]

There is absolutely NO evidence that Burke had anything to do with his sister's death. NONE.

Well, oddly enough, the Grand Jury thought there was, and charged both John and Patsy with neglect leading to homicide, as well as being accessories to a homicide. I can't imagine why they'd do that if a total stranger had killed JonBenet, can you?

"The grand jury also had alleged that each parent "did ... render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death."

 

[mauidreemn]

I suspect we disagree on what counts for "evidence". This was a crime, not a science experiment, all kinds of evidence are admissible in court and a jury weighs that evidence. Just like the grand jury decided to indict the parents weighed the evidence. They decided that the parents put JBR in a dangerous situation and helped cover up her murder - and they made that decision based on the evidence they were presented. And many of us here weigh the evidence in the same way - however, since this is an internet forum and not a court proceeding our standards of evidence can even be lower than the grand jury's standard- which balances out the fact that we didn't get all the evidence the GJ got.

Finally, if any of that seems unfair to you, then consider how many people the Ramseys pointed a finger at without any evidence of their guilt. We're just following their lead.

We don't need a video of Burke brutally murdering his sister to believe he did. The circumstantial evidence is sufficient for more that 80% of us.

Exactly this was a crime. The evidence against Burke is...?

 

[Heymom]

Exactly this was a crime. The evidence against Burke is...?

The hard evidence is not available to us, unfortunately, but Chief Kolar has seen it all and written a very good book about it. There is also the Grand Jury's indictments that state John and Pasty were negligent in protecting JonBenet and were also accessories to a crime. If they didn't commit that crime, there is only one other person who was in the house that night.

 

[mauidreemn]

Well, oddly enough, the Grand Jury thought there was, and charged both John and Patsy with neglect leading to homicide, as well as being accessories to a homicide. I can't imagine why they'd do that if a total stranger had killed JonBenet, can you?

"The grand jury also had alleged that each parent "did ... render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death."

They did not say a thing about Burke. BPD said Burke wasn't involved. There is NO evidence that Burke had anything to do with this. Only one that says so is Kolar and we know how revered he is on this site. Ridiculous