Who do YOU believe killed JBR?

[Roy23]

No!!

BR never testified in person. He was videotaped. It is unknown whether his lawyer (he had his own) was with him, but in real life (as opposed to Ramseyville), anyone testifying before a GJ may NOT have a lawyer present. Any mention of "clearing" BR must include mention of the FACT that he had to be cleared because under CO law, he was not allowed to be indicted.

"Exculpatory Evidence Related to Burke Ramsey
Burke Ramsey Cleared
•Burke Ramsey was cleared by BPD police chief Mark Beckner in 1999 and subsequently by Alex Hunter in an October 12, 2000 affidavit as well as in subsequent interviews with media, such as Larry King Live. This is the strongest evidence that Burke is not a plausible suspect in this case.

 

[Whaleshark]

...There is absolutely no way that an 8 year old boy would have done this. I know that there is probably one 8 year old boy somewhere that has done something like this, but the odds are amazingly against that happening. And, I don't believe that Burke would have been molesting JBR either. I think that the odds on this are also against it happening. I think that 8 year old boys aren't thinking of sex. As slow as most boys mature, they aren't thinking of girls that young.

I have always thought that everything points to mom and dad.

First, he wasn't 8 years old. He was almost 10; that is preteen.

Second, you are naive if you believe 9/10 years old, or even 8 years old is too young to think about or know anything about sex. Very naive. Children at very young ages, preschool and the like, are very curious about their bodies, hearing and repeating things they have heard about sex, experimenting in the common first games of sexual play called "Doctor", and sharing with their friends what they have learned from media, siblings, etc.

My son (now 13) told me that when he was 4, a little girl at his daycare told him that she liked him, and had asked him to go to a corner one time with her to express those feelings. She told him to take his pants down and she would take hers down and show each other, because that's what people who like each other do... Now I certainly didn't teach him that, and he was not molested by an adult or other person growing up. But whatever that girl was exposed to in her surroundings, she repeated to my son.

My son comes to me whenever he has a question about sex or his body, or when he overhears things at school. Now that he is in middle school, he says the 8th graders are constantly telling sex jokes all the time, the boys have a 'game' called 'slap Friday' where they harass the girls, and he often sees boys pin girls up against a wall, and sees other affectionate and inappropriate things going on.

Kids learn from what they hear and see around them....even if they didn't get it from their parents, who usually are trying to protect their children from such exposure. It doesn't work that way. Unless they are very sheltered, they will be exposed to things like that on a regular basis. It's part of life, part of our culture.

Now, my son is also very immature...more like 13 going on 9....but that doesn't mean they are not thinking about girls, or curious about sex, or want to try what they have heard about from other boys, etc....in fact, that is what often gets them into trouble with girls because they don't respect boundaries and/or don't know how to interact with them appropriately. Trust me, I have firsthand experience with this, and have gone through several situations with my son as such, simply because he is too immature to think for himself how his actions affect others, and that you don't pop girls' bras, or slap their butts just because they think it's a big joke or a game....I've been dealing with him repeating immature and inappropriate behaviors such as these since he was in 5th grade - that is 10 years old.... (However, he does not like to go to Hooters nor watch movies where guys and girls kiss because he says it makes him uncomfortable...). It is exactly the immaturity and curiosity that gets them into trouble...

I guarantee you a boy almost 10 yrs. old was not completely innocent and was not uncurious about sex and experimentation.

 

[DeeDee249]

"Exculpatory Evidence Related to Burke Ramsey
Burke Ramsey Cleared
•Burke Ramsey was cleared by BPD police chief Mark Beckner in 1999 and subsequently by Alex Hunter in an October 12, 2000 affidavit as well as in subsequent interviews with media, such as Larry King Live. This is the strongest evidence that Burke is not a plausible suspect in this case.

That had nothing to do with his GJ testimony. It is a FACT that he was not questioned in person, but by videotape, presumably with his lawyer present, which is not allowed when being questioned by the GJ.
Larry King live is equivalent to being questioned by Bozo the Clown. He is NOT the police and the Rs interviews with media "personalities" cannot be considered either truthful or exculpatory.
The media cannot "exonerate" a suspect in a legal sense. The present DA in Boulder has not exonerated any R.
BR being "cleared" by AH means nothing other than he was not able to accuse BR because of his age. Innocence, in the matter of age of responsibility for a crime, is not the same as being "cleared".

 

[DeeDee249]

I believe it was Burke Ramsey that was the focus of the Grand Jury Investigation...

Possibly. This explains why there was no indictment, and no reason given for the GJ's decision not to indict. The GJ had three choices. Indict, not indict with a reason, not indict with NO reason. They chose the latter. This is suspicious to me, especially in view of the nature of the crime and the case and that there WAS an underage family member in the home at the time of the murder. If they had refused an indictment on the basis of insufficient evidence, they could have said so. Instead, they said nothing, and that says it all to me. It says there WAS sufficient evidence to indict somebody, yet they did not and refused to say why. If BR was the focus, and the case led to him, they wouldn't be allowed to mention him anyway, and their only choice would be the one they chose- no indictment, no reason, no report.

 

[Roy23]

That had nothing to do with his GJ testimony. It is a FACT that he was not questioned in person, but by videotape, presumably with his lawyer present, which is not allowed when being questioned by the GJ.
Larry King live is equivalent to being questioned by Bozo the Clown. He is NOT the police and the Rs interviews with media "personalities" cannot be considered either truthful or exculpatory.
The media cannot "exonerate" a suspect in a legal sense. The present DA in Boulder has not exonerated any R.
BR being "cleared" by AH means nothing other than he was not able to accuse BR because of his age. Innocence, in the matter of age of responsibility for a crime, is not the same as being "cleared".

Burke Ramsey was cleared. This is common knowlege. I imagine Dave could confirm this but I will try and find something more concrete.

 

[Whaleshark]

More reading on the subject of children and sexual curiosity:
(from toddlers on up....yes, it happens) -

http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Child-Behavior/8-Yr-old-involved-in-sexual-behaviors/show/278950

 

[Roy23]

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-67483130.html

 

[UKGuy]

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-67483130.html

Roy,
What DNA are you talking about? What type of DNA is this, semen or blood etc?

Is any of this DNA that you are citing been discovered anywhere else in the Ramsey household?

How do you know it is foreign, it may be domestic, an environmental artifact that JonBenet came in contact with?


Without a match and a person to interview the DNA you cite means nothing, absolutely nothing, simply because it may have arrived on JonBenet at any point before her death and at any point afterwards e.g. at the autopsy etc.


.

 

[UKGuy]

First, he wasn't 8 years old. He was almost 10; that is preteen.

Second, you are naive if you believe 9/10 years old, or even 8 years old is too young to think about or know anything about sex. Very naive. Children at very young ages, preschool and the like, are very curious about their bodies, hearing and repeating things they have heard about sex, experimenting in the common first games of sexual play called "Doctor", and sharing with their friends what they have learned from media, siblings, etc.

My son (now 13) told me that when he was 4, a little girl at his daycare told him that she liked him, and had asked him to go to a corner one time with her to express those feelings. She told him to take his pants down and she would take hers down and show each other, because that's what people who like each other do... Now I certainly didn't teach him that, and he was not molested by an adult or other person growing up. But whatever that girl was exposed to in her surroundings, she repeated to my son.

My son comes to me whenever he has a question about sex or his body, or when he overhears things at school. Now that he is in middle school, he says the 8th graders are constantly telling sex jokes all the time, the boys have a 'game' called 'slap Friday' where they harass the girls, and he often sees boys pin girls up against a wall, and sees other affectionate and inappropriate things going on.

Kids learn from what they hear and see around them....even if they didn't get it from their parents, who usually are trying to protect their children from such exposure. It doesn't work that way. Unless they are very sheltered, they will be exposed to things like that on a regular basis. It's part of life, part of our culture.

Now, my son is also very immature...more like 13 going on 9....but that doesn't mean they are not thinking about girls, or curious about sex, or want to try what they have heard about from other boys, etc....in fact, that is what often gets them into trouble with girls because they don't respect boundaries and/or don't know how to interact with them appropriately. Trust me, I have firsthand experience with this, and have gone through several situations with my son as such, simply because he is too immature to think for himself how his actions affect others, and that you don't pop girls' bras, or slap their butts just because they think it's a big joke or a game....I've been dealing with him repeating immature and inappropriate behaviors such as these since he was in 5th grade - that is 10 years old.... (However, he does not like to go to Hooters nor watch movies where guys and girls kiss because he says it makes him uncomfortable...). It is exactly the immaturity and curiosity that gets them into trouble...

I guarantee you a boy almost 10 yrs. old was not completely innocent and was not uncurious about sex and experimentation.

Whaleshark,
Any alleged behaviour by Burke may have fallen into the doctors category. To move beyond this, imo, trancends any immaturity and curiosity phase.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Possibly. This explains why there was no indictment, and no reason given for the GJ's decision not to indict. The GJ had three choices. Indict, not indict with a reason, not indict with NO reason. They chose the latter. This is suspicious to me, especially in view of the nature of the crime and the case and that there WAS an underage family member in the home at the time of the murder. If they had refused an indictment on the basis of insufficient evidence, they could have said so. Instead, they said nothing, and that says it all to me. It says there WAS sufficient evidence to indict somebody, yet they did not and refused to say why. If BR was the focus, and the case led to him, they wouldn't be allowed to mention him anyway, and their only choice would be the one they chose- no indictment, no reason, no report.

DeeDee249,
I wonder if all underage children are afforded the same procedure or process during a GJ hearing. e.g. including innocent children?

If there is one instance where an innocent underage child has been named for whatever reason then this would really strengthen up what you say.


The curious aspect is the continuation of the investigation, after the GJ verdict. If as alleged Burke was implicated but afforded anonymity, then by extension John and Patsy must have been given a Get Out Of Jail Card, since I do not think it was Burke who placed JonBenet into the wine-cellar along with her barbie doll and gown.

I reckon a BDI offers the most consistent explanation of the crime-scene evidence, including the notion that there was a subsequent conspiracy.



.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

The curious aspect is the continuation of the investigation, after the GJ verdict.

(snipped)

I believe the case was closed in 2003 and was reopened in 2009. If the GJ had come back and said that Burke was guilty and since he was too young to be charged, wouldn't the case just be closed in 1999? Why would they keep it going for another 3 years and then reopen it more than 10 years after the crime?

 

[UKGuy]

(snipped)

I believe the case was closed in 2003 and was reopened in 2009. If the GJ had come back and said that Burke was guilty and since he was too young to be charged, wouldn't the case just be closed in 1999? Why would they keep it going for another 3 years and then reopen it more than 10 years after the crime?

eileenhawkeye,
Thats what I would like to know too. The cold case status may simply be procedure. Also as an ongoing case all the usual rules apply regarding sealed evidence etc, very convenient.

There may have been a legal conspiracy, something cooked up between the legal teams, which simply continues to play out on paper?

The case may not have been closed in 1999, specifically to afford anonymity to Burke.

This is the conspiracy feature of the BDI, which is consistent with the evidence and the brick wall Steve Thomas came up against during his investigation.

.

 

[Roy23]

Roy,
What DNA are you talking about? What type of DNA is this, semen or blood etc?

Is any of this DNA that you are citing been discovered anywhere else in the Ramsey household?

How do you know it is foreign, it may be domestic, an environmental artifact that JonBenet came in contact with?


Without a match and a person to interview the DNA you cite means nothing, absolutely nothing, simply because it may have arrived on JonBenet at any point before her death and at any point afterwards e.g. at the autopsy etc.


.

Uhmm, from what i understand it was from items in the Ramsey household. The source of the DNA I am not privy to. And as to how I know it, I just cannot reveal that. This is from what I know before any touch DNA was even a consideration in this case and it is from items sent to the FBI lab in 2002 by Beckner sitting in a BPD locker . The information flow has been shut off for a long time now.

There is no match and no person to interview or else they would be in the Can. Obviously this person is not in Codis.

 

[Whaleshark]

Whaleshark,
Any alleged behaviour by Burke may have fallen into the doctors category. To move beyond this, imo, trancends any immaturity and curiosity phase.

...Well, depends; it could be that and more: playing doctor usually occurs in the younger years: 5/6 yrs. old, etc. But it is still immaturity and curiosity in the older ages (8-10, etc), around my son's age, and of the other boys he tells me about at his school, that has them participating in sexually inappropriate behaviors...but then also gets into other reasons like: wanting to try what other boys are talking about, wanting to fit in and look like they are willing to do what the other kids are doing, not wanting to look like a baby - young and weak, wanting to know what it's like to feel a girl's body, not knowing how to tell a girl appropriately if a boy likes her, acting out what they have been exposed to or told about, not knowing how to handle urges and feelings, and wanting to try out things they can get away with....

My point is, whether it was a BDI scenario or not, BR would have most certainly been curious about sex and bodies at his age, whether he was 8 yrs. old or not, but especially since he was 2 wks. away from being 10.
...Also, if you go a BDI angle, you could argue that the doctor game would have been a level of sexual play he could have related JBR into engaging in for her age...Now, yes, if he was the one participating in the chronic molestation activities, or a secret touching/penetrating game/act, or whatever caused the chronic erosion of JB's hymen, that is a calculated repetitive deviant molestation behavior, with probably some coercions and secrets of 'don't tell', etc...and goes beyond immaturity/curiosity, but it all begins with being curious, and they are both immature at that age. Even if it is beyond that though, it doesn't mean that he would not be capable at his age. And if he was friends with even older boys: 11, 12, 13, then at some point he may have been exposed to discussions about sex and what boys do to girls, etc...

 

[UKGuy]

...Well, depends; it could be that and more: playing doctor usually occurs in the younger years: 5/6 yrs. old, etc. But it is still immaturity and curiosity in the older ages (8-10, etc), around my son's age, and of the other boys he tells me about at his school, that has them participating in sexually inappropriate behaviors...but then also gets into other reasons like: wanting to try what other boys are talking about, wanting to fit in and look like they are willing to do what the other kids are doing, not wanting to look like a baby - young and weak, wanting to know what it's like to feel a girl's body, not knowing how to tell a girl appropriately if a boy likes her, acting out what they have been exposed to or told about, not knowing how to handle urges and feelings, and wanting to try out things they can get away with....

My point is, whether it was a BDI scenario or not, BR would have most certainly been curious about sex and bodies at his age, whether he was 8 yrs. old or not, but especially since he was 2 wks. away from being 10.
...Also, if you go a BDI angle, you could argue that the doctor game would have been a level of sexual play he could have related JBR into engaging in for her age...Now, yes, if he was the one participating in the chronic molestation activities, or a secret touching/penetrating game/act, or whatever caused the chronic erosion of JB's hymen, that is a calculated repetitive deviant molestation behavior, with probably some coercions and secrets of 'don't tell', etc...and goes beyond immaturity/curiosity, but it all begins with being curious, and they are both immature at that age. Even if it is beyond that though, it doesn't mean that he would not be capable at his age. And if he was friends with even older boys: 11, 12, 13, then at some point he may have been exposed to discussions about sex and what boys do to girls, etc...

Whaleshark,

...
not wanting to look like a baby - young and weak, wanting to know what it's like to feel a girl's body, not knowing how to tell a girl appropriately if a boy likes her, acting out what they have been exposed to or told about, not knowing how to handle urges and feelings, and wanting to try out things they can get away with....

Sure but that is peer related behaviour, and presumably not gender exclusive?

Even if it is beyond that though, it doesn't mean that he would not be capable at his age. And if he was friends with even older boys: 11, 12, 13, then at some point he may have been exposed to discussions about sex and what boys do to girls, etc...

ITA. Burke and JonBenet, on occassions, shared either the same bed or the same room. So the same scenario attributed to Patsy, one of discovery or accident can be applied to Burke. Also the scream heard may have been Patsy finding JonBenet dead?

It could be that , as speculated, that Burke killed JonBenet for reasons totally unconnected with any form of intimacy. Although Coroner Meyer's autopsy remarks regarding sexual contact do need to be factored in, regardless of which theory you advance.

 

[Whaleshark]

Whaleshark,

Sure but that is peer related behaviour, and presumably not gender exclusive?.

Yes...and after re-reading my post, I didn't mean to imply only boys being curious in girls, and not girls in boys, or boys in boys, girls in girls - whatever someone's orientation may be, or discovering it to be... human nature is one of curiosity and discovery. Simply, we are sexual creatures, and whether a child is 'only 5', or 'only 8', or a preteen, immaturity does not exclude interest or possible participation in sexual activity.

Of course, a child has many avenues of possible exposure to sexual knowledge, not just peer-related: being molested themselves, seeing parents or others do something, watching it in some form of media, hearing people talk about it, finding/seeing ... regardless of how knowledge was gained, children can be exposed to it, and/or be curious about their bodies at any age.

ITA. Burke and JonBenet, on occassions, shared either the same bed or the same room. So the same scenario attributed to Patsy, one of discovery or accident can be applied to Burke. Also the scream heard may have been Patsy finding JonBenet dead?

It could be that, as speculated, that Burke killed JonBenet for reasons totally unconnected with any form of intimacy. Although Coroner Meyer's autopsy remarks regarding sexual contact do need to be factored in, regardless of which theory you advance.

Yep, I would agree with those being possible scenarios as well....

I just wanted to clarify that to assume a young child was in no way possibly involved in either molestation or interested in sexual activity because he was either 8 yrs. and / or immature, is not quite an accurate assumption, and not human nature.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes...
I just wanted to clarify that to assume a young child was in no way possibly involved in either molestation or interested in sexual activity because he was either 8 yrs. and / or immature, is not quite an accurate assumption, and not human nature.

Whaleshark,
Sure, and do you think Coroner Meyer's reference to chronic internal injuries is consistent with that of a nine-year old?


.

 

[norest4thewicked]

BR was 9, and was two weeks away from his 10th Birthday when JB was killed. Had it been 2 weeks later, the investigation may have had a different tone. His friend (and I assume you mean DS) was a year or so older, maybe 11 or 12. Pret-teen would be a better description.

You are right. He was 9. It would be extremely rare for a 9 year old boy to kill. Yes, I know it has happened before, but almost always in ways that do NOT involve sex. A 9 year old boy is not interested in sex.

 

[Whaleshark]

A 9 year old boy is not interested in sex.

9 Year Old Sexual Exploration with 8 Year Old Opposite Sex Cousin:
http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Child-Behavior/9-Year-Old-Sexual-Exploration-with-8-Year-Old-Opposite-Sex-Cousin/show/278054
"....Our 9 yr old son approached us with some real difficulty the other day and let us know that while he was taking a shower with his 8 year old cousin, that he asked her to sit on his private parts so that their private parts touched"....

Sexual behavior in a 8 years old boy:http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Child-Behavior/Sexual-behavior-in-a-8-years-old-boy/show/563728
"...My 8 years old son has being having some sexual interest with others boys since he was 5 years; that was when I saw him for the fist time doing this kind of behavior....."

11 boy sexually abuses 8 year old sister...HELP:http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Abuse-Support/11-boy-sexually-abuses-8-year-old-sisterHELP/show/1084641
"I recently got married to my sole mate…Happy News!!!! Well it goes down hill from here. He has an 11 year old son and an 8 year old daughter. I have an 11 year old son and a 6 year old daughter.....It has recently been brought to our attention that his 11 year old son attempted sexual intercourse with his 8 year old sister. By attempted I mean he stuck his hard penis into her vagina, but when she started to cry because it (obviously) hurt he stopped.

Sexual Exploration - Siblings 6yr boy 3-4 year old girls:http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Child-Behavior/Sexual-Exploration---Siblings-6yr-boy-3-4-year-old-girls/show/1289734
"My son just turned 6 yrs old.... I have a 3 and 4 year old daughter. My daughters have told there grandmother (NOT ME) that their brother has showed his private parts to them and asked them to do sexual favors...."

Sexual Behavior:
http://www.medhelp.org/posts/Parenting-Toddlers-1-5/Sexual-Behavior/show/446912
"My 2 and 3 year old grandsons were upstairs playing in their playroom, but quieter than usual so I went up to check on them and found them totally undressed on the bed, one on top of the other touching penis - penis..."

NoRest, How much more do you need?

 

[Whaleshark]

Whaleshark,
Sure, and do you think Coroner Meyer's reference to chronic internal injuries is consistent with that of a nine-year old?

I don't know, UK...depends on what you're asking...if by that question you mean: could he have caused those injuries by attempting sexual intercourse with her with his penis, being the average size of a 9-year olds...? (since we are getting all explicit here)....there's a lot of 'ifs'...IF you are asking me about that particular scenario - IF he was not avg/small size of 9-yr. olds, and IF he attempted molesting her that way, and IF he did that particular act numerous times...maybe.... but I never said that I think he did...I just said that you cannot eliminate the possibility of his interest in sex or participation in anything sexual because of his age or level of maturity.

And molestation can occur with other things other than that particular body part....hands, fingers, objects...

FYI - I never eliminated a friend, JBR father, or anyone else....I'm just sayin', can't eliminate BR either....