the killing of jon benet-the father speaks

[Harry D]

hi harry
one thing would be nice to know is who knew of the exact amount of jons bonus which the ransom note was demanding. we know jon and patsy of course. did the maid know? did he leave the paperwork in his office or lying around? who at his work knew?

the ransom note amount being the same as his bonus virtually rules out a stranger intruder. unless the amount was lying around the house in some paperwork or check receipt that the intruder found while he was rummaging around the house when they were out.

but i keep going back to the maid, because i think she may have known the amount of his bonus.

if i was the police i would have been on that money trail big time. find out who knew that amount and your killers amongst that group.

If the ransom attempt was the chief motive, then the housekeeper could be in the frame. She was money-hungry, had keys to the Ramsey residence, was familiar with the home, and there didn't seem to be much love lost between herself and Patsy.

However, the murder was a sadistic one. It does not look like a bungled abduction. Unless the person she conspired with simply couldn't help but sexually torture Jonbenet once he had her in his clutches. Another point is that the ransom note never mentions Jonbenet by name. This could suggest that the murderer didn't actually know the girl's identity, or perhaps the writer was desperate to deflect any suspicion from someone who knew the Ramseys.

[Abby Normal]

If the ransom attempt was the chief motive, then the housekeeper could be in the frame. She was money-hungry, had keys to the Ramsey residence, was familiar with the home, and there didn't seem to be much love lost between herself and Patsy.

However, the murder was a sadistic one. It does not look like a bungled abduction. Unless the person she conspired with simply couldn't help but sexually torture Jonbenet once he had her in his clutches. Another point is that the ransom note never mentions Jonbenet by name. This could suggest that the murderer didn't actually know the girl's identity, or perhaps the writer was desperate to deflect any suspicion from someone who knew the Ramseys.

thats what i was thinking too if the maid was involved. her male partner who did the actual crime was a pedophile who just couldnt help himself. it would also explain the unknown male dna.

speaking of dna, its surprising to me that they still have never gotten a hit in codis on the male dna, especially with the techniques that have now, like how they caught the GSK.

but another thing bothers me about the intruder theory, whether involving the maid or not. murder of a child in their own home by an intruder is extremely rare. with the parents there, rarer still. ive actually never of heard of such a thing. and not only that, are we to beleive that an intruder was in the house, rummaging around before they got home, wrote a ransom note from a pad of paper in the house,abducted her from her room, possible use of taser, bringing her to the basement, getting a suitcase from one part of the house to another, placing the ramsom note in another part of her home, feeding her pineapple in the dining room, violently sexually assault her, make a gaarot and use the garrott on her her, and massive blow to the head with heavy object (even neighbors said the heard a loud sound in the middle of the night as if a baseball bat struck something) and scramble out the basement window or door.... all this going on about the house and neither parent woke up!?! its almost absurd on the face of it. and implicates the parents almost to the point of guilt IMHO.

then when discovered missing what parent dosnt immediately search every inch of their house for their child!?! and around the yard.
and lawyer up immediately and talk more to the press than the police. they certainly acted quilty, even if they are innocent. bizarre effing family either way.

[Harry D]

thats what i was thinking too if the maid was involved. her male partner who did the actual crime was a pedophile who just couldnt help himself. it would also explain the unknown male dna.

speaking of dna, its surprising to me that they still have never gotten a hit in codis on the male dna, especially with the techniques that have now, like how they caught the GSK.

but another thing bothers me about the intruder theory, whether involving the maid or not. murder of a child in their own home by an intruder is extremely rare. with the parents there, rarer still. ive actually never of heard of such a thing. and not only that, are we to beleive that an intruder was in the house, rummaging around before they got home, wrote a ransom note from a pad of paper in the house,abducted her from her room, possible use of taser, bringing her to the basement, getting a suitcase from one part of the house to another, placing the ramsom note in another part of her home, feeding her pineapple in the dining room, violently sexually assault her, make a gaarot and use the garrott on her her, and massive blow to the head with heavy object (even neighbors said the heard a loud sound in the middle of the night as if a baseball bat struck something) and scramble out the basement window or door.... all this going on about the house and neither parent woke up!?! its almost absurd on the face of it. and implicates the parents almost to the point of guilt IMHO.

then when discovered missing what parent dosnt immediately search every inch of their house for their child!?! and around the yard.
and lawyer up immediately and talk more to the press than the police. they certainly acted quilty, even if they are innocent. bizarre effing family either way.

There's definitely a lot of red flags where the Ramsey family are concerned, but I still find it problematic for them to have committed the murder. There was no evidence of domestic violence or sexual abuse, so why did one of them randomly decide to sexually torture and murder Jonbenet that night? The pathology just isn't there.

A lot of theorists tend to zero in on Burke, but I also have trouble accepting that a nine year-old boy was capable of such an act, not without reoffending later in life or having some major behavioural issues. Besides, I doubt Burke would've been allowed to return to school as soon as he did, or be questioned by grand jury investigation, if the parents had any inkling that he was guilty.

[Abby Normal]

There's definitely a lot of red flags where the Ramsey family are concerned, but I still find it problematic for them to have committed the murder. There was no evidence of domestic violence or sexual abuse, so why did one of them randomly decide to sexually torture and murder Jonbenet that night? The pathology just isn't there.

A lot of theorists tend to zero in on Burke, but I also have trouble accepting that a nine year-old boy was capable of such an act, not without reoffending later in life or having some major behavioural issues. Besides, I doubt Burke would've been allowed to return to school as soon as he did, or be questioned by grand jury investigation, if the parents had any inkling that he was guilty.

agree re burke, if he had anything to do with it or they thought he had seen something, there is no way they would have let him talk to police.

re the sexual abuse. the autopsy said evidence of sexual abuse..abrasions to the v. their pediatrician denied it though, saying he never saw any evidence.

well if you follow just strictly the evidence, it points to the parents and the motive being sexual abuse. the other posters who mentioned possible nefarious reasons for being in the kiddie pageant business i think might be on the right track. i have a serious issue with parents who whore up their six year old daughter and parade her around, whether theyr guilty of her murder or not. theyre one very weird and dark family any way you slice it.

[FISHY1118]

agree re burke, if he had anything to do with it or they thought he had seen something, there is no way they would have let him talk to police.

re the sexual abuse. the autopsy said evidence of sexual abuse..abrasions to the v. their pediatrician denied it though, saying he never saw any evidence.

well if you follow just strictly the evidence, it points to the parents and the motive being sexual abuse. the other posters who mentioned possible nefarious reasons for being in the kiddie pageant business i think might be on the right track. i have a serious issue with parents who whore up their six year old daughter and parade her around, whether theyr guilty of her murder or not. theyre one very weird and dark family any way you slice it.

Indeed Abby. One has to ask the question as to why more wasnt done to investigate that entire industry? ,but then its not hard to figure out, the higher up the bigger authority.

[Parisi North Humber]

I'm afraid I have to agree with Abby and Fish. The whole child beauty pageant is a murky and tawdry excuse to dress up little girls for money and prizes.

Can you imagine in any other situation other than a so called beauty pageant if I said that I dress my very young daughter up like a cheap hooker after i've smeared her face in carcinogenic make up and fake tan of course. Then I taught in her how to sexualise her walk, instructed her to sing songs with innuendo or sexualised emphasis and then schooled her in flirtatious affectationsthen. Lastly I paraded her in front of any pervert that wants to look so I could benefit financially of her back...my daughter would have been taken by social services quicker than a heartbeat.

It casts a shadow on my soul to think that little girls all over the world are still being sold to the highest bidder and it can happen under the bright lights and the fake glamour of what promoters class as light entertainment. It does however possibly solve the puzzle of both an inside/stranger scenario. I don't know what happened to that young lass so this is pure conjecture but what if....... poor little Jon was told to make pretty for the man ( she would have been schooled for years how to do it) but something went wrong, perhaps it was her first time and she struggled banging her head and the attempted but aborted full intercourse failed however her attacker was sufficiently aroused to deposit ejaculate on her clothes. This would also explain the bruising and abrasions to her genital region but her doctor saying that she showed no signs child abuse.
I also agree that the whole garroting evidence more than hints of sadosexual practice.

Helen x

[Abby Normal]

I'm afraid I have to agree with Abby and Fish. The whole child beauty pageant is a murky and tawdry excuse to dress up little girls for money and prizes.

Can you imagine in any other situation other than a so called beauty pageant if I said that I dress my very young daughter up like a cheap hooker after i've smeared her face in carcinogenic make up and fake tan of course. Then I taught in her how to sexualise her walk, instructed her to sing songs with innuendo or sexualised emphasis and then schooled her in flirtatious affectationsthen. Lastly I paraded her in front of any pervert that wants to look so I could benefit financially of her back...my daughter would have been taken by social services quicker than a heartbeat.

It casts a shadow on my soul to think that little girls all over the world are still being sold to the highest bidder and it can happen under the bright lights and the fake glamour of what promoters class as light entertainment. It does however possibly solve the puzzle of both an inside/stranger scenario. I don't know what happened to that young lass so this is pure conjecture but what if....... poor little Jon was told to make pretty for the man ( she would have been schooled for years how to do it) but something went wrong, perhaps it was her first time and she struggled banging her head and the attempted but aborted full intercourse failed however her attacker was sufficiently aroused to deposit ejaculate on her clothes. This would also explain the bruising and abrasions to her genital region but her doctor saying that she showed no signs child abuse.
I also agree that the whole garroting evidence more than hints of sadosexual practice.

Helen x

hi parisi
agree with alot of what you say.

but theres no way her head injury was any kind of accident. she was hit with a hard heavy object with enough force to crack her skull open. the neighbors said they heard a loud whack in the night, like a baseball bat hitting something. its speculated that it was a baseball bat, that was found outside the house, or a large mag flash light which was inside tje house.
and most of the experts believed that the blow was so violent and hard it was the cause of death.

[Dr. John Watson]

I believe brother Burke murdered his sister, motive unknown. There is no hard evidence to support this, but it's founded on the suspicion that Burke was psychotic at the time. I think Burke had long been aware he was different from others his age, in terms of normal human emotions such as feelings of guilt, remorse, humor, selfishness, classic symptoms of what is termed psychopathy. As early as 1950 it was known that psychopathic children first become aware they're different from others their age at about age 8 (some believe even earlier) at which time they begin to mimic the emotions and reactions of other children (sorrow, fear, guilt, remorse etc.) and thus learn to quietly fit in with normal human actions and reactions. Whether his parents were aware of his condition is unknown, but as to the murder itself, I think the parents knew what happened and immediately went into cover-up mode. It's obvious to me that Patsy wrote the so-called kidnap letter and John likely carried his daughter's body to the basement storeroom to be discovered by his neighbor later. Nothing I've read since the time of the murder suggests any other reasonable solution.

[Abby Normal]

interesting and possible i guess, but i find it hard to beleive the parents who lawyered up immediately would have let him speak to anyone if he was involved or knew anything. the interviewer said he had no suspicions or concerns whatsoever, believed burke was telling the whole truth and that he slept through it all. but i dont rule it out. even at that age i think sex abuse is possible and he may have had mental issues and or extreme jealousy toward her. a family friend had said that he had struck jon benet a week earlier with a toy golf club or something. i beleive his prints were on the bowl of pineapple along with hers and patsys as well. also the marks that police think might have been taser marks matched perfectly with burkes toy train tracks.
i saw that interview with him when he was older. again very weird dude, very weird family.

[Harry D]

interesting and possible i guess, but i find it hard to beleive the parents who lawyered up immediately would have let him speak to anyone if he was involved or knew anything. the interviewer said he had no suspicions or concerns whatsoever, believed burke was telling the whole truth and that he slept through it all. but i dont rule it out. even at that age i think sex abuse is possible and he may have had mental issues and or extreme jealousy toward her. a family friend had said that he had struck jon benet a week earlier with a toy golf club or something. i beleive his prints were on the bowl of pineapple along with hers and patsys as well. also the marks that police think might have been taser marks matched perfectly with burkes toy train tracks.
i saw that interview with him when he was older. again very weird dude, very weird family.

I don't think we can convict Burke on the basis of him being odd. Growing up in that family, having been accused of his sister's murder at nine years old, he was bound to be affected mentally.

If Burke did it, there are two scenarios based on experts finding that the garrote was the murder weapon:

* He struck Jonbenet on the head, then the parents garroted their daughter and staged a kidnapping instead of pretending she slipped and fell.

* Burke was sociopathic enough at nine years-old to use a sadosexual murder weapon on his sister

Personally, I find both arguments unconvincing. There is no evidence that Burke was so maladjusted to commit such a crime. That he might have hit Jonbenet with a toy club is nothing remarkable. Child siblings are often spiteful to one another. This was something else entirely.

[Parisi North Humber]

Hi Abby, reading the cracking sound of her head being hit makes it feel even worse some how, poor little girl. Would you think this demonstrates anger, frustration?

Helen x

[Parisi North Humber]

If it was Burke then who did the unknown DNA belong to? Or are we thinking compromised evidence and/or chain of evidence tampering etc type scenario?

Helen x

[Dr. John Watson]

There is probably a multitude of unanswered questions regarding this homicide, but the bottom line remains this: If the alleged outsider is a nonexistent entity, than someone inside the home killed the girl, and her parents spent hours creating a cover story and manufacturing evidence to sustain it before notifying police. To explain this unconscionable action by her parents, I named her brother Burke as the most likely killer and recipient of his parents' protection. Some have now questioned this based upon his young age. A quick search online found that between 1929 and 2000 in the U.S. alone there were at least five homicides attributed to males between the ages of 6 and 9 years. Thus far, no one has questioned my theory that Burke may have been psychopathic, although admittedly there is no medical or scientific evidence to back this up.

[Parisi North Humber]

Hi Dr J, I wouldn't question Burke on his age but the unknown male DNA found on Jon. Could her parents get a rogue male DNA source and plant it so quickly ?Or are you thinking the evidence of Burkes DNA was manipulated in some way? I honestly don't know how any scenario paints the parents in a good light just some potential explanations are so chilling it makes one's blood run cold.

Helen x

[Harry D]

Thus far, no one has questioned my theory that Burke may have been psychopathic, although admittedly there is no medical or scientific evidence to back this up.

Maybe you missed it but I call this into doubt. Like you readily admit, there's no evidence at all to support the accusation that Burke was psychopathic. There's also no way the Ramseys would've let him return to school so soon or be questioned by the Grand Jury having gone to such lengths to cover for him.