Are the Ramseys involved or not?

[R.U.Kidding!]

For me, its very simple. Not the little things, but the overall picture.

1) Patsy wrote the RN. If you have researched the case and looked at the samples yourself, you would have to be a moron to not agree.

2) The Ramsey's did everything they could do to hinder the investigation. If they were innocent, they would have realized they needed to be cleared to catch the real killer. They didn't care about an 'investigation' because they knew what happened.

3) IMO, they failed lie detectors. The PR machine can spin it any way they want, but they hand picked and PAID for a polygraph and didn't pass. Go ahead with your 'Inconclusive' crap--anyone with half a brain can figure it out.

For some of you on here, common sense is being overlooked. For example--take the Ramsey's actions and evidence that we DO know and apply it to any other case on this board. Rid your mind of the Ramsey dream team propaganda and use your brain

OK--Sooner!

For me common sense does not have to be overlooked in this case. If that were indeed the case then the common sense of Every Law Enforcement official, as well as the entire Legal system would have to be overlooked, and I doubt that to be the case.

If it is so obvious Patsy Ramsey wrote the RN, then how can that just be overlooked.

I think what is more likely is no matter how we play this case out "the Fix is In", and the Ramsey's bought their freedom. How many people they must have paid off is incomprehensible to me, and it will always be impossible for me to believe not one single person had the decency to blow the lid off this case, and take down these elitist trash. I wonder just how much money it would take to buy off Boulder, Colorado.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

[/B]

OK--Sooner!

For me common sense does not have to be overlooked in this case. If that were indeed the case then the common sense of Every Law Enforcement official, as well as the entire Legal system would have to be overlooked, and I doubt that to be the case.

If it is so obvious Patsy Ramsey wrote the RN, then how can that just be overlooked.

I think what is more likely is no matter how we play this case out "the Fix is In", and the Ramsey's bought their freedom. How many people they must have paid off is incomprehensible to me, and it will always be impossible for me to believe not one single person had the decency to blow the lid off this case, and take down these elitist trash. I wonder just how much money it would take to buy off Boulder, Colorado.

John Ramsey had a $6 million net worth when JonBenet was killed. Would that be enough money to "buy off Boulder" and also continue living a comfortable lifestyle (private plane, multiple houses, private school) despite not having a job (steady income) for the past 16 years?

 

[R.U.Kidding!]

John Ramsey had a $6 million net worth when JonBenet was killed. Would that be enough money to "buy off Boulder" and also continue living a comfortable lifestyle (private plane, multiple houses, private school) despite not having a job (steady income) for the past 16 years?

$6 million isn't what it used to be, and I really am not sure it would be enough or even possible to pay off the amount of people he would of had to take care of. Who knows how far these payoffs would have to have gone. Prosecutors and Judges are pretty expensive, LOL. Just sayin

 

[SapphireSteel]

John Ramsey was very highly connected, and while he probably did not pay any one off, the threat of various business ramifications would probably be enough to make the 1% of Boulder wish this one would go away. He was also a regular church goer which can lead to secret handshake type loyalties and alliances in unlikely places.

Further, he had enough money for top legal advice. In the US, the more money you have, the more likely you are to escape any charges being laid in the first place. The local political environment came into this as well, with a particularly "out of their depth" LE who made some serious, stupid (if understandable) mistakes that a smart lawyer would have a field day with. There was the added interferance of a vote grubbing DA's office as well, with God knows how many hidden motivations and pressures.

Basically, no one in Colorado wanted the Ramseys to have murdered their child, most especially JR. A powerful, driven man, used to taking control, and an out of control wife and a dead, abused daughter. I can't forgive what he did, but I can understand it.

JMO.

 

[neesaki]

Okay, if an intruder brought the fresh pineapple, it had to be someone who knew JonBenet liked it, correct? (It's delicious.) She told her friend Megan and her mom that she'd been promised an extra visit by someone calling himself Santa. Would excitement about that make her forget if this was the same person who'd molested her at the party on the 23?

He had her crying and trying to call 911, because not even her parents protected her from molestation, (coroners said autopsy showed she was stretched, so it had evidently happened a lot, probably explained her going to the school nurse almost every Monday, and her bedwetting) and someone took the phone away from her who later claimed his mother was in a hospital, and then Stine wouldn't even open the door for police.

So does that mean the parents were involved, because they apparently never ever protected her? Were they to get business advantages from this? Did they definitely know, or not believe her? Poor little kid, imagine having to live like that!

I'm not that familiar with all and have forgotten some of the details of this case and am trying to catch up here as well as refresh my memory. Is it known whether JB's pediatrician reported any signs of abuse, i.e., the 'stretching'? Also, unexplained bedwetting is a sign of sexual abuse as well. I don't get it how this could have gone on repeatedly without intervention.

Something has always seemed very wrong to me with this entire case and with the Ramsey family. :shakehead:

 

[neesaki]

Hi, AutumnBorn. Why do you think Burke should be excluded? Dr. Cyril Wecht said there was nothing that was done to JonBenet that someone Burke's age at the time couldn't have done, and Dr. Michael Baden said that Burke needs to be looked at.

I'm convinced Burke did it. Nothing I've read or heard in all the years I've followed the case has changed my opinion on that.

IMO

I also have always had strong suspicions about Burke. They had to know he was very jealous of JB, maybe he acted out a lot to get negative attention, maybe he had a screw loose and they knew it. For one thing, hadn't he hit JB in the head once with a golf club or am I misremembering that?

 

[DeeDee249]

I also have always had strong suspicions about Burke. They had to know he was very jealous of JB, maybe he acted out a lot to get negative attention, maybe he had a screw loose and they knew it. For one thing, hadn't he hit JB in the head once with a golf club or am I misremembering that?

He did hit JB in the head (face, actually) with a golf club. Patsy took her to a hospital and she saw a plastic surgeon for that.

BR & JB had been caught on more than one occasion "playing doctor". On one occasion, the housekeeper found them under a blanket in his room (with a flashlight?) and both kids were irate upon being "discovered". The shouted at the housekeeper to "get OUT".
When I first started here, there was a poster called "Blue Crab" who was a firm BDI. I wasn't, as a matter of fact, BR was the last person I had on my short list, Patsy, JR, JAR and DP being also on it. But as the years have gone and different theories and come and go, I definitely moved BR up a few notches on that list. It fits some pieces of the puzzle together for me- the biggest piece is WHY Patsy would write that note (because she surely did) and why parents would cover up this crime. I can think of NO one else, not even DP, who would have gotten such a pass. But I can see them covering up for their son(s).
I think BR could have bashed her on the head when she screamed because he panicked and wanted to shut her up fast. If they were "playing doctor" in a dark room, the flashlight may have been right there. Having silenced her, she would have crumpled to the floor, possibly having a seizure, and never regained consciousness again. Hearing the scream (which tests showed COULD be heard from the parents' third-floor bedroom, even from the basement but especially if it happened on the first or second floor) and when they came running they found an unconscious dying JB. They sent BR to his room and told him to stay there until they came for him, and he complied, not realizing how seriously he had hurt his sister. When he heard them than morning yelling "help me Jesus" etc and running around the house, he came down to the kitchen and was heard on the 911 tape in the background.
I do not think BR played any part at all in the staging. That was ALL the parents and I believe both took part.
I have an alternate theory which involves BR and JAR and possibly DS.

 

[otg]

He did hit JB in the head (face, actually) with a golf club. Patsy took her to a hospital and she saw a plastic surgeon for that.

BR & JB had been caught on more than one occasion "playing doctor". On one occasion, the housekeeper found them under a blanket in his room (with a flashlight?) and both kids were irate upon being "discovered". The shouted at the housekeeper to "get OUT".
When I first started here, there was a poster called "Blue Crab" who was a firm BDI. I wasn't, as a matter of fact, BR was the last person I had on my short list, Patsy, JR, JAR and DP being also on it. But as the years have gone and different theories and come and go, I definitely moved BR up a few notches on that list. It fits some pieces of the puzzle together for me- the biggest piece is WHY Patsy would write that note (because she surely did) and why parents would cover up this crime. I can think of NO one else, not even DP, who would have gotten such a pass. But I can see them covering up for their son(s).
I think BR could have bashed her on the head when she screamed because he panicked and wanted to shut her up fast. If they were "playing doctor" in a dark room, the flashlight may have been right there. Having silenced her, she would have crumpled to the floor, possibly having a seizure, and never regained consciousness again. Hearing the scream (which tests showed COULD be heard from the parents' third-floor bedroom, even from the basement but especially if it happened on the first or second floor) and when they came running they found an unconscious dying JB. They sent BR to his room and told him to stay there until they came for him, and he complied, not realizing how seriously he had hurt his sister. When he heard them than morning yelling "help me Jesus" etc and running around the house, he came down to the kitchen and was heard on the 911 tape in the background.
I do not think BR played any part at all in the staging. That was ALL the parents and I believe both took part.
I have an alternate theory which involves BR and JAR and possibly DS.

Oh, DD, exactly. Is that any different from what I had theorized? Just add in one other little possibility:

Imagine that the two of them had also first played the little game mentioned recently on here of BR leading her around with a “leash”, as they had done before. Then imagine if he wanted to keep her in one place -- the “leash” would have to be secured to some rigid object. Then play out the rest of your scenario above and you have just about the same conclusion I came to. The strangulation and the head bash so close together that the coroner couldn’t determine which came first or which one actually caused her death.

And also imagine that, after being sent to his room, BR walks in on a 911-call and hears his frantic mother say something about “There’s a ransom note here!” So... puzzled, he waits until the phone is hung up (presumably) and says, “What did you find?” (And the answer of course was, “We’re not speaking to you.”)
.

 

[Whaleshark]

....Leash scenario also gives you a reason for a whittled handle on the end of the rope, doesn't it? And the more she pulls, the more it inadvertently chokes her....

See, when you consider the possibilities, not just over-simplify or eliminate on what you 'believe', you can see all the options (complex or not) there could be....

 

[Chrishope]

He did hit JB in the head (face, actually) with a golf club. Patsy took her to a hospital and she saw a plastic surgeon for that.

BR & JB had been caught on more than one occasion "playing doctor". On one occasion, the housekeeper found them under a blanket in his room (with a flashlight?) and both kids were irate upon being "discovered". The shouted at the housekeeper to "get OUT".
When I first started here, there was a poster called "Blue Crab" who was a firm BDI. I wasn't, as a matter of fact, BR was the last person I had on my short list, Patsy, JR, JAR and DP being also on it. But as the years have gone and different theories and come and go, I definitely moved BR up a few notches on that list. It fits some pieces of the puzzle together for me- the biggest piece is WHY Patsy would write that note (because she surely did) and why parents would cover up this crime. I can think of NO one else, not even DP, who would have gotten such a pass. But I can see them covering up for their son(s).
I think BR could have bashed her on the head when she screamed because he panicked and wanted to shut her up fast. If they were "playing doctor" in a dark room, the flashlight may have been right there. Having silenced her, she would have crumpled to the floor, possibly having a seizure, and never regained consciousness again. Hearing the scream (which tests showed COULD be heard from the parents' third-floor bedroom, even from the basement but especially if it happened on the first or second floor) and when they came running they found an unconscious dying JB. They sent BR to his room and told him to stay there until they came for him, and he complied, not realizing how seriously he had hurt his sister. When he heard them than morning yelling "help me Jesus" etc and running around the house, he came down to the kitchen and was heard on the 911 tape in the background.
I do not think BR played any part at all in the staging. That was ALL the parents and I believe both took part.
I have an alternate theory which involves BR and JAR and possibly DS.

Possible. I've always had a problem with BDI and I still do.

First, under a BDI theory such as yours, only one parent - the chronic molester- has any motive for staging a crime scene. Let's assume the chronic molester is JR, for the sake of discussion. I've always had a problem with the notion that PR goes along with the scheme.

So we have at a minimum one innocent parent - e.g. one who never harmed JBR and who has no motive for a coverup. Possibly we have two parents in this category because we do not know that it was JR who was the chronic molester, or even the acute molester. Why would one go along? And certainly if they were both innocent, neither would stage a crime scene.

Of course now is the time when BDIs suggest it was done to "protect" Burke. Burke of course if facing absolutely no criminal charges of any kind. The usual response is that they did it because of their image, (which is a complete change of motive from protecting BR) but their image is totally shot by everyone's hinky meter telling them the Rs are involved. No face has been saved, no image protected. No "good name" is retained. Plus, they staged in a way that most of us think clearly implicates them, begging the question - do parents actually run the risk of being charged with murder to "protect" BR from - nothing? Do they run the risk of life in prison (DP was a technical possibility but unlikely) to protect their "image"? Seems unlikely to me.

If we back up to the point where one innocent parent learns of JB's injury, the most likely response is not to agree to help stage a coverup, the most likely response is to call 911 even if one is pretty sure the child is dead. Maybe, just maybe, something can be done? At least that would be the hope of an innocent parent.

And how does the conversation between JR and PR go? "Dear, I've been diddling our daughter for quite some time, and if we call 911 now, well, I'll go to jail. So, how about we stage an intruder/kidnapping gone bad/murder ?" "Ok dear, whatever you say". I realize this is just made up but I'm asking BDI theorists to really think about the conversation and why PR would agree to go along with this?

Of course you can assume both parents have a strong motive for covering up, but then what is PR's motive exactly? If she's the molester and JR is innocent then we're right back where we started.

Then there are technical details. If the flashlight was the weapon used to crack JB's skull then do we think BR was actually strong enough to swing a flashlight hard enough to cause an 8.5 inch crack in the skull? Did Burke also do the strangulation -separate from the staged garrotte?

If BR didn't do the strangulation, and the strangulation and blow to the head came very close in time to each other this means the Rs went very quickly from discovering "accidentally caused" injuries to wrapping a cord around their daughters neck. Of course one need not accept that the two injuries occurred close in time, but if one does, then the Rs went almost immediately into the "plan". Could they have devised even a small portion of the plan that quickly?

Far from fitting the evidence, BDI always seemed -and still does- the most improbable of all RDI theories.

 

[Chrishope]

....Leash scenario also gives you a reason for a whittled handle on the end of the rope, doesn't it? And the more she pulls, the more it inadvertently chokes her....

See, when you consider the possibilities, not just over-simplify or eliminate on what you 'believe', you can see all the options (complex or not) there could be....

We shouldn't dismiss this out of hand, but it does require that two sleep kid who had already had a big day got up while their parents slept (or at least went to another part of the house while the parents did -whatever) and played this dog on a leash game. Just seems an unlikely time of night to be playing this.

 

[Whaleshark]

We shouldn't dismiss this out of hand, but it does require that two sleep kid who had already had a big day got up while their parents slept (or at least went to another part of the house while the parents did -whatever) and played this dog on a leash game. Just seems an unlikely time of night to be playing this.

Not if you recall that John Ramsey said he was up putting a toy together with Burke....

Not if you consider that they may not have gone to bed right away when they got home.... Most likely if Burke wants to stay up and play, so does Jonbenet...

And I find your replies dismissing the BDI scenario as falling victim to the same over-simplification that UKGuy often does...

And it didn't have to be one or the other as far as protecting Burke and the Ramsey reputation.... It could be both. And it WAS a big deal - the Ramsey name: this is a man who has run for public office, a family who opens their million dollar home up for public holiday tours, the winner of american beauty pageants, the owner of a billion dollar business, a family so important they have holiday newsletters, and a ransom note that alludes to the 'importance' of this family and business - so important that we are to expect their child would be ransomed for money by a group that respected John's business. Imagine this - even while dealing with the traumatic death of your child and trying to come up with a plausible scenario to explain what happened, and point guilt away from your family... You are of the mindset to state in the ransom note you are devising that the kidnapper 'respects your business'.... Now WHY at this
Moment are these words important or pertinent, at all, for the kidnapping? In fact, not only is this concern not to be dismissed, it is to be very carefully considered as a huge
Part of the motive of the MO of this cover up, including most defensive actions by the Rs that followed....

You make a grave mistake when you discount and scoff at this. It is of the utmost importance - to protect their reputation at all costs...

 

[Chrishope]

Not if you recall that John Ramsey said he was up putting a toy together with Burke....

Not if you consider that they may not have gone to bed right away when they got home.... Most likely if Burke wants to stay up and play, so does Jonbenet...

And I find your replies dismissing the BDI scenario as falling victim to the same over-simplification that UKGuy often does...

And it didn't have to be one or the other as far as protecting Burke and the Ramsey reputation.... It could be both. And it WAS a big deal - the Ramsey name: this is a man who has run for public office, a family who opens their million dollar home up for public holiday tours, the winner of american beauty pageants, the owner of a billion dollar business, a family so important they have holiday newsletters, and a ransom note that alludes to the 'importance' of this family and business - so important that we are to expect their child would be ransomed for money by a group that respected John's business. Imagine this - even while dealing with the traumatic death of your child and trying to come up with a plausible scenario to explain what happened, and point guilt away from your family... You are of the mindset to state in the ransom note you are devising that the kidnapper 'respects your business'.... Now WHY at this
Moment are these words important or pertinent, at all, for the kidnapping? In fact, not only is this concern not to be dismissed, it is to be very carefully considered as a huge
Part of the motive of the MO of this cover up, including most defensive actions by the Rs that followed....

You make a grave mistake when you discount and scoff at this. It is of the utmost importance - to protect their reputation at all costs...

Respectfully I think you are the one oversimplifying. The Rs were prominent, yes. Does that mean they were willing to risk life in prison to protect their "image"? I doubt it. And you seem to have not noticed that their "image" is irreparably damaged by suspicion anyway. Doing all this to protect their image doesn't ring true to me.

 

[Whaleshark]

I don't understand what you are saying exactly --

if they had called 911 for whatever really happened - child abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and/or maybe something that went wrong with Burke would obviously have been more of a risk to go to prison than what they decided to do instead.

They did what they did to avoid going to prison. And it worked.

I don't follow your logic. Because that argument is for IDI, but you, I thought, were RDI. So, I am not sure what you are saying..it's like it discounts your own argument...

 

[Noodles]

I swear you folks amaze me here with your knowledge of this case.


Has anyone speculated as to what was going on with the 911 call made during the R's party on Dec 23? I have been re-reading a boatload of stuff today and totally forgot about it. The caller didnt say anything and hung up. When police called back, they got the R's machine. When they went to investigate (stayed about 10minutes) they were told everything was ok. I dont recall reading much about this...anyone?

 

[Chrishope]

I don't understand what you are saying exactly --

if they had called 911 for whatever really happened - child abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and/or maybe something that went wrong with Burke would obviously have been more of a risk to go to prison than what they decided to do instead.

They did what they did to avoid going to prison. And it worked.

I don't follow your logic. Because that argument is for IDI, but you, I thought, were RDI. So, I am not sure what you are saying..it's like it discounts your own argument...

Yes, I'm RDI - all the way. Have been from the get go and see no reason at all to put any stock in IDI.

if they had called 911 for whatever really happened - child abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and/or maybe something that went wrong with Burke would obviously have been more of a risk to go to prison than what they decided to do instead.

No we are both confused because I'm not sure what you are saying.

Let me try to make my point again.

If BDI, then BR is not facing any form of punishment from the criminal justice system. So there is no need for protection in any legal sense.

If BDI, then the evidence, prior to any staging and manipulation, would point pretty clearly at BDI.

By doing the staging it certainly makes it look (to those who've studied the case in some detail, and probably to the police as well) as if the Rs had killed their daughter and staged a cover-up.

So, by attempting to stage the crime scene, converting it from obviously BDI to the mish-mash that makes it look as if they were responsible, they run the risk of life in prison.

What benefit is worth life in prison? I suppose it's up to the individual. Some people go to prison for life for 3 small drug busts, or robbing a gas station with a gun, etc. But the Rs are not low level street criminals or drug addicts. They would do a cost-benefit analysis, in a casual way (though I imagine JR has done very formal cost-benefit analysis in his business) They would ask themselves if protecting the family name and public image are worth the risk of life imprisonment. Given the kind of people they are I'm suggesting they'd opt to deal the the embarrassment of Burke killing his sister, more or less accidentally.

Now, up to this point, I've suggested a scenario in which BDI, and the Rs are innocent of both killing and molesting JB. Under this scenario, I don't think there is any doubt that the parents call 911, hoping against hope that paramedics can do something for their daughter. They'll deal with the fact that BR killed JB after they get help for JB. All they'd be calling for in this scenario is medical assistance. Paramedics most likely would call the police, once they saw the injuries, but again, the evidence at this point shows BDI and life in prison isn't worth risking when BR is not in danger from the justice system.

Of course what we actually have is some evidence of JB being chronically molested, as well as digitally molested the night of her death. This has led many to speculate that one parent (most likely JR, but not ruling out PR) was the molester, and therefore had a motive for a cover up. In fact, w/o the evidence of molestation, BDI is absurd on the face of it.

My opinion is that even with molestation, there are real problems making sense of BDI.

One problem is JR getting PR to go along with the coverup. (Or the other way around if you prefer to think of PR as the molester - I'm going to proceed with JR as molester, but it works the same) What reason does PR have for going along with this? PR would know at this point that BR did it, so JR would have to talk her into a cover up when the logical course of action is to call 911. Why would she agree to this?

Other BDI scenarios suggest BR did the molesting. So then the question is why either parent is motivated to do all that staging which tends to make them look guilty of murder? Again, the family name and public reputation is not worth a lifetime in prison. And again, Burke cannot be charged with a crime.

I have not yet heard of a scenario where both parents were molesting JB, but I suppose it's possible. Now the question would be do you risk being charged with murder, or do you accept you might be charged with child molesting, which carries a considerably shorter sentence?

if they had called 911 for whatever really happened - child abuse, physical abuse, sexual abuse, and/or maybe something that went wrong with Burke would obviously have been more of a risk to go to prison than what they decided to do instead.

The risk of going to prison depends on the BDI scenario you prefer. In the scenarios where BR did the molesting, or where only one parent did the molesting, the "innocent" parent is running a very substantial risk of being charged as an accomplice in a murder as opposed to - Nothing. No involvement. No charges.

The "guilty" parent, the one having done the molesting, probably knows he'll ( or she) be charged with molestation, but that is still preferable to murder.

The only sense I can make of your statement above is that they must have been very sure that their staging would work. As it actually did work, they avoided prison - they avoided any charges of any kind.

But they have not protected their public image. So the whole idea that they would do "anything" to protect their image is undercut by the fact that at least half the people in Boulder figure the Rs were in on the crime to some extent.

As far as I'm concerned the only thing BDI has going for it is that it supplies an otherwise missing motive for the parents behavior. If Burke didn't do it, why the staging? Why the cover up? Why are both parents in on it when only one really has any motive for a cover up? BDI answers these questions but at the same time ignores the questions I've asked. -Why does the "innocent" parent go along with the "guilty" parent to stage a kidnap/murder? Or if BR is the molester why do both parents stage a kidnap murder? Would you rather have friends and family wonder if you 'd killed your daughter, or would you rather deal with the repercussions of a case of sibling rivalry (or maybe just a game) that got out of hand?

IMO BDI makes very little sense under any scenario. What it does do is give us an explanation as to why both parents are involved in a cover up, but only by assuming the Rs would run risks out of all proportion to the desired benefits - benefits they don't enjoy anyway.

 

[otg]

I doubt they knew that, because the fact that he was just shy of ten-years-old, felony charges could not be filed due to the laws of the state of Colorado. The age varies from state to state. Does anyone here know the age in his or her own state?

As to their risking the media firestorm and public scorn that resulted... I'm sure that neither they nor anyone else foresaw that.
.

 

[Chrishope]

I doubt they knew that, because the fact that he was just shy of ten-years-old, felony charges could not be filed due to the laws of the state of Colorado. The age varies from state to state. Does anyone here know the age in his or her own state?

As to their risking the media firestorm and public scorn that resulted... I'm sure that neither they nor anyone else foresaw that.
.

It's a fair point. I don't know, off the top of my head, what the age is in my state. But if my 9 year old killed my 6 year old, I'd assume a very lenient sentence even if charges could be brought. I'd find it unlikely that my 9 year old would go to prison for life.

I'd be more accepting of BDI if I thought the Rs were genuinely fearful of BR going to prison or some sort of reformatory. But even under that scenario, if the Rs themselves go to prison, what has been gained? BR grows up w/o parents. With the Rs money I don't doubt they'd have been able to make things as easy as possible for Burke. I still have a hard time believing they'd risk life in the pen to keep BR out of a juvenile institution. Besides, aren't juvenile offenders usually released at age 18?

This also makes me wonder about the missing phone records. If calls were made, as some speculate, surely one of the first pieces of info given the Rs is that BR was in no danger from the law.

 

[Whaleshark]

Chrishope,

Ok, I know what you're saying now... but I don't totally agree.

To say that the staging would make them look more like they did the murder.. well, yeah, that's how it turned out, anyway though.... But the point of staging is to TRY and point the guilt away from oneself... and what other options did they have really, once they decided to go that route? I mean, obviously they DID try staging, cuz that's what they did and you agree it's RDI.. that's why it's confusing to follow your points sometimes..because if you believe they staged all that, and it still made it obvious that they are guilty, then why ask the question why they would stage and make themselves look guilty? On Christmas night, no stores open, no one else at the house, no other people there to blame, and no other people's items or DNA they can use at that moment to say belonged to an intruder - if they don't want to call 911 and explain, then they have to stage, in order to point the finger away.. but they will still look guilty because they are forced to use their own tools, household items, pens, papers, weapons, etc.... What else are they going to do, or where are they going to go for strange items on Xmas night?

So your points are you don't think they should have had anything to worry about if BDI did it, and would have called 911 no matter what, if so, because:

1) They may or may not have know the age at which he could have been charged, and probably did, if they were making calls in the night..

2) If he did it, they wouldn't have staged and covered up for him, pointed to themselves, and risked prison....

So, but, a couple things on this: I feel like you are missing your own fallacy of logic here - they staged anyway - which you agree to, since you are RDI. So, even if it wasn't to risk prison by covering up for Burke, they still staged, and risked looking guilty of murder through the staging - which they did, and they do. ... So, that didn't change anyway.
(But again, once they were blaming someone else, what choice did they have?)....

Also, whether or not Burke could have been charged/tried, and whether or not they did know that -- I am still going to have to disagree with you then on the gravity of everything they had to potentially lose - yes, their reputation is hindered either way. It was going to be forever changed, though, no matter what, now that their daughter is murdered, or died, mysteriously, and so violently.
Rather blame a kidnapper and be suspected, than remove all doubt.
And, yep, I think it was that important: not only their ruined reputation, and if it was Burke, their son possibly being blamed for molesting and murdering their daughter... wealth and status and money to lose...

Point of no return or lesser of two evils - I think it did matter. Again, if it didn't, there would be no allusion to 'respecting John's business' in the ransom note by the kidnapper, molester, and murderer of their child.

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,

Ok, I know what you're saying now... but I don't totally agree.

To say that the staging would make them look more like they did the murder.. well, yeah, that's how it turned out, anyway though.... But the point of staging is to TRY and point the guilt away from oneself... and what other options did they have really, once they decided to go that route? I mean, obviously they DID try staging, cuz that's what they did and you agree it's RDI.. that's why it's confusing to follow your points sometimes..because if you believe they staged all that, and it still made it obvious that they are guilty, then why ask the question why they would stage and make themselves look guilty?

On Christmas night, no stores open, no one else at the house, no other people there to blame, and no other people's items or DNA they can use at that moment to say belonged to an intruder - if they don't want to call 911 and explain, then they have to stage, in order to point the finger away.. but they will still look guilty because they are forced to use their own tools, household items, pens, papers, weapons, etc.... What else are they going to do, or where are they going to go for strange items on Xmas night?

I think this answers your question above. If all they have to work with is stuff from their own house, and no evidence of an intruder, it's bound to make them look guilty. It's quite a risk to take.

So your points are you don't think they should have had anything to worry about if BDI did it, and would have called 911 no matter what, if so, because:

1) They may or may not have know the age at which he could have been charged, and probably did, if they were making calls in the night..

2) If he did it, they wouldn't have staged and covered up for him, pointed to themselves, and risked prison....

Right.

So, but, a couple things on this: I feel like you are missing your own fallacy of logic here - they staged anyway - which you agree to, since you are RDI. So, even if it wasn't to risk prison by covering up for Burke, they still staged, and risked looking guilty of murder through the staging - which they did, and they do. ... So, that didn't change anyway.
(But again, once they were blaming someone else, what choice did they have?)....

Right they staged anyway. So IMO they did it to cover themselves, not to protect Burke or to protect the family name. They killed JB, and the staging was the only chance they had of altering the evidence so that it was less clearly pointing at them. IMO the fact that they staged is a strong indication that it's not BDI.

Also, whether or not Burke could have been charged/tried, and whether or not they did know that -- I am still going to have to disagree with you then on the gravity of everything they had to potentially lose - yes, their reputation is hindered either way. It was going to be forever changed, though, no matter what, now that their daughter is murdered, or died, mysteriously, and so violently.
Rather blame a kidnapper and be suspected, than remove all doubt.
And, yep, I think it was that important: not only their ruined reputation, and if it was Burke, their son possibly being blamed for molesting and murdering their daughter... wealth and status and money to lose...

As far as I can see JR is still pretty wealthy, so not much money lost. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree - I just don't see someone risking life behind bars to protect their son from being exposed as an "accidental" killer. He was 9 at the time. They could have passed it off as sibling rivalry that got out of hand. Plus if they go to prison, they effectively loose Burke anyway -except for the occasional prison visit.

Point of no return or lesser of two evils - I think it did matter. Again, if it didn't, there would be no allusion to 'respecting John's business' in the ransom note by the kidnapper, molester, and murderer of their child.

I'm sorry, I'm not following this last statement.