Was Burke Involved # 5

[jade.and.pals]

I'm confused, if you look at the ransom note, you can see that the "kidnapers" said that's JonBenet would be BEHEADED. but that is not how she died. this leads me to think more that is was someone from within the family. why would the "kidnapers" write a 2 1/2 page ransom note that is way too detailed. also at the end of the note they "sign it" by putting what i believe to be initials. kidnapers do not sign their initials at the end of a ransom note. they also say that they ad a group of people who don't like John. why would they need to do that?

 

[MzOpinion8d]

I'm confused, if you look at the ransom note, you can see that the "kidnapers" said that's JonBenet would be BEHEADED. but that is not how she died. this leads me to think more that is was someone from within the family. why would the "kidnapers" write a 2 1/2 page ransom note that is way too detailed. also at the end of the note they "sign it" by putting what i believe to be initials. kidnapers do not sign their initials at the end of a ransom note. they also say that they ad a group of people who don't like John. why would they need to do that?

The ransom note was intended to create a motive for JonBenet to be kidnapped. A "group of individuals" (what else is a group made of?) didn't like John Ramsey or his business, so to punish him they were stealing his daughter but they'd give her back in exchange for money.

I don't know a lot about ransom notes, but I'm sure that most of them are probably along the lines of "we have your kid. Give us $XXXXX at 2 pm at (location). Don't call the cops."

I don't think any ransom note in history has ever given so much information about who they are and why they're kidnapping someone!

 

[archieil]

The ransom note was intended to create a motive for JonBenet to be kidnapped. A "group of individuals" (what else is a group made of?) didn't like John Ramsey or his business, so to punish him they were stealing his daughter but they'd give her back in exchange for money.

I don't know a lot about ransom notes, but I'm sure that most of them are probably along the lines of "we have your kid. Give us $XXXXX at 2 pm at (location). Don't call the cops."

I don't think any ransom note in history has ever given so much information about who they are and why they're kidnapping someone!

For me, it was very important RN have a small group at the beginning and single person in the middle.

I doubt staging was a reason for this.

For me, this means he was a strong leader.

This could mean he was:
* alone in the house with some type of "helpers" (I used this one)
* older/had higher rank than others
* he was using this idea to cover self
* it was a group of kids with one older teen, sitter (too nasty to bother with this)

 

[BBB167893]

CBS listened to the 911 call and in the background you can hear burke say "what did you find?". so i'm not sure if it was him. John (the father) had another daughter who had also died. she died in an automobile accident but maybe it wasn't. two years after his daughter died he remarried to Patsy and had Burke and JonBenet. My suspicion is that John killed JonBenet and Pam helped him cover it up. the ransom note was written on Patsy's notepad and when they compared the handwriting it was very similar to Patsy's. what do you guys think?

Actually, he and Patsy had been married with Burke and JonBenet for several years before Beth died.

 

[BOBON]

This might be a completely different topic but I saw that someone of FFJ posted a picture of BR alleged golf clubs, has this been discussed yet? Someone was wondering what bag it might be and I actually am familiar with the character, it's the ape logo from the brand Paul Frank. I don't know exactly which bag it is but they are still making them now, they are called Paul Frank Junior Golf Club Set

 

[UKGuy]

This might be a completely different topic but I saw that someone of FFJ posted a picture of BR alleged golf clubs, has this been discussed yet? Someone was wondering what bag it might be and I actually am familiar with the character, it's the ape logo from the brand Paul Frank. I don't know exactly which bag it is but they are still making them now, they are called Paul Frank Junior Golf Club Set

BOBON,
Ahah! Is the Paul Frank Junior Golf Club Set what we can see in the picture? If so maybe it matters?

.

 

[otg]

This might be a completely different topic but I saw that someone of FFJ posted a picture of BR alleged golf clubs, has this been discussed yet? Someone was wondering what bag it might be and I actually am familiar with the character, it's the ape logo from the brand Paul Frank. I don't know exactly which bag it is but they are still making them now, they are called Paul Frank Junior Golf Club Set

‘Twas I (post linked at bottom). Thank you, BOBON, I’m not familiar with the character or brand. But now, after searching the name, I see they use it on all kinds of items branded by “Paul Frank.”

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/for...basement-train-room-video&p=197219#post197219

 

[Swirlz]

If you look at statistics, overwhelmingly, the most likely scenario is that it was one or the other of the parents and I don't see any compelling evidence that points either away from both of them or in the direction of specifically Burke. The BDI arguments I've seen are almost all that; A) He smiled too much on Dr. Phil. B) As a young child, he supposedly engaged in fecal smearing. C) He seemed "off" in some scenes of himself being interviewed by the police as a youngster or D) People just don't believe it is possible that either John or Patsy would or could either kill their daughter or cover for someone other than their surviving child assuming they know who did.

 

[UKGuy]

If you look at statistics, overwhelmingly, the most likely scenario is that it was one or the other of the parents and I don't see any compelling evidence that points either away from both of them or in the direction of specifically Burke. The BDI arguments I've seen are almost all that; A) He smiled too much on Dr. Phil. B) As a young child, he supposedly engaged in fecal smearing. C) He seemed "off" in some scenes of himself being interviewed by the police as a youngster or D) People just don't believe it is possible that either John or Patsy would or could either kill their daughter or cover for someone other than their surviving child assuming they know who did.

Peppermintswirlz,
Sure and that's what many think. I used to think BDI was a bit extreme, possible but one of the parents was the most likely killer?

Yet a good look at BDI 101 suggests otherwise:

JDI is weak and has little supporting evidence, and needs Patsy to back him up.

PDI is stronger has lots of forensic evidence, yet it has major holes in all the proposed PDI theories, not one stands up to inspection, and they all require JR to assist or be telepathic and know exactly what to avoid removing, what to say to the police, etc without making errors, a tall order I suggest.

So basically PDI and JDI are inconsistent on their own merits, hence no smoking gun despite the passage of the years.

Combine what we know about JDI and PDI and use it to explain BDI resolves a lot of issues. The inconsistencies go away, the bottom line is BDI as a theory explains more of the forensic evidence than either JDI or PDI does individually.

I prefer that to partially explained evidence in PDI or JDI. To get there you need to accept a 9-year old killed his sister, why is that any less doable than Mommy deliberately killing JonBenet?

.

 

[SecretaryGal]

If you look at statistics, overwhelmingly, the most likely scenario is that it was one or the other of the parents and I don't see any compelling evidence that points either away from both of them or in the direction of specifically Burke. The BDI arguments I've seen are almost all that; A) He smiled too much on Dr. Phil. B) As a young child, he supposedly engaged in fecal smearing. C) He seemed "off" in some scenes of himself being interviewed by the police as a youngster or D) People just don't believe it is possible that either John or Patsy would or could either kill their daughter or cover for someone other than their surviving child assuming they know who did.

Hello Peppermintswirlz;

There are always exceptions to statistics. So many aspects of this case can be swayed one way or another based on statistics. We can use statistics to help us solidify our theories, but at the end of the day, they aren't going to prove one scenario beyond a shadow of a doubt by themselves.

BR had/has issues. I think we can all agree that his family seemed to have more than its fair share of dysfunction. I'm also pretty sure I read accounts from several different sources regarding the fecal smearing, so I think that happened.

There is a totality of MANY things that could lead one to believe BDI, not just the conclusions you stated above.

For the record, I am on the fence myself about who did what; however, I find several plausible arguments for any combination of RDI.

Also I totally agree with your statement "I don't see any compelling evidence that points away from both of them."

Is it your belief that PDI, JDI or both?

 

[Swirlz]

There is a totality of MANY things that could lead one to believe BDI, not just the conclusions you stated above.

The conclusions I stated above are the ones I've seen repeated consistently. The running theme seems to be that Burke is weird and that of course, neither parent was capable of either killing or of staging a crime scene to protect an adult family member therefore, BDI.

Is it your belief that PDI, JDI or both?

I think Steve Thomas' scenario (PDI) fits best but I don't know for sure.

 

[Cottonstar]

If you look at statistics, overwhelmingly, the most likely scenario is that it was one or the other of the parents and I don't see any compelling evidence that points either away from both of them or in the direction of specifically Burke. The BDI arguments I've seen are almost all that; A) He smiled too much on Dr. Phil. B) As a young child, he supposedly engaged in fecal smearing. C) He seemed "off" in some scenes of himself being interviewed by the police as a youngster or D) People just don't believe it is possible that either John or Patsy would or could either kill their daughter or cover for someone other than their surviving child assuming they know who did.

The most common abuser of children, is other children. Of the three, who was acting out maliciously towards JB? Who was spreading feces on her Christmas candy? Who's room did she sleep in on Xmas eve? Who had the most access to her? Who had a nexus of contact with her that night eating pineapple about an hour before her murder? Who was in the basement peeling back presents? Who's knives were found near the scene? Who whittled wood and left shards of wood by the cellar door? Who owned a pair of Hi-Tec boots? Who was whisked away early on the morning of the 26th?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[BOBON]

Burke's behavior from what we can see was weird as a child and as an adult. That said, as an adult - I only have the Dr Phil interview to go on and personally, I had an accident which involved another child when I was 10 and if someone would interview me about it now, I wouldn't remember anything. I believe if there was sexual abuse, then maybe Burke was also abused which would explain poop smearing - of course that alone doesn't make him the predator. My question is who abused the child/children and if it might have been John's other son. It is my own belief that Burke might has RAD, the traits would match and it would explain why he'd lash out on impulse. In my scenario he hit her on the head, but I am still wondering why there was tissue found in JBR bathroom, hinting at Patsy changing her or something - it's the only thing that confuses me.

 

[UKGuy]

The most common abuser of children, is other children. Of the three, who was acting out maliciously towards JB? Who was spreading feces on her Christmas candy? Who's room did she sleep in on Xmas eve? Who had the most access to her? Who had a nexus of contact with her that night eating pineapple about an hour before her murder? Who was in the basement peeling back presents? Who's knives were found near the scene? Who whittled wood and left shards of wood by the cellar door? Who owned a pair of Hi-Tec boots? Who was whisked away early on the morning of the 26th?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cottonstar,
So well put, what more can you say? Maybe : in his interview with Dr Phil Burke admits returning back downstairs when everyone else was in their bedroom.

i,e, was BR the last person down in the basement prior to JonBenet being killed?

.

 

[UKGuy]

Burke's behavior from what we can see was weird as a child and as an adult. That said, as an adult - I only have the Dr Phil interview to go on and personally, I had an accident which involved another child when I was 10 and if someone would interview me about it now, I wouldn't remember anything. I believe if there was sexual abuse, then maybe Burke was also abused which would explain poop smearing - of course that alone doesn't make him the predator. My question is who abused the child/children and if it might have been John's other son. It is my own belief that Burke might has RAD, the traits would match and it would explain why he'd lash out on impulse. In my scenario he hit her on the head, but I am still wondering why there was tissue found in JBR bathroom, hinting at Patsy changing her or something - it's the only thing that confuses me.

BOBON,
The tissue might represent what you think it does. I reckon Patsy prepared JonBenet for bed, her hair was dressed in ponytails and hair-ties, definitltely not party attire, so I can see her in her pink pajamas which BR changed to his long johns.

There was a solied black pair of JonBenet's pants lying on her bathroom floor, likely from earlier in the day, who knows?

Any PDI has to explain why Patsy sexually assaulted and ligature asphyxiated JonBenet, tall order.

.

 

[Userid]

Peppermintswirlz,
Sure and that's what many think. I used to think BDI was a bit extreme, possible but one of the parents was the most likely killer?

Yet a good look at BDI 101 suggests otherwise:

JDI is weak and has little supporting evidence, and needs Patsy to back him up.

PDI is stronger has lots of forensic evidence, yet it has major holes in all the proposed PDI theories, not one stands up to inspection, and they all require JR to assist or be telepathic and know exactly what to avoid removing, what to say to the police, etc without making errors, a tall order I suggest.

So basically PDI and JDI are inconsistent on their own merits, hence no smoking gun despite the passage of the years.

Combine what we know about JDI and PDI and use it to explain BDI resolves a lot of issues. The inconsistencies go away, the bottom line is BDI as a theory explains more of the forensic evidence than either JDI or PDI does individually.

I prefer that to partially explained evidence in PDI or JDI. To get there you need to accept a 9-year old killed his sister, why is that any less doable than Mommy deliberately killing JonBenet?

.

This is somewhat rich considering BDI demands that not only JR is telepathic, but PR as well -- if BR did it all (but the ransom note). It has the 2 parents stumbling on JBR's body in the morning, and automatically knowing it was BR somehow, and immediately deciding the girl was dead (as opposed to calling an ambulance), which led to staging the crime scene.

 

[Swirlz]

There were NO candy smeared boxes. Kolar made that up. Basically anywhere he saw the color brown in any of the crime scene photos he said "Aha, feces!". Kolar seems to have some kind of obsession with Burke. No-one, including police EVER thought Burke had anything to do with it and I'm sure the police would have been happy to pin it on Burke if they had the slightest bit of evidence against him but they didn't apart from his prints on the pineapple bowl. CSIs didn't collect anything with fecal smears except JonBenet's underpants and that was all residual post-wash staining from previous messes she had made in her underpants, which her mother put down to careless wiping although many, including me, would put down to sexual abuse issues.

Burke's fecal smearing only occurred 3 years prior when his mother was first diagnosed with cancer, at least that is what all records show.

It is my own belief that Burke might has RAD, the traits would match and it would explain why he'd lash out on impulse

Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD), as officially defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), is characterized by a child being one of two things: either very withdrawn or overly friendly with unfamiliar people. RAD is a rare disorder, and it has no aggressive features.

 

[DeDee]

There were NO candy smeared boxes. Kolar made that up.
<>

That is a strong accusation against the Chief Investigator for the DAs office in Boulder. I am appalled to read those words here. Admittedly, it'll take me awhile to get over this harsh allegation.

There was feces smeared on the basement bathroom wall. FACT

 

[Cottonstar]

There were NO candy smeared boxes. Kolar made that up. Basically anywhere he saw the color brown in any of the crime scene photos he said "Aha, feces!". Kolar seems to have some kind of obsession with Burke. No-one, including police EVER thought Burke had anything to do with it and I'm sure the police would have been happy to pin it on Burke if they had the slightest bit of evidence against him but they didn't apart from his prints on the pineapple bowl. CSIs didn't collect anything with fecal smears except JonBenet's underpants and that was all residual post-wash staining from previous messes she had made in her underpants, which her mother put down to careless wiping although many, including me, would put down to sexual abuse issues.

Burke's fecal smearing only occurred 3 years prior when his mother was first diagnosed with cancer, at least that is what all records show.



Reactive Attachment Disorder (RAD), as officially defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM), is characterized by a child being one of two things: either very withdrawn or overly friendly with unfamiliar people. RAD is a rare disorder, and it has no aggressive features.

Your absolutely not correct. Kolar didn't make it up, he got it from the case file. JonBenet had suffered ongoing sexual abuse. Her hymen was nearly gone. Erosion is a word used often in the autopsy report when referring to her vaginal injuries. Erosion happens over time. Her name was JonBenet Ramsey.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[UKGuy]

Your absolutely not correct. Kolar didn't make it up, he got it from the case file. JonBenet had suffered ongoing sexual abuse. Her hymen was nearly gone. Erosion is a word used often in the autopsy report when referring to her vaginal injuries. Erosion happens over time. Her name was JonBenet Ramsey.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cottonstar,
Why would Kolar make something up he could easily be called out on, and for something that is not a smoking gun?

Holly Smith recently wrote a book about her 20 years with the Boulder County Sexual Abuse team. She left out the chapter about the Ramsey case, but is now revealing her part of the investigation exclusively to us.

She had the chapter about the JonBenet case redacted from her book, so she definitely knows something the R's do not want us to know? Did she see fecal smearing on the candy case, but not mention it as part of protocol in her TV Interview, then add it in her book?

It will all surface one day ...

A Memory Forever Engrained

Holly Smith remembers walking up the steps to the Ramsey home: the big candy canes more jarring than festive considering the circumstances. The house was lavishly decorated.

Smith recalls, "It was big and it was meandering and it was schmanzy fancy."

It was the third day of the investigation into the murder of JonBenet Ramsey. Smith was head of the Boulder County Sexual Abuse team and has been called into the investigation, as she says, "to consult about some of the dynamics and some of the things people suspected might be going on with this case."

She started, as always, with a visit to the child’s bedroom. "That's a really important piece of getting a real feel for a family," Smith explains.

With portfolio pictures galore and closets full of JonBenet’s elaborate pageant outfits, Smith says she had a hard time getting a feel for who the little girl really was, even in her bedroom.

She recalls, "I just had a sense the type of decor in her bedroom was not really a child's decor."

One poignant find that she does recall was a red satin box with what looked like JonBenet’s secret stash of candy.

She found something else in the room, however, which raised an immediate red flag. Smith says most of the panties in JonBenet’s dresser drawers had been soiled with fecal material.

"There is this dynamic of children that have been sexually abused sometimes soiling themselves or urinating in their beds to keep someone who is hurting them at bay," explains Smith.

Kolar also says there were fecally soiled pajama bottoms on JonBenet's bedroom floor. These were patently not from her Pajama Set worn the previous night, i.e. the pair Patsy failed to find. Also there was a pair of solied pants lying on JonBenet's bathroom floor. Kolar reckons the pajama pants belonged to Burke Ramsey.

.