Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Burke did it'
The Daily Mail ^ | 1/19/16 | Khaleda Rahman

Posted on 09/20/2016 7:59:03 AM PDT by traderrob6

JonBenet Ramsey was killed by her older brother Burke and it was covered up by her parents after a fight over a midnight snack of pineapples, investigators have claimed.

The six-year-old's mother Patsy Ramsey called 911 on December 26, 1996 to report that her six-year-old daughter had been kidnapped from her family's home in Boulder, Colorado.

JonBenet, a child beauty queen, was found beaten and strangled on the floor of the family's cellar several hours after the 911 call.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: brotherburke; coverup; jonbenet; jonbenetramsey; murder; mystery
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-157 last
To: traderrob6
What is it you don't get? Both elements must be present simultaneously in order for the crime of conspiracy to exist.

He could have had it drummed into his head by his parents to lie every day until the day before he turned ten, and he would have been participating in NO CRIME. After that, continuing to lie does not involve him any conspiracy unless he discussed lying with them at that time. Simply continuing to lie about something is not conspiracy.

141 posted on 09/20/2016 1:59:00 PM PDT by FredZarguna (And what Rough Beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Fifth Avenue to be born?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle
1. JonBenet ate it. Thus the parents are lying about her being brought to bed asleep from the car... Or she got up after that time. And one of them or even Burke fed it to JB. So they are lying either way.

2. Patsy Ramsey wrote that note, definitely. One sure thing.

3. They were up late or all night as patsy was wearing the same thing in the morning. The blow to the head probably occurred before midnight. Then the decision to finish JB off and set it up as a break in must have taken a while.

Excellent answers, Yaelle! You've solved the case. All of these answers seem so simple and transparent to an outside observer, as they were to many in law enforcement investigating the case, but money, position and power bought the Ramsey's time. Add to that some mistakes by the police and you've created "reasonable" doubt.

Whenever I speak to IDI's (Intruder Did It) about this, their answer is always the same: a mother doesn't kill her children. I beg to differ. It happens often.

142 posted on 09/20/2016 2:03:39 PM PDT by Kharis13 (That noise you hear is our Founding Fathers spinning in their graves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Kharis13

I don’t know who did it. I haven’t watched the show on it yet either. I’ve followed the case for years and I know patsy wrote that note. I also know Jon benet are the pineapple BECAUSE IT WAS FOUND IN HER STOMACH. My 3 was total conjecture — someone in the house did it, someone who would put the paper and pen back in its correct place after penning the longest ransom note in history. But I have not solved the case.


143 posted on 09/20/2016 2:42:08 PM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6
JonBenet Ramsey was killed by her older brother Burke and it was covered up by her parents after a fight over a midnight snack of pineapples, investigators have claimed.

????????

Pineapples?

144 posted on 09/20/2016 2:48:53 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: x

I watched every episode of this program and yes, it makes sense. Burke didn’t mean to kill her. He was 9 and under 10 he couldn’t be accused of murder. He got mad, maybe because she ate some of his pineapple(supposition) and he whacked her with a heavy flashlight. His parents covered it up to protect him. Sad tragic story, but fascinating.

I wonder if Burke has moved out of the country by now?


145 posted on 09/20/2016 2:54:13 PM PDT by Ditter (God Bless Texas!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

Three different docuentaries on different networks all seemed to work from different points of view—and came up with different conclusions.

It was interestng to watch this battle of evidence to see how this case is textbook example of how police investigations can go really really bad and how by leaks and relegating different type of evidence as relevant, the investigators can come up with different culprits or no culprit at all.


146 posted on 09/20/2016 3:04:44 PM PDT by wildbill (If you check behind the shower curtain for a slasher, and find one.... what's your plan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LouieFisk

Exactly.
The DNA on the panties is the ONLY definitive evidence suggesting a perp outside the family, but the fact that Patsy lied suggests exactly what you’re saying: the panties / DNA were a red herring, planted by Patsy.

The panties were so large, they’d fall off while she was standing/ still alive. They were placed on her when she was prone.
This brings the suspicion right back to the the liar: Patsy.

And the DNA / intruder theory simply does. not. square. with the idiotic, obviously faked ransom note. An unknown intruder could not / would not have composed that letter.
That letter-—practiced, composed and left in the house; the child’s body in the house—not taken away by any note-writing kidnapper; and the fact that John went directly to JBR’s body as if already he knew where she was—all this screams the Ramseys did it.
But which one did exactly what?
Either Patsy did it, or Patsy and John were covering for Burke.
John may have been molesting Jonbenet, and Patsy may have known.
Bed wetting is a sign of abuse.
Burke may have cracked Jonbenet’s head, or maybe not.
But I seriously doubt he strangled her too, and, at age 9, staged the crime scene and faked a sexual assault on her body.
More likely John did this while Patsy was writing the note.

My theory about the panties: They were Patsy’s, and she’d had an affair. In the frantic staging of the crime scene, Patsy might have told John, “We’ve got worse things to worry about right now than a little ole affair. These panties with my boyfriend’s man-juice on ‘em will save your life, so *shut up John. Don’t try to grow a pair now, John.*” (Those words were in the ransom note.)


147 posted on 09/20/2016 3:25:37 PM PDT by mumblypeg (Make America Sane Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: mumblypeg

I don’t have any theories other than the obvious - a person or persons within the house committed the crime.

The whole thing is bizarre.

Your daughter is missing and you throw a house party with all the friends and neighbors invited - who does that?

You mentioned John Ramsey knowing where to go when he was told by police to search the place. He said he had searched it before but the first time he didn’t bother checking out the basement room where the body was found. I’ve searched harder for a lost TV remote. In this case it was a missing child - anybody who’s even just babysat a little child knows they get into the dangdest places.

Just so many things that don’t add up.


148 posted on 09/20/2016 4:30:14 PM PDT by LouieFisk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 147 | View Replies]

To: LouieFisk

Yes. Your child is missing, there’s a ransom note on the stairs saying the kidnappers will call...but when nobody calls, you don’t seem anxious. You even seem to have forgotten your daughter has been “ kidnapped.”
You casually go thru your mail, and call a private pilot to arrange a flight to Atlanta ?!? Oh well, if she turns up, maybe she can come along!?!

Also I noticed the “kidnapper” shifts back and forth between singular and plural. It goes from “we” are a foreign faction, then it’s “I” will do thus and such to “your daughter.” Again, an obvious attempt to point to a culprit outside the family, but can’t keep the story straight because it’s so obviously false.
It’s typical, too, of parents to say “my daughter” when a child is doing well, but “your daughter” (to the other parent) when a child has misbehaved.
IOW, my daughter is a beauty queen. Your daughter caused all this.
There are a LOT of clues in that note.
All of the clues point to the Ramseys, and many, like “your daughter” suggest Patsy was trying to equally implicate John in order to keep him quiet.
Another clue is the level of violence in the threats directed at Jonbenet herself. This suggests Patsy blames JBR for making her angry in the first place.
The violence of the threats in the note are matched by the violence that was in fact done to JBR’s body. It makes sense that whoever was capable of threatening “she will die” and “she will be beheaded” did in fact cause the child’s brutal death, likely before the note was written.

I’ve always thought it was Patsy; Jonbenet may have wet the bed, again, and Patsy just went postal.
That’s the simplest, and to me, most plausible, scenario.


149 posted on 09/20/2016 6:52:00 PM PDT by mumblypeg (Make America Sane Again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco

Thanks for the explanation. Clears up things.


150 posted on 09/20/2016 9:37:41 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 125 | View Replies]

To: Hot Tabasco
As an addendum, on the show this morning they interviewed retired Wayne County coroner, Werner Spitz, who is sort of a legend in his trade.
He recounted that the police in Colorado invited him out to help in the investigation. However when he got there, no one from the dept. showed up other than a technician who presented Spitz with a slide that contained wooden fragments that were found in JonBenet's genitals.
Spitz then asked to visit the Ramsey house but police said that the Ramsey's would not allow it............

I suppose that the news media will bring forth this sad story on every possible anniversary for the next ten thousand years.

151 posted on 09/20/2016 9:39:38 PM PDT by cloudmountain
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: traderrob6

>>The strangulation was likely post mortem

Not according to the autopsy report and other evidence. There would be no reason for the Ramseys to delay calling an ambulance or taking her to the ER had she only been struck — they weren’t skilled in determining whether she was still alive or not. Its unlikely that they thought all this up immediately upon the discovery of their just killed daughter.

>>there was plenty of time to stage the scene.

Time, maybe, but that would have left evidence that wasn’t found. Making things up to try and pin this on someone doesn’t do anyone any good. Speculate based on the evidence.


152 posted on 09/20/2016 9:52:37 PM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: LouieFisk

>>What trail of evidence would there be?

You’re joking, right??

Wounds to the head bleed — A LOT. Trust me as I’ve cut myself shaving a bunch. The good news is that if the wound isn’t that bad, in the head, it has the ability to heal quickly because of the availability of blood to get to it. That availability makes it difficult to move a just wounded body without trace evidence of it being moved. Whatever they were, the Ramseys weren’t skilled in moving a body or staging a crime scene.

Again, don’t make things up to try and prove a point. Argue the evidence. If it doesn’t exist, there is likely a good reason for its non-existence.


153 posted on 09/20/2016 9:55:24 PM PDT by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: 1L

The bleeding was internal, not external:
“Police believe the flashlight’s heavy rubber coating seems consistent with an instrument that could deliver a crushing blow yet not cause bleeding”
Boulder News Archive
http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1998/01/12-1.html

This fact was hashed out at Reddit the other day:
https://www.reddit.com/r/JonBenet/comments/530j2k/the_blow_to_jonbenets_head_analysis

==
“Again, don’t make things up to try and prove a point. Argue the evidence. If it doesn’t exist, there is likely a good reason for its non-existence.’
==
You might want to get back to me on that one.


154 posted on 09/20/2016 10:23:27 PM PDT by LouieFisk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 153 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

DNA means nothing?

http://www.news-press.com/story/news/2016/09/28/cape-coral-police-make-arrest-cold-case/91212964/


155 posted on 09/29/2016 5:46:48 AM PDT by Clutch Martin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Clutch Martin
That's correct. It means nothing and 1000 links from every popup infested junk site in the world doesn't change that.

Like all other evidence, DNA evidence has a context and chain of possession.

If my wife turns up dead and they find my DNA on her body, does that prove I killed her? Nope. Proves nothing. We sleep in the same bed, sit on the same furniture, drive the same cars, and have done so for over 30 years.

If they find a stranger's DNA on her clothing does it prove anything? Nope. Every stranger she comes in contact with today, all of her coworkers, and the people who inspect, manufacture, and sell her clothing all can leave DNA on her clothes.

DNA Evidence, like all other evidence, only means something when it proven too be admissible, and even then only under the circumstances appropriate to its admission.

156 posted on 09/29/2016 11:25:46 AM PDT by FredZarguna (And what Rough Beast, its hour come round at last, slouches toward Fifth Avenue to be born?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: FredZarguna

What if the DNA is tagged and bagged at the scene and no one else in the house owns it? A hair, a piece or drop of bio etc... after 20 some odd years a cold case is reopened because the DNA is matched, where is was never matched before. That is something that wasn’t a known prior. Which causes the case to be reopened.

I get you point but I don’t think it means nothing. As for clothing, unless those clothes were never washed, perhaps.


157 posted on 09/29/2016 7:13:27 PM PDT by Clutch Martin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-157 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson