Pineapple Rules Out Intruder

[BlueCrab]

You could be right about JonBenet NOT telling Burke. Because since Burke's prints are on that pineapple bowl, and there is a tea-glass there, we assume it was Burke who was there sipping tea?

But what if Burke was not there, say he was in his bedroom, or down in the basement.

And the person who sipped the tea with JonBenet was her secret special "santa" visitor. He/she does not need to be a santa, but he will be someone JonBenet trusts.

UKGuy,

Burke's fingerprints are on the bowl of pineapple. Therefore, it was Burke, not an intruder, who handled the bowl. Burke was there with JonBenet.

And the Ramseys wouldn't be lying, and playing "duh" games with the investigation, and covering up, to protect the identity of an intruder. They would do these things ONLY if Burke was directly involved somehow.

IMO there was a fifth person in the house that night, but he wasn't an intruder. He was there at the invitation of Burke.

 

[sissi]

At the invitation of a nine year old? Without parental approval?
Kids this age are not that independent, and do not make those kinds of plans.
It's quite obvious, IMO, that Jonbenet was told of the visit, and it was a secret, but out of her hands, no planning on her part, just expectation. Santa is allowed, ya'know, to enter everyone's home at Christmas.

 

[RedChief]

So who else fits this profile, its not one a stranger would seem to fit?

One or more of Burke's sidekicks......or someone who had been in the house previously, perhaps during one of the home tours, and had cased the joint.

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

Burke's fingerprints are on the bowl of pineapple. Therefore, it was Burke, not an intruder, who handled the bowl. Burke was there with JonBenet.

And the Ramseys wouldn't be lying, and playing "duh" games with the investigation, and covering up, to protect the identity of an intruder. They would do these things ONLY if Burke was directly involved somehow.

IMO there was a fifth person in the house that night, but he wasn't an intruder. He was there at the invitation of Burke.

I AGREE with your interpretation of the evidence, but its not the only one possible!

Here is an alternative, Burke's prints are on the bowl because he put it back in the fridge or washer on previous occassion.

Patsy's prints are on the bowl since she took it back out either clean or partially filled with pineapple.

So now Patsy's and Burke's prints are on the bowl. But what if the santa visitor was wearing gloves or sipped the tea holding the the glass in a towel, and filled the bowl with pineapple whilst holding the bowl in the palm of his hand, which is covered by a tea or dish towel? Voila no prints and it looks as if Burke or Patsy were present.

You can also make a case for Patsy being present whilst the santa visitor was there, she then sees him to the door. But he returns to kill JonBenet, taking advantage of some knowledge regarding ramsay ilegallity. And so you have a rationale for a cover up, that may not involve Burke. This may be highly improbable, but it still offers an alternative interpretation.

Then again it may simply be that Burke drank the tea earlier and just left the glass sitting there.

So attributing all the evidence to Burke is not the only option!

 

[UKGuy]

One or more of Burke's sidekicks......or someone who had been in the house previously, perhaps during one of the home tours, and had cased the joint.

Yes someone who was already familiar with the ramsays, possibly in a context removed from their day to day life. e.g. just to be controversial, lets suggest a predatory pedophile, who is the father of girl who attends pageants!

And who may have formed some apparent innocent relationship with the ramsays, or it may have been an illegal one, who knows. But it may have resuted in JonBenet's death.

 

[Miss Daisey]

pennygram,

Yes, I have an idea who that fifth (and perhaps sixth) person was. Burke and JonBenet may have been downstairs snacking on pineapple and sipping on tea while waiting for a secret late-night visit from Santa, but IMO that secret Santa wasn't Bill McReynolds. He was likely young and someone who knew the Ramseys and knew the house, but disliked John and what John and his family politically stood for.{Quote}


Let's stop right here in the theory and say: Burke and JonBenet DID exactly that; went downstairs, had pineapple and tea and the supposed secret visitor never showed....by design...so the kids went upstairs to bed. The "secret Santa" was in the house all along without the kids knowing he was there... watching and listening to their conversation in the breakfast room.

The known visitor goes upstairs, strangles JoBenet in her bed and carries her down the spiral stairs (remnants from the stair railing decorations get caught in her hair, etc) to the basement and the killer proceeds to do exactly what he intended to do....murder the child and leave her in a grotesque position for her father to see. Having already written the ransom note there's no reason to delay. He's out of there right through the front door which automatically locks when it's closed.

All the crime scene evidence has gone unchanged. There's no evidence of an intruder, by design. He's snookerd Burke, possibly, into leaving a door unlocked ....or...he's found the key he knew Patsy has hidden out front...having baby sat the children w/the grandmother in the Ramsey home while the parents were away and spent a lot of time with the Ramsey kids from time to time. Or........

The sucker is just a cold blooded BTK type killer who has stalked JonBenet and the Ramsey family and knew A LOT about John and his success and THOUGHT he knew that John was Southern...while he isn't. (ie) "that southern common sense" from the ransom note. Nonsense. This isn't a kidnapping. It's murder. And we know it can/has happened exactly like that.

I just can't get my head around 1 or 2 kids 9yrs old, together with an adult,(or without an adult) killing, staging the crime scene and keeping this dreadful secret from LE all these years. If that were possible...I don't think the Ramseys would have EVER let their kid....or their friend's kid...take the fall for this murder if they knew or even suspected another adult was involved.

I also can't imagine an adult (outside the family) allowing the knowledge of the murder.. being kept secret by 1 or 2 kids that age...without killing the both of them as witnesses.

IMO

 

[BlueCrab]

OCCAM'S RAZOR: "One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything."

For centuries Occam's Razor has been the logical foundation for building a theory or a model -- which is what we're trying to do with the JonBenet Ramsey murder case. Occam's Razor demands that unnecessary scenarios be eliminated.

Another way of putting it is that a straight line between two points is better than a line with multiple curves and loops in it. The straight line has ONE meaning; the line with curves and loops can have an infinite number of meanings.

Since this thread is about the pineapple, I'd like to apply Occam's Razor to the pineapple theory:

1. JonBenet ate pineapple about one hour before she died.

2. There is a bowl of pineapple on the breakfast room table.

3. Burke's fingerprints are on the bowl of pineapple.

4. There is a waterglass with a used tea bag in it on the breakfast room table.

5. Burke is a tea drinker.

6. Therefore, the most likely scenario is that Burke and JonBenet were sitting together at the breakfast room table about one hour before JonBenet died.


BlueCrab

 

[jaeger]

At the invitation of a nine year old? Without parental approval?
Kids this age are not that independent, and do not make those kinds of plans.

Nine year olds CAN and DO make those kind of plans.

 

[UKGuy]

OCCAM'S RAZOR: "One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything."

For centuries Occam's Razor has been the logical foundation for building a theory or a model -- which is what we're trying to do with the JonBenet Ramsey murder case. Occam's Razor demands that unnecessary scenarios be eliminated.

Another way of putting it is that a straight line between two points is better than a line with multiple curves and loops in it. The straight line has ONE meaning; the line with curves and loops can have an infinite number of meanings.

Since this thread is about the pineapple, I'd like to apply Occam's Razor to the pineapple theory:

1. JonBenet ate pineapple about one hour before she died.

2. There is a bowl of pineapple on the breakfast room table.

3. Burke's fingerprints are on the bowl of pineapple.

4. There is a waterglass with a used tea bag in it on the breakfast room table.

5. Burke is a tea drinker.

6. Therefore, the most likely scenario is that Burke and JonBenet were sitting together at the breakfast room table about one hour before JonBenet died.


BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

Touche, you even slipped in some euclid and riemann too, yes it seems to be a very persuasive interpretation, I cannot contradict it as it stands.

 

[Miss Daisey]

OCCAM'S RAZOR: "One should not increase, beyond what is necessary, the number of entities required to explain anything."

For centuries Occam's Razor has been the logical foundation for building a theory or a model -- which is what we're trying to do with the JonBenet Ramsey murder case. Occam's Razor demands that unnecessary scenarios be eliminated.

Another way of putting it is that a straight line between two points is better than a line with multiple curves and loops in it. The straight line has ONE meaning; the line with curves and loops can have an infinite number of meanings.

Since this thread is about the pineapple, I'd like to apply Occam's Razor to the pineapple theory:

1. JonBenet ate pineapple about one hour before she died.

2. There is a bowl of pineapple on the breakfast room table.

3. Burke's fingerprints are on the bowl of pineapple.

4. There is a waterglass with a used tea bag in it on the breakfast room table.

5. Burke is a tea drinker.

6. Therefore, the most likely scenario is that Burke and JonBenet were sitting together at the breakfast room table about one hour before JonBenet died.


BlueCrab

Blue Crab,

Re: OCCAM"S RAZOR

Were you referring to my post #86 ?

OK...Gotcha'

I don't buy your entire theory. How's that?

 

[BlueCrab]

Blue Crab,

Re: OCCAM"S RAZOR

Were you referring to my post #86 ?

OK...Gotcha'

I don't buy your entire theory. How's that?

Miss Daisey,

That's okay. None of us know for sure what happened.