Was Burke involved?

[tweezybird]

the link to the video of Burke at his job at Mobi.

 

[otg]

I am not Linda but I think there has been some misinterpretation here. What she is saying is that children are molested everyday and siblings are quite often the perps. Not that a 9 year old sibling molesting a sister molests and murders a sibling almost everyday.

Wild speculation... hmmm, that is your opinion and I'm not going to disagree outright. From your posts (and others) I see this is the way you see it, and I can understand.

Would you agree that what happened in that house that night was wild in terms of the crime? I mean according to the FBI- the one and only existing case where a ransom note was left but the child victim was actually never taken but found sexually assaulted and murderd in her home. The murder appears to be brutal- wouldn't you agree? If an intruder wanted JonBenet for sexual purposes he/she could have walked out a door (he/she did do this at some point) but instead went down to a basement with the child shoved an object in the child's vagina, wiped her down, redressed her, bashed her head, strangled or garrotted her, wrapped her up and then left the home- after leaving a very lengthy, personal, and in my mind bizzare ransom note, for a considerably small amount of cash- which was a total lie. Wild- right. All the time someone could have woken up and caught the perp. All of the universe coinciding to allow possibly several hours in the home committing this awful, terrible crime. This is bizarre- wild... wouldn't you agree?

No one has been caught, charged or brought to justice.

We are left to speculate- wildly in your opinion- some of us however understand that anything is possible- that every person in that home that night needs to be looked at and for good reason.

I know two people personally who were sexually molested by their own brother (I just actually realized it is three women I know). I know their stories- their ages and how long the abuse occurred (for two it went on a LONG time). It happens- I know the stories well.

Children can be violent. This too is a fact.

Accidents occur between siblings. This is a fact.

Children are killed accidentally and sometimes intentionally by other children- This is a fact.

Parents have been known to lie to protect their children from being prosecuted for a crime. It isn't only ever about protecting their good name or image, they do it so their child doesnt get taken away or sent to jail or prison.

Someone comitted this crime. That person has gotten away with it. We are exploring all of the possibilities. I have changed my mind over time- I may again- I'm not a juror, this is not a court of law and my conscience is clear. My conclusions are not known facts or absolutes- they are opinions.

So wild speculation (in some opinions) indeed- at this point it is what many of us can do in an effort to get close to the truth.

What happened to a little girl before, during and after her murder is wild, in my book- I have a wild imagination and could never have dreamed this story.

Way back in history- when a certain wild crime was comitted- if it had never been comitted before, does that mean it couldn't happen? If the perp was completely unexpected- does that mean he didn't do it?

I'm probably not explaining myself very well. I just will never understand the idea that someone or something can't happen because of someones age, size or previous history.

:goodpost:

Excellent post, Frigga. A simple "thank you" just wasn't enough.

 

[otg]

Yes, it was a staged brutal crime scene, IMOO.

I don't think Burke was a brutal, homicidal maniac. I don't know wether they started out together to get a snack and he wanted to play around- again- sexually with her. A 10 year old boy can get an erection, can take something farther and farther, over time. Maybe this was the night he ended up wanting to do more. Maybe JonBenet was finally having none of it- she screamed and he hit her.

Everything else, IMOO was staging by the parents to make it appear she was attacked by a sadistic and crazed pedophile... a kidnapper from a small foreign faction. I don't know... but for the most part- my head does not go tp the place that this was anything other than an unintended accident (on Burke's part) from a seemingly (again IMOO) detached and unempathising boy (possibly with sociopath tendencies) and a huge, crazy coverup by his shocked parents, who had some idea- maybe even outright knowledge of inapropriate behavior by their son towards their little daughter- who would never have imagined that things could go down this way (the perfect and horrible confluence of things going terribly, horrifibly wrong) maybe even knowing in the recesses of their minds that something really bad could happen due to Burke's behavior, but then convincing themselves otherwise, until the night it actually did.

They were going to save their beloved son- the last child they had left together- at any and all costs.

They did things unimaginable to you or me or almost anyone with one thought only- to save their son. Their beloved son.

So much so, that they, at some point were preparing to be arrested over it.

To save their son.

They couldn't have known until after the horrifying and brutal staged cover-up that he never could be charged in the first place. Maybe that was hell enough for them. Worse than any earthly prison- they did what they did, unspeakable, unbearable things to their dead baby girl- for nothing- and then it was already too late.

Oh, my, Frigga. You're on a roll! :thumb:

(I hope no one starts suspecting you and I are the same person posting under different hats. But then, you said it so much more eloquently than I could even hope.)

 

[Linda7NJ]

the link to the video of Burke at his job at Mobi.

I can't see the video.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tawny]

Studies are a waste of time. 9-year-old boys come in all shapes and sizes and emotional makeup. There is only one boy who was nine in this case and that was BR and I've seen no studies that suggest he was capable of these crimes against his sister.

JMO

Studies... are a waste... of time...

I....... what.

Absence of proof is absence of fact.

RSBM

Absence of proof is not absence of fact. Just because there is no proof of something doesn't mean it didn't happen. For example, plenty of people have absence of proof of abuse/rape, and to dismiss that the FACT of the abuse happened to them is offensive.

JBR was abused. The PROOF is in the autopsy. Someone repeatedly penetrated her with something small enough as to erode her hymen without breaking it outright. That fact is presented in the autopsy. Denial of that is denial of facts.

 

[tweezybird]

I can't see the video.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sorry, I'm asking if someone has that link. I had it but could never view because of my old internet speed.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Studies... are a waste... of time...

I....... what.



RSBM

Absence of proof is not absence of fact. Just because there is no proof of something doesn't mean it didn't happen. For example, plenty of people have absence of proof of abuse/rape, and to dismiss that the FACT of the abuse happened to them is offensive.

JBR was abused. The PROOF is in the autopsy. Someone repeatedly penetrated her with something small enough as to erode her hymen without breaking it outright. That fact is presented in the autopsy. Denial of that is denial of facts.

It is only a fact if there is evidence to back it up. We know that JBR was sexually assaulted because the autopsy showed it. FACT.

Fact has to have evidence or there is no case. Lawyers can not go into court and say, It is a fact that so and so killed John but we have no evidence.

A Fact has to be able to be proven.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

the link to the video of Burke at his job at Mobi.

Burke is not a suspect. Are we allowed to start sleuthing him now? Post videos of him working??

That seems to be against TOS.

 

[otg]

Studies... are a waste... of time...

I....... what.



RSBM

Absence of proof is not absence of fact. Just because there is no proof of something doesn't mean it didn't happen. For example, plenty of people have absence of proof of abuse/rape, and to dismiss that the FACT of the abuse happened to them is offensive.

JBR was abused. The PROOF is in the autopsy. Someone repeatedly penetrated her with something small enough as to erode her hymen without breaking it outright. That fact is presented in the autopsy. Denial of that is denial of facts.

Tawny, can I tell you as a friend that you're wasting your effort here? You don't need to preach to the choir, and the atheists won't listen to you anyway.

 

[Linda7NJ]

It is only a fact if there is evidence to back it up. We know that JBR was sexually assaulted because the autopsy showed it. FACT.



Fact has to have evidence or there is no case. Lawyers can not go into court and say, It is a fact that so and so killed John but we have no evidence.



A Fact has to be able to be proven.

There is no courtroom in sight.
This is a online forum to discuss theories and the known evidence.

I don't understand why anyone would frequent here if a theory requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That's what trials are for.

We are what Websleuths is about. Theorizing based on what's known,

No one here has the ability to try this case before a jury or has access to ALL the evidence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tawny]

Tawny, can I tell you as a friend that you're wasting your effort here? You don't need to preach to the choir, and the atheists won't listen to you anyway.

Thanks, you're right. I needed the reminder :loveyou:

 

[Linda7NJ]

Thanks, you're right. I needed the reminder :loveyou:

I needed it too


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[tweezybird]

Please excuse me if I broke the TOS. Please feel free to delete my post.

Thanks so much for your concern Scarlett.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

There is no courtroom in sight.
This is a online forum to discuss theories and the known evidence.

I don't understand why anyone would frequent here if a theory requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt. That's what trials are for.

We are what Websleuths is about. Theorizing based on what's known,

No one here has the ability to try this case before a jury or has access to ALL the evidence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yes you are right.. But still facts can not be called facts unless they are. That does not change. We have to stick to facts or then state it is our opinion.

There is nothing wrong with us tossing ideas around and trying to make theories that fit, Even if we don't agree, but facts are facts. There is no version of facts.

IYKWIM?

I realize we don't have the same standard here as in a court but if we call something a fact there should be proof that supports it.. IMHO

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Please excuse me if I broke the TOS. Please feel free to delete my post.

Thanks so much for your concern Scarlett.

I don't know if it is or not. I just don't know.. That is why I posed the Question..

While we seem to be allowed to talk about him even though he was never declared a suspect, I don't know if that then carries to present day and sleuthing who he is now or him at his job or whatever.. KWIM?

I am hoping a mod will step in and let us know..

 

[Linda7NJ]

yes you are right.. But still facts can not be called facts unless they are. That does not change. We have to stick to facts or then state it is our opinion.

There is nothing wrong with us tossing ideas around and trying to make theories that fit, Even if we don't agree, but facts are facts. There is no version of facts.

IYKWIM?

I realize we don't have the same standard here as in a court but if we call something a fact there should be proof that supports it.. IMHO

I agree.

I get my undies twisted when sweeping generalizations are made that are patently false.
For example: there is no evidence of X's involvement.
That's not true. Every single scenario presented here has evidence to support it. Even the BDI & IDI theories.
While we may not agree on any particular theory or portion there of....we all need to admit that the is indeed evidence to support it.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

I don't know if it is or not. I just don't know.. That is why I posed the Question..



While we seem to be allowed to talk about him even though he was never declared a suspect, I don't know if that then carries to present day and sleuthing who he is now or him at his job or whatever.. KWIM?



I am hoping a mod will step in and let us know..

Look at the title of this thread.

All threads must be approved by a mod.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Look at the title of this thread.

All threads must be approved by a mod.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I know that we are allowed to discuss burke even though he was never named a suspect. However I am not sure of the line as it exists. That is why I was asking.. Are we allowed to post present day information on him? Work stuff, Pictures and videos?

That is why I am asking. I don't know where the line is.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

I agree.

I get my undies twisted when sweeping generalizations are made that are patently false.
For example: there is no evidence of X's involvement.
That's not true. Every single scenario presented here has evidence to support it. Even the BDI & IDI theories.
While we may not agree on any particular theory or portion there of....we all need to admit that the is indeed evidence to support it.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We agree again! This is like 3 times and it is only the 3rd month of 2014...

There have been many times I have heard a theory in a case, any case, and it makes perfect sense to me.. And I think, yep.. They have it.. And then I go fact checking and find it is based on something that has never been proven as a fact and it throws me back to the abyss of the unknown theory.

This case is so tough because there are so many hands in the pot from the beginning. Just a mess. I still pray that there will be a resolution. That someone will go back and look at more evidence and test more things.. Do something more.. And get justice for Jonbenet.

 

[Linda7NJ]

We agree again! This is like 3 times and it is only the 3rd month of 2014...



There have been many times I have heard a theory in a case, any case, and it makes perfect sense to me.. And I think, yep.. They have it.. And then I go fact checking and find it is based on something that has never been proven as a fact and it throws me back to the abyss of the unknown theory.



This case is so tough because there are so many hands in the pot from the beginning. Just a mess. I still pray that there will be a resolution. That someone will go back and look at more evidence and test more things.. Do something more.. And get justice for Jonbenet.

That would be nice.

But I've resigned myself to never knowing.
I think that's what keeps me coming back to this case...year after year after year.... I haven't been able to let this one go since the very first day it made the news.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk