Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey

[AddieBoo]

Yet they didn't believe the prosecution provided probable cause for most of their charges.



Why would they, when no one has been charged with first degree murder in this case?



I don't see that changing, honestly.

The Grand Jury could have dismissed the charges. Or only indicted John. Or only Patsy. They didn’t. Or lessor charges.
They didn’t. They chose severe charges in the midst of the most severe charge.

The DA’s office wrote the charges.
Alex Hunter didn’t prosecute nada.

There is enough evidence for trial. And JonBenet deserves that, at the very least. And John Ramsey deserves a trial too. He probably would welcome one. ….for the opportunity to clear his name of course …

The narrative is changing….

 

[Tower]

4

Why is it fascinating that he is described as almost 10? Do you not think there is any developmental changes between the 2 ages? I think to point out that one is more near a child development stage vs another is significant especially as one is approching puberty.

There is exactly one year of development from one’s ninth birthday to one’s tenth birthday. I find it interesting how often I find Burke’s age listed as 10 (not “almost 10,” but actually 10) in BDI posts here and all over the internet when he was verifiably 9. I have an advanced degree in childhood development (I am not verified, not planning to be, believe me or not, moo). We document a child’s age to be 9 until their 10th birthday in research. If your bias is to make him seem more capable of violent behavior, listing his age in double digits serves that end. I think this could even be subconscious for some sleuthers.

To answer your question, there is so much individual variation among children, especially if we speculate there were behavioral, emotional or medical concerns with BR, his chronological age would mean nearly nothing to me. He may have behaved more like a 7-year-old without some basic math and reasoning skills or less awareness of death’s permanence. He could have had reasoning closer to the level of a prepubescent child. Or at any number of other developmental levels.

Jmo

 

[AddieBoo]

Yet they didn't believe the prosecution provided probable cause for most of their charges.



Why would they, when no one has been charged with first degree murder in this case?



I don't see that changing, honestly.

What prevented the Grand Jury from an indictment to someone for first degree murder. Did they have someone in mind? Seems odd…

 

[Tower]

I'm not saying that they should be publicly released and available for all to view, sorry if I wrote it wrong - I rather meant that they should have been made available for the police and other authorities, who were working on and solving this case. There should be no reason to family for keeping/sealing any information that they (police) have requested, as it was needed for solving the case. IMO

Thank you for responding. It is my understanding that subpoenas were issued to several parties who testified to his school, behavioral and other history. So some portion of that information was reviewed by LE. Because BR was never a suspect, it may have been limited.

If I were an innocent parent, I would still protect my only living child’s privacy, for the same reason that innocent people should retain a lawyer and not agree to lie detector tests. I have seen LE misuse information and I would protect my child.

I am not defending the parents’ behavior in other ways because I would open myself up to any level of scrutiny to clear my name, as an adult.

 

[AddieBoo]

This is confusing to me.

Your opinion is that JB had no history of SA and was not SA the night of her murder? Despite the evidence?

There is exactly one year of development from one’s ninth birthday to one’s tenth birthday. I find it interesting how often I find Burke’s age listed as 10 (not “almost 10,” but actually 10) in BDI posts here and all over the internet when he was verifiably 9. I have an advanced degree in childhood development (I am not verified, not planning to be, believe me or not, moo). We document a child’s age to be 9 until their 10th birthday in research. If your bias is to make him seem more capable of violent behavior, listing his age in double digits serves that end. I think this could even be subconscious for some sleuthers.

To answer your question, there is so much individual variation among children, especially if we speculate there were behavioral, emotional or medical concerns with BR, his chronological age would mean nearly nothing to me. He may have behaved more like a 7-year-old without some basic math and reasoning skills or less awareness of death’s permanence. He could have had reasoning closer to the level of a prepubescent child. Or at any number of other developmental levels.

Jmo

Outcry, sure, but hardly embarrassment. The grand jury was convened to bring charges against JonBenet's killer - and they couldn't get murder charges? From a legal perspective the decision has always been self-evident, though of course people would complain endlessly. We still have people who believe the four true bills are as good as a conviction and that they actually mean something for the Ramseys' guilt. Besides, it wouldn't be Hunter's fault for the GJ's failure, since Kane handled that.

About those murder charges…why not? Do you think the GJ believed they knew who killed JonBenet?
Why didn’t the Grand Jury bring an indictment against who they thought was the killer.
They believed the killer intended to kill JonBenet and had planned it…
Maybe the reason is in the remaining pages.

The Grand Jury didn’t fail. The judicial system in Boulder Colorado at that time, failed JonBenet. And the obstruction of justice surrounding this case deserves its own litigation.

 

[Tower]

About those murder charges…why not? Do you think the GJ believed they knew who killed JonBenet?
Why didn’t the Grand Jury bring an indictment against who they thought was the killer.
They believed the killer intended to kill JonBenet and had planned it…
Maybe the reason is in the remaining pages.

The Grand Jury didn’t fail. The judicial system in Boulder Colorado at that time, failed JonBenet. And the obstruction of justice surrounding this case deserves its own litigation.

I don’t disagree, but the first epic failure was by a grossly inexperienced Boulder Police investigation and the unfortunate timing of having a skeleton crew for the holiday. Everyone should have been kicked out of the house immediately and the “kidnapping” scene secured. That’s exactly why this case is unsolved.

 

[Slebby]

Thank you for responding. It is my understanding that subpoenas were issued to several parties who testified to his school, behavioral and other history. So some portion of that information was reviewed by LE. Because BR was never a suspect, it may have been limited.

If I were an innocent parent, I would still protect my only living child’s privacy, for the same reason that innocent people should retain a lawyer and not agree to lie detector tests. I have seen LE misuse information and I would protect my child.

I am not defending the parents’ behavior in other ways because I would open myself up to any level of scrutiny to clear my name, as an adult.

BR is well into adulthood now, late 30s? If I was him, and tired of all the speculation, I’d voluntarily release my medical and school records. Take all the talk, questions, accusations, nip it in the bud. It’s his life and his info, personally, I’d share it and end the discussion.
IMO

 

[AddieBoo]

Thank you for responding. It is my understanding that subpoenas were issued to several parties who testified to his school, behavioral and other history. So some portion of that information was reviewed by LE. Because BR was never a suspect, it may have been limited.

If I were an innocent parent, I would still protect my only living child’s privacy, for the same reason that innocent people should retain a lawyer and not agree to lie detector tests. I have seen LE misuse information and I would protect my child.

I am not defending the parents’ behavior in other ways because I would open myself up to any level of scrutiny to clear my name, as an adult.

I don’t disagree, but the first epic failure was by a grossly inexperienced Boulder Police investigation and the unfortunate timing of having a skeleton crew for the holiday. Everyone should have been kicked out of the house immediately and the “kidnapping” scene secured. That’s exactly why this case is unsolved.

It was epic failure, agree/ but, trying not to come off as too conspiratorial, I am a wee bit suspect of the level of ineptitude. It was so bungled. All the people that showed up. When did the Dr Mayer show up? JR is unaccounted for hour and a half. Arndt is alone. Her calls for backup are not headed in a matter of urgency. On and on.
John Ramsey had made phone calls that early morning. How long did it take before they were lawyered up? I don’t think it is in the realm of impossibility that the level of bungling was a strategy, AND the whole “sweep” of the Ramsey household by Patsys sister???? Seriously? That’s routine?
Nevertheless, there must have been some deeply compelling evidence that the Grand Jury heard that convinced them of the charges they chose.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

The Grand Jury could have dismissed the charges.

Not getting a majority vote for fourteen out of eighteen charges is functionally the same.

Or only indicted John. Or only Patsy. They didn’t.

They didn't indict what the prosecutors couldn't give them evidence for.

Or lessor charges.

They did indict on lesser charges. No murder charge, no SA charge.

They didn’t. They chose severe charges in the midst of the most severe charge.

None of these charges deal with the actual question - who killed JonBenet?

The DA’s office wrote the charges.
Alex Hunter didn’t prosecute nada.

He preferred plea deals, yes.

There is enough evidence for trial.

And as even the grand juries knew, it was a trial with a foregone conclusion. The prosecution would have lost.

And JonBenet deserves that, at the very least.

JinBenet deserves justice. That means a competent investigation by competent Investigators, leading to solid indictments and a trial. The thing is, Hunter could build the most elaborate structure of a case to bring before a jury and it wouldn't matter because the foundation set by the BPD was made of sand. Bringing a half-baked sure to lose case to trial would give no one justice, least of all JonBenet.

And John Ramsey deserves a trial too. He probably would welcome one. ….for the opportunity to clear his name of course …

The narrative is changing….

There won't be a trial for John. Unless UM1 is identified I don't see a trial for anyone.

What prevented the Grand Jury from an indictment to someone for first degree murder. Did they have someone in mind? Seems odd…

Lack of evidence. It really is that simple. If the state can't prove a case beyond probable cause it has no business in a courtroom.

About those murder charges…why not?

Not enough evidence for probable cause.

Do you think the GJ believed they knew who killed JonBenet?

I'm sure they had ideas, but the prosecution couldn't support them.

Why didn’t the Grand Jury bring an indictment against who they thought was the killer.

Not enough evidence for probable cause.

They believed the killer intended to kill JonBenet and had planned it…

But the prosecution didn't provide enough evidence for such a charge.

Maybe the reason is in the remaining pages.

It is, actually. The pages weren't signed by the foreman because the prosecution couldn't provide enough evidence to reach probable cause. That's the answer.

The Grand Jury didn’t fail.

As an institution no. They did their job correctly. But the strategy to put the case before the GJ did fail. Hunter had hoped a GJ would make a weak case stronger. Others hoped a GJ (which wasn't run by Hunter but Kane) would force Hunter's hand with true bills. They were all disappointed.

The judicial system in Boulder Colorado at that time, failed JonBenet. And the obstruction of justice surrounding this case deserves its own litigation.

No obstruction, just a botched investigation, terrible relationship between police and the DAO and inconvenient evidence that ruined everyone's pet theories.

 

[Tower]

BR is well into adulthood now, late 30s? If I was him, and tired of all the speculation, I’d voluntarily release my medical and school records. Take all the talk, questions, accusations, nip it in the bud. It’s his life and his info, personally, I’d share it and end the discussion.
IMO

Interesting thought. I almost certainly do not have any access to my school records prior to age 9 and I bet they don’t exist. I wonder if it’s too late?

Psychiatrists in my state must keep records forever, but I don’t know how long a counselor would need to keep them.

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

The whole reason the GJ works in secret is so the information about people whose culpability doesn't even reach the level of probable cause can be discussed without the info getting out. True bills are official acts so they can be released as the end products of the GJ work, but there's no reason to release what they couldn't agree on. Of course the Ramseys have requested those counts be released too since they would show clearly how weak the case against them was.



I mean, they were grand jury true bills. They're not actually that damning as grand juries sign off on the prosecutor's charges about 95% of the time.



It had nothing to do with balance. The signed bills were official acts, the rest weren't.



Because that's when someone petitioned got their released.



They did. They have asked for the not agreed upon counts to also be released so people can see what the GJ didn't think the prosecutors could prove.



Because the DA didn't sign the true bills, the suspects wouldn't have been notified. At least, that's my understanding.

There is exactly one year of development from one’s ninth birthday to one’s tenth birthday. I find it interesting how often I find Burke’s age listed as 10 (not “almost 10,” but actually 10) in BDI posts here and all over the internet when he was verifiably 9. I have an advanced degree in childhood development (I am not verified, not planning to be, believe me or not, moo). We document a child’s age to be 9 until their 10th birthday in research. If your bias is to make him seem more capable of violent behavior, listing his age in double digits serves that end. I think this could even be subconscious for some sleuthers.

To answer your question, there is so much individual variation among children, especially if we speculate there were behavioral, emotional or medical concerns with BR, his chronological age would mean nearly nothing to me. He may have behaved more like a 7-year-old without some basic math and reasoning skills or less awareness of death’s permanence. He could have had reasoning closer to the level of a prepubescent child. Or at any number of other developmental levels.

Jmo

I work in a very similar field.
Nearly every behavioral screening tool is based on age. Actually, T-scores are organized by gender and age.
If they score in a very low range for their chronological age and are 3 weeks away from the next age group, that would be noted as significant in the over all evalution.
A physical examination would be relevant also. Many children go through puberty early or may have delays. Prior milestones or missed milestones are important as well. Milestones are based on age.
If you had a child who just turned 3 and was not potty trained, are you saying that the same child 3 weeks away from their 4th birthday wouldn't be considered delayed?
Sexual development and appropriateness has everything to do with age.
I find your comment about chronological age meaning nothing to you quite bizarre as diagnosis of developmental delay has everything to do with age. What am I missing ?

 

[Tower]

I work in a very similar field.
Nearly every behavioral screening tool is based on age. Actually, T-scores are organized by gender and age.
If they score in a very low range for their chronological age and are 3 weeks away from the next age group, that would be noted as significant in the over all evalution.
A physical examination would be relevant also. Many children go through puberty early or may have delays. Prior milestones or missed milestones are important as well. Milestones are based on age.
If you had a child who just turned 3 and was not potty trained, are you saying that the same child 3 weeks away from their 4th birthday wouldn't be considered delayed?
Sexual development and appropriateness has everything to do with age.
I find your comment about chronological age meaning nothing to you quite bizarre as diagnosis of developmental delay has everything to do with age. What am I missing

Burke’s chronological age of ~9.9 years would not indicate to me if he is more or less impulsive, if he understands the permanence of death, or if he is more easily deceived by his parents than any other child his age. His chronological age is not necessarily an indicator of his behavior or cognition.

If a typical child at age 9 or 10 cannot easily be deceived by his parents, that doesn’t mean Burke would not be totally deceived. If you showed me standardized testing that showed his cognition or behavior was more similar to, say, age 12, that would be meaningful to me, but still would not tell his whole story without other investigation.

ETA: To address your issue with my original post, we have none of his testing results, which is why saying he is almost 10 so he should behave like _____ is meaningless to me. He may have functioned more similarly to an 8-year-old. In fact, public opinion of him being “weird” (I do not agree with this assessment, it has just been a common observation on these forums) would make it more likely he is not neurotypical or possible developmentally delayed in various areas. I personally do not have an opinion about his function or neurotypicality.

 

[AnnieDuke]

There is exactly one year of development from one’s ninth birthday to one’s tenth birthday. I find it interesting how often I find Burke’s age listed as 10 (not “almost 10,” but actually 10) in BDI posts here and all over the internet when he was verifiably 9. I have an advanced degree in childhood development (I am not verified, not planning to be, believe me or not, moo). We document a child’s age to be 9 until their 10th birthday in research. If your bias is to make him seem more capable of violent behavior, listing his age in double digits serves that end. I think this could even be subconscious for some sleuthers.

To answer your question, there is so much individual variation among children, especially if we speculate there were behavioral, emotional or medical concerns with BR, his chronological age would mean nearly nothing to me. He may have behaved more like a 7-year-old without some basic math and reasoning skills or less awareness of death’s permanence. He could have had reasoning closer to the level of a prepubescent child. Or at any number of other developmental levels.

Jmo

I hope in 2025 that we will be able to put BDI to rest. I find it to be such a distraction and red herring that is in complete opposition to solving the case. I think it was born out of those that wanted RDI to be true but had no believable explanation for the head wound. It just isn’t believable that if Burke was a hothead that couldn’t control himself to the point of violently murdering his sister that he could then hide his actions and show no signs of it in police interviews. And was BR a strange kid? Heck he probably was given how strange his parents were. But a 9 year old being responsible for that head injury defies logic. I’m really surprised this theory has endured with so little evidence to support it (or really no evidence at all). Just my $0.02.

 

[snarast]

Okay, can you unpack your intruder did it theory?
Was it an intruder known to the Rs or a random stranger?
How did they travel to and from the R home?
I will set aside how did they enter and exit for now.
Was the intruder there to kidnap JBR? Or to murder her? Or to SA her?
If there to SA, why bother with the RN, especially if leaving the body behind?
If there to murder her, why leave a RN?
If there to kidnap her, why not get the heck out of there once JBR was taken from her bedroom?
What did the intruder come prepared with? The RN was written on PR’s notepad with her pen. The SA was with PR’s art supplies.
I’ll set aside the “fed pineapple” for now.
I don’t buy the RN being dramatic and long due to spinning out. Who spins out into stealing lines from Dirty Harry movies? Or utter ridiculousness - “we are a foreign faction”. A true RN would be short and to the point - I have your daughter. Wait for my call. $118,000. No police or I kill her”
Why leave the body behind but also leave the RN behind?
IMO, an intruder would be there for one purpose - pick one.
Kidnap? Leave short note and take JBR with you when you leave. No need for SA, murder, garrotté etc.
SA? Commit the act then leave. No RN required.
Murder? Commit the act then leave. No SA or RN required.
All imo

Hypothetically, if it’s an intruder:

It’s probably not a question of what’s required - it’s a sadist with access to the family and their house. Not just hiding in plain sight but more likely offering support and condolences to the Ramseys.

This is the sadist’s Christmas gift that keeps on giving. Torture by proxy.

IMHO

 

[Ponytale]

But a 9 year old being responsible for that head injury defies logic.

Actually, it does not. And no theory should be dismissed until proven to be false.

 

[AddieBoo]

Not getting a majority vote for fourteen out of eighteen charges is functionally the same.



They didn't indict what the prosecutors couldn't give them evidence for.



They did indict on lesser charges. No murder charge, no SA charge.



None of these charges deal with the actual question - who killed JonBenet?



He preferred plea deals, yes.



And as even the grand juries knew, it was a trial with a foregone conclusion. The prosecution would have lost.



JinBenet deserves justice. That means a competent investigation by competent Investigators, leading to solid indictments and a trial. The thing is, Hunter could build the most elaborate structure of a case to bring before a jury and it wouldn't matter because the foundation set by the BPD was made of sand. Bringing a half-baked sure to lose case to trial would give no one justice, least of all JonBenet.



There won't be a trial for John. Unless UM1 is identified I don't see a trial for anyone.



Lack of evidence. It really is that simple. If the state can't prove a case beyond probable cause it has no business in a courtroom.



Not enough evidence for probable cause.



I'm sure they had ideas, but the prosecution couldn't support them.



Not enough evidence for probable cause.



But the prosecution didn't provide enough evidence for such a charge.



It is, actually. The pages weren't signed by the foreman because the prosecution couldn't provide enough evidence to reach probable cause. That's the answer.



As an institution no. They did their job correctly. But the strategy to put the case before the GJ did fail. Hunter had hoped a GJ would make a weak case stronger. Others hoped a GJ (which wasn't run by Hunter but Kane) would force Hunter's hand with true bills. They were all disappointed.



No obstruction, just a botched investigation, terrible relationship between police and the DAO and inconvenient evidence that ruined everyone's pet theories.

Actually, it does not. And no theory should be dismissed until proven to be false.

A nine year old (IMO) could easily cause a catestrophic skull fracture. They could also fire a gun… or drive a car…or set a house on fire…or lie.
Are we putting too much emphasis on age rather than personality? There is an interesting post by Clouded Truth that addresses that.

I don’t know if BDI. I’m looking for evidence of that and there seems to be circumstantial but not so much forensic except the DNA in the Barbie nightgown in the cellar…but none that is made public anyway, on the ligature. But the killer(s) were very thorough in cleaning most of their tracks. According to the GJ consensus by association of the indictments to first degree murder, the killer(s) planned it and John and Patsy are accused of accessory….as well as knowingly putting their daughter in an environment that lead to her death. They know the killer or one of them is responsible.

So… anything’s possible except intruder theory (which the GJ rejected) and justice for JonBenet in Boulder Colorado. So far…
Her killer(s) have enjoyed plenty of life since her murder.
Secrets fester. And the financial meter on secrets is running dry by time. Somebody is getting sick and tired of …..MOO

 

[ShadyLady]

I hope in 2025 that we will be able to put BDI to rest. I find it to be such a distraction and red herring that is in complete opposition to solving the case. I think it was born out of those that wanted RDI to be true but had no believable explanation for the head wound. It just isn’t believable that if Burke was a hothead that couldn’t control himself to the point of violently murdering his sister that he could then hide his actions and show no signs of it in police interviews. And was BR a strange kid? Heck he probably was given how strange his parents were. But a 9 year old being responsible for that head injury defies logic. I’m really surprised this theory has endured with so little evidence to support it (or really no evidence at all). Just my $0.02.

I believe BR had hit JBR before. With a golf club, IIRC.
Is it possible that a high functioning child could have written a ransom letter filled with references to favorite movies? Star Trek First Contact example.

 

[FergusMcDuck]

I don’t know if BDI. I’m looking for evidence of that and there seems to be circumstantial but not so much forensic except the DNA in the Barbie nightgown in the cellar…but none that is made public anyway, on the ligature. But the killer(s) were very thorough in cleaning most of their tracks. According to the GJ consensus by association of the indictments to first degree murder, the killer(s) planned it and John and Patsy are accused of accessory….as well as knowingly putting their daughter in an environment that lead to her death. They know the killer or one of them is responsible.

A grand jury true bills isn't a trial verdict. It mainly establishes that the prosecution provided enough evidence to bring it to trial. The evidence wasn't shown to or countered by the defense. And probable cause is the lowest legal standard. A grand jury gives true bills 95% of the time, so it's an extremely easy threshold to reach. And yet in this case they didn't for fourteen out of eighteen counts.

So… anything’s possible except intruder theory (which the GJ rejected) and justice for JonBenet in Boulder Colorado. So far…

By that logic the grand jury also rejected the theory that either Patsy or John killed her. Moreso for the Ramseys, since there was never a count for the unknown intruder that the grand jury deliberated on. Yet they didn't sign true bills for any Ramsey as a murderer.

 

[AddieBoo]

I believe BR had hit JBR before. With a golf club, IIRC.
Is it possible that a high functioning child could have written a ransom letter filled with references to favorite movies? Star Trek First Contact example.

Well..,the Grand Jury indicted John and Patsy with accessory….so according to the Grand Jury who heard everything-who rejected the intruder theory - the killer didn’t act alone. That Ramsey house is huge don’t ya know …

 

[ShadyLady]

Well..,the Grand Jury indicted John and Patsy with accessory….so according to the Grand Jury who heard everything-who rejected the intruder theory - the killer didn’t act alone. That Ramsey house is huge don’t ya know …

I would really like JR to answer the question that IF HE WANTED HIS CHILD back alive.....why didn't he make even the slightest attempt to follow the instructions on the ransom letter????