Question re Ransom Note

[Ivy]

One reason Burke didn't become an "actual suspect" was because LE, for some stupid reason, had it in their heads that the person who killed JonBenet had to be the same person who wrote the note...and since LE decided Burke couldn't have written the note, they decided he wasn't the killer.

Another hilarious reason given by Hunter was that Burke was asleep when the murder took place, and another was that Burke was considered too young and not strong enough to do the things that were done to JonBenet. I guess LE believed that Burke was too young to play doctor, and too puny to strangle her with the cord device or fracture her skull.

Wrong on all counts.

If Burke had been questioned and investigated properly, and not treated as a just a possible witness, LE probably would have solved the case.
___
IMO

 

[Shylock]

The force involved to displace that large piece of skull and cause that linear crack was beyond the strength of a 9-almost-10-year-old.

Baloney. Any boy about to turn 10 can swing a baseball bat hard enough to cause that kind of damage to the skull of a 6 year old. Any parent with a son in Little League knows that much.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Burke was interviewed several times, the first time being the afternoon of Dec 26 at the Whites house. BPD questioned Burke without the knowledge of or permission from his parents.

Burke was asked for, and gave (with permission from his parents) handwriting samples on Dec 28.

There was never any indication that Burke was involved in the murder, the sexual assault or the ransom note.

Burke wasn't then, and isn't now, on any LE radar as a suspect.

Only a few internet posters keep Burke on their personal suspect lists.

 

[BlueCrab]

Not true LP. Here's the current internet results from Bill Bickel's poll on CRIME/PUNISHMENT that was rebooted on April 15, 2002 (there were 1,461 votes):

WHO KILLED JONBENET?

John Ramsey 10%

Patsy Ramsey 50%

Burke Ramsey 19%

Intruder 18%

Fleet White 2%

Misc. 1%

Thus, as you can see, more people believe that Burke killed JonBenet than believe that an intruder killed JonBenet.

JMO

 

[Shylock]

Burke wasn't then, and isn't now, on any LE radar as a suspect.

And just how do you know Burke isn't a top suspect in Tom Beanett's new investigation?

 

[Jayelles]

Only a few internet posters keep Burke on their personal suspect lists.

You are so wrong about this. Almost without exception, every single British person I have spoken to who has seen the Tracey documentaries - believes that Burke is involved. I have also spoken to numerous Canadian friends about the case and every single one of them has considered that Burke is involved.

I think I am probably talking about several dozen people - and BDI opinion rate of 95%. Last year I met several AMericans on a cruise and towards the end of the cruise I summoned up the courage to ask their opinion. One thought the Ramseys were innocent, 6 thought they were involved and 1 thought Burke did it.

My own mother believes BDI and she is probably one of the most compassionate people I know. Incidentally, she absolutely adores children and can see no wrong in them so it's not a case of her being "BORG".

It has always amazed me that after seeing the Tracey Docs, that so many people should have reached this conclusion. I don't think Burke was involved.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

There is nothing from Keenan's office to make me believe that Burke is even being considered a potential suspect.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
7 April 2003

Contact: James Burrus, Media Information Officer, 303-441-1622

D.A. Keenan concurs with order of District Court Judge Carnes
From: Boulder County District Attorney Mary Keenan

I have carefully reviewed the Order of United States District Court Judge Julie Carnes in the civil case of Wolf v. John Ramsey and Patricia Ramsey. I agree with the Court's conclusion that "the weight of the evidence is more consistent with a theory that an intruder murdered JonBenet than it is with a theory that Mrs. Ramsey did so."

Although issued in the context of a civil case, the Court's ruling is a thoughtful and well-reasoned decision based on the evidence that was presented by the parties in that case. It should be read in its entirety.

John and Patricia Ramsey have been the focus of an exhaustive investigation with regard to the murder of their daughter, JonBenet, for more than six years. People charged with a crime are presumed to be innocent until proven guilty in court. Since Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey have not even been charged, much less convicted, they must be presumed innocent and must be treated accordingly.

For several months, my office has been investigating new and other unpursued leads, most of which involve the possibility that an intruder committed this crime. We are proceeding with the full cooperation of the Ramseys, Detective Lou Smit and the Boulder Police Department. We are all focused on the apprehension and successful prosecution of the killer of JonBenet.

-30-

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Jayelles, I haven't yet found an American I've asked opinion of on the case that believes Burke is responsible.

Forum discussions on the Ramsey case have a small minority of posters who think Burke is a viable suspect.

There is no indication that LE did or does suspect Burke of any involvement whatsoever.

 

[BlueCrab]

Almost without exception, every single British person I have spoken to who has seen the Tracey documentaries - believes that Burke is involved. I think I am probably talking about several dozen people - and BDI opinion rate of 95%.

Jayelles, I have a theory about the difference. It's the power of the media in the U.S. with respect to influencing public opinion in favor of the Ramseys. As I have mentioned in previous posts, IMO there is a small circle of people who know the truth about Burke, and that circle includes some of the main media.

IMO the truth is the GJ solved the crime, BDI, and Colorado law prohibits the public disclosure of a juvenile's name who is involved in a major crime. The court has the duty to support the law in this respect, hence the tortured logic and almost bizarre comments coming from the bench from judges who actually know better.

They are trying to put an "unsolved" murder mystery to bed without violating Colorado law and the court confidentiality order protecting the identity of juvenile perpetrators. They'll all be stepping on egg shells until the case finally blows over some day. The U.S. media is helping to put the case to bed by supporting the intruder theory, despite the logic against such a theory.

JMO

 

[Ivy]

LovelyPigeon... It's clear from the document you posted that Keenan and Carnes are two peas in a pod, and that Keenan relies on the same information that Carnes based her Wolf v. Ramsey ruling on--information provided to her by Lin Wood--so why would Keenan consider Burke a suspect? She, like Carnes, has INTRUDER on the brain.

Besides, let's not forget that Keenan is essentially Wood's puppet. If she doesn't dance when he pulls the strings, he'll sue the city of Boulder.

__
IMO

 

[Ivy]

A relative of mine works in a bio-tech lab in the Denver area. We've only talked about the case a couple of times, because she doesn't follow it closely. She thought Patsy probably "lost it" and killed JonBenet over a bedwetting incident but didn't say who she thought had molested JonBenet.

At Christmastime, she told me that when she and a half-dozen other lab people were in the coffee room one day, someone mentioned the JonBenet case, and a discussion ensued. It turned out that everyone but her was a BDIer.
___
IMO

 

[why_nutt]

For several months, my office has been investigating new and other unpursued leads, most of which involve the possibility that an intruder committed this crime.

What was that word again?

For several months, my office has been investigating new and other unpursued leads, most of which involve the possibility that an intruder committed this crime.

Not all? Not entirely? Not definitely? Keenan knows how to use the words all and definitely or certainty or even probably, and she consciously refused to for the record. She could have written "all of which involve the certainty that an intruder committed this crime, none of which involve even the possibility that a member of the Ramsey family is guilty." Keenan did not. So Bluecrab is granted, by Keenan herself, the wiggle room needed to consider a Burke-did-it theory.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Wiggle room to include Burke in any involvement in JonBenét's death has to exist in the mind of the poster.

It certainly makes no sense to me, and no sense to any law enforcement agency.

 

[Ivy]

Originally posted by LovelyPigeon
Burke was interviewed several times, the first time being the afternoon of Dec 26 at the Whites house. BPD questioned Burke without the knowledge of or permission from his parents.

Burke was interviewed as a possible witness, not as a possible suspect. Every strange or questionable response he gave in the interviews with the police psychologist was interpreted as a possible sign that he'd been abused by his parents, or that they'd coached him to cover their guilt.

When Burke was questioned by a police officer at the Whites', he was probably asked--very gently--if he'd heard or seen anything unusual that night, to which he probably replied, "No. I was asleep," or something like that. Regardless of what he was asked or how he replied, why did the Ramseys go ballistic? SO WHAT if they hadn't been asked for permission to talk to him. Didn't they want the police to pursue every lead they possibly could? Very hinky.
___
IMO

 

[BlueCrab]

Wiggle room to include Burke in any involvement in JonBenét's death has to exist in the mind of the poster.

It certainly makes no sense to me, and no sense to any law enforcement agency.

LP, with all due respect, it's time for you to support your hollow statements in defense of Burke with some facts. The BDI theory exists far more than "in the mind of the poster". We've repeatedly presented serious and convincing evidence against Burke, but get only empty responses featuring the ludicrous Carnes and Keenan show.

JMO

 

[Shylock]

There is nothing from Keenan's office to make me believe that Burke is even being considered a potential suspect.

There is also nothing from Keenan's office that states Burke has been cleared by the new investigation.

Keenan has to walk a fine line. On one hand she has to appease Lin Wood so he doesn't sue Boulder and waste more of the tax payer's money, and on the other hand she can't get the Boulder residents all worked up thinking a murderer is walking their streets who can strike again at any time. The Ramsey case has been reduced to nothing but political rheteric at this point. It will be no closer to being solved in 20 years then it is now.

 

[Shylock]

It certainly makes no sense to me, and no sense to any law enforcement agency.

LP, I wouldn't go making generalized statements you know nothing about. I happen to know that ANY competent law enforcement agency would consider Burke a suspect. I know that because I have personally talked to several members of such agencies and they all told me the same thing: All it takes to commit a crime is "ability and opportunity". (Burke had BOTH.)

Additionally, there was a poster several years ago who had a family member in the FBI. He confirmed that the FBI does not rule out that Burke could have been involved in the crime. The FBI is a little smarter than your average Joe Boulder investigator.

Burke will be a suspect all his life--long after his parents and Lin Wood are dead and gone. And rightly so...

 

[K777angel]

Baloney. Any boy about to turn 10 can swing a baseball bat hard enough to cause that kind of damage to the skull of a 6 year old. Any parent with a son in Little League knows that much.

And any parent with a son that age (or even younger) who has seen them swing a bat at a pinata knows - they can whack the daylights out of ANYTHING.
I have 2 sons. Both of them could have swung and cracked the skull of a small child at age 10. They probably could have done it at age 7.

This notion that Burke, at age 10, could not have delivered that blow to her head is pure hogwash.

 

[Ivy]

In addition, Burke was tall for his age, and much taller than JonBenet:

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doc845.jpg
____
IMO

 

[LovelyPigeon]

So you happen to know, Shylock, but I don't, huh? LOL Because you've talked to members of law enforcement agencies means I couldn't have, I suppose? I know police officers and went to school with a law enforcement major whose father and brother were highway patrol but he's now FBI. A former poster I've remained friendly with has an uncle in FBI. I know lawyers. I've spoken to several forensic pathologists in several states. I've not talked to a professional yet who believes Burke is a suspect, or ever was a viable suspect.

Whether its possible that a 9-almost-10 year-old is capable of committing a crime isn't the point. The point is that this particular child was looked at as a possible, potential suspect--and rightly so at the time since he was inside the house--and nothing was found to continue any consideration of his involvement. He was interviewed, he gave handwriting samples, etc but he never rose to suspect because there was nothing to indicate he should be a viable suspect.

I've heard this same ol jive (plus plenty of other jive) since I began posting on JBR forums in 1998. Burke has never become a suspect, and furthermore there have been official statements that he is not suspect, statements from LE involved in the case, and from the DA, and even a federal judge. Suits have been filed his behalf when accusations have been made that he was involved in JonBenét's death--and each and every one of those suits has been won. There is no evidence to even support an accusation that any law enforcement agency ever suspected Burke beyond an initial, cursory look at him soley because he was present inside the house.

Obviously some of you posting here want to ignore the evidence and continue to suspect Burke, so dream on. But I'd never call it "rightly so".