Was Burke Involved? # 4

[Charliegirl610]

Wasn't one of the books that Nedra purchased for the Ramsey's titled "Why doesn't Johnny know right from wrong?" or something like that? It's not a huge leap to think a boy just shy of 10 might just be sexually curious. Kids these days mature much sooner than we as children did. My own daughter was 9 when she got her period. My boys both had pubic hair before age 12 and that's only when I accidentally found out about it. These kids are walking hormones these days. I"m talking preteens. I don't believe that BR was finding gratification from sexually abusing JBR if in fact he did it. It was curiosity and she was an easy target. The books Nedra purchased tell us that there were some behavioral issues going on that the adults in this family were aware of. If I remember correctly wasn't there a dictionary opened in JR's study to "incest". My guess is that BR had previously been inappropriate with JBR, the adults were aware of it and failed to take the steps to protect JBR effectively. "Hence" the indictment verbiage.

 

[ThinkHard]

Wasn't one of the books that Nedra purchased for the Ramsey's titled "Why doesn't Johnny know right from wrong?" or something like that? It's not a huge leap to think a boy just shy of 10 might just be sexually curious. Kids these days mature much sooner than we as children did. My own daughter was 9 when she got her period. My boys both had pubic hair before age 12 and that's only when I accidentally found out about it. These kids are walking hormones these days. I"m talking preteens. I don't believe that BR was finding gratification from sexually abusing JBR if in fact he did it. It was curiosity and she was an easy target. The books Nedra purchased tell us that there were some behavioral issues going on that the adults in this family were aware of. If I remember correctly wasn't there a dictionary opened in JR's study to "incest". My guess is that BR had previously been inappropriate with JBR, the adults were aware of it and failed to take the steps to protect JBR effectively. "Hence" the indictment verbiage.

I actually don't think it was about curiousity at all. It seems to me like it was about control.

Btw when you say "kids these days" keep in mind this case took place 20 years ago. What kids are doing TODAY is leaps and bounds beyond where we I was as a preteen 20 years back.

 

[carolinea]

I was thirteen or fourteen when this happened, and what Charliegirl610 said was as true then as now. I got my period at ten, and I knew quite a few girls who were already wearing training bras and using pads. We also had sex ed in elementary school, around fifth grade, where we learned about basic reproductive issues. It's not unheard of for an almost ten-year-old to have learned some basics of anatomy in legit ways.

Rape and molestation aren't generally about sex, though. Like ThinkHard says, it's about power, punishment and control.

 

[Heymom]

And you beat me to it. Every time I think I have an original thought...

As I say to my friends and sister often: "Two minds with but a single thought..." You stated it very well. Even in a jealous sibling, acting out sexually like this takes things to another level.

 

[carolinea]

Here's the description for "Why Johnny Can't Tell Right From Wrong," for those interested:

"A hard-hitting and controversial book, WHY JOHNNY CAN'T TELL RIGHT FROM WRONG will not only open eyes but change minds. America today suffers from unprecedented rates of teenage pregnancy, drug abuse, suicide, and violence. Most of the programs intended to deal with these problems have failed because, according to William Kilpatrick, schools and parents have abandoned the moral teaching they once provided. In WHY JOHNNY CAN'T TELL RIGHT FROM WRONG, Kilpatrick shows how we can correct this problem by providing our youngsters with the stories, models, and inspirations they need in order to lead good lives. He also encourages parents to read to their children and provides an annotated guide to more than 120 books for children and young adults."

It seems to be mostly about the nuclear family, how schools fail, the problems with society, etc.

 

[Charliegirl610]

Yes I will agree with that this was driven by control.

 

[vela341]

Yes I will agree with that this was driven by control.

along with hate and rage, moo

 

[flourish]

Well, whatever, maybe my sons were socially retarded. But we are arguing about something that is quite indicative of Burke's attitude toward Patsy and toward what happened that morning. Stating that his mom was "going psycho" is denigrating her for freaking out about JonBenet's absence and/or death. HIGHLY inappropriate then and now.

While the word "retarded" is considered an offensive term, it does have a legitimate definition. And "socially retarded," while not a diagnostic term, is still used in some literature regarding autism spectrum disorders and social anxiety. I don't think we can assume that the poster was using it derisively because the context, to me, says it could go either way. I'm going to view this as a "teachable moment," I guess.

My current job title used to contain the term "mental retardation" up until just a few years ago when it changed to "intellectual disabilities," but "retarded" is still in a lot of my clients' diagnostic paperwork.

Just my 2 cents, which is likely what it's worth lol.

Speaking of inappropriate terms:

Spread the Word to End the Word is a United States national campaign to encourage people to pledge to stop using the word *advertiser censored*. End the "R" word advocates believe the use of the word “*advertiser censored*(ed)” in colloquial and everyday speech is hurtful and dehumanizing to individuals with intellectual disabilities.

http://www.r-word.org

 

[spitsthetruth]

The CBS documentary laid out the bones of the Grand Jury path for indictment and so many people missed it. The story was in the subtle suggestions of Lee and Spitz. No they were not going to come out and make sexual abuse accusations against anyone on National TV but if you know your stuff, you sure no what was implied by cover up. The subtle documentary even gave away the one piece of evidence that may have stopped JR and PR from being prosecuted.

I am reading post saying " why all the elaborate staging for an accidental killing " or " Murder 1, how were they ever gonna prove that and BR cant be charged anyways ".

You missed the point.....this was never about covering up an accidental death, it was about covering up long term sexual and physical abuse.

The Murder 1 charges were not for BR.....they were levied at JR and PR.

Watch the documentry again, become familiar with the work of Lee and Spits from the beginning of this case, get a copy of the ME report and a copy of the McCann, Wecht, Spitz ect....findings on the sexual abuse and a minimal amount of research on Colorado law and you will see the bulk of the case presented to the grand jury. The subtle things that were not said for legal reasons are the most important. Note things like what the pineapple represents....It makes BR the last known person to see JBR alive. Note Henry Lee's reference to the condition of the pineapple in the small intestine....it establishes time of death.

If you follow the path laid out in the show...and apply the listed material you will fill in every charge listed on the Grand Jury charges. You will have both causes of death listed in the autopsy, and you will see the one piece of evidence Henry needed for this case to be prosecuted.

Here is the sequence...JBR last known alive with BR at breakfast bar between 10:45 and 11:20...BR hits JBR in head with blunt object causing unconsciousness ( brain dead but hearth still beating )(Knowingly placing a child in an abusive situation leading to death). JR and PR find body and staging begins as JR knows ME is sure gonna notice signs of sexual abuse. What better way to cover-up sexual abuse then to try and stage it happened from and intruder. JR or PR apply garrote killing JBR and now we have death by asphyxiation and also pre-meditated( murder 1). sexual abuse is staged with paintbrush causing small particles to be found in JBR vagina. ( see McCann report on acute vs. chronic sexual abuse found ).

Seasoned vets on here can apply what they know about each item used in the cover up and almost tell who staged what. IE...Duct tape....PR fibers. Panties....JR fibers. This case wasn't prosecuted for many political reasons. However, if you note that both JR and PR are charged with Murder 1 you understand that there is yet to be a determination which one applied the garrote and this is prolly the excuse to not prosecuting them as murder is a specific charge. cant just go into court and say " one of them did it". This is why Henry refers to testing the knot in the garrote 4 times in the show as the " most important piece of evidence" you find which ones DNA in the knot, you have your killer.

also note the charges seem to reflect that BR was the one who was abusing JBR and JR and PR had knowledge of this.

The references to the golf club incident and the smearing of the fecal matter were mentioned in the show as subtle demonstrations of BR mental state and reflect history of abusing JBR.

 

[flourish]

But they weren't charged with murder 1. The indictments were for accessory and child endangerment.

But yeah it's always helpful to have someone come in and tell us all how dense we are.

 

[spitsthetruth]

DENVER — Grand jurors who reviewed evidence in the death of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey indicted both of her parents for child abuse resulting in death and being an accessory to a crime, including first-degree murder, according to documents released Friday. nice attitude btw.

If your charged with accessory then the other would be the murderer and vice versa. Why I mentioned evident they haven't establish who used the garrote.

 

[flourish]

DENVER — Grand jurors who reviewed evidence in the death of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey indicted both of her parents for child abuse resulting in death and being an accessory to a crime, including first-degree murder, according to documents released Friday. nice attitude btw.

Being an accessory to a murder. Not the same as murder.

Edited to add a LINK and quote.

" Stan Garnett, the current Boulder district attorney, submitted eighteen pages for judicial review. Last fall, Judge Robert Lowenbach decided to release only four redacted pages, showing that the grand jury had indeed sought to indict the parents on identical counts of felony child abuse and an accessory charge."

http://www.westword.com/news/jonben...got-derailed-and-why-it-still-matters-6053856

 

[flourish]

I don't believe they would charge both of them with accessory thinking one was the actual murderer and just not knowing which one. How would they think that could be proven? No, the murder itself was committed by someone else, the both of them were accessories, hence the accessory, not murder, charges. For both of them.

 

[MsFacetious]

I am aware, I have a 13 year old with Down syndrome.
Just saw the opportunity to point it out and raise awareness.

While the word "retarded" is considered an offensive term, it does have a legitimate definition. And "socially retarded," while not a diagnostic term, is still used in some literature regarding autism spectrum disorders and social anxiety. I don't think we can assume that the poster was using it derisively because the context, to me, says it could go either way. I'm going to view this as a "teachable moment," I guess.

My current job title used to contain the term "mental retardation" up until just a few years ago when it changed to "intellectual disabilities," but "retarded" is still in a lot of my clients' diagnostic paperwork.

Just my 2 cents, which is likely what it's worth lol.

 

[Occams Razor]

I'm still PDI, but finding the BDI theories easier to swallow since the shows aired. :happydance:

My thing is: even if Burke was a violent incestuous sex offender, he had to have picked that behavior up somewhere. And we all know who usually has the most influence over kids--the parents or guardians. What was going on in that home that caused Burke to engage in escalating violent behaviors that culminated in someone's death? It had to be more than jealousy over Jonbenet's pageants. If BDI, it's not a simple case of "you get more attention than me, and I must eliminate you."

Pre-pubescent children do not engage in penetrative sexual acts unless they learned how to do that somewhere. That part of a girl's body is internal...most little girls don't even know it's there! Yet the autopsy report suggested prior sexual abuse (according to some analyses) and people are blaming Burke for that too. But the buck doesn't stop with a 9-year-old child even if he did it.

So either way, J&PRDI to some extent. The Grand Jury seems to have agreed.

 

[johnjay]

I'm still PDI, but finding the BDI theories easier to swallow since the shows aired. :happydance:

My thing is: even if Burke was a violent incestuous sex offender, he had to have picked that behavior up somewhere. And we all know who usually has the most influence over kids--the parents or guardians. What was going on in that home that caused Burke to engage in escalating violent behaviors that culminated in someone's death? It had to be more than jealousy over Jonbenet's pageants. If BDI, it's not a simple case of "you get more attention than me, and I must eliminate you."

Pre-pubescent children do not engage in penetrative sexual acts unless they learned how to do that somewhere. That part of a girl's body is internal...most little girls don't even know it's there! Yet the autopsy report suggested prior sexual abuse (according to some analyses) and people are blaming Burke for that too. But the buck doesn't stop with a 9-year-old child even if he did it.

So either way, J&PRDI to some extent. The Grand Jury seems to have agreed.

The way I read the GJ endangerment charge is that they had sufficient knowledge of Burke's past behaviors to reasonably know that JBR was in danger and failed to act on that knowledge and protect her from him.

 

[ThinkHard]

I'm still PDI, but finding the BDI theories easier to swallow since the shows aired. :happydance:

My thing is: even if Burke was a violent incestuous sex offender, he had to have picked that behavior up somewhere. And we all know who usually has the most influence over kids--the parents or guardians. What was going on in that home that caused Burke to engage in escalating violent behaviors that culminated in someone's death? It had to be more than jealousy over Jonbenet's pageants. If BDI, it's not a simple case of "you get more attention than me, and I must eliminate you."

Pre-pubescent children do not engage in penetrative sexual acts unless they learned how to do that somewhere. That part of a girl's body is internal...most little girls don't even know it's there! Yet the autopsy report suggested prior sexual abuse (according to some analyses) and people are blaming Burke for that too. But the buck doesn't stop with a 9-year-old child even if he did it.

So either way, J&PRDI to some extent. The Grand Jury seems to have agreed.

It is a fallacy to believe that sexually aggressive behavior in young children is always a sign of sexual abuse. It is actually proved to be a relatively poor predictor of sexual abuse in study after study.

BR s brain likely came into this world wired very very different,y, and when his brain was combined with the circumstances of his life, it created the perfect storm of nurture and nature. He was disturbed, he lacks social awareness, he likely sees the world quite differently, and he was likely ill. but sexual aggression may or may not be a sign of sexual abuse. We cannot conclude that with certainty. It's about 50/50

 

[Heymom]

It is a fallacy to believe that sexually aggressive behavior in young children is always a sign of sexual abuse. It is actually proved to be a relatively poor predictor of sexual abuse in study after study.

BR s brain likely came into this world wired very very different,y, and when his brain was combined with the circumstances of his life, it created the perfect storm of nurture and nature. He was disturbed, he lacks social awareness, he likely sees the world quite differently, and he was likely ill. but sexual aggression may or may not be a sign of sexual abuse. We cannot conclude that with certainty. It's about 50/50

How do you explain how he knew where JonBenet's vaginal opening was? Someone had to show him, and more than once. Sex education classes don't happen until the 5th grade, and even then, they are usually limited to sex-segregated material - girls learn about their own equipment and boys, theirs.

 

[flourish]

How do you explain how he knew where JonBenet's vaginal opening was? Someone had to show him, and more than once. Sex education classes don't happen until the 5th grade, and even then, they are usually limited to sex-segregated material - girls learn about their own equipment and boys, theirs.

In my experience and through my education and training, it's a huge red flag for a young child to even realize there's somewhere to penetrate. Red flag doesn't definitively mean fire though. Just that a closer look is needed. And I'd go so far as to say it's more likely than not that if you see that particular red flag there's something wrong.

While I didn't realize my body had an opening like that, I actually exhibited some sexual knowledge beyond my years when I was a little one. However, I was never molested, thank goodness, I was just raised with several older siblings who were teenagers who I eavesdropped on, and had a very curious nature and a good memory, and all that combined meant I sometimes freaked my conservative LDS mother out by doing or saying provocative things whether or not I really understood what they meant. But my mom kept an eye on me and likely made some mental notes.

My poor mommy dealing with all 7 of us odd little ducks. Yesterday was her birthday. I miss her. That's off topic but I do miss her and I don't care how old I get, sometimes I need my mommy.

 

[HarmonyE.]

How do you explain how he knew where JonBenet's vaginal opening was? Someone had to show him, and more than once. Sex education classes don't happen until the 5th grade, and even then, they are usually limited to sex-segregated material - girls learn about their own equipment and boys, theirs.

Boys talk. You'd be surprised the things they talk about at that age. And even back in my day, a generation earlier, most kids by 10 or 11 had seen *advertiser censored* in print form either in the home or from other kids who snuck books out for group viewings in the woods. Even stuff as rough as Penthouse. Parents are usually oblivious to how easy it is for kids to find things they hide.

Burke was not a small child. He and his friends were probably more sheltered than kids of my time, but kids in the 90's did have access to the internet, particularly those from wealthy families. I know I had a color printer at home in '96 so I assume it was a common thing.