Christmas Morning Picture of Burke and JB...

[BOESP]

me too,although I don't think JAR had anything to do w. her death.
what nags me the most is Mark Fuhrman's comment that it was no accident...that really,really nags me,kwim? I mean I just think he's smart enough and experienced enough to not be wrong about that.

He also believes it was an inside job.

Was Fuhrman ever clear about why he thought it wasn't an accident? Did Fuhrman have access to the evidence? (I'm worse than a two-year-old for asking questions. :blushing

 

[JMO8778]

Was Fuhrman ever clear about why he thought it wasn't an accident? Did Fuhrman have access to the evidence? (I'm worse than a two-year-old for asking questions. :blushing

he didn't elaborate,but he seems to dispute the accident theory,and I don't think he means the ligature strangulation,b/c of course that was no accident.
I don't know if he had any more access to evidence than we the public have.But I'm guessing just from what's there,he can put together a pretty accurate timeline of events,and possibly a lot of insight as to why it happened.
I think part of it may be due to the head wound being as severe as it was,from the looks of it,that causes him to say it was no accident,it was quite intentional.I wonder if that suggests she was hit intentionally with an object,with intent to kill,and not just slammed against the side of the tub or sink,thus 'accidently' killing her.I have a hard time with that one,I really do,due to there being so much overkill to it.(IMO).

 

[trixie]

Was Fuhrman ever clear about why he thought it wasn't an accident? Did Fuhrman have access to the evidence? (I'm worse than a two-year-old for asking questions. :blushing

Seems like I remember a chat or something where Steve Thomas had said he went over this case with Mark Fuhrman. They are reportedly buddys.

 

[BOESP]

Seems like I remember a chat or something where Steve Thomas had said he went over this case with Mark Fuhrman. They are reportedly buddys.

Thanks, Trixie.

 

[Ames]

Thanks. I appreciate the response. I'm like you, I waffle from day to day on some of the details but I'm firmly convinced John and Patsy know what happened, how it happened, and why.

Interestingly, I have a close friend who is a regional director for child protective services. About two weeks after JonBenet died we were talking and I asked my friend what she thought happened. Without hesitation, she said (or words to this effect), "I'd bet the mother found the father playing around with the little girl and aimed at him and hit the child."

I don't know if I buy the scenerio of Patsy aiming for John, but hitting JB instead....John is a much bigger target....how in the world could she have missed him??

 

[BOESP]

I don't know if I buy the scenerio of Patsy aiming for John, but hitting JB instead....John is a much bigger target....how in the world could she have missed him??

My friend and I talked about that. Her speculation was the mother went into the room with the flashlight during the nightly "potty run," saw what was going on, went into a rage, aimed at the father's head and the father turned or arose. At that moment, the momentum from swinging the flashlight was in force and JonBenet was hit instead because the original target (the father) moved. This conversation was only a couple of weeks after JonBenet died so there wasn't much for outsiders to go on - we were just brainstorming because of mutual interest in these type things.

Remember, this was my friend's first speculation, not mine, and we were bouncing around ideas, so I can only address what we discussed. If you want me to ask her a specific question, just let me know. Her second idea was bed-wetting rage (this was long before Steve Thomas wrote his book). She told me bed-wetting is a common precursor to the rage that precipitates many cases of child abuse, particularly with over-stressed mothers who would not otherwise lay a hand on a child. At the time (January 1997) I told my friend that my suspicions were on the father being the killer or else the sibling was involved and both parents were protecting him. As you know, no one yet really knows and we were just two friends discussing something dear to our hearts - child protection.

I still think Steve Thomas knows of evidence that led him to conclude Patsy may have done this in a rage. Thomas's opinion, coupled with the skills I know my friend has in this area, makes me lean toward Patsy. I just wish we had access to the evidence locker.

 

[BOESP]

I don't know if I buy the scenerio of Patsy aiming for John, but hitting JB instead....John is a much bigger target....how in the world could she have missed him??

Too late to edit my earlier post but I've changed my mind several times over the years. After getting to see the autopsy report and photos, I think the head wound indicates a low velocity/high pressure injury, so I don't think the swinging of a flashlight alone did it.

 

[JMO8778]

Seems like I remember a chat or something where Steve Thomas had said he went over this case with Mark Fuhrman. They are reportedly buddys.

..the difference bet. the 2 is that ST says 'accident',and MF's comment was,'no accident,quite intentional'.so I don't understand that.

 

[Ames]

My friend and I talked about that. Her speculation was the mother went into the room with the flashlight during the nightly "potty run," saw what was going on, went into a rage, aimed at the father's head and the father turned or arose. At that moment, the momentum from swinging the flashlight was in force and JonBenet was hit instead because the original target (the father) moved. This conversation was only a couple of weeks after JonBenet died so there wasn't much for outsiders to go on - we were just brainstorming because of mutual interest in these type things.

Remember, this was my friend's first speculation, not mine, and we were bouncing around ideas, so I can only address what we discussed. If you want me to ask her a specific question, just let me know. Her second idea was bed-wetting rage (this was long before Steve Thomas wrote his book). She told me bed-wetting is a common precursor to the rage that precipitates many cases of child abuse, particularly with over-stressed mothers who would not otherwise lay a hand on a child. At the time (January 1997) I told my friend that my suspicions were on the father being the killer or else the sibling was involved and both parents were protecting him. As you know, no one yet really knows and we were just two friends discussing something dear to our hearts - child protection.

I still think Steve Thomas knows of evidence that led him to conclude Patsy may have done this in a rage. Thomas's opinion, coupled with the skills I know my friend has in this area, makes me lean toward Patsy. I just wish we had access to the evidence locker.

I have always, from the first time that I heard of this case....right after it happened, have thought that it was a bedwetting issue. I am not an expert though, in child abuse. I just couldn't imagine John, having a long Christmas day, going to the party, and having to get up very early in the morning....and with Patsy in the house....would have molested JB (that particular night, anyway). And if Patsy had left....how did John know WHEN she would return....I think that it would have been a "bit" risky for him to take that time to molest JB, when Patsy was either STILL in the house (which I would imagine that she would have been at 10:00 pm, and had to get up early the next morning....I do NOT believe, however, that she was packing for the trip....she wouldn't have waited until that NIGHT to do the packing, it would have been done beforehand) or if she had left, and he had no idea when she would return. I don't buy the John molesting JB theory, anyway. I hate to be graphic, and maybe your friend has already told you this, but...I know a lady that works with sexually abused children and she said...that little boys and girls that are molested repeatedly....(this is graphic....stop reading if you are grossed out easily).....grow hair, on their private parts. I guess its from the hormones that comes from being molested by a male, if you know what I mean. Anyway, I am talking LITTLE KIDS....3,4,5 years old. Pitiful....I know.

 

[Ames]

Too late to edit my earlier post but I've changed my mind several times over the years. After getting to see the autopsy report and photos, I think the head wound indicates a low velocity/high pressure injury, so I don't think the swinging of a flashlight alone did it.

Not unless Patsy was the Incredible Hulk.

 

[JMO8778]

I think it's much more likely Patsy got angry for a specific reason and deliberately killed her for that,rather than just anger over toileting issues.she knew JB had those.it seems whatever prompted her was sudden and surprising,IMO.
If JR did molest her that night,it would have also been his last chance to do so b/f the trip..I'm also suspect of the so called Santa visit...JR was the one calling himself Santa (in DOI).
If Patsy left,she may not have been gone long,or as long as JR thought she would be.She may have said she would be back at a certain time,and came back sooner.

 

[DeeDee249]

JMO, do you recall the blanket/bedspread that was stuffed in the suitcase found below the basement window? Was it off John Andrew's bed?

This was described as a "comforter" from JAR's bed. It MAY have been described as a comforter he took to college (for his bed in the dorm). It was found to have traces of JAR's semen on it. This, and the Dr.Seuss children's book, were the sole contents of the suitcase. One of JBR's hairs was found on that blanket, wasn't it?

 

[DeeDee249]

I waffle between thinking that PR DID swing at JR and hit her daughter by mistake- that would certainly give both PR & JR a reason to cover for each other. OR the head bash came as a knee-jerk reaction to silence her quickly when she screamed from a painful molestation. As I run this through my mind I imagine someone taking JB(awake) to the basement for the molestation while using the flashlight to get around in the dark. A neighbor reported seeing "strange moving lights" in the kitchen. This would be consistant with walking around with the flashlight, and being in the kitchen area is consistent with the pineapple snack being consumed at that time, which is consistent with the autopsy report of the approximate time the pineapple was eaten before death. When they get to the basement (JBR & her molester/killer) the killer is still holding the flashlight, but I would think they would have to put it down, because it would be difficult to molest a child while holding it. So she is molested- and screams. To silence her, she is bashed on the head. The killer has to then pick up the flashlight to do this.
There is also a log grabber shown clearly on the floor of the wineceller, right next to where the body (supposedly) was. These are included in nearly all sets of fireplace tools, including mine, and it is the heaviest of all the tools in the set (shovel, broom, poker). It would ABSOLUTELY be capable of punching a hole in a skull if swung, and it probably wouldn't take a tremendous amount of force to do it.
Anybody know how closely that log grabber was looked at by LE? Because I don't recall seeing a log grabber mentioned at all as far as forensic tests.

 

[BOESP]

This was described as a "comforter" from JAR's bed. It MAY have been described as a comforter he took to college (for his bed in the dorm). It was found to have traces of JAR's semen on it. This, and the Dr.Seuss children's book, were the sole contents of the suitcase. One of JBR's hairs was found on that blanket, wasn't it?

I have heard a hair was found but don't know for sure. A child's book and a soiled comforter, in a suitcase, in the basement makes an interesting combination.

Didn't Patsy say she had been in JAR's bedroom packing clothing for the trip? I'm thinking she said this during the same interview where she stated the dust ruffle on JAR's bed looked like someone had crawled out from under the bed. I always thought that observation was a little off because photos of bed and dust ruffle on JonBenet's bed looked like someone could have crawled out from under it too. I'd say the toes of someone's feet could also get caught as they faced the bed, thus pulling the dust ruffle askew as the stepped away from the bed.

 

[Ames]

I think it's much more likely Patsy got angry for a specific reason and deliberately killed her for that,rather than just anger over toileting issues.she knew JB had those.it seems whatever prompted her was sudden and surprising,IMO.
If JR did molest her that night,it would have also been his last chance to do so b/f the trip..I'm also suspect of the so called Santa visit...JR was the one calling himself Santa (in DOI).
If Patsy left,she may not have been gone long,or as long as JR thought she would be.She may have said she would be back at a certain time,and came back sooner.

They had a trip to go on the next morning, where could Patsy possibly have went, that late at night....they didn't get home until 10:00, and had to get the kids in bed, and then get up real early for their trip. I don't believe that she went anywhere that night...this whole case makes no sense...but, her leaving at 10:00 pm, just when she got home from party, and was exhausted from the days activities...makes even lesser sense. IMO

 

[rashomon]

me too,although I don't think JAR had anything to do w. her death.
what nags me the most is Mark Fuhrman's comment that it was no accident...that really,really nags me,kwim? I mean I just think he's smart enough and experienced enough to not be wrong about that.

He also believes it was an inside job.

It would be interesting to know how Fuhrman defines 'accident'. A rage attack for example, while not premeditated, is no accident either. A person in a rage strikes out intentionally, although (in most cases) not with the intention to kill.

 

[Ames]

It would be interesting to know how Fuhrman defines 'accident'. A rage attack for example, while not premeditated, is no accident either. A a person in a rage strikes out intentionally, although (in most cases) not with the intention to kill.

I agree. An accident would be her accidently falling down the stairs, or slipping in the bathtub. Flying into a rage, and harming someone...although unintentionally....is NO accident. Let's say..there is an argument between a man and his wife, one of them "flies into a rage"...and shoots or stabs the other one, and kills them...unintentionally. Is THAT an accident? No...its not. Now, if a man was running through the house, with a knife...and falls on it...accidently...then THAT is an accident.

 

[DeeDee249]

It's such a fuzzy area. But consider this...a mother flying into a rage and slamming her child into the edge of a tub or sink or faucet....and the child dies as a result. Accident? Yes and no. The slamming was NOT an accident. But the death WAS in the sense that the slamming was not done intentionally to kill her.

 

[Ames]

It's such a fuzzy area. But consider this...a mother flying into a rage and slamming her child into the edge of a tub or sink or faucet....and the child dies as a result. Accident? Yes and no. The slamming was NOT an accident. But the death WAS in the sense that the slamming was not done intentionally to kill her.

I just believe thats what MF meant when he said that it was No accident....that it wasn't a slip in the tub, or a fall down the steps.

 

[DeeDee249]

Oh, yes, that's probably right. I know there is some conjecture that maybe she was slammed accidentally in a rage. But honestly, that skull fracture is SO massive I just can't see it happening that way. Unless she fell from a great distance. Or down those spiral stairs. But then there'd be lots of bruising, and possibly other broken or fractured bones.
No, I believe she was bashed. Either with the huge flashlight, golf club, baseball bat or ....(and this really intrigues me) the log grabber that appears on the floor near where the body was in the crime scene photos of the wineceller.