Was Burke involved?

[UKGuy]

If this is all you have left to question about BDI, SS, I'll try to wrap it up for you (even though I don't really think it will make a difference in your opinion). There are obviously differences in opinion even within BDI theories. When anyone tries to address their reason for objecting (as you do often), they assume each BDI thinks the same as all others. I'll only address my own ideas.

I think Burke is responsible for the sexual assault, the head blow, and the unintentional strangulation. All subsequent actions were done by the parents. I do NOT believe that ANYONE intentionally pulled the cord tight with the intent to cause harm to JonBenet, to "finish her off", or to "end her suffering". I believe (if you've bothered reading any of my posts) that JonBenet was already dead when John and Patsy found her in the basement. I imagine that John told both his wife and his son what to do. Burke's job was to get out of the way and not interfere with what was being done to "protect" him. Every detail of what would be done (and the reason for it) was not explained to him. When all CS changes were done, John told Patsy to call 911. I believe Burke was probably "clinging" to his mom from fear of his dad's wrath when the 911 call was made. He was scared when they said they were calling 911. He asked his mom why they were calling 911. She was answering him when the call was answered and she said, "Hon', we need 'em...", then realized the call had been answered and said, "POLICE!" (I've heard these words on the 911 recording myself.) Don't try and deny that Burke was awake and was instead sleeping soundly during all this, because both he and his parents have admitted and confirmed that he was awake when the call was made. His (or some young male's) voice was heard on the BPD enhanced recording according to investigators who have heard the recording. The recording that was released to the public has the end erased, but some of the words that have been reported are still audible. Patsy can be be heard saying, "Help me, Jesus; help me, Jesus." There are differing versions of what else was heard by investigators, but the most reliable (IMO) is that Burke asked, "What did you find?" John answers (sternly), "We're not speaking to you." To which Burke responds, "But what DID you find?" With the erasure, all that we can hear is, "What did you..." so I don't doubt that this version is correct.

So you ask why would he ask that question. The answer is simple: He didn't know anything about the "ransom note" that he just heard his mother report to 911 (the police) that they had "found". He (and John) thought the phone had been hung up and they were free to talk. When he thought his mother was off the phone, did he ask about his sister? Did he ask if she was okay? Did he ask where she was? Did he ask about the police coming to their house? No. He asked what his mother had "found". John didn't want to have to answer to him, so he said, "We're not speaking to you."

I don't for a moment think Burke was a monster, as you have in the past suggested would be the case if he was responsible for any of this. And like you, I see Burke as a victim more than anything else. He was NOT responsible for his actions. He was, after all, a child himself. I put all ultimate blame on his parents. The situation they created caused this. But even with that said, I still have sympathy for them. I know what they were going through prior to that night, and they made some very bad choices. Who's to say whether any of us would have done anything differently if we were in their shoes. We can say we would -- but do we really know without actually being there?

To sum up my belief, I'll tell you that there was no "murder". No one intentionally strangled that innocent child to end her life. She died as a result of a bad environment, bad individual choices, and bad circumstances that caused her death.

otg,
BBM: ITA. I reckon this along with BR returning to bed faking being asleep tells you all three R's colluded in the death and staging of JonBenet.

Why do you think BR whacked JonBenet on the head, would he not be compounding any, then current, problems?

The sexual assault can be explained away as can the ligature asphyxiation, but the head blow, that escapes me.

Why did the parents not dial 911 for medical assistance, they must have known JonBenet was alive?


.

 

[bettybaby00]

ITA. Especially if they beleived that JB was injured too severely to ever recover or live a normal life again.

The Casey Anthony analagy is actually quite good and one I have not heard in reference to this case before. But your point is well taken. I believe the Senior Anthonys truly loved that little baby. I have pretty much hated them for a long time now because they covered for their despicable monster of a daughter, instead of seeking justice. However I think it is clear to most any of us that followed that case, they had already lost Caylee, they weren't
ready to let go of the monster as she was what they had left.

Not that I am comparing Burke to the monster though.While I think he was clearly troubled, and who wouldn't be with his whack job mother, and distant father, but he was a child.

BBM

Or what if she is already dead when they come onto the scene?

I think that if a person believes RDI, then it's reasonable to consider that BR could have had a part in this as well. It then becomes a question of how involved he may have been.

His behavior is very suspect for me. It can be argued that his "affect" was the result of shock. Ok, I'll accept, that not everyone will react to a tragic situation with tears, or obvious emotion. However, IMO that doesn't explain his seemingly unconcerned demeanor when he "wakes up," his behavior on the ride to the whites, the way he conducted himself when questioned at the whites, or during the "interview" approx. 2 weeks later with the court appointed psychiatrist. On the morning of the 26th, he shows no fear that he could possibly fall victim to the same person who abducted his sister. He has no questions regarding why all the police, family friends, the minister, and crime scene people are in his house. He has no questions for FW on the ride over to the Whites. Later that day, with presumably no idea his sister is dead, he has no questions for the cop who questions him. No queries as to her welfare, or what is being done to find her. Even during his visit with the doctor, he says he's not afraid of an intruder returning. he doesn't ask about why this happened to his sister, or wonder what the police are doing to find her killer. Another brother might even state that he's mad about what happened, or that he wished he could help.

Add in the inconsistencies of his statements to those of his parents, the hidden medical records and it just doesn't add up.

IA the CA comparison is a valid one. On a certain level the parents part in helping her walk free is even worse. CA is an adult, one who most definitely fully understood the consequences associated with her actions. She callously murdered and discarded her young daughter seemingly without a second thought. And "covered up" her crime for a month with vague excuses whenever anyone asked where her baby was.

So yea, I can see the Rs lying through their teeth to protect their son. It's a theory with merit IMO.

ETA: I see there was quite a bit of typing all at the same time

 

[otg]

(bbm)

otg,
BBM: ITA. I reckon this along with BR returning to bed faking being asleep tells you all three R's colluded in the death and staging of JonBenet.

Absolutely, my friend.

Why do you think BR whacked JonBenet on the head, would he not be compounding any, then current, problems?

The sexual assault can be explained away as can the ligature asphyxiation, but the head blow, that escapes me.

I think (as I've said repeatedly) that he hit her over the head simply to stop the scream -- just a quick, thoughtless reaction.

Why did the parents not dial 911 for medical assistance, they must have known JonBenet was alive?

She wasn't (IMO) when they found her.

 

[Linda7NJ]

BBM

Or what if she is already dead when they come onto the scene?

I think that if a person believes RDI, then it's reasonable to consider that BR could have had a part in this as well. It then becomes a question of how involved he may have been.

His behavior is very suspect for me. It can be argued that his "affect" was the result of shock. Ok, I'll accept, that not everyone will react to a tragic situation with tears, or obvious emotion. However, IMO that doesn't explain his seemingly unconcerned demeanor when he "wakes up," his behavior on the ride to the whites, the way he conducted himself when questioned at the whites, or during the "interview" approx. 2 weeks later with the court appointed psychiatrist. On the morning of the 26th, he shows no fear that he could possibly fall victim to the same person who abducted his sister. He has no questions regarding why all the police, family friends, the minister, and crime scene people are in his house. He has no questions for FW on the ride over to the Whites. Later that day, with presumably no idea his sister is dead, he has no questions for the cop who questions him. No queries as to her welfare, or what is being done to find her. Even during his visit with the doctor, he says he's not afraid of an intruder returning. he doesn't ask about why this happened to his sister, or wonder what the police are doing to find her killer. Another brother might even state that he's mad about what happened, or that he wished he could help.

Add in the inconsistencies of his statements to those of his parents, the hidden medical records and it just doesn't add up.

IA the CA comparison is a valid one. On a certain level the parents part in helping her walk free is even worse. CA is an adult, one who most definitely fully understood the consequences associated with her actions. She callously murdered and discarded her young daughter seemingly without a second thought. And "covered up" her crime for a month with vague excuses whenever anyone asked where her baby was.

So yea, I can see the Rs lying through their teeth to protect their son. It's a theory with merit IMO.

ETA: I see there was quite a bit of typing all at the same time

You're right, it's a great theory.

He also had quite the motive. Jealousy. And what child wouldn't have been in that situation?
IMO he never looked back because he was happy as a clam to be the center of his parents attention. No more spot light on his sister. In the house anyway.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Linda7NJ]

(bbm)Absolutely, my friend.

I think (as I've said repeatedly) that he hit her over the head simply to stop the scream -- just a quick, thoughtless reaction.

She wasn't (IMO) when they found her.

I do find it highly suspicious the Ramsey's didn't admit Burke was awake...for YEARS! Iirc


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otg]

BBM

Or what if she is already dead when they come onto the scene?

I think that if a person believes RDI, then it's reasonable to consider that BR could have had a part in this as well. It then becomes a question of how involved he may have been.

His behavior is very suspect for me. It can be argued that his "affect" was the result of shock. Ok, I'll accept, that not everyone will react to a tragic situation with tears, or obvious emotion. However, IMO that doesn't explain his seemingly unconcerned demeanor when he "wakes up," his behavior on the ride to the whites, the way he conducted himself when questioned at the whites, or during the "interview" approx. 2 weeks later with the court appointed psychiatrist. On the morning of the 26th, he shows no fear that he could possibly fall victim to the same person who abducted his sister. He has no questions regarding why all the police, family friends, the minister, and crime scene people are in his house. He has no questions for FW on the ride over to the Whites. Later that day, with presumably no idea his sister is dead, he has no questions for the cop who questions him. No queries as to her welfare, or what is being done to find her. Even during his visit with the doctor, he says he's not afraid of an intruder returning. he doesn't ask about why this happened to his sister, or wonder what the police are doing to find her killer. Another brother might even state that he's mad about what happened, or that he wished he could help.

Add in the inconsistencies of his statements to those of his parents, the hidden medical records and it just doesn't add up.

IA the CA comparison is a valid one. On a certain level the parents part in helping her walk free is even worse. CA is an adult, one who most definitely fully understood the consequences associated with her actions. She callously murdered and discarded her young daughter seemingly without a second thought. And "covered up" her crime for a month with vague excuses whenever anyone asked where her baby was.

So yea, I can see the Rs lying through their teeth to protect their son. It's a theory with merit IMO.

ETA: I see there was quite a bit of typing all at the same time

I agree with all you said, bettybaby, and you list more reasons than I could have come up with in one sitting to enumerate all the "hinky" stuff that just doesn't make much sense unless you consider the BDI possibilities.

(And to your ETA... Yeah, that happens sometimes. Fortunately, it's not always too embarrassing.)

 

[chlban]

Love you too!

And I'm not really disagreeing with you. John could very well have been involved from the start, i just can't wrap my head around him going forward with that ridiculous " ransom" note.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I feel the same and I am not totally married to a theory either, but I think it was either, as I said earlier, Burke for the head blow, and then Patsy covered it up, or it was Patsy delivering the head blow in a fit of rage. Either way I think Patsy did the staging and John was likely clueless when he woke up to the nightmare. He probably started catch on pretty quick when he saw the note and recognized not only Patsy's writing, but her over the top, overdramatic style.

I also think the PDI theory explains two other questions about the 26th. One being why she called half of Boulder to come over, because it prevented John from confronting her, and also why they behaved the way they did to one another. She was unable to face him, and he was furious.

 

[UKGuy]

(bbm)Absolutely, my friend.

I think (as I've said repeatedly) that he hit her over the head simply to stop the scream -- just a quick, thoughtless reaction.

She wasn't (IMO) when they found her.

otg,
You may well be 100% correct, since BR did admit saying he knew JonBenet had a head injury. I think he suggested she was whacked on the head with a hammer?

So BR kills JonBenet then PR and JR takeover to stage the wine-cellar scenario?

Sounds pretty greusome to me, do you reckon BR told PR JonBenet fell over or similar, or did BR try his hand at a cleanup and some childish staging?


.

 

[Venom]

Love you too!

And I'm not really disagreeing with you. John could very well have been involved from the start, i just can't wrap my head around him going forward with that ridiculous " ransom" note.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I agree about him going forward with that ransom note. The only thing I can come up with is that he didn't proofread the note before 911 was called.

 

[bettybaby00]

To sum up my belief, I'll tell you that there was no "murder". No one intentionally strangled that innocent child to end her life. She died as a result of a bad environment, bad individual choices, and bad circumstances that caused her death.

Or put another way....

A Boulder grand jury indictment accused John and Patsy Ramsey of two counts each of child abuse resulting in death in connection to the first-degree murder of their 6-year-old daughter JonBenét.

The charges didn't directly accuse the Ramseys of killing their daughter. Instead they alleged that the parents permitted JonBenét to be placed in a dangerous situation that led to her death and it accused them of helping whoever killed the girl.

Or if we want to be technical about it...

Count four of the indictment said the Ramseys "did unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously permit a child to be unreasonably placed in a situation which posed a threat of injury to the child's life or health, which resulted in the death of JonBenét Ramsey, a child under the age of sixteen."

Count seven of the indictment said the Ramseys did "unlawfully, knowingly and feloniously render assistance to a person, with intent to hinder, delay and prevent the discovery, detention, apprehension, prosecution, conviction and punishment of such person for the commission of a crime, knowing the person being assisted has committed and was suspected of the crime of murder in the first degree and child abuse resulting in death."

 

[otg]

otg,
You may well be 100% correct, since BR did admit saying he knew JonBenet had a head injury. I think he suggested she was whacked on the head with a hammer?

We've only heard what was reported to have been some of his responses in that interview. I don't think he used the word hammer, but rather that he just indicated a swinging motion with his arm. He also mentioned someone using a knife to get her quietly down to the basement. You're correct about this being before anyone outside of the investigation knowing about the head injury though (or the knife found in the same room with her body).

So BR kills JonBenet then PR and JR takeover to stage the wine-cellar scenario?

That's what I think.

Sounds pretty greusome to me, do you reckon BR told PR JonBenet fell over or similar, or did BR try his hand at a cleanup and some childish staging?

Possibly (on the staging). But I don't really think he had much time before the scream was heard and one or both of the parents came to find out what happened. (I'm also at about 50/50 on whether he told, or they knew, that she had been hit over the head.)

 

[otg]

Or put another way....

Or if we want to be technical about it...

There ya' go, bettybaby. Well said.

 

[Linda7NJ]

We've only heard what was reported to have been some of his responses in that interview. I don't think he used the word hammer, but rather that he just indicated a swinging motion with his arm. He also mentioned someone using a knife to get her quietly down to the basement. You're correct about this being before anyone outside of the investigation knowing about the head injury though (or the knife found in the same room with her body).


That's what I think.


Possibly (on the staging). But I don't really think he had much time before the scream was heard and one or both of the parents came to find out what happened. (I'm also at about 50/50 on whether he told, or they knew, that she had been hit over the head.)

I can imagine him jabbing her unconscious body with that train track. After the head bash. Before the staging with the cord & handle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DeeDee249]

So your theory is B did the initial assault and the parents finished JB off, each operating seperately to the other?

Why would any parent murder one child to protect another?

Would YOU murder your badly injured child?

Of course not! That's ridiculous!

Of course I wouldn't. But that's me.That's most people. But it may have not been THESE people. I also wouldn't look the other way if I suspected one child was molesting the other. This was a dysfunctional house, IMO. Patsy was under her mother's thumb and Patsy kept her kids under her own thumb. I don't believe the parents "murdered one child to protect another". It isn't that black and white. It is many shades of gray. To them, JB may have already been dead. Or irreversibly injured (this was true, experts agree she'd have died of the head bash alone if the ligature hadn't been involved).

 

[UKGuy]

We've only heard what was reported to have been some of his responses in that interview. I don't think he used the word hammer, but rather that he just indicated a swinging motion with his arm. He also mentioned someone using a knife to get her quietly down to the basement. You're correct about this being before anyone outside of the investigation knowing about the head injury though (or the knife found in the same room with her body).


That's what I think.


Possibly (on the staging). But I don't really think he had much time before the scream was heard and one or both of the parents came to find out what happened. (I'm also at about 50/50 on whether he told, or they knew, that she had been hit over the head.)

otg,
If JonBenet screamed then she was whacked on the head, you reckon she died there and then, what about the alleged time gap between the head blow and asphyxiation?

If you read the GJ findings etc and the suggested charges, what I find interesting is: how do the GJ know that the person who they left JonBenet with was likely to unlawfully, knowingly, recklessly and feloniously cause injury to her?

i.e. the GJ must have knowledge of the perpetrators prior behaviour, otherwise the charges would be tossed out court at the first hearing?

I suspect BR performed some staging, even if it was just some minor alterations to the primary crime-scene, if it was him, he would realize how serious it all was!

.
.

 

[Tadpole12]

Possibly (on the staging). But I don't really think he had much time before the scream was heard and one or both of the parents came to find out what happened. (I'm also at about 50/50 on whether he told, or they knew, that she had been hit over the head.)

I suspect BR performed some staging, even if it was just some minor alterations to the primary crime-scene, if it was him, he would realize how serious it all was!.

So within this BDI scenario, what staging would he have been capable of doing? given the time constraints.
Hiding some evidence?
Placing her in the WC?

added: I guess my confusion lays in Kolar's mention of the urine stain on the carpet, if considered contemporaneous with the crime, then it does not necessarily mark the position of post mortem bladder release but mat be solely indicative of the location of the strangulation.

 

[Anyhoo]

So within this BDI scenario, what staging would he have been capable of doing? given the time constraints.
Hiding some evidence?
Placing her in the WC?

Its absolutely ridiculous to think that nine year old Burke staged anything IMO. All staging was done by the parents.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Love you too!

And I'm not really disagreeing with you. John could very well have been involved from the start, i just can't wrap my head around him going forward with that ridiculous " ransom" note.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

There^ that sentence.

That is WHY folks still struggle with this case. NO ONE can wrap their heads around two white wealthy individuals being monsters.

How this is LESS likely than a 9 year old being one, is beyond me. Makes no sense at all.

I don't think JR had any clue about the ransom note.

He told PR to "clean up" never imagining she would do something so mental.

Actually the ransom note may have been PR's way of pointing the finger at John. There was certainly no love lost between them.

My theory, fwiw....JR had been sexually abusing JB for a while, with PR's cooperation/enabling.

Christmas night was the night Daddy was finally going to open the "present".

JB kicked and screamed and PR dragged her to the basement for some discipline. Good girls do what their daddy tells them to do.

PR went a little bit too far with the punishment, JB fell and started seizing, PR flew into a panic, JR who was waiting upstairs for his Christmas treat, came down and "took over" as CEO's do, instructing PR on cleaning the scene and JB.

The note was something PR did unasked, unknown to JR. Her way of blaming HIM for JB's death.

 

[SapphireSteel]

Its absolutely ridiculous to think that nine year old Burke staged anything IMO. All staging was done by the parents.

Common sense tells anyone that the ones who staged are the ones who committed the crime.

Statistics, too.

The ones who molested JB are the ones who killed her - the molestation occured in that house.

And I don't mean by her 9 year old brother, either, who was quite possibly molested too.

 

[SapphireSteel]

RSBM

I don't agree. I think they sent him to bed after the accident and said they'd take care of the mess he made. Whether or not they told him she was dead is up for debate, IMO. But I do think they ushered him out, wrote the note, did all the staging, and then shielded him from seeing any of it. So yes, he had NO idea what they found or anything else that happened.

Plausible deniability. If he is clueless about the staging, it could put reasonable doubt in a jury's mind (if it ever came to that).

Why is that "insane"? Just because you don't personally agree with a theory doesn't make that theory insane. I don't agree with IDI but I don't think people are stupid or insane for believing in it.

The goal was to convolute the scene as much as possible, from keeping BR ignorant, to plastering their own DNA all over JBR every chance, to contradicting every single thing they ever said.

Again, what would be YOUR reaction if you found one child gasping on the floor and the other standing over his sibling with a hammer/torch/gun/whatever?

The natural reaction is to summon help. NO PARENT says "gee, now look at that. He's half killed her. Well, I better finish the job".

THAT is what I call Insane.