Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? Poll

[Tadpole12]

[SIZE=-1]A child dies every day in an unsolved homicide[SIZE=-1]
http://www.sitnews.us/0910news/091310/091310_shns_murder_child.html[/SIZE][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Of the 51,753 murders of juveniles 17 or younger, nearly 21 percent were unsolved.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1][/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]High failure rates in homicide investigations often reflect failures of will by local political leaders to make murder cases a top priority, according to crime experts.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]"The one factor that stands out is the leadership of the police department," Wellford said. "If they're committed to clearances, if they make it a priority, if they provide the resources and demand that their investigators use the best practices, we always see increases in the clearance rates in those communities."[/SIZE]

 

[Coldpizza]

Police Reportedly Hope JonBenet Ramsey's Brother May Provide Clue

(Sept. 29) -- The author of a book about the slaying of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey says police want to reinterview her brother, who was 9 when the young beauty queen was killed in 1996

http://www.aolnews.com/crime/articl.../19654258?icid=main|main|dl1|sec1_lnk3|174202

 

[Tadpole12]

Police Reportedly Hope JonBenet Ramsey's Brother May Provide Clue

(Sept. 29) -- The author of a book about the slaying of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey says police want to reinterview her brother, who was 9 when the young beauty queen was killed in 1996

http://www.aolnews.com/crime/articl.../19654258?icid=main|main|dl1|sec1_lnk3|174202

ty CP.

from link:

FBI spokesman Dave Joly told AOL News today that he had not heard of any developments in the case. Ramsey could not be reached for comment. His phone number is unlisted.

Last year, Beckner said authorities had investigated 140 people as potential suspects. He said in his statement today that based on recommendations from the task force, there has been additional contact with those who may have information pertaining to the case. Authorities refused to elaborate.

 

[madeleine]

He said agencies participating in the task force were the FBI, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, the Colorado attorney general's office, the Denver district attorney's office, and the Boulder County and Jefferson County sheriff's departments.


good

 

[Tadpole12]

Heyya Madeleine,

140 is alot of peeps.

 

[joeskidbeck]

He said agencies participating in the task force were the FBI, the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, the Colorado attorney general's office, the Denver district attorney's office, and the Boulder County and Jefferson County sheriff's departments.


good

:woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo: :woohoo:
Hi Madeleine. That's a lot of LE. Even better than that is the fact that this list doesn't say Boulder Police Dept. and Boulder DA's office. I think this calls for a toast (too bad I don't drink). I guess it's a given that both of those offices are also involved, but I would rather keep believing they are out of it.

 

[minazoe]

after all the books and years of studying this case, these things stand out to me.

no footprints in the snow
who writes a kidnap note when the child is dead in the basement?
a clothes concious 6 year old beauty pagent contestent is an unlikley bed-wetter.
the paintbush garrote, what killer relies on random items and found twine etc to perform a murder?

the drama and behaviour of the Ramseys after the event.

I believe there is some deep mental illness in this story somewhere..and yes, i agree that there may have been an attempt to cover the past abuse and the actual cause of death which was not her asphxiation.

something dark in that house...

 

[Linda7NJ]

after all the books and years of studying this case, these things stand out to me.

no footprints in the snow
who writes a kidnap note when the child is dead in the basement?
a clothes concious 6 year old beauty pagent contestent is an unlikley bed-wetter.
the paintbush garrote, what killer relies on random items and found twine etc to perform a murder?

the drama and behaviour of the Ramseys after the event.

I believe there is some deep mental illness in this story somewhere..and yes, i agree that there may have been an attempt to cover the past abuse and the actual cause of death which was not her asphxiation.

something dark in that house...

BBM

Children do not intend to wet the bed. It's caused by an immature bladder, deep sleep, exhaustion, trauma, sexual abuse. It's EXTREMELY rare for a child to intentionally wet the bed, pagent queen or not.

 

[dodie20]

Actually, I've been giving this case some extra thought lately, & now there's movement! But my thoughts weren't really about Burke. When Patsy died, it was kind of assumed that Jon Benet's killer died, & it hit me that that might not be right. Her death let John off the hook, in a big way. Anyway, I was thinking that now might be the time to go after him. If he didn't kill his daughter, then so be it, but he should be made to legally, fully cooperate. & if Patsy's named the killer, & it's proven? then as a murderer, she deserves that. But if John's guilty, he should pay. It's been so long since Patsy died, & still nothing from John, & that makes me suspicious. Not many people would judge him for protecting a cancer stricken wife, & if he's not the murderer, he wouldn't have much to lose now, but his silence is suspicious...at least to me. I don't care how much money they had, or what their position in high society was, there's no excuse for this.

 

[dodie20]

When this case 1st broke, my 1st instinct was that Burke had done it. I remember a film clip of the funeral, & Patsy was surrounded by her friends, John was with his, & then there was Burke, walking by himself. & I thought he looked like he had been kicked...& hard. (figuratively kicked). Now, him being alone, might've just lasted for a few seconds, but I wondered then, why this family wasn't clinging to each other. why the fracture? I thought at the time, that his parents must've been very angry with him. I moved away from the Burke theory, pretty quickly, because of Patsy's behavior, but this new movement does make me wonder what Burke knows. I don't think he would've slept through Patsy's hysterics.

 

[DeeDee249]

Actually, I've been giving this case some extra thought lately, & now there's movement! But my thoughts weren't really about Burke. When Patsy died, it was kind of assumed that Jon Benet's killer died, & it hit me that that might not be right. Her death let John off the hook, in a big way. Anyway, I was thinking that now might be the time to go after him. If he didn't kill his daughter, then so be it, but he should be made to legally, fully cooperate. & if Patsy's named the killer, & it's proven? then as a murderer, she deserves that. But if John's guilty, he should pay. It's been so long since Patsy died, & still nothing from John, & that makes me suspicious. Not many people would judge him for protecting a cancer stricken wife, & if he's not the murderer, he wouldn't have much to lose now, but his silence is suspicious...at least to me. I don't care how much money they had, or what their position in high society was, there's no excuse for this.

See, that's the whole problem right there. Our legal system works in such a way that JR simply CANNOT be forced to cooperate with LE. I thank God we have the legal system that we do, even though sometimes a sleazeball slips through. But as far as this case is concerned, even if JR were arrested he still does not have to talk to police. They have to make their case without his cooperation. Police have to have a reason to arrest him, and DA Hunter saw to it that even back then when the case was hot the Rs would not be arrested. They can't arrest him just because they want to talk to him. For JR to be arrested, some new evidence must be brought to bear implicating him in either the murder or the coverup or both.
As frustrating as it seems, even when someone is suspected of a crime as horrible as this one, they cannot be compelled to talk to police. And the R lawyers will never allow either JR or his sons to talk to police. What can break this logjam? Police would have to find new evidence (or use existing evidence, this time with a DA who is not a coward, and CHARGE him with this crime. The trouble is (and was) that police can't seem to pinpoint exactly who did what. While JR's fibers are present at the crime scene, so are Patsy's and she is dead, so she can't be charged. And I don't think LE has anything they can throw at JR that will stick. Besides, he'd just blame Patsy anyway at that point.
I am sure LE still feels the Rs have some part in all this. But the case has to be brought in such a way as to indicate JR did it, and at this point we have only the fibers as actual forensic evidence (that has been made public, anyway).
It reminds me of a small scene in the movie "Schindler's List". A group of prisoners is lined up and asked which one of them had committed a crime (I believe it was stealing a chicken). One of the prisoners had already been shot dead, and as the question was asked again, a boy stepped forward. He was asked if he was the culprit. He shook his head "No". He was then asked if he knew who the culprit was. He said "Yes". He was then asked to point to who it was, and he pointed to the dead man. JR would do the same.

 

[dodie20]

See, that's the whole problem right there. Our legal system works in such a way that JR simply CANNOT be forced to cooperate with LE. I thank God we have the legal system that we do, even though sometimes a sleazeball slips through. But as far as this case is concerned, even if JR were arrested he still does not have to talk to police. They have to make their case without his cooperation. Police have to have a reason to arrest him, and DA Hunter saw to it that even back then when the case was hot the Rs would not be arrested. They can't arrest him just because they want to talk to him. For JR to be arrested, some new evidence must be brought to bear implicating him in either the murder or the coverup or both.
As frustrating as it seems, even when someone is suspected of a crime as horrible as this one, they cannot be compelled to talk to police. And the R lawyers will never allow either JR or his sons to talk to police. What can break this logjam? Police would have to find new evidence (or use existing evidence, this time with a DA who is not a coward, and CHARGE him with this crime. The trouble is (and was) that police can't seem to pinpoint exactly who did what. While JR's fibers are present at the crime scene, so are Patsy's and she is dead, so she can't be charged. And I don't think LE has anything they can throw at JR that will stick. Besides, he'd just blame Patsy anyway at that point.
I am sure LE still feels the Rs have some part in all this. But the case has to be brought in such a way as to indicate JR did it, and at this point we have only the fibers as actual forensic evidence (that has been made public, anyway).
It reminds me of a small scene in the movie "Schindler's List". A group of prisoners is lined up and asked which one of them had committed a crime (I believe it was stealing a chicken). One of the prisoners had already been shot dead, and as the question was asked again, a boy stepped forward. He was asked if he was the culprit. He shook his head "No". He was then asked if he knew who the culprit was. He said "Yes". He was then asked to point to who it was, and he pointed to the dead man. JR would do the same.

I wish JR WOULD point to Patsy, then LE could try to build the case, & then force the inconsistencies & the evidence that doesn't point to her, on HIM. He'd be left with no alternative but to explain them...or be charged with murder. One of them would go down, & if he's willing to point at Patsy to save himself, then he should be able to back it up. I've heard of cases being tried without a body, & with very little evidence, so this is ridiculous. They've got the body, they've got the evidence, & like you said, they've got evidence they haven't shared with the public, so there's no sense in this. I would think that now that Patsy's dead, JR would want the truth to come out...IF Patsy was guilty. He may want to protect Patsy's reputation, but I say, what reputation? I would think he'd want to clear his own name. If Patsy killed Jon Benet, then John doesn't owe her a danged thing, because while he was keeping her out of prison, his own name was sullied, right along with hers. But...if HE's guilty, then that's a whole different story. Times are different now, & money & prestige, & self importance don't mean anywhere near as much as they used to. It's like he thinks that punishment is for the common folks? Who does he think he is? royalty? Also, reading an earlier link, I saw where he downplayed the pagents & called them occasional. Oh, really? Then why did he & Patsy bury Jon Benet in a gown & tiara? That tells me, that pagents are what mattered most to these people. Because when all is said & done, this comes down to 1 thing? Why is JR not talking? is he choosing to protect his dead wife, (a killer), over his dead daughter, (a victim)? There's no nobility there, because that would be for appearances only...because it's less uncouth to have your daughter murdered by an outsider, than it would be to have your daughter murdered by her mother/your wife. or is JR not talking because HE's guilty? MOO.

 

[DeeDee249]

Charges cannot be brought against a dead person. So as far as Patsy is concerned it's a "dead end" (no pun intended). Police can't accuse a dead person, per se, but neither can they accuse JR officially without enough evidence. JR and Patsy are both complicit in the events of that night. Either JE did it, Patsy did it, or another relative did it. Either way, the parents were both involved in the coverup so even if they were not responsible for her death, they KNOW how she died. This coverup would never have been done for anyone BUT the people I mentioned, no matter how close a friend they were, and obviously not for a stranger.

 

[UKGuy]

Charges cannot be brought against a dead person. So as far as Patsy is concerned it's a "dead end" (no pun intended). Police can't accuse a dead person, per se, but neither can they accuse JR officially without enough evidence. JR and Patsy are both complicit in the events of that night. Either JE did it, Patsy did it, or another relative did it. Either way, the parents were both involved in the coverup so even if they were not responsible for her death, they KNOW how she died. This coverup would never have been done for anyone BUT the people I mentioned, no matter how close a friend they were, and obviously not for a stranger.

DeeDee249,

If the person who killed JonBenet is dead, why bother interviewing BR?

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,

If the person who killed JonBenet is dead, why bother interviewing BR?

Because JR, in helping cover it up, may be guilty of tampering with a body. And because they want to know if JR's involvement was more substantial. Like accessory to murder/manslaughter. They may also feel (like many of us do) that although Patsy wrote the note and both parents covered it up, that BR may be involved as well. They KNOW he can't be charged, and obviously Patsy can't. But if they could at least get closer to solving the case by questioning him, they'd lie to try.

 

[grammieto5]

I've always thought BR was involved, I think the parents would not cover for each other but they would both cover for their son.

 

[KoldKase]

When this case 1st broke, my 1st instinct was that Burke had done it. I remember a film clip of the funeral, & Patsy was surrounded by her friends, John was with his, & then there was Burke, walking by himself. & I thought he looked like he had been kicked...& hard. (figuratively kicked). Now, him being alone, might've just lasted for a few seconds, but I wondered then, why this family wasn't clinging to each other. why the fracture? I thought at the time, that his parents must've been very angry with him. I moved away from the Burke theory, pretty quickly, because of Patsy's behavior, but this new movement does make me wonder what Burke knows. I don't think he would've slept through Patsy's hysterics.

I once read an onilne blog years ago in which the blogger talked about almost running over Burke in Atlanta. The blogger said Burke was on a skateboard and came shooting out from behind a parked car on the road. The blog wasn't a Ramsey case blog at all, just someone who lived around the Atlanta area near the Ramseys. This was before the Ramseys moved to Charlevoix, I think. I found it when it just turned up on a google.

The thing I thought was how could parents who had a child murdered by an unidentified intruder who was still "out there" let their other child ride around the streets on a skateboard like that? Even jams mentioned Burke skateboarding down the street.

I guess it's a small thing, but like you, I wonder.

 

[DeeDee249]

I once read an onilne blog years ago in which the blogger talked about almost running over Burke in Atlanta. The blogger said Burke was on a skateboard and came shooting out from behind a parked car on the road. The blog wasn't a Ramsey case blog at all, just someone who lived around the Atlanta area near the Ramseys. This was before the Ramseys moved to Charlevoix, I think. I found it when it just turned up on a google.

The thing I thought was how could parents who had a child murdered by an unidentified intruder who was still "out there" let their other child ride around the streets on a skateboard like that? Even jams mentioned Burke skateboarding down the street.

I guess it's a small thing, but like you, I wonder.

I guess just like these parents could let him go to a friend's house that VERY morning. And of course, he returned to school, unaccompanied by a bodyguard. Don't wonder TOO hard. You know the answer. So do we.

 

[Amy Noel]

The Ramseys did not kill their daughter! We may bever know who did, which is very sad and hard to accept, but that is the truth. The case was destroyed from the start. They police and investigators were the most incompotent bunch of clowns ever. However the one piece of undisputable evidence that they do have rules out the Ramseys and points to an unknown male and that is the pubic hair found on JonBenet that was tested. Maybe one day we can hope that they will find him by this DNA, maybe he will be arrested on a unrelated charge and we will finally know! I hope that day comes soon!!! Please let this woman RIP, I wish she had lived to see On July 9, 2008, when the Boulder District Attorney's office announced that as a result of newly developed DNA sampling and testing techniques, the Ramsey family members are no longer considered suspects in the case and sent a letter to John Ramsey the same day, officially apologizing to the Ramsey family. I think if this would have come sooner she might have beaten the cancer.

 

[DeeDee249]

The Ramseys did not kill their daughter! We may bever know who did, which is very sad and hard to accept, but that is the truth. The case was destroyed from the start. They police and investigators were the most incompotent bunch of clowns ever. However the one piece of undisputable evidence that they do have rules out the Ramseys and points to an unknown male and that is the pubic hair found on JonBenet that was tested. Maybe one day we can hope that they will find him by this DNA, maybe he will be arrested on a unrelated charge and we will finally know! I hope that day comes soon!!! Please let this woman RIP, I wish she had lived to see On July 9, 2008, when the Boulder District Attorney's office announced that as a result of newly developed DNA sampling and testing techniques, the Ramsey family members are no longer considered suspects in the case and sent a letter to John Ramsey the same day, officially apologizing to the Ramsey family. I think if this would have come sooner she might have beaten the cancer.

Ditto what I said in the previous thread. You KNOW who killed JB? I hope you've told LE. If you are SURE the parents were not involved. Because you can't be SURE unless you know who DID do it.