"This me when I was first born. That's my Mom and the doctor."

[icedtea4me]

That is if you believe that is what actually happened. Go ahead and read Patsy's account of that incident (I believe it is in the first interview). You will not that she wasn't questioned further about it, but she says that Jonbenet suffered injuries to both her head and leg. How is that possible if it were an accident? I JB was standing behind him and was hit in the head with a backswing, then the only possible way she could be hit a second time would be with the follow through. But a golf swing follow through finishes high with the club over your back. How could she have possibly receive both a head and leg injury with one mistaken swing? She couldn't have. I believe it is highly likely Patsy is lying here, but why? The only possible conclusions here are:

- Burke hit JB more than once with the club.

- At least one of those blows was intentional.

- Patsy lied to cover up Burkes behavior.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh, so it didn't occur to you that her being hit on her face and her leg could have come from two movements? First, she is hit in the face during a backswing. He hears her cry out, lowers his club down, spins around and, in the process, hits her leg.

 

[Amonet]

I'm not saying he did or didn't do it, I'm just curious as to your thought process and exactly why you don't think he was involved, because even if he didn't actually kill her I believe this kid was involved with or aware of every aspect of this coverup.

You guys have examined this case in far greater detail than I have -- I only joined the forum about 2 months ago? I remember the case when it happened, I've looked through things on the internet a few times, but I've never seen all the details that appear to be in this forum. I'm not familiar with all the abbreviations being used...there are a lot of things I am curious about. This case, and that of Madeleine McCann are two cases that are extremely interesting and that you just wish you had the answers to.

I have seen a possible scenario laid out by an investigator, whose name I don't recall, and he laid out an excellent case, imho, for Patsy being the main player. His scenario, as best I can recall, was that Patsy maybe struck JonBenet in her bedroom, causing the knock on the head. Then spent all night preparing the scene and writing the ransom note. Then, when police called, Patsy was allegedly wearing her clothes from the day before and had her hair and makeup all done (which he thought suggested she'd been up all night as opposed to getting up and doing her hair and makeup and putting on yesterday's clothes). I think this is the most likely scenario in my mind. It leaves a lot of things out, but there's no law that says a lot of things in a crime scene can't be extraneous to the actual crime.

Maybe Burke struck JB, then the parents constructed the cover up to protect their son...didn't want to lose both their children in one go (I always feel great sympathy for parents in that situation where one child has caused the death of a sibling). But I don't see signs of Burke in the presentation of the crime...considering that it has an element of being laid out as a cover-up and diversion scene, and then the ransom note used as an attempt to divert outside the home, but failing entirely due to it being written on their notepaper with their pen and a carefully laid out murder scene, all done when they're in bed on Christmas night.

I don't find it very unusual for a family member's DNA to be on an item of clothing within the home. JB and Burke would have used the same bathroom, his sputum on the bathroom sink, her nightie brushing against it and picking it up...there are a lot of scenarios where DNA can be picked up by a family member from totally innocent encounters.

 

[andreww]

You guys have examined this case in far greater detail than I have -- I only joined the forum about 2 months ago? I remember the case when it happened, I've looked through things on the internet a few times, but I've never seen all the details that appear to be in this forum. I'm not familiar with all the abbreviations being used...there are a lot of things I am curious about. This case, and that of Madeleine McCann are two cases that are extremely interesting and that you just wish you had the answers to.

I have seen a possible scenario laid out by an investigator, whose name I don't recall, and he laid out an excellent case, imho, for Patsy being the main player. His scenario, as best I can recall, was that Patsy maybe struck JonBenet in her bedroom, causing the knock on the head. Then spent all night preparing the scene and writing the ransom note. Then, when police called, Patsy was allegedly wearing her clothes from the day before and had her hair and makeup all done (which he thought suggested she'd been up all night as opposed to getting up and doing her hair and makeup and putting on yesterday's clothes). I think this is the most likely scenario in my mind. It leaves a lot of things out, but there's no law that says a lot of things in a crime scene can't be extraneous to the actual crime.

Maybe Burke struck JB, then the parents constructed the cover up to protect their son...didn't want to lose both their children in one go (I always feel great sympathy for parents in that situation where one child has caused the death of a sibling). But I don't see signs of Burke in the presentation of the crime...considering that it has an element of being laid out as a cover-up and diversion scene, and then the ransom note used as an attempt to divert outside the home, but failing entirely due to it being written on their notepaper with their pen and a carefully laid out murder scene, all done when they're in bed on Christmas night.

I don't find it very unusual for a family member's DNA to be on an item of clothing within the home. JB and Burke would have used the same bathroom, his sputum on the bathroom sink, her nightie brushing against it and picking it up...there are a lot of scenarios where DNA can be picked up by a family member from totally innocent encounters.

You raise some good points but let me ask you this;

Why were the Ramsey's so eager to get Burke out of the house that morning?

Why did he not show any curiosity about why police were in the house or any concern as to where his sister was?

Why did the Ramsey's lie about Burke being present during the 911 call?

Why did the family lie about Burke owning the hiTek boots with the compass?

Why were Burkes prints on the pineapple when nobody in the family admitted to eating any?

Why did the Ramsey's refuse to provide Burkes medical records?

Why does Burke continue to this day to deny police an interview?

Sorry, there is probably a lot more that I haven't mentioned, but I'm sure others will chime in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[OliviaG1996]

You raise some good points but let me ask you this;

Why were the Ramsey's so eager to get Burke out of the house that morning?

Why did he not show any curiosity about why police were in the house or any concern as to where his sister was?

Why did the Ramsey's lie about Burke being present during the 911 call?

Why did the family lie about Burke owning the hiTek boots with the compass?

Why were Burkes prints on the pineapple when nobody in the family admitted to eating any?

Why did the Ramsey's refuse to provide Burkes medical records?

Why does Burke continue to this day to deny police an interview?

Sorry, there is probably a lot more that I haven't mentioned, but I'm sure others will chime in.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You were very thorough, andreww. I will add these:


Why were marks consistent with train tracks from BR's train room on JBR's lower back?

Why was BR so embarrassed and upset at LHP for catching him and JBR underneath the covers to the point where he screamed at her to leave?

Why was BR's tDNA on JBR's bloodstained nightgown found next to her body?


One or two of these puzzle pieces isn't enough to think BDI, but put them all together and it must at least cross your mind.

 

[OliviaG1996]

Oh, so it didn't occur to you that her being hit on her face and her leg could have come from two movements? First, she is hit in the face during a backswing. He hears her cry out, lowers his club down, spins around and, in the process, hits her leg.

What a coincidence: two marks and they were both accidents. That sounds like an excuse a mother would make for her child when another child accuses him of hurting him on the playground.

 

[sloane7777]

Voice of Reason,

Darnay Hoffman's examiners in 1997 didn't have Patsy's official exemplars. Only the six CBI examiners had her historic exemplars and the London Letter exemplars, plus the original ransom note, to examine. The CBI examiners didn't need the captions from the photos in Burke's photo album, and wouldn't have used them anyway because it was questionable whether they were Burke's or Patsy's exemplars. Darnay Hoffman's examiners had to use the captions on the photos because there wasn't much else available for them to use.

In regard to historic exemplars from Burke, there are none available to the public. The Ramseys are careful not to let any sample of Burke's handwriting, from school work or anyplace else, to be released. After the murder Burke and Patsy both began typing everything that had a chance of getting into the hands of the public. If you can find a sample of Burke's handwriting, before or after December 26, 1996, you're sitting on a gold mine.

BlueCrab[/QUOTE

Wow this did it for me , the only thing that has ever made sense is covering for the sibling that is still alive. its the only scenario that has ever made any sense to me.

 

[BOESP]

The part that doesn't make sense to me is why the adult Ramseys didn't call 911 for EMTs or carry JonBenet to an emergency room.

 

[UKGuy]

The part that doesn't make sense to me is why the adult Ramseys didn't call 911 for EMTs or carry JonBenet to an emergency room.

BOESP,
Quite likely because by the time the adults arrived JonBenet was in a coma and bleeding internally from a sexual assault?

.

 

[BOESP]

BOESP,
Quite likely because by the time the adults arrived JonBenet was in a coma and bleeding internally from a sexual assault?

.

Yes, I see what you are saying but had that been my child, she would have gotten emergency help regardless of what I thought the outcome might be. I just don't understand "loving" parents letting a small child lie there unaided. I think that's what the Grand Jury may have thought as well.

Hope all is well across the pond.

 

[Fides]

Yes, I see what you are saying but had that been my child, she would have gotten emergency help regardless of what I thought the outcome might be. I just don't understand "loving" parents letting a small child lie there unaided. I think that's what the Grand Jury may have thought as well.

Hope all is well across the pond.

BOESP,

I second your doubts. Combine them with the "Scout merit badge" nature of the garrote. and I think the ligatures were applied by BR, not by the parents. Not, as I have said before, in order to harm, but to escape punishment.

 

[icedtea4me]

BOESP,

I second your doubts. Combine them with the "Scout merit badge" nature of the garrote. and I think the ligatures were applied by BR, not by the parents. Not, as I have said before, in order to harm, but to escape punishment.

[Burke thinking to himself] I'd better apply some ligatures so I won't be grounded.

 

[Fides]

[Burke thinking to himself] I'd better apply some ligatures so I won't be grounded.

Or "I had better make this look like it was someone else or my parents will hate me and send me away forever."

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, I see what you are saying but had that been my child, she would have gotten emergency help regardless of what I thought the outcome might be. I just don't understand "loving" parents letting a small child lie there unaided. I think that's what the Grand Jury may have thought as well.

Hope all is well across the pond.

BOESP,
Strange weather over here, its like its September, with autumn just arriving as the leaves fall off the trees, must be that global warming effect?

I guess medical assistance would have been at the front of the adults mind, but possibly JonBenet might have been taking seizures, or/and unresponsive to touch and vocal requests?

Whichever R was responsable, they knew they had to stage a crime-scene, even if that person was beneath the age of criminal responsibility, since this might deflect any blame?

One of those R's was protected and a crime-scene fabricated so reasonable doubt could be generated. Have you considered the R's thought JonBenet was dead or near deaths door when they reached her?

If the case had been PDI, I reckon Kolar would have dropped more hints in that direction and backed up some of Steve Thomas' theories, I doubt Kolar would have been sued over this since he could claim the subject was already in the public domain.


That Kolar thinks the ligature asphyxiation was not staging and part of the overall assault on JonBenet must mean once person did it all, except for the wine-cellar staging, and that changes my perspective completely.

.

 

[UKGuy]

[Burke thinking to himself] I'd better apply some ligatures so I won't be grounded.

icedtea4me,
Kolar seems to think the ligature asphyxiation was part of the homicide, i.e. it was intended to kill!

.

 

[InstantProof]

That Kolar thinks the ligature asphyxiation was not staging and part of the overall assault on JonBenet must mean once person did it all, except for the wine-cellar staging, and that changes my perspective completely.

.

I think it makes the most sense.

 

[UKGuy]

BOESP,

I second your doubts. Combine them with the "Scout merit badge" nature of the garrote. and I think the ligatures were applied by BR, not by the parents. Not, as I have said before, in order to harm, but to escape punishment.

Kolar suggests the ligature was intended to finish off what was started manually, i.e. it was no accident, someone really did want JonBenet dead?

.

 

[Fides]

Kolar suggests the ligature was intended to finish off what was started manually, i.e. it was no accident, someone really did want JonBenet dead?

.

I disagree with Kolar on this point. The extreme behavior of the parents to protect their son at all costs, behavior that continues today, says to me that he was innocent of intent to harm his sister.

 

[icedtea4me]

BOESP,
Strange weather over here, its like its September, with autumn just arriving as the leaves fall off the trees, must be that global warming effect?

I guess medical assistance would have been at the front of the adults mind, but possibly JonBenet might have been taking seizures, or/and unresponsive to touch and vocal requests?

Whichever R was responsable, they knew they had to stage a crime-scene, even if that person was beneath the age of criminal responsibility, since this might deflect any blame?

One of those R's was protected and a crime-scene fabricated so reasonable doubt could be generated. Have you considered the R's thought JonBenet was dead or near deaths door when they reached her?

If the case had been PDI, I reckon Kolar would have dropped more hints in that direction and backed up some of Steve Thomas' theories, I doubt Kolar would have been sued over this since he could claim the subject was already in the public domain.


That Kolar thinks the ligature asphyxiation was not staging and part of the overall assault on JonBenet must mean once person did it all, except for the wine-cellar staging, and that changes my perspective completely.

.

Oh, right. Because the only reason why Patsy would've killed JonBenet was because she wet the bed.

 

[tsitra01]

I think it's as likely that Patsy wrote the captions on the photo album as it is that Burke wrote them. I don't find it particularly unusual for a parent to write the captions as though the child was writing in the first person. If doing that, a parent might also try to make their writing look like a child's writing so that it's easy for the child to read and maybe to add an air of authenticity to the caption.

I think the ransom note is Patsy's attempt at not writing like herself, hence the similarity with the caption. I've seen a video of John Ramsey denying that it's Patsy's writing but I think it could be "it's not Patsy's 'normal' writing that she'd use when writing as herself"
There are some similarities between the ransom note and the photo caption but it's hard to say because there are some strong differences too.

I don't think a nine year old could write that ransom note, not that length of it, not the composition of it, and not if he'd murdered his little sister. I understand that the theory is of a psychopath child, but children are children, and this does not seem like a child's crime nor a child's composition in the ransom note. A child, imho, even one who's a psychopath, would revert at some point to being the child that they are, possibly using that as the reason they're innocent or not involved, but I don't see any sign of that here.

Burke might have been up that night, maybe he saw something, I don't know, but I don't believe he wrote the note or had anything directly to do with JonBenet's death.

(Sorry for bumping up such an old thread, but it was linked to from one that was posted in today.)

I agree. The RN was not written by a child. Burke heard or saw something.....why else would the parents talk so angry toward him and not insist he be beside them and not send him back to his room.

 

[icedtea4me]

What a coincidence: two marks and they were both accidents. That sounds like an excuse a mother would make for her child when another child accuses him of hurting him on the playground.

If Burke intentionally hit JonBenet with the golf club as you claim, then why wasn't her injury more extensive and severe? Why wasn't her cheekbone crushed? Why wasn't her leg broken?

Most children when they swing a golf club do so rather clumsily and, due to the momentum, will often swing their whole body around. But if you want to think that Burke kept his body perfectly still like some mini-Arnold Palmer, then go right ahead.