JonBenet Ramsey

[ElDosEquis]

I have a brother who was a fucker when he was a kid. He'd fly off the handle and throw shit or pick up whatever was handy and swing it around.

Mom always gave him the benefit of a doubt and coddled him.

So knowing that one fact - about how a mom COULD favor or play the "NOT MY SON" card - brings the case into focus for me.

John and Patsy Ramsey were looking at possible losing TWO children and their "social" status within the neighborhood.

Imagine the heartbreak of knowing your son killed your daughter - over something stupid like pineapple - and then going thru the agony of a possible court case/possibly having their son taken away and having friends and neighbors point and ponder what drove him to kill.

 

They would have been put under a microscope and treated like pariahs.

IF (and I state that with major league stink eye) the Ramsey bunch were responsible for JBR's death - accidental or even worse, planned by the son - THAT would have ruined the family.

The cover-up? Worse than the crime because it involved three people that had no concept of telling the truth and they kept up with lie for years.

It shows a real lack of empathy and honesty.

There were too many "What about the......." questions in this case to get a clear look at the bottom of that pond - too many people muddying up the waters and scaring any truths into the weeds by the shoreline.

[Jel]

Interesting link, chocoltechip45 -- thanks for posting it. Lots of interesting info there.

[ElDosEquis]

Here is something to gnaw on?

The Polly Klaas murder case, a home invasion kidnapping and murder, came to a close in the summer of 1996.

That case was still fresh in the minds of the people of CA (I don't know how it played out in the media in the rest of the nation), it happens again?

Burke may have accidentally killed JBR.

Then P and J freaked out and staged a kidnapping, hiding the body in the home. 

Thinking that the cops would look outside the home for her and seeing that that angle wasn't going to work for them, John took that hour and a half to stage a crime scene.

Their attempts at making it look like the PK kidnapping went south and they had to go with another scenario.

[Jel]

Did anyone else get skeeved out by Santa? His keeping JB's glitter with him all the time and his desire to have his ashes mixed with her glitter after death? His note about a special surprise after Christmas? 

[choclatechip45]

Quote

Interesting link, chocoltechip45 -- thanks for posting it. Lots of interesting info there.

No problem. The whole site is really interesting.

Quote

Did anyone else get skeeved out by Santa? His keeping JB's glitter with him all the time and his desire to have his ashes mixed with her glitter after death? His note about a special surprise after Christmas? 

Yes I was always skeeved out by him. I think he was ruled out because of his health. I don't think his hairs from his beard were found around the body.

Edited September 23, 2016 by choclatechip45

[Jel]

Yes, and he was too large to get through that window I'd say. But if he had a skinny accomplice, who could have gone through the window and opened the door for him...

Would Santa have known they were going to friends' for Christmas, could he have overheard them talking about it? Time to be there, etc., so he'd know exactly when the house would be vacant? JB gave him a tour of the house.

If Santa woke up a six year old girl in the middle of the night, for her special surprise and told her to be very quiet getting up and going downstairs, would she? Told her her special surprise was hidden down in the basement, etc. I do think she'd trust him.

He was a smartish man, former professor, smart enough to cover his tracks? Creeps me out a lot to think about it.

[Guest]

I'm pretty sure he mentioned in the Dr Phil interview that he "could have" had Hi Tec boots. 

I read through that Lou Smit interview at the link posted above and all I can say is, "WOW." I can't believe that an investigator was allowed to spoon feed a suspect so much. 

[Jel]

Doesn't Burke saying he could have had hi-tek boots point more to his honesty than anything else? I mean if he did it, and knew there was a boot print, but he's not being investigated, why not simply say no? Why, if you're lying about everything else, suddenly get truthful about these boots, which, if they were Burke's don't mean diddly anyway. If that's Burke's bootprint, it's not any kind of evidence of murder because he lived in that house. By him saying he could have had a pair, all he does is weaken the intruder theory.  It just doesn't add up to me.

[BookWoman56]

I've never followed this case much after the initial few days of major media coverage, so for me the only shock about this special has been hearing that so many people never gave serious thought to the idea that Burke could have done it. Based on the fairly small amount of coverage I saw then, it seemed to me the only logical explanation was that the brother did it either accidentally or deliberately, and the parents staged the ransom note and so forth to divert attention away from him.  After seeing the special, I am more of the opinion that Burke did it, either in a fit of rage or as a deliberate act of viciousness, and the parents were afraid he would either be charged with a crime (even though he was technically too young) or institutionalized. Given the stories about the golf club and the different incidents with feces, I have to think that both parents were aware that the kid was majorly fucked up but failed to do anything about it, were confronted with JonBenet's death as incontrovertible evidence of their failure as parents to protect her from him, and decided they would try to protect him from being blamed for her death.  The interview where he seems so carefree despite his sister having been murdered in their home two weeks earlier is chilling. But equally chilling for me was the statement by the woman who had asked Patsy about JonBenet's scar when photographing her. When she repeated Patsy's comment that Burke had lost his temper and hit JonBenet with a golf club, it was like she was mimicking Patsy's tone of voice, which indicated that there was not the slightest thing unusual or shocking about Burke having responded that violently. Yes, siblings fight but when one attacks the other with a golf club, that's the point at which a parent or both parents should consider getting professional advice and help for their kid. I'm guessing that there had been more than one episode of violence.  Kids can easily cause injury or death because they don't understand the consequences of their actions. But there are also some kids who are just vicious and enjoy inflicting pain on others. After watching Burke both as a child and as an adult, to me he seems more the type who derived pleasure from inflicting pain.

Part of the reason I've never watched much coverage of the case is that I have a very visceral reaction to Patsy and the pictures of JonBenet dressed up in her pageant costumes. About a year before the murder, I had to be at a conference in a hotel where one of those kiddie beauty pageants was being held, and I was horrified at hearing the mothers screaming at their five and six-year-old daughters that they needed to be more sexy or they wouldn't win. I have no idea if Patsy was that demanding, but I don't think that's much of a stretch. So in that household there's one parent who is pretentious and self-absorbed, another who seems checked out, a child who is exhibiting seriously disturbing behavior, and another child who was already being exploited to be a boost to her mother's ego.  No wonder the end result was a clusterfuck.

Edited September 24, 2016 by BookWoman56

[choclatechip45]

Quote

Doesn't Burke saying he could have had hi-tek boots point more to his honesty than anything else? I mean if he did it, and knew there was a boot print, but he's not being investigated, why not simply say no? Why, if you're lying about everything else, suddenly get truthful about these boots, which, if they were Burke's don't mean diddly anyway. If that's Burke's bootprint, it's not any kind of evidence of murder because he lived in that house. By him saying he could have had a pair, all he does is weaken the intruder theory.  It just doesn't add up to me.

His parents have always been adamant that he did not have the boots. In the link I posted they even try to imply that he meant high-tech shoes like light up shoes. Lin Wood goes so far to say to the  investigators that Burke never said that to investigators. If the parents and Burke were adamant that he had the boots I would say that would point to his innocent.

Edited September 24, 2016 by choclatechip45

[MsJamieDornan]

3 hours ago, ElDosEquis said:

 

I have a brother who was a fucker when he was a kid. He'd fly off the handle and throw shit or pick up whatever was handy and swing it around.

Mom always gave him the benefit of a doubt and coddled him.

So knowing that one fact - about how a mom COULD favor or play the "NOT MY SON" card - brings the case into focus for me.

 

I understand that completely.  I'm not sure who killed JonBenet but I don't think it was an intruder. And just because John and Patsy say something didn't happen or they don't remember something,,,we don't have to believe it. Even tho the cops seem to.

[torqy]

Like some others here I never followed this case much after the initial eruption. I had forgotten that there even was a brother. I only remember vague ideas that the parents may have been involved.

One thing that I haven't seen addressed yet is what hold the Ramseys had on the City of Boulder. Did they own all of the outstanding municipal bonds? Yes they were wealthy (seemingly); did they have photos of the mayor with a goat? With a circle of "friends" that extensive, I find it hard to believe that someone who was jealous of/slighted by them didn't break the silence.

At this point I am in the Burke Did It camp, only because any other theory seems even more bizarre and unlikely. That, and the fact that no sane person spreads crap around the house.

Edited September 24, 2016 by torqy

[ghoulina]

4 hours ago, torqy said:

At this point I am in the Burke Did It camp, only because any other theory seems even more bizarre and unlikely. That, and the fact that no sane person spreads crap around the house.

No. Not at his age. A two-year-old may take their diaper off and smear poop. It happens. By the age of 9. that is an extremely troubling behavior. Jon Benet had a very high number of visits to her doctor. I think it was like 27 in the last year. Was Burke ever in to see a doctor? Were his parents just hoping this was a phase that would pass? Did they ever bring the poop smearing up with his pediatrician? I doubt it, because most good doctors would immediately recommend a behavioralist. 

[BitterApple]

Did they say what the visits were for? 27 visits in a year is crazy high, unless Patsy was one of hypochondriac mothers who made an appointment if her kid had a hang nail or scraped knee. In the A&E special, JB's pediatrician was adamant that he would have reported any abuse, but oftentimes the rules are bended when your client is rich and powerful. Plenty of mandated reporters knew Josh Duggar was molesting his sisters and look how that turned out.

[Abmis]

6 hours ago, torqy said:

Like some others here I never followed this case much after the initial eruption. I had forgotten that there even was a brother. I only remember vague ideas that the parents may have been involved.

One thing that I haven't seen addressed yet is what hold the Ramseys had on the City of Boulder. Did they own all of the outstanding municipal bonds? Yes they were wealthy (seemingly); did they have photos of the mayor with a goat? With a circle of "friends" that extensive, I find it hard to believe that someone who was jealous of/slighted by them didn't break the silence.

At this point I am in the Burke Did It camp, only because any other theory seems even more bizarre and unlikely. That, and the fact that no sane person spreads crap around the house.

Your last sentence makes me wonder about Patsy.  Was any of the feces ever tested for DNA?  The more I read and hear about Patsy the weirder I think she must have been.  I hate to think of anyone smearing crap around, let alone a grown woman but who knows what goes on behind closed doors?

I always wanted to believe an intruder did it because what JB went through was terrible, and to me it's even more horrifying to think that she suffered at the hands of the people who were supposed  to love and protect her.  Sadly, I'm leaning more and more towards thinking Patsy did it.

[ElDosEquis]

This is the great thing about these boards - you can get some great views, opinions and other avenues that open you up to looking in other directions.

I wasn't able to watch the whole miniseries at once, I watched in bits and pieces - On Demand - and finally got to the end where they experts gave their hypothesis on the case.

It wasn't surprising that they all had pretty much the same conclusion.

The case is a black mark on the city of Boulder and it's crazy that they - PD, DA's office and the people of the community - didn't/don't want a definitive answer and a close to the case.

This case is that bowl of food that gets shoved to the back of the fridge, is forgotten and you smell every time you open the door.

The people of Boulder - and the spineless assholes that knew the family and don't want to talk/help in any new investigation - are just as much to blame for this case not having a satisfactory conclusion.

[BitterApple]

Regarding Burke, I agree his cavalier "whatevs" attitude towards his sister's brutal murder was unsettling. I know there's no right or wrong way to act, but even if he didn't do it, there was certainly no love lost between the siblings. Burke wasn't all that unhappy to see his competition gone.

It's also doubly weird that Burke was hiding out in his room like a kid who knows he's been bad and is trying to avoid punishment. Your mother's flipping out, there's cop cars in the front yard and friends flooding the house and you don't come out of your room to ask what's going on? Wtf?

[Jel]

The ransom note had a rambling, make it up on the fly quality, and a throw a few things up and see what sticks quality. It, as far as I know about ransom notes which isn't much, was very unlike others where an actual kidnapping took place. So, I can see why people think it's a cover up.  

The practice copy (copies?) also bug me. Was the note written before or after she was dead? Was it written by an intruder, while waiting around in the house, arriving shortly after they left with a bunch of time on his/her hands? or was it written after she died? It seems pretty damn risky for an intruder to stick around after her death to write several copies of the note. So, if an intruder did it, then I think it would have been before.

So why write a note? Did s/he/they actually plan to take her and ransom her for the sum of $118,000? Could someone have known (other than the Ramseys) that John got that bonus, so that amount would be in his account? Why exactly $118,000? Is there some significance to that number?

Or, did they intend to keep her and so fake a ransom-motivated kidnapping designed to buy some time, until  10am, assuming the Ramseys would not call the police?  The horrible truth is that some pedophiles do take children and keep them -- there are a number of publicized cases where that has taken place.

Edited September 24, 2016 by Jel

[ElDosEquis]

3 minutes ago, BitterApple said:

Regarding Burke, I agree his cavalier "whatevs" attitude towards his sister's brutal murder was unsettling. I know there's no right or wrong way to act, but even if he didn't do it, there was certainly no love lost between the siblings. Burke wasn't all that unhappy to see his competition gone.

It's also doubly weird that Burke was hiding out in his room like a kid who knows he's been bad and is trying to avoid punishment. Your mother's flipping out, there's cop cars in the front yard and friends flooding the house and you don't come out of your room to ask what's going on? Wtf?

Your last two posts floored me.

The specials/new investigations focused on the death and who did it - the extenuating circumstances? Not so much.

The abuse angle and JBRs bedwetting make sense, A nine year old boy, who was jealous of his sister, might just abuse his sister to show his displeasure. Have we forgotten that some kids play "doctor" when they are that young?

Had JBR told her mom that Burke WAS abusing her and Patsy freaked out about THAT? More cover-ups?

I wonder what is in her medical records?

-----

All of Burke's "I sleep deeply/I stayed in my room" blasé attitude about the death make even MORE sense now.

Let's go with "Pissed off over Pineapple Scenario".

Burke hits JBR and pokes her with the RR track, when he gets no reaction - he panics and wakes up J and P, they send him to his room.

Burke only remembers his hitting his sister - because he was in his room while the cover-up goes on - the whole 'concept' of her death doesn't register as anything OTHER than his rival/competition was gone.

Patsy's obsession with JBR's pageants and the time she with JBR must have grated on Burke and he didn't think anything about her death.

If that is the case, He is one fucked up character?  

[Abmis]

1 hour ago, Jel said:

So why write a note? Did s/he/they actually plan to take her and ransom her for the sum of $118,000? Could someone have known (other than the Ramseys) that John got that bonus, so that amount would be in his account? Why exactly $118,000? Is there some significance to that number?

 

I've always wondered if Patsy bragged about John's bonus and a lot of people knew the amount.  I read a comment somewhere by a poster wondering if the mother of one of JB's pageant competitors may of done it.   Kind of like the Texas Cheerleader case.  I'm intrigued by that idea.  Maybe it was someone who was on the very edge of Patsy's social and/or pageant circle.   Someone close enough to know details about the family yet enough on the edge  to be somewhat invisible.  I know I'm making a Lifetime movie plot out of it, but it pains me to think it was someone in the family.

[AZChristian]

19 minutes ago, Abmis said:

I've always wondered if Patsy bragged about John's bonus and a lot of people knew the amount.  

Or if she complained that it was "ONLY" $118,000.  That would be more cause for jealousy.  "They won't even miss this."

[LGGirl]

If someone came in and kidnapped your kid, I can see calling the police.  What I can't see is calling friends to come over and contaminate the scene and cause confusion.  I would want the police to go through my home with a fine tooth comb.   

Also, I would get the money, like John did.  But I would be anxiously waiting for the call.  No call came at the designated time.  Wouldn't any normal parent start to freak out?   The time came and went without notice.  

You know why?   Because they knew what happened.  There was no intruder.  No kidnapping.  She was dead and they knew it.  

[choclatechip45]

I always thought it was weird JonBenet's gravestone said December 25th not December 26th.

[pamplemousse]

If a rival pageant mom did it, then she brought five men with her to help because that's how many people (1 woman, 5 men) the DNA on Jonbenet's leggings, underwear, and beneath her fingernails pointed to. Anyone on the edge of Patsy's social or pageant circle wouldn't be familiar enough with the Ramseys habits and day-to-day life to know about the layout of the Ramseys' maze of a basement and which stairway they used more frequently in order to put the ransom note there.

It's sad to think that a family member did it, but that's what happens in the vast majority of child murder cases. It's usually family, not some random pedophile.

I used to think that Burke smeared his feces on a wall when Patsy had cancer the first time around because he was upset his mother had cancer. Now I think that he was so jealous of anyone or anything that took up Patsy's attention, he did it because he was jealous that she had ovarian cancer and had to pay attention to her own health over him.

[BookWoman56]

5 hours ago, ElDosEquis said:

This case is that bowl of food that gets shoved to the back of the fridge, is forgotten and you smell every time you open the door.

The people of Boulder - and the spineless assholes that knew the family and don't want to talk/help in any new investigation - are just as much to blame for this case not having a satisfactory conclusion.

After watching the special, I am 95% convinced the reason John and Patsy pressured their friends not to talk to the cops was that they didn't want any stories about Burke's weird behavior being heard and attracting attention. I can easily see them telling the friends that obviously an intruder did it but the cops here are so dumb, that if they hear Burke has a temper they will harass and use him as a scapegoat so they can say they solved the case. Unless the only time Burke acted out was at home, I could easily see that there might have been incidents with other kids, not necessarily as intense as hitting JonBenet with a golf club, but perhaps enough that taken together, the cops would have figured out something was seriously off with the kid. Without there being something to hide, it makes no damn sense for John and Patsy to request their friends not to tell the cops everything they knew. People react differently to tragedies, but in what universe do parents whose child has been brutally murdered in their own house, supposedly by an intruder, not beg their friends and neighbors to cooperate fully with the cops in the hope of tracking down the killer and preventing this from happening again?

Edited September 24, 2016 by BookWoman56
Missing conjunction

[Cara]

8 minutes ago, pamplemousse said:

If a rival pageant mom did it, then she brought five men with her to help because that's how many people (1 woman, 5 men) the DNA on Jonbenet's leggings, underwear, and beneath her fingernails pointed to. Anyone on the edge of Patsy's social or pageant circle wouldn't be familiar enough with the Ramseys habits and day-to-day life to know about the layout of the Ramseys' maze of a basement and which stairway they used more frequently in order to put the ransom note there.

It's sad to think that a family member did it, but that's what happens in the vast majority of child murder cases. It's usually family, not some random pedophile.

 

I started reading James Kolar's book, Foreign Faction last night. He starts out by writing a narrative of how events would have played out under the intruder theory. When you read it in that form it's obvious just how implausible it is that things happened that way.

BTW, the book is free to borrow with Amazon Prime if anyone is interested.

[AZChristian]

3 minutes ago, Cara said:

I started reading James Kolar's book, Foreign Faction last night. He starts out by writing a narrative of how events would have played out under the intruder theory. When you read it in that form it's obvious just how implausible it is that things happened that way.

BTW, the book is free to borrow with Amazon Prime if anyone is interested.

I think you have to pay for it if you have Amazon Prime, but it's free to read via Amazon Unlimited.  I do have Prime, but not Unlimited, so if I'm wrong, PLEASE let me know so I can read it for free.

[Cara]

46 minutes ago, AZChristian said:

I think you have to pay for it if you have Amazon Prime, but it's free to read via Amazon Unlimited.  I do have Prime, but not Unlimited, so if I'm wrong, PLEASE let me know so I can read it for free.

I don't have Unlimited either. With Prime there are certain books, like this one that you borrow one at a time on Kindle for free. You have to "return" it before you can borrow a new one.

Edited September 24, 2016 by Cara

[AZChristian]

34 minutes ago, Cara said:

I don't have Unlimited either. With Prime there are certain books, like this one that you borrow one at a time on Kindle for free. You have to "return" it before you can borrow a new one.

Thanks!  I'd never done that before, but I sure will use it now and in the future.  I owe you a cuppa coffee!!!!

[torqy]

2 hours ago, Cara said:

I don't have Unlimited either. With Prime there are certain books, like this one that you borrow one at a time on Kindle for free. You have to "return" it before you can borrow a new one.

Thanx for mentioning this. I do have Prime, and will look into this book. Mrs. Torqy is a true-crime junkie.

[AZChristian]

I started reading it a little while ago.  Even though I thought I knew a lot about the case, I've already learned a lot more, and a couple of my formerly unanswered questions have been answered.

[Ohmo]

7 hours ago, Jel said:

The ransom note had a rambling, make it up on the fly quality, and a throw a few things up and see what sticks quality. It, as far as I know about ransom notes which isn't much, was very unlike others where an actual kidnapping took place. So, I can see why people think it's a cover up.  

The practice copy (copies?) also bug me. Was the note written before or after she was dead? Was it written by an intruder, while waiting around in the house, arriving shortly after they left with a bunch of time on his/her hands? or was it written after she died? It seems pretty damn risky for an intruder to stick around after her death to write several copies of the note.

That whole thing with the "foreign faction" really sticks out like a sore thumb.  In this day and age, with having to deal with terror threats, the use of words like "faction" would make more sense.  Unfortunately, that has become something that is on people's radar.  However, this was pre-9/11.  "Faction" is not a word that one would hear in average conversation at that time. 

Also, I'm not saying there's any connection, but I remember seeing some old footage of when Patty Heart was kidnapped. I'm not sure when that happened, but I was either not born or very young.  Anyway, the rambling nature of some of the stuff I heard about Patty Hearst reminded me of the JB ransom note.  The length of the note is a major strike against the intruder theory.  It makes NO sense for an intruder to hang around in the house and take as long as it did to write it.

Another thing to think about: I taught elementary school years ago---kids who were Burke's age.  I promise you that the "teacher radar" of Burke's teacher was probably pinging something fierce.  You can pick up stuff (both positive and negative) about a student just from daily interactions with him or her.  Burke's school files probably contain some very interesting reading, but they are protected by privacy laws.  However, I believe that they could have been accessed by court order.

In terms of JB, she was six, which would have made her in kindergarten or first grade.  Don't know about Colorado, but it was state law in the state where I taught: Teachers were bound by law to report the suspected abuse of any student.

[EVS]

The phrase "foreign faction" is meant to suggest a professional or at least semi-professional group.  However, the rambling ransom note, complete with movie quotes, is more suggestive of the bumbling bad guys in the 'Home Alone' movies. Definitely a contradiction, imo.

[Calamity Jane]

I watched this a few days ago, and after sitting with it since then, it feels like a better explanation than anything else I've read or seen in all these nearly 20 years.  An outsider just never seemed possible, especially with that bizarre ransom note, and the parents never felt right either.  I never even considered Burke because it seemed like too much of a grown-up crime, but having watched this version, and those entirely weird recordings of his interviews, I think I can buy it.  There are always going to be weird things that seem unaccountable when nobody comes forward to explain them, I guess, but this seems to have fewer insurmountable issues than other scenarios.  I'm kind of embarrassed I'm still spending any energy on such a long-ago, fairly common crime, but sometimes unsolved crimes do stick with you.  

[AZChristian]

According to "Foreign Faction," the Boulder District Attorney's office hired a world-famous linguist to analyze the note.  This is the guy who "outed" Joe Klein as the anonymous author of "Primary Colors."  Klein denied for 6 months, but then finally admitted he wrote it.

The linguist is a firm believer that style of written communication is almost like DNA; it's scientific, and impossible to hide, even if you try to change it.  He was given six writing samples from six people connected to the case.  His conclusion:  No one BUT Patsy Ramsey could have written that note.  When he presented his findings to the DA's office, their response was, "Oh - you must be wrong."  Period.

[choclatechip45]

2 hours ago, AZChristian said:

According to "Foreign Faction," the Boulder District Attorney's office hired a world-famous linguist to analyze the note.  This is the guy who "outed" Joe Klein as the anonymous author of "Primary Colors."  Klein denied for 6 months, but then finally admitted he wrote it.

The linguist is a firm believer that style of written communication is almost like DNA; it's scientific, and impossible to hide, even if you try to change it.  He was given six writing samples from six people connected to the case.  His conclusion:  No one BUT Patsy Ramsey could have written that note.  When he presented his findings to the DA's office, their response was, "Oh - you must be wrong."  Period.

The big problem with Foster was that before he was involved in the case he wrote a letter to Patsy Ramsey and told her she could not have done this based on the ransom note. He based this off of writings that were on the internet.

[SSAHotchner]

8 hours ago, choclatechip45 said:

I always thought it was weird JonBenet's gravestone said December 25th not December 26th.

From the start that always said to me that the parents knew she was dead on the 25th. Any time after midnight, they would have put Dec. 26th on the stone. 

[SSAHotchner]

3 hours ago, Calamity Jane said:

I watched this a few days ago, and after sitting with it since then, it feels like a better explanation than anything else I've read or seen in all these nearly 20 years.  An outsider just never seemed possible, especially with that bizarre ransom note, and the parents never felt right either.  I never even considered Burke because it seemed like too much of a grown-up crime, but having watched this version, and those entirely weird recordings of his interviews, I think I can buy it.  There are always going to be weird things that seem unaccountable when nobody comes forward to explain them, I guess, but this seems to have fewer insurmountable issues than other scenarios.  I'm kind of embarrassed I'm still spending any energy on such a long-ago, fairly common crime, but sometimes unsolved crimes do stick with you.  

You don't need to be embarrassed. I've always enjoyed mysteries, puzzles and reading true crime stories. This case does stick with you because the victim was so young and the bizarre elements like the rambling ransom note. My husband and I have watched so read so many mysteries and watched so many TV crime shows that now when we watch one we call out the stuff that stands out and are able to figure out who the murderer is a lot of the time. No one wants to believe that a family member could have done this to a sweet, innocent 6 year old, but unfortunately it's not uncommon for a family member to be responsible for a child's death. Every time you read, "I woke up and he/she wasn't there" you find yourself waiting for the child to be found and the news story announcing that a parent or significant other of one of the parents were arrested to follow. Of course you hope that the child will be found alive, but it's almost never the case. 

[ElDosEquis]

5 minutes ago, SSAHotchner said:

From the start that always said to me that the parents knew she was dead on the 25th. Any time after midnight, they would have put Dec. 26th on the stone. 

I wonder what the death certificate says?

----

The more I looked at the interviews that the Ramsey's gave - with the idea that they HAD lost two kids - the more I think that they covered up whatever happened to the child.

If the murder went down, as the show's experts say it did?

Imagine the pain of living with the your son, knowing that he killed his sister and having sold your soul to the devil to protect him. That's no river in Egypt, that's just crazy.

One thing that came to mind is that they both looked defeated in the interviews they together. They didn't lie when they said they had nothing to do with her death, but what about a cover-up?

It might have been bad form to have asked them any question about a cover-up, so they were able to go on shows without the fear of being tripped up with that line of questions?

There is a difference between, "Did YOU break that window?" and "WHO broke the window?"

[AZChristian]

18 minutes ago, ElDosEquis said:

I wonder what the death certificate says.

 

December 26.

[Epeolatrix]

Quote

I always thought it was weird JonBenet's gravestone said December 25th not December 26th.

It's inherently more memorable and tragic / dramatic to say she died on Christmas.

[ghoulina]

Did they say what the visits were for? 27 visits in a year is crazy high, unless Patsy was one of hypochondriac mothers who made an appointment if her kid had a hang nail or scraped knee. In the A&E special, JB's pediatrician was adamant that he would have reported any abuse, but oftentimes the rules are bended when your client is rich and powerful. Plenty of mandated reporters knew Josh Duggar was molesting his sisters and look how that turned out.

 

I don't believe every single visit has been accounted for, but she did have a history of vaginosis. I don't think that was the reason behind every trip to the doctor, though. Twenty-seven is definitely excessive. I also read somewhere that Patsy called the pediatrician 3 times within one hour just a few nights before Christmas. I'm not sure if she ever reached him or what the reason was, though.

[AZChristian]

50 minutes ago, ghoulina said:

I don't believe every single visit has been accounted for, but she did have a history of vaginosis. I don't think that was the reason behind every trip to the doctor, though. Twenty-seven is definitely excessive. I also read somewhere that Patsy called the pediatrician 3 times within one hour just a few nights before Christmas. I'm not sure if she ever reached him or what the reason was, though.

I had never heard of vaginosis before, so just did some googling.  Apparently, "excessive washing of the vagina may alter the normal balance of bacteria in the vagina, which may make Bacterial Vaginosis more likely to develop."  Excessive cleaning of the genitalia might also cause accidental rupture of the hymen if the washer's finger slips or is too rough during cleansing.  Like maybe a mother might do if her 6-year-old child frequently wet the bed and had to be cleaned up so she could go back to sleep.

This is SPECULATION on my part . . . but it makes one think.

[pythonite]

Santa made my skin crawl when I watched him being interviewed years ago. It was all weird little stories about how important Santa Bill was to JBR, and he struck me as being far too at ease with the idea she was dead. I'm very suspicious of his intentions toward the little girl, he was obsessed with her in an unhealthy way. I though it was him.

Sadly this series made me agree that it was Burke, and I don't think it was an accidental blow. I think he used a golf club, not flashlight. I read something on websleuths about a member of Patsy's family removing a golf club from  the house. I think jealousy over Christmas presents was the cause, with him being jealous and resentful of her in general, in addition to lacking empathy. 

It best explains the bizarre ransom note and why the parents never turned on one another in spite of all the pressure the police put on them.

Weird irony that Burke was a month shy of being able to be charged with anything anyway. Uber rich people can be strange.

Rest in peace JBR.

[glowbug]

On September 24, 2016 at 11:40 AM, choclatechip45 said:

I always thought it was weird JonBenet's gravestone said December 25th not December 26th.

The time of death on the birth certificate is 13:23 (1:23 pm) which is when the body was discovered, not when she actually died. It's possible that the estimated time of death was late December 25, or the estimated window started on December 25. Don't get me wrong, I believe one of the Ramseys did it, but there could be other reasons why the date of her death was the 25th instead of the 26th on her gravestone aside from them knowing when she died because they or their son did it.

There is no doubt in my mind that one of the family members did it, most likely Burke, and Patsy and John tried to cover it up. That ransom note was so obviously fake. No kidnapper would write something like that, or write it in the Ramseys' home using their pen and paper. The mistakes in the coverup, like forgetting to get rid of the pineapple, are believable to me. These people, regardless of their intelligence, are not criminally sophisticated, and they came up with the plan last minute while dealing with the fact that their daughter, who I believe they loved, had just been killed by their son. There was no way either parent was thinking clearly. 

The Ramseys were also acting very suspiciously. The reaction to the supposed ransom letter made no sense if they believed in the letter. It states that if they call anyone or alert the authorities then Jonbenet will be killed. So first they immediately call the police without telling them to send an unmarked police car. Then they call two family friends to come over as well. They aren't taking the threat in the letter seriously at all because they know it's fake or know their daughter is already dead. It was also suspicious that they weren't cooperating with investigators and telling friends not to cooperate with them either. I could understand if they didn't want them talking to the media but it doesn't make sense, if they want the killer found, to tell them not to talk to the police as well. I don't blame them for lawyering up (I've listened to Serial and other podcasts about wrongful convictions and I've watched plenty of legal dramas with shady cops) but they weren't just having a lawyer present for questioning, they were refusing to be questioned and then demanding to have the questions ahead of time.

As for why they covered it up in the first place when Burke was too young to be held legally responsible in Colorado, there are several potential reasons. For one, they might not have known that a nine year old couldn't be prosecuted for murder. The laws are different in each state and they're from the South which is traditionally more conservative and less lenient on juvenile offenders. They also probably didn't want Burke to have the stigma of having killed his sister following him around. This was also a family that cared about appearances so it's possible they didn't want to look bad, although if that was their motive it completely backfired.

There is something seriously wrong with Burke. Both the interviews they showed in the docuseries and the clips I saw from the Dr. Phil interview are disturbing. His affect, behavior and answers aren't consistent with someone who believes their sister was murdered by an intruder and many of them made me think he was guilty. I know everyone reacts differently to trauma but that only goes so far. There is a range of possible reactions and his fall outside that range. He shows absolutely no fear and seems very unaffected by his sister's death and he smiles at very inappropriate times. I really think he's a psychopath and not a very smart one at that. Intelligent psychopaths are able to read other people well and feign normal human emotion like guilt and empathy even when they don't feel it. Burke either lacks this ability or doesn't care what people think.

I do think the docuseries went a little too far by suggesting that the pineapple was the motive of the murder. It's possible but there are also a billion other equally possible situations that could have triggered Burke to murder his sister. I also wish they had addressed some of the concerns noted above. I have to wonder if some of it was addressed but had to be cut when they reduced the series from six hours to four. Laura Richards and Jim Clemente have a podcast, Real Crime Profile, where they've said they'll answer questions from listeners about the docuseries so I hope someone asks those questions and they choose to answer them. Laura Richards and Jim Clemente are also very responsive to viewer emails if someone here wants to email the podcast. I once emailed them a question unrelated to this case and Jim Clemente sent me a response a few days later and it wasn't a short response either. 

Edited September 26, 2016 by glowbug

[sassykattt]

Whoever did it got away with it.  We'll never know.  We wrecked a lot of peoples lives already.  Can we please let it go?

[ElDosEquis]

8 hours ago, sassykattt said:

Whoever did it got away with it.  We'll never know.  We wrecked a lot of peoples lives already.  Can we please let it go?

There can never be a close to the case because it is a murder and that child will never know justice as long as there is no resolution..

We, as a people interested in her life and death, should be the ones to look after her - her family, friends and the some of the people in Boulder failed her.

Our children deserve better than that?

[ghoulina]

11 hours ago, pythonite said:

 

Santa made my skin crawl when I watched him being interviewed years ago. It was all weird little stories about how important Santa Bill was to JBR, and he struck me as being far too at ease with the idea she was dead. I'm very suspicious of his intentions toward the little girl, he was obsessed with her in an unhealthy way. I though it was him.

 

Santa WAS very creepy, and if I thought it could have been an intruder, he'd be my prime suspect. There is no way he could fit through that window, however. 

[MaggieG]

I talked to my cousin a few days ago and she watched the other special, the one that aired on either ID or A&E, and she said that she now believes an intruder did it, just from the way that special presented the evidence. She said she thought the pineapple was a lame piece of evidence and was not sure why it was even introduced. Now I don't know what to believe! I guess I can watch that other special but I'm curious as to what you guys (who have watched both specials) think. I apologize in advance if this was discussed in another thread.

[TattleTeeny]

DO IT--watch them all! Join this circus in which we have no idea what we posted where or who said what on which show, haha! 

I may have exhausted myself with this over the last couple of weeks. 

Edited September 27, 2016 by TattleTeeny