What exactly were Dr. Lee's findings?

[capps]

That makes sense Sandraladeda.
Which also brings us back to the question,of why was it known that Patsy and Burke's fingerprints were on the bowl,but no word on whose fingerprints were on the big spoon, tea bag or glass.

 

[BlueCrab]

Maybe this doesn't make sense to me because I have not really followed your theory Bluecrab, but I do have to ask: Do you have children?

Yes trixie, I have children -- lots of them. In fact, seven grandchildren are living with me right now -- and have been for the past four years. I had to buy a bigger house to accomodate them all. Why do you ask?

BlueCrab

 

[ellen13]

Eller clearly had some sort of grudge against the FBI and I'm sure that also played into their not sticking around.

Well, the FBI should have "grown a set" and not get intimidated by Eller.
To me, that was a national crime!!!!!!!!!

 

[trixie]

Yes trixie, I have children -- lots of them. In fact, seven grandchildren are living with me right now -- and have been for the past four years. I had to buy a bigger house to accomodate them all. Why do you ask?

BlueCrab

Congradulations on being such a good grandpa! The only reason I asked is because most people who have children know when their back is turned the kids will get into things they shouldn't have. I think if Burke was up without parents he would go for chocolate or other goodies instead of tea. Until we find out whose prints are on that tea glass I can't conclude it was Burke who was up drinking it in the middle of the night. IMO, it's just not what a kid would do if he had a chance to eat or drink anything he wanted. Burke being the resident tea drinker is wrong, IMO, since Patsy said she drinks sweet tea also.So Burke is not the only tea drinker in the house.

 

[narlacat]

Trixie

I've often thought the same thing.

If the kids were downstairs by themselves and getting a midnight snack, why on earth would they go for pineapple and tea??
My child loves fruit too, but given a choice he'd opt for junk food first.
Why would they snack on pineapple and tea when the fridge/cupboard was probably full of christmas goodies.
Maybe there wasn't any Christmas goodies left or maybe the fridge had been emptied out due to the family going away the next day.

 

[Becba]

I have his book. He alludes to RDI. Lays out the specifics and then asks the question of who did it.

I think he was saying RDI and wanted to cover his butt by laying out the evidence,

 

[aussiesheila]

JonBenet ate pineapple about one hour before she died. Burke's fingerprints were on the bowl of pineapple from which JonBenet ate the pineapple. That and the waterglass with a tea bag in it can place Burke at the breakfast room table with JonBenet about one hour before she died.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

Burke's fingerprints that were on the bowl of pineapple from which JonBenet ate the pineapple could very easily have gotten there the following morning between 6 and 8 am. He would have been hungry by then, looking for a snack, no-one would have noticed if he touched the bowl if indeed he did. This is a very likely and plausible scenario, you cannot ignore this.

THIS is when I think Burke's fingerprints got on the bowl and it is just as likely to have been at this time that I suggest as when you suggest.

You CANNOT say for certain that Burke's fingerprints on the bowl places him at the breakfast room table with JonBenet about one hour before she died.

 

[aussiesheila]

Kidnapping or terrorist related crimes come under the jurisdiction of the FBI, Field Agents did attend the crime-scene that morning but left quietly after conferring with their Field Office and BPD.

Make of that whatever you want, some people see a conspiracy, others pragmatism of the part of the FBI, others think the Ramsey influence had its effect, also Lockheed-Martin was a major defense contractor, and some think there was a reporting protocol in the instance of an abduction or terrorist attack.

I found Steve Thomas' book more readable than PMPT, and I guess both books have some factual errors, the former book seems to be more motivated by personal theory, maybe it was his best shot at the time, IMO reviewing the forensic evidence allows for a more darker interpretation than a bed-wetting/toilet-rage scenario.

I always thought it was Eller, head of BPD detective division, who got rid of the FBI.

My take on this is that he was trying to keep the whole investigation entirely under his control and did so because he was protecting the pedophile ring.

 

[aussiesheila]

BlueCrab.

They might if John & Patsy were indulging in some form of illegal activity, and the invited intruder had left then returned after the Ramsey's had gone to bed.

And if there was no fifth person the Ramsey's may lie because they were both guilty.

The securing of separate attorneys, all round, suggests the possibility of potential finger-pointing at some stage?

JonBenet's homicide is not a case of accidental death that was covered up, the forensic evidence suggests something far darker than that, that forensic evidence was re-located and staged suggests the perpetrator(s) foresaw and planned for the lea and media response.

Whether you attribute their success in evading justice to their crime-scene staging or the ineptness of the lea, is an open question, but this they have accomplished, and to date no theory satisfactorly explains either the evidence or supplies a motive!


.

UKGuy, please can you post your theory on the Members' Theories thread. It is too difficult (for me) to get the meaning of most of your posts without having an outline of your theory.

 

[aussiesheila]

Were there any other family members' fingerprints found on the bowl too?


Is there any evidence to back this up? For if not, this is a mere assumption stated as fact.

I don't think BlueCrab means to do this, but alot of his assumptions are stated as fact. I used to get really mad and pull him up all the time. But I gave up. BlueCrab does great research which I have found very valuable. So I forgive him for his misdeeds. I'm sure I err as well.

 

[aussiesheila]

BlueCrab,

You may be correct but there is not enough evidence to be conclusive on this one. e.g. Was the tea-sipping and pineapple eating co-terminous events, they may be exclusive. Burke or Patsy may have laid out the bowl, assuming it came from the fridge, possibly they have to wait a little for it to warm up.

Maybe JonBenet took some in a bowl upstairs to snack on, maybe the tea was sipped at a different point in time, children are not reknowned for their tidying up activities.

How did JonBenet eat this pineapple, from memory, there was just a large serving spoon in the bowl, if she used her hands, maybe she made a mess of her top. I've seen kids do this.


The pineapple and JonBenet is great because we have a timeline, to insert Burke and another party seems a bit tenuous, but it does'nt cost to speculate, and you could be onto something. Personally I think you are but dont find the invited guest scenario helps explain things.

Only thing is, is this invited intruder, and Burke and the Colorado Childrens Code, he/she will also have to be under the age of ten, else why was he/she given a Get-Out-Jail-Card?

.

OK, I'm going to take this opportunity to pick a bit of a hole in the group of young males being responsible for JonBenet's death scenario.

I think BlueCrab has it that there were at least 3 including Burke, whose identities I am clear about, and I think he has 2 more unknown to me. So I'll just talk about the 3 I know of. These 3 males would be young men in their late teens and mid twenties by now, out in the big wide world, socialising with a whole cross-section of people, partying, taking different sexual partners.

Don't people here think that if any of these guys were into tying up 6 year old girls by the wrists and applying EA ligatures around their necks and stun gunning them into submission, when they themselves were only 9 to 17 years old, that by now they would still be every bit as perverted and possibly even more so, and would have indulged themselves many times over in similar and even worse ways over the intervening years?

And don't people think that stories would have leaked out somehow about their weird behaviours? In these days of cheque book journalism many a young University graduate getting a sniff of such a story would be onto it like a shot. Even a tiny snippet of some juicy info plus a snapshot would net them a sizeable sum of money. But this has never happened. In all these years.

So how does one explain this? Well my explanation is that there are no stories because these young men are not deviants and never were and would therefore not have been the ones responsible for JonBenet's death in the manner BlueCrab describes.

 

[aussiesheila]

Trixie

I've often thought the same thing.

If the kids were downstairs by themselves and getting a midnight snack, why on earth would they go for pineapple and tea??
My child loves fruit too, but given a choice he'd opt for junk food first.
Why would they snack on pineapple and tea when the fridge/cupboard was probably full of christmas goodies.
Maybe there wasn't any Christmas goodies left or maybe the fridge had been emptied out due to the family going away the next day.

I think an invitee pedophile probably Santa, brought the (drug laced) fresh pineapple with him in a plastic bag as a 'treat' for JonBenet who, everyone knew, loved fresh pineapple. Patsy got the bowl out of the cupboard for him to empty it into. He served it up to JonBenet. Patsy made Santa a cup of tea.

My proposal is that Santa had told Patsy there was a highly respected photographer friend of his who wanted to take a few photographs of JonBenet for a high class glossy magazine before she left for Charlevoix the next day. I think they sat around the kitchen eating pineapple and drinking tea waiting for the supposed photographer to arrive, until Patsy finally fell asleep. At which time Santa took JonBenet downstairs and contacted the other pedophiles to come and join him.

 

[narlacat]

>>Don't people here think that if any of these guys were into tying up 6 year old girls by the wrists and applying EA ligatures around their necks and stun gunning them into submission, when they themselves were only 9 to 17 years old, that by now they would still be every bit as perverted and possibly even more so, and would have indulged themselves many times over in similar and even worse ways over the intervening years?<<


You have a point Aussie.
I often wonder how it is that Burke appears so normal, if he was the one responsible or in any way involved.
It doesnt seem to have affected him too much, he has a girlfriend and has started university...pretty normal stuff.

 

[BlueCrab]

I don't think BlueCrab means to do this, but alot of his assumptions are stated as fact. I used to get really mad and pull him up all the time. But I gave up. BlueCrab does great research which I have found very valuable. So I forgive him for his misdeeds. I'm sure I err as well.

aussiesheila,

What misdeeds? Please be specific and we'll discuss it. If I'm presenting a theory based on a fact then assumptions are a necessary part of the theory, but I'll make it clear that it's a theory based on a fact.

However, Occam's Razor must also come into play or nothing will get done. For instance, JonBenet snacked from the bowl of pineapple that had been left out on the table that night (this was proven in a lab study). Burke's fingerprints and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl. If someone else had handled the bowl then THEIR fingerprints would have been on the bowl, not just Burke's and Patsy's.

I don't think Burke does the dishes, therefore Patsy's fingerprints would be on the bowl because it would have been she who removed the bowl from the dishwasher and put it away in the cabinet on some day in the past. So it had to have been Burke who handled the bowl and likely spooned pineapple in it from a Safeway plastic container in the refrigerator. If an intruder or ANYONE else did it then HIS fingerprints would have been on the bowl. But there were only Burke's fingerprints. Therefore, it had to have been Burke who was secretly downstairs with JonBenet after the parents had gone to bed. Occam's Razor dictates that conclusion.

BlueCrab

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

aussiesheila,

However, Occam's Razor must also come into play or nothing will get done. For instance, JonBenet snacked from the bowl of pineapple that had been left out on the table that night (this was proven in a lab study). Burke's fingerprints and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl. If someone else had handled the bowl then THEIR fingerprints would have been on the bowl, not just Burke's and Patsy's.

BlueCrab

It was proven in a lab study that pineapple was left on the table? Really? What study?

Who says if someone handles something, their fingerprints would be required to be left behind? Is this another lab study?

 

[Brefie]

Question: Would an expert be able to determine if another 'gloved hand' handled the bowl? I know they would never know who the hand belonged to, but can they 'see' another 'handler'?

 

[sandraladeda]

I think an invitee pedophile probably Santa, brought the (drug laced) fresh pineapple with him in a plastic bag as a 'treat' for JonBenet who, everyone knew, loved fresh pineapple.

Wasn't there toxicology testing done on JBR?

My proposal is that Santa had told Patsy there was a highly respected photographer friend of his who wanted to take a few photographs of JonBenet for a high class glossy magazine before she left for Charlevoix the next day. I think they sat around the kitchen eating pineapple and drinking tea waiting for the supposed photographer to arrive,

After 10 o'clock at night? When they were scheduled to fly out early the next morning?

until Patsy finally fell asleep. At which time Santa took JonBenet downstairs and contacted the other pedophiles to come and join him.

So you are suggesting the ring of pedophiles tiptoed in, past PR, keeled over fast asleep at the kitchen table, had their fun with JBR, killed her, then wrote an outlandish RN, or woke PR and convinced her to write the outlandish RN in order to protect her social standing? And she went along with it?

 

[Brefie]

I have a problem with that, too. I do believe Patsy was in on the cover up, but I don't believe for a second that ANY aspect of this crime was premeditated by Patsy or John.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I agree also. I believe the murder was never intended to end in murder, but I think both John and Patsy were in on the cover up, and I think they were because one of the Ramseys killed JonBenet. They wouldn't go as far as they have to cover up and not cooperate for anyone other than one of their own.

 

[rashomon]

Weren't Patsy's fingerprints found on the bowl too?