I understand you very well. I'm new on commenting here (or anywhere really), so it's been quite easy for me to misunderstand something or feel misunderstood myself, or like I have to defend myself, unfortunately. I'm sorry for that. I know we are all here for the same reason and I'm happy to be part of this great community. Thank you and happy new year to you and all the members here!
But maybe not if he is wired with that kind of mental illness…
I have grabbed a bowl/glass out of the dishwasher only to find out the DW hadn't been run. Not hard to do by accident and probably less so for a kid.
I was thinking the same thing. A bowl that had been rinsed so it could be mistaken as clean.
When Det.Shuler interviewed him. the information he revealed just about his 2 knives was enough to get your attention. I'm not sure why he wasn't under more suspicion.
You seem to over look the part where he explains the knife " has a little thing that you tie knots better with".
If you attribute all those characteristics to John, I bet many would think of it as a clear sign of him being involved. But indeed, somehow when we are talking about Burke, there are those who suddenly see him as not capable of doing anything like that, or even if he said and did all that, it sure is not significant and is not connected to the crime. And there is no logic or reasoning why so, it is just because. IMO. Sadly...
Anyone who knew how to tie their shoes could've tied those knots.
My cardigan fibers were tied to my daughters scrunchie - does that mean that I must have been the one who did her hair? No, it does not. I found my daughters hair on my bathrobe yesterday - does that mean that she must have worn my bathrobe at some point? No it doesn't. Finding someone's fibers or hairs around the house where all the family lives is not significant. Fibers, hairs and DNA are easily transferred - it only proves that those people were living in the same house, nothing more. And it certainly is not any solid proof to link someone to anything. I have already expressed my thoughts about how those fibers could have innocently transferred into the knot on another comment or two, so I'm not going to to that again.
If Burke was not present when the crime scene was staged and had no contact with JBs body, his fibers to not need to be on JB's body or on the elements of staging.
I have already expressed my opinion on that matter many times.
Yes, I believe it was an accident caused by Burke. I believe that his parents did all the staging and that no additional SA happened during the staging. I have already expressed my opinion on that matter many times.
couldn't Burke have done all of those?
Patsy's fibers are in the ligature knot and John's fibers link him to SA. There is ZERO evidence linking Burke. How does Burke not leave his own evidence? How do JR and PR attempt to stage Burke out but manage to leave their own evidence? Do the parents want people to believe JR and PR bludgeoned, object raped and strangled JBR?
