Was Burke involved?

[tezi]

Oh OK so then it's not brutal then....our bad....


The stun gun is not what makes it brutal. How does this actually need to be explained. Ok taking a break from this thread.

Hey, I never said the murder wasn't brutal, now did I? I just said the stun gun wasn't used.

JMO

 

[tezi]

That is just a difference of opinion. Not fact. We have experts who say it was and some that says it wasn't.
IT is a wash in my opinion and you just have to decide for yourself if you believe there was a stun gun or not.

I do believe there was a stun gun used. JMO

It's a FACT, that the stun gun manufacturer told Lou Smit that their product was NOT used in the attack. The model was the Air Taser that Smit said was used.

Not my opinion, but a fact.

ETA: Page 108, "Foreign Faction:"

Boulder investigators had contacted the manufacturer of Air Taser stun gun that Smit ultimately declared to be the weapon used in this murder, and they were told in no uncertain terms that the marks on JonBenet's body would not have been created by their device."

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

It's a FACT, that the stun gun manufacturer told Lou Smit that their product was NOT used in the attack. The model was the Air Taser that Smit said was used.

Not my opinion, but a fact.

ETA: Page 108, "Foreign Faction:"

Boulder investigators had contacted the manufacturer of Air Taser stun gun that Smit ultimately declared to be the weapon used in this murder, and they were told in no uncertain terms that the marks on JonBenet's body would not have been created by their device."

There are more than one stun gun. I don't believe that is fact. IMO it is just another point of view.

 

[tezi]

:facepalm::facepalm::facepalm:

Yes, now Air Taser is on the conspiracy to frame the Ramseys.:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:

I really don't think Kolar made any of his book up. He investigated the case. He knows more about this case than probably anyone. Why must it always be that it's "his opinion" when we post sources from his book? Please don't bother to answer that, I already know the short and long answer to the question.

JMO

 

[2 percent]

The more I think about it... I'm considering that Burke could have bashed her in the head AND strangled her with the rope when she just wouldn't die.
He couldn't let her live. He would get in BIG trouble if she were to tell.
( remember the kid that killed a little neighbor girl and hid her under his waterbed for 8 days until his mother made the discovery?)
It would explain why the extra leverage of the paintbrush handle was used.
He was bright and imaginative enough to have written that note and he couldn't be excused from writing it.

Staging by the adults would have included the wiping down, redressing and wrapping JonBenet in that blanket.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You lost me here.
Most BDIs I'm familiar with point to his odd behavior to show he was sexually curious at the very least. That this sexual behavior was observed or at least suspected by more than one person in the house/family and point to the evidence of a previous assault as Burke's doing. I think the assumption is that Patsy discussed or observed behavior by Burke that disturbed her and most likely talked to him about it or disciplined him.

So here's my problem....nothing that Burke did that night was any different than what he'd supposedly done before. There was nothing new, escalated, to the sexual assault evidence (semen, saliva, etc). Most of the theories have the garotte as part of the staging, not the assault if BDI. So why would Burke suddenly be so afraid of being disciplined? So afraid he killed JB so he wouldn't get in trouble? Even a 9 year old knows death is far more serious than injuries from a sexual assault he had presumably committed before.

 

[bettybaby00]

Shakes head....

IDG why there is still arguing? A number of people believe that BR was incapable or just not responsible for his sisters death...

We get it.

But then there's "a small faction" that believe he was involved in some way.

Pages and pages of "prove it," which is promptly disregarded--based on bias I might add--and it's no wonder this thread has been shut down 3 times in the last week.

I certainly don't go into the IDI thread and demand proof of an intruder. I don't believe there was one, but I'm not going to spend my time arguing against IDI. I ain't changing their mind, and the "anti-BDI" theorists aren't gonna change mine,

eace:

 

[Tawny]

Shakes head....

IDG why there is still arguing? A number of people believe that BR was incapable or just not responsible for his sisters death...

We get it.

But then there's "a small faction" that believe he was involved in some way.

Pages and pages of "prove it," which is promptly disregarded--based on bias I might add--and it's no wonder this thread has been shut down 3 times in the last week.

I certainly don't go into the IDI thread and demand proof of an intruder. I don't believe there was one, but I'm not going to spend my time arguing against IDI. I ain't changing their mind, and the "anti-BDI" theorists aren't gonna change mine,

eace:

:yourock:

 

[2 percent]

One example of objectivity is a Grand Jury who evaluates evidence known only in that courtroom, both for and against, yet who decide a True Bill is needed so that John and Patsy Ramsey can be indicted. The Grand Jury found enough evidence to take the case to trial, charging Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey.

I'm not in any way BDI but my first thought on hearing the indictment against the Ramseys was that Burke confessed during the Grand Jury proceedings, the GJ charged them with what they could and Hunter refused to follow through because it was drama and tragedy all wrapped up in a little boy.

...then I came down to Earth, bumped my head on Mars :floorlaugh:

Anyway, I don't think there was tragic drama played out in the GJ anymore. I think the GJ smelled a rat and thought the courts should sort it out.

 

[bettybaby00]

I'm not in any way BDI but my first thought on hearing the indictment against the Ramseys was that Burke confessed during the Grand Jury proceedings, the GJ charged them with what they could and Hunter refused to follow through because it was drama and tragedy all wrapped up in a little boy.

...then I came down to Earth, bumped my head on Mars :floorlaugh:

Anyway, I don't think there was tragic drama played out in the GJ anymore. I think the GJ smelled a rat and thought the courts should sort it out.

But who needs "a day in court," if the DA is a friend of your lawyers, and everyone is scared of being on the wrong side of a civil suite. It's interesting to see who they sought to sue and who they didn't.

As for Hunter, the # of times he actually worked a courtroom is shameful. Did the citizens of Boulder not know this when they elected him how many times?

 

[2 percent]

Shakes head....

IDG why there is still arguing? A number of people believe that BR was incapable or just not responsible for his sisters death...

We get it.

But then there's "a small faction" that believe he was involved in some way.

Pages and pages of "prove it," which is promptly disregarded--based on bias I might add--and it's no wonder this thread has been shut down 3 times in the last week.

I certainly don't go into the IDI thread and demand proof of an intruder. I don't believe there was one, but I'm not going to spend my time arguing against IDI. I ain't changing their mind, and the "anti-BDI" theorists aren't gonna change mine,

eace:

BBM

This is a forum to discuss and debate active and cold cases. To discuss you have to talk, to debate you have to question people's theories and conclusions.

To my eyes all of the theories in this case inevitably come to a stalemate and bickering ensues, then entrenched bickering, space and then the cycle starts all over again.

I think to involved yourself in a forum, where there unquestionably is debate, you have to grow a thick skin and if you have a firm theory you have to be able to accept you have to repeat it over and over infinity.

But you can mitigate the wear and tear on the phalanges...take time to write out your theory with all the facts and figures and post it in the Member's Theories thread. Then when people ask, you can point them to it and move on.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Shakes head....

IDG why there is still arguing? A number of people believe that BR was incapable or just not responsible for his sisters death...

We get it.

But then there's "a small faction" that believe he was involved in some way.

Pages and pages of "prove it," which is promptly disregarded--based on bias I might add--and it's no wonder this thread has been shut down 3 times in the last week.

I certainly don't go into the IDI thread and demand proof of an intruder. I don't believe there was one, but I'm not going to spend my time arguing against IDI. I ain't changing their mind, and the "anti-BDI" theorists aren't gonna change mine,

eace:

The whole point of this is to discuss the case. Discuss theories and challenge our theories. If we all agreed what would be the point. No matter how long someone has been looking at this case there is always something to discuss, new people to discuss it with and new articles to chat about.

 

[bettybaby00]

BBM

This is a forum to discuss and debate active and cold cases. To discuss you have to talk, to debate you have to question people's theories and conclusions.

To my eyes all of the theories in this case inevitably come to a stalemate and bickering ensues, then entrenched bickering, space and then the cycle starts all over again.

I think to involved yourself in a forum, where there unquestionably is debate, you have to grow a thick skin and if you have a firm theory you have to be able to accept you have to repeat it over and over infinity.

But you can mitigate the wear and tear on the phalanges...take time to write out your theory with all the facts and figures and post it in the Member's Theories thread. Then when people ask, you can point them to it and move on.

Oh I get debate...but some research comes in handy when trying to dismiss other peoples ideas.

People aren't even reading the sources they demand, and I've often found long posts with quotes, that have no source, or the source only represents part of what they're attributing the quote to.

As for my own theory, I don't have all the answers. But I most certainly have posted why I believe the Rs are suspect, and why BR should have never been given a free pass. And yes, I've listed the "evidence" that we have in this case, but that's discounted too. Its all rationalized away by people who want to rationalize it away.


I'm not trying to argue with you b/c I know you're not that type of poster I'm just replying to your post

 

[Chewy]

The problem I see is that there's a difference between a hypothesis and an opinion based on hinky meters, personal experience and biased "research" that amounts to "looking only at things that support my opinion and ignoring the rest."


I've not seen a single response, theory or explanation that addresses my issue with the whole thing beyond the actual crime into the investigation.

So one last time

Please explain how a "troubled" nine year old boy has been able to dupe a professional team of crime investigators and a Grand Jury?

 

[Frigga]

" We are a Christian, God-fearing family. We love our children. We would do anything for our children."
~ Patsy Ramsey Jan 1, 1997 CNN interview

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

" We are a Christian, God-fearing family. We love our children. We would do anything for our children."
~ Patsy Ramsey Jan 1, 1997 CNN interview

That describes half the mothers in america. IMO

 

[Tawny]

We have no idea what he told a Grand Jury.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The problem I see is that there's a difference between a hypothesis and an opinion based on hinky meters, personal experience and biased "research" that amounts to "looking only at things that support my opinion and ignoring the rest."


I've not seen a single response, theory or explanation that addresses my issue with the whole thing beyond the actual crime into the investigation.

So one last time

Please explain how a "troubled" nine year old boy has been able to dupe a professional team of crime investigators and a Grand Jury?

I think the issue is that no one has to post their theory. This place is to help you formulate yours.

 

[Linda7NJ]

You lost me here.

Most BDIs I'm familiar with point to his odd behavior to show he was sexually curious at the very least. That this sexual behavior was observed or at least suspected by more than one person in the house/family and point to the evidence of a previous assault as Burke's doing. I think the assumption is that Patsy discussed or observed behavior by Burke that disturbed her and most likely talked to him about it or disciplined him.



So here's my problem....nothing that Burke did that night was any different than what he'd supposedly done before. There was nothing new, escalated, to the sexual assault evidence (semen, saliva, etc). Most of the theories have the garotte as part of the staging, not the assault if BDI. So why would Burke suddenly be so afraid of being disciplined? So afraid he killed JB so he wouldn't get in trouble? Even a 9 year old knows death is far more serious than injuries from a sexual assault he had presumably committed before.

Maybe there was never a blood curdling scream and blood before?

I don't find it likely, just a remote possibility.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Venom]

I'm going to throw my :twocents: in. I've scrolled and rolled and kept my fingers from typing for a day or two.

There's only so much to debate when people seem to be at an impass.
What I mean is people have posted reasons for BDI and those against it say it's ridiculous. Ok, we're not going to change your mind and that is fine. But why keep on posting saying that our thoughts are ridiculous and using snark?
If you just don't get how we can think BDI is a possibility, don't ridicule us and put words in our mouths.
I don't go on IDI threads and comment that IDI is ridiculous and demand that they tell me their theories and give their posts "smh's."
JMO :moo:

 

[Chewy]

I think the issue is that no one has to post their theory. This place is to help you formulate yours.

I guess I'm confused about the nature of the site, I thought people were actually trying to solve crimes on here.