Burke did NOT kill JonBenet

[ILikeToBendPages]

Looks royal blue to me.

Vintage 1994 Flintstone kids pj.

 

[Meara]

Yes, they believe someone wiped her after a sexual assault. The panties she'd gone to bed in were gone and she was in the large panties with the long johns back on her body.

The fibers are thought to be from whatever the killer used to wipe her with. And the fibers matched a new sweater JR had received as a gift but hadn't yet worn. But fiber technology isn't exact and those fibers on her crotch would also match millions of other pieces of clothing made from black wool.

Plus, there was none of JBR's DNA on JR's sweater, and had she been wiped with that -- there should have been.

GRT, I'm seeing another set of possibilities. Let's say for the moment that JR is the one who wiped JBR down. We don't know what he used for that purpose, but it wasn't necessarily his wool shirt. Here's why. Knitted woolen garments shed fine fibers, especially when they're new; and we're told John's shirt was brand new. If he wore the shirt during the wiping down, wool fibers could have fallen onto JBR or become attached to whatever item was used and then transferred to JBR. But even if he wasn't wearing the wool shirt, he would still have had fibers on his skin and/or whatever top he was wearing that could be shed onto JBR or transferred. If both things are true - that JR used something other than his shirt to wipe down JBR and was shedding wool fibers - this would explain why his shirt fibers were found in her crotch, but her DNA was not found on his shirt. In fact, I'd say the absence of her DNA on his shirt increases the odds that he used some other item to wipe her down and was wearing something else when he did it. But, it's been a while since I last reviewed all the details about the wiping down. If there's anything that rules out the possibilities I've described, please let me know.

 

[Meara]

I think that the offender did use gloves and covered his shoes (with a slip when they found heel prints). We also don’t really know if there actually WAS evidence that you mentioned because the crime scene and house was not secured well and I don’t know that I fully blame BPD for that as they just didn’t have the experience. Hindsight is 20/20. So, there are a lot of unanswered questions. Investigators should see themselves as purely data collectors, especially in the initial stages because when you make a theory early on; you’re only going to find data that fits that theory and miss the other data at the scene and leave many questions unanswered. For example, if you do an exercise and have your children count the number of blue cars on the freeway for 5 mins, they will give you an answer at the very end. But, if you ask them how many white cars they saw, they’re not going to have an answer. It’s possible to count both colors of cars, but you will need to be methodical, experienced, and capable. I actually am undecided on my stance as to who did what. But, have yet to see evidence that cannot be explained away.

You make good points, and very well. It reminded me, though, that BPD called in the FBI straightaway, since kidnapping is a federal crime, and the FBI are the experts; but when Special Agent Ron Walker assessed the evidence and circumstances he didn't think there had been a kidnapping or an intruder. He said, "You're gonna find a body." He was right. That was the first theory, and the data fit. As you say, BPD lacked the experience to handle the crime scene well, and they made many mistakes. But, I think it is to their credit that they considered other theories and investigated many leads and suspects, even though they believed - with good reason - that Ron Walker's theory was the correct one.

 

[proust20]

JonBenet was wiped to remove evidence. But of what?

 

[Swirlz]

JonBenet was wiped to remove evidence. But of what?

sexual assault

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

There were TWO types of fibers located in association with the sexual assault on JBR, dark blue and dark. The dark blue fibers were described as cotton towel material and the dark fibers were scientifically matched to the sweater John was wearing on the night of the homicide. No fibers were matched to Burke. If John wiped JBR simply to cover for Burke, he managed to completely remove any trace of Burke but was somehow also careless enough to leave his own fibers. This isn't plausible. John didn't cover for Burke. This is not about Burke Ramsey.

Wasn't the whole point of the blue towel to remove evidence?
To say it isn't plausible for JR to remove fibers yet leave his own behind is not . How do you know how much his sweater was shedding as different articles of clothing shed at different rates.

 

[Swirlz]

Wasn't the whole point of the blue towel to remove evidence?

Right, but all of John's evidence wasn't removed so again; in order to believe Burke is responsible for SA, we have to believe John wiped blood out of JBR's vagina thoroughly enough to remove Burke's evidence but not thoroughly enough to remove his own. We also have to believe John was so invested in wanting to protect Burke that he was willing to engage in this particular task on the body of his deceased or unconscious 6 yr. old. And since the underpants were urine soaked, which means she was wearing them when she was strangled; we also have to believe she was already walking around in a pair of size 12 underpants with no one noticing; either that or John wiped her and then called Patsy, who's fibers are in the ligature knot, to come in and help him strangle JBR to death rather than begin resuscitation efforts and call 911. Just so we're clear here on what the Burke theory entails...