Was Burke Involved # 5

[Userid]

Why couldn't it be JDI?

It very well could be.

 

[UKGuy]

JDI is just as plausible as either BDI or PDI.

Second, you've also admitted on occasion to not have certain answers to certain questions that go against BDI.

Third, simply because you don't like certain answers (that are beyond logical, like PR and/or JR making mistakes during the staging because they had never committed a murder/staging before) in no way invalidates them. You can call them "trite" all you want, but such rebuttals are more than fair. Especially considering your inability to answer how JR/PR were "expert" enough to eliminate all the evidence of a nine-year old while staging, but not their own (like the fiber evidence that was found on the duct tape and JR's shirt fiber evidence).

Userid,
JDI? nah, that's for neophytes. The answers are not answers they are Just So stories, they fill in the gaps, and you know it!

Did Patsy sexually abuse JonBent, the autopsy report cites sexual assault. Please explain in the context of a PDI please. Also JonBenet had her hair dressed in ponytails using hair-ties, again explain in the context of a PDI?

You PDI guys are all mouth and no reasoned theory, you remind me of The Donald, e.g. Its Fake News, and we are Right, get it?

.

 

[UKGuy]

It very well could be.

Userid,
If its JDI explain why JR leaves PR's forensic traces all over the crime-scene compared with so little of his? Its a no brainer ...

.

 

[Userid]

Userid,
JDI? nah, that's for neophytes. The answers are not answers they are Just So stories, they fill in the gaps, and you know it!

Did Patsy sexually abuse JonBent, the autopsy report cites sexual assault. Please explain in the context of a PDI please. Also JonBenet had her hair dressed in ponytails using hair-ties, again explain in the context of a PDI?

You PDI guys are all mouth and no reasoned theory, you remind me of The Donald, e.g. Its Fake News, and we are Right, get it?

.

"You remind me of the Donald".....says the guy who always plays the victim with ad hominem attacks. LOL. Typical UKGuy, can't see through your own hypocrisy.

There is more reasoned theory in PDI than BDI. We've gone over it ad nauseum already; read through the threads.

 

[Userid]

Userid,
If its JDI explain why JR leaves PR's forensic traces all over the crime-scene compared with so little of his? Its a no brainer ...

.

Well, it would be the same reason why PR left traces in a BDI scenario -- because there was a murderer (JDI) and an accomplice (PR).

Listen, I don't want to get into a long thing about JDI -- I'm PDI -- but all I was saying, is that unlike you, I don't believe I have all of the answers. I won't completely shut the door or pooh-pooh JDI as forcefully as I do IDI; that was my one and only point. I certainly don't blame people for being JDI; any 3 theories are likely, and no one theory is a slam dunk. If one theory was, we wouldn't all be here.

 

[UKGuy]

"You remind me of the Donald".....says the guy who always plays the victim with ad hominem attacks. LOL. Typical UKGuy, can't see through your own hypocrisy.

There is more reasoned theory in PDI than BDI. We've gone over it ad nauseum already; read through the threads.

Userid,
mmm, so how many posts since your ad hominem post, and still no answers. All this anti BDI stuff will be noted by members, you are not doing your PDI friends any favors.

The bottom line is you have no answers to difficult questions, yet BDI can answer those questions. Your failure to reason demonstrates why you are in The Donald camp.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Well, it would be the same reason why PR left traces in a BDI scenario -- because there was a murderer (JDI) and an accomplice (PR).

Listen, I don't want to get into a long thing about JDI -- I'm PDI -- but all I was saying, is that unlike you, I don't believe I have all of the answers. I won't completely shut the door or pooh-pooh JDI as forcefully as I do IDI; that was my one and only point. I certainly don't blame people for being JDI; any 3 theories are likely, and no one theory is a slam dunk. If one theory was, we wouldn't all be here.

Userid,
Nah, you demonstrate your ignorance, all three theories are not equally probable, simply because they all carry different amounts of forensic evidence, and thats the objective view.

Maybe you wish they were all equally probable, since that's how simplistic your model of the R's world is? Why should I intrude upon private perspective, each post of yours simply outlines to members how narrow minded you are!

.

 

[Userid]

Userid,
mmm, so how many posts since your ad hominem post, and still no answers. All this anti BDI stuff will be noted by members, you are not doing your PDI friends any favors.

The bottom line is you have no answers to difficult questions, yet BDI can answer those questions. Your failure to reason demonstrates why you are in the The Donald camp.

.

I'm not trying to do anyone any favors, so that's more than fine. You seem more concerned over your "side" being right than you are about JBR herself.

Only in your mind does BDI answer specific questions. Which questions do you want answered? If PR sexually abused JBR? It's possible she did as punishment for bed-wetting or to stage a sexual assault. If the sexual assault occurred over a prolonged period of time, it could have JR who committed it. It's more logical to believe that than it is to believe her 9 year old brother committed the sexual assault. What else? The hair ties? There is absolutely no discernible evidence to prove who put those hair ties in her hair -- you want to believe it was BR, but there is zero evidence of that. It could have been JBR herself for all we know. There is no way of knowing for certain...this is being reasonable.

 

[Userid]

Userid,
Nah, you demonstrate your ignorance, all three theories are not equally probable, simply because they all carry different amounts of forensic evidence, and thats the objective view.

Maybe you wish they were all equally probable, since that's how simplistic your model of the R's world is? Why should I intrude upon private perspective, each post of yours simply outlines to members how narrow minded you are!

.

Who's more reasonable: the guy who admits he doesn't know it all, or the know it all?

 

[Userid]

You left off Patsy's answer, UK.

Columbo: Excuse me Ma'am, could I ask one last question?

Patsy: Sure, fire away.

Columbo: Why did you redress JonBenet in her brothers long johns, you must have known minimally that doing that would make Burke a prime suspect?

Patsy: Are you blind? Did you actually look at the long johns? Those would barely fit him when he was six. Make him a prime suspect? If you were a competent detective, you wouldn't even be asking this question. You're going down the wrong path buddy.

Precisely.

 

[UKGuy]

I'm not trying to do anyone any favors, so that's more than fine. You seem more concerned over your "side" being right than you are about JBR herself.

Only in your mind does BDI answer specific questions. Which questions do you want answered? If PR sexually abused JBR? It's possible she did as punishment for bed-wetting or to stage a sexual assault. If the sexual assault occurred over a prolonged period of time, it could have JR who committed it. It's more logical to believe that than it is to believe her 9 year old brother committed the sexual assault. What else? The hair ties? There is absolutely no discernible evidence to prove who put those hair ties in her hair -- you want to believe it was BR, but there is zero evidence of that. It could have been JBR herself for all we know. There is no way of knowing for certain...this is being reasonable.

Userid,
Multiple options to a question do not represent an answer. I've never said BR added hair-ties to JonBenet, where do you get that? So you reckon Patsy sexually assaulted JonBenet as a form of punishment, which ended in her death?

That sounds off the wall to me.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Who's more reasonable: the guy who admits he doesn't know it all, or the know it all?

Userid.
What a guy. You want to tell everyone you know how equally probable each of the RDI theories are, yet they are not. You are obviously one of these people who believe if they talk long enough they will prevail.

.

 

[Userid]

Userid,
Multiple options to a question do not represent an answer. I've never said BR added hair-ties to JonBenet, where do you get that? So you reckon Patsy sexually assaulted JonBenet as a form of punishment, which ended in her death?

That sounds off the wall to me.

.

Those aren't multiple options. Those are multiple answers.

Yes, I think ST's theory could very well have occurred. It's been proven to occur before. I bet there are more examples of the bed-wetting punishment leading to a child's death by a parent, than there are of a nine-year-old sibling sexually assaulting his sister, murdering her, re-dressing her, and leaving zero evidence behind other than his fingerprints on a glass on the complete other end of the house.

 

[Userid]

Userid.
What a guy. You want to tell everyone you know how equally probable each of the RDI theories are, yet they are not. You are obviously one of these people who believe if they talk long enough they will prevail.

.

Am I still the one using ad hominem attacks?

You aren't answering my questions (like you just accused me of, but I digress), including this one: who's more reasonable, the guy who admits he doesn't know it all, or the know it all?

 

[UKGuy]

Precisely.

Patsy: Are you blind? Did you actually look at the long johns? Those would barely fit him when he was six. Make him a prime suspect? If you were a competent detective, you wouldn't even be asking this question. You're going down the wrong path buddy.

Nah, Another straight jacket of a Donald answer. how do we know those long johns are for a six year old boy and why would Patsy keep them for three years just for this occasion, i.e. JonBenet;s murder?

Patsy had a drawer full of JonBenet's pajama bottoms to chose from, she could not find the prior nights bottoms, so selected Burke's long johns, to her staging, i.e she was fitting BR up.

Is all this credible? Nah its BDI and Patsy was staging for Burke.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Those aren't multiple options. Those are multiple answers.

Yes, I think ST's theory could very well have occurred. It's been proven to occur before. I bet there are more examples of the bed-wetting punishment leading to a child's death by a parent, than there are of a nine-year-old sibling sexually assaulting his sister, murdering her, re-dressing her, and leaving zero evidence behind other than his fingerprints on a glass on the complete other end of the house.

Userid,

I bet there are more examples of the bed-wetting punishment leading to a child's death by a parent

Maybe there are, but that does not allow you to assume JonBenet's death falls into that category by virtue of your intellect.

than there are of a nine-year-old sibling sexually assaulting his sister, murdering her, re-dressing her, and leaving zero evidence behind other than his fingerprints on a glass on the complete other end of the house.

There is other evidence, i.e touch-dna etc. It is not only that Burke was reponsible for his sisters death but his parents assisted in staging a crime-scene. This scenario, however outlandish explains the evidence PDI does not.

.

 

[otg]

The fact that JB was wearing Burke's long johns isn't surprising. Well, actually that's an assumption... It IS a fact that she was found wearing boys' long johns -- presumably Burke's. It was past practice. The following is from a Peter Boyles interview with Linda Wilcox in 1998 (bbm):

LINDA WILCOX: One more thing...I think the first summer, the summer of '94, they took the dog with them to Michigan. See Patsy took care of the dog, John took no responsibility for it whatsoever. He tolerated it at best. And, if it got anything of his, heaven forbid. I don't know this, but I think they got rid of the dog because when they were in Michigan, they were busy with pageants. They were doing other things and there was no one to look after the dog. I think they gave it to the neighbors when they left for the summer because they didn't want to hassle with the dog. Life was good for them until it was inconvenient.

Like, JonBenet, for example. She got no affection at all when she was little except maybe from their nanny. Until she started to perform or produce, she was basically ignored. At one point, John was complaining because he had to get her dressed one morning because Suzanne had been out of town. He couldn't find any clothes that matched. The reason was, she was wearing cast-offs from Burke because she didn't have any clothes of her own.

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/07211998lindawilcoxon-pb.htm

​

 

[otg]

Who do you think strangled JB with the garrote?

In various articles I see people suggesting that BR killed her in a fit of rage by hitting her over the head- but that's not the cause of death listed on her autopsy- it was the strangulation. So, is it thought that BR did all that as well?

Some say that the parents staged the latter part in the basement to protect BR, but that doesn't make sense in the way any parent would think- as that was contributing to her death.

Have you considered she was already dead when the parents found her?

 

[otg]

otg,
I doubt birefringent foreign material was his personal objective observation. To arrive at birefringent foreign material you need spectral analysis to confirm what you have, not unless he knew in advance, so was intending to be opaque?

Certainly not my area of expertise, but I don't think spectral analysis is required to confirm -- only to measure. No opacity here. Even cellophane is birefringent. More about birefringence here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birefringence

I reckon they were wanting to lock Patsy into that answer. They probably already had the lab results, else why bother with the question?

I don't know their reasoning. I'd like to think they had it analyzed and knew the answers to their questions before asking them; but I just don't know. Your guess is as good as mine (maybe :wink.

1998 BPD Patsy Interview Excerpt

Curiously Patsy replies with her absence of blood remark before she is asked does JonBenet have nose-bleeds? Did she had advance indication some questions might relate to blood? Is Patsy trying to suggest, no blood, so nothing happened in her bedroom?

The absence of blood was patently important to Patsy, BPD never seemed to take any notice.

Unfortunately, a lot of opportunities were missed in some of these interviews. Remember though, BPD wasn't allowed to do the questioning in this interview. The Ramsey lawyers had bargained to get the interviewers only from the DA's office (DeMuth and Haney). Probably the BPD investigators had submitted questions to the DA's office, but not knowing her answer ahead of time, they couldn't know what followup questions should be asked. And also it's worth noting that DeMuth wasn't exactly unfriendly with the Ramsey legal team.

 

[k-mac]

Those aren't multiple options. Those are multiple answers.

Yes, I think ST's theory could very well have occurred. It's been proven to occur before. I bet there are more examples of the bed-wetting punishment leading to a child's death by a parent, than there are of a nine-year-old sibling sexually assaulting his sister, murdering her, re-dressing her, and leaving zero evidence behind other than his fingerprints on a glass on the complete other end of the house.

bravo userid!

uk must think himself a neophyte (whatever that means) as its not that long ago he was peddling JDI!! LOL