JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

[Wickerman]

I believe the head trauma was caused in the kitchen and probably by the flashlight. I suspect Burke because I honestly cannot imagine a mother hitting JB over the head with a flashlight.

Which makes his claim that he thought his sister was hit over the head with a hammer seem a little odd.

[louisa]

They didn't leave their DNA on the garrote either, but what was found didn't match anyone in the family.

What WAS found exactly?

It has now been proven that the Ramseys should NOT have been exonerated on the basis of DNA findings at the scene.

The Ramseys DNA was found on almost everything in house. They lived there after all!

John and Patsy both held the corpse thereby ensuring that any DNA found on the body that belonged to the couple, could be explained.

I looked to see if John said he went outside, in the dark, that morning.
He could have grabbed the torch/flashlight at that point.
He said he did go out to check a door, I think it was a side-door to the garage that he went to check.
But yes, the item belonged to them.

However, if an intruder scoured the house while the family were at the Whites dinner (he already may have found John's payslips), then it is quite reasonable to believe he found a torch. Then he could more easily move about the house in the dark later that night.

Wicksy - Please stop it with this 'intruder' rubbish. You're performing contortions with your theory trying to make it fit, instead of believing the obvious.

Surely you know it's baloney, as do most of the people following this case.

Which makes his claim that he thought his sister was hit over the head with a hammer seem a little odd.

This kid was an screwball. He had probably forgotten his sister was dead until people reminded him.

.
.

[Harry D]

There's no evidence at all to implicate Burke Ramsey. It's just a bunch armchair detectives playing judge, jury and executioner. I'm not saying he couldn't have done it, it's possible, but the accusations are baseless. I can't imagine what it would be like growing up with people suspecting you of brutally murdering your own little sister.

[louisa]

There's no evidence at all to implicate Burke Ramsey. It's just a bunch armchair detectives playing judge, jury and executioner. I'm not saying he couldn't have done it, it's possible, but the accusations are baseless. I can't imagine what it would be like growing up with people suspecting you of brutally murdering your own little sister.

If (if) he was innocent then it would/should have been hell for him. But he looks happy enough, doesn't he?

If it wasn't him then it was his mother. It had to be one of the two, because this baloney 'intruder' theory just doesn't fit.

If it was PR then it would have been rather good of her to tell the truth instead of allowing all the speculation about her son.

As for evidence. It's circumstantial. Burke was up and about during the night. His fingerprints were on the pineapple bowl.

Aggression? - hospitalizing JB when he hit her with a golf club. It was said to be an accident and maybe it was. Who knows? He also spread faeces around the house, and in JB's bed. I suspect he resented his sister and all the attention she got from her mother. Jealousy can be a powerful emotion.

The intruder theory is like a piece of a jigsaw that's the wrong size and people keep trimming bits off and trying it again for size. Determined to hammer it in, if necessary, until it fits.

.
.

[louisa]

NO EVIDENCE OR SIGN OF AN INTRUDER

Just a few of the many reasons why I believe no intruder was present.


When I learned that JB was wrapped in a blanket with her favourite nightgown close by I recalled that any time a blanket or something was placed on the child (or any victim for that matter) that usually it was a loved one who did it - a parent or a partner of the murder victim.

Not just the length of the ransom note but an intruder walking around the house for hours, taking chances that he/she would be discovered. Just walking up the stairs to place a note made no sense to me at all when I heard about it.

The time between the head trauma and the strangulation could have been up to TWO HOURS!

The fact that the father immediately went to the basement and found the body. The odds of finding a body in that huge house right away are very low, especially when the police already went down there.

This one probably should be my first red flag. If any person discovers a ransom note - especially detailing that their loved one would be "beheaded" if they called the police - they would never call the police first. Never. Maybe the FBI or a lawyer friend to help them but they would read the entire note.

The pineapple - when they told police JBR was asleep and went straight to bed they did not think there was anyway someone could dispute that (i.e. they didn't consider an autopsy would prove she did not go straight to bed).

PR's clothing fibers under the tape on JB's mouth and in the ligature.

Not asking BR if he had seen JB or heard anything.

Looking back, the ONE BIG THING that pointed to Ramsey guilt for me was that they waited months to agree to be thoroughly interviewed by police. No parents who are innocent and want to catch their daughter's killer would refuse to cooperate immediately! Instead, they went on television to proclaim their innocence. It was as if they felt they were above the law, and to me, their arrogance cost them all credibility

The Ransom Note

The mammoth size of the ransom note. Investigators discovered it would have taken somebody 20 minutes to just write it and that doesn't including thinking time about what they are going to write.

All written in their own home, on PR's notepad and written with her pen, which they put neatly back in it's proper place.

The completely unnecessary bit about making sure to bring the proper sized 'attache'. And to "be well rested"

The amazing similarity between handwriting of Patsy and the writer of the ransom note.

And at the end, the sudden need to make very sure that this letter is addressed to JOHN. No mention of his name at all, until 'Don't grow a brain, JOHN.' 'Don't underestimate us JOHN'. 'It is up to you now, JOHN!'

It's like all of the sudden PR realized she needed to push this whole letter thing away from herself, and shoved it at JOHN.

No Ramsey fingerprints on the note. PR said she "couldn't remember" if she handled the note or not when she found it on the stairs. But wouldn't this be the logical thing anyone would do? You come downstairs at 6 in the morning and see a multi-page note laying on the stairs that wasn't there when you went you to bed. At this point, you have no idea what it says or who wrote it. Wouldn't the natural thing be to bend over, pick it up, and look at it to see what it was?

JR said he *did* move the note "from the stairs to the floor," and then knelt down and read it from the floor. Neither of their stories ring true for me. Their fingerprints should have been on the note if they were innocently stumbling on this for the first time. The fact that they weren't on the note suggests to me that they purposefully didn't handle it because they already knew what it said, and the author had worn gloves while writing it so that they wouldn't leave their fingerprints on it. But IMO, they forgot about that one small detail that this was one area of the crime scene where their fingerprints *should* have been if they were, in fact, innocent.

Told investigators that on the morning of the murder she had looked in JB's room and saw that she was missing, then she had come down the spiral staircase and found the note.

"I found JonBenet's room empty and went down the spiral staircase and found the note"
Later that morning she changed her story to "I went down the spiral stairs, found the note and ran back up to JB's room and found it empty"

It's really the totality of the evidence (looking at it whole from the balled up sweater to Patsy's fibers on the duct tape and paint tote; even looking at the so-called exculpatory evidence), and mainly the couples' lies, makes me believe there was never an intruder.

And of course there was no evidence, or sign of an intruder ever having been in the Ramsey house that night.
.
.

[louisa]

And if anyone can write a list as long as that giving reasons why they think an intruder was responsible, I'd like to see it.
.
.

[Hannibal Hayes]

Very convincing.

Going back to Burke, I have no idea what his situation is nowadays, health wise or personal wise. If he hit his sister, causing her death, I think he must have been suffering from some sort of illness.

I find it difficult to understand how someone balanced can kill their sister & then be able to block it out for the rest of their life. I can only think that he was/is ill & can’t recall doing it or doesn’t associate his actions with her death.

Maybe he was brainwashed by his parents to disassociate his actions with his sister’s death or that was why she was injured further so they could plant the idea in his head that his smack round her head didn’t kill her?

If that was the case, she would have needed to have been ok after he hit her & maybe had a fit or convulsion sometime after her hit her.

Apologies if this has been discussed before.

[louisa]

Very convincing.

Going back to Burke, I have no idea what his situation is nowadays, health wise or personal wise. If he hit his sister, causing her death, I think he must have been suffering from some sort of illness.

I find it difficult to understand how someone balanced can kill their sister & then be able to block it out for the rest of their life. I can only think that he was/is ill & can’t recall doing it or doesn’t associate his actions with her death.

Maybe he was brainwashed by his parents to disassociate his actions with his sister’s death or that was why she was injured further so they could plant the idea in his head that his smack round her head didn’t kill her?

If that was the case, she would have needed to have been ok after he hit her & maybe had a fit or convulsion sometime after her hit her.

Apologies if this has been discussed before.

Hi Hannibal,

That's an interesting theory - the brainwashing. It could explain a lot.

Burke is a bit of an unknown quantity - he's been off the radar for the past 20 years. His father (whose every word we need to take with a pinch of sodium chloride) says he has a job in a 'high tech industry' but nobody seems to know which one. It's a mystery.

He is currently suing CBS for $150M (!) for suggesting he was responsible for his sister's murder. That's a nice little earner. CBS stand by what they said, but unfortunately as they are unable to prove it one way or the other they may have to pay up.

And if he gets that pay-out there would be no way that he would ever be able to admit to the crime because it would mean he would have to re-pay all that money.

His strange behaviour during this interview has been explained away (by Dr. Phil) as being due to nervousness. Hmmm.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUaDh8Ah3ys

.
.

[louisa]

An relevant extract from James Kolar's book 'Foreign Faction'................

"A 1993 nationwide survey of SBP therapists identified pre-adolescent behaviors in 222 children that ranged from voyeurism to coercion: The more serious offenses involved digital penetration, penile intercourse, anal intercourse, bestiality, and ritualistic or sadistic sexual abuse.

•Another 1993 survey conducted in the Northwest revealed that some offenders used physical coercion that included tying up their victims.
•Offenders lack compassion, empathy, and exhibit inadequate social skills.
•A victim may be the object of revenge or anger and could be viewed as the parent’s “favored child” by the perpetrator.
•Families frequently attempt to portray themselves to the world as the “perfect” family.
•Co-morbidity: SBP patients have a higher incidence of psychiatric disorders that include, but are not limited to, attachment disorder and separation anxiety."

Revelation of these clinical case studies and the emerging national recognition of this childhood behavioral disorder was in its infancy at the time of JonBenét’s death, but confirmed what I had occasionally witnessed in the District Attorneys’ weekly SART meetings: Children of Burke’s age had been proven capable of sexually abusing their siblings and others.

Moreover, these studies confirmed that children of his age were capable of committing horrendous acts of physical violence typically thought to have been reserved to adults.

It had been stated repeatedly that there had been no prior recorded history / incidents of abuse that would have suggested parental involvement in JonBenét’s death. As I pointed out in the case analysis report and Power Point outline completed in the fall of 2006, Burke had already exhibited one prior incident of violence against JonBenét.

The incident that involved a blow to the head with a golf club that took place in Michigan was claimed to be an “accident” by the Ramsey family, but it is interesting to note that this incident took place within a day or two of JonBenét’s birthday in August 1994.

One can only wonder whether sibling jealousy or envy may have played any part in that instance, and whether these feelings spilled over into the events of the Christmas holidays in 1996.

I had also found it interesting that the Paugh’s (Patsy's mother and sisters) had reportedly purchased several books on childhood behavior for the Ramsey family. The titles of the books were intriguing:

•The Hurried Child – Growing Up Too Fast, by David Elkind;
•Children at Risk, Dobson / Bruer;
•Why Johnny Can’t Tell Right From Wrong, Kilpatrick.

When exploring the nature of the content of these three books, I wondered what might have been taking place in the home that prompted the grandparents to purchase these types of childhood behavioral books for the family.
.
.

[Wickerman]

What WAS found exactly?

It has now been proven that the Ramseys should NOT have been exonerated on the basis of DNA findings at the scene.

I'd like to know what you mean by "proven", nothing concerning the family's involvement in this case has been proven.

What has been proven on this thread is that a good number of your accusations have been based on a misunderstanding of either procedure, meaning of terms, or sequence of events.

Wicksy - Please stop it with this 'intruder' rubbish. You're performing contortions with your theory trying to make it fit, instead of believing the obvious.

Surely you know it's baloney, as do most of the people following this case.

The fact that this is now predominantly described as "a DNA case", and that the Ramsey's DNA is not under consideration, directly implies a third party is involved.
This is potential evidence of our intruder.

After 20 years, when nobody has been able to come up with the required evidence that points to anyone in the family, then the obvious conclusion is the culprit is outside the family.

This kid was an screwball.

Is this a proven professional opinion (references?), or another example of your condescending opinions?

[Wickerman]

Aggression? - hospitalizing JB when he hit her with a golf club. It was said to be an accident and maybe it was. Who knows?

Why use words like "Aggression?", and "hospitalizing", when you don't know the details of how it happened?
It caused a mark on her cheek, no damage to the cheekbone. The mark was superficial so lets quit trying to portray it as if he tried to take her head off shall we.

He also spread faeces around the house, and in JB's bed. I suspect he resented his sister and all the attention she got from her mother. Jealousy can be a powerful emotion.

Sure it can, but what does this have to do with murder?

[Wickerman]

CBS stand by what they said, but unfortunately as they are unable to prove it one way or the other they may have to pay up.

Yes, and it can happen to anyone who makes unsubstantiated accusations, some people should bare that in mind.

[Wickerman]

Looking back, the ONE BIG THING that pointed to Ramsey guilt for me was that they waited months to agree to be thoroughly interviewed by police. No parents who are innocent and want to catch their daughter's killer would refuse to cooperate immediately!

John Ramsey said he initially understood they would both be suspects, as part of a broad investigation. It was when Commander Eller tried to hold JonBenet's body as 'ransom' until the Ramsey's committed to an interview.
That was the last straw, neither John nor Patsy had any respect for the B.P.D. after that.

Not only was holding the body totally unethical, it was illegal. The Chief told Eller he will do no such thing. It was even being considered to take Eller off the case.

[louisa]

I'd like to know what you mean by "proven", nothing concerning the family's involvement in this case has been proven.

What has been proven on this thread is that a good number of your accusations have been based on a misunderstanding of either procedure, meaning of terms, or sequence of events.

The fact that this is now predominantly described as "a DNA case", and that the Ramsey's DNA is not under consideration, directly implies a third party is evidence of our intruder.

Is this a proven professional opinion (references?), or another example of your condescending opinions?

After 20 years, when nobody has been able to come up with the required evidence that points to anyone in the family, then the obvious conclusion is the culprit is outside the family.

Wicksy - When I began posting on this thread you were constantly asking me to substantiate what I was saying, even calling me a liar when I posted facts on the case; facts that you hadn't heard of before.

If you recall, I always came up with those links to the facts and quotes that I had posted.

I feel your latest attack is childish and inaccurate. However, as always, I will politely answer your latest queries.

I certainly have not 'misunderstood' procedure or 'meaning of terms or sequence of events'. In fact you are the one who keeps asking me where I got my information. I have to keep pointing you to the relevant internet site or book references. In fact you seem not to know some of the facts because you keep stating that JonBenet was raped, when anyone interested in this case can tell you that she was NOT.

I don't know whether you have looked on the internet at all the masses of websites dedicated to the murder of JonBenet? Probably the best one is www.websleuths.com

This website, good as it is, has only this ONE dedicated thread to this particular murder, whereas Websleuths has over 22,000 threads about this case, so as you can imagine, nothing about the case has been overlooked.

The most interesting thing about the other websites on this case is nobody is seriously talking about an intruder. They've been there, done that and found it to be ludicrous. In fact on some of the websites you would get laughed off if you mentioned it.

The Ramseys remain "under an umbrella of suspicion" in this murder. DNA which was previously thought to exonerate the family has been proven to be erroneous. It's on the internet if you wish to research this.

Your last paragraph is, frankly, ridiculous. There is PLENTY of circumstantial evidence pointing to the Ramseys and NONE pointing to an intruder. I have written pages of it over the last couple of weeks, especially over the last few days. I presume you haven't been reading my posts because if you had then you wouldn't be making uninformed comments.

If the Ramseys had gone to trial (as they rightly should have) then I am certain they would have been convicted.

Your last post regarding the police 'holding JB's body as hostage' was thrown out years ago as being untrue. It is a phrase coined by a lawyer connected to the DA and the Ramseys, and the myth has perpetrated ever since.

on December 29th 1996 (just four days after her body was discovered) the family had a memorial service in Boulder and then had the funeral in Atlanta and JB was buried in Georgia.

.
.

[Abby Normal]

Wicksy - When I began posting on this thread you were constantly asking me to substantiate what I was saying, even calling me a liar when I posted facts on the case; facts that you hadn't heard of before.

If you recall, I always came up with those links to the facts and quotes that I had posted.

I feel your latest attack is childish and inaccurate. However, as always, I will politely answer your latest queries.

I certainly have not 'misunderstood' procedure or 'meaning of terms or sequence of events'. In fact you are the one who keeps asking me where I got my information. I have to keep pointing you to the relevant internet site or book references. In fact you seem not to know some of the facts because you keep stating that JonBenet was raped, when anyone interested in this case can tell you that she was NOT.

I don't know whether you have looked on the internet at all the masses of websites dedicated to the murder of JonBenet? Probably the best one is www.websleuths.com

This website, good as it is, has only this ONE dedicated thread to this particular murder, whereas Websleuths has over 22,000 threads about this case, so as you can imagine, nothing about the case has been overlooked.

The most interesting thing about the other websites on this case is nobody is seriously talking about an intruder. They've been there, done that and found it to be ludicrous. In fact on some of the websites you would get laughed off if you mentioned it.

The Ramseys remain "under an umbrella of suspicion" in this murder. DNA which was previously thought to exonerate the family has been proven to be erroneous. It's on the internet if you wish to research this.

Your last paragraph is, frankly, ridiculous. There is PLENTY of circumstantial evidence pointing to the Ramseys and NONE pointing to an intruder. I have written pages of it over the last couple of weeks, especially over the last few days. I presume you haven't been reading my posts because if you had then you wouldn't be making uninformed comments.

If the Ramseys had gone to trial (as they rightly should have) then I am certain they would have been convicted.

Your last post regarding the police 'holding JB's body as hostage' was thrown out years ago as being untrue. It is a phrase coined by a lawyer connected to the DA and the Ramseys, and the myth has perpetrated ever since.

on December 29th 1996 (just four days after her body was discovered) the family had a memorial service in Boulder and then had the funeral in Atlanta and JB was buried in Georgia.

.
.

and the NEXT day held a nationwide TV interview.