Chewy
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2010
- Messages
- 2,566
- Reaction score
- 2,353
I am well aware of the cause of death. As for my personal belief I don't think it was both parents, I think it was Patsy. I also think she believed that she was either dead or so badly injured that she would not recover. Based on my own recent experience with viewing a head injury occur, up close and personal, I think it is also likely that JB was convulsing, as the young girl that I saw injured was. I can tell you that I absolutely thought the girl was dying. She convulsed terribly and was then completely unresponsive. Thank God I my perception was absolutely wrong and the girl only had a concussion, but I would never, ever have believed that had I not witnessed the injury and aftermath.
I still don't see how this idea is any less believable than the idea that one or both parents just decided to garrote their daughter to cover up sexual abuse. I personally don't believe John was the source of the abuse, but if he was,then OK maybe he would do it, but why on earth would Patsy write the RN and assist him? It is somehow more believable that she would cover for a child abusing husband than her nine year old child?
I see why this thread is so frustrating for so many. It seems almost any RDI theory is given reasonable consideration whether or not we all believe it except this one.
I still say people need to read Kolar's book. However, the one thing that moved me from 95% Patsy, 5% Burke to 50/50 Patsy or Burke was the Grand Jury Indictment, which clearly, IMO, states they assisted the killer. Who the heck else would they assist?
Thank you for the relevant contribution, that makes a lot of sense. The flaw in the BDI theory IMO has always been the idea that a 9 year old child could dupe an intense police investigation
As far as the cover up, it could be interpreted as each covering for the other.