Was Burke involved?

[TheyDontSee]

No, he was not involved.
It all seems too ridiculous. Nothing makes sense if HE did it.

Poor kid. Apparently he was very close to his sister.

 

[chissus]

I think Burke killed his sister. John found out and tried to cover it up. That's why he knew where her little body was. Patsy had no idea so when she found the ransom note that Burke wrote, she called the police.

I don't think Burke meant to kill his sister.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The touch DNA means nothing to me. Kids touch each other all the time touch each others clothes.
Kids raised in the same house put DNA everywhere.

 

[DeeDee249]

The touch DNA means nothing to me. Kids touch each other all the time touch each others clothes.
Kids raised in the same house put DNA everywhere.

Correct. Which is exactly why the touch DNA in JB's clothes is meaningless. It cannot be sourced, so it cannot be proven to belong to an intruder or the killer.

 

[FrayedKnot]

I think Burke killed his sister. John found out and tried to cover it up. That's why he knew where her little body was. Patsy had no idea so when she found the ransom note that Burke wrote, she called the police.

I don't think Burke meant to kill his sister.

i agree up until the ransom note. Patsy wrote that. IMO

 

[FrayedKnot]

I read through this thread.. And still feel the same.
I feel this crime was done by an intruder and that the family had nothing whatsoever to do with it.

Every few months, I get a bug about it and read more and look more and read more and go over evidence.. Try and find the source and come back to the same thing,

Intruder.

Not Burke.

Intruder? Seriously? May I ask why you think that?

 

[bettybaby00]

:seeya:

This case has long haunted me. My daughter was a young toddler when JRB was murdered, and the similarities in their appearance, coupled with the brutality of the crime has made this case hard to forget. And FWIW, I mean light-haired, blue-eyed, cherub-faced similarities!

this is my first post here on JonBenet's board, as I've only recently started reading this forum, and boy is there a lot of info to get through!!!!! I'm interested in reading Kolar's book, and i'm hoping some of you could offer other recommendations. I can clearly see by this board that i've still got a good bit of research to do!

I followed this case as much as I could back in the day, and it certainly was much more difficult to keep up with the details then it is now. Its amazing to me how much was kept out of MSM. For years I believed in the Remsey's innocence completely. When suspicion was initially cast their way, it seemed plausible that if they were involved, it was a case of one parent being the perpetrator, while the other helped to cover the other's "guilt." Yet as the months and years dragged on, I became even more convinced they were innocent, especially when they were "exonerated," by the DAs office. It was inconceivable to me that such a charade could be upheld for so long. Nor could I ever wrap my head around the idea that ANY parent would be willing to perpetrate such a lie. Not only did it seem very improbable to me that one parent would cover for another for so long, but i found it hard to believe that they would never "give it away," over time. I'll admit, this was very much influenced by my own beliefs and emotions regarding parenthood and what that means to me.

After reading through many of these threads, i've begun to be a BDI believer. Although my reasoning isn't all that "scientific," it has become the theory that holds the most plausibility for me. What is most compelling for me is how long this cover-up has lasted, and who--IMO--had the most to benefit. I just can't see one spouse covering for the other for so long. If I were to believe that JDI, then I would have to accept that PR was complicit in the cover up, and i just can't see her doing this for nearly 10 years. IMHO, the only reason a person/people would be willing to go to such lengths would be to protect their child, and in this case, their only surviving child. Its the only thing that makes sense.

ETA: Have I understood correctly that the Ramsey's refused, and therefore, never turned over both JRB's and BR's medical records? That's very telling to me, and further points to BDI.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Intruder? Seriously? May I ask why you think that?

Not like that you can't..

Just because someone has looked at the evidence and sees it a different way does not make them wrong. I look at the hard stuff. The stuff the police have. I do not look at what wanna be detectives look at. I don't make up scenarios.. I look at the evidence as gathered and look for the answer there.

For me it still points to intruder. I do believe it was someone they knew or that knew them better than the Ramsey's knew them.

But I believe it was someone other than the immediate family.

 

[chissus]

i agree up until the ransom note. Patsy wrote that. IMO

To me, the ransom note reads like a little boy's Jame Bond fantasy. I can't see an adult writing such a long silly story.

I understand the ransom note's comparison to Patsy was inconclusive. And maybe the misspelled words that Patsy also misspelled in a card was the way she taught Burke to spell that word.

Please tell me why your think Patsy wrote it. I really need to put this case to rest in my mind.

 

[DeeDee249]

To me, the ransom note reads like a little boy's Jame Bond fantasy. I can't see an adult writing such a long silly story.

I understand the ransom note's comparison to Patsy was inconclusive. And maybe the misspelled words that Patsy also misspelled in a card was the way she taught Burke to spell that word.

Please tell me why your think Patsy wrote it. I really need to put this case to rest in my mind.

For one, the handwriting matches Patsy's. So does the linguistics, based on her past Christmas newsletters. And that note wasn't written by a little boy. Attache? Be well rested? No way did a child write that. It was silly, though. Only problem is the author dod not realize it. Why teach a child to spell a word incorrectly?

 

[ATasteOfHoney]

For one, the handwriting matches Patsy's. So does the linguistics, based on her past Christmas newsletters. And that note wasn't written by a little boy. Attache? Be well rested? No way did a child write that. It was silly, though. Only problem is the author dod not realize it. Why teach a child to spell a word incorrectly?

You said it, DeeDee. The note is written like a Harlequin novel, too fluffy to be real, full of drama, verbage that is outdated, romantisized linguistics, and illogical. If is wasn't such a serious matter (JBR's death) this note would be laughable as far as ransom notes go.

What it is not is what it should be: concise, clear, strategic, to the point, logical.

 

[chissus]

For one, the handwriting matches Patsy's. So does the linguistics, based on her past Christmas newsletters. And that note wasn't written by a little boy. Attache? Be well rested? No way did a child write that. It was silly, though. Only problem is the author dod not realize it. Why teach a child to spell a word incorrectly?

I did some research and you are right. PR did write the RN. It was after JBR was dead. She was covering for Burke. I thought PR was smarter than that. I could write a better fake RN:

"Your little girl is safe...for now. If you contact or tell anyone, she will be killed. We want $118,000 for her safe return. You will be contacted with further instructions".

But why write that silly RN and leave the dead child in the house? Maybe PR wanted to be a suspect to further shield Burke?

I'm going crazy.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

When I read the ransom note it reads to me like someone who has watched a lot of movies and was trying to make sounds as least like them as possible. But also to make them important and sound powerful.
I see it as written by a young man. Not a boy.. but someone who wanted to appear powerful and masterful.

There are too many facts that make it ludicrous to me that Patsy wrote the note.

 

[otg]

When I read the ransom note it reads to me like someone who has watched a lot of movies and was trying to make sounds as least like them as possible. But also to make them important and sound powerful.

Okay, that's an impression you get. Right? No one can argue that because it's what it "reads to (you) like".

I see it as written by a young man. Not a boy.. but someone who wanted to appear powerful and masterful.

Again, this is your impression -- what you "see". Others "see" it differently.

There are too many facts that make it ludicrous to me that Patsy wrote the note.

Okay, here we go... "facts". (I like facts.) What are the "facts that make it ludicrous (to you) that Patsy wrote the note"? Most people here really do have open minds if you can convince them with facts. Many have come to their conclusions based on all the facts available. If you are aware of some facts we haven't considered that will convince us to agree with you, please do share them.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Okay, that's an impression you get. Right? No one can argue that because it's what it "reads to (you) like".


Again, this is your impression -- what you "see". Others "see" it differently.


Okay, here we go... "facts". (I like facts.) What are the "facts that make it ludicrous (to you) that Patsy wrote the note"? Most people here really do have open minds if you can convince them with facts. Many have come to their conclusions based on all the facts available. If you are aware of some facts we haven't considered that will convince us to agree with you, please do share them.

I am sorry I should have been more clear.. Facts as put forth in the ransom note. Terms used. I have been looking at it all morning.. Reading the note, Looking at comparisons.. Watching her interviews... Reading articles she did.. Transcripts..

I don't believe that any of the Ramseys were involved. Especially not burke.

 

[otg]

I am sorry I should have been more clear.. Facts as put forth in the ransom note. Terms used. I have been looking at it all morning.. Reading the note, Looking at comparisons.. Watching her interviews... Reading articles she did.. Transcripts..

I don't believe that any of the Ramseys were involved. Especially not burke.

And if you start off with that bbm unshakable opinion, you will never be open to facts that might lead you to the truth.

There are no "facts as put forth in the ransom note". The RN is a complete fantasy. There was no "foreign faction", no "two gentlemen watching over (JR's) daughter", no phone call "between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct (him) on delivery", no one "(had JR's) daughter in our posession", and she was not "safe and unharmed" when the writer penned the note. Nothing -- no "facts" in the RN -- completely bogus.

But since you are doing a little reading this morning anyway, if you care to do a little more reading in your spare time, please take the time to read the analysis done here:
[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404"]Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note - Forums For Justice[/ame]


The poster Cherokee did a very detailed analysis and was asked to join FFJ and share her work there. In addition, she posted the statements by other document examiners as follows:

Independent Confirmation of the Handwriting Analysis


Gideon Epstein - Forensic Document Examiner:

“Based on the presently available documents, there are strong indications that Patsy Ramsey is the author of the ransom note.”

David S. Liebman - Certified Document Examiner:

“There are far too many similarities and consistencies revealed in the handwriting of Patsy Ramsey and
the ransom note for it to be coincidence. In light of the number of comparisons and similarities between Patsy Ramsey and the ransom note writer (51), the chances of a third party also sharing the same characteristics is astronomical. In my professional opinion Patsy Ramsey is the ransom note writer.”

Tom Miller - Attorney, Court Qualified Expert Witness in Questioned Documents:

“Based upon available exemplars compared to the purported "ransom" note in the JonBenét Ramsey murder, the handwriting is probably that of Patsy Ramsey.”

Chet Ubowski - Colorado Bureau of Investigation Handwriting Expert:

Chet Ubowski wrote, "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.'' He is said to have found 24 of 26 letters in the ransom note which matched exemplars from Patsy Ramsey.

Cina L. Wong - Certified Document Examiner:

“I have made careful examination and comparison of the ‘ransom’ note and the exemplars of Patsy Ramsey. I have reached the conclusion that the handwritings and ‘ransom’ note were very probably written by the same person…it is my professional opinion that Patsy Ramsey very likely wrote the ‘ransom’ note.”

Larry F. Ziegler - Forensic Document Examiner:

“It was determined and is still determined by myself that Patsy Ramsey is the writer of the ransom note.”

ScarlettScarpetta, I'm not trying to be tough on you or single you out, but most of the posters here have spent years studying everything about this case. They know more about it than I, or probably you. Some have even been of the opinion at one time or another that it was an intruder who was responsible for JonBenet's death (Hi, SD :seeya: .) So the RDI's here (myself included) didn't arrive at that opinion based on nothing more than their gut feelings or a desire to condemn a family who lost a loved one. We came to that opinion based on the information we have available. So understand, SS, that it may seem like you're being attacked when you say things that make others feel like you believe you are the only one who wants to look only at hard evidence. (We all wish we had more.) But when you go against the flow of a river, you have to expect a little turbulence.

I do hope though that you will stick with it and share your opinions (even if we disagree at times).

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

And if you start off with that bbm unshakable opinion, you will never be open to facts that might lead you to the truth.

There are no "facts as put forth in the ransom note". The RN is a complete fantasy. There was no "foreign faction", no "two gentlemen watching over (JR's) daughter", no phone call "between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct (him) on delivery", no one "(had JR's) daughter in our posession", and she was not "safe and unharmed" when the writer penned the note. Nothing -- no "facts" in the RN -- completely bogus.

But since you are doing a little reading this morning anyway, if you care to do a little more reading in your spare time, please take the time to read the analysis done here:
Analysis of the Linguistics and Handwriting in the Ramsey Ransom Note - Forums For Justice


The poster Cherokee did a very detailed analysis and was asked to join FFJ and share her work there. In addition, she posted the statements by other document examiners as follows:

ScarlettScarpetta, I'm not trying to be tough on you or single you out, but most of the posters here have spent years studying everything about this case. They know more about it than I, or probably you. Some have even been of the opinion at one time or another that it was an intruder who was responsible for JonBenet's death (Hi, SD :seeya: .) So the RDI's here (myself included) didn't arrive at that opinion based on nothing more than their gut feelings or a desire to condemn a family who lost a loved one. We came to that opinion based on the information we have available. So understand, SS, that it may seem like you're being attacked when you say things that make others feel like you believe you are the only one who wants to look only at hard evidence. (We all wish we had more.) But when you go against the flow of a river, you have to expect a little turbulence.

I do hope though that you will stick with it and share your opinions (even if we disagree at times).

I think that mainly the reason that this forums seems to be only of one opinion is because those that post something contrary to the main opinion, get picked apart and made to feel like they have to be crazy to think that way..

I also believe that sometimes spending too much time on a case can slant your vision of the facts.

I look at the evidence. I look at what I see coming from LE. I look at the time line, and yes I am still reading.. But I am careful in what I read. I want to see the evidence untainted by opinion.

I do not see the Ramseys as perpetrators of this crime. I still see evidence that points away from them.

I don't take differing opinions personally.

I never have. It does not bother me to be the lone dissenter. I need to believe in what I post and put out there. And I don't believe at all it was the RAmseys. Not because that is my etched in stone mindset, But because it has not been proven to me yet. I am always open to the facts and evidence. I just don't see it yet.

 

[Chelly]

Not like that you can't..

Just because someone has looked at the evidence and sees it a different way does not make them wrong. I look at the hard stuff. The stuff the police have. I do not look at what wanna be detectives look at. I don't make up scenarios.. I look at the evidence as gathered and look for the answer there.

For me it still points to intruder. I do believe it was someone they knew or that knew them better than the Ramsey's knew them.

But I believe it was someone other than the immediate family.

BBM
Please list the evidence that points to intruder?

 

[Darlene733510]

The GJ voted to charge the R's, but AH decided not to take it to trial. He also made decisions that a lot of the evidence wouldn't be tested. Who knows what evidence is still there that would add or detract from ML's decision to exonerate the R's
The GJ made their decision the day after BR testified. Was his testimony the deciding factor? We may never know, and everyone has the right to their own opinion. A beautiful 6 year old child was murdered, is the reason we post here. We would like to see justice for her. This is one cold case that may never be solved, but hope is eternal.
I stayed away from the forums for years, but never have forgotten JB......so here I am. Each Christmas I think of her, and always will.

 

[bettybaby00]

Not sure if this is the correct place to ask...can anyone point me in the direction of the "law" Re: the age of culpability for a criminal act in Co.? Google in this instance appears not to be my friend. I've tried numerous searches, and all I'm getting is broad references to "defense of infancy" statutes that don't really get into all the finer points that are often cited here.

TIA