If you look at it logically it's very clear who did it!

[ispywithmylittleeye]

Snipped by me for focus on one element of your post…

I’m glad you brought up the behaviour panel, I watch a lot of their videos. I go there a lot when I’m following a crime, see if they’ve covered it, and what is their perspective. They have a very unique skill set.
In one of their earlier episodes on this case, you are right, their position on the Rs was that they had "guilty knowledge". It's been a while since I watched it, it may have been just in PR that they detected guilty knowledge.

Much more recently, the panel actually met JR, i might be wrong but I think it was at a Crime Con? Meeting him in person, they seemed to have a very favourable impression of him. My theory is that these white alpha males at the top of their field feel a common bond with JR, a white alpha male successful in his field. I think JR has a gift of winning people over. Like Lou S.

Anyway, love their coverage of different personalities in the news, I highly recommend giving them a watch, they’re on YouTube.

IMHO

They lost me. They taught me so well I didn't find them credible in their later
interviews or when they start collaborating with Dr Phul of bs

 

[ispywithmylittleeye]

I don’t know what the FBI thought. I’ve never seen any FBI reports. I know the Ramsey’s have never been charged due to lack of evidence. That’s a fact.

The Grand Jury saw enough to think that the Ramseys “unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death.”

 

[Deleted member 187229]

Yes, but it could all be explained away just the same with things that could not have been connected to the crime at all.
DNA- Multiple ways how and when it could have gotten there that possibly has nothing to do with the crime.

The ransom note - If I write one, does that mean an intruder was in my house? Again, it does not point to an intruder.
What evidence do you point to exactly that was put together by Lou Smit? I do not know any factual evidence that he had put together that proves an intruder was in the house. He too had only his theories and beliefs.
The suitcase that was in the basement only proves that there was a suitcase that was located in the basement.
The scuff mark on the wall only proves that there was a scuff mark on the wall. We know John has said publicly that had entered that window previously. Maybe he left it. Maybe someone else did. Maybe Burke was playing in the train room once and climbed out of that window just for fun?
Same for the debris/foliage. It only proves that it is there. We do not know when and how it was disturbed or got there.

All of these have been discussed previously and there are plenty of simple explanations available for all of them. I'm not going to explain them here again.

Yes, there is no clear evidence that points to the Ramsey's and I agree that if there was the case would be possibly solved by now. But putting the whole picture together considering what we know, IMO, points a lot more towards it being an inside job, rather than an intruder.
Only my opinion.

It’s a very hard case to solve. I believe the only chance this case has of being solved is if the DNA is from the killer. It seems the DNA deposits are very small and may not be enough left to enter into genealogical data bases because they require much larger samples. But who knows if technology changes or has changed maybe a tiny smount of DNA will be enough one day. I think the police would have used genealogical data bases if they were suitable for Whats left which from my understanding is only a half dime sized blood spot on JB underpants that is likely to be a mixture of her blood and a very small partial dna of unknown man 1. All of the information the police have to date about this case obviously isn’t enough to convict anyone. Poor little girl. I think having dna in her underpants is a huge clue. If your child had an unknown man’s dna in her underpants, under her fingernails and on the waistband of her pyjama pants, what would you think?

 

[Deleted member 187229]

The Grand Jury saw enough to think that the Ramseys “unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death.”

Well the DA knew there wasn’t enough evidence to reach a conviction. Grand juries aren’t always 100% right, lots of innocent people have been sent to jail. It was also a high profile case with lots of media attention. We don’t know what was presented to the grand jury but if there was enough evidence to go ahead with a prosecution the DA would have. You don’t need a grand jury to charge someone, if there was enough police thought they had a winning case with enough evidence they would have charged the Ramsey’s decades ago. There’s not enough evidence, only theories and theories aren’t facts. In my opinion, the reason why there isn’t enough evidence against the ramseys is because they didn’t do it. Unknown male 1 did it in my opinion and no one knows who he is.

 

[Chypre]

IMO, Burke's guilt or innocence largely depends on the interpretation of the 911 recording.

I've been reading and posting on JonBenet threads for a month now. I was firmly DNA IDI, now still trying to give IDI as some reasonable dobt. I think reasonable doubt on is what the case has not moved forward, more so than the grand jury shadiness.

My background is in psychology, therapy, and education. I only have a vague time period of somewhere in the 2000s there was a sweeping change of new programs and protocols for working with sexual offenders. There were regional trainings on stats, assessments, polygraph, etc and Jim Clemente was one of the trainers. I watched The Case of JonBenet knowing he looked familiar but not putting it together in my brain. In my brain, he was filed under helpful things for adoption because of what I had a project on.

Anyhow, after all official stuff was complete, later there was social time. I remember him saying the brother did it because he was awake . I remember asking how did they know from that, and he said what are the chances . . . only time this ever happened. But just like here I focus on doubt so I asked if just by being awake can that be convictable, and he replied they have him recorded that he was awake, and what are the chances . . .

Edit to add: As far as the 911 call, I think the sentences can be interpreted in more than way.

So, that's my little nugget.

 

[Slebby]

They lost me. They taught me so well I didn't find them credible in their later
interviews or when they start collaborating with Dr Phul of bs

I agree! Been disappointed in them lately.

 

[Swirlz]

IMO, Burke's guilt or innocence largely depends on the interpretation of the 911 recording.

Why does Burke's guilt or innocence depend largely on a 911 recording?

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

I don’t know what the FBI thought. I’ve never seen any FBI reports. I know the Ramsey’s have never been charged due to lack of evidence. That’s a fact.

Respectfully, that might not be entirely the situation nor a ‘fact’ @rebeccap …..

From outward information and what has been released publicly, IMO it may be more accurate to say that the Rs were not charged because the DA at that time made the decision not to proceed. That DA was then Alex Hunter.

And that decision by the then DA was made we now know despite a GJ having issued ‘true bills’ IIUC for certain crimes related to the death of JBR. And had that course been pursued additional evidence could well have come to light, additional depositions taken, and further investigation that might have revealed much more than has ever been stated publicly or identified with respect to the death of JBR that evening / morning. And actually, they were possibly 5, 6, or even 7 possible associated crimes related to the death of JBR. That is also way up thread in one of these threads.

And for reasons debated at length in this and the many other JBR threads, BR was not eligible to be charged due to his age at the time of the crime(s). MOO

 

[Deleted member 187229]

Respectfully, that might not be entirely the situation nor a ‘fact’ @rebeccap …..

From outward information and what has been released publicly, IMO it may be more accurate to say that the Rs were not charged because the DA at that time made the decision not to proceed. That DA was then Alex Hunter.

And that decision by the then DA was made we now know despite a GJ having issued ‘true bills’ IIUC for certain crimes related to the death of JBR. And had that course been pursued additional evidence could well have come to light, additional depositions taken, and further investigation that might have revealed much more than has ever been stated publicly or identified with respect to the death of JBR that evening / morning. And actually, they were possibly 5, 6, or even 7 possible associated crimes related to the death of JBR. That is also way up thread in one of these threads.

And for reasons debated at length in this and the many other JBR threads, BR was not eligible to be charged due to his age at the time of the crime(s). MOO

No. That’s not true. The police don’t view burke as a suspect. They believed patsy did it due to a bed wetting incident. Why haven’t they been charged in 30 years?

 

[Deleted member 187229]

Respectfully, that might not be entirely the situation nor a ‘fact’ @rebeccap …..

From outward information and what has been released publicly, IMO it may be more accurate to say that the Rs were not charged because the DA at that time made the decision not to proceed. That DA was then Alex Hunter.

And that decision by the then DA was made we now know despite a GJ having issued ‘true bills’ IIUC for certain crimes related to the death of JBR. And had that course been pursued additional evidence could well have come to light, additional depositions taken, and further investigation that might have revealed much more than has ever been stated publicly or identified with respect to the death of JBR that evening / morning. And actually, they were possibly 5, 6, or even 7 possible associated crimes related to the death of JBR. That is also way up thread in one of these threads.

And for reasons debated at length in this and the many other JBR threads, BR was not eligible to be charged due to his age at the time of the crime(s). MOO

Police don’t charge people with the hopes more evidence will come to light. If there’s not enough evidence to proceed to trial, charges won’t be laid. The DA said there wasn’t enough evidence. That’s what happened. Obviously there isn’t enough evidence to this day or they would have charged them by now.

 

[Gigiky]

No. That’s not true. The police don’t view burke as a suspect. They believed patsy did it due to a bed wetting incident. Why haven’t they been charged in 30 years?

It was a theory that Pasty did it due to a bed wetting incident. Not fact. And there have been theories that BR did it. One being that he may have been jealous of JBR. The only fact in any of this is, no one knows!

 

[Deleted member 187229]

It was a theory that Pasty did it due to a bed wetting incident. Not fact. And there have been theories that BR did it. One being that he may have been jealous of JBR. The only fact in any of this is, no one knows!

Yes, that’s what I’m saying. That’s why the ramseys have never been charged. Because there isn’t enough evidence. That’s why Alex hunter didn’t proceed with the grand fury recommendations, because there wasn’t enough evidence. There’s only theories and not enough evidence. Every argument has a counter argument such as patsy’s ref fibres found on JB and the ligatures, the counter argument is they could have transferred when she ticked her into bed etc. there’s not enough evidence to prove anything. The only concrete evidence is if it was an intruder is the DNA. But that might not be suitable for genealogical testing because the sample that’s left is likely a small amount.

 

[Chypre]

Why does Burke's guilt or innocence depend largely on a 911 recording?

I'm trying to discuss how much evidence or proof is needed for a prosecutorial theory.

IMO, remembering that conversation, it appeared that Jim Clemente: believed Burke was the #1 suspect, when asked how his belief was backed up he said Burke was awake that night. Then I asked how that proves his theory. He said Burke was recorded. Then I babbled about reasonable doubt and specifically if "just" a recording of being awake can be proof. That's when he replied questioning the odds of the Ramseys being innocent. (Nice ducking out of answering, JC!)

Personally, and anyone that reads my posts, I really take reasonable doubt seriously

ANY LAWYERS or legal people on here? Is proof that Burke was awake, enough to focus on him?

 

[Gigiky]

I'm trying to discuss how much evidence or proof is needed for a prosecutorial theory.

IMO, remembering that conversation, it appeared that Jim Clemente: believed Burke was the #1 suspect, when asked how his belief was backed up he said Burke was awake that night. Then I asked how that proves his theory. He said Burke was recorded. Then I babbled about reasonable doubt and specifically if "just" a recording of being awake can be proof. That's when he replied questioning the odds of the Ramseys being innocent. (Nice ducking out of answering, JC!)

Personally, and anyone that reads my posts, I really take reasonable doubt seriously

ANY LAWYERS or legal people on here? Is proof that Burke was awake, enough to focus on him?

Oh I do like this and I'm very interested in the response it will get!

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

No. That’s not true. The police don’t view burke as a suspect. They believed patsy did it due to a bed wetting incident. Why haven’t they been charged in 30 years?

IANAL. And I can gladly agree to disagree on this point and many others associated with this case. One would really ask need to ask the DAs office why no one has been prosecuted in this case. I wish I knew the answer to that.

With regard to how a DA and their offices function or operate, I also have no idea. But with respect to this case, something seems IMO rather unusual with respect to the pronounced DA involvement and intervention in this case. And unfortunately little has happened since December 1996 to provide any assurance of how this case was investigated, assessed, or considered for prosecution.

As an individual not at all associated with the case, and not a resident of Colorado, all that there should be IMO is justice for the death and murder of a young child JBR. IMO that is all that matters. Sadly there has been no justice for her. And IMO until that justice is pursued and attained, unfortunately there’s really nothing more to be gained from it. Very sad IMO. MOO

 

[Deleted member 187229]

I'm trying to discuss how much evidence or proof is needed for a prosecutorial theory.

IMO, remembering that conversation, it appeared that Jim Clemente: believed Burke was the #1 suspect, when asked how his belief was backed up he said Burke was awake that night. Then I asked how that proves his theory. He said Burke was recorded. Then I babbled about reasonable doubt and specifically if "just" a recording of being awake can be proof. That's when he replied questioning the odds of the Ramseys being innocent. (Nice ducking out of answering, JC!)

Personally, and anyone that reads my posts, I really take reasonable doubt seriously

ANY LAWYERS or legal people on here? Is proof that Burke was awake, enough to focus on him?

After you hang up from 911, the line stays open from the 911 end. That noise in the recording could have been from the call centre, it could have been a crossed line or it could have just been static interference. They had to speed up the call to make it into what it is. It defies logic. Burke wasn’t awake during the call, he was in bed asleep. The police had the Ramseys phone records. You can clearly hear the phone disconnect.

 

[Chypre]

IMO, Burke's guilt or innocence largely depends on the interpretation of the 911 recording.

I've been reading and posting on JonBenet threads for a month now. I was firmly DNA IDI, now still trying to give IDI as some reasonable dobt. I think reasonable doubt on is what the case has not moved forward, more so than the grand jury shadiness.

My background is in psychology, therapy, and education. I only have a vague time period of somewhere in the 2000s there was a sweeping change of new programs and protocols for working with sexual offenders. There were regional trainings on stats, assessments, polygraph, etc and Jim Clemente was one of the trainers. I watched The Case of JonBenet knowing he looked familiar but not putting it together in my brain. In my brain, he was filed under helpful things for adoption because of what I had a project on.

Anyhow, after all official stuff was complete, later there was social time. I remember him saying the brother did it because he was awake . I remember asking how did they know from that, and he said what are the chances . . . only time this ever happened. But just like here I focus on doubt so I asked if just by being awake can that be convictable, and he replied they have him recorded that he was awake, and what are the chances . . .

Edit to add: As far as the 911 call, I think the sentences can be interpreted in more than way.

So, that's my little nugget.

I want to add the irony for me is that by attending JC's modules on sex offenders, that is what has made me so generous with IDI theory/ someone that had been to the house before.

I wish I could ask now, how and what methods could they have used to go through possible outside offenders with today's methods? Add: What specifically made you focus on the family?

 

[Gigiky]

After you hang up from 911, the line stays open from the 911 end. That noise in the recording could have been from the call centre, it could have been a crossed line or it could have just been static interference. They had to speed up the call to make it into what it is. It defies logic. Burke wasn’t awake during the call, he was in bed asleep. The police had the Ramseys phone records. You can clearly hear the phone disconnect.

Could you provide a link for this? TIA.

 

[Bean&Cheese]

Well the DA knew there wasn’t enough evidence to reach a conviction. Grand juries aren’t always 100% right, lots of innocent people have been sent to jail. It was also a high profile case with lots of media attention. We don’t know what was presented to the grand jury but if there was enough evidence to go ahead with a prosecution the DA would have. You don’t need a grand jury to charge someone, if there was enough police thought they had a winning case with enough evidence they would have charged the Ramsey’s decades ago. There’s not enough evidence, only theories and theories aren’t facts. In my opinion, the reason why there isn’t enough evidence against the ramseys is because they didn’t do it. Unknown male 1 did it in my opinion and no one knows who he is.

Mitch Morrison talks about why the DA didn’t proceed with the case and that is because he was called in as a DNA expert and said that the unknown man’s DNA is enough to cast a reasonable doubt. He also said exactly what you said… that there is only half a dime-sized mixed sample that includes JB’s blood and (what is presumed to be saliva) from an unknown male. He said that once that last sample is tested, then that is that; it uses up whatever sample they have left. Therefore, he said that we need to wait until the technology catches up in order to be confident that it will give a good result.

 

[Chypre]

After you hang up from 911, the line stays open from the 911 end. That noise in the recording could have been from the call centre, it could have been a crossed line or it could have just been static interference. They had to speed up the call to make it into what it is. It defies logic. Burke wasn’t awake during the call, he was in bed asleep. The police had the Ramseys phone records. You can clearly hear the phone disconnect.

There are people that dispute the 911 call recording, but it was done with the best technology.
If he was awake, would your thoughts on his innocence change?