Was Burke Involved? # 4

[ThinkHard]

Her hair seems pretty long in the last photo taken of her before her death


View attachment 102439

Not 17 inches long though.

 

[BBB167893]

I just want to say...I am so intrigued with the input of everyone on this site. But please get rid of this notion that PR and JR "thought she was dead after BR hit her over the head-so they staged the cover up". I have been in a medical field for 25 years, and been with hundreds of people at or after their time of death. You can tell if someone is dead!! For God's sake-especially if it was your child!!! You would check for a pulse all over their body---look and feel for breathing-look at their skin color!!!!!
even f I were NOT a medically trained professional-I would certainly assess for the normal functions of life!!! Please get rid of this notion that they thought she was dead-I have tried to hold my tongue on this for so long, but it is simply not realistic.

Sorry, scruffydog, but there's a difference between what you as an experienced medical professional would know and what someone who was not only NOT a medical professional but also in a highly volatile state would think. I would call it possible that they did check but didn't find anything.

 

[CindyTx]

Yes, what I meant was that she was not strangled while conscious, first, and then hit with something, and then strangled again to her death, which is what some here seem to believe happened.

So just to clarify - the white line is where the cord was when she was actually strangled, but where it was furrowed into her neck came *after* she had died?

So what are your thoughts on the angle? Upward angle? Someone was behind her pulling upward? And then it after it slipped into the final location...the knot was tied?

Do you think she was unconscious at this time of strangulation? Already hit on the head and unconscious for 90 minutes...heart still beating; brain swelling; and then strangulation from behind.

IMO...BR did all of the above out of anger/jealousy. Psychopath? BR went back to bed and then PR found her this way and staged ransom note and tape; possibly cleaned her and changed underwear; blanket around her; tying of hands above head after she was turned over to her back.

Not sure when JR got involved.

Someone posted they thought the barbie nightgown was possibly attached to the blanket from the dryer with static cling. Makes sense.

 

[flourish]

Not 17 inches long though.

It actually could be 17 inches from scalp to tip. IMO since I don't any children handy to measure. My former preschool classes used to be helpful for these things but I've changed jobs. But when I was 7, my mother got my hair cut and they cut a foot off and I still had shoulder length or slightly longer hair and my hair wasn't crazy long prior. I'm certain one of y'all out there have a 6-year old around somewhere.... So... Hintedy hint hint they don't have to know why you're measuring their hair.

Eta: among a gazillion other details and major facts that would be great to have more clarity on in this case, whether or not there were skin tag things on the end of the hair would be helpful information right about now.

 

[Meara]

I don't think it does, because a child of Burke's age could not form the intent to commit either of the crimes the indictments accuse the parents of assisting with or being accessory to. So I think it's a grey area.

If it was clear we wouldn't still be discussing it.

Hi Tortoise. First degree murder usually means murder committed with premeditation and the intent to kill. But in some states, Colorado among them, there is also the crime of felony murder. This is a death caused by? associated with? - not sure of the verb here - the commission of a felony, even without premeditation or intent to kill - think armed robber running over a bystander as he flees the scene - and it, too, is a first degree offense. I believe this means the GJ could have thought John and Patsy were accessories to felony murder, rather than deliberate murder, committed by BR. They could have determined that he held JonBenet captive and struck her head with the Maglight without actually plotting her death, but was guilty of 1st degree murder, based on the felonies of kidnap and assault with a deadly weapon.

 

[scruffydog]

For the record, I highly doubt that, but think as you may. If it were my child, believe me I would ascertain if she were alive or dead!!! But we all have our own opinions, which makes this world much more interesting. (this is in answer to the person who said that non-medical people might not know if someone was alive or dead).

 

[BBB167893]

For the record, I highly doubt that, but think as you may. If it were my child, believe me I would ascertain if she were alive or dead!!! But we all have our own opinions, which makes this world much more interesting. (this is in answer to the person who said that non-medical people might not know if someone was alive or dead).

That would be me.

It's one thing to say what you would have done (and as before, I go back to what Stephen Pitt said about making those kinds of judgments); but let's stick to THESE people.

I didn't say that they wouldn't try to determine if she was alive or dead. I'm saying that they (at least one of them) probably DID, but without proper medical knowledge and being in what we could generously call a highly-agitated state, even if they knew what to look for they might not have found anything, JonBenet being in the condition she was in.

In a less direct way, you have to consider other possible thoughts of theirs: what kind of life will she have from here on? A wheelchair-bound invalid unable to feed herself for the rest of her life? She'll never win any pageants that way. And you could have a recurrence of cancer any time. And what if she does regain consciousness? What if she blabs what happened?

 

[DexterMorgan]

They made Burke look up to her and he was mad.

Case closed.

Didn't a guy with Aspergers toss his mother off a boat 2 weeks ago and was suspected of killing his grandfather several years ago.

-Nathan Carman-

 

[questfortrue]

If I may add a word....

There is forgiveness as we know it in faith, a participation in God's ongoing and eternal forgiveness, and there's forgiveness as a human experience. So often the intention and desire to forgive are present, but the heart does not, cannot, line up behind them right away. It needs time to work through the shock, the anger,the helplessness, the pain, the grief, whatever it is it must come to terms with. Forgiveness as we know it in faith is what anchors us until the storms of the heart subside. When Jesus teaches that we must forgive not seven times but "seventy times seven", He is speaking metaphorically. He means we must forgive without limit, as God forgives. But I think He is also telling us how well He understands our human hearts and the long effort it can take to reconcile faith with experience. He is commanding us to forgive seventy times seven and, at the same time, saying He understands it may take us that long.

It's hard to generalize about the Ramseys because they're so weird, but when they said the killer deserved forgiveness, and they weren't angry with the person, it was a good guess right then that it was a family member or friend. While it's not impossible to immediately forgive a murderous stranger who bashed your daughter's head in, strangled her with a cord, and molested her with a paintbrush, what are the chances of that kind of virtue growing unseen on the pageant circuit, in a life of conspicuous consumption, only to flower in the light of TV studios?

Nice post.

Well JR has been known to give talks in church about forgiveness. (That’s quite interesting in light of his professed hatred of the BPD for persecuting his family and allowing the real killer to escape. Sarcasm.)

But what I found most revealing about JR’s role within the context of this horrendous event was his question ‘why.’ The issue ‘why’ was muttered by JR the evening of the 26th. Again on the CNN interview he phrased the same thought: ‘For our grief to resolve itself we now have to find out why this happened.’ His question points to the idea that he did not grasp the motivation and actions of the family member responsible, and it really appeared he did not have a clue there was any ‘trouble in River City.’

It would have taken courage, seemingly far beyond their personal strength, to allow BR to receive the therapy he needed after JB’s death. (A child doesn't know how much he needs therapy or medicine.) But PR and JR put their own needs above the needs of BR. It’s doubtful a social services or judicial review would have ordered containment in an institute for life. It’s Colorado after all, and the Rs had connections. But undoubtedly the authorities would have ordered more intensive therapy than he received in Atlanta (a psychiatrist visit once every 3 weeks). Imo, the Rs’ egos and reputation superseded BR’s needs.

And then look at what else they taught him: Sue anyone for imagined harm, ruin careers, throw friends under the bus, all because of their need to run from their responsibility in this.They obviously protected themselves and BR at a cost greater than they’d planned. But for their daughter in the basement, heartbreakingly, there hadn't been much protection at all.

 

[Annapurna]

They made Burke look up to her and he was mad.

Case closed.

Didn't a guy with Aspergers toss his mother off a boat 2 weeks ago and was suspected of killing his grandfather several years ago.

-Nathan Carman-

Yes I recently read about that case. He was also in a wealthy family (though you wouldn't know from that boat).

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/09/29/man-rescued-raft-suspect-grandfathers-murder/91260294/


"Family members have said Carman has Asperger's syndrome, a form of autism that can be characterized by social awkwardness and repetitive behavior. Experts say people with Asperger's are no more likely than others to commit violent crimes."

"In the course of investigating the killing, authorities said in court papers that they learned from family members that Carman had a history of violence as a child, including one incident in which he allegedly held another child "hostage" with a knife. The documents also said Carman had several alarming episodes while he was a high school student, although no details of those incidents were given."

Sensational story, but I don't think its really the same. I really wonder what BR's upbringing was like after this. Was he a proto-sadist and they put him through tons of therapy? Medications? (we know the R's liked to turn to the doctors...especially their children's doctors).

He seems to be a bit of a recluse now. Can't blame him. He works from home. He's supposedly so socially anxious that he giggles while he talks about the circumstances around his sister's tragic death. Its kind of like a self-enforced house arrest. JMO

 

[BBB167893]

Nice post.

Well JR has been known to give talks in church about forgiveness. (That’s quite interesting in light of his professed hatred of the BPD for persecuting his family and allowing the real killer to escape. Sarcasm.)

But what I found most revealing about JR’s role within the context of this horrendous event was his question ‘why.’ The issue ‘why’ was muttered by JR the evening of the 26th. Again on the CNN interview he phrased the same thought: ‘For our grief to resolve itself we now have to find out why this happened.’ His question points to the idea that he did not grasp the motivation and actions of the family member responsible, and it really appeared he did not have a clue there was any ‘trouble in River City.’

It would have taken courage, seemingly far beyond their personal strength, to allow BR to receive the therapy he needed after JB’s death. (A child doesn't know how much he needs therapy or medicine.) But PR and JR put their own needs above the needs of BR. It’s doubtful a social services or judicial review would have ordered containment in an institute for life. It’s Colorado after all, and the Rs had connections. But undoubtedly the authorities would have ordered more intensive therapy than he received in Atlanta (a psychiatrist visit once every 3 weeks). Imo, the Rs’ egos and reputation superseded BR’s needs.

And then look at what else they taught him: Sue anyone for imagined harm, ruin careers, throw friends under the bus, all because of their need to run from their responsibility in this.They obviously protected themselves and BR at a cost greater than they’d planned. But for their daughter in the basement, heartbreakingly, there hadn't been much protection at all.

I'm reminded of a line Robert DeNiro has in Sleepers: If you run from this, you'll run until you die. One of them already has.

 

[madeleine]

I'm reminded of a line Robert DeNiro has in Sleepers: If you run from this, you'll run until you die. One of them already has.

My favourite movie btw.

I was thinking of the cops planting bugs at JB's grave..weird that if RDI no one said something...dunno about others but whenever I visit someone's grave I talk to them...personal stuff..better than going to therapy lol

Also, I was wondering how often JR and BR visit JB and PR?

 

[SweetCaramels]

You're absolutely correct, TeaTime. C.R.S. 18-1-801 (Insufficient age) states the following (bbm):

Although a child under the age of 10 cannot be charged with an offense, it does not necessarily follow that the child cannot violate the law. In enacting the statute, the general assembly determined those persons who could be held responsible for their criminal acts, not that such persons could not commit the acts. People v. Miller, 830 P.2d 1092, (Colo. App. 1991).
​

The reference to People v. Miller, 830 P.2d 1092 (http://www.leagle.com/decision/19911...%20v.%20MILLER) was from a case in which a parent appealed her conviction of Contributing the Delinquency of a Minor because the child was too young to be charged with a crime (theft). From that Appeals Court opinion:

Miller first contends that the trial court erred in denying her motion for judgment of acquittal on the charge of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. She asserts that her eight-year-old son was not charged with theft because a child under the age of ten cannot be charged and convicted of any offense. Section 18-1-801, C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8B). Thus, according to Miller, since it was impossible for her son to violate any state law, she cannot be found guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
​

The Appeals Court’s decision states:

Here, the language of the statute is clear and unambiguous. The General Assembly is concerned with adults who encourage children under eighteen to commit crimes. The statute does not require that the minor be charged or convicted of a crime nor does it require the minor to be over the age of ten.

Further, Miller's reliance on § 18-1-801 is misplaced. Although a child under the age of ten cannot be charged with an offense, it does not necessarily follow that the child cannot violate the law. Rather, in enacting § 18-1-801, the General Assembly determined those persons who could be held responsible for their criminal acts. It did not determine that such persons could not commit the acts themselves. Cf. Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815, 108 S.Ct. 2687, 101 L.Ed.2d 702 (1988). We therefore conclude that even though Miller's son was only eight years old at the time of her offense, Miller could be found guilty of contributing to the delinquency of a minor.
​

And in C.R.S. 18-6-701 (Contributing to the delinquency of a minor) Annotations, it states:

An adult may be charged with violating this statute regardless of whether the minor was actually charged with or convicted of a crime or whether the minor was old enough to be charged with or convicted of a crime. People v. Miller, 830 P.2d 1092 (Colo. App. 1991).
​

Thanks, very interesting.
It does however seem contradictory to me that a child could be found to have committed first degree murder which requires a strong level of intent yet not be capable of being charged. *
In the case of theft I can see how one can determine a theft has occurred but that the person had no intent of stealing or rather due to their age didn't realize that what they were doing was stealing and wrong.

 

[madeleine]

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_id=2&objectid=11722756

Shock claim Burke Ramsey killed JonBenet - but with different weapon

 

[madeleine]

“I really don’t think the Ramseys would have left it out on the counter had they known Burke just used it on his sister,” says Ms Wilson. “I think that was out for other reasons — they were probably using it for what they were doing down in the basement.”

-----
@bold

true BUT maybe they weren/t even told about the head bash if BDI?

 

[madeleine]

The fact a grand jury voted to indict the Ramseys but Boulder’s then-prosecutor, Alex Hunter, threw out the case is particularly frustrating. In fact, District Attorney Mr Hunter had never prosecuted a single case.

“Everything is settled through negotiation,” says Mr Van der Leek. “It’s a very wealthy individual ... it is a town full of very wealthy people.”

-------------

and thats the REAL problem with this crime :banghead:
it/s beyond frustrating

 

[SweetCaramels]

The fact both JonBenet and Burke were regularly wetting the bed at six and nine years old points to "some trauma, some stress, some anxiety" in the house, adds Ms Wilson.

The above quote is also from the book. But apparently John's kids from his first marriage were also bedwetters at those ages.

 

[BoldBear]

“I really don’t think the Ramseys would have left it out on the counter had they known Burke just used it on his sister,” says Ms Wilson. “I think that was out for other reasons — they were probably using it for what they were doing down in the basement.”

-----
@bold

true BUT maybe they weren/t even told about the head bash if BDI?

What were they doing in the basement that they couldn't have done with a light switch? It's not like the neighbors would have known anything other than someone had turned on a light in the basement at such and such a time.

 

[madeleine]

So many possibilities > that much speculation. That's why I believe that the CBS team did a mistake by excluding other objects and focusing solely on the flashlight. Especially since we have also strangulation and sexual assault. How can you know what really happened there. Easy to say hey he must have been jealous. A lot of kids are but their siblings don't end up dead with their skull fractured and their hymen missing.

 

[madeleine]

Am not happy about it bue Wood will probably win against these kind of speculations based on assumptions. This is not justice. BR probably did this, BR might have done that...If you are an expert and influent bettet find a way to get SG retract those exoneration letters, its the first step in the right direction.