Could it be her brother?

[sloane7777]

I just don't agree with that at all. I think that the parents would have reacted and turned their son over to the police knowing what he had done to his baby sister and could have done the same to another person. I understand that they would think about what he did to his little sister... And I would hope they would have made the correct discussion and turn him over to the authorities.

Well they didn't , if that, in fact is the way it happened, Which I think it was , and honestly there are a lot of people who would and DO cover for their firstborn.

 

[owsley]

Most who clear the Ramseys of guilt feel wealth makes people virtuous.

 

[kay74]

kay74,
So explain to everyone how you get from unidentified forensic evidence to Ransey innocence?

Do you reckon an Intruder murdered JonBenet and redressed her in the size-12's on the way out the door?

The broken window and open doors might be staging, e.g. offering an Intruder access narrative?

Why would the Intruder bother waisting time on a ransom note that was never intended to be cashed in?

.

Yes I believe an intruder entered the house while they were at Christmas parties and yes I believe an intruder did this. I think this person listened to patsy talking and mimicked her in that note. Might have been someone who didn't like her or jus made fun of her. The Ramsys were a good family and loved their children. LE should have gotten on this right away instead of focusing on them. That was a true travesty.

 

[sloane7777]

Most who clear the Ramseys of guilt feel wealth makes people virtuous.

I just think wealth = the ability to cover up in most cases , I grew up surrounded by a lot of wealth and let me tell you there was always some shady s@#$ going on , I've never thought that , in fact Ive always thought it the opposite for the most part!

 

[sloane7777]

Most who clear the Ramseys of guilt feel wealth makes people virtuous.

I do think you are right though BTW

 

[UKGuy]

I just think wealth = the ability to cover up in most cases , I grew up surrounded by a lot of wealth and let me tell you there was always some shady s@#$ going on , I've never thought that , in fact Ive always thought it the opposite for the most part!

sloane7777,

I just think wealth = the ability to cover up in most cases

Yes, this is what the Ramsey's did. They just litigated any opposition towards potential bankrupcy.

IMO wealth in the USA is a synonym for class or status, as you do not go in for landed gentry, lords and ladies, knights and dukes, etc.

Titled people in the UK arrived there in the past via claims based on being an illegitimate child, killing the holder, etc. So virtue plays little role in its allocation.

22 Billion Dollars found: Photos of a Mexican drug lord’s home after being raided – Veterans Today | Military Foreign Affairs Policy Journal for Clandestine Services
Has anyone seen the photos of the busted Mexican Drug Cartel that displayed millions of dollars USD taken after they were arrested?

Does the existence of all these Dollars USD mean the members of the Drug Cartel were virtuous people?

.

 

[Nerissa]

look: people can be in total denial of what their darn DOGS did or could do or are capable of....

Imagine it's your child who has done something: And now this child is your only remaining child

And further: you knew the surviving child had issues that were directed to the now deceased child

And you are wealthy. Entitled. Just want to 'move on' like BR said....

You move on

JMO

 

[sloane7777]

look: people can be in total denial of what their darn DOGS did or could do or are capable of....

Imagine it's your child who has done something: And now this child is your only remaining child

And further: you knew the surviving child had issues that were directed to the now deceased child

And you are wealthy. Entitled. Just want to 'move on' like BR said....

You move on

JMO

THIS EXACTLY! have you heard JR making pleas to finally solve his daughters murder? Any From BR? No not even on his Dr Phil Interview , and honestly the parents wouldn't let a child (BR) in on the knowledge that they did it ,So where are the pleas from Burke to find my sisters killer , that's one case for BR did it right there , where are the pleas from JR? they don't exist because he knows BR did it , where are the pleas from BR? they don't exist, not because his parents let him in on the fact that they are murderers , but because he knows what happened he was there and awake as evidenced in the 911 call when he was supposed to be asleep per patsy JMO

 

[DuckDuckGoose]

I'm pasting here from someone else, but this is one of the reasons I think the brother did it.

I don't know why people want to believe that every case has to be something so complicated and bizarre. There was a special on tv a while back that had a bunch of experts go thru the case and they all came to the same conclusion, Burke did it. And when they explain it, it's simple and makes sense.

Burke was eating pineapple and Jon Bennet came over and like a sibling does, grabbed a piece of his out of his bowl. He got mad and grabbed the flashlight off the counter and hit her on the head.

He finished eating his pineapple and when she didn't get up. Then either he told his parents or they came across the situation.

They panicked discovering she was dead and that burke did it. Not thinking clearly they couldn't comprehend what would happen to him if they let him be found guilty of this even if it was accidental.

So they created such an elaborate kidnapping scene hoping it would lead away from him not realizing it would end up making them seem guilty.

As the case led on they continued the whole charade because as parents do, they were doing whatever could b done to protect their other child.

The experts did tests to show that the flashlight found made an almost identical mark as was found on her skull.

From what I've read and heard about burke he seemed like a jealous brat who often tormented his sister.

Seeing the sessions with the therapists, he did not behave like a normal child. He was very odd even back then. Which kinda explains why he may not have ran to his parents right away after hitting her and her not waking up, he had a very nonchalant attitude towards her esp if she was hurt.

All the keeping burke from the police and not letting anyone talk to him for so long afterwards shows they were trying to figure out how to handle the situation and how to prob coach him as to how he would answer questions. The only thing they couldn't coach him on was his acting.

Years later I saw him on dr. Phil and he is just as creepy and weird. They said it was cause he was not used to being on tv or interviewed but I don't buy it. I think he's guilty and the years of covering it up have just added a sociopath attitude towards him and just hope something else never makes him really snap.

 

[Swirlz]

Responding to the post directly above:

Parents kill their children all of the time and that is what I believe happened here. There isn't anything complicated or bizarre about believing that. If you look at statistics, a parent having caused the death is overwhelmingly the most likely explanation.

The CBS series was produced for ratings and entertainment purposes. In real life, the case was investigated by law enforcement. The detectives who investigated the case came to the conclusion that a parent caused the death although they remained divided on which particular parent.

The flashlight belonged to John and was placed in his hand on Dr. Phil.

Burke hit JonBenet once with a golf club 2 yrs. prior to the homicide. All but one family friend who wasn't present when the incident occurred claimed it was an accident. There are no other known examples of Burke being a "jealous brat who often tormented his sister".

Brief footage of one interview with a child psychologist (Dr. Bernhard) has been made public. Dr. Susanne Bernhard concluded that Burke had not knowledge of or information about the homicide.

Burke wasn't kept from the police. As a child he gave 3 separate police interviews. Two of them were conducted with the consent of John and Patsy.

The Dr. Phil interview obviously backfired. Burke didn't come off well. I wonder whether Phil was fed the info about the flashlight having been in John's hand or whether he guessed. Either way, it was an interesting piece of info that most viewers seem to have overlooked.

 

[UKGuy]

Responding to the post directly above:

Parents kill their children all of the time and that is what I believe happened here. There isn't anything complicated or bizarre about believing that. If you look at statistics, a parent having caused the death is overwhelmingly the most likely explanation.

The CBS series was produced for ratings and entertainment purposes. In real life, the case was investigated by law enforcement. The detectives who investigated the case came to the conclusion that a parent caused the death although they remained divided on which particular parent.

The flashlight belonged to John and was placed in his hand on Dr. Phil.

Burke hit JonBenet once with a golf club 2 yrs. prior to the homicide. All but one family friend who wasn't present when the incident occurred claimed it was an accident. There are no other known examples of Burke being a "jealous brat who often tormented his sister".

Brief footage of one interview with a child psychologist (Dr. Bernhard) has been made public. Dr. Susanne Bernhard concluded that Burke had not knowledge of or information about the homicide.

Burke wasn't kept from the police. As a child he gave 3 separate police interviews. Two of them were conducted with the consent of John and Patsy.

The Dr. Phil interview obviously backfired. Burke didn't come off well. I wonder whether Phil was fed the info about the flashlight having been in John's hand or whether he guessed. Either way, it was an interesting piece of info that most viewers seem to have overlooked.

Swirlz,

The Dr. Phil interview obviously backfired. Burke didn't come off well. I wonder whether Phil was fed the info about the flashlight having been in John's hand or whether he guessed. Either way, it was an interesting piece of info that most viewers seem to have overlooked.

Dr Phil Interview with Burke Ramsey, episode 2, excerpt

Dr Phil: I think your dad had said he used the flashlight that night to put you to bed, and then you snuck downstairs to play?

Burke: Yeah, I had some toy that I wanted to put together. I remember being downstairs after everyone was kinda in bed, and wanting to get this thing out.

Dr Phil: Did you use the flashlight, so you wouldn't be seen?

Burke: I don't remember. I just remember being downstairs, I remember this toy.

Dr Phil: Did you hit your sister over the head with a baseball bat?

Burke:Absolutely not.

Obviously John fed the flashlight story to Dr Phil as he patently never got it from Burke, otherwise he would have said Dr Phil : Now I believe you said you used the flashlight ...

Why? Because John is covering for parts of Burkes story that does not match the forensic evidence, e.g. Burke's touch-dna found in the wine-cellar along with his penknife, etc.

Otherwise if the case were really JDI then John is putting Burke directly in the frame just like Patsy did with the size-6 underwear and Burke's longjohns.

The unaswered question is how did the flashlight arrive downstairs in the kitchen?


Is it all more Ramsey smoke and mirrors or is John covering for Burke?

.

 

[DuckDuckGoose]

Hi, I'm Chief Marshall James Kolar. AMA. : UnresolvedMysteries . This is an AMA with the police chief at the time of the murder.

"
I don’t believe any DNA testing was performed on the tea glass, spoon or the bowl of pineapple. As you know, fingerprints of Burke and Patsy were found on those articles, which conflicted with Patsy’s recollection of events. I think the significant piece of forensic evidence is that raw pineapple was discovered in her digestive tract, and the only plausible explanation is that she ingested it at home that evening after the White dinner party.

The forensic experts consulted by BPD indicated that there was evidence of sexual contact preceding JBR’s death, but it could not be determined how many occasions that this had occurred, or the duration. Based upon case studies of this type, I suspect that the pattern of bed-wetting supports these observations and could be related to prior incidents of abuse. As I have stated previously, if Burke was in anyway involved in this crime, he is immune from prosecution in Colorado due to his age. Though nearly 10 years of age at the time of JBR’s death, there are no charges that could be brought against him in this instance."

"Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms "thought to belong to Burke" found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected?"

"It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn’t see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don’t think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. "

"based upon statements of his daughter's fiance, I believe John found JBR's body around 1100 am, when Det. Arndt lost track of his whereabouts for around an hour. He never reported this to the officers on scene..."

"
An evaluation of the statement made by John, which I considered to be a spontaneous utterance that formed criminal culpability, suggests that he was not aware that her body was downstairs until he went roaming after the 1000 am ransom failed to come.

He became an accessory to crime when he failed to tell Det. Arndt that he had discovered the body. His beeline to the basement later with Fleet was thought to be a ruse.

Arndt had her hands full with the house packed with friends, and with Patsy, who was extremely distraught, puking and crying.."

"Think it through. What reason would he have to cover for family, and if he did, wouldn't he then become an accessory after the fact?

The changing story line of his statements over the following months was indicative of deception.

If he recognized Patsy's handwriting, and her 'turn of phrase' in the ransom note, why would he think there was an intruder involved?
"

"it is the belief that a stun gun was used by an intruder to commit this crime. I think there is ample information to impeach this theory, and yet many cling to this erroneous ‘fact’ as a basis to support the involvement of an outside perpetrator."

The grand jury also voted to indict the Ramsey parents in the murder, but the DA at the time disregarded it.

 

[Swirlz]

This is an AMA with the police chief at the time of the murder.

Jim Kolar worked as an investigator with the Boulder PD from 2005 - 2006. JonBenet was killed in 1996.

 

[kay74]

Hi, I'm Chief Marshall James Kolar. AMA. : UnresolvedMysteries . This is an AMA with the police chief at the time of the murder.

"
I don’t believe any DNA testing was performed on the tea glass, spoon or the bowl of pineapple. As you know, fingerprints of Burke and Patsy were found on those articles, which conflicted with Patsy’s recollection of events. I think the significant piece of forensic evidence is that raw pineapple was discovered in her digestive tract, and the only plausible explanation is that she ingested it at home that evening after the White dinner party.

The forensic experts consulted by BPD indicated that there was evidence of sexual contact preceding JBR’s death, but it could not be determined how many occasions that this had occurred, or the duration. Based upon case studies of this type, I suspect that the pattern of bed-wetting supports these observations and could be related to prior incidents of abuse. As I have stated previously, if Burke was in anyway involved in this crime, he is immune from prosecution in Colorado due to his age. Though nearly 10 years of age at the time of JBR’s death, there are no charges that could be brought against him in this instance."

"Where in JonBenet's room were the feces-smeared pajama bottoms "thought to belong to Burke" found? If they were in plain sight, is there a crime scene photograph of them? Were they collected?"

"It is my recollection that the pj bottoms were on the floor but I didn’t see that they or the box of candy were collected. It was an odd observation noted by investigators, but I don’t think they grasped the significance of those items at the time. "

"based upon statements of his daughter's fiance, I believe John found JBR's body around 1100 am, when Det. Arndt lost track of his whereabouts for around an hour. He never reported this to the officers on scene..."

"
An evaluation of the statement made by John, which I considered to be a spontaneous utterance that formed criminal culpability, suggests that he was not aware that her body was downstairs until he went roaming after the 1000 am ransom failed to come.

He became an accessory to crime when he failed to tell Det. Arndt that he had discovered the body. His beeline to the basement later with Fleet was thought to be a ruse.

Arndt had her hands full with the house packed with friends, and with Patsy, who was extremely distraught, puking and crying.."

"Think it through. What reason would he have to cover for family, and if he did, wouldn't he then become an accessory after the fact?

The changing story line of his statements over the following months was indicative of deception.

If he recognized Patsy's handwriting, and her 'turn of phrase' in the ransom note, why would he think there was an intruder involved?
"

"it is the belief that a stun gun was used by an intruder to commit this crime. I think there is ample information to impeach this theory, and yet many cling to this erroneous ‘fact’ as a basis to support the involvement of an outside perpetrator."

The grand jury also voted to indict the Ramsey parents in the murder, but the DA at the time disregarded it.

There was unknown DNA ON JB!!

 

[kay74]

Instead of going after this poor family, why don't you go after LE who did not go out looking for suspects immediately! The Ramsey family did not kill her.

 

[SkyBoomer]

Instead of going after this poor family, why don't you go after LE who did not go out looking for suspects immediately! The Ramsey family did not kill her.

 

[UKGuy]

There was unknown DNA ON JB!!

kay74,
So what does unknown DNA tell you?

Remember nearly all human beings on the planet will have other peoples touch-dna on them as it can be picked up anywhere and everywhere from shaking hands to lifting toilet seats, turning door handles to being in the vicinity of someone sneezing or coughing.

.

 

[kay74]

kay74,
So what does unknown DNA tell you?

Remember nearly all human beings on the planet will have other peoples touch-dna on them as it can be picked up anywhere and everywhere from shaking hands to lifting toilet seats, turning door handles to being in the vicinity of someone sneezing or coughing.

.

It depends on how much and where it is.

 

[dogperson]

I've always been fairly firmly in the BDI camp. If the Ramseys didn't know who killed JonBenet, why were they never out there demanding justice like the parents of other murdered children? Instead of making a public outcry for their child's killer to be found and punished, they hid from law enforcement. They refused to be questioned. They stalled interviews for months while they insisted they wouldn't answer questions unless they could be provided with copies of the questions ahead of time. They withheld the clothing they wore the night of JonBenet's death for a very long time, making any evidence found on the clothing completely useless. This is not what innocent grieving parents do. This is what parents do when they are guilty or when they know who is.

You can be certain that if John and Patsy Ramsey weren't wealthy and if the DAs office hadn't been so lazy and corrupt, they'd have been arrested on the spot when JonBenet's body was found in the house. It's rare or maybe even non-existent that children who have been the victim of a kidnapping or murder are found in their own house unless a family member did the killing. Plus the evidence doesn't add up to an intruder, especially that very lengthy ransom note. I don't think PR or JR killed JonBenet, but I think they know who did and that they are guilty of covering it up.

 

[UKGuy]

It depends on how much and where it is.

kay74,
So if it were to transpire that there was more of Burke Ramsey's touch-dna found on JonBenet than anyone else including her parents or the unknown touch-dna, would that be relevant.

You see to date we only know about the unknown touch-dna alleged to be saliva in origin and nothing about the distribution of any other Ramsey touch-dna on JonBenet !

Patently Patsy's touch-dna will be on JonBenet, but you can guess where I might not expect to find either John or Burke's touch-dna on JonBenet's person?

Consider this: I expect that Burke Ramsey's touch-dna was discovered on her genital region or thereabouts, why because JonBenet was wearing her brothers longjohns.

Now if validated this might mean Patsy was aware of dna matching so deliberately dressed JonBenet in Burke's longjons, or it was Burke himself who put his own longjohns on JonBenet?

Either way these scenarios put Burke Ramsey in the frame. If she is staging for anyone else, e.g. herself or John, you have Patsy injecting her son into a homicide case via the longjohns and size-12's.

Naturally anyone who has a theory regarding JonBenet's death has to explain why she was redressed in Patsy's niece's size-12 underwear and Burke Ramsey's longjohns?

.